SUMMARY MINUTES OF A CONTINUATION OF THE

AUGUST 25, 2003 BUSINESS MEETING OF THE

CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, AT 7:00 P.M.

 

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

 

Council members present were Flicka Bateman, Pat Evans, Ed Harrison, Bill Strom, Dorothy Verkerk, Jim Ward and Edith Wiggins

 

Council Member Mark Kleinschmidt was absent, excused.

 

Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, Finance Director Jim Baker, Principal Planner Gene Poveromo, Library Director Kathy Thompson, Transportation Planner David Bonk and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.

 

Item 6 - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:

 Application to Modify Development Plan

 

a.   Continuation of Public Hearing

 

·        Comments and Questions from the Mayor and Town Council

 

Mayor Foy explained that the purpose of this portion of the discussion was to insure that the Council understood all of the stipulations in the proposed resolution.  If Council members wanted further stipulations or conditions, those should be presented to the University and discussed, he said.

 

Council Member Harrison told the Council that UNC had given him a large graphic representation of the Cobb Deck area as he had requested.  He passed the map around so that Council members could examine it.

 

Mr. Horton presented language for three additional stipulations addressing issues that the Council had raised on the previous night, August 25th.  Mayor Foy stated that the University had agreed to these stipulations. The new stipulations were: 

 

1.      After the Cobb Deck is constructed and in operation the University will conduct traffic counts of vehicles entering and exiting the deck using Paul Green Theater Drive.  Such counts shall be completed at reasonable times and no earlier than six months or later than twelve months after the deck has been opened.

 

2.      Improvements to Country Club Road, and its intersection with Raleigh and Gimghoul Roads, will be completed as shown on Country Club Road improvement option 6b, which has no widening of Country Club Road, no realignment of Paul Green Theater Drive at Gimghoul, and no traffic light.  In addition, existing bike lanes will remain and bicycle lanes would be established where safely feasible along Country Club Road. The University will repair and regularly maintain Chapel Hill gravel on the sidewalk along Country Club Road, from Gimghoul to the Boundary/Battle intersection until such time as the Council determines that a paved walkway is necessary.

 

Mayor pro tem Evans interjected that she had brought up the issue of a sidewalk along the south side of Paul Green Drive.  She had understood that here would be a buffer along that stretch, she said.  Mr. Horton replied that the staff had not proposed a stipulation that would require a sidewalk in that location.

 

3.      UNC agreed to work with the Town on a joint taskforce appointed no later than six months from the date of this resolution.  The taskforce's objective would be to improve the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery consistent with the master plan for the cemetery, with the University contributing $100,000 and the Town contributing $50,000 toward that end.

 

Mayor pro tem Evans noted that the University had also agreed to restore and repair all of the cemetery's stone walls.  She pointed out that this had been inserted on page 4.9.

 

In response to requests from citizens on August 25^th, Council Member Wiggins asked UNC representatives if they would agree to separate components of the modification request to allow the Council to vote on each one.  UNC Vice Chancellor Nancy Suttenfield replied that the UNC Board of Trustees had instructed that improvements to the project were contingent upon the approval of both projects.  Trustees had told negotiators not to agree to separate aspects of the projects, she said.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos what effect a Council vote on an individual project would have.  Mr. Karpinos replied that he understood the University to be saying that the entire package must be accepted.  However, this did not preclude the Town Council from voting on various components separately, he said.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked what situation the Town would be in if the Council voted and passed some parts but not others.  Mr. Karpinos replied that he understood the University to be saying they would not accept approval of any portion of it.

 

Mayor Foy asked what the University's recourse would be if its package were denied.  Mr. Karpinos replied that they might seek review in the courts or go to another forum for relief.

 

Council Member Verkerk clarified that there could be a net gain of 1,550 parking spaces with the development plan and that the Cobb Deck would take 129 of those.  Ms. Elfland verified that there would be 129 more at that location.  But since others had been lost campus-wide there actually would be no net gain yet in permit parking, she said.  Council Member Verkerk noted that the Manning Deck was scheduled to have 1,500 spaces and asked how that fit in with the plan.  Ms. Elfland pointed out that the Council had deleted the Manning Deck in June when it approved part of the modification request.  The "running total" for the development plan was 1,550 spaces, she said, adding that the Manning Deck could not be considered again unless the Town Council agreed to it.

 

Council Member Strom asked Mr. Horton to explain how the wording in stipulation #9, "The Town and University agree that the configuration on South Columbia Street will be subject to reconsideration by the Town and the University no earlier than one full academic year after completion of construction of the South Columbia Street improvements", would not become "a peg upon which NCDOT could hang its hat and just drag its feet and actually not build this project."  Mr. Horton replied that NCDOT could drag its feet if it wanted to regardless of what the Town does.  But he did not believe the wording gave them any incentive to do so, he said, adding that he was not sure how it could be used as an excuse to do that.

 

Council Member Strom proposed that NCDOT might not move on a project if both the Town and the University seem to feel that the project might not be sufficient.  Ms. Suttenfield agreed to remove that last sentence in stipulation #9.

 

With regard to stipulation #15, Council Member Strom asked if UNC would change the Raleigh Street access to 7:00 p.m. rather than 6:00 p.m.  Council Member Ward asked to extend it to 11:00 p.m. during special events. Ms. Elfland replied that the road had been designed as it was because UNC anticipated using it when closed for evening functions.  She asked Council Member Ward if he was asking that it be open for theater events but not for student events, such as women's basketball.  Council Member Ward said that he wanted to maximize the options that people have for leaving special events.

 

Council Member Strom asked why UNC had suggested opening the road from 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. rather than just leaving it open.  Ms. Elfland explained that, since the road is in the backyard of residence halls, UNC was interested in allowing students to use the brick area for functions.  Council Member Strom noted the possibility of conflict between a student function and a play.  Then Gimghoul would end up with all the traffic, he said.  Ms. Elfland pointed out that agreeing to keep all entrances and exits open during events that use the deck would mean that students could not have a function on the night of an event.  Council Member Strom ascertained that the University Parking Office would be responsible for coordinating this.

 

Mr. Horton offered the following language to be included in stipulation #5 to address this issue:  "...with access generally open 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and until 11:00 p.m. for access during special events."

 

Mayor pro tem Evans pointed out that the first bullet in stipulation #10, which states that there will be a traffic signal at "Country Club Road, Gimghoul Road, Paul Green Theater Drive," was inconsistent with 6b, which does not show a traffic signal at the intersection of Gimghoul and Country Club Road.  Mr. Horton explained that the language in 6b would be deleted and replaced with new language that had been put at Council members' places.

 

Council Member Ward commented that neighbors had desired a traffic signal at pedestrian crossings.

 

Mayor Foy said that he thought the Council had heard the opposite.  Citizens want to leave the intersection as close to its current condition as possible, he said.  Council Member Ward remarked that he'd thought that applied to the width of the road as it leaves the intersection.  Mayor Foy ascertained that UNC was amendable to the traffic signal, but proposed that it be in the discretion of the Town Manager to decide on its appropriateness. Mr. Horton explained that the staff would rely on advice from Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli.  Pure traffic engineering would be the only means of assessing the situation, he said.

 

Council Member Strom remarked that conversations with neighbors had led him to believe that a traffic signal was viewed negatively.  He asked those neighbors to come forward and comment themselves, but Mayor Foy declined to reopen the meeting for public comment.

 

Council Member Verkerk pointed out that many neighborhoods had successfully worked with the Town staff regarding traffic signals.  Mayor Foy agreed, pointing out that the University was willing to make improvements but the Town did not know whether it wanted to make them or not.  He suggested not making a binding decision about that tonight and leaving some flexibility.  Mayor Foy pointed out that the Council did not even know yet whether the UNC modification would be approved.  Mr. Horton concurred, adding that it would be more appropriate for the Council to make that determination than for the Manager to do so.

 

Council Member Strom asked if that meant proceeding with the language in 6b, which says no light.  Mayor Foy replied that it would mean leaving the option of a light in the discretion of the Council after the Council has consulted with neighbors.  Mr. Karpinos suggested inserting "Subject to the determination of the Town Council" at the start of the first sentence in the section on Country Club Road/Gimghoul Road/Paul Green Theater Drive. Mayor Foy determined that this was acceptable to Ms. Suttenfield.

 

Council Member Harrison determined that there would be no time constraint associated with this.  There might be a need for a signal some day but there appeared to be no consensus for it now, he said.

 

Council Member Strom said that he wanted to vote on these elements individually because he viewed them as distinct projects.  He asked Mr. Karpinos if he had prepared language for voting on separate resolutions.  Mr. Karpinos replied that such options were available for the Council.  He noted that changes had just been made to the Cobb Deck/Chiller stipulations, but said that the Jackson Deck was ready with only one change to stipulation #9.

 

Council Member Ward asked if the request that noise be monitored at all points had been woven into the resolution.  Mr. Horton replied that the chiller plant and all associated facilities would have to be in compliance with the Noise Ordinance at all times.  And the Town may measure compliance at any time, he said, so normal provisions for enforcement would cover all of the conditions described.

 

With regard to Council Member Strom's suggestion to separate items, Council Member Wiggins urged the Council to first vote on the package.  If that fails, she said, then the Council could vote on individual components to see if they can approve some of them.  Mayor Foy recommended closing the public hearing and then seeing if the Council wants to proceed in the direction that Council Member Wiggins was suggesting.

 

Council Member Ward asked if the proposed changes to the Raleigh Street access section could also include leaving it open for special events on Saturday.  Ms. Elfland wondered if that would mean leaving it open until 11:00 p.m. after an event that ends in the afternoon.  That would work if it could be restricted to special events, she said, adding that it really was a matter of how the Town crafted the language.  Mr. Karpinos suggested adding "on any day" so that the section would read:  "…with access generally open 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and on any day until 11 p.m. for access during special events."  If there were no event on Saturday evening then it would not be open until 11:00 p.m., he explained.

 

Mayor pro tem Evans inquired about the possible situation where a student wanted to go to the library.  Mr. Horton pointed out that the language allows the University to close the area but does not require it to do so except for these times.  Ms. Elfland agreed with the proposed language, as long as it was clear that the University would not be required to open the road at 6:00 a.m. on Saturday for an evening basketball game. Mr. Horton pointed out that the language also specifies that it be "consistent with the University calendar and operating requirements."

 

• University's Statement Regarding Proposed Conditions

 

Ms. Suttenfield submitted printed copies of the previous night's power point slides and asked that they be included in the record. She said that UNC had submitted its modification request in accordance with the provisions of the OI-4 ordinance.  The proposal reflected changed conditions and new data that UNC had acquired since the original approval in 2001, she said.   Ms. Suttenfield asserted that the plan would contribute to maintaining the health, safety and welfare of the community, as well as property values.  Council members had made it clear during Town-University Committee meetings that no progress could be made on the Jackson Circle Deck without clarity on the University's position on South Columbia Street, she said.  Ms. Suttenfield stated that the University had agreed to join the Town in urging the NCDOT to immediately implement the 1998 South Columbia Street improvements.

 

·           Council Discussion

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

Mayor Foy explained the way that he had analyzed this issue.  The Town and University had a unique relationship, he said, and both had changed over the last several years and would change over the next several years.  He proposed that being able to work together as they change is the key to their common future.

 

Mayor Foy explained that he and the Council had worked hard over the past two years to develop a relationship of trust, honesty and straightforward dealing with their colleagues at UNC.  The negotiating committee process is a productive way to work together in the future, he said, especially as the Carolina North development comes closer to reality.  Mayor Foy characterized the changes resulting from the Town-University Committee as clear evidence that reasoned, honest discussion will yield good results for both.

 

Mayor Foy pointed out that both the University and Town have limits on what they can and cannot do.  It is the Town's responsibility under the law to ensure that the University's actions do not adversely affect the public health, safety and welfare, he said.  Mayor Foy characterized reducing the number of people who park on campus as a desirable goal, but noted that it would not be immediately achieved.  A transportation plan is a process and the Town can work with the University to implement a rational transportation plan that reduces the number of people driving single-occupancy cars to campus, he said.

 

Mayor Foy pointed out that UNC had made a legally binding commitment to ensure that traffic from the Cobb Deck onto Country Club Road would create no net increase from Paul Green Theater Road.  He said that the cemetery would become a better and more carefully guarded sacred space.

 

Mayor Foy clarified that the Town had raised the issue of Columbia Street in the context of the Development Plan modification.  He said that Council members on the Town-University Committee had explicitly stated that they would not consider the Jackson Deck without resolution of South Columbia Street.  Mayor Foy noted that many had questioned the integrity of the University regarding that and that he did not view that as fair.  Many others had forcefully argued for South Columbia Street improvements, he noted, and the case for Columbia Street stands on its own merits.  The University had conceded the importance of the street to the Town, Mayor Foy said, even though doing so was not in their interests.

 

Mayor Foy remarked that no one had spent more time and energy than he had on trying to reshape attitudes toward transportation in Chapel Hill.  He listed the many projects that he had supported and opposed in that pursuit.  Mayor Foy pointed out that the University's request for parking spaces at the Jackson Circle and Cobb Decks was in the context of deleting the 1,550 that had previously been planned for the Manning Deck.  The University had always planned to increase parking on campus by 1,550 spaces and had not deceived the Town, he said, adding that the Town had accepted that in the context of its overall transportation goals.  Mayor Foy acknowledged that the University's effort to eliminate surface parking would lead to a greater concentration of parking in certain areas.   The Cobb Deck is absorbing parking from surface lots that are being removed, he said.

 

Mayor Foy described this decision as a difficult one for all members of the Town Council. He noted that what they decide would have ramifications far beyond the specifics of this project.  The Town has an obligation to deal fairly with the University, he said.  Mayor Foy stated that he thought UNC had abided by the law and had designed the projects so that they would not infringe on the health, safety and welfare of Chapel Hill.  He acknowledged that his was not a popular position and that many in the community were opposed to the growth and changes that they see occurring on campus.  But Council members represent the Town and are not the managers of campus growth, Mayor Foy stated, adding that the Council must manage Town growth in the face of campus growth.  And the best way to do that is to work with the University in the context of the law and in good faith, he said.  Mayor Foy expressed confidence that the Town would do that by approving the plan.  He said that approval would be in the best interests of all the citizens of Chapel Hill. 

 

Council Member Strom declared that he would vote against the modification proposal.  He agreed that the projects were significantly better than they had been prior to the Town-University negotiations, he said, and that such an exchange of information was the model for which all should strive.  Council Member Strom explained that when he took his seat on the Council he pledged to do his best to find the best possible solutions to situations that would confront the Council, rather than the  "least worse solutions."  Council Member Strom argued that the Council was facing a least worse solution in this proposal.  It was not his role as a Council member to blindly trust experts, planners and hired consultants, he said.  Council Member Strom stated that he believed the Council's role was to put a human touch and scale to projects, and to protect, whenever possible, the interests of Chapel Hill's citizens and neighborhoods.

 

Council Member Strom listed the neighborhoods and groups that had testified in opposition to these proposals.   He was not convinced that there were no other options available to UNC, he said, pointing out that Manning Drive remained an option.  Council Member Strom suggested that UNC's financial models be more flexible so that they do not put such pressure on perimeter areas.  He "whole-heartedly disagreed" with the suggestion by some that this Council does not support the cutting edge of research and technology activities on campus. 

 

Council Member Strom explained that he had served on the 1999-2001 committee that approved OI-4 zoning, which he described as the Town's response to accommodate the massive growth that was funded by the bond programs.  On one night, he said, that committee had approved four million square feet of growth on a campus that had less than fourteen million square feet.  That is about 35% of additional square footage, he said, and it was approved with the understanding that this Council would treat the perimeter areas and neighborhoods around the campus with special care.  Council Member Strom argued that the proposed mitigations would not protect property values or the public health, safety and welfare associated with those perimeter neighborhoods. He described the proposal as a "change in the handshake agreement that we made with the administrators at the time."

 

Council Member Strom said, "I don't think you right a wrong by asking the party you've wronged to do you a favor first."  He pointed out that the Town had created special conservation districts that include the neighborhoods in question.  "It is the stated policy of Chapel Hill that neighborhood protection issues in these areas are paramount," he quoted from the Comprehensive Plan.  "When policy choices that affect these areas are before the Town Council…the balance should tilt in favor of protection and preservation."  Council Member Strom stressed that this document held the guiding principles for Town Council members.

 

Council Member Wiggins, the third Council member on the Town-University Committee, said that collaboration had improved the University's original modification requests and that surrounding neighborhoods and the larger community would benefit from those changes.  The results of the process had illustrated that the University can fulfill its mission and responsibility for campus planning, she said.  Council Member Wiggins also pointed out that the Council can fulfill its mission and responsibility for protecting the entire community and surrounding neighborhoods with the provision of necessary mitigations.

 

Council Member Wiggins characterized the moment as perhaps the defining one for future Town/University relations.  That relationship is a valuable legislated privilege, she said, and it is the Town's best guarantee that University growth will take place in harmony with the character and goals of the community and its various neighborhoods.  Council Member Wiggins added that without this privilege the Town could be relegated to, at best, to providing courtesy reviews and, at worst, becoming bystanders to University growth, struggling to absorb its impacts as best it can.

 

Council Member Wiggins explained that she had called on the University several times during deliberations to honor past agreements with the Town and to demonstrate that a collaborative planning process can be successful.  She expressed hope that the Council would show its belief in the cooperative planning process with the University.  Council Member Wiggins concluded that she would vote "for the process" by voting for the current proposal.  She asked other Council members to join her in sending a strong and unanimous message that they value and believe in the process.

 

Council Member Ward said that there was no doubt the proposal before the Council had been a compromise.  He advised the Town and University to move ahead and work together for the sake of all who live in the community.  The project has many attributes, said Council Member Ward, adding that he wanted to build on the process in the future when the hurdles will be greater and higher.

 

Council Member Ward pointed out that UNC had the highest transit use of any employer in North Carolina, and that their commitment to transit-oriented development had been put in question.  But, UNC was demonstrating its long-term commitment to reduce automobiles through their recent hiring of a traffic engineer, traffic demand management staff, a sustainability coordinator, a commuter alternative program, zip car program, and a $4½ million annual contribution to the Chapel Hill Transit System, Council Member Ward said.

 

Council Member Ward concluded that UNC's modification request had not signaled a change in their high level of commitment to addressing community and regional traffic issues.  He said that Council members' sworn duty was to find, based on sworn testimony at the public hearing, that the project maintains the public health, safety, welfare and the value of adjacent property.  Council Member Ward concluded that the Council was legally obligated to approve the project as amended with the stipulations discussed tonight.

 

Council Member Bateman described this as an agonizing decision.  She believed that the Jackson Parking Deck was a reasonable request, she said, because allowing some additional employees to park where they work was a reasonable proposition.  Council Member Bateman pointed out that UNC was anticipating opening a cancer center in that area.  No one would deny cancer patients and visitors parking for that, she remarked.

 

Council Member Bateman said that she would have to blindly trust on the need for a chiller plant, since she has no expertise in that area.  She agreed that dispersing traffic three ways for the Cobb Deck was a reasonable approach.  Where she was stuck, she said, was on the Cobb Deck's proximity to the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery.   "You don't drive your car past a funeral procession.  You don't stand on graves.  You don't deface tombstones.  And you don't put a ten thousand ton, five-story chiller/parking deck next to a cemetery," she said.  Council Member Bateman explained that she could not let go of those principles because they were core beliefs, and would not support the resolution on that basis.

 

Council Member Harrison objected to the way this had come before the Council.  He noted his feeling of being rushed, adding that he was just beginning to understand the University’s Master Plan.  Council Member Harrison said that he had been involved in neighborhood protection issues all of his professional life.  He explained that his decision on this one was being affected by the perception that UNC would go over the Town's head to the State if the Town does not approve the plan.  Council Member Harrison said that he would regretfully support the modification request because Roger Perry, representing the UNC Trustees, had told the Council that the Town would not be able to do anything cooperatively with the University on development if it does not proceed to approve this application.

 

Council Member Verkerk said that she had intended not to give a speech, but wanted to say that "it's really easy to tell other people to take public transit…When you tell other people to behave a certain way maybe you should think about taking the G Bus to the mall."

 

Mayor pro tem Evans stated that she had lived in Chapel Hill for 33 years and now lives in one of the affected communities.  People who live close to the University have the option of walking places, she said, but she pointed out that most of the people in Chapel Hill do not have that option.  The Town Council must consider their health, safety and welfare too, she said.  Mayor pro tem Evans commented that an historic neighborhood and dormitory on UNC/Greensboro's campus is closer to their chiller/deck than Chapel Hill's would be.  And a performing arts center is as close as Playmakers Theater would be to this one, she said.

 

Mayor pro tem Evans stressed that the University and Hospital offer much to the community, and the community needs to have access to those things.  These are the things that make Chapel Hill one of the great retirement centers, she said.  Mayor pro tem Evans emphasized that she had spent 19 years working as a public servant and would "never vote" for something that she thought would harm the community.  She expressed confidence that the proposals would not do so and that they would maintain the public health, safety and general welfare.  And they would "certainly" maintain property values, she said.  Mayor pro tem Evans commended both parties for their cooperative approach and predicted that the future would show that this was a good decision.

b.   Consideration of Resolutions

 

COUNCIL MEMBER WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS, TO ADOPT 17A WITH THE AMENDMENTS LISTED ON THE HANDOUT AND THOSE AGREED UPON THIS EVENING.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (6-2) WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS STROM AND BATEMAN VOTING NAY.

 

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN MODIFICATION #1 FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL (2003-08-26/R-17a)

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill and the University of North Carolina are bound by a shared history and desire a unified vision for the future; and

 

WHEREAS, the University serves as the economic mainstay of the Town while offering a wealth of services from cultural amenities to quality medical care; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town serves as an attractive and desirable home for faculty, staff and students while offering valued services to the University; and

 

WHEREAS, the University and Town recognize the need to allow for growth while mitigating transportation, environmental, noise, light, and other impacts; and

 

WHEREAS, the Chapel Hill Town Council enacted a new zoning district on July 2, 2001 to address the need to allow for growth while mitigating impacts, and applied this zoning district to the University’s Main Campus; and

 

WHEREAS, on October 3, 2001, after reviewing Development Plan materials submitted by the University, dated July 3, 2001, and Addenda dated August 7, 2001 and September 3, 2001  the Town approved a Development Plan that maps out  future campus growth and addresses mitigation of impacts; and

 

WHEREAS, on June 25, 2003, after reviewing Development Plan Modification No. 1 application materials dated April 3, 2003 and Addenda dated May 23, 2003, seeking to amend the Development Plan approved by the Council on October 3, 2001, the Town Council approved a portion of the Development Plan Modification No. 1 application with conditions and continued the June 25 hearing until August 25, 2003, for consideration of proposals for a parking deck at Jackson Circle, a parking deck near Cobb Dormitory, and a Chiller Plant near Cobb Dormitory that warranted further study;  and

 

WHEREAS, further study of these proposals has been conducted and further evidence has been submitted pertaining to these projects at the continued Public Hearing on August 25, 2003;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that development proposed by the Development Plan Modification No. 1 application of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, for property identified as parts of Chapel Hill Township Tax Maps numbered 71, 73, 74, 86, and 87, if developed according to the Development Plan Modification No. 1 dated April 3, 2003, and Addenda dated May 23, 2003 and  Modification #1, Addendum #1, Map 4, dated June 3, 2003, and in compliance with the conditions listed below, as described in materials submitted by the University in Attachment #1 in the August 25, 2003 Continuation of Public Hearing on Modification of the UNC Development by the Development Plan Modification No. 1 application, would:

 

1.         Maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare; and

 

2.         Maintain or enhance the value of adjacent property.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for the additional adjustments to the Development Plan Modification No. 1 to provide for the construction of a parking deck/chiller plant near Cobb Dormitory, and a parking deck near Jackson Circle, in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:

 

General Stipulations

 

1.      Relationship to 2001 Development Plan: This approval modifies the terms of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Development Plan approved by the Town Council on October 3, 2001, and the Development Plan Modification No. 1 approved by the Town Council on June 25, 2003.  Except as specifically authorized or modified by this document, the terms and conditions of the Development Plan Resolution as adopted by the Council on October 3, 2001, and Development Plan Modification No. 1 Resolution as adopted by the Council on June 25, 2003, remain in effect.  The previously approved 1,550 parking spaces, from the October 3, 2001 Development Plan shall not be impacted.

 

2.      Level of Development:  This Development Plan Modification No. 1 approval represents preliminary authorization for demolition and construction of facilities as shown on “Modification No.1- Map 2 and Maps 6 and 7 Addendum No.1” from the “Development Plan Modification No 1 Addendum No 1,” dated May 23, 2003.  Additional information is included in the April 3, 2003 “Development Plan Modification No. 1” and the “Development Plan Modification No. 1 Addendum No. 1,” dated May 23, 2003 modified by conditions outlined below. 

 

In any case involving conflicting information, the controlling component of the “Development Plan Modification No. 1” shall be the Map called “Modification No.1 Map 2 Addendum No.1,” dated May 23, 2003.  The controlling maps for Perimeter Transition Areas shall be “Maps 6 and 7 Addendum No.1” from the “Development Plan Modification No. 1 Addendum No. 1,” dated May 23, 2003. 

 

3.      Land Use:  Unless otherwise modified by conditions herewith, this Development Plan Modification No. 1 authorizes the following:

 

A.     As shown on “Modification No.1, Map 2 Addendum No. 1,” dated May 23, 2003:

 

·        Construction of a parking deck (800 space, 5-level) identified as structure P-10 Mod;

·        Construction of a parking deck identified as structure P-9 Mod, limited to a total of 500 spaces in the deck and associated surface parking area;

·        Construction of a chiller plant (21,600 square feet) identified as structure I-3 Mod.

 

B.     Area and parking space calculations for the following list of structures as shown by “Table 3 – The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Development Plan – Modification No. 1- Addendum No.1, Area Calculations for Proposed Buildings,” revised, dated June 16, 2003:

 

·        Infrastructure structure I-3 Mod;

·        Parking deck structures P-9 Mod, and P-10 Mod, with P-9 Mod limited to 500 spaces (total of deck and surface parking).

 

4.      Land Use Intensities:  Land Use Intensities, authorized by the October 3, 2001 Development Plan, are modified as specified below:

 

Land Use Intensity	Modification of a Development Plan
Infrastructure Floor Area	+   21,600 sq ft    (increase)

 

5.      Consistency of Site Development Permit Application with Development Plan Modification No.  1:  No application for a Site Development Permit, for land use authorized by this permit within the boundary of this Development Plan Modification No. 1, as shown on the “Modification No.1-Map 2 Addendum No.1’” dated May 23, 2003,  shall be approved unless such application is consistent with the Council-approved Development Plan Modification No. 1.  Consistent does not mean identical; building footprints and landscaped areas shown on the Council approved Development Plan Modification No. 1, except as otherwise noted below for certain Perimeter Transition Areas, shall be considered to indicate approximate size and location.

 

6.      Interpretation of “Modification No.1-Map 3 Addendum No.1:” “Modification No.1-Map 3 Addendum No.1” dated May 23, 2003 shall be considered to indicate, approximately, areas of pervious and impervious surface that will exist within the area covered by this Development Plan Modification No. 1 after full development has been completed.  Except for incidental paving for walkways and fire lanes, areas shown as “Forest” and “Cleared Woodlands” will be expected to be pervious surface after full development, either with existing vegetation left undisturbed or with new vegetation planted and maintained, unless further specified by stipulations below.

Stipulations Related to Transportation

 

7.   Requirements for Ongoing Data Collection and Analysis for Biennial Transportation Impact Analysis:

 

a)      Intersection Analysis: 2003 and subsequent Biennial Transportation Impact Analysis shall analyze the following additional intersections for existing, no-build, and build conditions Level of Service (LOS) in addition to the 34 intersections analyzed in 2002 Transportation Impact Analysis:

b)       

1.      Franklin Street and Boundary Street

2.      Franklin Street and Park Lane

3.      Boundary Street and Battle Lane/Country Club Road

4.      Country Club Road and Gimghoul Road/Theater Road

5.      Manning Drive and Hibbard Drive

6.      Manning Drive and Craige Drive

7.      New East Drive/Dogwood Deck Exit and Entrance, including Jackson Circle Lot (S-6) Access

8.      Mason Farm Road and Hibbard Drive

 

Existing A.M. and P.M. peak hour turning movement counts for the above intersections shall be undertaken on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday when school is in session.

 

c)      Average Daily Count Analysis: 2003 and subsequent Biennial Transportation Impact Analysis shall include the following additional locations for existing, no-build, and build conditions Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Counts in addition to the 12 locations analyzed in 2002 Transportation Impact Analysis:

 

1.      Franklin Street (west of Raleigh Street)

2.      Franklin Street (east of Boundary Street)

3.      Boundary Street (south of Franklin Street)

4.      Mason Farm Road (east of South Columbia Street)

5.      Mason Farm Road (north of Fordham Boulevard)

6.      Purefoy Road (east of South of Columbia Street)

 

Existing counts for the above locations shall be undertaken on Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday when school is in session.

 

8.      Traffic Signal System Improvements:  The Franklin Street and Boundary Street signalized intersections shall be upgraded by replacing the existing 8” signal heads with 12” signal heads.  The upgrade must be approved by the Town Manager and North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), and construction must be completed prior to the end of calendar year 2005.  The University shall be responsible for the above traffic signal system improvements.’

 

9.      South Columbia Improvements: The University shall, jointly with the Town Council, forward to the North Carolina Department of Transportation, a request for the NCDOT to immediately implement plans for the design and construction of roadway improvements on South Columbia Street (NC 86) between Manning Drive and Fordham Boulevard, as outlined in a plan forwarded to the NCDOT in 1998 and as adjusted in 2002 by addition of a sidewalk on the west side of the street.  The design and construction shall consist of two twelve-foot wide travel lanes, two four-foot wide striped bikelanes, curb and gutter along both sides of the roadway, five-foot wide sidewalks along both sides of the roadway, and associated drainage and intersection improvements as can reasonably be accommodated with minimal disruption of adjacent properties.

 

10.    Road Improvements:  The University shall be responsible for constructing and implementing the following roadway and intersection improvements or their equivalent prior to the opening of the Cobb Hall Parking Deck (P-9 Mod):

 

·        Country Club Road/Gimghoul Road/Paul Green Theater Drive:  Subject to the determination of the Town Council, the University shall design and install a fully actuated traffic signal with pedestrian countdown heads at the intersection of Country Club Road and Gimghoul Road/Paul Green Theater Drive.  The design and installation of the traffic signal shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to installation.  The design of signal poles and equipment shall be in keeping with the historic character of the neighborhood. 

 

Improvements to this intersection shall not change the design or current roadway configuration on the Gimghoul Road side of the intersection. 

 

·        Boundary Street/Battle Lane/Country Club Road:  The University design and reconstruct the Boundary Street/Battle Lane/Country Club Road intersection.  The design and construction may incorporate a traffic signal.  Such design shall include signal timing plans for the new signal.  Alternatively, the University may consider a “round-about” or similar intersection redesign with or without a traffic signal.  Prior to construction, the design must be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.

 

If the University demonstrates that intersection improvements at this location are deemed unfeasible, the University shall investigate and implement other methods to mitigate the negative impact the proposed Development Plan Modification No. 1 would have on the intersections in this area.  Subject to approval by the Town Manager, the mitigation measures shall be installed prior to the opening of the Cobb Hall Parking Deck (P-9 Mod).

 

• The University shall install a sidewalk on the east side of Country Club Road, between Gimghoul Road and NC 54.

 

• A previous requirement established in the Council’s October, 2001 approval of a Development Plan, to widen Country Club Road to add additional turn lanes at its intersection with NC 54, is hereby rescinded.  Lane changes may be accomplished with re-striping, but no widening of this Road shall occur as part of this Development Plan.

 

• Improvements to Country Club Road and its intersections with NC 54 and Gimghoul Road shall be completed as shown on the applicant’s Country Club Road Improvement Option 6b (Response to Mayor’s Committee in August) as contained in the applicant’s August 22 submittal.  Bicycle lanes will be established where safely feasible along Country Club Road; existing bicycle lanes on Country Club Road west of Gimghoul Road shall remain.  The University shall repair and regularly maintain a Chapel Hill gravel sidewalk along Country Club Road from Gimghoul Road to the Boundary/Battle intersection until such time as the Council determines that a paved walkway is needed because of pedestrian volumes.  At such time, the Town and the University shall share cost of constructing the paved sidewalk.

 

11.        Signalized Intersections:  The following signalized intersections shall be upgraded with  pedestrian “count down” heads and remarked crosswalks prior to the opening of the Cobb Hall Parking Deck:

 

·        Cameron Avenue/Country Club Road and Raleigh Street

·        Franklin Street and Boundary Street

 

12.  South Road Sidewalk: Prior to the opening of the Cobb Hall Parking Deck (P-9 Mod) the University shall construct a sidewalk along the north side of South Road, adjacent to the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery.  The final design and location of the sidewalk shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.

 

Stipulations Related to Site Development Permit Applications

 

13.  P-10 Mod (Jackson Circle Parking Deck):  The Site Development Permit for parking deck structure P-10 Mod (Jackson Circle) must include details on the proposed Fixed Guideway Corridor including potential room for a future transit stop/transfer station location.

 

Stipulation Related to Perimeter Transition Areas

 

14.  P-9 Mod and I-3 Mod Perimeter Transition Area Designation (Cobb Hall Parking Deck and Chiller Plant):  Approval of this further modification to the Development Plan Modification No.1 shall designate the parking deck structure P-9 and the infrastructure structure I-3 Mod (Cobb Hall Parking Deck and Chiller Plant) projects as a Perimeter Transition Area. 

 

15.  P-9 Mod and I-3 Mod (Cobb Hall Parking Deck and Chiller Plant):  For P-9 Mod and I-3 Mod structures, the  following additional stipulations shall apply:

 

a)      Submittal of a Site Development Permit shall include detailed maps, similar to the Perimeter Transition Area Maps included in Modification No. 1 Addendum No.1 dated May 23, 2003.  These maps must, at a minimum include the following information:

 

·        OI-4 and surrounding zoning district boundaries

·        Perimeter Transition Boundary Area

·        Structures including existing and approved per the Development Plan and Development Plan Modification No. 1

 

b)  This development site must comply with the following standards:

 

Mechanical Equipment:  All mechanical equipment, both rooftop and ground locations, must be screened from view from the Cemetery.

 

Lighting and Noise:  Parking deck and chiller plant must comply with the Noise and Light Performance Standards adopted by the Town Council on July 2, 2001.

 

Details confirming compliance will be provided in the Site Development Permit.

 

Building Height: Building mass of the parking deck and chiller plant shall be consistent with adjacent buildings.  The tallest roof ridge elevation for the deck and chiller plant shall not exceed the roof ridge of the adjacent Cobb dormitory (except for elevator shafts, chimneys, mechanical equipment enclosures and parapet walls).  The height of the cooling towers shall be as shown on elevation plans presented on August 25, 2003.

 

Building Design:  The exterior design of the chiller/deck shall be similar to the overall design and façade treatments as shown generally in the renderings presented to the Mayor’s Committee.  Pedestrian systems and access points shall be designed to minimize pedestrian traffic through the adjacent cemetery.

 

Landscape Buffer: The location of the new deck/chiller as shown on the proposed plans shall be shifted to the north to allow the installation of a 30 foot wide Type C buffer or equivalent, shall be located between the building and the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery.  The landscape buffer shall consist of a mix of evergreen and deciduous plant materials.  Landscape details will be part of the Site Development Permit submittal.  A twenty foot wide portion of the 30 foot buffer shall be established between the Cemetery and the parking deck/Paul Green Theater access road; 10-feet of landscaping shall be provided on the north side of the access road.

 

Cemetery Improvements:  The present/former stone walls along the edges of the cemetery shall be repaired/rebuilt; design of the deck and chiller plant shall include provisions to channel pedestrian traffic to the main, center walk; the southern façade of the deck/chiller plant shall be designed in a manner that obscures views of parked vehicles, and the design shall reflect the character of the immediate area.  Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Town Manager prior to the commencement of construction of the deck/chiller plant.

 

That the University agree to work with the Town on a joint task force, appointed no later than six months from the date of this resolution, whose objective would be to improve the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery consistent with the Master Plan for the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery; with the University contributing $100,000 and the Town contributing $50,000 to this end.  The recommendations of the task force will be presented to the Town Council within one year of the date of the establishment of the task force.

 

Use and Activity during Cemetery Services: The University shall establish a standing procedure to make parking available, in the deck or accompanying surface spaces, for persons attending funeral services and for those making graveside visitations to the cemetery.  The University shall also establish a standing procedure to require that work on projects near the cemetery shall be interrupted for a period from one hour before to one hour after funeral services.

 

Transportation:  Required improvements to the Country Club/South Road intersection and signalization of the Country Club/Gimghoul intersection shall be completed prior to the opening of the parking deck; signage shall be installed at egress points of the parking deck indicating western movements out of the deck to access South Road.

 

Access:  An improved two-lane entrance and exit drive shall be provided between Raleigh Street and the new deck with access generally open 6:00 am to 7:00 pm, Monday through Friday, and on any day until 11 pm for access during special events, consistent with the University calendar and operating requirements, so long as any adjustments to operating hours do not substantially reduce the overall benefit of the access.  Access to South Road, between the western wall of the Cemetery and Conner Dormitory shall be designed for one-way in (ingress) travel during the morning peak use period and one-way out (egress) travel during the evening peak use period.

 

After the Cobb Deck is constructed and in operation, the University will conduct traffic counts of vehicles entering the deck and exiting the deck using Paul Green Theatre Drive.  Such counts shall be completed at reasonable times, no earlier than 6 months and no later than 12 months after the opening of the deck.  These counts will be compared to the current traffic counts of vehicles using the Paul Green Theatre Drive.  In the event the traffic counts after construction of the deck show an increase in vehicles using the Paul Green Theatre Drive, the University will implement measures to control access such that the level of traffic going into and out of the deck from the Paul Green Theatre driveway does not exceed the current volume of traffic going into and out of the current Paul Green Theatre driveway at Country Club Road.

 

c)  That the submittal of a Site Development Permit for the Cobb Hall Parking Deck or Chiller Plant include verification that the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources was involved in the planning process.

 

Miscellaneous Stipulations

 

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

 

17.    Severability:  If any of the above conditions is held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, all other conditions shall remain valid and this approval shall remain intact.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for a Modification of a Development Plan by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

 

This the 26^th day of August, 2003.

 

 

Item 7 - Resolutions Ratifying Actions to Begin the Process

 for a November Bond Referendum, Introduction of Bond Orders

 and Calling a Public Hearing on November 8, 2003

 

Due to a newspaper deadline, Mr. Horton explained, the staff had already submitted ad copy for the hearing that is now being called.  He said that the staff had anticipated that the Council would call for the maximum amount.

 

Finance Director Jim Baker stated that the action proposed for the Council's consideration tonight would be the first step toward a bond referendum in November on the proposed Library expansion and green infrastructure improvements projects discussed in June.  He said that Resolution A would ratify certain actions, which, as the Manager had just explained, the staff had already taken.  These would:

 

·        Ratify the form of a Notice of Intent to make an application to the Local Government Commission for approval of the issuance of bonds.

·        Ratify the publication of such notice.

·        Ratify the filing of the application for approval of the issuance of bonds with the Local Government Commission.

·        Approve the use of bond counsel in connection with the issuance of proposed bonds.

 

Mr. Baker pointed out that Council members were also being asked to act on the introduction of each of the bond orders, as well as to adopt Resolution B, which would call a public hearing on September 8, 2003, to consider the bond orders as introduced tonight.  Mr. Baker explained that Resolution B would direct the publication of the Notices of the Public Hearing and the filing of the sworn Debt Statement.

 

Mr. Baker noted that the Council had decided on June 23, 2003, to consider bonds for the Library totaling $16,260,000, as recommended in the Library Master Plan that the Council had adopted.  Council members had also indicated a desire to finance projects totaling $13.1 million for green infrastructure improvements, as recommended by the Committee on Sustainability, Energy and Environment, he said.  Mr. Baker recommended that the Council adopt Resolution A and consider setting a date for the public hearing.

 

Council Member Harrison determined that there would be five issues listed on the ballot.

 

Council Member Ward asked how those would be identified, noting that the tag "public building bonds" makes it difficult to communicate what this was about.  Mr. Karpinos explained that the ballot question would be for $1/2 million for improvements to public buildings and that the bonds would presumably be used to construct energy-saving projects.  The accounting for that energy saving could be done by the Town, Mr. Karpinos said.

 

Council Member Strom inquired about the possibility of not saying "energy improvements to public buildings" on the ballot.  Mr. Karpinos recommended asking the bond attorney that question.  But, he added, he did not believe that is the way the statutes designate the different categories.  Mr. Horton added that the bond attorney would be at the meeting to explain those limitations of law.  Mr. Horton pointed out, though, that the Council does not have much flexibility in this regard.

 

Council Member Strom determined that Mr. Horton and Mr. Karpinos had already posed the question, and Mr. Horton said that they agreed that the wording did not clearly communicate the Council's key interest.  Council Member Strom verified that they would ask again.  Mr. Horton said, though, that he was not optimistic that the bond attorney would change his opinion.

 

Council Member Verkerk asked how the order in which bond items are listed is determined on the ballot.  Mr. Karpinos offered to bring that answer back on September 8^th.

 

Bob Schreiner, Chair of the Library Board of Trustees, expressed support for full expansion of the Library as recommended.  The question is whether citizens will feel they can afford it, he said, adding that the Library would work with the bond committee to convince people that this is a wise move for the community.  If funded, it will result in a Library that will last at least 25 years, Mr. Schreiner said.

 

Council Member Verkerk reported that there had been a good turnout that afternoon at the Library bond meeting.

 

Mayor pro tem Evans determined from Mr. Schreiner that the $16 million included an amount for tiered parking, and asked if the Library Board had discussed the need for additional parking.  Mr. Schreiner replied that Board members believed that more parking was necessary since the Library was being expanded to three times its size.  Board members were concerned about the deck being a controversial item, he said, but a deck will be necessary if they Library size increases.

 

Mayor Foy reminded Council members that there would be a public hearing on this issue.  The Council need only ratify action that had already been taken, he said.  That action would put out for public notice a proposal to call for a citizen vote on authorizing bonds in an amount not to exceed $29,360,000, he said.  Mayor Foy noted that the amount could change after the Council hears from citizens.  He ascertained from Mr. Horton that the Council would have to decide on the issues involved by September 22 at the latest, but preferably on September 8, 2003.

 

Joe Herzenberg, a former member of both the Town Council and the Library Board, encouraged support of the bond.  He commented that supporting that would help Green Infrastructure as well, which is his major interest.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT R-18A.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

 

A RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE FORM OF THE NOTICE OF INTENT TO MAKE APPLICATION TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL OF ISSUANCE OF BONDS, RATIFYING THE PUBLICATION OF SUCH NOTICE OF INTENT, RATIFYING THE FILING OF THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF ISSUANCE OF BONDS WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION, AND APPROVING BOND COUNSEL (2003-08-25/R-18a)

 

WHEREAS, the Council desires to pursue the possibility of issuing general obligation bonds of the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina in the aggregate principal amount not to exceed $29,360,000 (the “Bonds”); and

 

WHEREAS, the proceeds of the Bonds would be used to finance all or a portion of the costs of the following projects:  $5,000,000 to pay capital costs of providing parks and recreation facilities; $2,000,000 to pay capital costs of acquiring real property in order to maintain, protect, limit the future use of or otherwise conserve open spaces and areas; $5,600,000 to pay capital costs of providing sidewalk and street improvements; $16,260,000 to pay capital costs of providing library improvements; and $500,000 to pay capital costs of providing public building improvements; and

 

WHEREAS, the form of notice of intent to make an application to the North Carolina Local Government Commission for approval of the issuance of the Bonds, which notice was published on August 12, 2003 in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, is attached as Exhibit A hereto; and

 

WHEREAS, the law firm of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC, has been recommended to the Board as a law firm possessing capabilities in each of the following areas:

 

(a)        North Carolina municipal law, including in particular the Local Government Finance Act;

(b)        Municipal finance and municipal securities law;

(c)        Corporate Finance and Corporate Securities Law; and

(d)        Tax Law, including Section 103 and Sections 140 through 150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina as follows:

 

Section 1.  The form of notice of intent to make an application to the North Carolina Local Government Commission for approval of the issuance of the Bonds, which notice is in the form of Exhibit A attached hereto, is hereby ratified and approved and the publication of said notice on August 12, 2003 in a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina is ratified and approved.

 

Section 2.  The form of the Application for Approval of Issuance of Bonds is hereby ratified and approved and the filing of said Application with the Local Government Commission of North Carolina is ratified and approved.

 

Section 3.  The law firm of Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC is hereby designated to serve as bond counsel in connection with the issuance by the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina of the Bonds, or any series thereof, and in connection with the issuance by the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina of such additional issues of bonds as the Town Council shall deem appropriate.

 

Section 4.  This resolution shall taken effect upon its passage.

 

Section 5.  A certified copy of this resolution shall be filed with the Local Government Commission.

 

This the 25^th day of August, 2003.

 

                                                                 

Mr. Karpinos explained that the appropriate next step for Council members was to individually introduce each bond order.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED THE INTRODUCTION OF THE BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $5,000,000 PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED THE INTRODUCTION OF THE BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 OPEN SPACES AND AREAS BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED THE INTRODUCTION OF THE BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $16,260,000 LIBRARY FACILITIES BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED THE INTRODUCTION OF THE BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $5,600,000 SIDEWALK AND STREET BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED THE INTRODUCTION OF THE BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $500,000 PUBLIC BUILDING BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT R-18B CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

 

A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING ON BOND ORDERS, DIRECTING PUBLICATION OF NOTICES OF PUBLIC HEARING AND FILING OF DEBT STATEMENT (2003-08-25/R-18b)

 

WHEREAS, the bond orders entitled, “BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $16,260,000 LIBRARY FACILITIES BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA”; “BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $5,600,000 SIDEWALK AND STREET BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA”; “BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $5,000,000 PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA”, “BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 OPEN SPACES AND AREAS BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA” and “BOND ORDER AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $500,000 PUBLIC BUILDING BONDS OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA” have been introduced at the meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina held on August 25, 2003, and the Town Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina desires to provide for the holding of a public hearing thereon and the submission of a statement of debt in connection therewith as required by the Local Government Bond Act;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina, as follows:

 

Section 1.  The public hearing with respect to said bond orders shall be held on the 8th day of September, 2003 at 7:00 o’clock P.M., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the Town Council Chambers in the Town of Chapel Hill, in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

 

Section 2.  The Town Manager is hereby directed to cause a copy of each of the bond orders to be published with a notice of such public hearing in the form prescribed by law in a qualified newspaper no fewer than six days prior to such public hearing.

 

Section 3.  The Town Manager is hereby directed to file with the Clerk to the Town Council of the Town of Chapel Hill prior to publication of the bond orders with the notice of such public hearing, a statement setting forth the debt incurred, the appraised value of property subject to taxation by the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina and the net debt of the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

 

This the 25^th day of August, 2003.

Item 8 - Consideration of Comments on Mason Farm Road

Feasibility Study by the NC Department of Transportation

 

Transportation Planner David Bonk explained that the NCDOT had asked for comments by June on a feasibility study regarding the relocation of Mason Farm Road between South Columbia Street and US 15-501.  He said that the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) and the Chapel Hill Town Council had both asked for an extension of that deadline to the end of August.  The TAC had sent comments to the State and most of those had been incorporated into the comments that the Manager was bringing forward for adoption tonight, Mr. Bonk said.

 

Mr. Bonk reported that there had been some confusion at the TAC because they do not have a good set of maps related to the UNC Master Plan, on which the road realignment was originally shown.  He said that the TAC had requested that no new access be provided onto South Columbia Street because an Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) map had implied that UNC's road plans for this part of campus included another entrance there.  Mr. Bonk told Council members that the Town staff had determined that the MPO map had been drawn incorrectly, and the UNC Master Plan shows Mason Farm Road accessing South Columbia at the same point as it does now but taking a different path once it moves to the east.  Mr. Bonk asked the Council to approved R-19, which would provide the NCDOT with the following comments on the Mason Farm Road relocation feasibility study:

 

1.        Include an evaluation of the impact of a relocated Mason Farm Road on South Columbia traffic.

2.        Evaluate different roadway cross-sections for Mason Farm Road.

3.        Assess the operational relationship between Mason Farm Road and the fixed guideway corridor also shown on the Campus Master Plan.

4.        Incorporate the stipulations on roadway design approved by the Town Council as part of approval of the University Development Plan.

5.        Include bicycle and pedestrian facilities and transit accommodations in the design of Mason Farm Road.

6.        Include staff from Chapel Hill and the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization in the preparation of the feasibility study.

7.        Allow for additional public comment on the feasibility study conclusions and recommendation.

 

Joyce Brown, a resident of Ransom Street, criticized what she perceived as UNC's lack of concern for neighborhoods.  She said that the proposed road looks like a four-lane, divided median thoroughfare linking Fordham Boulevard and South Columbia Street with Manning Drive thrown in for good measure.  Ms. Brown stated that the proposed realignment looks "suspiciously like" the south loop road which the Council had rejected years ago in agreement with the Board of Transportation. "How could this possibly not induce more and thoroughfare-like traffic?" she asked.  Ms. Brown requested that the Council and Mayor stand by the new direction in transportation and the commitment to protect neighborhoods that it made in 2001.  This realignment would have ramifications for all adjacent neighborhoods, including her own, she said.    

 

Mason Farm resident Peg Rees said that based on published information and maps she can only assume that Mason Farm Road is to be two lanes of a four-lane highway with a median in the middle.  If Mason Farm Road is to be part of the new access to UNC Hospitals, Ms. Rees proposed building an impressive entrance from Fordham Boulevard with a median and flowers and so forth.  She also requested a traffic circle at the Mason Farm Road intersection with roads going east to Beaty Hill, north on a two-lane road north of the housing units and on to the hospital parking decks, and west on Mason Farm Road, with sidewalks on one side.

 

Westwood Drive resident Elaine Barney expressed concern about the impact on Mason Farm Road and South Columbia Street and the increased number of cars traveling through both neighborhoods.  She said that this was in some ways worse than pitting one neighborhood against another because it will harm both.  Ms. Barney asked the Council to give serious consideration before setting such a dangerous precedent.

 

Mason Farm resident Ken Broun described his neighborhood as "dwindling," since some have been forced to sell their houses and other's houses are in University hands.  Those left have been working hard to help the neighborhood, he said, adding that they have been helped by other neighborhoods who have spoken on their behalf.  Their goal, he explained, is to be left in peace.

 

Mr. Broun stated that the location where the road comes in from Fordham Boulevard was very important to the neighborhood, as were the alignments of the road north or south of student family housing.  He suggested that Council members begin discussing these issues, as well as the number of lanes and whether the road goes north or south.  These issues are enormously important to his neighborhood, Mr. Broun said.  He suggested adding a new comment #8 to the Manager's recommendation, which would say:  "Include an evaluation of the impact of the relocation on the neighborhood adjoining Mason Farm Road."

 

Council Member Harrison inquired about the unlabeled north/south road through the Mason Farm neighborhood.  Mr. Broun replied that it was not a road but the drive to Lillian Smith's house.  But there is access from Whitehead Road and Whitehead Circle to Mason Farm Road, he said, adding that the only other access to Mason Farm Road was Oteys Road.  Mr. Broun proposed that there was enough room north of the student family housing for both a two-lane road and the transit corridor.  That was the original plan, he said, and the preference of neighbors at that point.

 

Council Member Ward suggested that the new #8 proposed by Mr. Broun also include the King's Mill and Morgan Creek neighbors.

 

Oteys Road resident Claudeline Lewis stated that UNC was asking her and her sister to donate the house that they had lived in for 40 years and 10 months.  She and her sister had worked for Chapel Hill for more than 30 years, she said, explaining that her sister had been the head of the English Department at Chapel Hill High and that she had been a clinical social worker for the University and Hospital.  Ms. Lewis praised the Town and University for the Committee's negotiations and for all the modifications they had made.

 

Ms. Lewis suggested that the University not only teach its students about high tech but also be role models.  She warned Council members to be cautious about promises.  "I have worked for and with universities in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois and Virginia," she said.  "In all of my 85 years I've never seen such smoothly sophisticated blackmail as is tied up in the package deal."  Ms. Lewis pointed out that Mayor Foy had tonight taken some responsibility for that deal.  "If he is responsible then I apologize to the University," she said.

 

Sally Greene asked that a new #9 be added that would include the Kings Mill and Morgan Creek neighborhoods.  She suggested the following language:  "…to include a discussion of ways to mitigate the impact of this road on ingress and egress of the Morgan Creek neighborhood."  Ms. Greene remarked that this was not a matter of opposing UNC growth but a matter of managing that growth for all of the common interests.  She described her neighborhood as a perimeter area that would be nearly engulfed in traffic from two major roads and the three parking decks that will be constructed.  In 2002, her neighborhood had been included as a Neighborhood Conservation Area, she said.  Ms. Greene asked Council members to consider the edge of her neighborhood a perimeter area for the purposes of this plan.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED R-19, AND COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK SECONDED.

 

Council Member Ward amended it to add #8 to include but not be limited to Mason Farm, Kings Mill, and Morgan Creek Roads.

 

Mayor Foy amended #2 to specifically include a two-lane cross-section like the Columbia Street proposal.

 

Council Member Verkerk proposed adding Ms. Rees's suggestion about the traffic circle.  Council Member Strom suggested making it broader than that to include non-traditional methods of traffic movement management such as traffic circles, roundabouts, etc.  Council Member Strom agreed with Ms. Rees's suggestion to have additional capacity located north of the married student housing.  This had been discussed extensively during OI-4 discussions, he said.

 

Mayor Foy clarified that doing so would mean shifting the road north of the housing.

 

Mayor pro tem Evans asked Mr. Bonk's advice on how to convey this, and Mr. Bonk replied that the language already put forth would suffice.

 

Ms. Rees asked that the new access road be given a new name and not referred to as Mason Farm Road, which would be misleading.

 

Council Member Harrison said that it was commendable to make these requests and that he was proud to be part of it.  But "nobody at NCDOT looks at neighborhood impact," he said, adding that the requests might seem confusing to those doing the feasibility study.

 

Council Member Ward ascertained from Mr. Bonk that "and other mitigation strategies" could be added to #1 after "evaluation of impact."  Council Member Ward also asked that other mitigation techniques be included in #5.  And he asked if the study could include some information on the intersection of Mason Farm Road and the bypass.  Mr. Bonk replied that there would not be detailed plans drawn at this level of evaluation, but the issue of whether a new intersection would have full access in all directions and the effects of that on other roads should be evaluated as part of this phase.

 

Council Member Ward asked to add "include evaluation of the Mason Farm Road/15-501 intersection and the impact of a new signalized intersection on traffic flow along Fordham Boulevard between South Columbia, US 15/501, and Manning Drive."  Mayor pro tem Evans accepted that as a friendly amendment.

 

Mr. Bonk replied that there were not yet plans drawn that would show that level of function.  But they could learn whether a new intersection there would have full access in all directions, he said.  Council Member Ward asked that the motion include evaluation of the Mason Farm Road/15-501 intersection and the impact of a new signalized intersection on traffic flow along Fordham Boulevard between US 15-501 and Manning Drive. Mayor pro tem Evans accepted that.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked to also include the Westwood neighborhood in stipulation #8.     

 

MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO ADOPT R-19 AS AMENDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD TO ADD A #8 TO INCLUDE AN EVALUATION OF IMPACT ON ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO MASON FARM, WESTWOOD, KINGS MILL AND MORGAN CREEK, AND AMENDED BY MAYOR FOY TO HAVE #2 SPECIFICALLY INCLUDE A TWO-LANE CROSS-SECTION SUCH AS THE ONE IN THE COLUMBIA STREET PROPOSAL.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0). 

 

 

A RESOLUTION PROVIDING COMMENTS TO THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTAION ON THE FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE PROPOSED RELOCATION OF MASON FARM ROAD (2003-08-26/R-19)

 

WHEREAS, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has included the relocation of Mason Farm Road in the Campus Development Master Plan; and

 

WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation has requested comments on the development of a feasibility study for the relocation of the Mason Farm Road;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council provides the North Carolina Department of Transportation with the following comments:

 

1.            The new access road should not be referred to as Mason Farm Road for the purposes of this study, but referred to as the “new access road.”  From this point forward, this resolution will refer to that roadway as the “new access road.”

2.            Include an evaluation of the impact of a relocated new access road on South Columbia traffic.

3.            Evaluate different roadway cross-sections for the new access road to specifically include a two-lane cross-section similar to the Columbia Street proposal.

4.            Assess the operational relationship between the new access road and the fixed guideway corridor also shown on the Campus Master Plan.

5.            Incorporate the stipulations on roadway design approved by the Town Council as part of approval of the University Development Plan, including non-traditional approaches to traffic movement management, including traffic circles, roundabouts, and other mitigation techniques.

6.            Include bicycle and pedestrian facilities, traffic calming, and transit accommodations in the design of the new access road.

7.            Include staff from Chapel Hill and the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization in the preparation of the feasibility study.

8.            Allow for additional public comment on the feasibility study conclusions and recommendation.

9.            Include an evaluation of the impact on the adjacent neighborhoods, including but not limited to the Mason Farm, Kings Mill, Morgan Creek, and Westwood neighborhoods.

10.        Include an evaluation of locating the new access road north of the proposed married student housing.

11.        Evaluate the impact of a new signalized intersection on traffic operation along Fordham Boulevard between South Columbia/15-501 and Manning Drive.

 

This the 25^th day of August, 2003.

 

Item 9 - Hargraves Center Project

 

a.      Recommendation for an Artist Selected for the Hargraves Center/A. D. Clark Pool Extraordinary Maintenance Project. 

 

b.      Selection of Artist for Percent for Art Hargraves Center/A. D. Clark Pool Extraordinary Maintenance Project (R-20, O-4).

 

Both items a and b were deferred to the Council’s September 8, 2003 meeting.

 

 

Item 10 - Consideration of Council Calendar through 2004

 

Mayor Foy explained that he had asked that no Council meetings be scheduled for July or August 2004.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT R-21.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A CALENDAR OF COUNCIL MEETINGS THROUGH DECEMBER 2004 (2003-08-25/R-21)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following calendar of Council meetings.  Meetings will be at 7 p.m. unless otherwise noted.

 

 

Remainder of 2003

Month	Day of week	Date	Type of Meeting	Notes
September		1		Labor Day holiday (Monday)
	Monday	8	Business
	Monday	15	Hearing
	Monday	22	Business
		27-28		Rosh Hashanah (sundown on the 27th through sundown on the 28th)
	Tuesday	30		Assembly of Governments, Southern Human Services Center, 7:30 p.m.
October		6-7		Yom Kippur (sundown on the 6th through sundown on the 7th)
	Wednesday	8	Work Session	Report from the Mayor’s Downtown Task Force, 5:30 p.m.
	Wednesday	8	Business
		12		University Day
		12-14		NCLM Annual Conference in Winston-Salem
		13		Columbus Day Observed (Not a Town holiday)
	Wednesday	15	Joint Planning Hearing	Southern Human Services Center, 7:30 p.m.
	Monday	20	Public Hearing
		23-26		UNC Fall Break
	Monday	27	Business
November		4		General Election
	Monday	10	Business
Month	Day of week	Date	Type of Meeting	Notes
November		11		Veterans’ Day (not a Town holiday)
	Monday	17	Work Session	Traffic Calming Issues, 5:30 p.m.
	Monday	17	Public Hearing
	Monday	24	Business
December	Monday	8	Business	Council Organizational Meeting
		9-13		National League of Cities Congress of Cities (Nashville, TN)
		20-27		Hanukkah (begins sundown on 20th)
		24-26		Christmas Holidays

2004

Month	Day of week	Date	Type of Meeting	Notes
January		1		New Year’s Day Holiday
	Monday	12	Business	Human Services Advisory Board's annual Needs Report
	Friday	16	Planning Session	8:30 am, location TBD; includes budget/financial overview
		19		Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday
	Wednesday	21	Public Hearing
	Monday	26	Business	Setting the scope for potential legislative requests.
	Wednesday	28	Public Forum	Budget, capital program, Comprehensive Grant, HOME program, Community Development grant, Downtown Service District; potential legislative requests
February	Monday	9	Business
	Wednesday	11	Budget Work Session	4-6:30, Advisory Board Presentations
	Monday	16	Hearing
	Wednesday	18	Budget Work Session	5:30-7:30, Advisory Board Presentations
	Friday	20	Legislative Breakfast	7:30 am

 

Month	Day of week	Date	Type of Meeting	Notes
February	Monday	23	Business
	Wednesday	25	Budget Work Session	4-6:00, Presentation by Departments
	Friday	27	Budget Work Session	12 noon-5:00, Presentation by Departments
March	Monday	1	Business	Submittal of proposed 2004-2005 public housing budget;   Consideration of adopting legislative program;   Submittal of potential changes to service plan for Downtown District for public hearing on May 12   Request to County for Library, Parks and Recreation and Project Turnaround funding; authorizing boards to make presentations to the County Commissioners
	Wednesday	3	Budget Work Session	5:30-7:30, presentations by Downtown Commission and Visitors Bureau
		5-9		NLC Congressional City Conference (Washington, DC)
		6-14		UNC Spring Break
	Monday	15	Hearing
	Monday	22	Business
	Wednesday	24	Public Forum	Status report on development of 2004-2005 budget; capital program; Comprehensive Grant, HOME grant program, CD grant; and changes to the Downtown Service District service plan
	Monday	29	Joint Planning Hearing	Southern Human Services Center, 7:30 p.m. (tentative)
	Wednesday	31	Budget Work Session	4:00-6:00 p.m., if desired

 

Month	Day of week	Date	Type of Meeting	Notes
April		5-13		Passover (begins at sundown on 5th)
		9		Good Friday Holiday
		10-18		CH/CARR City Schools Spring Break
		12		Easter Monday (not Town holiday)
	Wednesday	14	Business	Recommendation by the Human Services Advisory Board on the total amount to be allocated for human services performance agreements in 2004-2005
	Monday	19	Hearing
	Monday	26	Business	Submittal of: ·        recommended budget and capital program ·        proposed  plans for using  grants: 1. Comprehensive grant, 2. HOME program, and Community   Development grant
	Wednesday	28	Budget Work Session	5:30-7:30 p.m., if desired
	Thursday	29	Assembly of Governments	Southern Human Services Center, 7:30 p.m. (tentative)
May		9		UNC Commencement
	Monday	10	Business
	Wednesday	12	Budget Public Hearing	Budget, capital program, Downtown Service District, transportation grant
	Monday	17	Hearing
	Wednesday	19	Budget Work Session	4-6:00 pm
	Monday	24	Business
		31		Memorial Day Holiday

 

 

Month	Day of week	Date	Type of Meeting	Notes
June	Monday	14	Business	Consideration of 2004-05 Budget; CIP; related items
	Monday	21	Hearing
	Monday	28	Business	Consideration of performance agreements: ·        visitor information and cultural events funded with hotel-motel taxes, ·        human services (including recommendations by Human Services Advisory Board) and ·        Downtown Service District; ·        year-end budget amendment
July		4		Independence Day – Town holiday
August
September		6		Labor Day holiday (Monday)
	Tuesday	7	Business
	Monday	13	Business
		15-17		Rosh Hashanah (sundown on the 15th through sundown on the 17th)
	Monday	20	Hearing
		24-25		Yom Kippur (sundown on the 24th through sundown on the 25th)
	Monday	27	Business
	Wednesday	29	Assembly of Governments	Southern Human Services Center, 7:30 p.m. (tentative)
October		11		Columbus Day (not Town holiday)
	Monday	11	Business
		13-15		UNC Fall Break
	Monday	18	Hearing
	Thursday	21	Joint  Planning Hearing	Southern Human Services Center, 7:30 p.m. (tentative)
		24-26		NCLM Conference (Raleigh)
	Wednesday	27	Business

 

Month	Day of week	Date	Type of Meeting	Notes
November		2		Election Day
	Monday	8	Business
		11		Veterans’ Day (not Town holiday)
	Monday	22	Business
		25-26		Thanksgiving Observance – Town Holiday
		30-Dec 4		National League of Cities Congress of Cities (Indianapolis, IN)
December		Nov 30-Dec 4		National League of Cities Congress of Cities (Indianapolis, IN)
	Monday	6	Business
		8-15		Hanukkah (begins sundown on the 8th)
		23, 24, 27		Christmas Holidays (tentative)

 

This the 25^th day of August, 2003.

 

 

Item 11 - Appointments:

 

a.      Appointments to the Chapel Hill Public Arts Commission.  Jonathan Walker and Kirsten Wright were appointed.

 

 

b.      Appointment of Council Members to Five Public Art Review Committees.  The Council deferred these appointments to the September 8, 2003 Council meeting.

 

 

Item 12 - Petitions:

 

There were no petitions.

 

Item 13 - Reserved for Discussion of Consent Agenda Items

 

5c - Orange Community Housing.

 

With regard to the Land Trust Board report, Council Member Bateman called the Council's attention to the discussion of how the Larkspur developer had first opposed occupancy and then required an affordable housing resident to sign additional restrictions saying they would not leave toys around and would rake the leaves. Council Member Bateman noted that this was an Hispanic family with five children.  If they meet all the eligibility requirements then they have every right to live there, she said.

 

Council Member Wiggins requested that the staff respond to this, and both Mr. Karpinos and Mr. Horton agreed to look into it.

 

Mayor Foy described the information as troubling.

 

Council Member Ward recommended finding a way to expeditiously and broadly "stop this in its tracks."

 

Council Member Strom recommended waiting until the Manager and Attorney had collected information, noting he wanted to make sure the Council had the full story.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS, TO REFER ITEM 5C TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY FOR MORE COMMENT.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).

 

5f - Report on Advisory Boards' Processes for Citizens Comments and Applicant Interviews.

 

Council Member Strom asked that this be put on the main agenda at a regular business meeting.

 

BY CONSENSUS, ITEM 5C WAS DEFERRED TO SEPTEMBER 8, 2003.

 

5L - Horace Williams Citizens' Committee Interim Budget.

 

Mayor Foy explained that the he had requested this report early so that it could be forwarded to the University and incorporated into their thinking regarding Chapel Hill North.  He proposed forwarding the report to the University with a letter from the Council saying they had received it and wanted to share its contents.

 

COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREED BY CONSENSUS TO FORWARD THE HORACE WILLIAMS CITIZENS' COMMITTEE INTERIM REPORT TO UNC.

 

Council Member Strom, a member of the Horace Williams Committee, explained that the report was the second of three and that it stated primary priorities and principles.  Report #3, he said, would be the final report and would include strategies.

 

The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.