SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING

Council members present were Flicka Bateman, Joyce Brown, Pat Evans, Kevin Foy, Lee Pavão, Bill Strom, Jim Ward, 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 Bill Stockard, Public Works Internal Services Superintendent Bill Terry, Parks and Recreation Program Administrator Bill Webster, Parks and Recreation Director Kathryn Spatz, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Engineering Director George Small, Human Resources Director Pat Thomas, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, Transportation Planner David Bonk, Employee Relations Coordinator Lindsay Wallace, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.

Mayor Waldorf recognized the members of the Greenways Commission: Audrey Boothe and Joe Herzenberg, and Debbie Morris, who chaired the awards sub-committee. She also recognized the members of the Parks and Recreation staff. Mayor Waldorf presented these awards to:

· The Vision Award to Jean and Pearson Stewart. Mrs. Stewart’s recognition was posthumous. Mr. Stewart paid tribute to Mrs. Stewart, and thanked the Council with a few words of encouragement to the Council to continue the work of preservation. Mayor Waldorf said that the Capital Needs Task Force was recommending a specific amount of money for development of Greenways in both Chapel Hill and Carrboro in the Orange County bond issue.

· Honor Award to Hazel and Ernest Craig in recognition of the donation of eight acres of open space to the Town.

· Honor Award to Eastowne Associates, represented by Ed Pizer, for donation of 34 acres of open space along Dry Creek near Chapel Hill High School to the Town.

· Friends of Chapel Hill Parks, Recreation and Greenways Citizens Award, accepted by Pam Hemminger, for the Bolin Creek Greenway.

· Citizens Award for the UNC Recreation Society, accepted by Stan Trodgen, for the student-organized March for Parks Program to raise money as a gift to the Town for the Bolin Creek Trail and the Homestead Park.

· Vision Award to Joe Nassif, former Mayor and Council member, who had worked hard for the Cane Creek Reservoir and for being effective in preserving open space and building greenways. Mr. Nassif thanked the Mayor and the Council for all the work they do for the Town. He urged the Council to continue to keep on the track they were pursuing with the University.

· Vision Award to Alice Welch, for the Alice Welch Greenway and her vision for the Greenways.

Petitions by Citizens

1. Sally Green spoke on behalf of the Kings Mill/Morgan Creek Neighborhood Association to ask for help in developing a small area plan for their neighborhood for the creation of a residential conservation overlay district compatible with the Development Ordinance. She said they would like to begin the process because of the Master Plan of the University that would affect their neighborhood.

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

2. Alan Rimer, member of the Board of Directors of the Chapel Hill Museum, petitioned the Town and the Council to consider naming the bridge over Morgan Creek for James Taylor. He said the Museum was planning an event to include the history of James Taylor and his family. He said that Taylor’s song “Copperline” did include mention of the Morgan Creek Bridge. Mr. Rimer said that the Museum Board had talked with the Department of Transportation (DOT), indicating they had no problem with the naming, but would need the Town’s, as well as the County’s, concurrence.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ENDORSE THE SUGGESTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

3. Alan Rimer, speaking as a neighbor in the area of East Franklin Street, petitioned that the Town staff look into the possibility of changing the way Park Place intersected with East Franklin Street, which he believed should be a street intersection instead of a curb cut, and look into the serious drainage problem created when it rained. Mr. Rimer suggested that a four-way stop sign be placed at the intersection of Rosemary and Boundary Streets.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THIS PETITION TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

4. Linda Carver, President of the Lloyd Street Neighborhood Association, said the neighborhood was planning a Neighbors United Community Appreciation Day to thank the Chapel Hill and Carrboro police for keeping the crime and drugs down in their neighborhood. She asked if the Town would donate money to help make the day a great event. She said the event would be on June 23, 2001, 3:00 p.m. to 7::00 p.m.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THIS PETITION TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

5. Dan Coleman said his petition was based on some discussions of revisions to the Development Ordinance. He read a statement regarding the Council’s appointments procedures to advisory boards, and the different votes by board members compared to those votes by Council members. He suggested that each Council member would appoint one citizen to each of the relevant advisory boards, and if a member of the Council left the Council his/her appointees would be asked to resign, although they could be reappointed by a new Council member.

Mayor Waldorf said she thought this petition was an interesting one to consider, but commented that many times not enough people applied for the openings on the boards.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THIS PETITION TO THE MANAGER, THE ATTORNEY, AND THE TOWN’S ADVISORY BOARDS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

6. Wendy Trueblood said she was appearing on behalf of the disability community in Chapel Hill regarding a petition submitted on May 30, 2001, for support of funding for the Parks and Recreation Department position that focused on people with disabilities. She said she had an additional 30 signatures to add to the petition. Ms. Trueblood said, although the Council had taken some small steps toward reaching the disabled, that very little is now being done to reach those people.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO REFER THIS PETITION TO THE COUNCIL TO DISCUSS AT ITS NEXT BUDGET WORK SESSION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

7. Pat Conway said he seconded the remarks of Ms. Trueblood, as a parent of a special needs child and as a coach in Special Olympics. He said the Special Olympics program was a very good program, but there were many other special needs of people within the community who did not participate in that program. He said that Special Olympics was a stand-alone program for the athletically able, but not the mentally disabled. He urged the Council to try to do a better job for those not participating in the Special Olympics program.

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THIS PETITION TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Mayor Waldorf read a letter of explanation of what had been occurring in the meetings between the Council and the University. She felt that the community needed to be informed about the work.

STATEMENT OF MAYOR ROSEMARY I. WALDORF

“I think that it is important to keep the community informed of the work in which I and other members of the Council have been engaged regarding the University’s proposed development plan, and will take just a few moments to report. I realize that much of the information has been covered by the news media, but believe it would be useful to comment on the facts and key issues as we understand them.

“As all of you know, we began discussions with Chancellor Moeser and other University representatives last fall about their plans to carry out the most significant building program in the history of the University. Altogether, with funding from the State-wide bond issue as well as from other sources, the University likely will spend well over a billion dollars in the next ten years on renovations and new buildings.

“We said when the discussions began that, just as the University has a responsibility to carry out its mission of service to the State, the Mayor and Town Council have a responsibility to carry out our legal duties to protect the community and the environment and to mitigate the adverse impacts of the University’s development.

“We have made progress in this important work. In mid-April, the Council and the University, respectively, authorized Town and University staffs to work collaboratively on development of an ordinance that would establish a new Office-Institutional 4 zoning district to be applied to the main campus. The two staffs also were charged to develop a statement of the application requirements for the development plan which will be submitted by the University.

“Town and University staffs worked diligently for the next month to prepare the new zoning district regulations and application requirements for:

“Council Members Foy and Strom and I, along with the Town Manager, senior members of his staff and the Town Attorney met again with the Chancellor, senior members of his staff, and representatives of the Board of Trustees on May 24^th to receive the staff report. (Mayor pro tem Pavão, who also has served as an advisor for this work, was unable to attend the meeting.)

“We were very pleased with the proposals put forward by Town and University staffs. They were in agreement on the language of the ordinance and all of the details in the extensive application requirements, with the exception of a single item. As to that item, an issue in the stormwater management performance standards regarding volume of runoff, it was clear that the staffs were committed to working out a satisfactory resolution and believed that they could do so in a timely manner. We expect this issue to be resolved this week.

“At the same meeting, it also was clear that the Chancellor and representatives of the Board of Trustees were concerned about how the vote on the proposed rezoning would be considered. The Town Attorney had concluded, based on his research at that point, that separate votes should be taken on the nine separately identified parcels of University-owned land. Key factors in his opinion were that consideration of the zoning change was being initiated by the Council, and eight of the parcels now have zoning different than that of the main campus, which presently is zoned Office/Institutional-3.

“The Chancellor and other University representatives also were concerned that one or more protest petitions might be filed, thus invoking a requirement that a zoning change would require seven affirmative votes. Finally, they expressed their concern that some portion of their property would not be rezoned and that such action could make it impossible for them to proceed with their development plan.

“After discussion, we agreed that the Town Attorney and the University Chief Counsel should work together to conduct further research on the issues and report to both Town and University representatives in the following week.

“I was surprised when the Chancellor called me four days after our meeting, on Memorial Day, to let me know that a bill had been introduced in the Legislature that would exempt the University from the Town’s land-use regulations. In addition to being surprised, I was very disappointed, because the Council had been working in good faith in a collaborative process with the University.

“It seemed to me, for many reasons, that it was wrong for the University to seek exemption from all Town land-use regulation. It also seemed unnecessary, based on the good progress that we had made by working together.

“As everyone knows, the Council and I immediately began discussions with members of the Orange County Legislative delegation. I also continued discussions with the Chancellor.

“The Town Attorney completed his further research over the Memorial Day holiday and met with University General Counsel Susan Ehringhaus on Tuesday, May 29. He reported to the Council on Wednesday, May 30. He concluded that it would be appropriate for the Council to act on the proposed zoning in a single action, if the University requested that the Town treat the rezoning as a single action encompassing all the parcels in the proposed rezoning to OI-4. On June 1, the University made that request.

“Ultimately, the language that would have exempted the University from all land-use regulations was withdrawn from the Senate appropriations Bill. All of us are grateful to Senators Howard Lee and Ellie Kinnaird and to Representatives Joe Hackney and Verla Insko for the good work that they did to protect the reasonable interests of our community. We are fortunate to have Senators and Representatives who are well-positioned to help us when we call on them.

“Now it’s time to get back to work and to finish the process that we agreed upon.

“The Manager and I met with Chancellor Moeser and Vice Chancellor Suttenfield last Thursday to continue discussion of the fiscal issues of concern to the Town. The Chancellor reaffirmed his commitment to completing these discussions prior to the scheduled consideration of the new zoning ordinance on July 2.

“Next Monday, June 18, we will conduct a formal public hearing on the proposed Office-Institutional 4 zoning ordinance and the proposed rezoning of the University land to that district. If the Council authorizes the new zoning district on July 2, the University will be able to submit a specific development plan for consideration by the Council through the normal process of review by staff, evaluation by advisory boards, a public hearing, and Council vote.

“I remain confident that we still can achieve our original objectives. The University will be able to carry out its development plan on a timely basis; and, the Town Council will be able to require mitigation of the adverse consequences of the University's development.”

Item 4 – Consent Agenda

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

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

A RESOLUTION NOMINATING APPLICANTS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2001-06-11/R-2)

WHEREAS, the applications for service on an advisory board or commission or other committees listed below have been received; and

WHEREAS, the applicants have been determined by the Town Clerk to be eligible to serve;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the following names are placed in nomination to serve on an advisory board or commission:

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board

Housing and Community Development Advisory Board

Human Services Advisory Board

Parks and Recreation Commission

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF A BACKHOE/ LOADER (2001-06-11/R-3)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has advertised notice of waiver of the formal bid process by legal notice in The Chapel Hill Herald Classifieds on April 27, 2001, in accordance with G.S. 143-129(g) for the purchase of a backhoe/loader; and

WHEREAS, a formal bid competition was held by the City of Rocky Mount with a bid opening on November 9, 2000 in accordance with G.S. 143-129; and

WHEREAS, the North Carolina Equipment Company offers the Town the backhoe/loader at the same price as offered to the City of Rocky Mount.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town implements the waiver of formal bid process in accordance with G.S. 143-129(g) and accepts the offer to sell of North Carolina Equipment Company in the amount of $59,038.

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF THREE CUSHMAN MODEL 487 POLICE UTILITY VEHICLES (2001-06-11/R-4)

WHEREAS, a formal bid competition was held by the State of North Carolina on November 29, 2000 in accordance with G.S. 143-129; and

WHEREAS, Carolina Industrial Equipment, Inc., offers the Town the three (3) police utility vehicles at the same price as offered to the State of North Carolina.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council implements the waiver of formal bid process in accordance with G.S. 143-129(g) and accepts the offer to sell of Carolina Industrial Equipment, Inc., in the amount of $59,448.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO ACCEPT THE BID OF CAVALIER EQUIPMENT CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $246,293.58 FOR THREE (3) REAR-LOADING REFUSE TRUCKS (2001-06-11/R-5)

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill News/Village Advocate Classifieds on April 11, 2001, in accordance with G. S. 143-129 for the purchase of a three (3) rear-loading refuse trucks; and

WHEREAS, the lowest responsive bid submitted by Cavalier Equipment Company in the amount of in the amount of $246,293.58 meets the Town’s specifications;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager is authorized to accept the bid of Cavalier Equipment Corporation in the amount of $246,293.58 for three (3) rear-loading refuse trucks.

AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A PROJECT BUDGET FOR A TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL GRANT (2001-06-11/O-1)

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 projects are hereby established:

The Federal Transit Administration Discretionary Program (Section 5309) funds are from 1999 federal funds from an agreement with the North Carolina Department of Transportation.

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

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

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO INDICATE ACCEPTANCE OF THE 2001-2002 HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND GRANT BY SIGNING THE GRANT AGREEMENT AND THE CERTIFICATION OF MATCHING SHARE FORM AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF MATCHING FUNDS (2001-06-11/R-6)

WHEREAS, the Town, through the Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives, has stated the goal of conserving and enhancing areas, sites, and structures of special visual, architectural or historical value; and

WHEREAS, the Town, through the Comprehensive Plan, has stated the goal of conserving and enhancing the natural beauty and atmosphere of Chapel Hill; and

WHEREAS, updating the architectural and historic inventory would help the Town achieve these goals; and

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Preservation Society has agreed to help in implementation and funding; and

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Preservation Society agrees to provide the Town of Chapel Hill $15,000 for funding this project and cover any unanticipated cost overruns; and

WHEREAS, the Town Council indicated the need for updating the Historic District Survey through the resolution of November 13, 2000, authorizing the Town Manager to apply for a grant for this purpose;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to indicate acceptance of the 2001-2002 Historic Preservation Fund Grant by signing the Grant Agreement and the Certification of Matching Share Form and authorizes the expenditure of matching funds in the amount of $5,000.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EMPLOYMENT OF AN APPRENTICE IN THE INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT (2001-06-11/R-7)

WHEREAS, the Town is interested in providing employment and training opportunities to local high school youth; and

WHEREAS, the Inspections Department has successfully worked in the past with a local high school student in the apprenticeship program; and

WHEREAS, high school staff and the Inspections Director have identified a promising candidate for an apprenticeship as a building inspector.;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to employ an apprentice in the Inspections Department and to allow that apprentice to begin work immediately.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to include money for the Building Inspections apprentice in the 2001-2002 budget for the Inspections Department.

Item 5 – Information Reports

Item 6 – Meadowmont Park and School Issues

6a. Consideration of Resolution regarding Meadowmont Park and School Special Use Permit Modification.

Nick Didow, Chair of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) Board of Education, said the School Board was forwarding to the Council this evening a set of concept plans that they believed served the interests and the objectives of the school system well, the interests and objectives of the Town Council well, and the collaborative interests of the joint Meadowmont school site and Town of Chapel Hill park site well. He said they added positively to the Meadowmont project and served the long-term best interests of the Chapel Hill community.

Mr. Didow said the Board had given thoughtful consideration to each point raised by Council members at their joint meeting in June, including the Meadowmont site design and building design standards that might pertain to the project. He said the Council’s desire to relocate fields originally sited by the Council in the flowage area on the adjacent Town park land, but now onto the school site had also been considered.

Mr. Didow stated there was reconsideration of the programmatic construction costs, operating costs, environmental effects, and energy efficiency implications of a one-story versus a two-story design. He said three concept designs, each representing a compact, single-story, 600-student elementary school to be built in a manner consistent with the style and look of the overall Meadowmont project, were being presented this evening. Mr. Didow said each would be another significant step forward in school design. He said one design assumed the construction of only a multi-purpose room in the school structure, and the other set of designs would upgrade the multi-purpose room for Parks and Recreation purposes to a community gym.

Mr. Didow said that each site plan would accommodate the respective number of playing fields onto the school site, and out of the flowage area of the adjacent park site. He said each plan would enable and encourage pedestrian and bicycle access from the greenway and other pathways of the project.

Steve Scroggs explained the three models being brought to the Council, with overheads:

· 5C, moving the building to the southwest to provide playing fields, reducing the buffers, pushing parking towards the front

Mr. Scroggs said the plans met the needs of instructional programs for children, and would allow for construction of a building that would be completely day-lit, and provide for energy savings and high performance school standards, as well as meeting the needs for instructional programs for the children.

Mayor pro tem Pavão asked if the elevation in the designs had changed. Mr. Didow said they had not, but there was less buffer to block the view of Meadowmont Lane in Plan 5C and the sidewalk from Meadowmont Lane would be closer.

Mayor pro tem Pavão asked, in the event that the Council did not approve 5C, which he said he would support, if a stand-alone gymnasium could be built in the field in the future. Mr. Scroggs said the field was larger on Plan 5A—140 x 240, and Plan 5C was 140 x 200.

Mayor pro tem Pavão said from the Town’s perspective it would like to see the multi-purpose room be a full-sized gymnasium for community use, but they might be too late in achieving this purpose because of the delay in deliberations in approving the design. He said he would prefer Plan 5C, but if it were not too late, then a free-standing gymnasium could be built in the future.

Council Member Bateman said if the Council approved two designs then it would not have to come back to the Council from the School Board after the Commission had made its decision.

Council Member Strom agreed with Mayor pro tem Pavão, and pointed out that when the Council talked about Resolution 6B, they had to be sure that there was enough square footage allotted to potentially build a gymnasium.

Council Member Ward said he was in favor of Plan 5C, but asked, if the funding did not come forward to build a full-sized gym, could the multi-purpose room be built on the footprint on 5C, and at some point be converted to a gymnasium. Mr. Scroggs said the conversion of a multi-purpose room to a gymnasium was a very expensive proposition, and it would be more cost-effective to build a gym than to have to tear down and add on to a multi-purpose room.

Council Member Ward asked if it would cost as much to convert a multi-purpose room to a gym as it would to build a stand-alone gym. Mr. Scroggs said it would not cost as much, but the HVAC systems would have to be rebuilt, and duct work and electrical systems would have to be redone to expand the systems.

Council Member Bateman said she wanted to be satisfied that what the Town was paying for was worth it. She asked for an explanation of what the difference was between what was being proposed for this school and the gym at McDougle Middle School. Mr. Scroggs said the McDougle Middle School had a full-sized gymnasium. Mr. Didow said that was not what was proposed to be built at the Meadowmont school, but that the model was the model of the Hargraves gymnasium model. He said it would be a very functional facility, but would not have bleacher-seating configuration and would have enough room to collaborate with Parks and Recreation, which was the model that the Town requested be considered.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE PLAN 5C AS A PREFERENCE, AND WITH PLAN 5A REVISED AS AN ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVE SITE DESIGN.

Council Member Brown said she would not vote to approve this motion because she felt it was an extremely environmentally sensitive site, and she did not feel the school should be built there. She stated her “:no” vote would be a protest.

Council Member Evans said she would support the motion, but that she was disappointed that it was too late to consider a two-story building, or a different configuration. She asked the School Board, in future deliberations for school design in traditional neighborhood developments, to look at wise use of the land, instead of a sprawling design. She said she would support the motion because it was imperative to have a new school in Meadowmont and the four playing fields were needed, but she said she did so reluctantly.

Mayor Waldorf said she supported the motion enthusiastically, and there was not any other land that she was aware of in Chapel Hill or Carrboro that was not environmentally sensitive and available for a school. She said she felt that a one-story building was the best design for instructional and energy purposes.

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 8-1, WITH MAYOR WALDORF, MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO, COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN, EVANS, FOY, STROM, WARD, AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE, AND COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN VOTING NAY.

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO PARTICIPATE WITH THE CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO CITY SCHOOLS BOARD OF EDUCATION AND THE DEVELOPER OF MEADOWMONT IN THE APPLICATION FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE MEADOWMONT PARK AND SCHOOL (2001-06-11/R-8)

WHEREAS, the Town Council approved a Special Use Permit for the Meadowmont Park and School in 1997; and

WHEREAS, the Special Use Permit contemplated the construction of a school by the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Board of Education and the construction of four fields, basketball court, parking, greenway and bike paths, three pedestrian bridges, a picnic shelter and a compost/yard waste site by the developer of Meadowmont; and

WHEREAS, the Special Use Permit stipulated that the developer of Meadowmont would deed the 92-acre site to the Town of Chapel Hill and the Town would deed the 22-acre school site to the Board of Education; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager is authorized to participate with the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Board of Education and the developer of Meadowmont in the application for a modification to the 1997 Special Use Permit, pursuant to the general site plan called Alternative #5c as first choice of design, with alternative 5a revised as an alternate choice, as presented to the Town Council on June 11, 2001.

Assistant Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal said that the developer of Meadowmont transferred the 92 acres involved in the park and school site to the Town, and the next step was for the Town to transfer the 22-acre school site to the Board of Education. She said that along with the deeds came restrictive covenants noting a maximum amount of floor area allowed in each parcel, which related back to the Master Land Use Plan for Meadowmont, setting maximum amount of floor area to non-residential uses. Ms. Loewenthal said that the park deed allowed 60,000 feet of floor area, which would not be even close to the building intended, because most of the parks were in the Resource Conservation District (RCD) and the 100-year flood plain. She said if the Town retained 4,100 square feet of floor area that would be enough to build free-standing bathrooms, a maintenance building, and a picnic shelter, retain an existing log cabin.

Ms. Loewenthal said the staff recommended adoption of a resolution that would authorize:

1. The transfer of floor area limited in the deed covenants from the Meadowmont Park to the Meadowmont School site for the purpose of building an elementary school, and

2. The execution of documents by the Town Manager on behalf of the Town prepared by the Board of Education and subject to legal review, and

3. Indicate the willingness of the Town Council to consider an application for a modification of the Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan that would increase total allowable floor area by 10,000 square feet and that would permit this additional floor area only on the school site.

Mayor pro tem Pavão asked if, after transfer of the floor area ratio to the schools, there would be enough space to build a stand-alone gym, if necessary. Mr. Horton said the Council would have to increase the floor area by about 5,000 square feet, from 10,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet.

Council Member Strom asked if the amount of floor area was changed from 10,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet in the Resolution, would that still give the Town the control over the square footage which would be needed for a stand-alone gym. Mr. Horton responded that an agreement would still be needed from East West Partners.

COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 9, WITH THE ADDITION OF 15,000 SQUARE FEET INSTEAD OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO TAKE STEPS NECESSARY TO TRANSFER FLOOR AREA PERMITTED BY DEED COVENANTS ON THE MEADOWMONT PARK SITE TO THE MEADOWMONT SCHOOL SITE (2001-06-11/R-9)

WHEREAS, the Town Council approved a Special Use Permit in 1997 for the Meadowmont Park and School Site; and

WHEREAS, this Special Use Permit stipulated that the developers deed 92 acres to the Town and that the Town shall coordinate deeding of the 22-acre school site to the Board of Education; and

WHEREAS, the deeds transferring the 92 acres include covenants that limit the amount of floor area to be built on any one parcel; and

WHEREAS, the park site will not use all the floor area included on its parcels and the Board of Education needs more floor area than permitted by deed covenants on its parcels;

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

Ms. Loewenthal said that in 1997 the Town and Schools signed a 30-year agreement which would allow them to mutually develop, program and maintain the athletic field. She said the staff had prepared a similar agreement as a resolution authorizing the Manager to execute a mutual cooperation agreement for the Meadowmont school/park site based on the site option selected by the Council and the terms outlined. She said it would be for a period of thirty years, with provisions for good faith.

Council Member Bateman asked about the 7^th bullet in the outline, and asked if the public would have access to the school’s parking lots, sidewalks, playground, access road and greenway trail during school hours. Ms. Loewenthal said the parking lots would probably be full during school hours, and the fields would be in use, but people might want to walk on the greenway trail.

Council Member Ward asked about the 8^th bullet, and corrected the word on the third line to read “after 4:00 p.m.” instead of “before 4:00 p.m.” He asked if there would be an opportunity to word the resolution to extend the agreement for a period beyond thirty years. Mr. Horton said the only way the School Board had agreed to thirty years was to agree to an assessment after 10 to 20 years.

Mr. Didow explained that the agreement had been developed by both the Town’s and School Board’s staff, but he felt that the Board would not see the end of thirty years as the end of the cooperative agreement, since it was for the benefit of both. Mr. Scroggs said the thinking of the staff was to put into place some time period of reassessment, so that if adjustments to the agreement or to the facility needed to be made they could be.

Mayor Waldorf suggested adding a sentence in bullet #8 to say that the Town had a guarantee that the Town and School Boards have a mutual commitment to seriously consider extending this agreement at the end of 30 years. Mr. Scroggs said he would be happy to take that suggestion back to his Board.

Council Member Ward asked if it was possible to have the work on the fields done by a single contractor, rather than having the two entities hiring two sets of laborers. Ms. Loewenthal said the fields would be used differently, some used more than others, and the staff felt that with the Town’s knowledge of maintaining fields with higher use, it would be simpler to have them maintained separately from the field which would only be used by the school.

Council Member Foy asked about payment for the fields. Ms. Loewenthal responded that the original Special Use Permit (SUP) required the developer to develop four fields or provide the cash to the schools to build them.

Council Member Foy said if the Town was putting a certain amount of a contribution over the length of the agreement for the building of a gym, then he felt that the terms of the agreement should be longer than 30 years. Mr. Horton said that was one of the reasons that the staff started out asking for 30 years to make sure that the Council’s investment received a reasonable amortization period. He said he was comfortable with the 30 years.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 10, WITH THE REVISION TO THE 8^TH BULLET OF THE AGREEMENT TO INCLUDE THAT THERE IS A MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE TOWN COUNCIL AND THE SCHOOL SYSTEM TO EXTEND THE AGREEMENT BEYOND 30 YEARS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO EXECUTE A MUTUAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF RECREATION FACILITIES ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE MEADOWMONT DEVELOPMENT AND OWNED BY THE CHAPEL HILL/CARRBORO CITY SCHOOLS (2001-06-11/R-10)

WHEREAS, The Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools owns 22 acres of land adjacent to the Town’s 70-acre Meadowmont Park site; and

WHEREAS, the Meadowmont School and Park Special Use Permit for the site indicate that recreation facilities are to be built on the 22 acres owned by the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools; and

WHEREAS, by deed covenants, the Town property has been assigned more floor area than is needed for the park and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools require additional floor area in order to build the proposed Meadowmont School; and

WHEREAS, recreation facilities originally intended to be located on the park site would be better located out of the Little Creek floodplain and the Army Corp of Engineers flowage easement;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Manager is authorized to execute a mutual cooperation agreement for operation and maintenance of public recreation facilities on the 22-acre Meadowmont School site owned by the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools that includes the following terms:

-The school would have use of the gym one evening per week during the school year

-The School would have use of the gymnasium on up to eight weekend days throughout the school year with at least 60 days notice.

-Costs of refinishing and replacing the gymnasium floor would be shared equally by the Town and the Board of Education

Ms. Loewenthal said the difference in cost between a full-size gym and a multi-purpose room was about $715,000. She said the contribution from the Town would include the equivalent of the development fee ($36,000), the cash equivalent from the developer of the free-standing restroom facility and the softball field that are in a bond which the Town can call. She said Mr. Roger Perry, the developer, said that he could make $200,000 available to the Town, if he did not have to build the restroom facility and the soccer field. Ms. Loewenthal said the staff recommended that the Town adopt the resolution that provided a total of $236,000 for the gym, on two conditions: (1) that the Commissioners could fund the remainder; and (2) that the joint-use agreement was concluded for the joint use of the fields and the rest of the school.

Council Member Bateman asked who would be paying for the lights and the irrigation in the athletic field. Ms. Loewenthal said that was the responsibility of the developer.

COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 12. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY. (9-0).

A RESOLUTION OFFERING $236,000 TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GYM INSTEAD OF A MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM AT THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN MEADOWMONT (2001-06-11/R-12)

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education and the Town Council of the Town of Chapel Hill have a joint use agreement for facilities at the elementary school at Meadowmont; and

WHEREAS, both the Board and the Town Council agree that community use of school facilities should be encouraged; and

WHEREAS, the Town does not have any gym in the southern or eastern part of Town;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that is will appropriate $236,000 for the construction of a gym instead of a multi-purpose room in the elementary school at Meadowmont, if the Orange County Board of Commissioners funds the remaining cost of the project, and provided that the Town and the Board of Education complete a mutually satisfactory joint use agreement.

COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 11A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION WAIVING THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FEE FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT MEADOWMONT AS A CONTRIBUTION TO THE COST OF A COMMUNITY GYM TO BE BUILT AT THAT SCHOOL IN PLACE OF A MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM (2001-06-11/ R11a)

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City School Board has requested that the development review fee be waived for the elementary school to be built at Meadowmont, and

WHEREAS, the Town Council would like a gymnasium to be built at that school in place of a multi-purpose room, and

WHEREAS, the gym would cost approximately $715,000 more than the multi-purpose room,

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the waived fee shall be considered as a contribution of $36,000 to the additional cost of a community gym.

Michelle Lewis stated that she is a newly appointed member of the Board of Adjustment, but is speaking tonight as a private citizen regarding legal procedural problems with the hearing scheduled for June 18^th.

Ms. Lewis noted that she is an attorney, but is not giving legal advice. She said she believed that legal problems should be solved before it results in a lawsuit, and that she was sure that the University and the Town would want to make sure that if the Council were to decide on a single rezoning as the University has requested, that it would not be subject to easy legal challenge.

Ms. Lewis stated that she had two concerns: 1) whether there had been effective notice given to citizens; and 2) whether there has been an effective protest period allowed. She said she had thought to bring this up at the June 18^th public hearing, but it would not give the Town Council time to remedy the situation if the Town Attorney agreed that these two issues were valid concerns.

Ms. Lewis said that regarding the effective notice, the notice that went out to citizens on May 8 says that the rezoning proposal would change the zoning for portions of the central campus area at the University from its current OI-3 to the new proposed OI-4, but many of the zones that have been debated, such as McCauley-Cameron and Mason Farm, are not OI-3. She said that even though the map on the back of the notice does outline the current proposed OI-4, the notice is somewhat ambiguous, and she would like to petition that the Town Attorney take a look at it to make sure that effective notice was given. Ms. Lewis said the NC General Statutes require that effective notice be given at least ten days prior to a public hearing.

Ms. Lewis said her second concern was the effective protest period. She said that a protest was only valid if it was signed by twenty percent of the landowners adjacent to the any one side of the property proposed for rezoning. Ms. Lewis said that if there are not nine rezoning areas but one large rezoning area then we have one big square instead of nine squares, and that changes whether a protest is a valid protest. She said this queries whether the Mason Farm protest, which has already been filed, is valid. Ms. Lewis said that, given that the University just filed its request for one rezoning application on Wednesday, June 6^th, and the deadline for citizens to submit protests is this Wednesday, that has really given citizens a very short period of time, particularly along the Pittsboro Street side, to get citizens together to file a protest. Ms. Lewis said she is concerned that if the Council were to accept one new zone, it might be subject to easy legal challenge.

Ms. Lewis said she is petitioning that the Town Attorney and Ms. Ehringhaus consider these issues to make sure that everything can move forward without a legal challenge later.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE ATTORNEY, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

Diana Steele said she came to Chapel Hill in 1942, and had been a self-employed pre-school teacher for 33 years in a Mason Farm home that is currently targeted by the University’s march to the 15-501 by-pass. She said that her property taxes were over $9,000 per year, and as a pre-school teacher that is a huge amount of money.

Ms. Steele said that, as the Mayor had so eloquently summarized, the UNC and Chapel Hill personnel justifiably want to move forward on the projects that the recent bond referendum funded. She said they also wanted to tack on many or all of the additional projects that have been described in the master plan. Ms. Steele said that the Town of Chapel Hill appears to have bent over backwards, sometimes alarmingly, but always with courtesy and civility, to help the UNC planners. She said the speeded up process that the Town itself has voluntarily and willingly proposed has cost the Town real dollars and will cost much, much more as it continues. Ms. Steele said that the Town proposed rezoning the entire central campus from OI-3 to OI-4 and for that there would have been no fee.

Ms. Steele said that UNC spokespersons requested rezoning legislation to cover eight additional areas primarily residential, to be tacked on to the original suggested central campus OI-3 area. She said she understands that this is no longer the Town’s proposal, which would have incurred no fee, and since the current request for rezoning comes from UNC, there is by law and custom a related fee to be paid to the Town. Ms. Steele said the fee is $28,640, and to the University this is a pittance. Ms. Steele said she would like to see the Town not waive the review fee and let the University, as they now have, demonstrate its good faith in a collaborative relationship with the Town by paying the normal development review fees to cover some of the excessive dollar cost that it is costing the Town. Ms. Steele said she did not want her pre-school earnings and high dollar real estate taxes to pay the review fees for UNC’s current activities, and she is glad that will not happen, now, since those activities include the destruction of her house and pre-school.

Mayor Waldorf thanked both speakers, adding that she had decided that she would not have voted to allow waiver of the University’s development review fees.

Council Member Foy asked Mr. Karpinos when protest petitions regarding the rezoning were due. Mr. Karpinos answered they are due by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, June 13^th. He said that is the deadline that gives the staff two full working days prior to the date of the hearing, and that is the deadline established by the ordinance and by State law. Mr. Karpinos said anyone wanting to file a protest petition can do so, but it needed to be at Town Hall by 5 p.m. on Wednesday, the day after tomorrow.

Council Member Foy asked if the requirements for a protest petition changed as a result of the change in posture of the rezoning request. Mr. Karpinos said the protest petition requirements would be applied to the rezoning that has been requested, that is, the protest petition rule would apply to the area as a whole under the request to have the rezoning considered as one rezoning. He said that in order for a protest petition to be sufficient, it would need to include owners of twenty percent of the land on any one side of the overall tract.

Council Member Foy said that citizens who want to know exactly what that means could contact Town Hall. Mr. Karpinos said that was correct, that the Planning Department has information on the details of how to file a protest petition, that forms are available in the Planning Department, and that these rules can be explained in further detail by coming to the Planning Department.

Council Member Foy asked if Mr. Karpinos would have an answer to tonight’s petition at the public hearing on the 18^th. Mr. Karpinos said he would respond at the public hearing.

Council Member Ward asked how do you figure what is twenty percent of that shape. Mr. Karpinos said it was twenty percent of the land on any one side, going back 100 feet. He said basically, you draw a line 100 feet from the perimeter of the property to be rezoned, and the owners of twenty percent of the land on any one side would be sufficient.

Council Member Ward asked how do you define a “side.” Mr. Karpinos said our general practice was to wait until we had received the protest petitions, and evaluate them based on whatever the lot looks like. He said that we hope that we have a clear answer, in that it is not one of those difficult cases where we have to make very fine judgments. Mr. Karpinos said that looking at this particular piece of property, it is fairly easy to determine what four sides are and we hope that based on that determination that we can have a clear answer from looking at the protest petitions about whether there is or is not a protest petition filed sufficient to require the super majority vote, the three-fourths majority vote. Mr. Karpinos said that the best way to answer that question is to wait and see what protests are submitted by Wednesday at 5 p.m. and to take the time between Wednesday and Monday evening to evaluate those. He said the staff would make a report at the hearing as to the determination of those petitions and explain those results to the Council.

Council Member Ward said if the Town received protests on 15% of the land on each side of the property, does that mean the petitions would not be valid. Mr. Karpinos said the petitions must total 20% of the land, going back 100 feet, on any one side, so you cannot accumulate land on four sides. He said it has to be 20% of the land on one side.

Council Member Bateman asked if we know that the people who would be affected by the nine rezonings know about this change. She said that it seems to her that, based on what Ms. Lewis said, that when it was nine discreet parcels, people knew what was involved in making a protest petition. But, she said, now that we have one large polygon, we are assuming that everyone knows how to protest. Mr. Karpinos said that people who want to protest the rezoning have an opportunity to protest until 5 p.m. on June 13. As to what the notice stated, he said, the notice showed the entire area proposed for rezoning and said that information about protest petitions was available in the Planning Department, so that information had always been available to people who got the notice. Mr. Karpinos noted there is still two days left for citizens to file protest petitions.

Council Member Wiggins asked when neighbors were notified of the proposed change in the zoning, have they been notified a second time that the change is now a request for one rezoning. Mr. Karpinos said they were never notified that there was to be nine rezonings. He said the notification that went out showed a map proposing the entire area for rezoning. Mr. Karpinos said the map that went out in the mail and in the legal ad indicated a proposed rezoning of the entire area that the University was requesting rezoning of.

Council Member Wiggins asked if people who requested information about the protest petition initially, were they given information that described how a valid protest petition would be counted with our original assumptions that there was going to be nine different votes, or was the information they were given at that time, would that still be accurate information in terms of how they would affect the decision. Mr. Karpinos said he did not know what information they were given, that he did not give out the information. But, he said, he believed the Planning Department was telling people during that time was that it was proposed as a Council initiative as nine rezonings, but there was also information to indicate that the University would file a request, and if they filed the request, then it would be one rezoning. Mr. Karpinos said that was the information that he believed was given to citizens who came to the Planning Department. Mr. Karpinos said he did not provide the information himself, and he does not know whom an individual citizen may have talked to or what might have been said in those conversations.

Council Member Wiggins said it was her understanding that when neighbors were notified that there was going to be a rezoning, they were told they could come to the Planning Department and get information on protest petitions. She asked if the information they were given when it was assumed there would be nine different votes was the same information they would need now that there would be only one vote. Mr. Waldon said that first, Mr. Karpinos was correct. He said that the notice that was mailed to approximately 1,100 to 1,200 people was talking about one rezoning, that it invited people to come to a public information meeting, it invited people to attend the Planning Board meeting on June 6, and invited people to attend the Council’s public hearing on June 18. Mr. Waldon said that also in the notice was a map showing one rezoning and contained information about protest petitions. He said the notice stated that there were State laws governing protest petitions, and if you were interested in pursuing that contact the Planning Department. Mr. Waldon said when people contact the Planning Department they have a standard response that they give. He said the response is: here is the form, you have to demonstrate that you are the property owner and that you are adjacent to the area to be rezoned, and after the deadline for submission of these petitions, we will do a tally and let you know if there are enough protest petitions that have been submitted to trigger the super majority vote provision. Mr. Waldon said that was what they had done. He said that at the public information meeting, at which about 20 people attended, he displayed a map of the area proposed for rezoning that contained the nine areas. Mr. Waldon stated he said to the persons present at that meeting that as we have looked at this, it is our conclusion that as a Town-initiated rezoning that this will be nine separate rezonings. He said that once it was clear that the University would make an application for one rezoning, which is again the original idea, then at that point we had only one or two citizens who had filed a protest petition. Mr. Waldon said they contacted those citizens to let them know of the situation. He said that the form for a protest petition is the same for all cases, whether it is for nine individual rezonings or for one.

Mayor Waldorf said that, in other words, between 1,100 and 1,200 households were notified through the mail, they were sent notification that showed the entire tract, and were given the directions on how to file a protest petition and the information explained the meaning of a protest petition. She asked if this was correct. Mr. Waldon responded that was correct.

Council Member Brown asked to see a copy of the notice, indicating she believed some of the language may be pertinent to the discussion. Mr. Waldon provided a copy of the notice. Council Member Brown said that in the notification, it said “the rezoning proposal would change the zoning of portions of the central campus area of the University of North Carolina from its current zoning designation of OI-3 to a proposed new OI-4 zoning district.” She said that it does not say anything about any areas that are not currently zoned OI-3, and there are eight that are not currently zoned OI-3. Mr. Waldon said that he disagreed with several of Council Member Brown’s comments. He said that the notice does say portions of the central campus, and it does say OI-3, but included with the notice was a map that showed the entire area proposed for rezoning. He said he would wait for the Town Attorney to respond at the public hearing, but it was his working assumption that the notice provisions have been done correctly and appropriately. Council Member Brown said she believed this was a significant part and it was certainly something that the Council needed to think about.

Council Member Strom asked if the applications for protest petitions that were received prior to the change, when the University became the applicant, would remain valid. Mr. Waldon said that was correct.

7a. Report on the Proposed Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines and Procedures.

Engineering Director George Small said the Council had established a number of goals and objectives for the year for the Town’s transportation policies, including: “Enhance the objectivity and usefulness of traffic impact analyses required for development applications.” He said the draft guidelines included:

Mr. Small pointed out one area included was the long-term analysis to look at the effects of this development on what the staff thought would occur in the future, and, as future developments occur, to look back to see if the projections and predictions came true. He said this was tied into the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Regional Model, which used a 25-year horizon period, and he suggested using that for the Town’s own long-term traffic impact analysis. Mr. Small noted that the Town would not expect many developments to need to perform a long-term analysis, but would occur in developments that had mixed-use types, and would be expected to change over time to have a long-term impact, such as Southern Village or Meadowmont.

Mr. Small said the staff had been asked to pursue ways to insure objectivity in traffic analysis, so it would not be perceived as biased. He said there were two alternatives:

· Alternative One: The Town could continue to require submittal of traffic impact analyses performed by consultants hired by developers, but revise the guidelines governing the content of those analyses outlines in the guidelines.

· Alternative Two: The Town could contract with private consulting firms to perform necessary traffic impact studies for the proposed developments, with the associated consulting costs covered by increased development fees.

Mr. Small said the staff believed that would be the most effective way to improve the perceived objectivity of the analysis. He said either alternative would provide more useful data, but would also increase staff review time. Mr. Small said that if one of the alternatives were chosen, they would proceed with the existing staff to see how it could be managed. Mr. Small said the procedure would be to hire two consulting firms to perform the studies with the fees being paid by the developer. He said the Transportation Board, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, and the Planning Board all unanimously supported the concept of retaining private consulting engineering firms to conduct traffic impact analyses required for development applications.

Mr. Small pointed out that on page 33 of the memorandum were comments on the proposed traffic impact analysis guidelines and the staff responses. He said the staff recommended that the Council adopt the resolution that would approve the revised guidelines and procedures for traffic impact analyses required for development applications.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 13.

Council Member Evans asked if the Town would be able to find firms who were not doing business in Chapel Hill, to do the quality of work expected. Mr. Small said the staff believed it could, there were about 50 or 60 firms available.

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES REQUIRED FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS AND CHANGING THE PROCESS FOR CONDUCTING TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSES (2001-06-11/R-13)

WHEREAS, one of the Town Council’s stated goals is to enhance the objectivity and usefulness of traffic impact analyses required for development applications; and

WHEREAS, the Council has received and reviewed revised Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines and Procedures and has considered alternatives for conducting traffic impact analyses intended to achieve that goal.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council adopts the revised guidelines and procedures for preparing traffic impact analyses; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to solicit proposals from and to select private engineering consulting firms to be engaged by the Town to perform traffic impact analyses for development applications in accordance with the procedure outlined in the attached report.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council that the effective date for implementation of the revised guidelines is October 1, 2001.

Transportation Planner David Bonk said the mobility report that Mr. Ray Moe would prepare would include:

· AM and PM Peak hour intersection turn movements counts and levels of service analysis of key intersections.

· AM and PM peak and off-peak travel time and delay runs which determines the average time it takes to travel from one end of the City to another along various corridors and where the key congestion points are within each corridor.

Mr. Bonk said the proposal to prepare a mobility report was included in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan with an action plan to complete the survey by the end of 2001. He said the proposal, which totaled $71,000, would include Chapel Hill with the possibility of sharing a similar report which might be undertaken by the University. Mr. Bonk said the staff proposed that the Report Card be completed in the fall of 2001, and the Town try to secure funding from the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), with Directive Allocation funds for 80% ($56,800) and the 20% ($14,200) paid out of Town allocations. He said the Direct Allocation funding could be secured by August 2001, and the staff would then come back to the Council for a budget amendment.

Mayor pro tem Pavão asked if Mr. Bonk felt confident that the Town could get the Direct Allocation money. Mr. Bonk responded that he was.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 14.

Council Member Ward asked where the 2-3-year update money would come from. Mr. Bonk said it would come from the same source.

Council Member Ward asked if the Town’s share of the update could be part of the development fees. Mr. Horton said that cost should be counted as part of the development review services.

Council Member Ward encouraged monitoring and inventorying other bicycle facilities beyond bike lanes.

Mayor Waldorf said she agreed with Council Member Ward concerning adding fees to the development process for the updates.

A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. TO COMPLETE A MOBILITY REPORT CARD(2001-06-11/R-14)

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill 2000 Comprehensive Plan includes a recommendation to complete a Town-wide mobility survey by December 31, 2001; and

WHEREAS, LSA Associates, Incorporated. has estimated the cost of performing a comprehensive mobility survey within the Town; and

WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to have an initial mobility survey performed before the end of 2001;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council directs the Manager enter into a contract with LSA Associates, Incorporated, to complete the proposed comprehensive Mobility Survey at a cost not to exceed of $71,000.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council directs the Manager to request reallocation of Surface Transportation Direct Allocation Funds for this project and prepare a budget amendment for the local match.

Joe Capowski, 404 Coolidge Street, petitioned the Council to improve the safety at the intersection of Coolidge Street and South Columbia Street. He described the hazards of trying to make a right-hand turn out of Coolidge Street, and said this issue was about safety, not cut-through traffic, or traffic in the neighborhood. He said two separate polls had been returned to the Council in which two-thirds of the respondents had said they wanted the intersection improved. Mr. Capowski said the neighbors would prefer that the east end of Coolidge be closed, but would accept making it a one-way westbound block. He suggested that the Council ask the Town Engineering Director, George Small, if he thought the intersection was safe, and if he did not, then that it should be fixed.

Council Member Brown suggested that the Council ask Mr. Small his opinion on the safety of the intersection. Mr. Small said whether an intersection was safe or not was purely subjective, depending on conditions and the driver’s skills. He said it was a difficult intersection and the Council had two alternatives to make it safer. Mr. Small said that some of the residents used a different route to avoid the intersection.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2A.

Council Member Brown said this would take the Town up to the time when improvements to the road were scheduled.

Council Member Ward asked what this would do to the plans for redesigning South Columbia Street in the next few years. Mr. Small said it would not affect it very much, but there would probably still be a left-turning lane if it were one-way.

Council Member Ward asked if, when the redesign was scheduled, the intersection would be closed so there would not need to be a left-turning lane. He asked when that was scheduled. Mr. Small said there probably would not be any work on hard designs for a couple of more years, but if the intersection were closed the designers would have to know soon. He said the staff would remind the Council when the designs were being drawn, so they could have some input. Mr. Horton said the staff could put the Department of Transportation (DOT) on notice that the Council wished this issue to be considered at the time of the design work.

Mayor Waldorf said she would want the DOT to make the intersection safe so that it could then again become a two-way street.

Mayor pro tem Pavão said he could support Council Member Brown’s motion with the understanding that in the future the intersection would be made safe so that it could eventually become a two-way street again.

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 21-10 AND 21-13 OF THE TOWN CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING ONE-WAY STREETS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY AND STOP REGULATIONS (2001-06-11/O-2a)

Section 1. Section 21-10 of the Town Code “One-way Streets.” is hereby amended by inserting the following:

“(f) Traffic on Coolidge Street between Columbia Street and Old Pittsboro Road shall move only in a westerly direction.”

Section 2. Section 21-13 (a) of the Town Code “Right-of-way and stop regulations.” is hereby amended by deleting the following:

Mr. Horton said the staff would send a letter to the DOT to request that this area be studied in order to make it safer when improvements are made.

Transportation Planner David Bonk said that in December 2000, the Council asked the staff to develop a preliminary recommendation for consideration by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board and the Transportation Board regarding the appropriateness of bicycle lanes or wide outside lands as part of several roadway improvement projects being raised. He reviewed the summary of the recommendations, guided by the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for different modes of transportation.

Mr. Bonk said that there were several documents reviewed before the preparation of the report, and opinions in the literature came down on both sides of the argument, arguing that each part of the issue had strengths and weaknesses. He said that the federal study came to the conclusion that the majority of bicyclists, not at the top of the pyramid of elite bicyclists, preferred bike lanes to wide outside lanes. Mr. Bonk said that the policy developed by the staff to take to the advisory boards was based on the premise that wide outside lanes were appropriate in certain situations, but bike lanes should be pursued in order to encourage more people to ride bicycles.

Mr. Bonk said the staff was recommending that the Council adopt Resolution A, which would set forward a policy that would stipulate that the Town should pursue the construction of bike lanes on arterials and on some collector facilities, with a location by location determination being made as to whether bike lanes would be appropriate. He said that some facilities would be better accommodating by using wide outside lanes, particularly if they were part of a larger bicycle network.

Mr. Bonk said Resolution B would put forward the criteria set by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board. He added that there was also before the Council this evening a proposal by Loren Hintz, Resolution C, which would incorporate all of the points of Resolution A, and add provisions pertaining to the cleaning of debris next to facilities, and bicycling education activities.

George Cianciolo, representing the Transportation Board, said the Board had unanimously endorsed the use of bike lanes wherever possible because they thought they would promote added use of bicycles in the Town. He said that Loren Hintz had pointed out in a memo to the Council some additional issues and that bike lanes also had a traffic calming effect. Mr. Cianciolo said the Board would welcome the opportunity to work with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board.

Wayne Pein, bicyclist and member of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, said he first thought bike lanes were satisfactory, but he now believed that they were not. He said that wide lanes could be as much as four feet wider than a regular standard 12-foot lane. Mr. Pein said that wide outside lanes had no problems operationally. He cited other wide outside lanes throughout the Town that worked very well. Mr. Pein said that bike lanes segregated bicyclists by vehicle type. He said it was very difficult to make a left-hand turn from a bike lane, and there was often debris, and the driveways entrances were dangerous.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FOY, TO ASK THE TRANSPORTATION BOARD AND THE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY BOARD TO MEET IN ORDER TO PRODUCE A JOINT RESOLUTION, AND THAT THE STAFF BE INCLUDED IN THIS DISCUSSION.

Council Member Wiggins said this would be the second time that the Council had asked the Boards to get together.

Mayor Waldorf suggested that when the item came back to the Council, that it be placed on the Consent Agenda so that the Council would not have to discuss it again.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN AMENDED HER MOTION TO INCLUDE MAYOR WALDORF’S SUGGESTION FOR THE ITEM TO BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA SO THE COUNCIL WOULD NOT HAVE TO DISCUSS IT AGAIN. THE MOTION AS AMENDED WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Planning Director Roger Waldon said that the Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity House on East Franklin Street, while doing internal renovations, wished to expand another 956 square feet. He said because the original building was not built under the current regulations, the members were asking for a modified Special Use Permit (SUP). Mr. Waldon said the staff felt this request was reasonable and they were recommending to the Council adoption of Resolution A.

Jim Spencer, speaking for the fraternity, said that their preference would be adoption of Resolution C because of the curb and gutter along Pickard Lane. He added that a stormwater analysis had shown that the drainage on the site was not affected, but they thought it would affect the three large trees on the site. He said that Resolution A asked for replacement of two trees that had the potential to be damaged, replacing them with two new caliper trees.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER FOY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 17C. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION FOR THE LAMBDA CHI ALPHA FRATERNITY (2001-06-11/R-17c)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit Modification application proposed by Michael Hining Architects on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 80, Block E, Lot 8, and PIN # 9788-48-7081, if developed according to the site plan dated January 16, 2001 (Revisions January 31, 2001 and March 23, 2001), 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 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 14.12 to allow the existing alternative buffers on all four edges of the site, in lieu of the required landscape bufferyards.

2. Modification of Subsection 14.6.6 (a) to allow the new sidewalk to be adjacent to the exterior wall of the house (rather than providing a five-foot landscaped strip).

3. Modification of Subsection 14.6.6 (c) to allow the newly paved parking areas to be granted relief from the 6’-0” screening from adjacent Residential properties requirement.

Said public purposes being the (1) provision of a renovated development that complies with the Town’s fire safety codes (including the addition of a sprinkler system, improvements to exterior fire stairwells), (2) the improvement to an aging structure that provides needed student housing close to campus, and (3) the provision of an architecturally integrated structure that better reflects the character of the Franklin/Rosemary Historic District as a whole.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity House in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:

1. That construction begin by June 11, 2003 (2 years from the date of approval) and be completed by June 11, 2004 (3 years from the date of approval).

2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit Modification authorizes a 956 square foot addition to the existing Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity House, including interior and exterior renovations.

3. Parking: That 23 parking spaces shall be permitted on this site with standard parking dimensions. Bicycle Parking: That 26 spaces shall be provided on this site. Twenty-three of the bicycle parking spaces may be provided within the residents’ rooms.

4. Bicycle Parking: That the locations for bicycle parking should be in view of residents and out of view of the general public.

5. Pickard Lane Improvements: That a twelve foot fire lane shall be striped on the entirety of the east side of Pickard Lane.

6. Street Improvements: That the requested Pickard Lane street improvements not include curb and gutter and preserve the existing 17 inch maple tree in the right-of-way of Pickard Lane.

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. We recommend that this plan indicate the size, type, and location of all proposed plantings.

8. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This plan shall indicate which labeled trees are proposed to be removed and where tree protection fencing will be installed.

9. Fencing: That tree protection fencing shall be placed around the 23” pecan tree, the 25” double maple tree, and the 17” maple tree located in the Pickard Lane right-of-way.

10. Replacement Plantings: That a large caliper shade tree shall be installed in the southeast section of the property.

11. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA), Duke Power Company, BellSouth, Public Service Company, and the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

13. 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.

14. Sprinkler System: That the building shall have a sprinkler system in accordance with Town Code, which shall be approved by the Town Manager.

15. Sprinkler System Connections: That a Fire Department sprinkler system connection shall be provided on the East Franklin Street side of the building, and approved by the Town Manager, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit.

16. Fire Hydrant: That a fire hydrant be provided within 50 feet of the Fire Department sprinkler system connection, to be located in the southeast corner of the Lambda Chi Alpha site, with the final location to be approved by the Town Manager, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

17. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a Solid Waste Management Plan, including provisions for recycling and for the management and minimizing of construction debris, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

18. Approval of Shared-Container and Joint Access Agreements: That a shared-container and joint access agreement be provided between this site and the adjacent Tau Epsilon Phi site, with the possibility for other organizations to participate. The agreement shall be approved by the Town and recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office; and, that copies of the agreement shall be submitted to the Town of Chapel Hill prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Miscellaneous Stipulations

19. Stormwater Management Plan: That a Stormwater Management Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. Based on a1-year, 24-hour storm, the post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate.

20. Historic District Commission Approval: That the Historic District Commission shall approve the building elevations and the lighting plan for the site, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. Erosion Control: That a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan (including provisions for maintenance of facilities and modification of the plan if necessary), be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer, if necessary, and that a copy of the approval be provided to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

24. That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

25. That the applicant have the option of providing either semi-permeable surfaces or traditional pavement for the western parking lots.

26. 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. The construction sign may have a maximum of 16 square feet of display area and may not exceed 6 feet in height. The sign shall be non-illuminated, and shall consist of light letters on a dark background.

27. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

28. 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 Modification for the Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity House.

Item 11 – Wilshire Place: Application for Special Use Permit Modification. Consideration of Alternative Resolutions Regarding the Special Use Permit Modification

Planning Director Roger Waldon said the main issue discussed at the May 7, 2001 meeting, after the close of the Public Hearing, was the Council’s affordable housing objectives. He said the applicant had offered to provide a $10,000 payment-in-lieu to the Orange Community Housing Corporation. After Council consideration and discussion, Mr. Waldon said the applicant had agreed to pay $36,000 to the Orange Community Housing Corporation, which was agreeable to the Corporation. Mr. Waldon said the staff was recommending adoption of Resolution A.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 18A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION FOR WILSHIRE PLACE (2001–06–11/R-18a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit Modification application proposed by Robert N. Anderson, Jr. on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 47, Block A, Lots 7, 21, 22B, and 23 (PIN numbers 9799034313, 9799037226, 9799035187, and 9799023967); if developed according to the site plan prepared on October 19, 2000 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 to 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 Modification for Wilshire Place in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:

1. That construction begin by May 7, 2003 (two years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by May 7, 2004 (three years from the date of Council approval).

2. Relationship to 1979 Special Use Permit Modification: This authorization is intended to be in addition to the terms of the Town Council, September 24, 1979 Special Use Permit Modification document recorded in deed book 280, page 176 of the Orange County Register of Deeds and is not intended to change the previously approved and developed phases 1-3.

· construction of phase 4 as 14,500 square feet of new residential floor area to include;

· construction of an 18-space parking lot, including 14 under-building bays (each counted as a single space) and 4 outside spaces.

The total floor area authorized for the 4-phase development is 46,480 square feet. The aggregate authorized land use intensities, for phases 1 through 4 (existing and proposed) are as follows:

5. Cross-Access Easement: That the applicant shall provide a cross-access easement through the phase 4 residential site, to be delineated on the recorded Final Plat and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

6. South Estes Drive Access: That the following note be added to the Final Plans and subsequent plats: The driveway access along South Estes Drive is subject to limited right in and right out movements and/or removal without compensation to the owner, if, in the opinion of NCDOT or the Town of Chapel Hill, traffic safety and/or traffic operational problems develop at this location.

7. Pedestrian Access: That a sidewalk shall be provided, connecting the building to Estes Drive, via the Estes Drive frontage, if feasible.

8. Town Standards: That all new streets, parking lots, drive aisles and sidewalks associated with this development shall be constructed to Town standards. Catch basins and underground stormwater pipes (rather than drainage swales) shall be utilized to collect stormwater.

9. Parking Spaces: That a total of 18 parking spaces shall be provided, including: 14 bays beneath the building (each counted as a single parking space) and 4 outside parking spaces, and 3 handicapped spaces in phase 4. This will increase the aggregate total number of parking spaces in phases 1-4 to 120.

10. 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.

11. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, clearly indicating which rare and specimen trees will be removed and preserved and including Town standard landscaping protection notes, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

12. Landscape Bufferyards: That the following landscape bufferyards shall be provided, and that if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirement, the vegetation shall be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:

Bufferyard Location	Buffer Required
The Center (west)	20 ft. Type ‘CC’¹
Chapel Hill Professional Village (north)	20 ft. Type ‘C’
Chapel Hill Professional Village (east)	20 ft. Type ‘C’
South Estes Drive (south)	30 ft. Type ‘D’

1. Approximately 230 feet of the buffer on the western property boundary is shared with The Center.

13. Protection of Significant Trees: That the applicant shall attempt to save the two large hardwoods (15” oak and 18” maple) between the drive aisle and northwest property line and replace them with like species if they die.

14. Tree Protection Fencing: That the tree protection fencing shall be erected around all existing vegetation that is to remain on site.

15. Catch Basins and Stormwater Pipes: That catch basins and stormwater pipes shall be utilized as part of street construction, in order to minimize land disturbance in buffer areas. Drainage swales or other detention facilities shall not be established in the required landscape bufferyards.

16. Slopes in Buffer Areas: That all newly graded landscape buffer areas shall not exceed a 3:1 slope.

17. Buffer Plantings: That all canopy trees installed in graded buffer areas shall be a minimum of 3 – 3½” caliper when installed. Also, all small trees installed in graded buffer areas shall be a minimum of 8 feet in height.

18. Planting Strips: That five-foot wide planting strips shall be provided between drive aisles and each building, where possible.

19. Parking Lot Screening: That parking areas shall be screened in accordance with Section 14.6.6 of the Development Ordinance.

Stipulations Related to Utilities

20. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan shall be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA), Duke Power Company, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable, and the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

21. Utility Lines: That all new utility lines, other than 3-phase electric power distribution lines, shall be underground.

22. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report shall be 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.

23. Fire Hydrant Location: That fire department connection(s) on all new structures shall be located within 50 feet of a fire hydrant, subject to the approval of the Town Manager, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

24. Sprinkler System: That new buildings shall have sprinkler systems in accordance with Town Code, which shall be approved by the Town Manager.

25. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a Solid Waste Management Plan, including provisions for the recycling, management, and minimization of construction debris, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

26. Heavy-Duty Paving: That all new drive aisles that provide access to dumpsters or recycling facilities shall be constructed to Town standards with heavy-duty pavement.

Miscellaneous Stipulations

27. Community Design Commission Approval: That the Community Design Commission shall approve the building elevations, the lighting plan, and any proposed alternative buffers for the site, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

28. 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 shall not exceed the pre-development rate.

29. Stormwater and Water Quality Best Management Practices: That stormwater detention and water quality management shall be accomplished with an alternative system such as an underground system with a slow release into a level spreader to facilitate sheet flow into the western buffer area, to be approved by the Town Manager.

30. Drainage Easements: That stormwater infrastructure shall be located within a recorded drainage easement and an approved operations and maintenance plan shall be approved prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

31. Recreation Requirements: That applicant shall provide a payment-in-lieu for on site recreation space according to requirements in Section 13.7.10 of the Development Ordinance.

32. 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.

That 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; 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.

33. Affordable Housing Payment-In-Lieu: That the applicant shall provide a $36,000 payment-in-lieu for the provision of affordable housing to the Orange Community Housing Corporation (OCHC) prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.

34. 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.

35. 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. A performance guarantee shall be required, in accordance with the Town Code of Ordinances, and the guarantee shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of any permit authorizing land-disturbing activity.

36. Open Burning: That no open burning shall be permitted during the construction of this development.

37. Silt Control: That the applicant shall take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

38. Construction Sign Required: That the applicant shall post a construction site identification sign following the issuance of a building permit, prior to the start of any construction activity on the site. The sign’s message shall include the following:

B. Identification of Property Owner’s representative (including phone number);

C. Identification of architects, engineers, contractors, and other individuals or firms involved with the construction (including phone numbers); and

D. Identification of the Town of Chapel Hill Planning Department (including phone number) as the contact for regulatory information.

The construction sign may have a maximum of 16 square feet of display area and may not exceed 6 feet in height. The sign shall be non-illuminated, and shall consist of light letters on a dark background.

39. Plant Rescue: That the applicant is encouraged to conduct a “plant rescue” for this site, after the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit and prior to the start of construction.

40. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

41. 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 approves the application for a Special Use Permit Modification for Wilshire Place.

Council Member Bateman asked if the staff could develop some form of amounts or criteria for determining payments-in-lieu.

Mayor Waldorf said that there were no single situations strongly similar to any other situation.

Council Member Foy said he felt that the Council had been successful in getting concessions, and each situation was unique.

Mr. Horton said there also could be some legal issues that would complicate the situations if the Council tried to formulate the amount or set criteria.

Mr. Horton said that the Council, at their January Retreat, had set as one of their goals to have a way of hearing employees’ opinions about the Town work environment, and had asked the staff to pursue this possibility. He said he had contacted Henry McKoy of Raleigh, whom he had worked with many times before, and that Mr. McKoy would present a proposal to the Council this evening.

Mr. McKoy said he was proposing that diversity training be combined for all of the Town’s employees, and during the training session that an instrument be administered that would focus on 16 questions. He said the questions would be aimed to get at employee perceptions about fairness and opportunity within the Town.

Mr. McKoy said that an instrument questionnaire would first be filled out by Town employees at a training session and kept by them, focusing on the strengths and differences that people have in working together and on individual issues and concerns about diversity. He said the piece that would get to the questions raised by the Council would be administered to the employees and turned in after the session was over. Mr. McKoy said an analysis would then be conducted on the 16 questions and the Council would have an opportunity to see how the employees of different levels and diversity saw the question. He said the survey would ask that the employees name their department so the Council could see what the perceptions and attitudes were within the different departments. Mr. McKoy said the questionnaire was designed to protect the confidentiality of each of the employees.

Council Member Ward asked if any of the staff who met with Mr. McKoy had been non-supervisory. Mr. Horton said in the initial meeting there had not been, but he expected that there would be a focus group that the staff would receive feedback from as part of the initial work.

Council Member Ward said he was concerned that the non-supervisory personnel were not at the initial meetings. Mr. McKoy commented that the first session would be conducted with a test group, primarily consisting of employees who were not managers. He said when the test was conducted he would be looking at how adequate were the questions, which would then be used to restructure the questionnaire to fine tune it before it goes to the larger organization.

Council Member Ward pointed out that in #9 of the questionnaire there was a double negative, and he felt it should read, “An employee is likely to be treated fairly…” Mr. McKoy responded that most of the questions were stated in the affirmative, and that question #9 could be restructured.

Council Member Bateman asked if there would be a need to provide the information in any other language than English. Mr. Horton said there might be a need for a Spanish translation for a very limited number of employees, and the staff would provide a translation for them.

Council Member Wiggins said her concern had been that the questionnaire called for a good deal of writing, and some people had difficulty expressing themselves in writing. She said she had spoken with Mr. McKoy and had been assured that those people could receive confidential help in expressing their feelings. She said that many of the employees delivered services to citizens, so this training would be good to ensure that the citizens were not treated unfairly, either. Council Member Wiggins said it was also important that the Council would be participating in the activity at its next retreat, so it would be something that was being done throughout the organization. She said it was important that the employees should know of the Council’s participation and that the Council took the attitude that this was a very important activity for the organization.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 3. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND “THE ORDINANCE CONCERNING APPROPRIATIONS AND THE RAISING OF REVENUE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2000 (2001-06-11/O-3)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Budget Ordinance entitled “An Ordinance Concerning Appropriations and the Raising of Revenue for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2000” as duly adopted on June 26, 2000 be and the same is hereby amended as follows:

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 19. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION REGARDING DIVERSITY TRAINING AND A STUDY OF THE TOWN’S WORK ENVIRONMENT (2001-06-11/R-19)

WHEREAS, the Town workforce is composed of a large number of employees from diverse backgrounds; and

WHEREAS, the Town Council and Town management want a workforce that is fair and free of discrimination; and

WHEREAS, the Town Council and Town management want employees to provide their perceptions of the Town as a fair and non-discriminatory workplace in a confidential manner; and

WHEREAS, McKoy and Associates from Raleigh has conducted diversity training and work environment studies for North Carolina local governments;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Town Manager to contract with McKoy and Associates to conduct employee training on diversity issues, to survey employees on their perceptions of the Town work environment, and to present a report to the Council including recommendations for follow-up actions.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO, THAT THIS ISSUE BE CONSIDERED AT THE COUNCIL’S RETREAT IN JANUARY 2002. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

13a. Board of Adjustment. The Council appointed Stephen Manton, Delilah Snow, and Richard Williams to the Board of Adjustment.

13b. Community Design Commission. The Council appointed Richard Barrett and Polly van de Velde to the Community Design Commission.

13c. Greenways Commission. The Council appointed Bill Bracey, Peter Calingaert and Ann-Christin Pautz to the Greenways Commission.

1. Mayor Waldorf said she had a joint petition on behalf of Council Members Ward, Foy and Strom. She noted that the resolution stated that “We support the recommendation of the Capital Needs Advisory Task Force with respect to Parks and Recreation recommendations, and that what they have put through is minimal and should not be reduced, and they encourage the Commissioners to support it.”

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 20. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CAPITAL NEEDS ADVISORY TASK FORCE (2001-06-11/R-20)

WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners intends to present a comprehensive bond package to citizens this November; and

WHEREAS, Chapel Hill and Carrboro presented a coordinated, joint and mutually supported parks and recreation bond projects request to the Capital Needs Advisory Task Force in April; and

WHEREAS, the Capital Needs Advisory Task Force for many weeks worked diligently and thoughtfully to consider a broad range of urgent capital needs in Orange County;

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

Council Member Strom said the letters should be sent to both the offices and the homes of all the Commissioners and it should be done tomorrow.

2. Mayor Waldorf asked that the Council adopt Resolution R-21, urging the N.C. House not to redirect the N.C. Railroad Funds into the State’s General Fund budget for 2001-2002.

MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 21, TO ALLOW THE MAYOR TO URGE THE N.C. HOUSE NOT TO REDIRECT N.C. RAILROAD FUNDS INTO THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION urging the North Carolina House not to redirect N.C. Railroad funds into the General Fund budget for 2001-2002 (2001-06-11/R-21)

WHEREAS, the North Carolina Senate version of the 2001-2002 budget calls for redirecting approximately $19 million from current and projected revenue of the N.C. Railroad; and

WHEREAS, the N.C. Railroad has adopted a plan to use $7 million of these funds to replace an existing substandard railroad bridge across N.C. Highway 54 near Miami Boulevard in Research Triangle Park; and

WHEREAS, replacing this bridge is an important first step toward widening N.C. Highway 54 between Davis Drive and Miami Boulevard and will affect a 25-acre, mixed-use development that will include the first housing in Research Triangle Park; and

WHEREAS, the House Appropriations Committee will discuss the N.C. Railroad funding issue in detail and has scheduled the next meeting for June 12;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council urges the N.C. House not to redirect N.C. Railroad funds into the General Fund budget for 2001-2002.

3. Council Member Strom requested a resolution to be sent to the Directors of the Research Triangle Foundation, and the Durham and Wake County elected officials, with the hope that they will develop planning mechanisms to continue to examine housing opportunities for RTP, to develop mechanisms to transfer housing density from outlying areas into RTP, and to seek applications of mixed-use overlays with the goal of transforming RTP into a pedestrian and transit oriented community.

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 22. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

A RESOLUTION supporting the development of housing in Research Triangle Park and encouraging the Research Triangle Foundation to work with Durham and Wake County governments and with the Triangle J Council of Governments to: (1) develop planning mechanisms to continue to examine housing opportunities in RTP; (2) develop mechanisms to transfer housing density from outlying areas into RTP; and (3) seek leading-edge applications of mixed-use overlays with the goal of transforming RTP into a pedestrian and transit-oriented community (2001-06-11/R-22)

WHEREAS, the Research Triangle Foundation is working with Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) and Craig Davis Properties to develop a 25-acre parcel of land for Research Triangle Park’s transit center; and

WHEREAS, the development project will include about 325 apartment or condominium units; and

WHEREAS, this will be the first time in the Park’s history that it will have residential housing; and

WHEREAS, housing and mixed-use development in Research Triangle Park is needed to relieve the negative impacts of sprawl; and

WHEREAS, between 1970 and 1999, vehicles miles traveled grew 140% nationally; and;

WHEREAS, both Durham and Wake counties received grades of “F” in the American Lung Association’s State of the Air 2001 report, which measures air quality as measured by ozone monitors; and

WHEREAS, the Research Triangle Foundation should continue seeking housing development opportunities and examining rules that prevent residential growth in the Park;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council supports the development of housing in Research Triangle Park and encourages the Research Triangle Foundation to work with Durham and Wake County governments and with the Triangle J Council of Governments to: (1) develop planning mechanisms to continue to examine housing opportunities in RTP; (2) develop mechanisms to transfer housing density from outlying areas into RTP; and (3) seek leading-edge applications of mixed-use overlays with the goal of transforming RTP into a pedestrian and transit-oriented community.

4. Council Member Brown presented a petition that would create a policy that would do one of the following: 1) request the Town Manager to bring to the Council a new policy at the next regular meeting of the Council that would require all consultants to produce all documents for the Council using recycled paper, demonstrating that the paper contains at least 30% or more recycled paper content, and containing no material that is not currently recyclable, and using the least materials possible; or 2) placing this item on the next regular meeting agenda for discussion and possible action by the Council to establish such a policy.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO PLACE HER PETITION REGARDING RECYCLING ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

5. Council Member Brown presented a petition requesting that the Council ask the Town Attorney to research how to approach changing the State policy forbidding citizens to bring their own containers for take out of prepared food.

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, THAT THE COUNCIL ASK THE TOWN ATTORNEY TO RESEARCH THE ISSUE OF NOT BEING ALLOWED TO BRING CONTAINERS INTO RESTARAUNTS AND DELIS AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COUNCIL IN AUGUST, SO THAT THE COUNCIL COULD IN SOME WAY CHANGE THE POLICY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Mayor pro tem Pavão thanked Assistant to the Manager Bill Stockard for pulling together all the information regarding downtown redevelopment and the financing for the City of Monrovia. He said that this was not allowed in North Carolina so any discussion of this issue would be a moot point.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM PAVÃO, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

a.	Nominations to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, the Housing and Community Development Advisory Board, the Human Services Advisory Board, and the Parks and Recreation Commission. (R-2).
b.	Bid for Backhoe/Loader (R-3).
c.	Bid for Parking Enforcement Utility Vehicles (R-4).
d.	Bid for Three (3) Cab and Chassis with Rear-Loading Packer Body (R-5).
e.	Project Ordinance for a Fiscal Year 2000-2001 Transportation Capital Grant (O-1).
f.	Acceptance of Historic Site Survey Grant (R-6).
g.	Authorization to Employ Apprentice in Inspections Department (R-7).
*h.	Deleted.

Petitions by Citizens

STATEMENT OF MAYOR ROSEMARY I. WALDORF

Item 4 – Consent Agenda

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board

Housing and Community Development Advisory Board

Human Services Advisory Board

Parks and Recreation Commission

Item 5 – Information Reports

Item 6 – Meadowmont Park and School Issues

6a. Consideration of Resolution regarding Meadowmont Park and School Special Use Permit Modification.

“(f) Traffic on Coolidge Street between Columbia Street and Old Pittsboro Road shall move only in a westerly direction.”

Miscellaneous Stipulations

Stipulations Related to Utilities

Miscellaneous Stipulations

A RESOLUTION REGARDING DIVERSITY TRAINING AND A STUDY OF THE TOWN’S WORK ENVIRONMENT (2001-06-11/R-19)

Applicants

Applicants

Applicants

*Board of Adjustment*		Council Members
Applicants	Waldorf	Bateman	Brown	Evans	Foy	Pavão	Strom	Ward	Wiggins	TOTAL
Applicants	Waldorf	Bateman	Brown	Evans	Foy	Pavão	Strom	Ward	Wiggins	TOTAL
Stephen Manton	X	X		X	X	X	X	X	X	8
Delilah Snow	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	X	9
Richard Williams	X	X			X			X	X	5