SUMMARY MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
MONDAY, JUNE 16, 2003, 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, Mark Kleinschmidt, Dorothy Verkerk, Jim Ward, and Edith Wiggins.
Council Member Bill Strom was absent, excused. Mayor Foy explained that Council Member Strom was not present due to a family obligation, adding that. Council Member Strom would view the meeting on videotape and offer his written comments.
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, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Principal Planner Gene Poveromo, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
Item 1 - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill:
Application to Modify Development Plan
Town Manager Cal Horton explained that consideration of the University's Development Plan had begun with approval of the 2001 agreement that created a new zoning category, Office and Institutional-4, which allows minor changes to the Development Plan to be approved by the Town Manager. Mr. Horton said that the University was asking tonight that the Town Council consider the first significant amendment to that Plan.
Planning Director Roger Waldon outlined the proposed changes and asked Council members to take action on the application before the end of June. This would conform with the 90-day review period, he said. He then listed the following proposed changes:
· Delete a previously proposed parking deck at Manning Drive/Fordham Boulevard
· Add a parking deck on Manning Drive near the Health Affairs decks
· Add a parking deck/chiller plant near the Cobb Dormitory and the Chapel Hill Cemetery
· Replace the existing Bennett Building on Manning Drive with a larger building
· Establish new utility corridors
· Adjust design for proposed Student Family Housing along Mason Farm Road
Mr. Waldon said that the staff's preliminary recommendation was for approval with a number of specific conditions, which were included in Resolution A. He noted that the proposed changes must continue to meet the overall standards of the ordinance.
· Presentation by the University.
Nancy Suttenfield, Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration, introduced the following University staff members: Bruce Runberg, Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities Planning and Construction; Caroline Elfland, Associate Vice Chancellor for Campus Services; Dean Bresciani, Interim Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs; Pat Crawford, Associate to University Council; Jonathan Howes, Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Local Relations; Linda Convissor, Coordinator of Local Relations; Kevin McNaughton, Special Assistant for Capital Projects; Christopher Paine, Director of Student Housing; Mary Hicks, Associate Director of Student Services; Diane Bachman, Facility Architect, Paul Kapp, Campus Historic Preservation Manager; Joel Coleman, Landscape Architect; Karen McCall, UNC Health System Public Affairs Officer; and George Alexiou, Transportation Consultant with the firm Martin Alexiou Bryson.
Ms. Suttenfield reviewed the history of the Development Plan and outlined the sources of funding for the $1 billion worth of capital projects that the University has scheduled for completion over the next 7-10 years. She said that about half of the bond money would be spent for renovations and/or replacement space for existing facilities. Seventeen percent of that money would go toward upgrading and replacing utilities infrastructure, she said, leaving one-third to be spent on new facility construction.
Ms. Suttenfield explained that the University and the Town had worked together to create the new OI-4 zoning district. This was followed in 2001 by the Development Plan, she said, adding that the Plan had described all known projects, which totaled about six million square feet of space, that the University would put under construction by 2008. Ms. Suttenfield explained that the proposed modifications reflect different timing and sequencing than was anticipated in the 2001 Development Plan. But they are in consonance with UNC's campus master plan, she said. Ms. Suttenfield called on Associate Vice Chancellor Bruce Runberg to present the proposed modifications in detail.
Mr. Runberg explained that details from utility and technology studies, individual project designs, and significant recommendations from the UNC Advisory Committee on Transportation had lead to the request to delete the Manning Drive parking deck and add two others. He explained that the University needed to co-locate its six-story, 105,000 square foot technology services center to the northeast corner of Manning/Emergency Drive because most of the campus telecommunications fiber optics terminate there. Mr. Runberg also explained that there would be fewer and larger Student Family Housing buildings than had been indicated on the Development Plan. This will allow almost all of the parking to be underneath, he said, but added that doing so requires a small increase in the size of the building's footprint.
Mr. Runberg addressed several issues that the Planning Board had raised regarding Student Family Housing. These included parking on neighborhood streets during special events at the Smith Center and concerns about sidewalk construction along Mason Farm Road. Mr. Runberg said that the University wanted to work with the Town to control parking in the Mason Farm neighborhood during special events. And this modification does not propose any changes to the condition that the University would build a sidewalk on the north side of Mason Farm Road, he said. Mr. Runberg explained that the sidewalk would run from 15-501 to west of Diana Steele's property and would be constructed as early in the project as is feasible.
Mr. Runberg explained that the University did not believe it was prudent or necessary to build a secondary access road to Skipper Bowles Drive. Doing so would violate environmental goals and would minimize the buffers, he said. Mr. Runberg explained that the access road had not been part of the Mason Farm Housing Project. It was designed to accommodate the 1,500-car Manning Deck, he said, pointing out that the University was asking to remove that deck from the plan. Mr. Runberg objected to the staff's stipulation #16 concerning access to building H-21.
Mr. Runberg reported that the University's Advisory Committee on Transportation had recommended replacing the Manning Deck with two smaller decks. He explained that the total net increase in parking spaces with this change would be 29. Mr. Runberg stated that the University was endeavoring to increase the use of park and ride lots from off-campus lots. But, he said, there still was a need for on-campus parking and the Manning Deck was not the best site for that. Mr. Runberg pointed out that the Manning Deck was physically removed from campus activity centers and that recent studies had indicated that the new access to the bypass should be in place prior to building that deck. So rather than build the Manning Deck at this time, he said, the Advisory Committee on Transportation had recommended building the Jackson and Cobb decks instead. Mr. Runberg displayed slides of where those two decks would be located.
Mr. Runberg noted that the UNC Healthcare System had submitted a letter stating their position regarding the Manning Deck. He also explained that some had expressed concern over how the Manning Deck would impact traffic on South Columbia Street. An impact analysis had shown that impact would increase by 3-4%, he said. Mr. Runberg explained that a recent utilities study had shown that a chiller plant was required in the Cobb area to support the central chilled water system. He outlined the proposal for a five-story deck with a chiller plant built into it and showed a preliminary concept model of how the brick building would look. Mr. Runberg assured Council members that the University would be sensitive to the cemetery and would work with neighbors as the design process goes forward. He noted that he had met with Ms. Rebecca Clarke and had discussed ways to improve landscaping, particularly on the western side of the cemetery.
Karen McCall, Vice President of Public Affairs and Marketing for the UNC Healthcare System, read a letter from UNC Healthcare Director Mary Beck. In the letter, Ms Beck expressed support for the proposed modifications, especially the Jackson Circle Parking Deck, which, she said, would help meet the critical need for parking for medical staff, hospital staff, patients and visitors. Ms. Beck wrote that the deck would help to serve the NC Clinical Cancer Center, which will replace the antiquated Gravely Building, and would meet that need in a way that the Manning Deck could not. She stressed that the Jackson Circle Deck was needed whether or not South Columbia Street was widened.
· Recommendation of the Planning Board.
Planning Board Chair Scott Radway commented that 90 days had been a short review period but that the process was working the way the Council had intended. It had given the Board the opportunity to work directly with citizens and University representatives on some of the proposal details, he said. Mr. Radway pointed out that the Planning Board had not voted for or against the proposed modifications. Rather, they had voted (8-1) to bring forward the following seven items for consideration:
1. Mason Farm Road-Student Family Housing
2. Relocation of Parking to the Interior of the Campus.
3. Jackson Circle Parking Deck
4. Cobb Hall Parking Deck
5. Proposed Chiller Plant
6. Utility Corridor Adjustments
7. Information Technology Building to replace Bennett Building
Council Member Verkerk, noting that the Planning Board had deviated from its usual procedure, asked why they had not voted for or against. Mr. Radway replied that there had not been time to ask the applicant to address certain matters and to come back with more information. With the 90-day time period, he said, most Board members just wanted to pass their strong concerns on to the Council.
Council Member Harrison inquired about a close vote that he recalled witnessing at a Planning Board meeting. Mr. Radway explained that there had been two motions and two seconds to deny the proposed modification. Both had failed (4-5), he said, so they had nothing to bring forward to the Council even though they had voted.
· Recommendations of other boards and commissions.
Transportation Board
Transportation Board Chair Loren Hintz corrected a typo in item #6 of his Board's list of recommendations. He asked that at least some of the Board's comments, which had been approved by the Board (6-0), be made into stipulations. Mr. Hintz pointed out that moving the parking lot moves parking toward the center of campus. He said that this would be contrary to the original UNC Development Plan, would increase traffic in several areas, and would cause problems for the general public. Mr. Hintz said that if the proposed changes are implemented, then it would be important that all sidewalks be built.
Mr. Hintz noted that there were similarities between the Board's recommendations and staff stipulations 9, 10, 11 and 12. He pointed out that the University's projected traffic estimate varied greatly from those that the Board had seen from other sources. Mr. Hintz cautioned Council members to look carefully at some of the assumptions in the University's report.
With regard to the Married Student Housing changes, Mr. Hintz agreed that having a connection to the north/northeast was important. But he expressed concern about the southern connection, particularly since the access road connecting Manning Drive and Mason Farm Road was being eliminated. Mr. Hintz emphasized that all changes in housing dimensions and utilities should show that the transit corridors are protected. He stressed the importance of keeping the option to continue a transit corridor to the north of campus, specifically to Chapel Hill North and Carrboro. Mr. Hintz expressed concern that construction might block that corridor.
Community Design Commission
Community Design Commission Vice Chair Martin Rody expressed concern about the proposal to delete the Manning Deck and to construct parking decks internal to the campus. These decks could negatively impact traffic conditions on South Columbia Street and around the Gimghoul neighborhood, he said. Mr. Brody reported that the Commission felt it would be inappropriate to locate the parking deck and chiller plant next to the cemetery. This was viewed as being insensitive to the existing adjacent land uses or to the historic importance of this memorial site, he said.
Mr. Rody expressed concern that noise from the chiller plant could disrupt services at the cemetery. He argued that lighting from the parking deck and vehicular traffic should be shielded from the cemetery as well. Mr. Rody said that due to the obtrusive nature of the parking deck the project should be adequately landscaped with buffers between the structure and the cemetery. The architecture at this site should be very strong and impressive and the visual appearance from South Street through the cemetery should be minimized, he said. Mr. Rody concluded that the University should take extraordinary measures during construction to protect the cemetery if it proceeds with this project.
Historic District Commission
Kimberly Kaiser, representing the Historic District Commission, read the following HDC report:
The consensus of the Historic District Commission is that any development must minimize its affect on the surrounding area, in this case most importantly the Old Chapel Hill Cemetery. The cemetery is significant to the Town and to the University as the final resting place for many of the Town's and the State's more prominent figures, and is a National Register listed historic property.
Ms. Kaiser then read some of the Commission members' comments:
1. The proposed changes to the UNC Development Plan Modifications are not minor. They are major.
2. Four out of six members present at the June 12, 2003 meeting felt strongly that the proposed deck and chiller plant should not be built on this site. The structures would not be congruous with the height, setbacks, placements, form and proportions, and architectural scale of the surrounding buildings. In addition, the use of this area is both inappropriate and in conflict with the University's efforts to discourage traffic in the center of campus and with community reverence for the cemetery.
3. If a parking deck and chiller plant must be located in the central campus area, the Commission suggests a reconfiguration of the site plan. Buildings should be positioned farther from the cemetery. Consideration should also be paid to lighting, buffers, and traffic patterns, both automobile and pedestrian (locating a deck at this site will increase foot traffic through the cemetery).
· Comments from citizens.
Gimghoul resident Glenn Wilson commented that the University was proposing more parking at the expense of nearby neighborhoods. The plan would not protect the public heath and safety, he said, adding that UNC was displaying utter disregard for the community at large. Mr. Wilson stated that the plan would not maintain the value of the adjacent property, which, he said, was the Town Council's responsibility. He stated that figures provided by the University had been inconsistent, and argued that the University's proposal would lead to more traffic congestion.
Mr. Wilson emphasized that walking or driving from the Gimghoul neighborhood onto Country Club Road already was a hazard to health and safety. Placing timing devices at Raleigh Road and Battle Lane will not suffice, he said. Mr. Wilson argued that the residents of Gimghoul were entitled to reasonable, safe access to their neighborhoods. The Town Council must ensure that a traffic light is installed at Gimghoul and Country Club Roads so that residents will have a safe way to leave and enter their community, he said.
Gimghoul Road resident Wadleigh Harrison noted out that the ordinance says the Town Council shall approve a development plan "unless it finds that the proposed development would not maintain the public health, safety and general welfare, or the value of adjacent property. She stated that building the chiller plant behind Playmakers Theater and Cobb would certainly jeopardize public health because of the car pollution and the lack of a safe crossing. Ms. Harrison, who is physically handicapped, explained that she had to move to Gimghoul in the first place because the surrounding area was accessible to her on her electric scooter.
Ms. Harrison stated that building the parking deck/chiller plant there would cut the campus off from the elderly and handicapped. She further commented that the two buildings would lower the value of the adjacent properties. Ms. Harrison pointed out that the University already had a parking lot in the area. The Town has a good bus system, she said, and the Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) is available. Ms. Harrison argued that there was no need to put a parking deck in the central campus and add to the traffic and pedestrian problems that already exist.
Purefoy Road resident Kimberly Brewer, a former Town representative to the University's Master Plan Advisory Committee, said that a comparison of the original traffic impact analysis and the modified plan shows an increase in traffic for South Columbia Street of 5,000 trips per day. Ms. Brewer stated that this does not adhere to the principles that UNC's representatives had expressed throughout the master plan process. At that time, she said, the philosophy was to not increase parking spaces but to rely on park & ride lots and public transportation.
Ms. Brewer noted that Mr. Runberg had explained that UNC did not plan to build the Manning Deck "at this time." So the two decks would not replace the Manning Deck, she said, but would be in addition to it. Ms. Brewer recommended denying the proposed modification and studying the issue of incentives for using the Manning Deck. With regard to the utility corridor through Jones Park, she said that this would greatly damage the park and other nearby green spaces. Ms. Brewer asked the Town Council to deny that utility corridor.
Gooseneck Road resident David L. McElwain described the intersection of Manning Drive and South Columbia Street as a treacherous crossing spot. He told Council members that he and other UNC faculty members had refused to hold lectures at another location because it would have meant taking students across that dangerous street. "At what point does a progressive and intelligent community like ours decide that attracting more cars into the center of the city has more disadvantages than advantages?" he asked. Mr. McElwain described the parking decks and four-lane roads on campus as the "ugly underside of the master plan."
Whitehead Circle resident and former Chapel Hill Mayor Kenneth S. Broun argued that the neighborhood should have some control over parking, particularly for special events at the Smith Center. There should be some regulation, such as "residential parking only" permits, he said. Mr. Broun predicted that the most difficult time would be during the construction phase. He asked Council members to encourage the University to keep communication open and to work with the neighborhood on problems that arise.
Coolidge Street resident and former Council Member Joe Capowski stated that the modification before the Council clearly violates the underlying principle of the UNC development plan. That principle was that fewer employees would drive to the center of campus because they would rely instead on perimeter lots, park and ride lots, and mass transit. Mr. Capowski said that parking next to one's office is not a reality on the UNC campus anymore. Traffic projections are irrelevant, he said, because they do not include the new four-lane hospital access road, which will have such an impact on traffic that studies that ignore it are of little value. He asked Council members to reject the Jackson Circle Deck as both unnecessary and in violation of the plan's principles. Mr. Capowski asked them to reject the traffic projections and to recalculate them with the new access road taken into account.
Former Council Member and area resident Bev Kawalec urged the Council to prevent people from using the cemetery lot as a cut-through. She described the cemetery as a treasure for the Town and the University, noting that many distinguished and common people were buried there, black and white. Ms. Kawalec noted that the State had spent thousands of dollars in the 1990s on refurbishing graves and markers. But they were destroyed again, she said, adding that this happens in part because people enter the cemetery who have no interest in it but who just want to get from one point to another. Ms. Kawalec pointed out that a fence would also keep out those who go in to vandalize. While the parking deck is being built, she said, there should be an inviting, well lit, and safe path constructed outside the cemetery to keep cross-through traffic out. Ms. Kawalec described the cemetery as a resource for the Town and University and said that steps should be taken to protect it.
Planning Board Vice Chair Sally Greene urged Council members to reject the proposed modification because it was not consistent with the Town's goals and the University's own master plan. She noted that the UNC Master Plan had stated that the overall goal was to make the campus pedestrian-oriented and that the plan should support local and regional planning strategies. She acknowledged that parking decks were indicated on the Master Plan. But they are "not to this scale and not in such a hurry and without trying to do better" she said. Ms. Greene pointed out that the Planning Board's motion to deny had failed by one vote, which was hers. She had been trying to be cautious, she said, but added that she now believes that she should have said no. Ms. Greene described the plan as a major departure from the vision that the University had presented to the Town two years ago and still presents in its Master Plan. She urged the Council to reject the request for modification.
Historic District Commission member Terri Swanson read a letter from Robert E. Stipe regarding the cemetery. In his letter, Mr. Stipe stated that some of the undesirable impacts on the cemetery could be minimized through good will on the part of the Town and University and a bit of give and take on both sides. His letter urged the Town Council to pay special attention to the views expressed by the Historic District Commission and the Community Design Commission. By giving special attention to reducing the footprint of the parking deck, he wrote, and by having special sensitivity to color, texture, scale and landscaping of the south-facing facade, some of the more harmful impacts might be reduced. Mr. Stipe wrote that the wintertime view of the project from South Road would be critical. His letter asked that special attention be given to operational details during and after construction. Mr. Stipe’s letter predicted that automobile pollution would harm the gravestones and monuments. After she had finished reading Mr. Stipe's letter, Ms. Swanson corrected the wording in the first line at the top of page 1-6 in the Council's packet to read Historic Property rather than Historic District.
Gimghoul resident Dale Weddington, Professor of City and Regional Planning at UNC, complained that the Gimghoul neighborhood had not had enough time to study UNC's proposal. He pointed out that the neighborhood was a public area used by walkers and joggers. Mr. Weddington emphasized that Country Club Road was heavily trafficked and that there already was a traffic problem at the intersection with Raleigh Road where the exit from the Cobb Deck and chiller plant was being planned. He expressed concern that people leaving the parking deck at rush hour would cut through the Gimghoul neighborhood to avoid traffic congestion. Mr. Weddington noted that the Planning Board was split and that the data did not make sense. It is hard to say "no" to the University, he said, adding, "But I do it all the time. Just say no."
Diana Steele expressed concern regarding the change in UNC's thinking that the request for modification represents. She argued that the University was contradicting the goals that Chancellor Moeser had stated in his cover letter to the 2002 Master Plan. UNC is proposing to bring thousands of daily vehicle trips through neighborhood roads by building an additional 1,500 parking spaces on campus rather than at the periphery as was proposed in the master plan, she said. Ms. Steele asked Council members not to approve additional parking on campus. She also asked UNC representatives to show good faith by removing the block that they had placed on Columbia Street improvements.
On a map, Ms. Steele indicated an area of her land that UNC uses. She explained that she had asked the University why they think they have free access to her land, but had been unable to get a reply. Ms. Steele asked Council members to have UNC clarify this usage with her. She said that UNC had plans to invade the 60-foot buffer to her land with a driveway leading down to two dumpsters, surface parking, and a row of recycling bins. This would mean clearing the woods, with the exception of one tree, up to her lot line, she said. Ms. Steele asked the Council to ensure that the 60-foot buffer is respected and that there will be no construction within it.
Ms. Steele noted other proposed changes regarding access to building H-21. She asked Council members not to accept those changes and to follow the Planning Board's recommendation that the building be constructed according to the original Development Plan. Ms. Steele also requested that the Council insist that UNC use the northern route if they cannot put the utility ditch under the sidewalk to the north of Mason Farm Road.
Westwood Drive resident Elaine Barney read a statement from former Council Member Joyce Brown. In her statement, Ms. Brown said that the University had justified its Development Plan and the OI-4 rezoning, in part, with an argument that new development would rely much less on personal vehicles and much more on mass transit and a pedestrian and bike-friendly campus. Ms. Brown wrote that one way of achieving this mutually agreed upon goal had been to place the parking deck on the perimeter and not to significantly increase parking. She stated that UNC had, in less than two years, undermined one of the main reasons for approval by asking for modifications that would put new parking decks internal to the campus. Doing so will exacerbate traffic problems, she said, and will further compromise air quality. Ms Brown wrote that Council approval of this modification would negate the Council's 2001 actions, make the entire negotiated process hollow, and bring into question any further negotiations with UNC.
Ms. Barney expressed full agreement with Ms. Brown's statement, adding that she had grave concerns about the off-loading of traffic from the Jackson Circle Deck onto South Columbia Street. She questioned the timing of the proposed modification to build a parking deck at this location given UNC's pledge to widen South Columbia Street.
Westwood Drive resident Mark Shreve urged the Town Council not to approve the modification, which he described as "completely contradictory" to what was approved in the original plan. He pointed out that the Council had repeatedly stated that it did not want to approve development that would cause additional traffic on South Columbia Street and did not want to turn that into a four- or five-lane superhighway. If UNC is permitted to build an 800-car parking deck at Jackson Circle, he said, it will undoubtedly use the additional traffic as further justification for widening South Columbia Street. Mr. Shreve noted that the original 1,500-car parking deck had been scheduled for 2009. But the new Jackson Circle Parking Deck is scheduled for 2004, he said. He requested that the University explain the facts behind that shift.
Windsor Circle resident Dan Coleman noted that the University had said that only 90 of drivers using the Cobb Deck would use South Columbia Street. However, this seems like a low number considering the priority the University has placed on the widening of South Columbia Street, he said. Mr. Coleman wondered if the need for that widening had been overstated, or if the traffic analysis for the deck had been incorrect. He proposed that the interior of a pedestrian-oriented destination, such as the transit stop that is planned for that location, should be the last place to put a parking deck. Mr. Coleman commented that being unable to sell parking spaces at the Manning Drive lot seemed like a good thing to him. That means that it's working, he said, and he expressed surprise that Mr. Runberg had viewed it as a problem. Mr. Coleman urged Council members to reject the request to move the decks.
· Comments and questions from the Mayor and Town Council.
Mayor Foy explained that the Council would not take action this evening but was required to do so before July 5th. They would do so at their next meeting on June 23rd, he said.
Council Member Bateman stated that she had not yet heard a compelling argument for changing the parking decks. She commented on the apparent philosophical shift in the University's thinking since the Council approved the Plan. The University had wanted to encourage mass transit and to make Manning Drive a safer place to walk, she said. Council Member Bateman asked that someone from the University help her understand why there was this shift.
Caroline Elfland, Associate Vice Chancellor for Campus Services, replied that the proposed modification increases the number of parking spaces on campus by only 29. An important underlying principle of the Master Plan, she said, was that the University would remove about 20 acres of surface parking, 10 of which would become green space. Ms. Elfland stated that the intention always was to replace the on-campus surface parking with decks, and, in addition, to have a modest increase in on-campus "proximate" parking for employees. The University had been successful in encouraging the use of mass transit and park and ride lots, she said, but had never intended to tear up surface parking and not replace it.
Ms. Elfland stated that the Cobb and Manning decks were both in the Campus Master Plan. Parking at Jackson Circle was in the Master Plan but was located under buildings rather than in a deck, she said. Ms. Elfland explained that a utility study had pointed out the need for the chiller plant earlier than the University had thought when they originally submitted the Development Plan. That chiller plant will take over the Cobb parking lot, she said, adding that all other north campus parking had been lost to ongoing construction projects.
Ms. Elfland stated that the University was below 50% proximate parking on north campus. They cannot afford to lose the Cobb surface lot and not move forward with the deck, she said. "So, the reason the deck at Cobb has been pushed forward in our thinking is because the chiller plant was required, which we were not aware of. If we were not putting forward construction of the chiller plant at this time, we would not be putting forward construction of the deck at this time, because we wouldn't be losing that parking lot, which has really brought us to the tipping point for parking on north campus," said Ms. Elfland.
With regard to the Jackson Circle Deck, Ms. Elfland stated that UNC had made a poor choice when putting the Manning Deck into the Development Plan. There was not yet sufficient development in that area to make that deck be a reasonable proximate parking area for employees, she said. Ms. Elfland pointed out that development was occurring up the hill on Manning Drive. The University needs to build the parking that was planned up closer to the Health Affairs area and postpone the Manning Deck until later, she said. Ms. Elfland told Council members that the University would be coming back and asking for approval of more decks as they tear up surface parking. This is consistent with the master plan and is not a shift in the University's philosophy or its priorities, she said.
Council Member Bateman asked if the Cobb Deck had been on the Master Plan when the Town Council approved it. Ms. Elfland explained that the Council had approved the Development Plan, which is a piece of the Master Plan, not the Master Plan itself. She said that the deck was on the Master Plan but not on the Development Plan that the University had submitted to the Council. Council Member Bateman asked if the Jackson Circle Deck had been planned all along. Ms. Elfland replied that there was a parking area equivalent to it on the Master Plan. But the University should have put the request at the Health Affairs area, she said, because that it where development is occurring.
Mayor Foy asked if the size of the Cobb Deck had been indicated on the Master Plan. Ms. Elfland did not know the answer without checking the Plan.
Council Member Verkerk asked if UNC had considered placing the deck on the surface lot along Highway 54. Ms. Elfland replied that the University wanted to build the deck and chiller plant together at a location that was in accordance with the Master Plan. They did not look at other options, she said.
Council Member Wiggins verified that the University intended to convert its current surface parking to both classroom space and green space. Ms. Elfland stated that about ten acres would be torn up and converted to green space. Council Member Wiggins asked if the additional spaces in the two decks would equal the number of spaces being given up, plus 29. Ms. Elfland replied that eliminating the Manning Deck, adding the Jackson Deck and the Cobb Deck, and adding parking around the ITS building would lead to a net increase of 29 more spaces than were in the original Development Plan.
Mayor Foy noted that the Manning Deck still was on the Master Plan. Ms. Elfland replied that when there is more development in that area, and probably when there is another access to the campus from that direction, the University might come back and request another modification or another Development Plan.
Council Member Wiggins said that she was trying to determine whether or not there had been a change in the University's philosophy with regard to the number of parking spaces. Ms. Elfland acknowledged that people think of the Manning Deck as peripheral parking. But the University considers peripheral parking to be its free parking at the Friday Center and Jones Ferry Road lots, she said. Ms. Elfland explained that UNC views the Manning Deck as proximate parking. But the problem is that there is not sufficient development there now to need it, she said. Ms. Elfland stressed that the University had never viewed the Manning Deck as peripheral, but only as on-campus parking. Council Member Wiggins summarized the University's position as an attempt to trade proximate parking for proximate parking.
Council Member Kleinschmidt commented that it was difficult for him to accept that argument because the Master Plan does not indicate any development near the Manning site. So it would not be proximate parking for anything, he said, adding that it was difficult for him to accept the argument that the University saw it as anything but a peripheral lot. Council Member Kleinschmidt stated that he had understood that reducing parking on campus was a goal because of the underlying principle about making the campus more pedestrian friendly and reducing vehicle trips in and around the campus. So, even if the Manning Deck was not considered peripheral, he said, the other two decks are definitely interior. Council Member Kleinschmidt added that those decks do nothing to support that underlying principle because they invite more cars into the interior. Ms. Elfland replied that the University would remove about 4,000 surface spaces. The philosophy all along had been to replace those spaces in decks so that they would have smaller footprints and create less impervious surface, she said. Ms. Elfland explained that the intent was not to lower the amount of proximate parking on campus, but to relocate it into deck spaces.
Ms. Elfland began to show areas on campus that were planned for development, but Council Member Kleinschmidt suggested not moving the discussion away from his central point about the principles that got the Council's support when they approved the Development Plan two years ago. He said that it was difficult to say that the locations of these two decks were in any way congruent with those principles. Ms. Elfland emphasized that the Cobb Deck needed to be built simultaneously with the chiller plant. And UNC did not expect to lose the surface parking at Cobb when they initially submitted their Development Plan, she said. Ms. Elfland repeated that this was why the University was asking for the parking lot in conjunction with the chiller plant, which they also did not realize they needed until they had completed the detailed Infrastructure Master Plan study. And that study had not been completed by the time they submitted the original Development Plan, she said.
Mayor Foy asked Ms. Elfland to explain what a chiller plant is and why it needs to be in that location. Ms. Elfland replied that the University uses a central plant to produce chilled water that runs through underground pipes into buildings for air conditioning. UNC has a few of these in the southern part of campus, she said, but they need to pump chilled water into the newer buildings on northern campus. Chilled water loses coolness as it flows, so it needs to be close to the buildings it is intended to cool, she said. Ms. Elfland repeated that the need for that chiller plant had arisen sooner than the University had expected.
Council Member Harrison expressed concern that the sentiments expressed in Mary Beck's letter did not match those previously stated. He said that her letter in support of the Jackson Circle Parking Deck had cited critical parking requirements for medical staff, hospital staff, patients and visitors to the Clinical Cancer Center. Council Member Harrison said the letter also stated that the Manning Deck would not meet that need and that having it located at Jackson Place was important to the future of the UNC Healthcare system.
Council Member Harrison noted that the future parking distribution that UNC had laid out in the Development Plan changes showed no visitors spaces for the Jackson Circle Deck. The Cobb Deck has 100 spaces, he said, noting that this is a big jump from what is in that neighborhood now. Council Member Harrison asked where those visitors were expected to be going. Ms. Elfland replied that most of the daytime visitors would be families visiting the UNC Admissions Office. The University needs additional evening parking for dramatic arts performances and so forth, she said. Council Member Harrison commented that he had never had a problem finding parking in the NC 54 lot for any evening performances at the Paul Green Theater. He asked if the Jackson Circle Deck would be 90% employee parking. Ms. Elfland pointed out that a bridge comes across to UNC Hospitals. She said that the University has been discussing building the deck so that it could access that bridge directly. When the Cancer Enter is built, she said, the patient load will increase. Ms. Elfland added that the University had stated from the start that they were chiefly committed to patient parking and would displace employees for that.
Transportation Consultant George Alexiou stated that the University's transportation philosophy had not changed. He noted that the Master Plan had connected the Manning Drive Deck to an access road to the bypass. That was not in the Development Plan, he said, and UNC had since concluded that exiting from the Manning Drive Deck would be unsafe and that the deck would be premature without access to support it.
Council Member Ward clarified that the plan was to remove the Manning Deck from the Development Plan, but not from the Master Plan. He commented that the Manning Deck would be able to handle the traffic flow whereas the Cobb Deck would be too close to neighborhoods and would use neighborhood streets that are not equipped to handle that kind of traffic. Council Member Ward stated that Country Club Road and Raleigh Road were a mess already. He said that he could not imagine wanting to place that kind of density along those neighborhood roads. Nor was the road infrastructure there for the Jackson Lot, he said.
Council Member Ward remarked that if it was a question of timing, "then you guys build the road that you have on the Master Plan that takes you out to the bypass and gets you to those parking lots on an appropriate size road. Don't add another thousand trips to South Columbia Street. Don't add another thousand trips to Manning Drive up near the hospital, or to Raleigh Road past the Student Union. I just can't imagine that you folks want to add that kind of additional intensity where there's so much concern about the cross traffic of pedestrian bikes. I don't get it," Council Member Ward said. Mr. Alexiou replied that, lot by lot, much surface parking will be lost and much of that traffic will disappear as a result. He explained that there would be improvements at the intersection of Country Club and South Roads. There will be an additional left turn lane as you come down Country Club Road and an additional right turn lane as you come up from Ridge Road, Mr. Alexiou said.
Council Member Ward commented on what he and Council Member Kleinschmidt had described as a shift in parking from a perimeter lot on South Manning Drive to a more interior lot at the Cobb Deck. Even though the University would only be adding 29 spaces, he said, 1,000 of the total spaces would be used by commuters. Mr. Alexiou commented that the 900+ spaces at the Manning Deck were planned for commuters as well. "But they weren't going past Gimghoul," Council Member Ward commented, adding that the two have significantly different impacts.
Council Member Wiggins asked Mr. Runberg if he had offered protections for the cemetery during his conversation with Ms. Clarke. Mr. Runberg replied that Ms. Clarke had not indicated any opposition to the deck and chiller plant. Her interest was in improving the perimeter, he said, particularly portions on the north and west sides. He said that he had told Ms. Clarke that the University would be happy to work with her and others to make those improvements. Council Member Wiggins asked if the University intended to help out with cut-through and vandalism problems. Mr. Runberg replied that the University intended to get a number of wise people together and look at everything associated with the cemetery and periphery to see what could be done as part of installing or constructing the deck and chiller plant.
Mr. Runberg noted that there would be significant buffers planted on both sides of the road along the north side of the cemetery and that there would be a one-way right turn exit from the Cobb Deck leading to South Road. He emphasized that there had been no change in UNC's philosophy. Mr. Runberg noted that the University had been working hard with the Town to set up park and ride lots. But it was never the intent to reduce the number of spaces on main campus, he said, and there had never been a differentiation between inner and outer decks. Mr. Runberg stated that it was always understood that the total number of surface parking spaces would be reduced and replaced in decks and that the net increase of parking spaces on the main campus in all decks would be 2,500-3,000. Nothing has changed, he said, but the timing.
Council Member Verkerk, a former member of the UNC Transportation Parking Action Committee, recalled that those 2,500-3,000 parking spaces had been intended for visitor/hospital parking and not for employees. She described this as a definite switch that should be explained. Council Member Wiggins inquired about the best way for Diana Steele to get answers to her questions. Mr. Runberg replied that he would be happy to address those for Ms. Steele and the Council within the next couple of days.
Mayor pro tem Evans confirmed from Mr. Runberg that cooling towers associated with chiller plants do make noise. But the University has plans to make them quiet enough to meet the Town’s Noise Ordinance requirements, he said, just as they've done at the new south chiller plant. Mayor pro tem Evans urged the University to provide the "Married Student Housing" with very convenient access to mass transit. She suggested that the University solve the problem of special event parking in the Gimghoul neighborhood just as they had in hers, by having a student sit in a chair and monitor traffic.
Mayor pro tem Evans established that Country Club Road improvements planned for 2005 would be completed before the parking deck would be built. She remarked that a pedestrian crosswalk could be placed in Gimghoul if traffic were to increase. Mayor pro tem Evans predicted that senior citizens would use the parking deck when attending on-campus events. She expressed concern about safety issues at Baity Hill if there is only one-way access there. Mr. Runberg explained that there was not enough distance to make a two-way road given the grade of the land.
Council Member Harrison questioned whether the intersection at Country Club Road and Raleigh Road could work without a traffic signal. He determined that Mr. Alexiou did not think it would meet the warrants for a signal. Mr. Alexiou explained that four busy times a day does not warrant a signal. He noted that University planners were considering not allowing left turns out of the Cobb Deck onto Country Club Road.
Council Member Harrison asked if the Town could require northbound drivers to turn right so that no one would be making a left turn out of the Paul Greene Theater onto County Club Road. Mr. Alexiou commented that turning right might be a problem at night for people who do not know the area well and have come to the Theater one way but are being pushed out toward another direction. He predicted that some would still make that left turn. Council Member Harrison said that he was having a hard time seeing that intersection working. Mr. Alexiou replied that there would be tolerable delays between 4:30 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. "It's not tolerance we're concerned about…it's safety," Council Member Harrison said.
Council Member Bateman suggested that the staff get their best and brightest to work on improving that intersection. She agreed with others that there would be problems associated with eliminating the road between Manning Drive and Mason Farm Road. Council Member Bateman expressed concern about the "Married Students Housing" units having one access, and asked to know the University's thinking about that. She said that suggestions in a letter from Ms. Heidi Perry bear looking at to see if they are worth incorporating on a trial basis with some of the lots. Mayor Foy determined from the staff that they would forward Ms. Perry's email to the University.
Mayor pro tem Evans noted that there is an entrance for service vehicles to the Raleigh Road area from Raleigh Street. She proposed that this could alleviate some evening traffic leaving the deck for people who need to go north of Town. Mayor pro tem Evans suggested including the amount of traffic coming from the opposite direction in the analysis of that intersection. She said that drivers coming from Ridge Road would want to take a right turn onto Raleigh Road, which would conflict with traffic coming from the northern part of Country Club Road and turning left onto Raleigh Road.
Mr. Alexiou stated that the traffic analysis takes into account all of the campus changes. The Rams Head Deck is factored into the analysis, he said, as is the traffic going north up Ridge Road. With regard Mayor pro tem Evans's first comment regarding Raleigh Road, Mr. Alexiou explained that the intent of the site plan for that whole area was to create a pedestrian friendly precinct with a lot of open space. There would be some moving in and out of vehicles, he said, but the idea was to create an area that is primarily vehicle free.
Mayor Foy determined from Mr. Alexiou that most surface parking on campus would be displaced. He noted that 4,000 spaces were being replaced by decks and 1,500 new spaces were being added in the Development Plan. Mayor Foy asked where the 4,000 spaces were located, and Mr. Alexiou indicated a summary in the table on page 2-4. Mayor Foy commented that Raleigh Road would be impacted by an increase of about 1,500 spaces down the middle of campus. Mr. Alexiou said that the 541 net increase at the Bell Tower lot would be accompanied by a new access road down to Manning Drive. Council Member Kleinschmidt determined that this would be a two-lane road that would come out to one of the lights on Manning Drive. Mayor Foy verified that the road was in the Master Plan.
Mayor Foy asked Mr. Alexiou to respond to a comment that Mr. Capowski had made about South Columbia Street and the impact that the Jackson Circle Deck would have on traffic. Mr. Alexiou stated that the new south access road that was in the Master Plan is not in the Development Plan. UNC cannot factor in what that road might do to traffic because it is not really a project, he said.
Mr. Alexiou also explained that the first Y2000 traffic impact analysis of South Columbia Street had not included a traffic count. They had been asked to do an analysis based on whatever data they could get, he said, adding that some of it was 10 years old. He said that UNC had agreed to use that analysis, knowing that the "real" traffic counts at the end of the year would constitute the first proper baseline traffic analysis. The number used for South Columbia Street probably was 4,000 vehicles per day too low, he said, adding the NC Department of Transportation's count was even lower and less accurate.
Mr. Alexiou said that UNC had analyzed the Development Plan and had added about 4,100 trips to South Columbia Street. The Jackson Circle Deck adds another 900 vehicles per day, he said, noting that this included about 90 vehicles at the peak hour. Mr. Alexiou concluded that the net impact of the proposed modification versus the Development Plan was a 3-4% increase in traffic on South Columbia Street due to the Jackson Circle Deck. Mayor Foy determined that there were 800 spaces in the Jackson Circle Deck, with a net increase of about 650. Some of that traffic would disperse via roads other than South Columbia Street, he said.
Council Member Wiggins pointed out that the new housing would be "Student Family Housing," not "Married Student Housing." She noted that many residents will be single parents.
Council Member Ward asked to have a better understanding of the scale of the residence buildings along Mason Farm Road relative to the existing neighborhood. He commented that the Cobb Deck would have a wonderful front and pedestrian-friendly court associated with it. But no information has been provided about the other side of that building, he said, adding that the University's sensitivity to that area has not been apparent. Council Member Ward stated that there were solutions to these problems that were not being articulated. The process has therefore been more antagonistic than it needs to be, he said.
Council Member Verkerk asked if the University would undertake an architectural inventory, as recommended in a letter from the NC Department of Cultural Resources. She also requested that the Town be involved in discussions with Renee Earley, who had sent a letter to the Historic District Commission (HDC) regarding the Department's assessment of how the chiller plant would affect that historic area. Council Member Verkerk did not want to approve anything, she said, without knowing the HDC's opinion on the proximity of the cemetery and chiller plant.
· Motion to recess Public Hearing to June 23, 2003.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO JUNE 23, 2003. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
· Referral to the Manager and Attorney.
MAYOR PRO TEM EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m.