SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING

OF THE CHAPEL HILL, TOWN COUNCIL

MONDAY, JUNE 10, 2002, AT 7:00 P.M.

 

 

Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Council members present were Flicka Bateman, Ed Harrison, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom, Dorothy Verkerk, Jim Ward, and Edith Wiggins. Mayor pro tem Pat Evans was absent, excused.

 

Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant to the Manager Bill Stockard, Parks and Recreation Director Kathryn Spatz, Engineering Director George Small, Stormwater Engineer Fred Royal, Principal Community Development Planner Loryn Barnes, Recreation Planner Bill Webster, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Police Chief Gregg Jarvies, Senior Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper, Transportation Planner David Bonk, Police Attorney Terrie Gale, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.

 

Item 1 – Ceremonies

 

1a. Greenways and Open Space Awards

 

Greenways Commission Chair Joe Herzenberg introduced the members of the Awards Committee, and said that the Commission gives three categories of award—a citizen award, an honor award, and a vision award. He introduced the award winners:

 

·        Citizen award to three Eagle Scouts

·        Honor Awards

·        Community Church of Chapel Hill

·        Mark Properties

·        Kenan-Flagler Business School

·        Vision Award to Bill Webster, Parks and Recreation

 

1b. Proclamation Honoring the Animal Protection Society (APS)

 

Mayor Foy presented a proclamation proclaiming June 10, 2002, as Animal Protection Society Day.  He presented it to Dr. Bobby Schopler in recognition of his efforts as well as the efforts of the Center’s staff and volunteers.

 

Council Member Bateman urged the citizens to support the fundraiser being conducted by the APS.

Item 2 – Public Hearing to Amend the 2001-02 Community Development Program

 

Principal Community Development Planner Loryn Barnes said that the Council had received funding requests from Youth Creating Change for $2,100, and the Pines Community Center for $5,200. She said the Council could also consider other eligible uses for the Community Development funds, and any proposals approved by the Council would be implemented subject to meeting all U.S. Department of Housing and Development regulations. She said the Town would enter into Performance Agreements with the agencies, and monitor performance according to provisions of the Agreements. Ms. Barnes said, after comments during this evening’s Public Hearing, the staff would return to the Council on June 24, 2002 for consideration of the amendment.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

Item 3 - Petitions

 

1.      Holly Riddle, Director of North Carolina’s Council on Developmental Disabilities

 

Ms. Riddle described the background for the Council on Development. She said there was a new program to support people with developmental disabilities for self-determination and asked the Council to support the resolution.

 

Dick Harmson, of the Orange-Person-Chatham area program, said he supported people with developmental disabilities in trying to prove that they can make sound decisions for themselves and live in their own homes.  He introduced Ellen Perry who read parts of the Self-Determination Resolution for People with Developmental Disabilities     

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO RECEIVE AND ENDORSE THE RESOLUTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO FORWARD THE RESOLUTION TO THE TOWN’S LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION AND THE ORANGE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

2.      Estelle Mabry and Delores Bailey, Northside Neighborhood Issues

 

Ms. Mabry thanked the Council for agreeing to come to the Northside tour. She said the neighbors were grateful for having community police in the area, and were distressed that this coverage might not continue to be funded, because they had been very important to Northside.

 

Dolores Bailey said she had received a letter from the Police Chief which stated the Department would not take the Community Police away from the area, and thanked the Council for supporting the Northside.

 

Mayor Foy stated that Council was not considering cutting the funding for the Northside police coverage.

 

3.  Edwin Caldwell, Budget Issues

 

Mr. Caldwell asked the Council to commend the firefighters who had come to the neighborhood when a tree fell on a house and were so helpful.  He said he wanted to talk, also, about the budget shortfall, and he didn’t think speed bumps were a very high priority, considering the problems in the Northside neighborhood.

 

4.      Virginia Barbee, Request for Funds

 

Ms. Barbee said she wanted funding for a Director for the day care center. She said she would go all the way to Washington to get the funds.  Ms. Barbee stated that the City of Durham was supporting a summer camp for “at risk” youth, free of charge.  She demanded that the Town give her the money needed to pay the teachers.

 

THE PETITIONS WERE RECEIVED BY CONSENSUS OF THE COUNCIL.

 

Item 4 – Consent Agenda

 

Council Member Ward pulled 4f – Changes in Plan for the Booker Creek Linear Park Project, and 4g – Design Guidelines for Chapel Hill Historic Districts.

 

Mayor Foy pulled 4d – Follow-up Report on Flood Mitigation Measures at Eastgate Shopping Center and Options for Allocation of Drainage Improvement Funds, in order to allow a citizen to speak.

 

Item 4f - Jeanine Connor, speaking for Eastgate Shopping Center, thanked the staff, especially Cal Horton, Fred Royal, and George Small, for all their help and work for the tenants of the Center, and urged the Council to approve the Resolution, which called for $10,000 for drainage improvements, and when funds were available to contribute another $40,000 for the improvements.  She asked for deletion of the last clause in the Resolution – “provided the need for such improvements continues to exist.”

 

Mr. Karpinos said the Town would have to have a Performance Agreement executed before it could make any payment.  He said the question which needed to be answered would be whether or not the work done and to be done was for public purpose.  He said this would be an engineering decision, for a use of the money in the future, when the Town had the money.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 4, RETAINING THE LANGUAGE IN THE RESOLUTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO MAKE AVAILABLE UP TO $10,000 IN STATE ENHANCEMENT GRANT FUNDS TO FEDERAL REALTY INVESTMENT TRUST FOR FLOOD MITIGATION PURPOSES AND TO ALLOCATE REMAINING DRAINAGE FUNDS FOR RESOLVING A FLOODING PROBLEM ON BURNING TREE DRIVE (2002-06-10/R-4)

 

WHEREAS, the Eastgate Shopping Center has historically experienced and continues to experience repetitive flood damages; and

 

WHEREAS, the owner of the Eastgate Shopping Center, Federal Realty and Investment Trust, has investigated, designed, and is presently implementing measures to mitigate said repetitive flooding; and

 

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Town Council directed Town staff to assist and collaborate with Federal Realty in its investigation of possible flood mitigation measures at the Eastgate Shopping Center and to identify how the Town might assist the property owner in implementing those measures; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town has provided significant assistance to Federal Realty and its shopping center tenants including technical assistance and field maintenance work; and

 

WHEREAS, Federal Realty’s consulting engineer has shared data related to the drainage of the area in and around Eastgate with Town staff for use in designing the Linear Park; and

 

WHEREAS, Federal Realty’s consulting engineer, in association with Town staff, has identified certain measures that would be effective in mitigating flooding and flood related damages at the Eastgate Shopping Center; and

 

WHEREAS, Town staff has determined that it would be reasonable and prudent to continue to provide technical assistance to Federal Realty and to share in certain costs for implementation of identified flood mitigation measures, including modification to the Town’s planned Linear Park adjacent to the shopping center; and

 

WHEREAS, Town staff has determined that a flooding problem involving a drainage pipe under Burning Tree Drive, downstream from a tributary of  Little Creek, is the highest priority of drainage and flooding problems currently identified;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Manager is authorized to provide continuing technical assistance and to make available up to $10,000 of State Enhancement Grant funds to Federal Realty Investment Trust, through a Performance Agreement, for flood mitigation purposes that will provide a benefit to the public and will improve drainage conditions in the area.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that remaining 1996 drainage bond funds be allocated for mitigating the flooding problem at Burning Tree Drive close to a tributary to Little Creek.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council will consider contributing an additional $40,000 to the Eastgate Shopping Center drainage improvements at such time that funds are available and as may be recommended by the Town Manager, provided the need for such improvements continues to exist.

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCL MEMBER WIGGINS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1, WITHOUT D, F, AND G. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (2002-06-10/R-1)

 

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.

Nominations to Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, Board of Adjustment, Housing and Community Development Advisory Board, Human Services Advisory Board, Personnel Appeals Committee, and the Planning Board (R-2).

b.

Donation of Property by Duke Energy Company (R-3). 

c.

Regulation of Newspaper Racks in the 100 Block of East Franklin Street (O-1).  

e.

Town of Chapel Hill Hazard Mitigation Plan (R-5).

h.

Orange County HOME Consortium Agreement (R-8).

i.

Tentatively Scheduling a Council Meeting on July 26, if necessary, to Adopt a Final Budget for 2002-03 (R-9).

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

 

A RESOLUTION NOMINATING APPLICANTS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2002-06-10/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

Cory Brooks

Terrelle Buckner

Claire Millar

Wayne Pein

Brynda Smith

Nathaniel Stookey

 

Board of Adjustment

Valerie Bateman

Paul A. Caldwell

 

Housing and Community Development Advisory Board

Enrique Armijo

Evonne Bradford

Nancy Milio

Robin Whitsell

 

Human Services Advisory Board

Lew Borman

 

Parks and Recreation Commission

Paul A. Caldwell

 

Personnel Appeals Committee

Darlene Nicgorski

Robin Whitsell

Glenn Wilson

 

Planning Board

Paul A. Caldwell

Clinton Hicks

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

 

A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING, WITH THANKS, THE DONATION OF APPROXIMATELY 1.9 ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM DUKE ENERGY COMPANY (2002-06-10/R-3)

 

WHEREAS, on November 27, 2000, the Council adopted the “Report of the Merritt Pasture Access Committee to the Town Council”; and

 

WHEREAS, the Report contained recommendations related to gaining public access to the Merritt Pasture; and

 

WHEREAS, the property proposed for donation is a vital link in the adopted plan for providing public access to the Merritt Pasture;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council accepts the donation of approximately 1.9 acres of property from the Duke Energy Company.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Manager to pay the costs related to transfer of the property up to $5,000.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council thanks the Duke Energy Company for its generous donation of land that is crucial for public enjoyment and use of an important area of public open space.

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

 

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES ON STREETS AND SIDEWALKS (2002-06-10/O-1)

 

BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill as follows:

 

Section 1. Sec 17-85 is hereby amended to read as follows:

 

“Section 17-85. Distribution and sale of publications in the 100 block of North Columbia Street on certain specified blocks.

 

Any vendor choosing to distribute free publications in the 100 block of North Columbia Street locations listed below shall use the modular newspaper racks provided and maintained by the Town in this these areas. Individual privately owned free-standing newspaper racks shall not be permitted in the 100 block of North Columbia Street locations listed below for the purpose of distributing free publications.

 

Any vendor choosing to sell publications in the 100 block of North Columbia Street locations listed below shall purchase a newspaper rack meeting the design guidelines herein described, and shall locate and maintain the newspaper rack in an area designated by the Town Manager. All newspaper racks used for the sale of publications shall be green metal non-pedestal mounted racks not exceeding 20” in width or 36” in height, excluding top mounted coin slots. These racks shall be free of advertising on all sides excepting the front and top surfaces. Privately owned newspaper racks that do not meet these guidelines or that are not properly maintained, as determined by the Town Manager, shall not be permitted in the 100 block of North Columbia Street locations listed below for the purpose of selling publications.

 

a.       100 block of North Columbia Street; and

b.      100 block of East Franklin Street, south side.”

 

Section 2. Sec 17-84 is hereby amended to read as follows:

 

“Section 17-84.  Application of article to sale of article on U.N.C. property, sale of newspapers, magazines and food.

 

The provisions of this article shall not apply to the sale of any article on private property or on the property of the University of North Carolina, nor to the sale of newspapers or magazines except in the 100 block of North Columbia Street as to those locations as provided in Section 17-85, nor farm products exempted under North Carolina General Statutes 105-53 (c), provided such sales do not interfere with or impede the orderly flow of pedestrian or automotive traffic.”

 

Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

 

A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AS REQUIRED BY STATE SENATE BILL 300 IN ORDER TO REMAIN ELIGIBLE FOR STATE AND FEDERAL DISASTER RELIEF FUNDING (2002-06-10/R-5)

 

WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to remain eligible for State and federal disaster relief funds in the event of a declared disaster in Chapel Hill; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council recognizes the value of having a plan in place for identifying, prioritizing, and mitigating potential and real hazards that could affect Chapel Hill; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town has prepared a Hazard Mitigation Plan and has revised the Plan as suggested by the North Carolina Division of Emergency Management following its presentation at a Public Hearing on May 13, 2002 and its submittal to the State and to Town Departments for review and comment; and

 

WHEREAS, the North Carolina Division of Emergency Management has endorsed the proposed Town of Chapel Hill Hazard Mitigation Plan;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council herewith adopts the Town of Chapel Hill Hazard Mitigation Plan as presented on June 10, 2002.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to periodically review and to present for Council approval proposed revisions to the Plan as new data and information become available, as mitigation measures are achieved, and as mitigation strategies evolve.

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO EXECUTE A NEW HOME CONSORTIUM AGREEMENT FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY HOME PROGRAM (2002-06-10-/R-8)

 

WHEREAS, on July 6, 1992, the Council approved the participation of the Town of Chapel Hill in the Orange County HOME Consortium; and

 

WHEREAS, Chapel Hill, Orange County, Carrboro and Hillsborough are currently members of the Orange County HOME Consortium established on August 3, 1992; and

 

WHEREAS, on May 13, 1996, the Council authorized the Manager to execute a new HOME Consortium Agreement for the Orange County HOME Program from July 1, 1996 through June 30, 1999; and

 

WHEREAS, on July 7, 1999, the Council authorized the Manager to execute a new HOME Consortium Agreement for the Orange County HOME Program from July 1, 1999 through June 30, 2002; and

 

WHEREAS, the current Orange County HOME Consortium Agreement will expire on June 30, 2002; and

 

WHEREAS, the Orange County HOME Consortium desires to continue to be considered for eligibility under the federal HOME Program operated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development as authorized under the HOME Investment Partnership Act, as amended;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager to execute a new HOME Consortium Agreement for the Orange County HOME Program for the period of July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2005. 

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

 

A RESOLUTION TENTATIVELY scheduling a Council meeting at 8:00 a.m. on Friday, July 26, in the Council Chamber for the purpose of adopting a final 2002-03 budget, SHOULD SUCH AN ACTION BE NECESSARY (2002-06-10/R-9)

 

WHEREAS, the Council may need to adopt an Interim 2002-03 Budget by July 1; and

 

WHEREAS, the latest date for setting the Town tax rate and adopting a 2002-03 Final Budget is August 1; and

 

WHEREAS, if the General Assembly adopts appropriate protective legislation, then the Council would be able to use the funds to reduce the tax rate, provide for employee compensation increases, and allocate funding for additional capital improvement projects;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby tentatively schedules a Council Meeting at 8:00 a.m. on Friday, July 26, in the Council Chamber of Town Hall for the purpose of adopting a Final 2002-03 Budget, should such an action be necessary. 

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

 

Item 4f – Booker Creek Linear Park Project - Council Member Ward commented on 4f and said both of the bridges should be included in the project. Recreation Planner Bill Webster explained the options, stating that the bridge at Elliott Road would have a sidewalk. He said the State was only funding one bridge.  Mr. Webster said the bicycle route would have access to the Plaza as well, adding that the bridge would need to be wider for bicycles and would require more funding.

 

Council Member Harrison said any bicycle route would help, to keep people from using Highway 15-501.

 

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

 

 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO MAKE NECESSARY CHANGES TO THE BOOKER CREEK LINEAR PARK PROJECT BASED ON CHANGES TO THE SITE SINCE THE ADOPTION OF THE PLAN AND NEW FLOOD STUDY INFORMATION (2002-06-10/R-6)

 

WHEREAS, on September 13, 1999, the Council adopted the Booker Creek Linear Park Advisory Committee’s Report to the Town Council.; and

 

WHEREAS, on February 12, 2001, the Council accepted a NCDOT Enhancement grant for the project; and

 

WHEREAS, the site conditions have changed since the adoption of the plan; and

 

WHEREAS, recent flood studies have revealed that the planned bridge cannot be constructed in the location approved by the Council without an increase in 100 year flood levels;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager to make necessary changes to the Booker Creek Linear Park project based on changes to the site since the adoption of the plan and based on new flood study information.

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

Item 5 – Information Items

 

Regarding 5b, Council Member Wiggins thanked the Manager for finding a way to follow up on the McKoy Study on Equal Opportunity and Work Environment recommendations without using lack of funds a reason not to, making a major commitment to follow through.

 

Council Member Bateman commented on 5b, page 3, under “Implementation of Recommendations from the Assessment” #1 Action Plan.  She stated that she wanted to make sure that an advisory committee would have a broad spectrum of representation of races and gender.

 

Council Member Strom pulled 5e – Response to Petition on Signs on Utility Poles.

 

Council Member Harrison pulled 5c – Watershed Assessment and Restoration Project.

 

Item 6 – 2002 Mobility Report Card

 

Mr. Ray Moe, the Town’s consultant, made a report:

 

Mobility Report Card Elements

·        Vehicular Activity and Arterial Level of Service

·        Peak Hour Intersection Operations

·        Vehicular Travel Time

·        Pedestrian Facilities

·        Pedestrian Activity

·        Bicycle Facilities  

·        Bicycle Activity

·        Transit Service

·        Transit Ridership

·        Office Parking

 

Mr. Moe presented maps and graphics of, and explained the statistics of:

 

·        Traffic Counts

·        Vehicular Activity and Arterial Level of Service

·        Vehicle Peak Hour Intersection Operations

·        Vehicle Travel Time

·        Pedestrian Facilities

·        Pedestrian Activity

·        Bicycle Facilities

·        Bicycle Activity

·        Transit Service

·        Transit Ridership

·        Employee Parking

 

Mayor Foy said the Report was very well done and gave much information.  

 

Council Member Harrison said the information about the ratios of cars to bicycles on various roads was very helpful and wondered if copies of the Report were being distributed to the various advisory boards.  Mr. Horton said more copies could be printed, but he felt it would be more efficient to put it on the web.

 

Council Member Strom asked Mr. Moe to comment on the minimum threshold and maximum range the Council should be looking at in updating the data base. Mr. Moe said the Comprehensive Plan had suggested about three years to update and the Council could choose what element they wanted to update.

 

Mr. Horton thanked David Bonk, Kumar Neppali, and George Small for their work on the Mobility Report, as well.

 

Item 7 – Follow-up on Development Ordinance Revision

 

Planning Department Roger Waldon reviewed the background for discussions of the Second Draft of the Development Ordinance and the Public Hearings for citizen comments. He said that the key this evening would be a discussion of a 14th Discussion Paper, listing all the new ideas that were raised at the June 3 Public Hearing.  Mr. Waldon added that that for each idea the staff had offered its recommendation regarding what direction to give to the consultant for preparation of the Third Draft.  He said there seemed to be a clear direction and consensus for where the Ordinance was heading, and one hung in the balance—affordable housing.

 

Consultant Mark White, of  Freilich, Leitner and Carlisle, thanked the staff and citizens, Council, and others who were involved in the preparation.  He addressed “Inclusionary Zoning” and said there was question of its legality, and a technique unexplored.  Mr. White said other communities and states were looking at the issue.

 

Martin Rody said he had a problem with retention basins, which could be a risk for children, and some kind of fencing or bushes should surround the ponds.  He commented on affordable housing, saying services would be subsidized by the taxpayers.  Mr. Rody offered a suggestion that for every 50 houses approved for affordable housing, 100 acres should be rezoned for commercial rather than private housing, to support the affordable housing program.

 

Margaret Heath said an overlooked resource was the wetlands, which she said was overseen by State regulations.  She said she hoped that the Town Ordinance would compliment these regulations.  Ms. Heath said she hoped that developers would be required to identify and show how they would protect the areas.

 

Mayor Foy proposed that the Council begin discussion along the lines of his memo of June 10, 2002.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 10, WITH THE AMENDMENTS INCLUDED IN MAYOR FOY’S POINTS IN HIS JUNE 10, 2002 MEMORANDUM.

 

Council Member Harrison said the reason for his memo that was provided to the Council was that he disagreed with some of the points.  He supported those included for deferral.  Council Member Harrison said that wetlands could be dealt with locally.

 

Mayor Foy suggested going ahead with the discussion of the Discussion Papers because the staff and consultant needed input from the Council, and he felt that now was the time to say the direction in which they wanted to go.  Mr. Horton responded that the Planning Board had recommended that a number of the items be pursued at a later time.  Mr. White noted that he could put the regulations together, but more studies needed to be done to see what modifications would be needed.  He said he could produce it within the timeframe requested.

 

Council Member Ward said that Discussion Paper #1, Item #4, “Include Traditional Neighborhood Development Zoning District as an option in the new ordinance,” and Item #5, “Include Transit Oriented Development Zoning District as an option in the new ordinance,” were both very attractive zoning district tools, but he was concerned that the public felt that those elements were being deferred and not part of the opportunity for public discussion.  Council Member Ward said perhaps they could be brought back to the Council as some part of a companion piece, or to commit them to the Design Manual.

 

Council Member Harrison said he did support taking some of the items off for further discussion.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD OFFERED A “FRIENDLY” AMENDMENT TO REMOVE ITEMS 4 AND 5 OF DISCUSSION PAPER #1, FROM RESOLUTION 10. THE MOVER AND SECONDER WERE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE AMENDMENT.

 

Mayor Foy said he would like to defer Discussion Paper #13, Item #36, “Develop a transfer of development rights as an intra-town system for use inside Town limits, which could be used for the Resource Conservation District (RCD) in place of a variance.”  Mr. Waldon commented that it could be done if the Council would agree that the density could be moved to another place where zoning would allow.

 

Mr. Waldon said a commercial retrofit would be for rebuilding an older building, to provide incentive to encourage the owners to upgrade.  Mr. White added that some design standards should be upheld and some incentives could be offered.

 

Mr. Waldon said the staff had recommended that Paper #13, Item #72, “Create an Environmental Impact Statement system, with required analysis and statements, for projects over a certain threshold (to be determined),” not be incorporated into the Third Draft.  He said it should be looked at more carefully, and the complexity of the issue could not be developed over the summer.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED A “FRIENDLY” AMENDMENT, TO REMOVE #72 FROM DISCUSSION PAPER #13. THE MOVER AND SECONDER AGREED WITH THE AMENDMENT.

 

Council Member Strom said he hoped this would be placed in priority as a future goal.

 

Mayor Foy asked if there were further comments about Discussion Paper #13, Item #82, “Consider Impact Fee for transportation improvements.”  Mr. Waldon said he did not think this was a Development Ordinance item.

 

Council Member Verkerk said that transportation by foot or bicycle should be very clearly defined.  Mr. White said it could be any of them, but there has to be study to prove that there is a rationale, and that is not a study that is commonly done.

 

Council Member Ward asked if there was a way to get the developers to provide off-site sidewalks to fill gaps in the sidewalks for a continuation of pedestrian traffic.  Mr. White responded that would require additional documentation that it would be legal.  He said the developers could not be made to pay for existing deficiencies.

 

Council Member Ward asked if a single-lot development was required to provide a sidewalk.  Mr. Horton said that the lot might have been recorded many years ago.  Mr. White said it would go back to the impact study, and the fee could be established at a later date.

 

Mr. Waldon discussed Discussion Paper #14, Item #11, “Revise ordinance to include subjecting minor subdivisions to Planning Board approval followed by cursory Council approval on a consent agenda, so the item could be pulled for greater scrutiny if necessary,” who defined what was meant by a minor subdivision.  Mr. Karpinos defined what was legal under State law.

 

Mr. Horton, in response to a Council question, briefly described the process of pulling items from the consent agenda.

 

Council Member Strom said he felt that the pulling items such as this from the consent agenda would be a safeguard, in a different interpretation of the rules.  He said minor subdivisions would be more desirable, where they are possible.

 

Council Member Wiggins said she did not object to the issue coming before the Planning Board, but felt that pulling from the consent agenda would be very time-consuming for the Council for a review that was not necessary.  She said there were already rules which decreased housing stock, making housing cost more.  Council Member Wiggins said the only way to keep housing prices down was to increase the density.

 

Council Member Ward said it would be the way development was going to go in the future, and he felt a review by the Council would be appropriate.

 

Council Member Wiggins said that how the Town used the land determined the price of the housing.  She asked why the Council needed to review it.

 

Council Member Verkerk said the Council should have control of what would be on the minor subdivisions.

 

Council Member Kleinschmidt said he agreed with Council Member Wiggins, citing an occurrence in a neighboring town, and asked if the Overlay Districts offered that kind of protection.

 

Mayor Foy said he did not think so, but that would be coming to the Council for approval of a Special Use Permit, if over 5 acres.

 

Council Member Bateman said she had no a problem with the approval coming from the Planning Board, but she would like to have some monitoring of the minor subdivisions over the next 6 months, and then have the Council discuss whether to change the item.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked how many minor subdivisions there were.  Senior Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper, said there were different ones, some townhouses, some duplexes, some division of a lot in older neighborhoods.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BATEMAN MOVED A “FRIENDLY” AMENDMENT TO REMOVE #11 FROM PAPER #14. COUNCIL MEMBER STROM DID NOT ACCEPT THE AMENDMENT.

 

Council Member Harrison said he felt these minor subdivisions should at least come before the Planning Board for approval.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED A “FRIENDLY” AMENDMENT TO REVISE #11 FROM PAPER #14 BY PUTTING A PERIOD AFTER THE WORD “APPROVAL” AND REMOVING THE REMAINDER OF THE SENTENCE. COUNCIL MEMBER STROM ACCEPTED THIS.

 

Mayor Foy asked the staff for a past six-month report on the number of minor subdivisions had been acted upon.

 

Council Member Ward asked if the definition for a threshold could be changed so that 3 or more for a minor subdivision could come before the Council.  Mr. Horton said his advice for the Council was that they did not review it for any number of additions, but this was a judgement that the Council would have to determine.

 

Mr. Waldon said what was being proposed for stormwater management, Discussion Paper #14, Item #14, was more vigorous than what any other community is doing.

 

Stormwater Engineer Fred Royal said the proposal would be more rigorous and the 1-year storm would be more conservative.  He said the State requirement was a volume requirement.  Mr. Royal said the other was release rate.

 

Council Member Strom said he would prefer the highest standards possible. Mr. Royal said the wording of the State was volume and release.  He said minor subdivision requirements were still under discussion.  Mr. Roy explained it was very difficult to engineer a one and one-half year storm, but the language of the ordinance should be written to meet the minimum for the State standards for quality, and then to meet any quantity the Town wished.

 

Council Member Strom said the standards in the Town were not doing what we wanted them to do, and there was an obligation to have higher standards.  Mr. Royal said that meeting the State standards would be a much-improved standard than what was going on now in Chapel Hill.  He said this was a great improvement.

 

Council Member Harrison asked that Paper #14, Item #15 be deferred.

 

 Mr. Waldon commented on Paper #14, Item #18, that 150 feet no land disturbance was more than what the Town had now, and the staff would bring mapping and illustrative maps to the Council.

 

Mayor Foy offered a “friendly” amendment to Paper #14, Item #22, to read “Steep slopes should be undisturbed to the maximum extent possible.” This was accepted by both mover and seconder.

 

Council Member Ward asked for Council discussion on the exemptions from the Tree Ordinance.

 

Mayor Foy said there were a lot of model ordinances around the country, and he felt the Council could come up with some kind of balance in Chapel Hill without having to make choices.  He said given the choices of exemptions was unworkable to him.  Mayor Foy said the final ordinance be what the Council believed was workable.

 

Council Member Harrison said Tree Ordinances are labor-intensive for enforcement.  He suggested that the Manager develop an operational analysis, adding he felt the Council could look to other tree ordinances for examples.

 

Council Member Strom said there was broad consensus that the Tree Ordinance the Town had was not working.  He said the work that Sally Greene had done was done well.

 

Mr. White said there was more information on the website, and it was important to protect stands of trees.  He pointed out that tree ordinances throughout the country were very controversial.

 

Mr. Waldon said, referring to Paper #14, Item #42, “Can an SUP exceed the zone FAR?  If not, then this should be changed for greater density in non-residential zones,” that the answer was “No” unless there were some particular circumstances that would give the Council some flexibility.  He said the staff could bring back some suggestions for FAR in non-residential zones. He said the staff recommended that the Council not increase Floor Area Density.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD OFFERED A “FRIENDLY” AMENDMENT TO REMOVE ITEM #42. THIS WAS ACCEPTABLE TO THE MOVER, COUNCIL MEMBER STROM.

 

Item #45 had been removed in earlier discussion (Paper 1, Item #5).

 

Mr. Horton said, referring to Paper #14, Item #53, that he would not recommend changing the Agreement with the University on OI-4.  Mr. Karpinos said he would look up the Agreement. Mr. Horton said it could apply to future development.

 

Mr. Waldon said there were some special considerations of approval in the Development Plan of the University that would not necessitate a change in the OI-4 district. He stated that Item #53 would read “Look at the possibility of including a process for community input on buildings proposed for perimeter areas.”

 

Council Member Verkerk asked for more information about parking requirements.  Mr. Waldon said the staff was collecting comments.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK OFFERED A “FRIENDLY” AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE PAPER #13, ITEM #202. “Parking Requirements.” THE MOVER ACCEPTED.

 

Council Member Bateman asked if the Council had already decided about issuing the minimum setbacks for individual dwellings.  Mr. Waldon responded that the decision had been to keep the minimum setbacks, and not eliminate them.

 

Council Member Kleinschmidt commented on the Definition of Relationships people have, in regard to living in the same dwelling.  He said real concerns should be addressed, such as trash, and the like.  Mr. Waldon said the restrictions needed a lot of work, and that would be one of the issues the staff would be looking at.

 

THE MOTION AS AMENDED WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

 

A RESOLUTION GIVING GUIDANCE TO CONSULTANT AND STAFF REGARDING REVISIONS TO MAKE IN PREPARING A THIRD DRAFT OF A PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (2002-06-10/R-10)

 

WHEREAS, the Town Council is revising Chapel Hill’s Development Ordinance; and

 

WHEREAS, public discussion has been ongoing on a Second Draft of that proposed new ordinance; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town Council seeks to offer specific direction to staff and Consultant regarding preparation of the next draft of the document;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council offers the following guidance to the Town Manager and the Town’s Consultant working on a new Development Ordinance regarding revisions to make in preparing a Third Draft of the ordinance:

 

Make changes as indicated in the attached fourteen Discussion Papers accompanying the Town Manager’s June 10, 2002 memorandum to the Town Council, with the following exceptions:

 

·        Discussion Paper #1

 

Item #5 - Include Transit Oriented Development Zoning District as an option in the new ordinance.

 

·        Discussion Paper #13

 

Item #13 - Prohibit storage of hazardous material in watershed.

 

Item #36 - Develop a transfer of development rights as an intratown system for use inside town limits, which could be used for the RCD in place of a variance.

 

Item # 37 - Keep incentive for retail retrofit.

 

·        Discussion Paper #14

 

Item #9 - Lower the minimum lot size for non-residential zones.

 

Item #11 - Revise ordinance to include subjecting minor subdivisions to Planning Board approval.

 

Item #16 - Include post-development system in place for each development.

 

Item #18 - Define RCD as 150-foot minimum from stream or 3-feet above 100-year flood elevation, whichever is greater, with no land disturbance permitted within 150 feet, including bridges and streets, unless with a variance from the Board of Adjustment.  Maintain the tiered-structure for areas outside the 150-foot buffer.  Consider accommodations for trails and greenways.

 

Item #21 - Watershed restrictions regarding impervious surface should be applied townwide.

 

Item #22 - Steep slopes should be undisturbed to the maximum extent feasible.

 

Item #23 - Tree ordinance should be refined to include applicability to single lots, specimen trees, groves.  See memo from Sally Greene delivered in testimony dated June 3, 2002, particularly reference to “Guidelines for Developing and Evaluating Tree Ordinances,” published by the USDA Forest Service and Model Ordinance.  The goal is a system of community forest management for the town that emphasizes the aspect of a tree protection ordinance (see p. 2 of “Guidelines”) and that includes protection for trees on private property (see p. 8 of “Guidelines”).

 

Item # 53 - Include a process for community input on buildings proposed for perimeter areas, re: Section 3.5.2(h)(2).

 

This the 10th day of June, 2002.

 

 

Council Member Wiggins asked Mr. White if he was going to address in the Draft what happens to existing properties, what rights to rebuild under the old rules in case of a catastrophe.  Mr. White said he would be taking a look at this issue, and would have suggestions for the Council.

 

Item 8 – Amendment to Solicitation Ordinances

 

Police Chief Gregg Jarvies said there were 2 ordinances before the Council:

 

·        Adoption of Ordinance A would amend Chapter 13 of the Town Code of Ordinances that regulates door-to-door peddlers and solicitors.

·        Adoption of Ordinances B would Amend Section 11:170 of the Town Code of Ordinances that regulates begging, panhandling and soliciting.

 

Chief Jarvies noted the following:

 

·        Solicitors of door-to-door currently requires a permit.

·        Non-commercial solicitation does not require a permit.

·        Changes would be that all door-to-door solicitors would require a permit, valid for 30 days, and no $15 fee would be charged, and prohibited at nights. Religious solicitors would be exempt.

·        Changes to begging, panhandling and soliciting would be requirements to file a free permit, none at night, prohibited from medians and shoulders. 

 

Chief Jarvies said these suggested changes were in response to citizens’ complaints, and continue to increase.  He said the changes proposed were in many towns and cities throughout North Carolina.  Chief Jarvies indicated that the Manager recommended adoption of both Ordinance A and B.

 

Ruby Sinreich said that Chapel Hill had long held the reputation as being liberal, but it was beginning to look like a bastion of sterility and authoritarianism.  She said the Town should be trying to help people.  Ms. Sinreich noted that there already were local and State laws against aggressive panhandling, adding she had never felt fear for her safety.

 

Jim Gray urged the Council to pass the proposed two ordinances, noting it was a quality-of-life issue.  He said controls such as this had improved the quality of life in New York City. Mr. Gray stated it was a safety issue, and that the proposed  regulation was reasonable.

 

Scott Maitland said the proposed regulations were lawful, and he had had numerous unsafe and unpleasant contacts with people panhandling both at home and at work on Franklin Street.  He said the ACLU was subject to regulations.  Mr. Maitland said many people won’t come to the downtown because of the panhandling, especially at night.

 

Chris Moran, of the Interfaith Council for Social Service and other organizations whose goals were to eliminate homelessness, said he was concerned about the interpretations which could evolve from the ordinance.  He read a statement regarding homelessness from The Corporation for Public Housing.  Mr. Moran challenged the Council to partner with his organizations not to talk about panhandling regulations, but to talk about how each can end chronic homelessness, adding the Council should collect further data about homelessness to examine the problem.

 

Edmund Wise asked that the Council limit panhandling in any way that was effective and legal. He said most of them solicited for their alcoholic needs.  Mr. Wise said it was not a First Amendment problem to limit the activities of a group of minor terrorists.  He said although he considered himself a liberal, there was a limit to which a liberal could or should tolerate.

 

Aaron Nelson, Executive Director of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, brought the Chamber’s support for the ordinances, which addressed the concerns of many of the businesses in the community.

 

Marc Dorosin, President of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro ACLU, said the ordinance as proposed was a violation of the First Amendment.  He said it was a matter of solicitation for money.  Mr. Dorosin said the Town had an anti-aggressive panhandling ordinance on its books which was not being enforced.  He said he had no fear for his safety when refusing to give panhandlers money. Mr. Dorosin said the proposed ordinance was designed for the purpose of arresting people.

Robert Humphreys of the Downtown Commission said the Downtown Commission supported the changes to the ordinances, noting this change was a result of complaints from citizens.  He encouraged the Council to adopt the changes to the ordinances.

 

Council Member Bateman asked why, if there was an aggressive panhandling ordinance on the books, a cumbersome process should be put in place which would make things more complex. Chief Jarvies responded that, if the officer does not see the panhandling, he cannot enforce the ordinance, unless a citizen is willing to take out a warrant and go through the court process.

 

Council Member Bateman said if the Town did not want panhandling it should simply ban panhandling.

 

Council Member Kleinschmidt asked why the 9 or 10 people causing the problem could not be deterred, rather than creating a broad, sweeping regulation.  Chief Jarvies responded that there was a problem of more than 9 or 10, adding that there was a problem of solicitations at night at homes, in addition to downtown.

 

Council Member Kleinschmidt said there was a distinction with people going door-to-door and panhandling, and he asked why the two specific ordinances were necessary.  Chief Jarvies said there were several different kinds of solicitations.  He said all would be treated equally, fairly, and consistently.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED TO DEFER THE ISSUE AND CALL A PUBLIC HEARING TO GET CITIZEN COMMENTS.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 6-2, WITH MAYOR FOY, COUNCIL MEMBERS HARRISON, STROM, VERKERK, WARD AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS BATEMAN AND KLEINSCHMIDT VOTING NAY.

 

Council Member Strom said he would like more information on the issue of soliciting and why the existing ordinances could not be enforced.  He stated he wanted that information before the Public Hearing.

 

Mayor Foy suggested that all the Council Members should submit to the Manager their comments, questions, and suggestions prior to the public hearing.

 

Item 9 – Consideration of Resolution Regarding Alcoholic Beverage Control

 

Item 9 was deferred by consensus of the Council.

 

Item 10 – Appointment of Committee to Consider a Charge to

Combine the Bicycle-Pedestrian Advisory Board, Transportation Board,

and Possibly the Greenways Commission

 

Item 10 was deferred by consensus of the Council.

 

Item 11 –Appointments

11a.  Board of Adjustment

 

The Council appointed the following persons to the Board of Adjustment:  Enrique Armijo, Valerie Bateman, and Janet McLamb.

 

 

Council Members

Board of Adjustment

Applicants

Foy

Bateman

Evans

Harrison

Kleinschmidt

Strom

Verkerk

Ward

Wiggins

TOTAL

Enrique Armijo

 

 

A

X

X

X

X

 

X

5

Valerie Bateman

X

X

B

X

X

X

X

X

X

8

Terry Blalock

 

 

S

 

 

 

 

 

 

--

Paul A. Caldwell

X

 

E

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

Janet McLamb

X

X

N

X

X

X

X

X

X

8

Brian Smith

 

 

T

 

X

 

 

 

 

1

Glenn Wilson

 

 

 

X

 

X

X

 

X

4

 

11b.  Parks and Recreation Commission

 

The Council appointed the following persons to the Parks and Recreation Commission:  Paul P. Caldwell, Paul A Caldwell, Andrea Rohrbacher, and Mitch Strobin.

 

 

 

Council Members

Parks and Recreation Commission Applicants

Foy

Bateman

Evans

Harrison

Kleinschmidt

Strom

Verkerk

Ward

Wiggins

TOTAL

Terry Blalock

X

X

A

X

 

 

 

X

X

5

Evonne Bradford

 

 

B

 

X

 

 

 

 

1

Cory Brooks

 

 

S

 

 

 

 

 

 

--

Paul A. Caldwell

X

X

E

X

X

X

 

X

X

7

Paul P. Caldwell

X

X

N

X

 

 

X

X

X

6

Andrea Rohrbacher

X

X

T

X

X

X

X

X

X

8

Barry Starrfield

 

 

 

 

 

X

X

 

 

2

Mitch Strobin

 

 

 

X

X

X

X

X

X

6

Diane VandenBroek

X

X

 

 

X

X

X

 

 

5

 

 

Item 12 – Petitions from Council Members

 

Item 12 was deferred by consensus of the Council.

 

Item 13 – Consent Agenda Item 4g

 

Discussion of Item 4g was deferred by consensus of the Council.

 

The meeting adjourned at 11:09 p.m.