SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2004, AT 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council members present were Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom, Dorothy Verkerk, and Jim Ward.
Mayor pro tem Edith Wiggins was absent, excused.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Fire Chief Dan Jones, Planning Director Roger Waldon, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
Item 1 - Ceremonies: None.
Item 2 - Public Hearings: None.
Item 3 - Petitions by Citizens and Announcements by Council Members
a. Petitions by citizens on items not on the agenda.
1. Sally Norton, President of Village West Homeowners Association, regarding a Request for Paving of Jay Street.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
2. David Fernández, Kovens Construction Company, regarding Request for Review of Interpretation of the Special Use Permit for 1162 Airport Road (formerly Growin’ Green Nursery).
Prospective tenant David Fernández, CEO of Cordell Earthworks, summarized the following points of his petition.
· Cordell Earthworks meets the requirements in the SUP calling for a landscape and nursery operation.
· Use of the property as a residence, as sited in the SUP, should not be considered a requirement.
· There is no clear basis to interpret the SUP, or the Town Council's original intent in 1998, as requiring the owner to reside on the property or be the owner/operator of the landscape nursery business.
Property owner Scott Kovens explained that he had purchased Growin' Green Nursery several years ago when its owner became incapacitated. In 2000, Carolina Waterscapes moved into the location and then out again, he explained, leaving the property vacant since 2003. Mr. Kovens stated that he had been having trouble keeping vagrants off the property since Carolina Waterscapes moved out. He wanted to return its use to a landscape nursery and make the property safe again, he said.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Council Member Strom asked that the staff report back to the Council quickly because it would serve the community well to expedite this petition and have that vacant property occupied again.
3. Town of Carrboro, re Request that Elected Official be Appointed to Serve on the Substandard Housing Task Force.
Mayor Foy suggested that this come back at the next Council meeting. Any Council member interested in serving on the task force should let him know so the Council can sort it out before the meeting, he said.
COUNCIL MEMBERS AGREED BY CONSENSUS TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY TO COME BACK AT THE FEBRUARY 23, 2004 MEETING.
4. Johnny Randall, re Placing a Conservation Easement on the 32 acres of Town-owned land adjacent to Morgan Creek.
Johnny Randall, speaking on behalf of the Morgan Creek Valley Alliance Steering Committee and the Botanical Garden Foundation, Inc., asked Council members to consider placing a conservation easement along Morgan Creek. This would protect in perpetuity an important block of forested open space for wildlife and human recreation, he said. Mr. Randall noted that creek water quality is greatly enhanced by being adjacent to undeveloped land.
Mr. Randall explained that the easement would allow trail construction and other similar structures, but would not allow large scale construction or tree clearing without written consent of the easement holder. Current Town Council members, as well as the groups that he represents, were particularly conscientious about protecting the environment, he pointed out. Mr. Randall stressed that a conservation easement would provide a safeguard against development regardless of changes in Council membership and philosophy. He listed various groups that might be easement holders, including the Triangle Land Conservancy, OWASA, Orange County, the State of North Carolina, and the Botanical Garden Foundation.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Announcements by Council Members
1. Council Ward Member Ward announced a Sustainability and Green Building Workshop on February 24, 2004, from noon to 5:00 p.m., at the United Church of Chapel Hill. He encouraged Council members, staff, and citizens to take advantage of this opportunity.
2. Council Member Greene welcomed her mother, Sarah Greene, a guest at tonight's Council meeting. Her mother, a journalist with the Gilmer Mirror, was visiting from Texas, she said.
3. Council Member Strom mentioned a January 30, 2004 article in the Raleigh News & Observer regarding the Durham County budget. The article had noted that receipts from Southpoint had been significantly lower than anticipated and that Durham County had "yet to see a big impact from Southpoint," he said. Council Member Strom wanted everyone on the Council to be aware of what was being reported in Durham about that huge retail project, he said, adding, "all that glitters is not gold."
Item 4 - Consent Agenda
Mayor Foy noted that the Council had received an email from Horace Williams Citizens Committee Chair Randy Kabrick asking them to pull item 4f from the Consent Agenda.
Council Member Ward said he would removed 4f, calling for a public hearing on the Horace Williams property.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ADOPT R-1 WITH 4F REMOVED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (2004-02-09/R-1)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following resolutions and ordinances as submitted by the Town Manager in regard to the following:
|
a. |
Nominations to Various Advisory Boards and Commissions (R-2). |
|
b. |
Notification of Board and Commission Term Vacancies (R-3). |
|
c. |
Streets Closure for the Meadowmont Bicycle Classic Road Race (R-4). |
|
d. |
Proposed Parking Restrictions on NC 54 Right-of-Way East of East Barbee Chapel Road (O-1). |
|
e. |
Rejection of Bid for Mini-Attack Fire Pumper (R-5). |
|
g. |
Recessing Public Hearing on Proposed Amendments to the Land Use Management Ordinance (R-7). |
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
A RESOLUTION NOMINATING APPLICANTS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2004-02-09/R-2)
WHEREAS, the applications for service on an advisory board or commission or other committees listed below have been received; and
WHEREAS, the applicants have been determined by the Town Clerk to be eligible to serve;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the following names are placed in nomination to serve on an advisory board or commission:
Human Services Advisory Board
Virginia Brown
Glenn Gerding
Million Solar Roofs Committee
Brian Coble
Paul Fendt
Thomas Henkel
Ralph Taylor
Thomas Wills
Laura Wilson
Edward Witkin
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
A RESOLUTION REGARDING THE PROCESS FOR CONSIDERING APPOINTMENTS TO TOWN ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2004-02-09/R-3)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following schedule for appointments to Town advisory boards and commissions:
May 10 Transportation Board
Planning Board
Technology Committee
May 24 Historic District Commission
Board of Adjustment
Library Board of Trustees
Chapel Hill Public Arts Committee
June 14 Community Design Commission
Greenways Commission
Parks and Recreation Commission
June 28 Orange Water and Sewer Authority Board of Directors
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board
Housing and Community Development Advisory Board
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
A RESOLUTION TEMPORARILY CLOSING PORTIONS OF MEADOWMONT LANE, SPRUNT STREET, WEAVER MINE ROAD, LITTLE BRANCH TRAIL, PARK RIDGE AVENUE, AND SIMERVILLE ROAD ON SUNDAY, APRIL 25, 2004. FOR THE MEADOWMONT BICYCLE CLASSIC ROAD RACE (2004-02-09/R-4)
WHEREAS, the Tri-Cyclist Bicycle Racing Club has requested the closing of portions of several streets in Meadowmont for The Meadowmont Bicycle Classic Race;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby authorizes the closing of Meadowmont Lane between Simerville Road and Sprunt Street; Sprunt Street between Meadowmont Lane and Weaver Mine Road; Weaver Mine Road between Sprunt Street and Little Branch Trail; Little Branch Trail between Weaver Mine Road and Park Ridge Avenue; Park Ridge Avenue between Little Branch Trail and Simerville Road; and Simerville Road between Park Ridge Avenue and Meadowmont Lane between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on Sunday, April 25, 2004.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council assigns authority to the Chief of Police to administratively close these streets for this event in future years.
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21 OF THE TOWN CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING ON-STREET PARKING (2004-02-09/O-1)
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill as follows:
Section 1. Section 21-27 of the Town Code of Ordinances, “No parking as to particular streets.” is hereby amended by adding the following in appropriate alphabetical order:
“Street Side From To
NC 54 South East Barbee A Point 360 feet east of
Chapel Road East Barbee Chapel Road”
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective March 1, 2004.
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
A RESOLUTION REJECTING ALL BIDS FOR A MINI-ATTACK PUMPER (2004-02-09/R-5)
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has solicited formal bids by legal notice in The Chapel Hill News on December 21, 2003, in accordance with General Statute 143-129 for a mini-attack pumper; and
WHEREAS, the following single bid was received and opened on January 14, 2004:
BASE BID
Company: Total Bid:
Elite Power Products $157,072.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill rejects all bids and directs rebid.
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
A RESOLUTION RECESSING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE (2004-02-09/R-7))
WHEREAS, the Town Council opened a Public Hearing on January 21, 2004 to consider proposed changes to Chapel Hill’s Land Use Management Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the Council, at the end of discussion on January 21, recessed the Hearing, to be reconvened on February 9, 2004; and
WHEREAS, additional time is needed to perform staff work related to the issues under consideration;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council recesses this Public Hearing, to be reconvened at 7:00 pm on February 23, 2004, in the Town Hall Council Chamber.
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
Item 5 - Information Items
a. Second Quarterly Report 2003-2004.
b. Quarterly Report on Crime Rates in Chapel Hill and Northside.
c. Quarterly Report on Panhandling.
d. Quarterly Report on Status of Capital Projects.
e. Quarterly Report from Orange Community Housing and Land Trust.
f. Response to Council Request for Information regarding Creekside Subdivision.
g. Potential Legislative Initiatives.
With regard to 5c, Quarterly Report on Panhandling, Council Member Kleinschmidt asked the staff for a breakdown of panhandling citations. He wanted to know if there was aggression related to the citations, and Town Manager Cal Horton agreed to bring back that information.
Council Members agreed to remove 5g, Potential Legislative Initiatives, for discussion later in the meeting.
COUNCIL MEMBERS ACCEPTED THE INFORMATION REPORTS BY CONSENSUS, WITH 5G REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION.
Item 6 - Concept Plan: Proposed Village Plaza Theatre
Town Planning Director Roger Waldon explained that this Concept Plan proposed to modify a previously approved Special Use Permit (SUP) for the Village Plaza Center renovation for the limited purpose of removing the requirement to improve Driveway D as indicated in Stipulation #4 of the approved SUP. The original SUP, issued on January 27, 2003, had authorized demolition of the Plaza Theater, he explained, and the applicant, Eastern Federal Corp., had sought approvals to begin construction. Mr. Waldon pointed out, however, that Stipulation #4 required the applicant to widen Driveway D and that doing so would require approval of the adjacent property owner. The applicant had not been able to get an agreement for cooperative measures with the adjacent property owner, he said, so they were asking that Stipulation #4 be deleted as a condition of approval.
Mr. Waldon noted that no mention of Driveway D had been made at the time of approval. He said that the Manager had recommended modifying the SUP, asking for expedited processing, and requesting that the scope of that hearing be limited to Stipulation #4. The Council had granted expedited processing last week. Mr. Waldon explained. He said that presentation of a Concept Plan tonight was the first step toward modifying the SUP. Since the Council had given expedited processing and narrowed the scope to one issue, the staff could bring the item back quickly, probably by March 15, 2004, Mr. Waldon said.
Mayor Foy pointed out that the item still must go through the advisory committee process.
The applicant's attorney, Wayne Hadler, of Beemer, Savery, Hadler & Jones, stated that Eastern Federal had been surprised to discover that Stipulation #4, regarding Driveway D, had remained in the SUP. He read a letter in which the Town Manager stated that Stipulation #4 had been included due to an error in the Town's process. Neither the applicant nor the staff had realized that Stipulation #4 would require the applicant to obtain the cooperation of an adjoining property owner who had made it clear that such cooperation would not occur, Mr. Horton had written.
Mr. Hadler interpreted the Manager's letter as saying that the theater project met the requirements of the ordinance without the improvements to Driveway D. Mr. Hadler noted that a 2001 study by RSH had suggested that Driveway D, while recommended, was not essential. And he pointed out that the final proposed development was substantially less than what RSH had considered. The RSH report had proposed that drivers would use access driveways during peak times, Mr. Hadler said. He noted that there would be on-site monitors to direct traffic to park on the applicant's site. Mr. Hadler argued that to bring this issue forward now in a contentious manner was not fair to the applicant and not in the Town's interest.
Attorney Michael Ortiz, representing Ginn & Company, said that Mr. Ginn had always been willing to sit down and negotiate a reasonable cross-access agreement between the parties. But a golden opportunity had been missed last year just before the Council's vote on this matter, he said, when the Council dropped the agreement at the applicant's request. Mr. Ortiz argued that simply deleting the requirement to improve Driveway D without addressing access and circulation would not solve anything and would make a bad situation worse. And simply granting a construction easement to fix one driveway would ignore the problems facing all of the neighboring property owners, he said. Mr. Ortiz referred to existing parking problems of neighboring property owners and argued that simply deleting Stipulation #4 would allow the theater to continue ignoring those concerns.
PBS & J Senior Traffic Engineer Todd Brooks, representing Ginn & Company, disputed whether driveway D was "nonessential" as Mr. Hadler had claimed. He said that intersections C and D would operate at Level of Service D and that the Town's consultant had assigned more than three times as much traffic approaching and departing the site to and from Franklin Street or to the north to Driveway D. Mr. Brooks asked why Driveway D carries so much traffic if it is not essential. He argued that eliminating Driveway D, or making it one way, would clog the driveway, block access to parking spaces, and force traffic into the parking lots.
In response to a question from Council Member Harrison, Mr. Brooks explained that it had been recommended that 4-6 p.m. on Friday and 11 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Saturday be added to the traffic study. But, he said, he had used Monday through Thursday peak hour figures from the Town in his analysis in order to show what would happen if Driveway D were not approved. Mr. Brooks stated that Mr. Ginn had retained his firm's services to study all elements of the site. No scenario exists that considers Driveway D not being improved, he said, adding that his firm was prepared to find a solution that would benefit all parties and provide adequate circulation and parking for both sites.
George Jones, a team leader at Whole Foods Market, described how he'd had to cope with traffic issues in that location. He had no faith that Eastern Federal would abide by its agreements because of his experiences with them not doing so in the past, he said.
Council Member Kleinschmidt asked Mr. Jones to clarify his remarks. Mr. Jones explained that an agreement by which for 30 Whole Foods employees had been allowed to park on Mark Properties had recently been cancelled. Mr. Jones repeated his view that traffic issues pose a significant threat to Whole Foods and that not paying attention to issues such as Driveway D could force Whole Foods to relocate.
Mayor Foy asked Mr. Jones what the 30 employee parking spaces on Mark Properties had to do with this project. Mr. Jones replied that it had been part of an overall arrangement that had been severed.
Council Member Greene expressed confusion about whether there was a cross-access agreement between Mark Properties and Eastern Federal Corp. Mr. Jones said that he thought there was a subordinate agreement.
Mayor Foy suggested getting an answer to that from someone else later in the meeting.
Chris Shaw, speaking on behalf of Crowell Little, owner of Gateway Plaza, attempted to clarify the issue about Whole Foods employees' parking spaces. Mr. Ginn had been renting 30 spaces from Mark Properties since 1995, he said, and later, the State Employees Credit Union began renting spaces in front of the movie theater. Both of those businesses had been concerned about losing those spaces, he said, and they eventually were told that the spaces would not be available to them. Mr. Shaw commented that it seemed odd to sever that arrangement now, since there was no construction going on.
Mr. Shaw explained that Mr. Little was concerned about Driveway D, which runs through his property. The Town had required Mr. Little to obtain a cross-access agreement with Mr. Ginn when Mr. Little acquired the Lowes property, he said. Mr. Shaw noted that there were several driveways between the two properties and pointed out that the Town had required cross-access easements to facilitate traffic flow. It took about a year to work that out but everything had been working well since, Mr. Shaw said. He explained that Mr. Little was concerned that not improving Driveway D would lead to congestion for his patrons and tenants when people are going in and out of the movie theater.
Jim Groot, of Red Hot and Blue Restaurant, recommended that the Town look at "real life experience." A 1,600-seat theater with only 109 parking spaces will only be profitable if patrons park everywhere else, he said. Mr. Groot asked why Mr. Gurlitz had drawn Driveway D to begin with if it was not needed. He said that Eastern Federal had been unwise to demolish the building before the plans had been approved plans and a building permit had been issued.
Mayor Foy noted that tonight's Concept Plan review was an opportunity to give guidance to the applicant. The Council would not make any recommendations at this time, he said.
Council Member Kleinschmidt attempted to clarify what had happened between the parities a year ago. He recalled that the original proposal had anticipated a cross-access agreement for parking. Both sides had met outside Council chambers and had reached an arrangement that seemed to work, he said. But then, when everyone came back in, the agreement had fallen apart and the Council never really knew why. Council Member Kleinschmidt stated that Ginn & Co. seemed to be holding out for a cross-easement. But they had refused to agree to one, he pointed out, and he requested that someone from Ginn & Company explain that discrepancy.
Mayor Foy pointed out that the Council had a letter from Ginn & Company "that goes through some rendition of the Ginn position on what happened and why." Mr. Ortiz stated that Mr. Wilson, of Eastern Federal, and Mr. Ginn had met on January 13, 2003, for the purpose of trying to hammer out a cross-access agreement. And one was hammered out, he said, but it was a free flowing cross-access agreement that would not allow Ginn & Company to put up barriers if the overflow parking became unbearable.
Mayor Foy noted that the Council would have plenty of opportunity to discuss this in greater detail when it came back for a decision in March. But they need to give some guidance to the applicant on how to proceed over the next few weeks, he said. Mayor Foy noted that the process, when started, had been based on cooperation among the three property owners. That was why the Council had initially given expedited review to the whole application, he pointed out. Mayor Foy characterized it as "troubling" that such cooperation had never come to fruition but the SUP had been granted. He did not necessarily agree that this had been an error, he said, noting that the Council had balanced a lot of issues when making its decision. Mayor Foy said that he found it a little disturbing to be asked to change the SUP now.
Mayor Foy stated that when the Town deleted the cross-access agreement the Manager had also assured them that a cross-access easement was still viable. Whether that is the case or not, he said, the Council had based their approval on an assumption that it was the case. Mayor Foy stressed that some agreement had to be in place between the property owners. "I think you have to do that," he said, adding that the Council did not have to get into the details of figuring that out. But somebody does before it comes back to the Council, said Mayor Foy.
Mr. Horton commented that the staff had never stated that there was a cross easement. But they had said that the SUP for the area showed an unimpeded connection between the two properties, he said.
Council Member Strom asked to hear from Eastern Federal on how they were addressing the concerns raised by citizens, adjacent businesses, and Council members. Eastern Federal's Architect Richard Gurlitz replied that there had been many opportunities for cross-access agreements and sincere negotiations between Ginn & Company and Eastern Federal. But at some point in the negotiations, very close to the Council approval on January 27, 2003, those negotiations fell apart, he said. Mr. Gurlitz stated that Mr. Ginn had implied that he did not have the power to go into such an agreement with Eastern Federal without violating his lease with Whole Foods. Mr. Gurlitz said that he believed Mr. Ginn had been in favor of the agreement but that his hands were tied.
The second issue, according to Mr. Gurlitz, was that Mr. Ginn had requested the following five points for the agreement: completely drop phase two; require a cross-easement agreement between Ginn & Co and Eastern Federal; move the box office away from Eastern Federal property and design the drive lane to drop traffic off at a different location; further reduce the number of movie screens to nine or add a second floor parking deck to help accommodate 11 screens; and, provide security as needed to direct traffic away from Ginn property on weekends and holidays.
Mr. Gurlitz said that Eastern Federal had met four of those five stipulations. That was when negotiations had broken down, he explained, and Eastern Federal had come back to the Council and asked for a vote on the project with the understanding that there were no cross-access easements.
Mayor Foy pointed out that Council Member Strom had asked a specific question about how traffic flow would be affected. Mr. Gurlitz replied that the Town had commissioned a traffic survey with a Charlotte firm with which the Town does business. He explained that the traffic consultant had considered that Driveways D and Driveway C, which is on Eastern Federal property, would take all of the traffic. The consultant had ignored Driveways A and B, which are on Mark Properties, he said.
Mayor Foy asked why entrances A and B had not been included in the study. Mr. Gurlitz replied that the traffic consultant and the Town Engineering Department had made that decision and that Eastern Federal had not been involved.
Council Member Strom ascertained that the consultant had been working with a 1,784-seat scenario. In the consultants "no build" 1,600-seat scenario, Mr. Gurlitz explained, service at intersection D would be Level C at the evening peak and Level B at the Saturday peak. The level C would then revert to level D, with three lanes and not considering driveways A and B, he said.
Council Member Kleinschmidt questioned an earlier description of Saturday peak as being from 11:00 a. m. to 1:00 p.m. Mr. Gurlitz agreed that this was not a peak time for a theater.
Council Member Harrison commented that two additional time periods had recently been added and that no one seemed to know if the original consultant had used those. Mr. Gurlitz suggested asking the consultant about that.
With regard to the expansion scenario, which included a 12,000 square foot restaurant, Mr. Gurlitz quoted the consultant as reporting that the site would generate an estimated 473 vehicles per hour at it's busiest on Saturday evening. If the theater were redeveloped alone, then the site would generate 495 daily trips of which there would be seven fewer morning peak hour trips, the consultant had written, said Mr. Gurlitz.
Council Member Verkerk asked if both parties would agree to mediation. Mr. Gurlitz replied that Eastern Federal would agree as long as it was time-limited. He pointed out that it had taken a year to negotiate the agreement between Ginn & Company and Crowell Little. "That's a long time to have a fenced-in property," Mr. Gurlitz said.
Mayor Foy remarked that he had been in favor of the project, but that this problem needed to be resolved regardless of the date set for resolution.
Council Member Ward explained that he had not supported the project because he had believed it would jeopardize the success of a number of local businesses. Driveway D is a "lynchpin" to moving traffic in and out of that area, he said. Council Member Ward concluded that he could not support the project unless he is convinced that it will not harm existing businesses even though he would like that plot of land to be more productive than it is now or than it was before it was redesigned.
Council Member Ward asked what would happen to the parking spaces adjacent to Red Hot and Blue where the theater's property runs right down the middle of them. He also asked if Mr. Hadler's statement that the additional approved parking was consistent with the increase in theater seats and general Town policy was accurate. Mr. Waldon agreed to bring back answers to those questions.
With regard to the agreement between the Eastern Federal and Mark Properties, Mr. Gurlitz stated that an easement grants access between the two properties and allows Mark Properties to prevent its neighbor from parking there if the lot gets too full. But he understood that the agreement gets superceded by the SUP, which puts both parcels together, Mr. Gurlitz said. Mayor Foy asked that this be clarified when the item comes back.
Mayor Foy pointed out that Eastern Federal was willing to enter into mediation and ascertained that Mr. Ortiz would discuss that suggestion with Mr. Ginn and convey his response to the Manager. Mayor Foy asked Mr. Horton if the Town could use its offices to ensure that the mediation happened in a timely manner. Mr. Horton agreed, but pointed out that success would depend on the good faith of the two parties.
Mr. Groot told Council members that he had been one of those who had signed a petition asking the Town to expedite this at the start of the project. He had wanted Eastern Federal to have a fast and fair hearing, he said, noting that restaurant operators love movie theaters. But, Mr. Groot said, he was feeling troubled by one after another in a series of "not exactly accurate things," such as counting parking many different times and not requiring a cross easement when one had been required of Crowell Little. This was not a simple movie theater, he pointed out, but a new national concept of multiple screens. That changes how many people come, when they come, how they get in, and how they get out, said Mr. Groot. "If there are no fences, then the cows are going to be everywhere," he remarked, adding that mediation is great if it's done in good faith. But it's not useful if it means "let me do this thing and I'll use you land," said Mr. Groot.
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-8, REFERRING COMMENTS AND OTHER APPLICABLE MATERIAL TO THE APPLICANT AND THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION TRANSMITTING COUNCIL COMMENTS ON A CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE VILLAGE PLAZA MOVIE THEATRE (2004-02-09/R-8)
WHEREAS, a Concept Plan has been submitted for review by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, for the Village Plaza Movie Theatre; and
WHEREAS, the Council has heard presentations from the applicant, and citizens; and
WHEREAS, the Council has discussed the proposal, with Council members offering reactions and suggestions;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council transmits comments to the applicant regarding this proposal, as expressed by Council members during discussion on February 9, 2004, and reflected in minutes of that meeting.
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
Item 7 - Students Seats on Advisory Boards and Commissions
(Mayor pro tem Wiggins, Council Members Kleinschmidt and Ward)
Council Member Kleinschmidt said that the Council Committee had considered the petition by UNC Student Body Secretary Francis Ferris, asking that students be included on Town advisory boards and commissions. Mayor pro tem Wiggins, Council Member Ward and he had looked at this very broadly, he said, and had arrived at a recommendation that complies with the interests of the petitioner and the Town Council.
Council Member Kleinschmidt reported that the Committee had suggested creating a committee to find ways to increase high school and college student participation. The committee would also assess the quality of existing opportunities, including the liaison position, and look at Ms. Ferris's suggestion that students sit on advisory boards and commissions, he said. Council Member Kleinschmidt asked Council members to adopt R-9 and create a committee with that charge. He also asked that the item be moved along fairly quickly so that it would include the students who had initiated this.
Council Member Ward remarked that the Committee wanted to institutionalize this so that there would be clear ways to reach out to high school and college students rather than having to depend on student interest at various times.
William Hartye, chair of the Town Relations Committee of UNC Student Government, expressed support for the recommendation and agreed that the main objectives outlined were in keeping with the students' proposal. The recommended committee would help them advance toward the goals of increased student participation, he said. Mr. Hartye thanked the Council Committee for their time and effort and said that they looked forward to working with Council Members Ward and Kleinschmidt in the coming months.
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ADOPT R-9. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION SETTING THE CHARGE AND COMPOSITION OF A COMMITTEE TO STUDY THE POSSIBLE CREATION OF STUDENT SEATS ON TOWN ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2004-02-09/R-9)
WHEREAS, the Council Committee to Develop a Charge and Composition of a Committee to Study the Possible Creation of Student Seats on Town Advisory Boards and Commissions met on January 21, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the Council accepts the recommendations of the Council Committee regarding the charge and composition of this committee as follows:
Charge:
Committee composition:
1 UNC Student Activities Director (or a Division of Student Affairs Designee)
2 Council members
2/3 Current members of Town standing boards and commissions
2 Undergraduate students
2 Graduate students
2 Student body president (or his/her designee) from each of the Town’s two high schools
2 Community Service Coordinator from each of the Town’s two high schools
14 Possible members
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council accepts the recommendations of the Council Committee and forms a Committee to Study the Possible Creation of Student Seats on Town Advisory Boards and Commissions, with the charge and composition as listed above, and instructs the Town Clerk to begin recruitment.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council Members Kleinschmidt and Ward will serve as the Council’s representatives to the Committee, and that the Council requests that UNC Student Government submit the names of appropriate members to fill the undergraduate and graduate seats on the Committee.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council instructs the Committee to report back to the Council with recommendations no later than April 14, 2004.
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
Item 8 - Appointments:
a. Human Services Advisory Board. The Council appointed Virginia Brown.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
|
Human Services Advisory Board |
Foy |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Verkerk |
Ward |
Wiggins |
TOTAL |
||
|
Virginia Brown |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
A |
8 |
||
|
Glenn Gerding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||||||||||||
A = Absent, Excused.
b. Million Solar Roofs Committee. The Council appointed Brian Coble, Paul Fendt, Thomas Henkel, Ralph Taylor, Thomas Wills, Laura Wilson, and Edward Witkin.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
|
Million Solar Roofs Committee |
Foy |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Verkerk |
Ward |
Wiggins |
TOTAL |
||
|
Brian Coble |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
A |
8 |
||
|
Paul Fendt |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
B |
8 |
||
|
Thomas Henkel |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
S |
8 |
||
|
Ralph Taylor |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
E |
8 |
||
|
Thomas Wills |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
N |
8 |
||
|
Laura Wilson |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
T |
8 |
||
|
Edward Witkin |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
8 |
||
|
||||||||||||
A = Absent, Excused.
Item 9 - Petitions
a. By the Mayor and Council Members.
Council Member Strom requested an update at the Council's next business meeting on the EZ Rider Program.
Council Member Greene agreed, adding that she'd had calls from constituents asking how that program was working.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ASK THE STAFF FOR AN UPDATE AT THE NEXT COUNCIL BUSINESS MEETING ON THE EZ RIDER PROGRAM. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Council Member Greene asked for a staff update on when there would be a response to priorities the Council set at its planning retreat. Mr. Horton replied that it was scheduled for the next regular business meeting. Council Member Greene noted that the Council had deferred a discussion of homelessness and asked how that could be placed on the agenda for discussion. Mayor Foy suggested that he work with her on that and bring a recommendation to the Council on how to proceed and in what format.
Council Member Kleinschmidt requested that the format include a discussion of panhandling, Mayor Foy and Council Member Greene agreed that panhandling was part of what they would consider.
Item 10 - Reserved for Discussion of Consent Agenda Items
Item 4f - Calling a Public Forum on Principles, Goals and Strategies for the Development of the Horace Williams Property (Carolina North)
Mayor Foy explained that the Council had decided to incorporate a public forum on OI-4 into the public forum on goals and strategies for the Horace Williams property. But Horace Williams Citizens Committee Chair Randy Kabrick had asked Council members to address the two separately, he said.
Council Member Ward agreed that the two discussions ought to be separated, noting that there was some division among Horace Williams Committee members about zoning. These are specific concerns about how OI-4 is working now and they are totally unrelated to Carolina North, he said.
Mayor Foy ascertained that Council Member Ward was not objecting to holding the two hearings on the same evening, however, and to letting people comment on both items at the same time if they wish.
Council Member Kleinschmidt explained that he had originally raised the discussion of OI-4 because he wanted the Council to move on Council Member Greene's petition. But he did not care whether it was combined with the Citizens Committee's hearing or not, he said.
Council Member Hill recommended that the Council reconsider and clarify its charge to the Horace Williams Citizens Committee, whom he said were casting about for what to do next and were mentioning new agendas. Mayor Foy replied that the Council might have a better idea of what they want that Committee to do after the hearing.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO ADOPT R-6. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A PUBLIC FORUM ON Principles, Goals and Strategies FOR THE HORACE WILLIAMS PROPERTY (CAROLINA NORTH) AND ON OFFICE INSTITUTIONAL-4 Zoning regulations (2004-02-09/R-6)
WHEREAS, the Council established the Horace Williams Citizens Committee to develop a set of Principles to guide the Council’s deliberations with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill regarding the development of the Horace Williams property (Carolina North); and
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2004. the Horace Williams Citizens Committee presented to the Council its revised Recommended Principles, Goals and Strategies for Guiding the Development of the Horace Williams Property (Carolina North) report; and
WHEREAS, on June 23, 2003. the Council received a petition to consider potential changes to the timetable for reviewing projects proposed under Office Institutional-4 zoning;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council schedules a public forum for Monday, March 1, 2004. to receive comment on the Recommended Principles, Goals and Strategies for Guiding the Development of the Horace Williams Property (Carolina North) report, and on the Office Institutional-4 zoning regulations.
This the 9th day of February, 2004.
Item 5g - Potential Legislative Initiatives
Mayor Foy said that the seven items on the agenda did not necessarily carry equal weight, and suggested that the Council prioritize them before meeting with the legislators.
Council Member Harrison noted the timeliness of the regional transportation and funding item. Mayor Foy explained that this item addressed whether the Town would ever be able to afford an extension of public transportation from Duke or Research Triangle Park. The legislative delegation needed to know the Town's view of that, he said, because they might hear other views that conflict with the Council's thoughts about funding for its transit system. Mayor Foy pointed out that Orange, Durham and Wake Counties had varying interests and that a regional source of funding had not become available due to political reasons. If Orange County wants the project then it needs the authority to collect enough revenue to fund its transportation issues, said Mayor Foy.
Council Member Greene asked if priorities could also be added to the list in the future. She mentioned the need for flexibility with regard to changing the engineering at intersections. Mr. Horton explained that the Council would meet with the legislative delegation on February 20, 2004. The Council would then hear from the public again on March 17th and the final legislative bill drafting date will be May 19, 2004, he said. Council members would need to reach a conclusion no later than mid-May, Mr. Horton explained.
Mr. Horton predicted that other issues might also come up, such as one that Fire Chief Dan Jones had recently raised which would significantly increase State funding for fire protection at the University. This would not require an amendment of law, Mr. Horton explained, but it would be a request that the Council might consider putting forward to the legislature.
Mayor Foy pointed out this would be a short session of the General Assembly. They have rules about which bills they will and will not consider, he said.
Council Member Ward wondered if it would be productive to contact other towns within the 16-campus system regarding issues of university fire protection.
Mayor Foy recommended asking the legislative delegation for guidance on that.
Council Member Strom suggested talking with legislators about local control of local revenues. It was important for the Town to be able to ask for information and make their point of view clear on this issue, he said.
Mayor Foy pointed out that possible sources of revenue for transportation include: increasing the vehicle registration, increasing the tax on gasoline, the real estate transfer tax, changing the rates for tags and registration, and the local option sales tax.
The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.