SUMMARY MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
WEDNESDAY, JULY 7, 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, Lee Pavăo, and Edith Wiggins.
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, Police Chief Ralph Pendergraph, Library Director Kathy Thompson, Police Captain Gregg Jarvies, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, Transportation Planner David Bonk, Long Range Planner Claudia Paine, Current Development Planner Gene Pavaromo, Engineering Director George Small, Crisis Intervention Coordinator Jim Huegerich, Executive Secretary Toni Pendergraph and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
Mayor pro tem Capowski read a resolution honoring the life and service of Michael Hooker. He stated that the late Chancellor Hooker had understood that the University and the Town could not be divided from each other and had helped to create a successful working relationship. Mayor pro tem Capowski said that continuing to strive together would be a fitting legacy of Mr. Hooker’s leadership. He pointed out that the University had lost a good chancellor and the Town had lost a good citizen, noting Mr. Hooker would be remembered as a friend to the Town.
MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION HONORING THE LIFE AND SERVICE OF MICHAEL HOOKER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Resolutions ordinarily begin with a series of “Whereas’s” that establish why the Council later “Resolves”. But Michael Hooker was not ordinary; and, tonight we invent a new format.
(Michael liked invention and new formats.)
Michael Hooker was the Chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He also was a resident and citizen of the Town of Chapel Hill. Just as he was, in one person, both University Chancellor and Chapel Hill citizen, he understood that the University and the Town could not be divided from each other.
Instead, he recognized in his words and in his actions that the University and the Town occupied some of the same space at the same time.
Our success in working with each other was that we did so face-to-face and regularly. Michael helped us create a working relationship that really worked. We did not always agree, but we did always seek to find agreement where we could.
Continuing to strive together would be a fitting legacy of Michael’s leadership.
Michael described his return to the University in 1995 as a return to Chapel Hill:
“From the very first moment, my memories of Chapel Hill carry with them a quality of magic which is present to this day. As soon as I step on campus, I am filled with that feeling of respect, of awe, of magic. So it is a dream come true, a dream of a lifetime, to be able to come back to Chapel Hill as the chancellor of this campus.”
We were glad to welcome him home four years ago; and, now we join the community to mourn Michael’s passing from this life. The University lost a good Chancellor and we have lost a good citizen.
Our thoughts and prayers go out to Michael’s family: to his wife, Carmen; to his daughter, Alexandra; to his mother, Christine Hooker; and to Carmen’s two daughters, Jennifer and Cyndi Buell.
We will remember Michael Hooker with respect and affection as a friend of the Town.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
Mayor Waldorf announced that the Bed and Breakfast item had been deferred to the fall due to the length of tonight’s agenda.
Meadowmont Hilton and Office Building
Mayor Waldorf stated that the Council had just concluded a closed session on this item and was prepared to take action. She noted that representatives from Capital Associates had asked to address the Council.
Larry Sitton, attorney for Capital Associates, said that the resolution before the Council included items that all parties had agreed to. He noted, however, that there was one “sticking point.” Mr. Sitton pointed out that the series of negotiations had been aimed at avoiding an appeal, and cautioned the Council that if the Town lost the appeal it would not recieve any of the concessions made on behalf of Capital Associates for the office park.
Mr. Sitton listed the concessions that Capital Associates had made and stated that the problematic issue regarded one stipulation involving 15% of employees using means other than their own automobiles for transportation to the building. He said there were three ways that the 15% could be measured: survey tenants of the building, interview as people come into the building and count the number of empty parking spaces.
Mr. Sitton said that if counting the number of empty spaces were used by itself it would create significant problems for the owner of the building. He said, noting that Ms. Stoddard would explain what those problems were, that Capital Associates was asking for a stipulation which says, “if at least two of these three conditions are met.” Mr. Sitton added that the Town’s insistence on any one of the three conditions would be “a deal breaker.”
Anne Stoddard, an associate partner with Capital Associates, asked the Council to consider this final change to the details of the settlement agreement. She noted that the original goal of the park and ride lot was to use the building as a test case to provide transit service and encourage pedestrian use and other means of transit in an employment center. Ms. Stoddard said that Capital Associates was committed to that goal but could have a tremendous problem leasing and maintaining the building with the stipulation as it was written.
Ms. Stoddard explained that some tenants lease more space than they could fill immediately and some businesses’ spaces were filled only part of the time. She stressed that she intended to follow the intent of the park and ride lot, but could not do that while jeopardizing the building. Ms. Stoddard asked the Council to agree to a change in the wording to allow two of the three measures rather than just one. She added that she would not be able to agree to the settlement agreement if the current wording remained.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if the Council was in public hearing and accepting evidence for a Special Use Permit (SUP). Mr. Karpinos replied that it was not a public hearing. Mayor Waldorf explained that it was an item for action on the agenda.
Council Member Foy explained that he had been a participant in negotiating the agreement. He reported that the concessions the developer had made addressed some of the issues that had been raised about the office complex. Council Member Foy said that those concessions included deleting 51 parking spaces, leaving potentially 172 parking spaces for use as a park and ride lot, increasing the buffering through landscaping, and contributing to the affordable housing project at Meadowmont. He added that, based on those concessions and the fact that Superior Court had ordered the Council to issue the permit without those concessions, he would move the permit as outlined in Resolution 0.1a.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 0.1a.
Council Member Evans noted the requirement that the Town receive a payment equal to taxes even if the property was sold to the University.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT’S SUGGESTION THAT “AFTER 95% OCCUPANCY OF THE BUILDINGS, AT SUCH TIME AS TWO OUT OF THREE OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET, 86 PARKING SPACES LOCATED IN THE UPPER LEVEL OF PARKING DECK A WILL BE CONVERTED, WHILE SUCH CONDITIONS REMAIN, TO A PARK AND RIDE LOT.”
Council Member Evans added that the conditions had been stated frequently enough that all knew what they were.
Mayor Rosemary Waldorf asked if that was a friendly amendment. Council Member Foy replied that it was not.
Council Member Wiggins asked Mr. Sitton to repeat what the third measure was. Mr. Sitton replied that it was “counting the number of vacant spaces,” and gave two examples of how more spaces might be required than would actually be used on a daily basis. He agreed with Ms. Stoddard that conversion to a park and ride lot would not work if the only measurement used were counting the number of empty spaces. Mr. Sitton added that Capital Associates had suggested counting two of the three, that is, counting spaces but also either surveying tenants or doing a physical count and interviewing people when they entered the building.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked Mr. Sitton who would be in charge of managing an 86-car area designated as a park and ride lot and ensuring employees did not park there. Mr. Sitton replied that the concept was not for an exclusive park and ride lot. He said that tenants would be told the lot was available for that, but predicted that people using the park and ride lot would arrive early and fill up the spaces and there would not be spaces left available for tenants.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked how it was a park and ride lot if it was not exclusive. Mr. Sitton deferred to Ms. Stoddard for an answer, but offered his notion that the top floor of the parking deck would be designated as a park and ride lot, and other spaces reserved for tenants in the building would have identification. He noted that the park and ride area would not be assigned to any tenant, but stressed that discussions had never included making an exclusive park and ride lot which would sit empty if not used for park and ride.
Council Member McClintock remarked that there had been some good faith negotiation accomplished, and expressed concern about changing the terms of the agreement with an amendment. She said that she was prepared to support the main motion, but asked Council Member Foy if he, or anyone else on the negotiating team, would support the amendment on the floor. She said that if the change being sought were granted the likelihood of using the park and ride lot for that purpose would be diminished.
Council Member Foy said that the Council had originally gone into negotiations seeking a reduction in the number of parking spaces to 836. He pointed out that the judge ordered the Council to grant a permit for 951 spaces, and explained that negotiations had led to 900 spaces. Council Member Foy noted that the Council had also asked for 172 parking spaces for a park and ride lot, and the negotiation lead to the formula of “86 spaces upon 15% alternate usage by tenants and others visiting the building and the other 86 parking spaces on another 15% using alternative means.”
Council Member Foy reminded the Council that this was the deal that the Council’s negotiating team had agreed to in a session with the developer. He explained, noting that the hotel developer was also asked for a $150,000 contribution to the affordable housing project, that the hotel, office park, and East West Developers had agreed to contribute a total of $50,000 together.
Mayor Waldorf said that Council Member Foy had given a good summary of what had transpired during negotiations. She said she supported Resolution 0.1a, but added that she agreed that they needed two measures. Mayor Waldorf explained that the examples Ms. Stoddard had just given explained why merely counting parking spaces was not an adequate measure and might put Capital Associates in the position of violating leases. She added that she thought it was reasonable to address that detail and make that change.
Council Member Bateman asked who would determine which measure should be used. Mr. Horton replied that the Town would have access to the property and could administer any of those tests.
Council Member Bateman noted that there would then be some discretion on the Town’s part as to which measure to use.
Council Member Wiggins asked who suggested that a third measure be used and how much was it discussed. Mayor Waldorf replied that it had been Ms. Stoddard’s suggestion, and explained that the negotiating team did not talk in detail about any of the measures, but merely listed three options.
Mayor Waldorf asked for a vote on the motion to amend the resolution.
THE MOTION FAILED (4-5), WITH MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS EVANS, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, BROWN, CAPOWSKI, FOY AND MCCLINTOCK VOTING NAY.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked how Mr. Sitton’s remark that Resolution 0.1a was a “deal breaker” impacted what the Council was doing, since it was not at a public hearing. He asked if that was a binding statement which meant that everything was off and the developer would go to appeal if the Council voted for the resolution. Mr. Karpinos advised the Council to take what action it deemed appropriate, and, if the developer did not accept it, the Council could appeal in court while at the same time continue to negotiate if the parties wished to. He added that the Council also could opt not to adopt a resolution and go forward with the appeal that it already had authorized.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that reducing the number of parking spaces from 951 to 900 was not much of a reduction, adding that he did not think it would achieve the intent of reducing traffic.
MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI MOVED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION BY CHANGING THE 51-CAR REDUCTION TO A 151-CAR REDUCTION.
Council Member McClintock said that she was in favor of what Mayor pro tem Capowski was trying to do, but would not support it because she wanted to honor the agreement made by the negotiating team.
Mayor pro tem Capowski repeated his argument that a five percent reduction in parking spaces was not adequate to adopt the resolution before them.
THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Mayor Waldorf pointed out that there had been no second to amend and suggested returning to the main motion.
MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI MOVED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION TO RAISE THE ONE-TIME $50,000 CONTRIBUTION TOWARD AFFORDABLE HOUSING FROM THE MEADOWMONT DEVELOPERS TO $50,000 PER YEAR, OR .44% OF ANNUAL REVENUES PER YEAR.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said this amendment was based on his calculation that annual revenues from rooms would be $5.8 million per year and $5.6 million per year from offices.
THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
The Council returned to the main motion.
THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 0.1a WAS ADOPTED (8-1) WITH MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, BROWN, EVANS, FOY, MCCLINTOCK, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE AND MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI VOTING NAY.
A RESOLUTION ISSUING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE MEADOWMONT OFFICE PARK (99-7-7/R-0.1a)
WHEREAS, on January 11, 1999, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill adopted Resolution 99-1-11/R-13d, denying an application for a Special Use Permit for the Meadowmont Office Park; and,
WHEREAS, the Council’s denial was the subject to judicial review in the case Capital Associates and Meadowmont Development Company v. Town of Chapel Hill, et al, 99 CVS 227 (Orange County); and,
WHEREAS, on May 25, 1999, an Order was entered in that case reversing the Council’s denial of the Office Building Special Use Permit, and directing that the Town Council issue a special use permit in the form set forth in Resolution 13a of the Council’s Agenda Materials for January 11, 1999; and,
WHEREAS, on June 22, 1999, the Town of Chapel Hill gave Notice of Appeal from the May 25, Order of Superior Court; and,
WHEREAS, the parties to this litigation have negotiated and have agreed to certain adjustments to Resolution 13a, which the Town Council finds to be minor changes not requiring further public hearings and changes which could have been added subsequent to the close of the hearing on January 11, 1999, without necessitating further public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, upon the acceptance of the terms of this Resolution by the Developer and the other terms referenced in the Memorandum of July 7, 1999, from the Town Manager and Town Attorney, the Town Council authorizes and directs that its appeal of the pending litigation shall be withdrawn;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit proposed by Capital Associates, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 52, part of Lot 6; if developed according to the Site Plan dated July 8, 1998, the Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan, and the conditions below:
1. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Article 12, 13, 14, and 18, and with all other applicable regulations;
3. Would be located, designed, and operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and
4. Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council finds that the development proposed herein is consistent with the Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these findings are conditioned on the following:
The following terms are hereby incorporated into the development as part of the negotiated settlement of pending litigation:
1. If the property is conveyed to the University or other entity exempt from property taxes, a covenant will be placed in the deed of conveyance requiring the tax exempt purchaser to make a payment to the Town in lieu of property taxes.
2. The permit holder will delete 51 parking spaces (leaving 900 parking spaces in the development) including 16 parking spaces from the edge of the surface parking lot adjacent to Water Retention Pond #1, reducing impervious surface and allowing the pond to be slightly larger.
3. After 95% occupancy of the buildings, at such time as any one of the following conditions is met, 86 parking spaces, located in the upper level of Parking Deck A, will be converted to a park & ride lot. The conditions are that either:
a. at least 15% of the employees who regularly work in the buildings are using transit, bicycles or other means rather than single-occupant vehicles to commute to the buildings on a daily basis, as determined by a written survey distributed to employees; or
b. a physical count and survey of persons visiting the buildings demonstrates that at least 15% of the persons arriving do so by transit, bicycle or other means rather than single occupant vehicles; or
c. a physical count demonstrates that at least 15% of the parking spaces provided for the buildings are vacant on a regular basis.
Further, at such time as one of the above-referenced measures regarding employees, trips, or parking spaces reaches 30%, the permit holder will convert an additional 86 parking spaces to a park & ride lot, the location to be determined by the permit holder.
If, at the end of ten years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy, none of these standards has been met, the permit holder will convert to a park and ride lot, the location to be determined by the permit holder, whatever proportional share of the parking is represented by the results of any of these measures. (For example, if after 10 years 10% of the employees are using transit, bicycles or other means rather than single-occupant vehicles to commute on a daily basis, then two-thirds of the 86 spaces, or 57 spaces, would be converted to a park & ride lot, the location to be determined by the permit holder.) (The surveys and counts, which will be conducted no more than annually, shall be conducted in a statistically valid basis.)
4. The permit holder will provide a park & ride lot for major events on weekends and evenings, subject to the details of such an arrangement being agreed upon by the Town Manager and Capital Associates.
5. The permit holder will implement a transportation demand management program, subject to the terms being agreed upon with the Town, including meaningful service by Chapel Hill Transit to the buildings. The plan for this program will be referenced and made a part of the settlement agreement.
6. The permit holder will add $50,000 to its current landscaping budget. The Town staff will review the current landscape plans as shown and proposed additions to confirm the inclusion of additional landscaping reflective of this budget increase.
7. Upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a contribution of $12,500 will be made by or on behalf of the permit holder to Orange Community Housing Corporation in support of its affordable housing development at Meadowmont.
In case of any conflict between the terms listed in this section “Stipulations Required for Settlement of Litigation” and any other terms of this Resolution, the terms of this section shall control.
1. Construction Deadline: That construction begin by July 7, 2002 (three years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by July 7, 2007 (eight years from the date of Council approval).
2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit authorizes the following:
· One four-story building, with 150,000 square feet of floor area, for office-type business use;
· One three-story building, with 75,000 square feet of floor area, for office-type business use;
· Two two-level parking structures;
· 901,332 square feet of outdoor space;
· 144,877 square feet of livability space; and
· Up to 951 parking spaces.
3. Connection to Friday Center Drive: That a vehicular connection shall be provided to Friday Center Drive, or to the Friday Center service road.
4. NC 54 Improvements: That the following NC 54 improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for this office development:
A. Cross-section: Construction of one-half of a six-lane cross-section, with a center landscaped median, from Finley Golf Course Road to Friday Center Drive.
B. Right-Turn Lanes: Construction of one eastbound right-turn lane at the NC 54/Hilltop Collector Road intersection, and one eastbound right-turn lane at the NC 54/Friday Center Drive intersection.
C. Left-Turn Lanes: Construction of one westbound left-turn lane at the NC 54/Hilltop Collector Road intersection, and one westbound left-turn lane (in addition to the existing left-turn lane) at the NC 54/Friday Center Drive intersection.
D. Traffic Signal: Installation or payment-in-lieu of a traffic signal at the NC 54/Hilltop Collector Road intersection, including hard wire connections to the Town’s computerized traffic signal system.
E. Traffic Signal Upgrades: Installation or payment-in-lieu of traffic signal upgrades at the NC 54/Friday Center Drive intersection, including hard wire connections to the Town’s computerized traffic signal system.
F. Bicycle/Pedestrian Tunnel: Construction of the below-grade bicycle/pedestrian tunnel crossing NC 54, including utility wiring to allow future installation of a video monitoring system. The North Carolina Department of Transportation shall review and approve the specifications for this tunnel prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The tunnel shall be a minimum of 10 feet in width and shall satisfy the North Carolina Department of Transportation’s standards for non-vehicular tunnels.
G. Landscaped Center Median: That the center median along NC 54 shall include landscaping as approved by the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Town Manager. Curb and gutter shall be provided along the NC 54 median at the intersections with Friday Center Drive and Hilltop Collector Road, unless NCDOT determines that curb and gutter is required along the entire length of the median to accommodate plantings.
5. NC 54 Bicycle /Pedestrian Path:
A. Path Location: That the bicycle/pedestrian path along NC 54 shall be located at least 6-8 feet from the highway between the western edge of the site and the driveway, for purposes of tree preservation in this area. The path shall be located further from the highway, following the topography of the land, between the driveway and the bicycle/pedestrian tunnel; and if feasible, the path shall meet the Americans with Disabilities Act standards as it approaches the tunnel. East of the tunnel, the path shall remain away from the highway if an easement is obtained for construction of a continuous path on the University property to the east; if an easement is not obtained, the path shall be located at least 6-8 feet from the highway, within the public right-of-way if possible.
B. Path Width: That the bicycle/pedestrian path be 10 feet in width along its entirety, unless otherwise determined by the Town Manager.
C. Path Design at Intersections: That the off-street bicycle/pedestrian path along NC 54 be designed so that the path is drawn closer to the Highway when approaching the intersections with Friday Center Drive and the site’s entrance across from Hilltop Collector Road.
D. Path Completion: That the bicycle/pedestrian path shall be completed prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for this office development.
E. Path Maintenance: That maintenance of the bicycle/pedestrian path shall be the responsibility of the Owners’ Association.
F. Path Design: That the bicycle/pedestrian path shall follow the North Carolina Department of Transportation’s guidelines for design and signage.
G. Call Box Wiring: That the appropriate utility wiring shall be provided at the southern end of the bicycle/pedestrian tunnel, to provide the capability for installation of a call box if desirable or deemed necessary in the future.
6. Parking:
A. Eliminated Parking Spaces: That the 70 parking spaces along the southern property line be eliminated from the plans, for purposes of tree preservation along the southern property line.
B. Parking Area Revisions: That revisions be made to the grade-level parking area in the eastern portion of this site to allow preservation of the 43-inch red oak tree that exists within this proposed parking area.
C. Parking Area Screening: That all parking areas be screened from highway view, and that screening plans shall be approved by the Community Design Commission and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
D. Parking Lot Design: That all parking lots shall be designed and constructed to meet Town standards unless an alternate design is approved by the Town Manager.
7. Permanent Retention Basin Installation:
A. That the stormwater retention pond associated with each phase of development be in place prior to completion of that phase.
B. Compliance with the Town Watershed Protection District regulations, if applicable, shall be demonstrated with the provision of multiple permanent ponds. For those portions of the development complying with the Low Density Option identified in the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall not be required. For those portions of the development complying with the High Density option identified in the Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall be required in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance.
C. The size, accessibility, location, and design of each pond shall be approved by the Town Manager.
D. These wet retention ponds shall meet or exceed the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management requirements and shall be designed so as to be approved by the Division of Environmental Management, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Town Manager.
E. The property owner shall post a performance bond or other surety instrument satisfactory to the Town, in an amount approved by the Town Manager, to assure maintenance, repair, or reconstruction necessary for adequate performance of the engineered stormwater controls.
F. The Owners’ or Homeowners’ Association shall be responsible for arranging for annual inspections of all ponds by an appropriately certified engineer, to determine whether the ponds and associated structures are operating acceptably according to design requirements, and to report findings of said inspections to the Town Manager, with such recommendations for maintenance or repair as may be warranted. Any needed repairs shall be completed within 120 days unless otherwise approved by the Town Manager. Restrictive covenants shall be recorded which shall identify these responsibilities of the Owners’ or Homeowners’ Association, including pond maintenance.
G. Maintenance of the ponds shall be the responsibility of the applicant or a property/homeowners association. A maintenance plan shall be provided for each of the retention ponds, to be approved by the Town Manager. The plans shall address inspection, maintenance intervals, type of equipment required, access to each pond, and related matters.
H. As part of the application for Final Plan Approval, the applicant shall provide an up-to-date cumulative total of impervious surfaces within the sub-basin.
I. The minimum permanent pool depth shall be at least three (3) feet in addition to enough volume to store the accumulated sediment between clean out periods.
J. All sediment deposited in the ponds during construction activity on contributing sites must be removed before “normal” pond operation begins.
K. Emergency drains shall be installed in all ponds to allow access for repairs and sediment removal as necessary.
L. Anti-seepage collars shall be used on any structures penetrating dams or water retaining embankments.
M. That no ponds be created within the perimeter landscaped buffer required for the Meadowmont development.
N. That the ponds be located and designed such that damage to existing large trees can be minimized.
8. Stormwater Management:
A. Stormwater Management Plan: That a Stormwater Management Plan, based on a 10-year storm, shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate. Stormwater calculations shall be determined using methods acceptable to the Town Manager.
B. Pond Facilities/Access Easements: Design and construction of any stormwater management facility shall be approved by the Town Manager. All plans and final plats shall include dedication of permanent easements and construction of a paved or gravel drive for ingress/egress as necessary for construction, maintenance operations and equipment. The drive shall be in a location to be approved by the Town Manager.
9. Ownership and Responsibilities of Common Areas:
A. That an owners’ association be created for the maintenance and regulation of the private (residential, office, park, landscape, and commercial) areas including privately maintained streets and alleys. All property owners owning land within the area of the Master Land Use Plan approval, excluding governmental bodies, shall be represented in the owners’ association. This owners’ association shall have maintenance responsibilities for commonly owned development elements which affect the entire development including the stormwater management facilities.
B. In addition, a separate neighborhood association(s) and/or owners’ association(s) shall be created for the maintenance and regulation of the residential, office, and commercial areas. The documents creating these entities shall be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager, and shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
C. The responsibilities of these entities shall include the ownership and maintenance of the private alleys, private green spaces, private parks and recreation space, private retention and detention basins, and the landscape buffers.
D. These entities shall also be responsible for any “add-on fees” charged by Duke Power for special street lighting.
E. These entities shall have the ability to place a lien on property for nonpayment of dues or fees.
10. State or Federal Approvals: That any required State or federal permits or encroachment agreements be approved by the appropriate agencies and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
11. NCDOT Approvals: That plans for improvements to State-maintained roads, including landscaping and utility plans, be approved by NCDOT prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.
12. Landscape Protection Plan:
A. Landscape Protection Plan Approval: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This plan shall include areas of vegetation to be preserved; the anticipated clearing limit lines; proposed grading; proposed utility lines; a detail of protective fencing; and construction parking and materials staging/storage areas. The plan shall show the use of tree protection fencing, unless alternate protection measures are approved by the Town Manager, between construction and existing vegetation.
B. Landscape Protection Along NC 54: That the final plans include detailed information about the NC 54 widening project, and that the Landscape Protection Plan be revised to include tree protection fencing between the NC 54 construction and adjacent vegetation.
C. Off-Site Sewer Lines: That the Landscape Protection Plan be expanded to include the off-site sewer line construction for development in the eastern portion of the site.
D. Trees Along Southern Property Line: That the Landscape Protection Plan be revised to show all trees greater than 18” dbh near the southern property line of this site.
E. Retaining Walls: That retaining walls be installed to preserve significant vegetation near the southern property line, if/where deemed necessary by the Town Manager.
13. Landscape Plan Approval: That a detailed landscape plan and landscape maintenance plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
14. Plantings along NC 54 Frontage: That plantings be provided, meadows restored and existing vegetation preserved along the NC 54 frontage of this site, in general compliance with the Town’s Master Landscape Plan for Entranceway Corridors and the Meadowmont Design Guidelines, Plans and Details document. Planting plans for trees along NC 54 shall also be subject to approval by the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
15. NC 54 Entranceway Corridor: That the applicant provide additional information as part of the final plan review process including detailed elevations and direct views from NC 54 for consideration by the Community Design Commission. The Community Design Commission and Town Manager shall review final planting plans and approve the size and location of the proposed “windows” in the NC 54 buffer.
16. Landscaping Bufferyards:
A. The following landscape bufferyards shall be provided; and if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation will be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:
· Type D landscape bufferyard (between 100 and 400 feet in width), and meadow restoration in accordance with the Meadowmont Design Guidelines, Plans and Details document, along the site’s NC 54 frontage; and
· Type B landscape bufferyard (minimum width 20 feet) along the western, southern and eastern property lines of the site.
B. Supplemental plantings may be necessary to fulfill the requirements for landscape bufferyards, screening, and entranceway plantings.
17. Burial of Utility Lines: That all utility lines, new and existing, shall be placed underground.
18. Fire Flow: That a detailed fire flow report, certified by an engineer registered in North Carolina, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
19. Fire Hydrants: That a third fire hydrant be added to the plans at a location to be determined by the Town Manager.
20. Fire Sprinkler System: That the Fire Department connections to the sprinkler systems be approved by the Town’s Fire Marshal prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
21. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by the Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Duke Power Company, Time Warner Cable, Public Service Company, BellSouth or GTE, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
22. Refuse/Recycling:
A. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a detailed Solid Waste Management Plan, including a recycling plan and a plan for managing and minimizing construction debris, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
B. Refuse/Recycling Facilities: That revisions be made to the site plan to accommodate additional refuse and/or recycling facilities if deemed necessary by the Town Manager.
23. Transportation Management Plan: That a Transportation Management Plan, based on the draft plan submitted as part of this application, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This plan shall be updated and approved annually by the Town Manager. The required components of the Transportation Management Plan shall include:
· Provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;
· Provisions for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;
· Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;
· Ridesharing incentives; and
· Public transit incentives.
24. Bus Stop: That a bus stop, with amenities, be provided at a location to be determined by the Town Manager.
25. Construction Management Plan: That a Construction Management Plan, indicating how construction vehicle traffic will be managed, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The Construction Management Plan shall specify that no construction vehicles serving this site shall use any existing streets within the area bounded by Ephesus Church Road, George King Road, NC Highway 54, and Fordham Boulevard.
26. Building Elevation Approval:
A. Building Elevations/Site Lighting: That detailed building elevations and site lighting plan be approved by the Community Design Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
B. Building Heights: That the tops of the buildings shall not exceed the existing tree canopy as viewed from NC 54.
C. Compatibility of Buildings: That the Community Design Commission consider the building elevations in this office development for architectural compatibility with other Meadowmont-related buildings on the south side of Highway 54.
27. Design Guidelines: That revisions may be incorporated into the Meadowmont Entranceway Corridor Design Guidelines document, in accordance with this Special Use Permit approval. These revisions shall be subject to Town Manager approval.
28. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), landscape plans, and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable regulations and design standards of the Development Ordinance and Design Manual. Sight triangle easements shall be identified on the final plats.
29. Clearing and Grading: That all cut and fill slopes along public rights-of-way shall be a maximum of 3:1, or as approved by the Town Manager.
30. Certificates of Occupancy: That no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued until all required public improvements are complete, and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.
If the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; and no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase. A note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.
31. Erosion Control: That a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer and that a copy of the approval letter be provided to the Town prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
32. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.
33. Construction Sign Required: That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative with a telephone number; the contractor’s representative with a telephone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
34. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
35. Non-Severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby issues the application for Special Use Permit for the Meadowmont Office Park, effective upon the Applicant/Developer providing formal written confirmation of the acceptance of the terms contained herein.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 0.2a.
Council Member McClintock asked Council Member Foy to discuss how the negotiating team had asked for a significant decrease in the square footage of the hotel. He replied that they had asked for a downsizing of the physical structure, and explained that they did not get that. He noted that the Council also asked for a $150,000 contribution to the Orange Community Housing Corporation’s project of 32 affordable houses at Meadowmont, and received $50,000.
Council Member Foy reported that the Council’s team did get a restriction that would give the Town payment-in-lieu of taxes if the hotel was ever transferred to the University or any other non-tax paying entity. He said that the permit holder also agreed to provide shuttle service between RDU Airport and downtown Chapel Hill and would provide all of its guests and employees with information about public transportation. Council Member Foy said that the hotel also would work with the Friday Center to encourage pedestrian use between them to minimize traffic. He said that the hotel developer had agreed to provide $35,000 worth of additional landscaping as a buffer.
Council Member McClintock stated that this was difficult for her because of the overall size of the hotel and because the underlying zoning did not permit what is proposed.
Council Member Foy stated that the hotel developer had made a strong argument during negotiations as to why the size was needed. He said that Mr. Perry refused to agree to that change on the principle that he already had established in his mind and in the Court’s mind that he had the right to borrow that land under the Master Land Use, and he felt that if the hotel made that concession then he would be conceding that he did not have the right to do that and would jeopardize his current project and future SUPs. Council Member Foy explained that because Mr. Perry and the hotel developer were not willing to negotiate this at all, they had begun looking at other possibilities. He added that neither side was that happy with the outcome of the negotiations.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (6-3), WITH MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, EVANS, FOY, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CAPOWSKI AND MCCLINTOCK VOTING NAY.
WHEREAS, on January 11, 1999, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill adopted Resolution 99-1-11/R-12d, denying an application for a Special Use Permit for the Meadowmont Winston Hotel; and,
WHEREAS, the Council’s denial was the subject to judicial review in the case Winston Hotels, Inc. v. Town of Chapel Hill, et al, 99 CVS 226 (Orange County); and,
WHEREAS, on May 25, 1999, an Order was entered in that case reversing the Council’s denial of the Hotel Special Use Permit, and directing that the Town Council issue a special use permit in the form set forth in Resolution 12a of the Council’s Agenda Materials for January 11, 1999, as clarified by Winston Hotels at that hearing, as reflected in the transcript of that hearing; and,
WHEREAS, on June 22, 1999, the Town of Chapel Hill gave Notice of Appeal from the May 25, Order of Superior Court; and,
WHEREAS, the parties to this litigation have negotiated and have agreed to certain adjustments to Resolution 12a, which the Town Council finds to be minor changes not requiring further public hearings and changes which could have been added subsequent to the close of the hearing on January 11, 1999, without necessitating further public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, upon the acceptance of the terms of this Resolution by the Developer and the other terms referenced in the Memorandum of July 7, 1999, from the Town Manager and Town Attorney, the Town Council authorizes and directs that its appeal of the pending litigation shall be withdrawn;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit (Planned Development Mixed Use) proposed by Mr. Kenneth Crockett of Winston Hotels, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 52, part of Lot 6, and Durham County Tax Map 491, Block 6, part of Lot 696A, if developed according to the Site Plan dated February 11, 1998 (revised July 16, 1998; Sheet 3 revised August 24, 1998), the Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan, and the conditions below:
1. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Article 12, 13, 14, and 18, and with all other applicable regulations;
3. Would be located, designed, and operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and
4. Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council finds that the development proposed herein is consistent with the Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan.
These findings are conditioned on the following:
The following terms are hereby incorporated into the development as part of the negotiated settlement of pending litigation:
1. If the property is conveyed to the University or other entity exempt from property taxes, a covenant will be placed in the deed of conveyance requiring the tax exempt purchaser to make a payment to the Town in lieu of property taxes.
2. The permit holder will provide a shuttle service for guests traveling to or from RDU Airport or downtown Chapel Hill.
3. The permit holder will provide every hotel guest and employee with information on the Chapel Hill public transportation system and will work with the Town to encourage use of mass transit.
4. The permit holder will work with the Friday Center in an effort to encourage visitors to the Friday Center to utilize the Hotel’s facilities, which are within walking distance of the Friday Center.
5. The permit holder will add $35,000 to its current landscaping budget. The Town staff will review the current landscape plans as shown and proposed additions to confirm the inclusion of additional landscaping reflective of this budget increase.
6. Upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a contribution of $12,500 will be made by or on behalf of the permit holder to Orange Community Housing Corporation in support of its affordable housing development at Meadowmont.
7. The permit issued shall be adjusted, as required by the Order of the Court dated May 25, 1999, in order to incorporate the terms as clarified by Winston Hotels at the January 11, 1999, hearing, as those terms are reflected in the transcript of that hearing.
In case of any conflict between the terms listed in this section “Stipulations Required for Settlement of Litigation” and any other terms of this Resolution, the terms of this section shall control.
1. Construction Deadline: That construction begin by July 7, 2002 (three years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by July 7, 2009 (ten years from the date of Council approval).
2. Land Use Intensity:
A. This Special Use Permit approves:
¨ On-site Gross Land Area: 390,998 square feet
¨ Number of Lodging Units: 180
¨ Maximum Floor Area: 100,000 square feet
¨ Minimum Open Space: 298,707 square feet
¨ Minimum Livability Space: 178,588 square feet
¨ Number of Buildings: 1
¨ Number of Parking Spaces: 195
B. That because the land area of this Special Use Permit does not provide sufficient land to demonstrate compliance with the Land Use Intensity requirements of the Development Ordinance, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall obligate land within the bounds of the Master Land Use Plan to enable this development to demonstrate compliance with the Land Use Intensity requirements. With the application for Final Plan approval, the applicant shall provide documents(s), to be recorded at the Orange and/or Durham County Register of Deeds Office, that obligates allowable Land Use Intensity requirements of land (such as floor area, open space, and livability space) located within the boundary of the Master Plan, but outside the boundary of this Special Use Permit, to ensure compliance of this application with the Land Use Intensity requirements of the Development Ordinance.
3. Mix of Uses: That the initial phase proposing buildings on the Meadowmont site include a mix of residential and commercial uses.
4. Noise Impacts: That best efforts be made to minimize the impacts of noise from the air handling systems involved with this proposed development; and that the development, upon completion, shall comply with the Town’s noise ordinance, including future amendments.
5. Cellular Antennae: That no cellular antennae shall be placed on the hotel roof which would be visible from NC 54 or Friday Center Drive.
6. Existing Pond: That the property owner shall regularly maintain the existing pond as an aesthetic amenity.
7. Required Transportation Related Improvements:
A. An eastbound through lane and an exclusive right turn lane on NC 54.
B. An additional left turn lane onto Friday Center Drive from the NC 54’s westbound lanes.
C. A right turn lane onto NC 54 from Friday Center Drive.
D. Associated improvements to the existing signal and associated communication lines at the intersection of NC 54 and Friday Center Drive, including hard wire connection to the Town’s computerized traffic signal system.
E. A new bus stop on the NC 54 frontage, just east of Friday Center Drive, with a bus pulloff/acceleration lane.
F. A bus stop with pull-off be provided on Friday Center Drive, north of the hotel access drive.
G. Sidewalk at least 5 feet wide shall be constructed in the following locations:
· along the internal drive, from Friday Center Drive to the eastern property line;
· along the entire Friday Center Drive frontage;
· from Friday Center Drive to the hotel;
· on all sides of the hotel; and
· from the hotel building to the sidewalk on the south side of NC 54 at or near the bus stop (this path would be constructed as a bike path, per the Meadowmont Master Plan requirements).
8. NC 54 Bicycle/Pedestrian Path:
A. Path Location: The bicycle/pedestrian path along NC 54 be constructed between Friday Center Drive and the hotel site’s eastern property line, through the meadow, nearing the highway right-of-way at the eastern property line, as a shared bicycle/pedestrian facility, located at least 6-8 feet from the highway. The location, width, and design/construction standards shall be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager. The path shall be constructed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the building, whether the path is constructed by the applicant or the “master developer” of Meadowmont.
B. Path Width: That the bicycle/pedestrian path shall be 10 feet in width along its entirety, unless otherwise determined by the Town Manager.
C. Path Design at Intersections: That the off-street bicycle/pedestrian path along NC 54 be designed so that the path is drawn closer to the highway when approaching the NC 54/Friday Center Drive intersection.
D. Path Maintenance: That maintenance of the bicycle/pedestrian path shall be the responsibility of the Owners’ Association.
E. Path Design: That the bicycle/pedestrian path shall follow the North Carolina Department of Transportation’s guidelines for design and signage.
F. Path Easement and Signage: That an easement shall be dedicated and signage provided stating that the bicycle/pedestrian path shall be for public use.
9. Construction Management: That a Construction Management Plan, indicating how construction vehicle traffic will be manage, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. Construction Manager Plan shall specify that no construction vehicles serving this site shall use any existing streets within the area bounded by Ephesus Church Road, George King Road, NC 54, and Fordham Boulevard.
10. Permanent Retention Basin Installation:
A. Compliance with the Town Watershed Protection District regulations, if applicable, shall be demonstrated with the provision of multiple permanent ponds. For those portions of the development complying with the Low Density Option identified in the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall not be required. For those portions of the development complying with the High Density option identified in the Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall be required in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance.
B. The size, accessibility, location, and design of each pond shall be approved by the Town Manager.
C. The detention/retention pond shall meet or exceed the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management requirements and shall be designed so as to be approved by the Division of Environmental Management, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Town Manager.
D. The property owner shall post a performance bond or other surety instrument satisfactory to the Town, in an amount approved by the Town Manager, to assure maintenance, repair, or reconstruction necessary for adequate performance of the engineered stormwater controls.
E. The Owners’ or Homeowners’ Association shall be responsible for arranging for annual inspections of the detention/retention pond by an appropriately certified engineer, to determine whether the pond and associated structures are operating acceptably according to design requirements, and to report findings of said inspections to the Town Manager, with such recommendations for maintenance or repair as may be warranted. Any needed repairs shall be completed within 120 days unless otherwise approved by the Town Manager. Restrictive covenants shall be recorded which shall identify these responsibilities of the Owners’ or Homeowners’ Association, including pond maintenance.
F. Maintenance of the ponds shall be the responsibility of the developer or a property/homeowners’ association. A maintenance plan shall be provided for the detention/retention pond, to be approved by the Town Manager. The plans shall address inspection, maintenance intervals, type of equipment required, access to each pond, and related matters.
G. As part of the Final Plan Approval, Zoning Compliance Permit, and Building Permit, the developer shall provide an up-to-date cumulative total for impervious surfaces in the particular sub-basin.
H. The minimum permanent pool depth shall be at least three (3) feet in addition to enough volume to store the accumulated sediment between clean out periods.
I. All sediment deposited in the ponds during construction activity on contributing sites must be removed before “normal” pond operation begins.
J. Emergency drains shall be installed in all ponds to allow access for repairs and sediment removal as necessary.
K. Anti-seepage collars shall be used on any structures penetrating dams or water retaining embankments.
L. That no ponds be created within the perimeter landscaped buffer required for the Meadowmont development.
M. That the retention/detention pond be reconfigured, located and designed such that damage to existing large trees can be minimized.
11. Stormwater/Water Quality Related Improvements:
A. A stormwater management plan, based on a 10-year storm, shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate. Stormwater calculations shall be determined using methods acceptable to the Town Manager. The Plan must show where and how stormwater detention for this site will be achieved.
B. Design and construction of any stormwater management facility shall be approved by the Town Manager. All plans and final plats shall include dedication of permanent easements and construction of a paved or gravel drive for ingress/egress as necessary for construction, maintenance operations, and equipment. The drive shall be in a location to be approved by the Town Manager.
C. The final plans and final plat shall include dedication of permanent easements and construction of a paved or gravel drive for vehicular ingress/egress as necessary for construction, maintenance operations, and equipment. The easements shall include the detention/retention pond, pipes, and other storm drainage improvements, as well as the vehicle access drives. The drives shall be in a location to be approved by the Town Manager. These easements shall be recorded at the Orange and Durham County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
D. That the retention/detention pond shall be bonded and maintained by the owner and shall be monitored for compliance with Town and State regulations by the Town Manager, with performance guarantees provided as required by the Town Manager.
E. The Council reserves the right to require public maintenance of stormwater facilities during the life of the project. In the event of such requirement, the party holding title to a given facility may be required to pay maintenance fees lawfully established or to reimburse the maintenance entity for reasonable costs which it determines, and/or to post a financial guarantee of such payments.
12. Utility Related and Other Improvements:
A. That the final plans demonstrate there is no conflict between utility lines, easements, and other site elements.
B. Detailed phase-specific utility extension plans shall be reviewed for approval by OWASA and the Town Manager. These plans shall include water and sewer line construction both off-site and on-site.
C. That underground conduits be installed for future utilities and/or lighting in designated locations approved by the Town Manager.
13. Encroachment Agreements: That any required State or local encroachment agreements (for landscaping and other required improvements) be approved prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Stipulations Related to the Resource Conservation District
14. Boundaries: That the boundaries of the Resource Conservation District be indicated on final plans. A note shall be added to all final plats and plans, indicating that “Development shall be restricted within the Resource Conservation District in accordance with the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance.”
15. Variances: That all variances necessary for development within the Resource Conservation District be obtained before application for final plat or final plan approval for the subject phase(s) of development.
16. Construction Standards: That for encroachment(s) into the Resource Conservation District, the requirements and standards of subsections 5.6 and 5.8 of the Development Ordinance must be adhered to, unless the application is granted administrative exemptions from subsection 5.8. Permitted encroachments include, but are not limited to:
¨ Wet detention basin/stormwater management facilities;
¨ Utility lines; and
¨ Surface Parking.
17. State or Federal Approvals: That any required State or Federal permits or encroachment agreements (including, but not limited to those needed for improvements to NC 54, for pond construction, for stormwater management and erosion control, for water and sewer extension, and for development in the Watershed Protection District) be approved by the appropriate agencies and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.
18. NCDOT Approvals: That plans for improvements to State-maintained roads, including landscaping and utility plans, be approved by NCDOT prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.
19. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed landscape protection plan be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This plan shall include areas of vegetation to be preserved; the anticipated clearing limit lines; proposed grading; proposed utility lines; a detail of protective fencing; and construction parking and materials staging/storage areas. The plan shall show the use of tree protection fencing, unless alternate protection measures are approved by the Town Manager, between construction and existing vegetation.
20. Landscape Plan Approval: That detailed landscape plans (including buffers and meadows), landscape maintenance plans, and lighting plans be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
21. Plantings along NC 54 Frontage:
A. That the applicant provide additional information as part of the final plan review process including detailed elevations and direct views from NC 54. The Town Manager shall review final planting plans and approve the size and location of the proposed “windows” in the Highway 54 buffer.
B. That the plantings be provided, meadows be restored, and existing vegetation preserved along the highway frontage in general compliance with the approved Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan, the Meadowmont Design Guidelines, and the Town’s Master Landscape Plan for Entranceway Corridors along NC 54. The tree protection, maintenance and planting plans shall take into account the widening of the highway at Meadowmont full buildout. During highway construction, vegetation fencing shall be erected between the highway and the vegetation to be preserved.
C. That a plan for the thinning of the hedgerows along NC 54 be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
D. Planting plans for trees along NC 54 shall be subject to approval by the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
22. Street Tree Plantings Along Friday Center Drive: The developer shall provide street tree plantings along the east side of Friday Center Drive, in a continuation of the existing row of red maples, to the hotel site’s southern property line. The trees shall be planted 40-60 feet apart behind the sidewalk. These trees will be installed to Town standards as detailed in the Town’s Design Manual, and planters shall have a minimum of 200 square feet of permeable surface, or be in continuous planting strips at least 7 feet wide.
23. Landscape Buffers:
A. The following buffers shall be provided; and if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation will be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:
· along the western portion of the highway frontage for this site (Area B/1): 175 foot wide “bufferyard and building/parking setback” (Type “D” landscape buffer), with grading proposed within a 40-foot swath at its southern edge.
· along the eastern portion of the highway frontage for this site (Area A): a 75 foot wide “bufferyard and building/parking setback” (Type “D” landscape buffer), with grading proposed within a 20-foot swath at its southern edge.
· along the Friday Center Drive frontage, a 50 foot wide “bufferyard and building setback”, supplemented by an additional 25 foot wide band in which no parking is proposed. Grading and storm drainage facilities would occur within this designated setback/bufferyard area.
· along the southern property line, a 20-foot wide bufferyard and building/parking setback in which no disturbance is proposed.
B. No construction, other than limited grading, perpendicular utility lines, and road crossings, subject to Town Manager approval, shall occur in the landscape buffers.
C. Supplemental plantings may be necessary to fulfill the requirements for buffers, screening, and entranceway plantings.
24. Grading Plan: That the grading plan for the proposed paved and built areas be adjusted to preserve more vegetation where possible, particularly between the highway and the easternmost parking lot; and along the Friday Center Drive frontage; and near the proposed pond. The pond shall be reconfigured and shifted to preserve more of the large pines to the south and west.
25. Landscaping Around Permanent Detention/Retention Pond: That landscaping approved by the Town Manager shall be provided around the permanent retention/detention pond, and that such landscaping shall be in accordance with local and State watershed protection regulations.
26. Parking Lot Medians: That parking lot medians where canopy trees are proposed to be installed to a minimum of 10 foot width, or as approved by the Town Manager.
27. Fireflow: That a detailed hydrant plan and fireflow report, certified by an engineer registered in North Carolina, shall be required prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
28. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Duke Power Company, TimeWarner Cable, Public Service Company, BellSouth or GTE, and the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The property owner shall be responsible for assuring that these utilities, including cable television, are extended to serve the development.
29. OWASA Easements: That easements (plats and documents) as required by OWASA be recorded prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
30. Burial of Utility Lines: That all utility lines, new and existing, shall be located underground.
31. Design Related Requirements:
A. All parking areas shall be screened from highway view. Screening plans shall be subject to approval by the Town Manager and Community Design Commission.
B. That revisions may be incorporated into the Meadowmont Entranceway Corridor Design Guidelines document, in accordance with Special Use Permit approval. These revisions shall be subject to Town Manager approval.
C. That all sidewalks within public rights-of-way shall be at least five feet in width. Alternatively, the Town Manager may approve a narrower width in situations where there are topographical or other constraints.
32. Building Elevation Approval:
A. Building Elevations/Site Lighting: That detailed building elevations and a site lighting plan be approved by the Community Design Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
B. Compatibility of Buildings: That the Community Design Commission consider the building elevations in this hotel development for architectural compatibility with the other Meadowmont-related buildings on the south side of NC 54.
33. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a detailed Solid Waste Management Plan, including a recycling plan and a plan for managing and minimizing construction debris, be approved by the Town Manager and Orange Community Recycling prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
The final plans shall indicate an expanded refuse/recycling area, if deemed necessary by the Town Manager.
34. Transportation Management Plan: That prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall prepare, for approval by the Town Manager, a Transportation Management Plan which includes provisions to reduce automobile traffic and encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation. The scope of the plan, and its amendments, shall be subject to approval by the Town Manager.
The required components of each Transportation Management Plan shall include:
¨ Provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;
¨ Provisions for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;
¨ Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;
¨ Ridesharing incentives; and
¨ Public transit incentives.
The Transportation Management Plan shall be annually updated and submitted to the Town Manager for approval.
35. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), landscape plans, and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable regulations and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.
That all parking lots be designed and constructed to meet Town standard unless an alternate design is approved by the Council or Town Manager.
36. Certificates of Occupancy: That no Certificates of Occupancy be issued until all required public improvements are complete; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.
If the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; and no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.
37. Sight Triangle Easements: That sight triangle easements be provided on the final plat.
38. New Streets - Traffic Signs: That the property owners shall be responsible for placement and maintenance of temporary regulatory signs, including street name signs, before issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy until such time that the street system is accepted for maintenance by the Town.
39. New Street Names and Numbers: That the name of the development and its streets and building numbers be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
40. Erosion Control: That a detailed soil erosion and sedimentation control plan, including provisions for maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be reviewed and approved by the Orange and Durham County Erosion Control Officers prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
41. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.
42. Construction Sign Required: That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number; the contractor’s representative, with a telephone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
43. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
44. Non-Severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby issues the application for Special Use Permit for the Meadowmont Hilton Garden Inn, effective upon the Applicant/Developer providing formal written confirmation of the acceptance of the terms contained herein.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
on State Roads in Chapel Hill
Mr. Horton explained that Engineering Director George Small had been working with Town and NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) staff members in an effort that began with Mayor Waldorf and Council Member Brown requesting to work jointly on transportation standards and projects. He asked Mr. Small to go over the list that the two staff’s had come up with.
Mr. Small noted that the mission statement had asked the Committee to encourage and accommodate safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian traffic in Chapel Hill. He said they had focused on the State road system in Chapel Hill and identified general concepts and specific problems that they would like to see solved. Mr. Small explained that they then divided those into six categories: policies and guidelines, education and training, study and evaluation, maintenance, enforcement issues, and funding issues. He said that the Committee had resisted prioritizing and had simply categorized for the next stage in the process, which would be feedback from the public hearing and the Council on priorities, focus and direction.
Loren Hintz, a member of the Transportation Board, praised the Committee’s work and suggested adding to the list the suggestions and findings of the Special Work Group to Study the NC 54/Hamilton Road Intersection, the Bicycle Task Force, the Transportation Board, the Greenways Commission, the new task force for the Merritt Pasture, and the Walks and Bikeways Commission. Mr. Hintz also suggested including the year that construction was anticipated for each project. He noted that it was important to separate Estes Drive from Estes Drive Extension, which did not have a sidewalk, and supported the suggestion to improve extra edge treatment on Estes Drive Extension.
Mr. Hintz added that he hoped the Committee could find a way to make the Manager’s goal of getting things repaired within two weeks a reality. He suggested creating more shade for pedestrians and expressed hope that the Committee could do something for pedestrians and bicyclists at the Mt. Carmel Church Road section of Highway 15-501.
Johnny Randall pointed out that improvement opportunities hinged on getting vehicles under control. He noted that speed limit and traffic violations were not being enforced by the police, and recommended that the enforcement category in the draft list include “vigorously enforce existing traffic laws governing speed limit and traffic light regulations.”
Council Member Foy asked Mr. Small how striping affects pedestrians. Mr. Small replied that it probably did not, but was an aid to bicyclists.
Council Member Foy asked what the acronyms MUTCD and ASHTO mean. Mr. Small replied that MUTCD was the Manual of uniformed Traffic Control Devices, which were national guidelines, and ASHTO was Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, a federal organization that set up design standards, roads, and highways. He explained that the Committee thought MUTCD was lagging behind and would like to make changes in its criteria on a nation-wide basis that would allow more pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Council Member Foy asked if the Committee would consider going outside the guidelines. Mr. Small replied that the State pretty much followed the MUTCD guidelines, which were not laws. He said it would be difficult for them to be more flexible because the reason they were doing that was to cover their own liability. Mr. Small added that it probably would be necessary to work with the guidelines to have changes made on State roads.
Council Member Brown said that she would like, when the item comes back to the Council, to have some detailed recommendations on how to work more intensely on some of the problem streets and intersections, as the Committee did on Highway 54. Mr. Small replied that it would be helpful if the Council would tell the Committee which intersections to concentrate on since doing so was time consuming.
Council Member Brown explained that she was asking Mr. Small to establish a process that the Council could apply when needed, using the Highway 54 intersection as a model.
Council Member McClintock said that she would like to see all of the suggestions made by the two members of the public incorporated into the item. She also endorsed Council Member Brown’s suggestion.
Council Member Bateman said that she was delighted that the State had agreed to re-evaluate the need for a traffic light at Stateside Drive and Highway 86.
Mayor Waldorf asked how long that re-evaluation might take. Mr. Small replied that he did not know.
Council Member Bateman suggested that the re-evaluation be completed and the traffic light be put up by the time the widening was complete, which she understood to be the end of the year.
Mayor Waldorf, adding that this was an excellent suggestion, thanked the Committee and complimented Council Member Brown for thinking of the idea.
a. Petitions By Citizens
1. Mike Neal, representing Mana Environmental, Inc., the Orange County coordinators for the First Citizens Bank’s “Big Sweep Stream Clean-up” on September 18, 1999
Mr. Neal asked the Council to direct
the Manager to provide the following assistance with the event: waive the tipping
fees at the landfill for all litter collected during the September 18th
stream clean-ups; provide dumpsters or other means at clean-up sites for depositing
trash collected by volunteers and transmitting that trash to the landfill at
the conclusion of the clean-up; volunteer the Town’s GIS resources to provide
maps needed to facilitate the volunteer
efforts; and designate Town captains to assist volunteers on September 18th
with clean-ups in Chapel Hill. Mana Environmental, Inc. also asked the Town
Council to adopt a resolution declaring September 18, 1999 as the Town of Chapel
Hill’s “Big Sweep 1999 Day.”
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER.
Council Member Evans urged citizens to participate and added that they could use more help than they’ve had in the past, noting that she had participated in stream clean-ups.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
2. Aaron Nelson, UNC
Mr. Nelson thanked the Town Council and staff for their offer of help at the time of Chancellor Hooker’s death and during the memorial service. He also thanked the Council for the resolution they had just passed honoring Mr. Hooker. Mr. Nelson thanked Mayor Waldorf, in particular, for the column she wrote in the Chapel Hill News, which he described as absolutely wonderful. He stated that Chancellor Hooker’s death had been a tragedy for the University. He noted that Town officials had reached out immediately and he expressed thanks for that generosity of spirit.
Council Member Brown asked that Item 16b be removed from the agenda, stating that there was no need to discuss it. There was no objection.
b. Announcements by Council Members
Council Member McClintock explained that over summer break she intended to think about some things that the Council could propose to the staff to modify design standards so that the Town could be more progressive in what it required, such as how to improve water running off asphalt before it entered the water supply.
2. Love Trust
Mayor Waldorf asked Bill Stewart to stand and be recognized. She thanked him for all the work he had done on behalf of the Love Trust.
Item 4 — Consent Agenda
Council Member Foy removed items 4g and 4o.
Council Member Brown agreed with removing item 4o.
Council Member Bateman removed item 4p.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1, EXCLUDING ITEMS g, o and p. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
(99-7-7/R-1)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following minutes, resolutions and ordinances as submitted by the Town Manager in regard to the following:
|
a. |
Resolution accepting bid for purchase of a tractor scraper. (R-1.1). |
|
b. |
Resolution accepting two grants regarding the promotion of recycling programs and associated budget ordinance amendment. (R-2) (O-1). |
|
c. |
Project ordinance for transit technology grant. (O-2). |
|
d. |
Resolution authorizing extension of HOME Consortium Agreement. (R-3). |
|
e. |
Deleted. |
|
f. |
Resolution calling a public forum to receive comment regarding proposed traffic calming devices on Pinehurst Drive. (R-5). |
|
h. |
Resolution adopting an assessment resolution for paving Sugarberry Road and budget ordinance appropriating funds. (R-6) (O-4). |
|
i. |
Resolution authorizing the Manager to work with the Triangle Electric Auto Association to conduct display of electric vehicles in Town Parking Lot #5. (R-7). |
|
j. |
Resolution authorizing parking lease agreement with Brown & Bunch for 12 parking spaces in Town parking lot #6. (R-8). |
|
k. |
Resolution dedicating sewer easements adjacent to Booker Creek to Orange Water and Sewer Authority. (R-9). |
|
l. |
Resolution and ordinances accepting a bid for the renovation of Booker Creek Trail (R-10) (O-5) (O-6). |
|
m. |
Resolution receiving and accepting report from the Fiscal Relations Task Force. (R-11). |
|
n. |
Resolution endorsing the management of the Love Trust by the Chapel Hill Public Library Foundation. (R-12). |
|
q. |
Consideration of funding for La Fiesta del Pueblo. (R-15) (O-7) (Mayor Waldorf). |
|
r. |
Resolution adopting a process to amend the 1999-2000 Community Development Program. (R-15.1) |
|
s. |
Report on transportation issues from Balloffet and Associates. (R-15.1a) |
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID FOR PURCHASE OF A TRACTOR SCRAPER (99-7-6/R-1.1)
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill News on May 16, 1999, in accordance with G. S. 143-129 for the purchase of a Tractor Scraper; and
WHEREAS, the following bids have been received and opened on June 9, 1999:
VENDOR BID
Gregory Poole Equipment Co. $399,000
Raleigh, N. C. (Less Trade-In) $52,000
Total Cost $347,000
Interstate Equipment Co. $308,985
Cary, N. C. (Less Trade-In) $50,000
Total Cost $258,985
WHEREAS, the bid from Interstate Equipment Co. was found to be the lowest responsive bid to the specifications:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the lowest responsive bid of Interstate Equipment Co. in the amount of $258,985.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL TO ACCEPT GRANT FUNDS FROM THE NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF POLLUTION PREVENTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSISTANCE AND FROM THE ORANGE COUNTY ARTS COMMISION FOR PROMOTION OF RECYCLING AND WASTE REDUCTION IN ORANGE COUNTY (99-7-7/R-2)
WHEREAS, Orange Community Recycling division of the Town of Chapel Hill Solid Waste Management Department has developed recycling programs over the past twelve years for residents and businesses of Orange County; and
WHEREAS, the rate of recycling collection and diversion of solid waste from the landfill has stabilized and not continued to increase over the past two years; and
WHEREAS, the primary approaches to recycling and waste reduction program publicity and outreach in the past have been through use of only the print media; and
WHEREAS, The Town has received grants from the Orange County Arts Commission and the North Carolina Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance to promote recycling and waste reduction using visual art, performance and animated short television commercials;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accept the grant of $5,000 from the North Carolina Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance for television commercial revisions and the grant of $1,164 from the Orange County Arts Commission for recycled art and magic show.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1999 (99-7-7/O-1)
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, 1999” as duly adopted on June 14, 1999 be and the same is hereby amended as follows:
ARTICLE I
Current Revised
APPROPRIATIONS Budget Increase Decrease Budget
LANDFILL FUND 5,750,145 6,644 5,756,789
ARTICLE II
Current Revised
REVENUES Budget Increase Decrease Budget
LANDFILL FUND 5,750,145 6,644 5,756,789
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT A GRANT PROJECT ORDINANCE FOR A TRANSIT TECHNOLOGY GRANT (99-7-7/O-2)
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, the following grant project ordinance is hereby adopted:
SECTION I
The Advanced Technology funds authorized are from 1999 State funds from an agreement with 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 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.
N.C. Department of Transportation (NCDOT) $83,250
Town of Chapel Hill (local match) 9,250
TOTAL $92,500
SECTION IV
The following amounts are appropriated for the FY1999 Advanced Technology project:
Capital Equipment $92,500
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 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO EXECUTE A NEW HOME CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY HOME PROGRAM
(99-7-7-/R-3)
WHEREAS, on July 6, 1992, the Council approved the participation of the Town of Chapel Hill in the Orange County HOME Consortium; and
WHEREAS, Chapel Hill, Orange County, Carrboro and Hillsborough are currently members of the Orange County HOME Consortium established on August 3, 1992; and
WHEREAS, on May 13, 1996, the Council authorized the Town’s continued participation in the Orange County HOME Consortium; and
WHEREAS, the current Orange County HOME Consortium Agreement expired on June 30, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the Orange County HOME Consortium desires to continue to be considered for eligibility under the federal HOME Program operated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as authorized under the HOME Investment Partnership Act;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager to execute a new HOME Consortium Agreement for the Orange County HOME Program.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC FORUM TO RECEIVE AND CONSIDER PUBLIC INPUT REGARDING PROPOSED TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICES ON PINEHURST DRIVE (99-7-7/R-5)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill affirms its intent to pursue the development and implementation of reasonable traffic calming measures on Pinehurst Drive; and
WHEREAS, the Council has received a petition regarding the placement of various traffic calming devices along Pinehurst Drive;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council calls for a public forum during the Council’s regular business meeting on September 13, 1999, in the Town Hall, 306 N. Columbia Street, to receive and consider public input regarding proposed traffic calming devices on Pinehurst Drive.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Town Manager to notify all property owners within 1,000 feet of Pinehurst Drive by first class mail of the public forum and to publish notice of the forum in the local newspaper.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING AN ASSESSMENT RESOLUTION FOR PAVING SUGARBERRY ROAD (99-7-7/R-6)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby directs the Town Manager to undertake the paving of Sugarberry Road as described in the preliminary resolution adopted by the Council on May 24, 1999.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council that pursuant to Article 10 of Chapter 160A of the North Carolina General Statutes:
1. Special assessments shall be levied, after completion and determination of actual final costs of the improvements, on an equal share per lot basis abutting the project.
2. Fifty percent of actual final costs of the project, including those of construction (excluding intersections), legal services, interest charges, right-of-way acquisition, and publication expenses, shall be assessed to the owners of property abutting the project.
3. An owner of property abutting the project may pay an assessment in one cash payment for the entire amount of the assessment, without interest, within 30 days after publication of a notice of confirmation of the final assessment roll, or in not more than 10 annual installments, with interest at an annual rate of 6%, the first of which shall be due and payable concurrently with property taxes, and subsequent annual installments shall be due and payable on the same date in each successive year until the assessment is paid in full.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1999 (99-7-7/O-4)
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, 1999” as duly adopted on June 14, 1999 be and the same is hereby amended as follows:
ARTICLE I
Current Revised
APPROPRIATIONS Budget Increase Decrease Budget
GENERAL FUND
Non-Departmental
Transfer to Capital
CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS FUND 1,398,000 20,000 1,418,000
ARTICLE II
Current Revised
REVENUES Budget Increase Decrease Budget
GENERAL FUND
Charges for Services 722,000 10,000 732,000
CAPITAL
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO WORK WITH THE TRIANGLE ELECTRIC AUTO ASSOCIATION TO CONDUCT A DISPLAY OF ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN TOWN LOT #5 ON SEPTEMBER 11, 1999 (99-7-7/R-7)
WHEREAS, the Triangle Electric Auto Association has petitioned the Town of Chapel Hill for the use of Town Lot #5 located at Rosemary and Church Streets, for the purpose of conducting an electric vehicle display on September 11, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill supports the understanding and development of technology which is beneficial to the environment;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to work with the Triangle Electric Auto Association to conduct this event.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND PUBLISH A NOTICE OF THE TOWN’S INTENT TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT TO LEASE 12 PARKING SPACES IN LOT #6 WITH BROWN & BUNCH (99-7-7/R-8)
WHEREAS, the Town owns and operates Parking Lot #6 on West Rosemary Street which has 12 monthly rental spaces available; and
WHEREAS, Brown & Bunch, Attorneys and Counselors at Law has leased all 12 parking spaces in this lot since 1993 and has requested that the Town renew this agreement for the use of employees and clients of Brown & Bunch;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to execute an agreement with Brown & Bunch under terms and conditions which are substantially the same as the following agreement:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA AN AGREEMENT FOR
COUNTY OF ORANGE LEASE OF PARKING SPACES
An agreement for the lease of parking spaces in Town of Chapel Hill Parking Lot #6, dated the ___ day of July 1999, by and between the Town of Chapel Hill, a North Carolina Municipal Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "Town"), and Brown & Bunch Attorneys and Counselors at Law, a North Carolina Partnership, (hereinafter referred to as "Brown & Bunch").
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Town owns and operates Parking Lot #6 on Rosemary Street which has twelve monthly rental spaces available; and
WHEREAS, Brown & Bunch owns and leases property in the downtown area, and has leased this lot from the Town since July 1, 1993;
WHEREAS, the Town has published a notice of its intent to enter into a lease with Brown & Bunch for Town Lot #6, and no comments have been made by the public;
NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE PREMISES AND THE MUTUAL COVENANTS SET OUT BELOW, THE TOWN AND BROWN & BUNCH AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
1. The term of the agreement will be for two years beginning on July 1, 1999 with an option to renew the agreement with revised parking rates, for one additional year.
2. Lot #6 contains space for 12 vehicles. The annual payment per space for Brown & Bunch will be at the rates adopted by the Town Council as part of the annual budget process for determining rates for all monthly rental parking owned by the Town. The Council may change these rates at any time. Brown & Bunch must be given 60-days notice prior to the implementation of any rate change under this agreement. As of July 1, 1999 these rates will be $780 per space per year. This is a total of $9360 per year for all 12 spaces.
3. Payments will made by Brown & Bunch on a monthly basis by the 1st of each month for which the payment is due. Payments will be $780, which is 1/12th of the annual rate for all spaces leased.
4. Brown & Bunch assumes responsibility to monitor unauthorized parking in the lot.
5. Brown & Bunch may not sublet these spaces or authorize parking in this lot to anyone other than employees and tenants of Brown & Bunch.
6. The Town will be responsible for maintenance of the lot.
7. This agreement including any references and attachments constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto and shall be amended only by written modification executed by both parties.
8. Either party may terminate this agreement for any reason with 180 days written notice given to the other party. Additionally, this agreement may be terminated by Brown & Bunch by providing 60 days notice of cancellation to the Town, if Brown & Bunch is unwilling to accept future rate changes as notified by the Town. Finally, this agreement may be terminated by either party for cause, in the event of such a violation of the terms of the agreement. In such case, the termination would occur upon 30 days notification to the other party of the breach of the agreement and failure to take corrective action on the violation.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town and Brown & Bunch have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.
TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL BROWN & BUNCH
___________________________ ___________________________
Town Manager
Town Clerk
Town Attorney
This agreement has been preaudited in accordance with the Local Government Fiscal Control Act.
__________________________
Finance Director
___________________________
Director of Transportation
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING DEDICATION TO OWASA OF SEWER EASEMENTS LOCATED ADJACENT TO BOOKER CREEK BETWEEN EAST FRANKLIN STREET AND TADLEY DRIVE, ON LAND OWNED BY THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL (99-7-7/R-9)
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill owns property adjacent to Booker Creek, and
WHEREAS, OWASA intends to replace the section of the Booker Creek interceptor sewer that lies on Town property, and
WHEREAS, replacement of the sewer line would require that the width of the existing easements be generally increased to 45 feet,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager is authorized to transfer to OWASA sewer easements located on Town land along the west side of Booker Creek, between East Franklin Street and Tadley Drive, generally as shown in the attached drawings.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING AND AWARDING THE BID FOR RENOVATION OF THE LOWER BOOKER CREEK TRAIL IN THE AMOUNT OF $85,749 (99-7-7/R-10)
WHEREAS, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA), representing the Town of Chapel Hill, solicited formal bids by advertisement in The Chapel Hill News, Chapel Hill Herald, and the News & Observer on June 6, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the following bids were received and opened June 24, 1999:
Sanford Contractors, Inc. $85,749
Billings & Garrett, Inc. $88,874
Park Construction Corp. $91,325
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town accepts the bid of Sanford Contractors, Inc. in the amount of $85,749 for renovation of the existing Lower Booker Creek Trail and bridge.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that OWASA is authorized to represent the Town in the matter of accepting the bid and administering the Town’s portion of the construction contract.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that OWASA may not commit the Town to any change order that makes a substantive change to the project or increases the cost of construction without approval by the Town Manager or his designee.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager is authorized to approve up to $13,000 in change orders without further Council approval.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1999 (99-7-7/O-5)
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, 1999” as duly adopted on June 14, 1999, be and the same is hereby amended as follows:
ARTICLE I
Current Revised
APPROPRIATIONS Budget Increase Decrease Budget
CAPITAL IMPOVEMENTS
FUND
Transfer to Capital Projects
Ordinance Fund 0 98,749 98,749
Greenways 199,000 98,749 100,251
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CAPITAL PROJECTS ORDINANCE FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL PROJECTS (99-7-7/O-6)
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that, pursuant to Section 13.2 of Chapter 159 of the General Statues of North Carolina, that the capital projects ordinance for various capital projects funded from a variety of sources is hereby amended as follows:
SECTION I
The capital projects as authorized by the Town Council includes various capital projects funded from grants, the Capital Improvements Program funds, and other miscellaneous sources of revenue for a variety of projects extending beyond one fiscal year.
SECTION II
The Manager of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby directed to proceed with implementation of these projects within terms of funds appropriated here.
SECTION III
Revenues anticipated to be available to the Town to complete the projects are as follows:
Current Budget Revised Budget
Clean Water Management Grant 200,000 200,000
Metropolitan Planning Grant 56,000 56,000
State Bicycle/Pedestrian Grant 260,000 260,000
Pritchard Park Gift 100,193 100,193
Pritchard Park Interest & Rental Income 63,807 63,807
Donations 2,000 2,000
Orange County Bond Funds 105,000 105,000
Transfer from CIP Fund 42,800 141,549
Transfer from General Fund 25,000 25,000
Interest Earnings 88156 88,156
N.C. Transportation Grant 212,865 212,865
OWASA Reimbursement 42,931 42,931
Total 1,198,752 1,297,501
SECTION IV
Amounts appropriated are for projects as follows:
Current Budget Revised Budget
Booker Creek Linear Park 20,000 20,000
Dry Creek Trail 235,800 235,800
Lower Booker Creek Trail 330,000 428,749
Pritchard Park 164,000 164,000
Southern Community Park 105,000 105,000
Willow Drive Bridge 343,952 343,952
Total 1,198,752 1,297,501
SECTION V
The Manager is directed to report annually on the financial status of the project in an informational section to be included in the Annual Budget. He shall also keep the Council informed of any unusual occurrences.
SECTION VI
Copies of this projects ordinance shall be entered into the Minutes of the Council and copies shall be filed within 5 days of adoption with the Manager, Finance Director and Clerk.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION RECEIVING AND ACCEPTING THE REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON FISCAL RELATIONSHIPS AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN ACTIONS (99-7-7/R-11)
WHEREAS, the Town Council appointed members of a joint Task Force on Fiscal Relationships on October 13, 1997; and,
WHEREAS, Chancellor Michael Hooker similarly appointed members to the said Task Force; and,
WHEREAS, the Task Force was charged with, among other tasks, the development of a working definition of fiscal equity; and,
WHEREAS, the Task Force has completed its work and has submitted a final report to the Council and the University;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Report of the Task Force on Fiscal Relationships is hereby received and accepted by the Council and that, consistent with the recommendations of the Task Force,
The Mayor is authorized to request extension and expansion of the Town’s lease from the University of land at the Horace Williams tract for use by the Public Works and Transportation Departments;
The Mayor is authorized to initiate discussions with the University about appointment of a work group to consider development of policies, possibly including payments in lieu of taxes, applicable when the University or UNC Health Care System purchase properties not located on the north or south campuses, Mason Farm tract or Horace Williams tract; and,
The next review of fiscal equity issues for key services is hereby scheduled to be initiated in July 2002.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council thanks the members of the Task Force for their work.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE MANAGEMENT OF THE LOVE TRUST BY THE CHAPEL HILL PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION (99-7-7/R-12)
WHEREAS, the Cornelia Spencer Love trust was established in 1985 to provide for the needs of the Chapel Hill Public Library; and
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Public Library Foundation was established in 1996 for the sole purpose of supporting library activities: and
WHEREAS, the retiring Love Trustee wishes to transfer future management of the Love trust to the Chapel Hill Public Library Foundation; and
WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Public Library Foundation has agreed to manage the funds according to the terms included in its Memorandum of Understanding; and
WHEREAS, election of a trustee other than a bank would require a petition to the Court to transfer management authority to the Chapel Hill Public Library Foundation;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town endorses the management of the Love Trust by the Chapel Hill Public Library Foundation, based on the conditions included in the Foundation’s proposed Memorandum of Understanding to the Town, submitted on June 23, 1999.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Town Manager and Town Attorney to represent the Town in a joint petition to the court in order to effect a management authority transfer from the current Trustee to the Chapel Hill Public Library Foundation.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDING FOR LA FIESTA DEL PUEBLO AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO COORDINATE WITH COMMUNITY GROUPS TO DEVELOP A PROPOSAL FOR SPONSORSHIP (99-7-7/R-15)
WHEREAS, La Fiesta del Pueblo is one of the best attended and lively events we have in Chapel Hill; and
WHEREAS, La Fiesta del Pueblo has grown and diversified over the years;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council appropriates $5,000 for the 1999 Fiesta to be held at Chapel Hill High School.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Mayor to coordinate with the Town of Carrboro, Orange County, the Chamber of Commerce, and Chapel Hill – Carrboro Schools to develop a proposal for sponsorship and to bring this proposal to the elected boards in the fall.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1999 (99-7-7/O-7)
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, 1999” as duly adopted on June 14, 1999, be and the same is hereby amended as follows:
ARTICLE I
Current Revised
APPROPRIATIONS Budget Increase Decrease Budget
GENERAL FUND
Non-Departmental
Contingency 50,579 5,000 45,579
Agency Contributions:
Other 7.500 5,000 12,500
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PROCESS TO AMEND THE 1999 – 2000 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (99-7-7/R-15.1)
WHEREAS, the Town has an ongoing interest in the promotion of Community Development activities in the Town of Chapel Hill; and
WHEREAS, the Town has received Community Development program income; and
WHEREAS, additional funds from completed Community Development programs may be available for re-use;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council adopts the following process to amend the 1999 – 2000 Community Development program to budget Community Development program income:
· schedule a public hearing for August 23, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber in Chapel Hill Town Hall to receive citizen comments;
· publish a notice in the Chapel Hill Herald to announce the time and date of the public hearing and send a notice of the hearing to our Community Development mailing list;
· return to the Council on September 13, 1999 for consideration of the proposal; and
· if the proposal is approved, submit a revised 1999 - 2000 Annual Update to the Consolidated Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that if additional funds from completed Community Development programs are identified, or if additional program income is received, the funds will be included in the amendment process.
This the 7h day of July, 1999.
(99-7-7/ R-15.1a)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill requested an assessment of the Town’s transportation policies and recommendations for changes; and
WHEREAS, Balloffet and Associates has submitted its final report summarizing issues discussed by the Town Council at a March 24, 1999 work session;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council refers this report to the Town Manager, Transportation Board, and Planning Board for comments and recommendations concerning the topics addressed in the report by October 1999.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
There was no Council discussion.
a. Nominations
Mayor Waldorf noted that the Town had received another application for the Pay As You Throw Advisory Group.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO PLACE THE APPLICANT’S NAME IN NOMINATION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
b. Appointments
1. Parks and Recreation Commission
Mayor Waldorf said that the Commission had recently received a number of applications and asked the Council to reappoint Dan Costa, whose term had recently expired, to an additional one-year term.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 15.2. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION REAPPOINTING A PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEMBER (99-7-7/R-15.2)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby reappoints Dan Costa to the Parks and Recreation Commission to serve an additional one-year term expiring on June 30, 2000.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
2. Pay As You Throw Advisory Group
Mayor Waldorf explained that the Council could, if they chose, appoint Alan Rimer, whose name they had just placed in nomination.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO APPOINT ALAN RIMER TO THE PAY AS YOU THROW ADVISORY GROUP. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3. Deferral of Other Appointments
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 15.3. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION DEFERRING APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS UNTIL AUGUST 23, 1999 (99-7-7/R-15.3)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby defers appointments to the advisory boards listed below until August 23, 1999, to allow advisory boards to review applications and make recommendations to the Council for appointments:
Community Design Commission Library Board of Trustees
Housing and Community Development Parks and Recreation Commission
Advisory Board Personnel Appeals Committee
Human Services Advisory Board Transportation Board
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
Item 7 — Proposed Development Ordinance Text Amendment on Adding a Fifth Finding Related to Traffic for Review of Special Use Permit Applications
Roger Waldon, Planning Director, read the proposed fifth finding: “that the applicant has specifically mitigated auto-related impacts of the development both on site and in the region that the proposed use affects.” He noted that the staff had included in their memorandum some relevant information about case law, recommendations from the Transportation Board and opinions from the Manager and the Town Attorney about how the fifth finding might be used. Mr. Waldon said that the staff continued to recommend that the Council take no action at this time. He added that there was an ordinance included in the packet which would make the changes discussed.
Council Member McClintock supported the proposal because it allowed more emphasis to be placed in areas of concern. She added that the Development Ordinance dealt with traffic concerns in a general way, but noted that it never specifically required the developer to address traffic impacts. Council Member McClintock said that adding this finding set an expectation for what the Town would like to see in a development, and the result would be that the Town would get better projects. She thanked Mayor pro tem Capowski for bringing this to the Council.
Council Member Evans noted that the Planning Board had recommended by a vote of five to two that the Council not adopt the ordinance. She said that the Transportation Board recommended by a vote of six to zero that they not approve it. Council Member Evans argued that adding this finding would force the Town in a direction that the community really did not want to go. She concluded that this would mean widening roads, creating turn lanes, or making many intersections more difficult for pedestrians. Council Member Evans added that the staff raised other conflicting viewpoints, and recommended using the tools that were in place for handling the issue on a case by case basis.
Council Member Bateman proposed incorporating the concept into the first finding to say “Safety includes, but is not limited to, addressing traffic impacts.”
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 8.
Council Member Foy suggested that, if they adopt the ordinance, the Council take the Town Attorney’s advice and exempt already-approved master land use plans. He said the ordinance made it clearer that the Town was taking traffic into consideration because traffic had become of such consequence in the Town that the Council was letting developers know that it was taking this seriously.
Mayor pro tem Capowski added that he obviously favored this since he was one of those who had proposed it. He asked the Town Attorney if the ordinance was strong enough to compel a developer to improve a nearby intersection which the new development would impact. Mr. Karpinos replied that the Council could require a traffic impact statement. He said that whether or not the facts would require an improvement to that intersection would depend on the facts presented and would have to be dealt with on a case by case basis.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if there was anything in the law that said this was not possible. Mr. Karpinos said that it would depend on the facts and whether there was a rational nexus between the development and the needs created by that development.
Mayor pro tem Capowski inquired about the first sentence in the last paragraph of page three in the staff report: “It would be advisable to include a clear definition of what the Council means by the terms ‘specifically mitigated auto-related impacts’ and ‘the region that the proposed use affects.’” He said that it would be possible to define the second one, which they already did when deciding on contiguous property. Mayor pro tem Capowski added that the techniques for mitigating impacts existed and were well-known.
Mayor pro tem Capowski commented that the staff report did not address the last paragraph of the petition on page 16, which read, “we believe that each increase in asphalt should be coupled with some corresponding amount of human space where kids of all ages can safely picnic, walk, hold a conversation, hear birds and get poison ivy.” He explained that the paragraph was meant to say that asphalt caused a human loss and the public should be compensated for that. Mr. Horton replied that the staff had understood that to be the rationale for the petition and that was stated in the first part of the memorandum.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said he was delighted to support this ordinance.
Council Member Wiggins asked if Council Member Bateman’s suggestion that an addition be made to the first finding could be acted upon tonight since it had not been part of a public hearing. She asked Mr. Karpinos how they would proceed if they were interested in pursuing Council Member Bateman’s suggestion. Mr. Karpinos said that he did not think the Council could make those kinds of changes without going back to a public hearing.
Council Member Bateman stated that she was not in favor of the ordinance the way it was written, and would be in favor of having another public hearing. She asked if anyone had spoken at the first public hearing on the ordinance. Mayor Waldorf replied that no one had, except for the advisory board representatives.
Council Member Bateman disagreed with Mayor pro tem Capowski’s position, explaining that to say “in the region” was not clear. She commented that it was not fair to anyone who had gone through design and development and finally came before the Council to say “we have decided that for you the region is X.” Council Member Bateman said that she could support the ordinance if it read, “the applicant has addressed auto-related impacts of the development,” and would prefer to fold that into the first finding.
Council Member McClintock said that she did not understand Council Member Bateman’s position regarding resolution. Council Member Bateman replied that it was overkill. Mayor Waldorf noted that Council Member Bateman had also said it was vague and said she did not think it was fair to decide at the last minute what the “region” was for a particular applicant. She expressed support for Council Member Bateman’s proposal.
Council Member McClintock said she was concerned about going back to another public hearing and perhaps still not getting enough votes. She asked what the Council should do next.
Council Member Foy suggested removing the last clause, “both on site and in the region that the proposed use affects,” and leaving the finding that “the applicant has mitigated the auto-related impacts of the development.”
Mayor Waldorf asked Council Member Foy if he was amending his motion. Council Member Foy asked the Town Attorney if that could be done. Mr. Karpinos replied yes.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED ORDINANCE 8, AS AMENDED, TO READ, “THE APPLICANT HAS MITIGATED THE AUTO-RELATED IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT.” MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI, THE SECONDER, AGREED.
Mayor Waldorf asked what would be different when the staff worked with applicants in the future than currently if the Council approved a fifth finding that said “that the applicant has specifically mitigated the auto-related impacts of the development.” She said that she wanted to know the specifics of what she would be voting for and how it would play out through the process. Mayor Waldorf added that the Town and the applicants needed to have predictability.
Mr. Waldon replied that the language did not give the Town any more ability to require things than it had currently. He noted that the Town already asked for traffic impact statements and looked at levels of service, for example. Mr. Waldon added, though, that the ordinance did put more focus on traffic.
Council Member McClintock added that if the Council wanted more specificity it could develop guidelines on the kinds of things it was interested in.
Mayor Waldorf supported Council Member McClintock’s idea, remarking that it often happened that some people thought it was too much traffic and others did not.
Council Member Evans asked the Attorney if this ordinance was specific enough to defend the Town in court. Mr. Karpinos replied that it was as specific as any of the other standards. He pointed out that the Town’s basic argument would be the same as that for defending other denials, that was, “there was competent material and substantial evidence to support the reasons given for denial.” He added that it depended on the facts of the case.
Council Member Bateman said that she was not in favor of the ordinance because it added one more cumbersome and nebulous layer. She repeated her position that it should be included with the first finding.
Mayor Waldorf asked if Council Member Bateman wanted to make a substitute motion to advertise different language.
Council Member McClintock said that the Council could do both.
Mayor Waldorf said that she was going to vote against the motion because she liked Council Member Bateman’s idea better.
THE MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 8 FAILED (4-5), WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CAPOWSKI, FOY AND MCCLINTOCK VOTING AYE AND MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, EVANS, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING NAY.
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO CALL A PUBLIC HEARING ON CHANGING THE WORDING OF THE FIFTH FINDING TO INCLUDE THE SENTENCE, “SAFETY INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING TRAFFIC IMPACTS.”
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked the Attorney if passing Council Member Bateman’s motion would limit the Council addressing only the roads that were directly in front of a development, or would they be able to consider intersections that did not directly touch the development. Mr. Karpinos replied that the nature of that motion did not affect what the Town could and could not consider in that regard. He said that the Town could consider all of that, adding that what one could require depended on the evidence in any specific case.
Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that the Town would eventually have to advertise a public hearing to amend the ordinance. He asked if Council Member Bateman’s motion was sufficient that the advertisement would allow people to talk about what happened a quarter of a mile away at that next intersection. Mr. Karpinos replied that the Council would be able to advertise that it was going to change the ordinance to specifically say “traffic impact will be considered and it will be considered to the extent that the evidence in any specific special use case supports a finding that the Council wishes to make or a stipulation requiring public traffic improvements that the Council wishes to make.” He added that how it would be used in any case would depend on the evidence in that case.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if advertising it generally would allow someone to say that the Town had not been talking about regional traffic but only traffic on or adjacent to the site. Mr. Karpinos said that the only way you could require regional improvements would be if the project impacted that region. He said that what the Town could or could not require would depend on the evidence.
Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that applicants were presently required to make improvements such as widening the road and putting in bike lanes on the main road that fronted their properties. Mr. Karpinos remarked that the Town required what it required based on some combination of the evidence and what the applicant was willing to do.
Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that he had never seen an applicant required to improve an intersection a quarter of a mile away from a development which would obviously be impacted by the development. He asked if that was because the Town was not allowed to do that or because they had not thought of doing that. Mr. Karpinos replied that the extent to which the Town required off-site improvements depended on whether the evidence in any case showed there was a rational nexus between what was being required and the impact that the development was creating. He said that you could require such an improvement if the evidence justified it; if the evidence did not justify it, you could not, whether it was in front or down the road. Mr. Horton added that there was nothing in the proposed language that would prohibit the Council from being able to do that if the evidence suggested that it was reasonable to do so.
Mayor Waldorf asked the staff if they could suggest a way to look at guidelines and standards that go beyond level of service D, and do so within the context of the proposed change to the Special Use Permit language.
Mr. Horton suggested discussing these issues with Balloffet and Associates. He said he would like an opportunity to negotiate a scope of services to address these and other issues and to bring that back to the Council in the fall.
Mayor Waldorf said she supported that idea, adding that the Council needed to get tools, which would mean more than general language.
Council Members Evans and McClintock agreed.
Council Member McClintock asked Council Member Bateman if she would change the wording of her motion to “safety includes mitigation of traffic impacts.” Council Member Bateman refused, suggesting that the word “mitigation” was ambiguous.
Mr. Horton suggested scheduling the public hearing for October 18, 1999.
Council Member Bateman proposed going forward with developing standards rather than calling a public hearing for language which might also be considered vague.
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN WITHDREW HER MOTION.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO AUTHORIZE THE MANAGER TO WORK WITH CONSULTANTS TO DEVELOP GUIDELINES FOR TRAFFIC MITIGATION.
Council Member Foy asked if these guidelines would ultimately be put in the Development Ordinance. Mayor Waldorf said that would be the goal. Mr. Horton clarified that it would be the goal to the extent possible, pointing out that there might also be supplementary materials.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Mr. Horton reported that the Town would be working on Willow Drive in the fall. He said that the Kingston Drive contract had been awarded, and reported that the Town would go to bid on Raleigh Road and Cameron Avenue in the fall. Mr. Horton said that a 100-foot stretch on Roberson Street would be built in the fall, and reported that Weaver Dairy Road was under design. He stated that the Town would get the easement it needed to fix a small gap on Piney Mountain Road. Mr. Horton said he recommended that highest priority be given to construction of the Weaver Dairy Road sidewalk, which would cost $180,000 or more. He also recommended that High School Road, running from Seawell School Road to Homestead Road, be the highest priority project for construction with the Town’s own crews.
Mayor Waldorf expressed appreciation that more sidewalks were being built.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 16. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THAT TOWN FUNDS BE USED TO CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK ALONG WEAVER DAIRY ROAD AND HIGH SCHOOL ROAD
(99-7-7/R-16)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has proposed $60,000 in the Capital Improvements Program for pedestrian projects in the 1999-2000 fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the Council will have $100,000 available from the first half of the second allocation of 1996 Bond funds to be used for sidewalk and bicycle projects during the next fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed projects for possible use of these funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that 1999-2000 Capital Improvements Program funds and the funds from the first half of the second allocation of the 1996 Bond funds be used to construct the following pedestrian sidewalk projects:
· Weaver Dairy Road, between Kingston Drive and Cedar Fork Trail; and
· High School Road, between Seawell School Road and Homestead Road.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
Conditions on N.C. 54 Widening
Mayor Waldorf opened the floor for comment by those who had looked into this issue in detail, specifically Council Members Bateman, Foy, Capowski, and herself.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 17a.
Council Member Foy noted that it would be difficult to go back and modify the Special Use Permits (SUP) so that it would be a four lane rather than six lane road. He explained that the developer had stated during negotiations that he agreed in theory that it should be a four lane road but had problems with how to do that. Council Member Foy recommended asking the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT) not to widen the road.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN SECONDED THE MOTION.
Council Member Evans pointed out that there was more to the issue than just the Town working with NCDOT. She said that the applicant must ask for a modification of the SUP and go through the process of conducting more public hearings, which would then open everything up to reconsideration.
Council Member Bateman noted that the letter from Mr. Perry included two conditions under which he would even think about reapplying for a modification. She said that since the two conditions could not be met, passing this resolution would be futile and she would not support it.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that this was one resolution where the Council could make a statement that the Town was not interested in paving everything, adding that he supported Resolution 17a.
Council Member McClintock stated that she was in favor of it as well, mainly because of the principle and the opportunity to go after something they all thought was good.
Council Member Bateman noted that Mr. Perry had already talked with the Council and put his response in writing.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that Mr. Perry still could refuse, adding that if they did not pass the resolution the Council was making a statement that they wanted more asphalt.
Council Member Pavăo pointed out that passing a resolution inviting the applicant to submit also gave him the opportunity not to submit.
Council Member Foy said that Mr. Perry had stated at a meeting that he did not think the road should be widened, thereby agreeing with what they were saying: “No matter how many lanes the highway is it will eventually fill up, so lets just stop it at four, and find another way to get into Chapel Hill.”
Council Member Foy said that Mr. Perry expressed agreement with that philosophically, but could not see how the Council would be able to guarantee that they would not use that against him on the SUPs that he already had. He read from Mr. Perry’s letter and summarized Mr. Perry’s statement as: “If we all agree that we don’t want to widen the road out there, don’t turn around and use that against me.” Council Member Foy said that it was up to the Council to figure out a way to do that.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that another motivation Mr. Perry would have was money, explaining that the cost of the two additional lanes was somewhere between $1.5 million and $2 million. Mayor pro tem Capowski noted that Mr. Perry said he could “market Meadowmont with or without that extra widening.”
Council Member Pavăo asked what would happen in the future when there was gridlock and no alternate way to travel in or out of Chapel Hill. He asked who would pay for widening the road then.
Council Member Wiggins asked if the Council had addressed Mr. Perry’s concern about a mechanism to guarantee that this would not be used against his other SUP applications. Mr. Karpinos replied that he was not aware of a way that the Town could give Mr. Perry that guarantee. Council Member Pavăo added that they could not bind future Councils.
THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 17a FAILED (4-5) WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CAPOWSKI, FOY AND MCCLINTOCK VOTING AYE AND MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, EVANS, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING NAY.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 17b. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (5-4) WITH MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, EVANS, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CAPOWSKI, FOY AND MCCLINTOCK VOTING NAY.
A RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE COUNCIL’S DETERMINATION TO TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION AT THIS TIME TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL TO ELIMINATE REQUIREMENTS IN MEADOWMONT SPECIAL USE PERMITS THAT HIGHWAY 54 BE WIDENED (99-7-7/R-17b)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the possibility of inviting the developers of Meadowmont to seek modifications to Meadowmont Special Use Permits to eliminate the requirements that N.C. Highway 54 be widened and determined that it does not wish to invite the developers to do so;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council takes no further action at this time to consider the proposal to eliminate stipulations in Meadowmont Special Use Permits that require Highway 54 to be widened along the frontage of Meadowmont.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
Mr. Horton expressed appreciation to Marti Pryor-Cook, whom he said Chief Pendergraph described as having “great skill, great knowledge and great resources on these particular subject matters.” He asked her to make a presentation summarizing the work.
Ms. Pryor-Cook, Director of Orange County Social Services, presented highlights on behalf of the Committee to look at teen homelessness, which she chaired. She said that the Committee addressed three concerns: what was the extent of teen homeless, what resources were available; and what resources were needed. Ms. Pryor-Cook explained that the Town’s initial perception of 30 homeless teens was not accurate. She explained that there were teens who left home without approval and stayed with friends or relatives of compassionate families, but those thought to be homeless were older than 18 and not residents of Orange County.
Ms. Pryor-Cook said that two primary needs were for staff to coordinate resources on a County-wide basis and for out-of-home placements and independent living skill training. She said that the Committee did not identify a need for a drop-in shelter. Ms. Pryor-Cook noted that the Committee had made five recommendations, which were highlighted in the report. She said they also recommended that the report be sent to all governmental bodies in Orange County and that the Committee continue to meet until there was an action plan.
Reverend Jill Edens, using a 2 liter bottle as a prop, pointed out that there was more publicity about how to recycle plastic in Chapel Hill than there was on how to address the problems of adolescents. She said that the Committee would continue until its goals were reached. Rev. Edens thanked the Council for its support.
Police Chief Ralph Pendergraph also thanked the Committee, and commended Ms. Pryor-Cook, Rev. Edens and Jim Huegerich in particular. He pointed out that the Town had begun working on the issue before it became a national focus. Chief Pendergraph suggested that the Police Department and the Committee continue working together to identify solutions.
Council Member Bateman mentioned that she also had served on the Committee sporadically, and applauded them for their broad look at these complex problems. She said she was delighted that the Committee would be looking for more out-of-home placements, and she had confidence that this Committee, with its commitment and its verbal ability, would move forward. Council Member Bateman praised the idea of setting up a commission to continue. She also pointed out that the Committee had found that the non-minors identified as being homeless were eligible for services at the IFC shelter.
Council Member Bateman asked if the new commission to help youth would be for “at-risk” or for all youth. Ms. Pryor-Cook explained that it would be for young people between the ages of 16 and 18 who were troubled and who had issues that were not being addressed in any other arena.
Council Member Bateman suggested that a qualifier be added before it goes before the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
Mayor Waldorf noted that the Council needed to do that with the resolution as well.
Mayor Waldorf stressed that members of the Committee should go personally to the various boards and councils. She said that Rev. Edens should take her cola bottle because that would be more effective than merely having the Council forward the report.
Ms. Pryor-Cook replied that the plan was to go forward with the report and then follow up with a verbal presentation.
COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 18.
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION BY INSERTING “THE SPECIFIC NEEDS OF ORANGE COUNTY AT-RISK YOUTH.”
Council Member Evans noted that some had expressed objections to labeling people “at-risk” because they came from a dysfunctional family. She noted that the report had tried to avoid doing that and suggested that adding it to the resolution might be somewhat counter-productive.
Council Member McClintock asked if Council Member Evans could suggest an alternative. Council Member Evans replied that wording in the report and the resolution was sufficient as it stood.
Council Member Bateman replied that objections to “at-risk” had been expressed to her as well. She added, though, that this program was targeted toward a discreet cohort of kids who did not access the usual array of services that were available. Council Member Bateman said that she would go with whatever Ms. Pryor-Cook recommended.
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN WITHDREW HER AMENDMENT.
THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 18 WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION FORWARDING THE REPORT OF THE YOUTH STEERING COMMITTEE TO OTHER GOVERNMENTAL BODIES, MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND CONTINUING THE WORK OF THE YOUTH STEERING COMMITTEE (99-7-7/R-18)
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill supports the efforts of the Youth Steering Committee to improve the services for displaced teens in Chapel Hill and all of Orange County; and
WHEREAS, the Council acknowledges and appreciates the efforts of the eighty-one community people who gave a tremendous commitment of time and energy to the Youth Steering Committee assessment process;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that:
The Manager forward the Report and Recommendations of the Youth Steering Committee to all county governmental bodies, including Orange County, Carrboro, Mebane, Hillsborough, the Orange County Schools, the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Schools, and the University of North Carolina recommending an on-going, county-wide initiative;
The Manager recommend that the Orange County Commissioners create a County Youth Commission to represent the specific needs of Orange County youth and to collaborate with the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council;
A Youth Coordinator position be established for Orange County with a recommendation to plan and develop programs for 16-18 year olds, for whom services are most needed;
A collaborative effort be established between the proposed Youth Coordinator, Juvenile Crime Prevention Council, and the proposed Youth Commission to actively seek expansion of local out-of-home placements for teens with at least ten emergency beds. Further recommendations are to develop programs that:
· Coordinate youth services;
· Continue relationships among area agencies involved with youth and families;
· Provide easily accessible, up-to-date catalog of services and resources for youth and families;
· Provide a Youth hotline staffed by trained volunteers, possibly involving the schools and students;
· Establish a relationship with the University North Carolina for continued research and development on Youth issues; and
· Provide local family counseling resources. ; and
The Youth Steering Committee should continue to meet and to work with the Juvenile Crime Prevention Council to develop short-term, transitional programs to address youth needs until the recommendations are implemented. The continuation of this effort should prevent a repeat of past studies shortfalls and provide an on-going evaluation of this most critical issue.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
Zoning Atlas Amendment and Special Use Permit
Mr. Waldon said that a valid protest petition had been filed against the zoning application, which meant that rezoning would require seven affirmative votes from the Council. He said that the applicant’s request was to rezone with the conditions listed in the memorandum. Mr. Waldon reported that the Manager’s recommendation was for approval, noting that recommendations from the Planning Board and Transportation Board were included in the packet.
Mr. Waldon noted that the application for the Special Use Permit (SUP) was dependent on the rezoning. He said that if the Council approved the rezoning, then the staff recommended approval of the SUP. Mr. Waldon pointed out that the materials for tonight’s packet included responses from the applicant and the staff to comments made at the previous public hearing.
Elliot Sleight argued that this was an egregious mistake and that nine units per acre was an unacceptable level of density. He said that putting 14 units on an acre and a half of land was crazy, and would create a concrete-paved, permanent, residential eyesore. Mr. Sleight added that the developer and his supporters were enamored of a concept but did not realize the harm they were doing. He urged the Council not to violate the existing zoning and to honor the wishes of the community. Mr. Sleight suggested that the Council sell the site, put in a lower density development, or create a park in the area.
Alison Weiner, a board member of Orange
Community Housing Corporation (OCHC) and the Community Land Trust in Orange
County, urged the Council to grant the Zoning Atlas Amendment (ZAA) and the
SUP. She said that the OCHC design suited the site and would provide quality
housing that would remain affordable for a long time. Ms. Weiner asked those
who were still concerned to take a leap of faith beyond the fear of change.
She stressed that this was not a bad thing, but decent, safe, affordable, and
well-built housing which was needed. Ms. Weiner noted that a lot of people
had spent time and money on the project, and stressed that no
one was doing it to make money. She argued that every person needed a place
to call home and, hopefully, a home in the community in which they worked.
Ms. Weiner said that if that meant increasing density in some places, then she
thought it was worth it.
John Silvasi, president of the board of directors of The Meadows at Chapel Hill Homeowners Association, acknowledged the need for affordable housing in Chapel Hill. He stressed, though, that affordable housing should be built in a manner which did not exacerbate the increasingly bad traffic problem on Legion Road, which was being used at rush hour by drivers trying to avoid 15-501. Mr. Silvasi noted that many of the Association’s members were retirees and/or elderly and took issue with the Manager’s conclusion that the SUP met finding one relating to public safety. He recommended that the Council vote against the zoning proposal and the SUP application.
Margot Wilkinson thanked the Town for allowing the neighborhood to submit their protest petition. She noted that the question of how the Town had gotten this property had come up at Association meetings. Ms. Wilkinson stated that the Town had taken the land for taxes many years ago. She handed out copies of maps, and explained that the land had been sub-divided into small lots when it was set up for affordable housing after World War II. Ms. Wilkinson noted that the residents had been asked to submit their concept of what the area should look like if it was rezoned, and pointed out that they had suggested R-3 zoning. She added that the Town had insisted that the corner lot remain R-2 because of its proximity to the cemetery, and explained that this was put into the Land Use Plan in 1986 as part of the Comprehensive Plan.
Leah Wayland explained that she lived on the corner of Scarlette Drive and Legion Road and was one of those most affected by the project. She said she failed to see the logic of zoning a spot of land and then saying it was not spot zoning. Ms. Wayland commented that it would be difficult to prove the value to the surrounding community given the layout of that community now. She noted that the traffic was horrible, and said that she did not use that intersection at all. Ms. Wayland asked why John McPhaul’s offering of units for $105,000 was not being considered. She added that putting in a detention pool would add to a mosquito problem.
Linda Mews wondered why the Town would alienate so many people simply to accommodate 14 future, unknown residents. She noted that the more than 200 households objecting to the site were low- to moderate-income residents, which were the people who fit the Town’s profile of those who lived in affordable housing. Ms. Mews suggested that the land be used as an extension of the cemetery, pointing out that it would accommodate at least 15,000 grave sites and would make $750,000 for the Town. She said that a federal grant had been denied for the project because the income level was so high that the federal government said the project was not serving its intended purpose. Ms. Mews also said that the buffer was too small. She added that it was inappropriate to have a graveyard pushed up against banging dumpsters and screaming kids.
Linda Tingen, speaking on behalf of her mother, Ruth Wright, asked if the Council would consider moving the driveway that was planned to be in front of her mother’s house. She said that she had learned that the property line was farther than she thought and that all of the trees would be removed. She said that the buffer would be made up of new, immature trees, which would not make a good buffer, and that new trees could not be planted in front because of utility easements. Ms. Tingen argued that the Town was insisting on putting a round peg in a square hole. She added that there was no justification for the “spot zoning,” and pointed out that those in favor of the project did not live in the neighborhood.
Bob Avent pointed out that the cost and the value of property was a gray area. He expressed concern that this was not true home ownership and that people would not feel obliged to keep it up. He said that the project would be a burden and would depreciate the area.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked Mr. Dowling to describe the view from the cemetery. Mr. Dowling replied that, if one stood in the cemetery close to Legion Road and looked east at the site, one would be able to see the buildings. He said that if one was back on the nearest road to the site and it was summer, then one would not be able to see the buildings.
John Hawkins said that in wintertime the view would be worse than during the rest of the year. He explained that about 10 feet of the mature tree area would be left in the buffer. Mr. Hawkins said that the only part of the project visible from the cemetery would be at one corner. He noted that the dumpster would be substantially obscured, and completely obscured in the summertime.
Council Member McClintock asked what the view was from Legion Road, looking straight at the project, and asked if they would have to clear cut that property. Mr. Hawkins replied that from Legion Road the building would be the primary feature. He added that they hoped to plant some trees that would soften the architecture.
Council Member McClintock asked if they could legally do that. Mr. Waldon replied that plantings would be limited to low vegetation.
Council Member McClintock asked Mr. Waldon to explain the difference between R-2 and R-3 zoning regarding the number of units. Mr. Waldon replied that R-2 was four units per acre and R-3 was seven per acre. He noted that the new zoning would be 9.3 units per acre.
Council Member McClintock said she was reluctant to do this in a neighborhood where the majority felt that it would be a problem for them. She expressed concern that the Council had not listened to the neighbors and recalled what one citizen had said about the Town having zoned the land R-2 in support of the citizens.
Mayor pro tem Capowski inquired about the Town’s total financial investment in the project. He estimated that roughly $143,000 had been spent, including staff hours and the cost of the land the Town was donating, and noted that the Town had a substantial financial interest in the project. Mayor pro tem Capowski stated that whether the Town made improvements or OCHC made them it still came out of tax payers’ money. He said that he lived in an R-2 neighborhood and had asked himself how he would feel about having this in his neighborhood.
Council Member Brown said that she had asked the Town Attorney how the Town could address some of the issues raised by the neighbors if the rezoning and SUP were passed. She said that the time to address these would be during the next step in the process, when the Town turned the land over to the Land Trust. She noted that the Town could impose conditions and restrictions at that time, and proposed that the Town and OCHC involve the neighbors in the planning for restrictions on the development.
Council Member McClintock asked if any of what Council Member Brown was suggesting would affect the overall density. Council Member Brown said that when she stepped out of her house she looked right across the street at a development that was 23.7 units per acre. She added that there was another building, which was 33 units per acre, three blocks away from her house. Council Member Brown said that the Council would have to address the issue of density sometime because it was of concern to all neighborhoods. She noted that her suggestion had been one way to address neighborhood concerns.
Council Member Evans asked if there could be flexibility in placing the sidewalk to allow for trees and in design to allow for street vista. Mr. Dowling replied that Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) needed a 30-foot wide easement to extend the sanitary sewer up Scarlette Drive and down Legion Road. He said that OWASA had expressed some flexibility and that they were confident they would be able to plant some trees but were not yet able to say how many.
Council Member Wiggins said that the restrictions and covenants outlined in Council Member Brown’s memo would help. She explained that she felt a pull between responding to the neighbors and building this kind of housing, and suggested doing as much as possible to make it an exemplary project. Council Member Wiggins stated that she was not satisfied with the driveway placement and suggested that the Town consider paying for a fence between the townhomes and the cemetery. She said that the evidence convinced her that this project would be an asset to the neighborhood and that she would welcome it in her neighborhood. Council Member Wiggins added that she would welcome the project on the large tract of land that was right next to her house.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 9.
Council Member Bateman said that she wished all could feel that there were no winners or losers on this one. She said that she sympathized with those who did not know what to expect but she agreed with Council Member Wiggins that it would be a good project and serve a good purpose in the community. Council Member Bateman reminded the Council that OCHC had proposed putting five single homes on this property and the neighbors had been opposed to that and had asked the Council to cluster and maximize it instead. She summarized the neighbors reaction as, “We want you to do everything you can to eke out of this land what you can in terms of the amount of buildable space.”
Council Member McClintock said that she would not support the rezoning because it was a principle for her, and because she thought the density would cause traffic problems.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (8-1) WITH COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK VOTING NAY.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL ZONING ATLAS FOR THE SCARLETTE DRIVE TOWNHOMES (Chapel Hill Tax Map Number 27A.B.7 and 8)
(99-7-7/O-9)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the application of the Orange Community Housing Corporation to amend the Zoning Atlas to rezone property described below from Residential-2 and Residential-3 to Residential-Special Standards-Conditional zoning, and finds that the amendment is warranted in order to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Chapel Hill Zoning Atlas be amended as follows:
That the portion of the property identified as now or formerly Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 27A, Block B, Lot 7, located near the northwest corner of the Scarlette Drive/Legion Road intersection, be rezoned from Residential-3 to Residential-Special Standards-Conditional zoning.
That the portion of the property identified as now or formerly Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 27A, Block B, Lot 8, located at the northwest corner of the Scarlette Drive/Legion Road intersection, be rezoned from Residential-2 to Residential-Special Standards-Conditional zoning.
The description of the entire property is as indicated on the attached map.
SECTION II
That all ordinances and portions of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 20a.
Council Member Foy referred to page eight in the packet material, reading, “the Council believes it would be desirable for the developer to provide additional screening. We believe a condition could be added...” He said that he did not want to get too specific on phrasing because adding a fence to the buffer might require taking down additional vegetation. Council Member Foy stressed, however, that the Town should require as much buffering as possible. He pointed out that on page ten the staff said, “we might consider adding some language regarding street tree planting...” Council Member Foy noted that the Town would be looking at similar situations more often now, and would not be able to have the same restrictions it had in a suburban environment where there had been plenty of land for trees. He said that the Town had to figure out how to make it a livable place and could not have an easement problem in the long run. Council Member Foy suggested adding language that would essentially give the Manager discretion to make sure that the plantings were sufficient.
Mr. Horton pointed out that the following language at the top of page nine would address the first issue: “that the applicant provide a fence, or a vegetative screen that offers the same degree of visual obstruction as a fence, along the western property line adjacent to the cemetery subject to Town Manager approval”.
Council Member Foy said that he would include that language in his motion.
Mr. Horton said that the language in the second paragraph would be useful in addressing the second issue. Council Member Foy read, “that the applicant attempt to provide street plantings along Legion Road and Scarlette Drive subject to Town Manager approval.” Mr. Horton said that would give the staff the leverage they need to address both issues. Council Member Foy agreed to include both in his motion.
Council Member Wiggins asked Council Member Foy if he would recommend increasing vegetation or fence even if doing so would add more cost to the project. She added that she agreed that this should be done, but was concerned about how it would impact the cost of the units. Mr. Horton suggested looking at the total project cost and then identifying how the Town could use some of the funds available to subsidize the total project and also free money for this purpose. He added that some neighborhood revitalization funds had been returned, so the Town should be able to make a contribution in that way. Mr. Horton said that they could also sort it all out and find that they are short of funds and come back to the Council with suggestions on how to address that issue. He said he was confident the Town could address the issue in some manner.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that he would find it more acceptable if the cost were charged to the project, even if it meant that the Town reimbursed the project. He explained that if the Town had to spend money as a consequence of the project then the accounting would not be strictly true. Mr. Horton agreed, noting that the staff would want to keep the cost clear and in front of the Council and public in every way.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that if the Town did something with the cemetery that costs the Town money then that ought to be written off to the project. Mr. Horton agreed that the staff should identify that as project cost.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2Oa, AS AMENDED, SUCH THAT THE APPLICANT PROVIDE A FENCE, OR A VEGETATIVE SCREEN THAT OFFERS THE SAME DEGREE OF VISUAL OBSTRUCTION AS A FENCE, ALONG THE WESTERN PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT TO THE CEMETERY, SUBJECT TO TOWN MANAGER APPROVAL, AND THAT THE APPLICANT ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE STREET PLANTINGS ALONG LEGION ROAD AND SCARLETTE DRIVE, SUBJECT TO TOWN MANAGER APPROVAL. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (8-1) WITH MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, BROWN, CAPOWSKI, EVANS, FOY, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE AND COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK VOTING NAY.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE SCARLETTE DRIVE TOWNHOMES DEVELOPMENT (99-7-7/R-20a)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by the Orange Community Housing Corporation on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 27A, Block B, Lots 7 and 8, if developed according to the site plan dated January 25, 1999 (revised April 30, 1999) and conditions listed below, would:
1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, and 14, and with all other applicable regulations;
3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and
4. Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for the Scarlette Drive Townhomes project in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:
1. That construction begin by July 7, 2001 (two years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by July 7, 2002 (three years from the date of Council approval).
2. Land Use Intensity: That this Special Use Permit authorizes construction of 14 townhome units within two multi-family structures, and a 25-space parking lot.
3. Recombination Plat: That the two lots associated with this development (Chapel Hill Township Tax Maps 27A.B.7 and 27A.B.8) be recombined to form one lot, and that the final plat be recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds office, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
4. Roadway Improvements:
A. Scarlette Drive Right-of-Way: That one and one-half feet of right-of-way be dedicated along the Scarlette Drive frontage of the site, and that the new right-of-way line be located one foot behind the concrete sidewalk. The final plat identifying this right-of-way shall be recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
B. Scarlette Drive Improvements: That improvements to Scarlette Drive shall include curb and gutter and a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk.
C. Legion Road Right-of-Way: That one and one-half feet of right-of-way be dedicated along the Legion Road frontage of the site, and that the new right-of-way line be located one foot behind the concrete sidewalk. The final plat identifying this right-of-way shall be recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
D. Legion Road Improvements: That improvements to Legion Road shall include curb and gutter and a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk.
Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements
5. Landscape Plan Approval: That a detailed Landscape Plan, specifically addressing plantings along Scarlette Drive and Legion Road and along the western property line, be approved by Duke Power Company, OWASA and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
6. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
7. Landscape Bufferyards: That the following landscape bufferyards shall be provided, and that if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation shall be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:
¨ Type B landscape bufferyards (minimum width 10 feet) along the northern and western property lines of the site.
8. That the applicant provide a fence (or vegetative screen which offers the same degree of visual obstruction as a fence) along the western property line adjacent to the cemetery subject to Town Manager approval.
9. That the applicant attempt to provide street tree plantings along both Legion Road and Scarlette Drive, subject to Town Manager approval.
Stipulations Related to Utilities
10. Building Location: That the proposed building along Scarlette Drive be located outside of the existing 30-foot Duke Power Company easement.
11. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Duke Power Company, Public Service Company, BellSouth and the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
12. Fire Sprinkler System: That a fire sprinkler system shall be installed in the buildings, and that the Siamese connections to the sprinkler system be approved by the Fire Marshal prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
13. Fire Hydrants: That a fire hydrant shall be installed on the site near the corner of Scarlette Drive and Legion Road, at a location to be approved by the Fire Marshal. That a second fire hydrant be installed on the site, if deemed necessary by the Fire Marshal.
14. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report prepared by a registered professional engineer, showing that flows meet the minimum requirements of the Design Manual, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
15. Stormwater Management Plan: That a Stormwater Management Plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. Based on a 25-year storm, the post-development stormwater run-off rate should not exceed the pre-development rate.
16. Drainage Plan: That a storm drainage plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
17. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a Solid Waste Management Plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
18. Dumpster Pad Redesign: That the dumpster pad location shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
19. Playground Equipment: That the Town Manager shall approve the recreation area’s playground equipment prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
20.
Detailed Plans: That the final detailed site plan, grading plan, utility/lighting
plans, stormwater management plan (with hydraulic calculations), and landscape
plans shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance
Permit, and
that such plans shall conform to the plans approved by this application and
demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and design standards of
the Development Ordinance and Design Manual.
21. Erosion Control: That a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan, including provisions for maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer, and that a copy of the approval be provided to the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
22. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.
23. Construction Sign Required: That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number; the contractor’s representative, with a telephone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
24. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
25. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for the Scarlette Drive Townhomes development.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, THAT THE TOWN AND THE ORANGE COMMUNITY HOUSING CORPORATION WORK TOGETHER TO INVOLVE THE NEIGHBORS OF THIS PROJECT IN PLANNING FOR RESTRICTIONS ON THIS DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES IF THAT IS DEEMED NECESSARY, THAT THIS TAKE PLACE OVER THE SUMMER AND TO BE IN PLACE WHEN THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY TO THE LAND TRUST COMES BACK TO THE COUNCIL IN THE FALL.
Council Member McClintock asked if covenants could be added at the time of the transfer. Mr. Horton replied that would be the appropriate time to consider covenants. He said that the staff would work as expeditiously as they could, but said that he could not promise to have it completed by August 23rd.
Council Member Brown agreed that this could come back in the fall.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, THAT THE FIRST ROW OF GRAVE SITES NOT BE SOLD AND BE USED AS A BUFFER.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that he would support the motion if the plan was to plant vegetation where those graves would have been and to identify that as a project cost.
Mr. Horton made an alternate suggestion that the lots be reserved and not sold until a succeeding Council gave other direction. He said that he could envision a time when the buffer would be full and those lots would not be objectionable at all.
After discussion among the Council about how long to reserve them, Mr. Horton suggested the motion say “the Town Manager is not authorized to make any sales of burial permits for the first row of lots next to the project without coming back to the Council to receive specific approval.”
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, THAT THE TOWN MANAGER IS NOT AUTHORIZED TO MAKE ANY SALES OF BURIAL PERMITS FOR THE FIRST ROW OF LOTS NEXT TO THE PROJECT WITHOUT COMING BACK TO THE COUNCIL TO RECEIVE SPECIFIC APPROVAL. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED TO EXTEND THE SIDEWALK NORTH ON SCARLETTE DRIVE FROM THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY TO HIGHWAY 15-501, WITH CURB AND GUTTER.
Council Member Foy noted the project would cost about $7,000.
Mayor Waldorf clarified that Council Member Foy was proposing building the sidewalk as a Town cost and a Town project.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Application for Special Use Permit Modification
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED TO DEFER A DECISION UNTIL THE PROJECT HAD BEEN REVIEWED BY THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT PROCESS.
Council Member Foy explained that the Council might receive some useful information from that process.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mayor Waldorf suggested hearing from the applicant about whether delaying would create hardship for them. She also asked if anyone knew when the Council would be likely to get the information from the State.
Mary Beck, Director of Planning and Program Development at UNC, said that it would delay the project. She added that the building next to the proposed project had gone through the process and was given a “no significant impact” finding. Ms. Beck stated that there was no difference between this project and that project in the process that the State put forward. She said that UNC would be happy to accept the stipulation in Resolution A that they would have to come back to the Council if there were findings of significance associated with the project. Ms. Beck stressed that delaying the process would be unfortunate.
MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO SUBSTITUTE RESOLUTION 22a FOR THE MAIN MOTION.
THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (6-3) WITH MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, CAPOWSKI, EVANS, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FOY, BROWN AND MCCLINTOCK VOTING NAY. THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION IS NOW THE MAIN MOTION.
MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Council Member Brown asked if the new noise ordinance would apply if it were enacted before the Manager approved the Zoning Compliance Permit. Mr. Horton stated that was correct.
Council Member Foy noted that he was not necessarily against the project but wanted to wait because they might receive some useful information from the EPA.
Council Member McClintock suggested an amendment to the stormwater management section. She asked, noting that it would have a lot of paved surfaces to it, that the stormwater management division of DENR review the plans and make suggestions about any additional controls that might be necessary to control the overflow of water from this project.
Mayor pro tem Capowski said that he did not understand what the ramifications would be of that amendment. Council Member McClintock explained that the State would review the plan. Ms. Beck explained that the hospital had to do that anyway.
Mayor Waldorf said she assumed it was acceptable as an amendment. Mayor pro tem Capowski said that it was.
COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 22a, AS AMENDED, TO HAVE THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DIVISION OF DENR REVIEW PLANS AND MAKE SUGGESTIONS ABOUT ADDITIONAL CONTROLS THAT MIGHT BE NECESSARY TO CONTROL THE OVERFLOW OF WATER FROM THIS PROJECT. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (6-3) WITH MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, CAPOWSKI, EVANS, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, FOY AND MCCLINTOCK VOTING NAY.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR THE UNC HOSPITALS HEDRICK II OFFICE BUILDING
(99-7-7/R-22a)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit Modification application proposed by Corley Redfoot Zack, Inc. for an office building located on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 66, part of Lot 12, if developed according to the site plan dated November 10, 1998 (re-submittal date March 10, 1999) and the conditions listed below, would:
1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, and 14, and with all other applicable regulations;
3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, and
4. Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for the Special Use Permit Modification of the Special Use Permit for the UNC Indoor Tennis Facility recorded in Deed Book 886, Page 368, of the Orange County Register of Deeds, and the Special Use Permit for the UNC Hospitals Administrative Office Building (Hedrick I) recorded in Deed Book 1006, Page 274, of the Orange County Register of Deeds, and for the UNC Hospitals Hedrick II Office Building in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:
Stipulations Specific to the Development
1. That construction begin by July 7, 2001 (two years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by July 7, 2003 (four years from the date of Council approval).
2. Land Use: That this Special Use Permit Modification authorizes construction of a three-story, 78,500 square foot office building and the construction of up to 300 additional parking spaces, providing a total of 201,393 square feet of floor area and a total of 637 parking spaces within the boundaries of this Special Use Permit Modification.
3. North Carolina Environmental Policy Act: That the Environmental Assessment for this project be submitted to the North Carolina State Clearinghouse and receive a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and that the applicant provide documentation of this finding to the Town Manager, prior to the start of construction. In the event that this project does not receive a FONSI, the project will be required to submit all updated project information for Council consideration and approval.
4. Watershed Protection District: That the applicant demonstrate compliance with the Low Density Option of the Town Ordinance’s Watershed Protection District regulations by submitting a plan identifying that the impervious surface on this site does not exceed 24%, to be approved by the Town Manager. A note shall also be included on the final plat that states that the built-upon area on the site shall be restricted to a maximum of 24%, in accordance with the Low Density Option.
5. NC Highway 54 and Friday Center Drive Intersection Improvements:
A. Westbound Left Turn Lane: That a second exclusive westbound left turn lane from NC Highway 54 onto Friday Center Drive and necessary associated signal upgrades and connections to the Town’s computerized traffic signal system as determined necessary by the Town Manager, be constructed prior to occupancy of the building.
B. Northbound Approach Lane: That a third northbound approach lane on Friday Center Drive to NC Highway 54 and signal upgrades and connections to the Town’s computerized traffic signal system as determined necessary by the Town Manager, be constructed prior to occupancy of the building.
6. NCDOT Approval: That any required permits or encroachment agreements by the North Carolina Department of Transportation be obtained, and copies of the permits and agreements be submitted to the Town, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements
7. Landscape Plan Approval: That a detailed Landscape Plan and Landscape Maintenance Plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The Landscape Plan shall note any areas that are part of the landscape buffer for the Town’s Park and Ride Lot which will be disturbed by construction on this site, and shall indicate a replanting plan for such areas.
8. Landscape Protection Plan: That the Town Manager shall approve a Landscape Protection Plan prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
9. Landscape Bufferyards: That the following landscape bufferyards shall be provided, and that if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation shall be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:
¨ Type C bufferyard (minimum width 20 feet) along the northeastern property line adjacent to developed, residential-zoned property.
10. Grading and Landscape Plans: That the grading and landscape protection plans shall identify all road and sidewalk improvements.
11. Fire Evacuation Plan: That the Town’s Fire Marshal shall approve of a fire evacuation plan prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
12. Fire Flow Report: That a fire flow report and detailed construction plans, sealed by a registered engineer, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
13. Sprinkler System: That a sprinkler system for the Hedrick II Office Building and Fire Department connection locations to the sprinkler system be reviewed and approved by the Town’s Fire Marshal prior to starting construction of the building.
14. Stormwater Management Plan: That a Stormwater Management Plan, based on the Town’s Hydros program, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit; that the Stormwater Management Division of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources review these plans and make suggestions about any additional controls that may be necessary to control the overflow of water from the project. Based on a 25-year storm, the post-development stormwater run-off rate should not exceed the pre-development rate.
15. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a Solid Waste Management Plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
16. Transportation Management Plan: That prior to occupancy of the building, the applicant shall prepare a Transportation Management Plan for approval by the Town Manager. The required components of the Transportation Management Plan shall include:
¨ Provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;
¨ Provisions for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;
¨ Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;
¨ Ridesharing incentives; and
¨ Public transit incentives.
17. Erosion Control: That a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be approved by the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and a copy of the approval letter provided to the Town, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
18. Building Elevations and Site Lighting: That the Community Design Commission shall approve building elevation and site lighting plans prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
19. Utility Plan Approval: That the final utility plan shall be approved by Duke Power Company, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
20. Detailed Plans: That the final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility and lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), and landscape plans shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans shall conform to plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and Design Manual.
21. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.
22. Construction Sign Required: That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number; the contractor’s representative, with a telephone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
23. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
24. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the Special Use Permit Modification application for the UNC Hospitals Hedrick II Office Building.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 23a, AS AMENDED, WITH THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE: “THAT A SPACE BE PROVIDED FOR A REFUSE DUMPSTER AND PAD. THE PAD WILL BE BUILT AND THE REFUSE DUMPSTER PUT IN PLACE ONLY IF DEEMED NECESSARY AFTER THE FIRST YEAR OF OCCUPANCY. THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL WORK WITH THE TOWN TO DEVELOP AN AGGRESSIVE RECYCLING AND YARD WASTE COMPOSTING PLAN BEFORE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. REVIEW OF THE PLAN AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION WILL TAKE PLACE AFTER THE BUILDING HAS BEEN OCCUPIED FOR ONE YEAR. PERIODIC MONITORING OF THE WASTE GENERATED AT THE BUILDING DURING THE FIRST YEAR WILL TAKE PLACE AS WELL. A REPORT BY THE TOWN ON THE SUCCESS OF RECYCLING AND FOOD AND YARD WASTE COMPOSTING AND THE MATTER OF WASTE GENERATED AT THE SITE WILL BE SENT TO THE COUNCIL. THE COUNCIL WILL THEN DETERMINE THE NECESSITY OF REQUIRING A REFUSE DUMPSTER AND PAD. AT THAT TIME, THE SPACE WILL EITHER BE FREED UP FOR OTHER USES OR USED FOR A REFUSE DUMPSTER AND PAD.”
Mayor Waldorf asked the applicant to respond to the proposed stipulation.
Mike Berkelhammer, representing the Hillel Board, expressed resistance to the amendment and asked if it would mean that they should not put in heavy duty paving for the truck to come in. Mr. Horton replied that it would mean that they might have to do it later on if they did not do it in the beginning.
Council Member Brown explained that she thought the new language would respond to Hillel’s concerns. She pondered removing the heavy duty paving. Mr. Horton explained that if the Council were to do that they might as well remove the dumpster requirement.
Mr. Berkelhammer explained that there would not be much food waste. He said that all leftover food would be given to the shelter.
Mr. Horton commented that the Town must look at the potential, not just the present use.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked Mr. Horton if he was confident that the Town could handle Hillel’s solid waste needs without the dumpster and the heavy duty paving. He also asked if it could be arranged to leave things as they were but to compel Hillel to make the expenditure if the situation changed. Mr. Horton replied that the Attorney could write it so that the Manager could require dumpster service and require the owner to make whatever retrofit was necessary for that.
Council Member Foy stated that he would
support that, noting that the major concerns expressed had been regarding the
number of parking spaces the dumpster would take up and the unsightliness of
a dumpster if it was not necessary. He said that Council Member Brown’s
proposal was reasonable, but the Town needed to have some assurance that the
solid waste could be handled if the situation changed. Mayor Waldorf pointed
out that the Attorney was working on some language to achieve that.
Council Member Evans said that food composting had caused some problems in downtown areas, adding that she would not want to exacerbate the varmint problem. She said that she did not think it was wise to encourage food composting near the downtown area.
Council Member Brown noted that closed containers could achieve this.
Council Member Evans said that varmints had gotten into her closed container.
Mr. Karpinos suggested the following language: “that a space be provided for a refuse dumpster and pad with vehicle access. The vehicle access and pad will be built and the refuse dumpster put in place only if deemed necessary by the Town Manager. The property owner will work with the Town to develop an aggressive recycling and food and yard waste composting plan before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Review of the plan and its implementation will take place annually after the building has been occupied. Periodic monitoring of the waste generated at the building will take place as well. A report by the Town on the success of the recycling and food and yard waste composting and the amount of waste generated at the site will be sent to the Council.” He said that the idea would be that the Council would review it annually. Mr. Karpinos said that if at some point the Manager determined that the dumpster was necessary it would be built along with the necessary vehicle access and pad.
Council Member Brown said that the wording was fine with her.
Mr. Berkelhammer said the wording was acceptable.
Council Member Foy commented that he did not want to receive a report every year.
Mr. Karpinos explained that the Manager would review the report, not the Council.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 23a, AS AMENDED WITH NEW LANGUAGE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE HILLEL FOUNDATION (SUP 86-C-21) (99-7-7/R-23a)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by Rabbi Edward Elkin, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 86, Block C, Lot 21, if developed according to the plans dated January 6, 1999 (revised April 6, 1999) and conditions listed below, would:
1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, and 14, and with all other applicable regulations, with the modifications listed below;
3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and
4. Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Town Council of Chapel Hill that it finds, in this particular case, that the following modifications satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:
1. Modification of Subsection 13.11.2 of the Development Ordinance to exceed the maximum floor area limit, allowing 10,737 square feet of floor area; and
2. Modification of Subsection 14.12.6 of the Development Ordinance to allow no landscape buffer along a section of the western property line;
The public purposes served in this instance are that the project will fulfill the objective of the Comprehensive Plan: “Community facilities and services which meet the physical, social, and cultural needs of the population and which are available to all residents”; and that the project will generate less vehicular traffic to/from the site and will provide expanded services to university students.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the Special Use Permit application for the razing of the old Hillel Building and construction of a new one in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:
Stipulations Specific to the Development
1. That construction begin by July 7, 2001and be completed by July 7, 2002.
2. Use Approved: That this approval shall authorize 10,737 square feet of floor area, with up to 18 parking spaces.
3. Dumpster: That a space be provided for a refuse dumpster, pad and heavy duty pavement for vehicle access. The vehicle access and pad will be built and the refuse dumpster put in place only if deemed necessary by the Town Manager. The property owner will work with the Town to develop an aggressive recycling and food and yard waste composting plan before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Review of the plan and its implementation will take place annually after the building has been occupied. Periodic monitoring of the waste generated at the building will take place as well. A report by the Town on the success of the recycling and food and yard waste composting and the amount of waste generated at the site will be sent to the Council.
4. Driveway: That a shared driveway arrangement be provided in cooperation with the adjacent property owner, to reduce impervious surface on the site, consolidate traffic to and from the two properties, and to preserve the two magnolia trees in front of the building. If the adjacent property owner refuses such an arrangement, a two-way drive may be provided on this property, with the provision of two large (5”-6” caliper) trees in front of the building.
5. Bicycle Parking: That bicycle parking be provided for a minimum of 10 bicycles or in accordance with the ratio in the Town’s Development Ordinance, whichever is larger.
6. Fence Repair: That the existing fence along the northern property line be repaired and the vines removed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
7. Hazardous Waste Management: That the underground fuel oil tank and any contaminated soil be removed and disposed of in accordance with state and federal regulations prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
8. Recordation of Drainage Easement: That the property owner dedicate a 30-foot drainage easement centered on the existing 36-inch drainage pipe along the eastern property line, and that the dedication plat be recorded prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
9. Recordation of Encroachment and Access Agreements: That prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, encroachment agreements between the owner of this property and the owners of adjacent properties for the encroachment of the driveway onto property to the west, and for encroachment of the fence onto property to the north, shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds Office.
If a joint driveway agreement is reached, that such agreement between this and the adjacent property owner be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements
10. Landscape Protection Plan: That a Landscape Protection Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
11. Landscape Plan: That a detailed landscape plan and landscape maintenance plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
The landscape plan shall include the following landscape buffers:
· Type “A” landscape buffer (minimum width 15 feet) along the street frontage; and
· An alternative, reduced width Type “C” buffer (15 feet instead of 20 feet) along the northern property line;
· An alternative, reduced width Type “C” buffer (width varies from 3 feet to 10 feet) along the eastern property line, with a 6 foot tall wooden fence between the building and the adjacent property; and
· An alternative, reduced width Type “B” buffer along a portion of the western property line.
The landscape plan shall demonstrate compliance with the shading and screening requirements for parking lots.
Stipulations Related to Building Elevations
12. Building Elevation Approval: That the detailed building elevations and lighting plan be approved by the Historic District Commission prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit. All structure requiring a Certificate of Appropriateness shall be reviewed and approved by the Historic District Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
13. Placement of Utility Lines Underground: That all utility lines be placed underground.
14. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Duke Power Company, Orange Water and Sewer Authority, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
15. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report, prepared by a registered professional engineer, and showing that flow meet the minimum requirements of the Design Manual, be approved prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
16. Stormwater Management Plan: That a Stormwater Management Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. Based on a 25-year storm, the post-development stormwater run-off rate should not exceed the pre-development rate. The plan must show how stormwater detention for this site will be achieved.
17. Fire Protection: That the Fire Department connection to the building’s fire suppression sprinkler system be installed in a location to be approved by the Town Manager.
18. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a detailed solid waste management plan, including a recycling plan and a plan for managing and minimizing demolition and construction debris, be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The plan must include provisions for managing food wastes, including grease. The demolition debris plan must be approved by the Town Manager prior to initiation of demolition on the site.
19. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), and landscape plans and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to the plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.
20. Erosion Control: That a detailed soil erosion and sedimentation control plan, including provision for maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
21. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.
22. Construction Sign Required: That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number, the contractor’s representative, with a phone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
23. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above
24. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the Special Use Permit application for the Hillel Foundation.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
Item 14 —U.S. 15-501 Corridor
a. Scope of Work for Phase II of the U.S. 15-501 Major Investment Study
David Bonk, Transportation Planner, reviewed the history of the project to look at the options for developing fixed guideway and other transportation improvements in the 15-501 corridor between Durham and Chapel Hill. He said that the Phase I report of the Major Investment Study (MIS) was completed last year and the Council had begun to consider Phase II. Mr. Bonk noted that the Council had made recommendations to the Transportation Advisory Committee on what elements should be included, and, in December 1998, had adopted a resolution which set forth some principles that they wanted included in Phase II.
Mr. Bonk said that, by and large, the scope of work for the 15-501 Phase II project incorporated the elements that the Council had identified as being important. He said that the main purpose of the Phase II report was to answer two questions to the satisfaction of the elected officials and the public in Durham and Chapel Hill. Mr. Bonk said that with regard to the fixed guideway option for transportation improvements in the 15-501 corridor, the questions were: What was the technology that should continue to be evaluated?; and, what was the corridor on which that technology would then run and provide access between Durham and Chapel Hill?
Mr. Bonk said that the extension of the physical limits of the corridor in Durham had been changed as part of negotiations between Duke University, Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) and the City of Durham. He explained that the Phase I rail system would end at Ninth Street and the Phase II system, which the TTA might build some time in the future, would take it from Ninth Street through the Duke campus on to Chapel Hill. Mr. Bonk said the project limits for this MIS had been extended from Duke University to Ninth Street.
Mr. Bonk explained that the Phase II scope of work was the result of negotiations and discussions between the Town of Chapel Hill, the City of Durham, the NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT), and the TTA. He added that the Phase II report was in final draft form and a “price tag” would be developed for it. Mr. Bonk noted that the Committee hoped to take it to the NC Board of Transportation in August or September. He said that Chapel Hill and Durham would be asked to participate financially in the Phase II report in the same proportions as the Phase I report, which was about $650,000.
Council Member McClintock asked when Phase II would be completed and elected officials would be asked to make a decision. Mr. Bonk replied that it would be in August-September, 2000.
Council Member McClintock asked if there had been any narrowing of options. Mr. Bonk said that they had identified four technologies that would be evaluated: regional rail that TTA was currently operating in Phase I, a light rail vehicle, a busway, and a hybrid which was referred to as bus rapid transit, which involved both on street and off road operations of buses. He added that the corridors to be reviewed still fell within the two corridors that came out of Phase I.
Mayor Waldorf added that the fifth alternative, of course, was to do nothing—the “no build” alternative—and noted that it was a federal requirement to have those as part of the study.
Council Member McClintock remarked that if elected officials did not make a decision, the “no build” alternative was what would happen.
Council Member Bateman noted that Council Members had received petitions from the Westwood neighborhood (Mason Farm/Manning Drive Area). She asked if those neighborhoods were within the corridors. Mr. Bonk replied that the corridors A & B, identified in Phase I, indicated that the fixed guideway would access the campus at Manning Drive. He noted that the University had been trying to refine a corridor that would fit in with their master plan and accommodate the heavy rail technology that the TTA was implementing. Mr. Bonk said that his group would look at that technology. He added, though, that the other technologies were more flexible in terms of utilizing existing streets and avoiding properties that would be adverse in terms of the overall impact. Mr. Bonk explained that the Committee was not wedded to that same corridor when they look at light rail busway or bus rapid transit.
Council Member Brown noted that the plan seemed to be expanding into Durham. She added that the planners were spending a lot of time, energy and money without knowing what kind of ridership they would have. Mr. Bonk replied that they had studied this and found that the ridership varied between bus and rail, but was about 9,000 riders per day. He said that this study should give them more accurate ridership numbers.
Council Member Brown replied that she was more interested in knowing where these people were coming from and where they were going. Mr. Bonk said that an extensive origin and destination study had been done in 1996. He added that this information had been fed into the model that was now available for their use.
Council Member Brown asked where they got that information. Mr. Bonk replied that a household survey was conducted, adding that the results were statistically significant.
Council Member Foy asked if Phase II was going to try and determine the corridor between Duke and UNC. Mr. Bonk replied that it would evaluate four corridors that were specifically tailored to the technologies that they would review. He said that these technologies would be evaluated in five “hot spots,” which included the UNC campus, to determine if they could be accommodated within the existing land use and the operating parameters of those technologies. He said that planners would eliminate technologies that did not fit into any or all of those hot spot areas so that, in the end, they would be down to one technology and one corridor. He said they anticipated that they could have two technologies that met their criteria, and then there would be two corridors.
Council Member Foy clarified that the system would terminate somewhere around Ninth Street/Duke University in Durham and somewhere around UNC Hospitals/Columbia Street in Chapel Hill. He asked, noting that some people werre wondering if the link would be extended towards Carborro, if there would be a Phase III. Mr. Bonk replied that there would be a Phase III for the MIS with the corridor ending at the UNC Hospitals. He added that this would go through a very long public involvement process. Mr. Bonk said that the study would look qualitatively at the potential for extending each of the technologies beyond the terminus, which was the hospital, to see what the potential impacts would be. He added that this study was not in any sense intended to promote the extension of that, noting that that would be a different MIS completely.
Mayor Waldorf said that this qualitative look at how to get the various technologies from, say, the hospital to Carborro was nothing to be afraid of. She added that it would be a very superficial analysis, adding that she sometimes wondered why it was even in there.
Council Member McClintock noted that the best policy answer might not be the same as the best technical answer. She said that she would like the Council to find a way to insert its opinion that it would have a problem with putting rails through neighborhoods.
Mayor Waldorf agreed with Council Member McClintock’s suggestion and reassured the Council that she had said that at every meeting where multiple parties had come together. She encouraged the Council to approve the scope of work which they had been working on for a long time with many partners who all needed answers to their questions. She emphasized moving ahead, adding that it would be fine to make additional comments.
Council Member Evans said that UNC might have new information, such as additional students, which had not been fed into the model. Mr. Bonk said that the model was made using the projections that planners made several months ago for the 2025 plan that the region was now doing. He said that those projections incorporated an expansion of the UNC student body, faculty and staff, as well as the hospital.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 24. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE PROPOSED SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE U.S. 15-501 MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY PHASE II REPORT (99-7-7/R-24)
WHEREAS, a proposed scope of work for the US 15-501 Major Investment Study Phase II Report has been prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the Phase II scope of work;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council endorses the proposed scope of work for the US 15-501 Major Investment Study Phase II Report.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
b. Response to Petition Regarding Triangle Transit Authority Transit Technologies and Services in Chapel Hill
Mr. Bonk stated that the Committee had responded to a petition from a Council Member regarding information related to the various technologies and the various corridors that had been identified by the University, the Triangle Transit Authority (TTA), and the 15-501 Major Investment Study (MIS) for access to the UNC campus.
Council Member McClintock suggested passing a resolution with a general statement saying they would be opposed to rail running through neighborhoods in Chapel Hill.
Mayor Waldorf suggested saying that they were not in favor of technologies that were destructive to existing neighborhoods.
Council Member Brown said that she had stated that in her proposal, noting that she had been more specific in mentioning rail which she thought was the most environmentally and neighborhood destructive.
Mayor Waldorf said that she did not want the Town boxed in too much with restrictions.
Council Member Brown said that she was talking only about neighborhoods.
Mayor Waldorf suggested that Council Member Brown make that as a motion.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED THAT THE COUNCIL OPPOSE MASS TRANSIT ROUTES AND TECHNOLOGIES THAT WOULD HAVE ADVERSE IMPACT ON ANY CHAPEL HILL NEIGHBORHOOD.
Council Member Evans asserted that rail was the best way to capture riders, and pointed out that the Town had reserved rail through Meadowmont which was going to be a Chapel Hill neighborhood.
COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION OPPOSING MASS TRANSIT ROUTES AND TECHNOLOGY THAT WOULD HAVE SERIOUS ADVERSE IMPACT ON ANY CHAPEL HILL NEIGHBORHOODS (99-7-7/R-28)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council opposes mass transit routes and technology, including rail, that would have serious adverse impact on any Chapel Hill neighborhoods.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
Council Member Brown noted that she had information saying that bus systems attract just as much ridership as rail.
Council Member McClintock asked if the Mayor would forward the resolution to all relevant parties. Mayor Waldorf agreed to do so.
4o. Extension of Completion Date of the Lowe’s Village Center
Council Member Foy said that this proposal had been described as a Borders Bookstore, but that was not actually true. He said it was an extension of a Special Use Permit (SUP) time frame, and that it should be understood that anything could be built there.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 13a, AS AMENDED WITH THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE: “WHEREAS, THE APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR EXTENSION STATES HIS INTENT TO REDUCE THE ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO APPROXIMATELY 25,000 SQUARE FEET,” AND, “NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVES THE REQUEST FOR A 12-MONTH EXTENSION CONDITIONED UPON THE REMAINDER OF THE DEVELOPMENT FOR LOWE’S VILLAGE CENTER ADDING 25,000 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR AREA.”
Council Member Foy said that the goal was to have something like Borders in there, which would not create a parking burden and would have traffic patterns complimentary to Lowe’s.
Mayor Waldorf asked the Manager if the restriction would pose a problem. The applicant replied that he had no problem with the amendment.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE COMPLETION DATE FOR LOWE'S VILLAGE CENTER (99-7-7/R-13a)
WHEREAS, National Development Corporation has requested an extension of the completion time limit for Lowe's Village Center; and
WHEREAS, Article 18.6.3 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance requires Council to make the determination that a) the permit holder submits the request within 60 days of the completion time limit; b) the permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and c) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Council reconsideration of the approved development; and
WHEREAS, a) the permit holder submitted the request within 60 days of the completion date; b) the permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and c) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Council reconsideration of the approved development; and
WHEREAS, the applicant’s request for extension states his intent to reduce the allowable square footage to approximately 25,000 square feet;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council approves the request of National Development Corporation for the 12 month extension of the completion date of the Lowe's Village Center conditioned upon the remainder of the development for Lowe’s Village Center adding no more than 25,000 square feet of floor area.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
b. Removed.
c. Report on Proposed University Lab Building for the School of Public Health
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO REFER HER PETITION TO FORM A COMMITTEE TO DEAL WITH RESEARCH INVOLVING EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEASES AND BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL AGENTS TO THE MANAGER.
Mayor pro tem Capowski stated that the reply (which was not signed and had no letterhead), which he assumed was from UNC, was extremely disappointing. He said that it was content free and did not answer the question that was asked in the petition.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
d. Report on the Town’s Least Toxic Integrated Pest Management Policy
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, THAT THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE MANAGER TO APPOINT APPROPRIATE TOWN STAFF TO WORK WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN AND ANY OTHER INTERESTED COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ALLEN SPALT OF THE AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES CENTER, IF HE IS WILLING, OVER THE SUMMER TO BRING BACK TO THE COUNCIL ANOTHER REPORT ON THE PETITION FROM MARTHA DRAKE IN THE FALL.
Mr. Horton said that he was not sure what kind of report was envisioned. Council Member Foy said that the specific goals that the Manager had outlined on page four seemed like worthy goals, adding that he did not want them to be delayed or modified in any way.
Council Member Brown said that she would like to have either an ordinance or Council policy to look at strengthening some of the language and some of the recommendations.
Mayor Waldorf explained that Council Member Brown wanted to have an opportunity to review the report with Alan Spalt and bring it back. She asked Council Member Brown if she agreed that that the Manager should go ahead and do what he had been doing regarding pest management.
Mr. Horton said that he did not think there would be time to fulfill Council Member Brown’s request over the summer. He said that the staff could do it by the end of the year, but probably not by end of summer unless the Council wanted them to rearrange some priorities.
Council Member Brown changed the wording to “work when we can in the summer and into the fall.”
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO REFER HER PETITION REGARDING INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO THE STAFF TO WORK ON IT WHEN THEY COULD DURING THE SUMMER AND INTO THE FALL. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 10, AS AMENDED TO REMOVE UNDER SECTION 2-71B “THE NAMES OF CONTRIBUTORS LESS THAN $10.”
Council Member Evans stated that there was no provision to address the personal funding that could go into a campaign, noting that someone could finance their own campaign totally.
Mr. Karpinos agreed that there was no limit on how much a person could spend on his or her own campaign, adding that State law exempted money which a person or his family contributed to his campaign.
Mayor Waldorf noted that they were not exempt from disclosure. Mr. Karpinos agreed.
Robert Porter, a resident of Chapel Hill, said it was important for people to be able to follow the money trail. He quoted Senator Paul Simon and pointed out that candidates were most likely to listen to their biggest contributors when time was limited. Mr. Porter argued that a $200 limit was reasonable and pointed out that Senator Ellie Kinnaird had unilaterally limited her contributions voluntarily, and won the election. He recommended that Chapel Hill be a leader in this.
MAYOR PRO TEM CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MCCLINTOCK, TO REDUCE THE CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION LIMIT FROM $200 TO $100. THE MOTION FAILED (2-7) WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CAPOWSKI AND MCCLINTOCK VOTING AYE AND MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, BROWN, EVANS, FOY, PAVĂO AND WIGGINS VOTING NAY.
Council Member Wiggins asked, regarding the ordinance, if “no individual” did not include the candidate. Mr. Karpinos replied that it did not include the candidate or the candidate’s immediate family. He said that this should be clarified by adding “except as provided by State law.”
Council Member Foy suggested deleting the first clause in (a) so that the language begins, “all candidates for municipal elections.” Mr. Karpinos agreed, adding that they should delete (b) and change (c) to (b).
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 10, AS AMENDED WITH 2-71(b) DELETED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE DISCLOSURE OF NAMES OF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTORS AND TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT THAT MAY BE CONTRIBUTED TO CAMPAIGNS FOR TOWN ELECTIONS (99-7-7/O-10)
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill as follows:
Section 1. A new Chapter 2, Article IV of the Town Code is hereby enacted to read as follows:
“ARTICLE IV. CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE AND
CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS
Sec. 2-71. Disclosure of Contributors.
(a) All candidates for municipal elections in the Town of Chapel Hill, regardless of the amount they spend, shall file reports, listing the names of all contributors and the amounts contributed by each.
(b) Reports required by this section shall be filed in accordance with Part 2, Article 22A of Chapter 163, North Carolina General Statutes.
Sec. 2-72. Limitation on Contributions.
Except as provided by North Carolina General Statute 163-278.13(c), no individual or political committee shall contribute to any candidate, or political committee of a candidate, any money or make any other contribution in any Town of Chapel Hill municipal election in excess of two hundred dollars ($200.00) for that election.”
Section 2. This Ordinance shall become effective upon the enactment by the North Carolina General Assembly of the necessary enabling legislation, currently designated as House Bill 868, 1999 Session, and shall apply to all campaign contributions made after its effective date.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
Council Member McClintock left the meeting at 11:54 p.m.
a. By the Mayor and Council Members
Mayor Waldorf reminded the Council that it had made a commitment to make zoning changes on the 60 acres of the Greene Tract that were designated for solid waste use. She suggested that as a show of good faith the Council might set a date, such as October 18th, for a hearing.
Council Member Brown asked if this would be a public hearing to change the zoning. Mr. Horton explained that it would be to change what was permitted within existing zoning. Mayor Waldorf said that it meant adding material recovery facilities (MRF) and transfer stations as permitted uses rather than special uses, which was what they would be in that area.
Council Member Foy asked if it would be more than that 60 acres. Mr. Horton said that it would actually apply to wherever that zoning district was.
Council Member Brown said that the Council was not sure what they were calling the hearing for. Mayor Waldorf stated that her intent was to propose that the Council make amendments to the Development Ordinance and the Zoning Atlas, if necessary, “to enable MRFs and transfer stations to be permitted uses on the 60 acres of the Greene Tract that had been identified as exhibit E and had been identified as the acres that will be reserved for solid waste purposes.”
Council Member Brown said that she was concerned about notification of the neighbors who, if it was not a rezoning, would have recourse to a protest petition. Mr. Horton said that it would not be a rezoning and that the Town would advertise it in the same fashion that it would advertise any ordinance text amendment.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if there were any other rural transition areas other than the Greene Tract. Mr. Waldon replied that there were, and listed them.
Mr. Horton recommended that the Council call the public hearing for the purpose of considering a new zone that would be limited to that sixty aces.
Council Member Brown asked if it would be similar to what they did with Scarlette Drive which could involve a protest petition. Mr. Horton replied that it would be. Mayor Waldorf said that this was a much better solution.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 18, 1999, TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO REZONE THE 60 ACRES OF THE GREENE TRACT TO PERMIT THE USE OF A TRANSFER FACILITY OR A MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY THERE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
18 — Discussion of Consent Agenda Items
4p. Consideration of Response to At-Risk Youth Report
Council Member Bateman asked the staff to respond to questions on page four that were directed to elected officials. She also asked the Council to authorize the group to reconvene next spring in order to re-evaluate.
COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 14. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO CONTINUE EFFORTS TO IMPLEMENT THE 1999 CARRBORO, CHAPEL HILL, AND ORANGE COUNTY RECREATION COMMITTEE FOR AT-RISK YOUTH ISSUES, FINDINGS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS (99-7-7/R-14)
WHEREAS, a Committee consisting of elected officials and staff of the Town of Chapel Hill, the Town of Carrboro, and Orange County prepared a report on the issues and potential solutions for dealing with at-risk youth; and
WHEREAS, the Committee’s report contained specific recommendations targeted toward the staff; and
WHEREAS, the Council accepted the report on February 8, 1999;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Manager is hereby authorized to continue efforts to implement the “Recommendations to Staff” portions of the 1999 Carrboro, Chapel Hill, And Orange County Recreation Committee For At-Risk Youth Issues, Findings, and Recommendations.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
4g. Ordinance Restricting On-Street Parking on Stephens Street
Council Member Foy suggested amending the ordinance to restrict parking from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, so that people would feel free to park there for public hearings.
COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 3, AS AMENDED, TO RESTRICT PARKING ON STEPHENS STREET FROM EIGHT A.M. TO FIVE P.M. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
(99-7-7/O-3)
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of Chapel Hill:
SECTION I
That section 21-27 of the Town Code of Ordinances, “No parking as to particular streets.” is amended by inserting the following therein, in appropriate alphabetical order:
STREET SIDE FROM TO
Stephens Street North The centerline of A point 165 feet west of
Airport Road the centerline of
Airport Road
SECTION II
That section 21-27.8 of the Town Code of Ordinances, “No parking anytime except by residential permit.” is amended by inserting the following therein, in appropriate alphabetical order:
STREET SIDE FROM TO
Stephens Street North A point 118 feet east of A point 165 feet west of
North Columbia Street the centerline of
Airport Road
SECTION III
That the following new section is included in and made a part of Chapter 21 of the Town Code of Ordinances:
SECTION 21-27.2.3 Town Hall Parking
The south side of Stephens Street from a point feet one hundred eighteen (118) feet east of the centerline of North Columbia Street to a point three hundred ten (310) feet west of the centerline of Airport Road shall be reserved for Town Hall parking, between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday as designated by appropriate signs and/or markings; and parking shall be prohibited in said area during the times and days noted above without a special permit as authorized below.
The Manager is authorized to issue special Town Employee Permits that allows the permit holder to park vehicles, displaying such permits, in the designated area where parking is otherwise prohibited.
SECTION IV
That section 21-14(b) of the Town Code of Ordinances, “Vehicular traffic entering public streets at stop signs.” is amended by inserting the following therein, in appropriate alphabetical order:
Stephens Street Stephens Court Apartment Complex
SECTION V
This ordinance shall become effective August 1, 1999.
SECTION VI
All ordinances and portions of ordinances in conflict herein are hereby repealed.
This the 7th day of July, 1999.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVĂO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADJOURN. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
The meeting was adjourned at 12:05 a.m.
The minutes of July 7, 1999 were adopted on the 23rd day of August, 1999.
__________________________________________
Joyce A. Smith, CMC
Town Clerk