SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
MONDAY, MAY 10, 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, Jim Ward and Edith Wiggins.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Town Information Officer Catherine Lazorko, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, Parks and Recreation Director Kathryn Spatz, Senior Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt, Interim Public Works Director Bill Terry, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Engineering Director George Small, Principal Planner Gene Poveromo, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
Item 1 - Ceremony: Recognition of Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention
Mayor Foy introduced Linda Riggsbee, president of the Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention Coalition of North Carolina. Ms. Riggsbee stated that the 20 year-old Coalition, the oldest statewide organization of its kind in America, was participating this year with four other states in a disease control project to provide science-based approaches to pregnancy prevention for high-risk girls. One of those approaches, she said, was Teens Climb High at the Chapel Hill Women's Center, a teen-based program that had recently been honored for its work in preventing teen pregnancy.
Ms. Riggsbee told Council members that North Carolina had the highest birth rate among Hispanic teens in America and that the Coalition intended to do something about that. She noted that many Hispanic women were under the impression that having a baby in the US would give them citizenship. The only one who is legal, in that case, is the baby, she pointed out. Ms. Riggsbee noted that an average of 51 teens become pregnant in North Carolina each day, but, she pointed out that this was a decline from 74 each day 17 years ago. She stated that Orange County had consistently had one of the lowest teen pregnancy rates in the State due to its services and health care. Ms. Riggsbee cautioned that even though North Carolina's teen pregnancy rate is on a decline, it is still one of the highest in the nation.
Item 2 - Public Hearings: None
Item 3 - Petitions by Citizens and Announcements by Council Members
3a. Petitions by citizens on items not on the agenda.
3a(1). W. H. Knotts, Knotts Funeral Home, re Request to Remove the Parking Meters in Front of the Knotts Funeral Home
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3a(2). Bill Bracey on behalf of the Greenways Commission re Recommended Name Change for the Rail Trail.
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 (9-0).
3a(3). Pam Hemminger, on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Commission, re Recommendation to Officially Name the Land Currently Referred to as Southern Community Park.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE NAMING COMMITTEE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3a(4). Pam Hemminger, on behalf of the Parks and Recreation Commission, re Recommendation to Officially Name the Parkland Where the Carolina Sport Art Gymnastics Building is Located.
Mayor pro tem Wiggins confirmed with Ms. Hemminger that the Commission was not necessarily limiting the process to the names on their proposed list.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE NAMING COMMITTEE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3a(5). Jed Dube, on behalf of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, re Bicyclist Education Classes.
Nicholas Lurie explained that these classes would teach people how to ride bicycles in a way that would allow them to feel more comfortable on the road with less fear of being struck by cars. This would be done in addition to the engineering work that will be supported by the bond, he said.
Council Member Harrison suggested to the Town Manager that there might be some non-Town funding sources for this that had not yet been tapped. He had seen more odd and unpredictable actions by pedestrians and drivers during ten minutes that morning than he had seen in the previous week, Council Member Harrison said.
Council Member Ward, the liaison to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, said that this idea had been well received at a recent Board meeting. Local bicycle business owners and certified instructors were eager to be involved, he said. Council Member Ward noted that those who had attended the Board meeting had identified program promotion and Parks and Recreation Department participation as critical elements.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3a(6). Dan Lehman, on behalf of Holy Trinity Lutheran Church, re Request for Expedited Review of a Special Use Permit Application for 220 Rosemary Street.
Mr. Lehman, a Church member and chairman of its Master Planning and Construction Taskforce, asked Council members to consider a request for expedited review of a SUP for 227 Rosemary Street. That would allow the Church to remove a structure that is on that site and get started with construction, he said.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3a(7). Eric Chupp, for Kovens Construction Company, re Request for Formation of a Mayor’s Committee to Provide Guidance in the Planning and Design of land in the Urban Services Boundary.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO MAYOR FOY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3a(8). Missy Julian Fox, on behalf of the Historical Society, re Plaques in the Downtown District.
Ms. Fox, president of the Chapel Hill Historical Society, told Council members about a project to design historical markers that would reflect the community, its heritage, and its ideals. Phase one of that project had concentrated on the 100 block of Franklin Street and was now ready to implement, she said. Ms. Fox showed Council members a plaque, designed by Hy Catchetorian and stated that there was none other like it in the world. She explained that this had been done in partnership with the Historical Society, the Preservation Society, and individual property and business owners on Franklin Street.
3a(9). Ruffin Slater, for WCOM Community Radio, re request for an amendment to the Policy on Telecommunications Towers.
Mr. Slater explained that WCOM Community Radio was at the point of bringing a new public radio station to Chapel Hill and Carrboro. They have an FCC license to broadcast it, he said, and also have a grant from the federal government to buy equipment, they have a number of talented and interested volunteer programmers, and they have a studio location. But, the FCC had recently denied permission for them to move their broadcasting site to the Culbreth School, Mr. Slater said. He explained that the station had planned to mount their antenna on one of the light poles at the ball field, which is in keeping with the Town's policy on telecommunication facilities.
Mr. Slater said that the FCC would approve moving the antenna to the Dogwood Acres area, but there was no facility there to piggyback onto. He requested that the Council ask the staff to try and create some flexibility and recognition that low power radio is a new technology that did not exist in 1999 when the policy was passed. Mr. Slater explained that low power radio has a short range of approximately five miles, so the facilities need to be located within the community as opposed to further out of town where a full power station could be located. He also pointed out that these facilities are a much smaller scale than full-power radio TV or cell facilities. Mr. Slater said the antenna could be mounted on a very lightweight pole, adding that WCOM had a potential site on Smith Level Road.
Council Member Harrison ascertained that Mr. Slater had been working with the Planning staff for about three months on this, but this was a poor time of year for the Manager to address it quickly. Mr. Slater apologized for bringing the issue before the Town so late in the year. He pointed out, however, that it would be a shame to let a valuable community asset slip through the cracks since it might be a number of years before a license would be available again.
Council Member Strom asked for more specifics, and Mr. Slater explained that WCOM needed to be broadcasting by June 30, 2004. He said they must obtain permission from the FCC to move to a location before that date. Mr. Slater noted that the FCC process takes about three weeks from request to expedition. Council Member Strom replied that Mr. Slater needed an answer from the Council in three to four weeks.
Mayor Foy asked if WCOM could apply before knowing what the Council's position was. Mr. Slater replied that they did need a specific location. They could assume a course of action by the Council, he said, noting that it could work out if that course of action took place.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO COME BACK WITH A TIMEFRAME AND A PROCESS THAT WOULD ALLOW THE COUNCIL TO ACCOMMODATE WCOM'S REQUEST. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3b. Petitions by citizens on items on the agenda. None.
3c. Announcements by Council members. None.
Item 4 - Consent Agenda
With regard to 4g, Council Member Kleinschmidt thanked the Town Attorney for putting this together and noted that Chapel Hill would be the first town in North Carolina to pass a non-discrimination policy that includes gender identity and expression. He described that as an extraordinary achievement and expressed hope that other municipalities, and perhaps the State, would do likewise.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO ADOPT R-1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (2004-05-10/R-1)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following resolutions and ordinances as submitted by the Town Manager in regard to the following:
|
a. |
Nominations to various advisory boards and commissions (R-2). |
|
b. |
Extension of the Siena Hotel’s Lease of Town-Owned Parking Spaces (R-3). |
|
c. |
Communications with the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (R-4). |
|
d. |
Designation of Counsel for Sale of General Obligation Bonds (R-5). |
|
e. |
Establishment of a Chapel Hill Active Living by Design Partnership Advisory Committee (R-6). |
|
f. |
Response to Request for a New Median Opening on Meadowmont Lane (R-7). |
|
g. |
Response to Petition on Non-Discrimination Policy (R-8, O-1). |
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
A RESOLUTION NOMINATING APPLICANTS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS (2004-05-10/R-2)
WHEREAS, the applications for service on an advisory board or commission or other committees listed below have been received; and
WHEREAS, the applicants have been determined by the Town Clerk to be eligible to serve.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the following names are placed in nomination to serve on an advisory board or commission:
Chapel Hill Public Arts Commission
Roland Giduz
Jennifer Horney
Matthew Scheer
Wilhelmina Steen
Elizabeth Taylor
Historic District Commission
Roland Giduz
Stephen Rich
Library Board of Trustees
William Holton
Wilhelmina Steen
Planning Board
Bernard Law
Richard Loeber
Stephen Manton
Richard Williams
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO EXTEND THE LEASE OF TOWN PARKING SPACES ON THE PRITCHARD PARK PROPERTY TO THE SIENA HOTEL (2004-05-10/R-3)
WHEREAS, on November 27, 2000, the Council authorized the Manager to lease parking spaces to the Siena Hotel; and
WHEREAS, on May 29, 2002, the Council reauthorized the lease of parking spaces to the Siena Hotel; and
WHEREAS, on April 14, 2004, the Council authorized the Manager to continue discussions with the management of the Siena Hotel concerning a public/private partnership proposal;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager execute an agreement for the lease of parking spaces on the Pritchard Park property to the Siena Hotel at the rate of $65 per parking space per month until April 1, 2005.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A REGULAR SYSTEM OF RECEIVING INFORMATION FROM THE ORANGE WATER AND SEWER AUTHORITY (2004-05-10/R-4)
WHEREAS, at the Council retreat on January 15, 2004, the Council discussed establishing a regular system of receiving information from the Orange Water and Sewer Authority; and
WHEREAS, in the Council Goals item number 26, adopted on March 22, 2004, the Council established a goal of requesting that the Orange Water and Sewer Authority provide the Council with a written quarterly report augmented by presentations as desired by the Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council requests that the Orange Water and Sewer Authority provide the Council with a written quarterly report augmented by presentations as desired by the Council.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING BOND COUNSEL FOR THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (2004-05-10/R-5)
WHEREAS, the law firm of Sanford Holshouser, LLP, has been recommended to the Council as a law firm possessing capabilities in each of the following areas:
(a) North Carolina municipal law, including in particular, the Local Government Finance Act;
(b) Municipal finance and municipal securities law;
(c) Corporate Finance and Corporate Securities Law; and
(d) Tax Law, including Section 103 and Sections 140 through 150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina:
Section 1. The law firm of Sanford Holshouser, LLP, is hereby designated to serve as bond counsel in connection with the issuance by the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina of the 2003 General Obligation bonds, or any series thereof, and in connection with the issuance by the Town of Chapel Hill, North Carolina of such additional issues of bonds as the Town Council shall deem appropriate.
Section 2. This resolution shall take effect upon its passage.
Section 3. A certified copy of this resolution shall be filed with the Local Government Commission.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has been awarded an Active Living by Design grant; and
WHEREAS, during the development of the grant application a Partnership Group was organized to assist the Town in the development of a program of projects and activities; and
WHEREAS, an expressed goal of the Active Living by Design grant is the establishment of a formal Partnership Advisory Committee;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council establishes an Active Living by Design Partnership Advisory Committee to provide guidance to the Town as it implements the Active Living by Design program.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the charge and composition of the Partnership Advisory Committee be established as follows:
A. Charge of the Partnership Advisory Committee:
Provide the Town Council with guidance in the development and implementation of the Town’s Active Living by Design grant and other activities related to encouraging greater physical activity among Town residents. Provide the Town Council with recommendations on implementing programs designed to improve physical activity within Chapel Hill.
B. Composition of the Partnership Advisory Committee:
o Meg Molloy, North Carolina Prevention Partners
o Libby Thomas, University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research
o Daniel Stafford, Be Active North Carolina
o Ellen Young, Orange County Department of Public Health
o Alice Pettitt, Orange County Cooperative Extension Service
o Virginia Knapp, Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce
o Casey Saussy, WCHL
o Mary Lin Truelove, Chapel Hill-Carrboro Public Schools
o Lisa Stuckey, Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board
o Representative, North Carolina Smart Growth
o Representative, North Carolina Department of Public Health
o Representative, University of North Carolina Wellness Center
o Representative, Chapel Hill YMCA
o Member, Chapel Hill Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
o Member, Chapel Hill Transportation Board
o Member, Chapel Hill Parks and Recreation Commission
o Citizens (4)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council expresses its intent to advertise for the citizen representatives and make appointments to the Active Living by Design Advisory Committee by September 13, 2004.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, Transportation Board and Parks and Recreation Commission designate a member to serve on the Active Living by Design Advisory Committee.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council appoints Council Member Verkerk to be liaison to the Committee.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A MEDIAN CUT FOR MEADOWMONT LANE IN CHAPEL HILL (2004-05-10/R-7)
WHEREAS, the Town Council has approved a Master Plan and Infrastructure Special Use Permit for the Meadowmont development in Chapel Hill; and
WHEREAS, both of those approvals indicated a configuration for Meadowmont Lane through the development as a public street, with a median shown as continuous except for specific breaks; and
WHEREAS, Meadowmont Lane was constructed and dedicated as a public Town street; and
WHEREAS, the developer of The Cedars, a component of the Meadowmont development, has requested permission to construct an additional break in the median to accommodate left turns out of the site at its northernmost driveway, as shown in the attached Figure 2; and
WHEREAS, the Town Manager has recommended that this additional median break would be reasonable and desirable.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council approves the request to add another median break to Meadowmont Lane as shown in Figure 1, with the understanding that the developer of The Cedars will assume all costs of design and construction for the change to the median.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE TOWN’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY AND GENDER EXPRESSION IN THE TOWN’S NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY (2004-05-10/R-8)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill wishes to reaffirm the policy of this community against discrimination and to recognize sexual orientation, gender expression and gender identity as factors which should not be used as bases for discrimination in the provision of any programs, functions, services or operations of the Town of Chapel Hill municipal government;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town’s Non-Discrimination Policy in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan is hereby revised to read as follows:
“The Town shall administer all functions
without discrimination because of race, creed, sex, national origin, age,
economic status, or affectional preference sexual orientation, gender
identity or gender expression.”
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL CODE OF ORDINANCES TO REVISE THE PROHIBITION AGAINST DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT TO INCLUDE SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER IDENTITY AND GENDER EXPRESSION (2004-05-10/O-1)
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill as follows:
Section 1. Section 14-28 of the Code of Ordinances of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby revised to read as follows:
“Sec. 14-28. Statement of policy.
The policy of the town
is to foster, maintain, and promote equal employment opportunity. The town
shall select employees on the basis of applicant's qualifications for the job
and award them, with respect to compensation and opportunity for training and advancement,
including upgrading and promotion, without regard to age, sex, race, color,
religion, nonjob-related disability, national origin, affectional preference
sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or marital
status.
Section 2. Section 14-29 of the Code of Ordinances of the Town of Chapel Hill is hereby revised to read as follows.
“Sec. 14-29. Implementation of policy.
All personnel responsible for recruiting
and employment will continue to review regularly the implementation of this
personnel policy and relevant practices to assure that equal employment
opportunity based on reasonable job-related job requirements is being actively
observed to the end that no employee or applicant for employment shall suffer
discrimination because of age, sex, race, color, religion, non-job-related
disability, national origin, affectional preference sexual
orientation, gender identity, gender expression, or marital status.”
Section 3. This Ordinance shall become effective upon enactment.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
Item 5 - Information Reports
Mayor Foy noted that citizens had signed up to speak on 5j (Airport Gardens Rehabilitation Contract, 5k (Request from Habitat for Humanity), and 5L (Traffic Issues on Cameron Avenue).
Council Member Greene pointed out that members of the Planning Board were present to speak on 5g (Comparison of Square Foot Thresholds re Stormwater Management and Tree Protection Controls for Single-Family/Two-Family Lots).
Council Member Hill removed 5b (Quarterly Report on Council Goals).
With regard to 5b, Council members agreed by consensus that Council Member Hill would convene the Committee on Campaign Financing. Council Member Hill stated that any Council member who wanted to serve should let him know.
Mayor Foy verified that Council Members Kleinschmidt, Wiggins and Harrison had been on a similar committee but it had never convened.
Council Member Hill commented that the charge would be broader than the earlier one. It would encompass different reporting methods and ways to make the entire process more inclusive, he said. Council Member Hill agreed to write up a proposed charge so that the Council could endorse it.
With regard to 5g, Council Member Greene, liaison to the Planning Board, asked Planning Board members who were present to comment on their position, since it conflicted with the staff's position.
Planning Board Member Ruby Sinreich explained that the Board had felt that combining the thresholds made too blunt an instrument. Also, there were many things that affect stormwater runoff that do not really apply to tree protection, she said. Ms. Sinreich explained that the Board thought stormwater management and tree protection should be uncoupled and the majority of Board members felt that 5,000 square feet (SF) was too high.
Mayor Foy asked Council members how they wanted to proceed. He noted that making a change would mean calling a public hearing to consider an amendment to the LUMO. He also pointed out that the Council would need to do more work on this issue before calling a public hearing. Mayor Foy agreed with the Planning Board's argument that 5,000 SF was too high, but that is not specific enough. He added that he did not know if uncoupling was practical or how it would be done. Mayor Foy remarked that getting an engineering report to look at the topography and so forth seemed like an unnecessary expense for a lot of people. A strict guideline probably would be enough if it was the right number, he said.
Council Member Strom requested that some discussion of reducing the cost of requirements be included when the Council addresses these issues. He agreed with Mayor Foy's suggestion to put it back on the Council's agenda for more discussion before asking the Planning Board to address it.
Mayor Foy proposed asking the Planning Board to look at it while simultaneously putting it on the Council's agenda. Council Member Strom agreed with that idea.
Council Member Ward suggested offering the Planning Board some staff resources, such as the Town's stormwater engineer, to provide input regarding impact on the staff, the cost of testing, and for help coming up with a number other than 5,000 square feet. Town Manager Cal Horton said that would be fine.
Ms. Sinreich stated that the Planning Board would be glad to look at it again but would need much more information before being able to make a specific recommendation. The information they had on the number of properties that had been affected at different levels did not tell them how much impact, she said. Ms. Sinreich stated that the Board really wanted to know if a 3,000 square foot disturbance was making a mess or not, so, any technical advice and analysis would be helpful.
Mayor Foy agreed, saying that whatever creative solutions the Planning Board could come up with would be helpful for the Council. He recommended that the Council refer this back to the Planning Board to work with staff to come up with recommendations and to then come back to the Council at a LUMO work session in the fall.
With regard to 5j, Housing Director Tina Vaughn stated that the information report before the Council summarized the actions and interactions that had lead to the Town having to re-bid renovation work at Airport Gardens. She explained that the staff had originally recommended the base bid and alternate 2 because, under State law, the Town cannot enter into a contract unless it has the total amount of money to cover that contract. Ms. Vaughn explained that the Town was re-bidding Airport Gardens renovations because Housing and Urban Development (HUD) had told the Town that the original instructions to bidders had not been clear. The staff had therefore rewritten the instructions, she said, and HUD had approved them. Ms. Vaughn explained that the Town still did not have enough money to cover all the work, so it was re-bidding the job without most of the site work. She said the Town only has 919,328 available for this contract.
Attorney Walter Ricks, representing Vincent C. Brown of Hairston Enterprise, pointed out that his client had been the original low bidder. They had protested because the contractor had been improperly chosen and also because there would be change orders related to the project, he said. Mr. Ricks stated that every contractor who bids considers the base bid to be the minimum that will be awarded. Since there had been no argument about the base bid, it should have been awarded to the lowest bidder, which was Hairston Enterprise, he said. Mr. Ricks argued that his client had pointed out a mistake that had improved the bidding process but his client was now being penalized for that.
Vincent Brown, owner of Hairston Enterprise, referred to a February 23, 2004, memo which stated that the Town expected to receive an additional $95,773, which would bring the total amount available for Airport Gardens to $1,015,101. Mr. Brown took issue with Ms. Vaughn's statement that there was only $919,328 available for this contract. He said that the February 23rd memo also stated that the Town expected to receive other allocations that could be used for Airport Gardens. Mr. Brown stated that the Council had intended to award the entire contract to a contractor whose bid had been $55,000 higher than his own. He displayed a letter of recommendation from the Mayor of Durham and told Council members that he was a more than capable contractor and the process had been unjust and had damaged his ability to compete on this contract. Mr. Brown asked Council members to do the right thing by awarding the contract to him, the low bidder, pointing out that he was a Section 3 minority contractor.
Mayor Foy commented that the staff and Town Attorney had put together a step-by-step retrospective on what happened with regard to this matter and that it included supporting documentation. He pointed out that HUD had strongly advised the Town to reject all bids on this project and to re-bid the procurement. The Council will have to take the Manager's recommendation in this regard, said Mayor Foy. He thanked Mr. Brown and Mr. Ricks for coming in and testifying on this matter.
With regard to 5k, Habitat for Humanity Director Susan Levy noted that the Manager had recommended that the Council take no action on Habitat's request for $60,000 from the Housing Trust Fund for pre-development costs for the Sunrise Road property. In light of the Manager's view that awarding this would jeopardize funds for the annual HOME Program match, Ms. Levy said that Habitat had cut its request in half, to $30,000. She noted that the Town's investment of those funds would result in a substantial increase in its stock of long-term affordable homes. Ms. Levy presented the Town Manager with a $10,500 check that she had received that day from a Habitat homeowner who wanted to pay off his second mortgage.
Ms. Levy said that Habitat would submit a concept plan to the Council in June. That plan will incorporate the 17 principles that the Town Council had adopted for this project, she said. Ms. Levy stated that Habitat would meet with the neighbors and give them an opportunity to see the plan before it is submitted to the Council. Habitat had invested close to $120,000 of their privately raised funds in the project, she said, and they were at a critical point where Council support would allow them to continue moving forward. Ms. Levy asked Council members to approve the reduced request for $30,000.
Sunrise Coalition Member Rob Nelson expressed support for the Manager's recommendation. He stated that the Coalition supports affordable housing and is willing to work with Habitat for Humanity on their Sunrise Road efforts. However, Mr. Nelson said, the Coalition remained concerned about the density and size of the development and questioned the process by which the Town would fund development costs of a Special Use Permit (SUP) and then sits as a quasi-judicial body to review that SUP.
Mayor Foy inquired about the recommended 2004-2005 expenditures listed on page 23 under "Analysis of the Housing Loan Trust Fund." Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt explained that this would include the HOME match, second mortgages, and grants to the Land Trust.
Council Member Strom remarked that the attachment had convinced him that the Council should meet Habitat's request for $30,000, since projections were that there would still be cash in the account at the end of 2005-06.
Council Member Harrison asked how much was needed for the HOME Program match. Ms. Berndt replied that the current amount of $68,177 was what the staff had used in the projection. It had been lower in previous years, but the match amount had been increasing because grant funding had been going up, Ms. Berndt said. Mr. Horton commented that the staff sees no other source of matching money for the HOME Program.
Mayor Foy summarized that the Town would essentially run out of money in that category in the next budget year. Mr. Horton replied that there could be another windfall, but agreed unless that were to happen, the Town would be out of that source.
Council Member Ward clarified that the Town would not have matching funds in 2006-07 unless there were more checks such as the one just received from Ms. Levy. And, if the Council does not approve Habitat's request, there will be $30,000 unless it is exhausted for some other purpose, he said.
Council Member Ward asked Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos about the possible conflict of interest that Mr. Nelson had mentioned. Mr. Karpinos explained that language in the performance agreement would make it clear that providing funds for assistance in predevelopment costs would not constitute a commitment on the Town's part with respect to its position on any future SUP procedure. The Council would be maintaining its quasi-judicial role and would base its decision on the evidence, he said. Mr. Karpinos pointed out that this would be similar to the awkward position the Council finds itself in when it is its own applicant.
Council Member Kleinschmidt remarked that if the beginning fund balance in 2006-07 was only projected at $57,871, then there would not be enough for the matching fund in that year anyway. Mr. Horton again said, with this $10,000 check, we now have enough. Council Member Kleinschmidt clarified that he had meant that the $30,000 for Habitat would make it more difficult. Mr. Horton agreed that the Council would be looking at him very hard to find that money.
Mayor Foy expressed support for the motion, acknowledging that it would mean having to come up with more money but pointing out that funding is a balancing acts anyway.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO ADOPT R-9 WITH, THE AMOUNT OF $30,000 INCLUDED IN THE BUDGET. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION BUDGETING $ 30,000 FROM THE HOUSING LOAN TRUST FUND TO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, ORANGE COUNTY, IN FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004 FOR PRE-DEVELOPMENT COSTS FOR THE SUNRISE ROAD PROJECT (2004-05-10/R-9)
WHEREAS, the Town has an ongoing interest in the development of affordable housing in Chapel Hill; and
WHEREAS, a goal in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan is to increase the availability of well-designed, affordable, safe, and sanitary housing for all citizens of Chapel Hill; and
WHEREAS, a strategy in the Comprehensive Plan to achieve this goal is to work with housing providers to aggressively develop affordable housing in Chapel Hill; and
WHEREAS, Habitat for Humanity has requested funds from the Housing Loan Trust Fund for pre-development costs for the Sunrise Road project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council budgets $30,000 from the Housing Loan Trust Fund to Habitat for Humanity, Orange County in fiscal year 2003-2004 for pre-development costs for the Sunrise Road project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Manager to execute a Performance Agreement with Habitat for use of funds for pre-development costs for the Sunrise Road project.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
With regard to item 5L, former Transportation Board Member Coalter Lathrop pointed out that the staff had recommended against re-striping Cameron Avenue in four reports. The staff had done this despite petitions, letters and emails from citizens supporting bike lanes on Cameron Avenue and despite the Bicycle and Pedestrian Board's and Transportation Board's endorsements of having bike lanes there, he said. Mr. Lathrop agreed with the staff's point that bicycle commuters might displace automobile parking, but said that it would not be hard for him to choose between those two if forced to do so. After quoting from the Town's Comprehensive Plan and its transportation goals, he asked Council members to take action and vote for Resolution A, Resolution B or Resolution C.
Transportation Board Chair Loren Hintz urged the Council to adopt Resolution B and to enact Ordinance B-1. Both boards had felt that on-street parking should be prohibited from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and that bike lanes should be striped at seven feet, he said. Mr. Hintz noted that this would still allow evening and weekend parking. Parking is also available in Town lots and Town buses are fare free, he pointed out. Mr. Hintz argued that striping bike lanes should make it obvious to cars that they are parking in bike lanes and should reduce the number of violations.
Nicholas Lurie, Vice Chair of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, but speaking as an individual, pointed out that North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) controls the majority of roads where bike lanes might be appropriate. He predicted that NCDOT would be less likely to put bike lanes on the roads they control if the Town does not put them on Cameron Avenue, which it controls. Mr. Lurie noted that UNC was the #1 destination for cyclists. He proposed as solution that includes a 45-foot right-of-way and allows enough space for full-time parking, five-foot bike lanes, and two travel lanes. That design had been used extensively throughout the United States, Mr. Lurie said, and it had been proven to work without increasing danger to cyclists.
Richard Goldberg endorsed Resolution B. He agreed with the staff that the Town's Police Department had done a good job of ticketing cars, but noted that cyclists still have to swerve out of the bike lane into traffic to get past those ticketed cars. He added that the Police Department generally stops ticketing in the morning before the 9:45 legal parking hour. Mr. Goldberg stated that this leads to carloads of students parked in the bike lanes doing their homework at 9:20 in the morning. He stated that limiting parking from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. would keep cars out of there all day and provide adequate use for bicyclists.
Mayor Foy asked Town Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli if he had considered the proposed striping plan that Mr. Lurie had distributed. Mr. Neppalli replied that it had been one of the options that the federal government had approved, but it was not the preferable option. He explained that he had called some of the cities that use the plan and they had reported no accident problem with that striping, but he was not sure the roads in those towns had the same characteristics as Cameron Avenue, such as being in a university campus area, having parking concerns during the day, and being a major connector street during morning and evening peak hours.
Mr. Neppalli said that the Mr. Lurie had brought the plan to the Town's attention a couple of weeks ago. The staff had decided not to recommend it because it was a new standard for the community, he said. Mr. Neppalli pointed out that there had been 23 accidents on Cameron Avenue in 2003, between Merritt Mill Road and Pittsboro Street, and that only two of those involved bicycles. He argued that the existing striping allows a compromise that provides parking and wide outside lanes, which had proven to be successful in most communities, and on Cameron Avenue, for bike lanes.
Mayor Foy determined from Mr. Neppalli that Cameron Avenue was 45 feet wide.
Council Member Harrison verified that this did not include the curb and gutter.
Council Member Ward expressed the belief that most of the vehicles were single occupancy and that many of them had a fare free alternative. He said protecting those parking spaces was not a particularly great community resource. Council Member Ward suggested an alternate resolution that would direct the staff to re-stripe Cameron Avenue according to the diagram that Mr. Lurie had presented. He also proposed that parking be prohibited in areas where there is a center turn lane.
Council Member Verkerk asked if the information on ridership dropping by 50% had been based on Town studies. Mr. Lathrop replied that the Town's mobility report card in 2001, before fare free buses but after bike lanes had disappeared, had counted about 904 bike trips in a 12-hour day. The Town also had also done other 12-hour bike counts on Cameron Avenue in 1994 and 1996, he said, and the numbers were about 2,000 and 1,800 each day. Mr. Lathrop concluded that those data points showed more than a 50% drop without bike lanes.
Council Member Harrison said that the two bike accidents on Cameron Avenue in 2003 had been two too many. A 2001 report card had shown that Cameron Avenue had the highest number of riders in Chapel Hill, he said. Council Member Harrison stated that the Council should start thinking of Cameron Avenue as a street that will eventually have no non-resident cars. They should see it as one that is as important as a transit route into the campus, and as a bicycle access, that letting people park there for free is a poor use of the resource, he said. Council Member Harrison expressed support for Council Member Ward's motion, noting that Madison Wisconsin is another university town that had followed a similar plan. Council Member Harrison noted his concern about people parking on other neighborhood streets instead of Cameron Avenue.
Mayor Foy wondered what people who live on Cameron Avenue think about removing parking.
Council Member Harrison commented that allowing residents to park would make sense, but Mayor Foy replied that the Town would have the same problem then.
Council Member Hill explained that he had never been able to park on the section of Cameron Avenue where he lived. He said that Cameron Avenue was clearly just a parking lot for students going on campus, and that prohibiting it would drive it into the neighboring streets. Council Member Hill said that Mr. Lurie's proposal, on its face, seems to answer everyone's needs, but it would reduce ticket revenue, and it would create a situation where people will park there who could park elsewhere. He recommended that the Town just get rid of parking altogether, since residents do not park on the street anyway.
WHERE IS VERKERK’S MOTION???
Council Member Ward pointed out that he had already moved Mr. Lurie's plan, but had not received a second. Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos stated that the motion that had been seconded would be the motion on the floor unless Council Member Verkerk wished to withdraw it.
Council Member Verkerk did not agree to withdraw her motion, but Mayor Foy pointed out that Council Member Ward could move to substitute his motion for hers.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED TO SUBSTITUTE HIS MOTION TO HAVE THE TOWN STRIPE CAMERON AVENUE AS ILLUSTRATED IN THE PETITION BY MR. LURIE, AND THAT PARKING BE ELIMINATED IN AREAS WHERE THERE IS NEED FOR A LEFT OR RIGHT TURN LANE. COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON SECONDED.
Council Member Greene clarified that this would mean going from having parking on one side in the morning and the other side in the afternoon to allowing parking on both sides all the time with the addition of two bike lanes. It would mean adding more parking on Cameron Avenue, she said.
Mayor Foy noted that it would narrow the travel lanes as well.
Mayor pro tem Wiggins stated that she would be anxious driving on Cameron Avenue with the proposed new layout. She would rather not have to deal with cars on Cameron Avenue at all if the Town is going to make a change, she said. Mayor pro tem Wiggins expressed a preference for Resolution B and said that she would not vote for the substitute motion.
Council Member Kleinschmidt expressed concern about leaving Cameron Avenue as it is. The lanes are extraordinarily wide and people drive to fast, he said. Council Member Kleinschmidt spoke in favor of the substitute motion, proposing that the order that the lines would place on the street would lead to slower traffic.
Mayor Foy said that he would support the motion if Council Member Ward would be willing to send it back to the Transportation Board and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board for comments and to Mr. Neppalli for details.
Council Member Ward agreed, emphasizing that he respected Mr. Neppalli's opinion and would like to know how the two boards feel about it.
Council Member Ward also asked for feedback on adding paid parking to Cameron Avenue.
Mayor Foy commented that the Town might also want to know how to monitor parking without meters. Mr. Horton offered to bring it back both ways.
Council Member Harrison accepted the modified motion. He expressed a preference for painted lines, noting that some of the other materials used could be dangerous. Mayor Foy stressed that the Council was asking the boards for help refining this. Council Member Kleinschmidt verified that a similar plan was already being implemented on Barbee Chapel Road.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON, TO SUBSTITUTE HIS MOTION FOR THAT MOVED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON, TO DIRECT THE STAFF TO RE-STRIPE CAMERON AVENUE AS SUGGESTED BY MATERIALS SUBMITTED BY NICHOLS LURIE, AND THAT IN AREAS WHERE RIGHT OR LEFT TURN LANES REQUIRED THAT THREE LANES BE PROVIDED AND MARKING BE REMOVED, AS AMENDED BY MAYOR FOY TO REFER BACK TO THE TRANSPORTATION BOARD AND BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN BOARD AND TO THE TOWN'S TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND TO CONSIDER PARKING METERS AS WELL AS OTHER MEANS OF MONITORING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Item 6 - Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist Church:
Continuation of Public Hearing on an Application for a Special Use Permit
Mr. Waldon explained that at the conclusion of an April 14, 2004 hearing, all parties had been close to agreement on this issue. The applicant and its neighbor had been working cooperatively since then, he said, and there were reasons to be optimistic that the agreement that the resolution calls for would be executed. Mr. Waldon stated that staff continued to recommend approval of the application and the adoption of Resolution A.
Architect Phil Szosta said that R-A was acceptable to the Church. He asked for clarification of #10 on page 15 regarding maintenance of the gravel right-of-way. Mr. Horton explained that either the Town or NCDOT would maintain that.
Council Member Ward corrected the last sentence under #3 on page 13 to read "Stipulation #10" rather than "Stipulation #9." He asked what the final surface would be, and Mr. Horton replied that it would remain as it is unless the Town could find a way to connect the road to something else. If that were done, then it would be reasonable to pave it, Mr. Horton said. Council Member Ward asked what he and other Council members could do to extend that road to Estes Drive. Mr. Horton replied that they could make it a priority in the Town's bicycle plan development.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-13A, TO INCLUDE THE CORRECTION TO STIPULATION #10 RATHER THAN #9. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR OLIN T. BINKLEY MEMORIAL BAPTIST CHURCH (2004-05-10/R-13a)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by Philip Szostak Associates for Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist Church. on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 50, Block D, Lot 2 (PIN 9799234058) if developed according to the site plans dated November 26, 2003, site plan labeled Exhibit A, dated January 22, 2004, Attachments 15 and 16,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist Church in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:
Stipulations Specific to the Development
1. That construction begin May 10, 2006 and be completed May 10, 2014.
2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit authorizes a place of worship and land use intensity requirements and dimensional standards as specified below:
|
Land Use Intensity |
|
|
Net Land Area |
215,709 sq ft |
|
Total # of Buildings |
3 (including 2 sheds) |
|
Maximum Floor Area |
32,170 sq ft |
|
Maximum Impervious Surface Area |
90,605 sq ft |
|
Maximum # of Parking Spaces Proposed |
87 |
|
Minimum # of Bicycle Spaces |
10 |
3. Elimination of Curb-Cut and Gravel Drive in NCDOT Right-of-Way (along Fordham Boulevard): That prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall:
a. Abandon the eastern Willow Drive curb cut and construct approximately 60 feet of new curb, gutter, a 5-foot wide sidewalk and handicapped ramp, along the south side of Willow Drive, between Fordham Boulevard and the existing curb; and
b. Remove the gravel lane, re-grade the area and establish a vegetative ground cover. Upon completion of this improvement, use of the Fordham Boulevard right-of-way for parking shall be prohibited.
The final plans for the reconstruction and vegetation of the area along Fordham Boulevard, and the design and length of the new curb, gutter sidewalk and handicapped ramp along the southside of Willow Drive shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
This stipulation shall not preclude the bicycle/pedestrian path as shown on Attachment 15 and required by Stipulation #10.
4. Encroachment Permit: Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall secure and provide an encroachment agreement from the North Carolina Department of Transportation for all work, removal of the gravel lane and installation of plant materials, within the Fordham Boulevard right-of-way.
5. Improvements within NCDOT right-of-way: That all improvements required by the approval of this permit, within NCDOT right-of-way, are subject to the approval of NCDOT.
6. Traffic/Accident Study on Willow Drive: That the new curb-cut on Willow Drive shall be designed and constructed for full access initially. Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the design and construction details of this new access shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager. The Town Manager shall conduct a before/after accident and traffic analysis two years after completion of the construction of the driveway and, if deemed necessary by the Town Manager, the applicant shall revise the driveway access to a right-in/right-out only driveway. The design and construction details of the right-in/right-out driveway shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.
7. Agreement with University Mall Property Owner: That the applicant shall provide, prior to the issuance of Zoning Compliance Permit, a statement verifying that the applicant and the University Mall property owner have an agreement insuring that the University Mall property owner can proceed, as necessary, in order to reconfigure the Willow Drive driveway, in conjunction with the adjacent and parallel Binkley Church driveway, to combine the two driveways into one that provides access to both properties.
8. Reconfigured Driveway and New Access on University Mall Site. That the applicant shall provide plans for the redesign of the University Mall driveway into a drive with striped left and right turn lanes exiting the site, and one lane entering the site. The redesign shall also include new ingress from the University Mall driveway to the Church’s north property line and associated egress drive.
a. Easements on Church Property: The applicant shall identify all applicable easements (including construction, access, maintenance) necessary on the Church property authorizing the adjacent property owner (University Mall) to reconstruct the Mall driveway into a three lane cross-section. Said easements must be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager and recorded prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
b. Easements on University Mall Property: The applicant shall submit applicable an ingress, egress and regress easement, whereby the University Mall property owner(s) permit vehicular travel by church members and other associated parties, upon that portion of the reconfigured Mall driveway between Willow Drive and the new access drive described above. The easement shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the commencement of the construction activity for the shared driveway.
9. Elimination of the Curb-Cut and Driveway near University Mall Driveway: That after construction of the reconfigured driveway on the University Mall property and construction of the new ingress and egress drive between the mall driveway and the Church property, as described in Stipulation 7 above, the applicant shall:
a. Abandon the adjacent Willow Drive curb-cut and replace the curb-cut with new curb, gutter and a 5-foot wide sidewalk; and
b. Demolish that portion of the existing western driveway on the Church property, between Willow Drive and the new access from the University Mall-Harris Teeter driveway. This area shall be re-graded and a vegetative ground cover established. Following the completion of this work the use of this area for parking shall be prohibited.
The final plans for the re-grading/vegetation of this area, and the design and length of the new curb, gutter and sidewalk along the southside of Willow Drive, shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
This stipulation shall not preclude the sidewalk improvements as shown on Attachment 15 and required by Stipulation #11.
10. Pedestrian/Bicycle Path along Fordham Boulevard: That, if an encroachment agreement can be obtained from the North Carolina Department of Transportation, the applicant shall retain a portion of the existing gravel lane along Fordham Boulevard as a 10 foot bicycle and pedestrian path. The final design and location of this path shall attempt to accommodate the possibility of a future extension of a pathway southward, within the Fordham Boulevard right-of-way, to Estes Drive.
11. Internal Sidewalks: That the applicant shall construct a sidewalk along the new central driveway and along the west property line as shown by Attachment 15.
12. Bicycle Parking: That the development shall comply with the Town’s Design Manual for bicycle parking standards as follows:
|
Total Number or Required Spaces |
10 |
|
Number of Class I Spaces |
2 |
|
Number of Class II Spaces |
8 |
13. Redesigned Parking Area: That the proposed parking area, between Fordham Boulevard and the building, shall be constructed as shown on the attached site plan labeled Exhibit A, dated January 22, 2004.
14. Parking Lot Standards: That all parking lots, drive aisles and parking spaces shall be constructed to Town standards.
Stipulations Related to Landscaping and Architectural Issues
15. Required Buffers: That the following landscape buffer be provided; and if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation will be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:
|
Location of Buffer |
Required Buffer |
|
Fordham Boulevard frontage |
30’ Type ‘D’ Buffer (except for alternate buffer approved by the Community Design Commission) |
|
Willow Drive frontage |
Min 15 Type ‘A’ Buffer |
|
University Mall (south property line) |
Min 15’ Type B Buffer |
|
University Mall (west property line) |
Min 15’ Type B Buffer (includes buffer area on University Mall property) |
16. Alternative Landscape Buffer: That the details for the proposed alternate landscape buffers along Fordham Boulevard, including the landscaping around the stormwater facility, shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Design Commission prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
17. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, clearly indicating which rare and specimen trees shall be removed and preserved, as well as all significant tree stands, and including Town standard landscaping protection notes, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
18. Landscaping Plan: That a detailed landscape plan including a landscape maintenance plan, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The landscape plan shall indicate the size, type, and location of all proposed plantings.
19. Revised Significant Tree Stand Plan: That the Final Plan application shall include the following revisions to the significant tree stand map:
a. Extension of the primary tree stand area, as identified on Sheet L2, to include the four oak trees between the proposed choral addition and the new driveway; and
b. Identify and label the secondary tree stand area in the northwest corner of the site.
That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, a revised significant tree stand plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.
20. Tree Protection Fencing: That the limits of land disturbance with tree protection fencing, shall be shown on the Landscape Protection Plan, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
21. Parking Lot Screening: That all parking areas shall be screened from view in accordance with the provisions of Article 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The screening plans shall be approved by the Town Manager.
22. Building Elevations: That the Community Design Commission approve building elevations, including the location and screening of all HVAC/Air Handling Units for this project, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
23. Lighting Plan: That the Community Design Commission approve a lighting plan for this project prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Stipulations Related to Environmental Issues
24. Watershed Protection District/Impervious Surface Limits: That the site shall comply with Article 3.6.4 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. Impervious surface area is authorized at 90, 605 square feet.
25. Stormwater Management Plan: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit the applicant shall submit a Stormwater Management Plan for review and approval by the Town Manager. The plan shall construct the stormwater feature as shown on Attachment 16.
The plan shall be based on the 1-year, 2-year, and 25-year frequency, 24-hour duration storms, where the post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate and the post-development stormwater runoff volume shall not exceed the pre-development volume for the local 2-year frequency, 24-hour duration storm event. Engineered stormwater facilities shall also remove 85% total suspended solids and treat the first inch of precipitation utilizing NC Division of Water Quality design standards.
26. Land Disturbance in the Significant Tree Stand Areas: That except for land disturbance associated with the installation of the proposed stormwater feature, as shown by Attachment #16, land disturbance associated with stormwater management, within the Significant Tree Stand areas, as approved on the Final Plans, shall be prohibited.
27. Storm Drainageway Easement: That all stormwater management improvements, outside public right-of-way, shall be located inside reserved storm drainageway easements, per Town guidelines, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
28. Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan: That the applicant shall provide a Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan for all engineered stormwater facilities. We recommend that the plan include the owner's financial responsibility and include the maintenance schedule of the facilities to ensure that it continues to function as originally intended and shall be approved by the Town Manager, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
29. State or Federal Approvals: That any required State or federal permits or encroachment agreements must be approved by the appropriate agencies and copies of the approved permits be submitted to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
30. Erosion Control: That a detailed soil erosion and sedimentation control plan, including provision for maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. That a performance guarantee be provided in accordance with Section 5-97.1 of the Town Code of Ordinances prior to issuance of any permit to begin land-disturbing activity.
31. Silt Control: That the applicant takes appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.
Stipulations Related to Utility and Service Issues
32. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a Solid Waste Management Plan, including provisions for recycling, and for managing and minimizing construction debris, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
33. Heavy Duty Pavement: That all new drive aisles needed to access refuse containers, including if applicable the reconstructed University Mall driveway, shall be constructed of heavy duty pavement. The final plans must include a detail of this pavement section. It will also be necessary to include the following note on the final plans: “The Town of Chapel Hill, its’ assigns or Orange County shall not be responsible for any pavement damage that may result from service vehicles.”
34. Overhead Obstruction/Utility Lines: That the final plans include details verifying that no overhead obstruction or utility wires will interfere with service vehicle access or operation.
35. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final Utility/Lighting Plan be approved by Duke Power Company, Orange Water and Sewer Authority, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
36. Utility Line Placement: That all new utility lines shall be placed underground. The applicant shall indicate proposed off-site utility line routing and upgrades required to service the site on Final Plans, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
37. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report shall be prepared and sealed by a registered professional engineer, showing that flows meet the minimum requirements of the Town Design Manual, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
38. Construction Management Plan: That a Construction Management Plan, indicating how construction vehicle traffic will be managed, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
39. Traffic and Pedestrian Control Plan: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit the Town Manager review and approve a Traffic Management Plan for movement of motorized and non-motorized vehicles on any public streets (maintained and operated by the Town or the NCDOT) that will be disrupted during construction. This plan shall include detour information and a Pedestrian Management Plan indicating how pedestrian movements on or adjacent to public rights-of-way will be safely maintained.
40. Open Burning: That the open burning of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris associated with this development is prohibited unless it is demonstrated to the Town Manager or his designee that no reasonable alternative means are available for removal of the materials from the subject property. The Fire Marshall may establish safety standards, which must be met in order to receive a permit.
41. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), and landscape plans and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to the plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and the design standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and the Design Manual.
42. As-Built Plans: That as-built plans in DXF binary format using State plane coordinates, shall be provided for street improvements and all other existing or proposed impervious surfaces prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.
43. Certificates of Occupancy: That no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued until all required public improvements are completed; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.
That if the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase, and if applicable a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plan and/or plat.
44. Construction Sign: That the applicant shall post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative and telephone number, the contractor’s representative and telephone number, and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Building Permit, prior to the commencement of any land disturbing activities. The construction sign may have a maximum of 16 square feet of display area and may not exceed 6 feet in height. The sign shall be non-illuminated, and shall consist of light letters on a dark background.
45. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
46. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for the Special Use Permit application for Olin T. Binkley Memorial Baptist Church in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
Item 7 - Options for Traffic Calming Policy and Procedures
Mr. Horton explained that the staff was presenting options for Council consideration. He recommended that the Council schedule a public hearing. Mr. Horton said Engineering Director George Small was prepared to make a presentation, but pointed out that the Council could adopt the resolution calling a public hearing and hear a staff presentation at that hearing.
Mayor Foy proposed adopting Resolution A, calling for a public hearing on June 14, 2004.
COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO ADOPT R-14A. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A PUBLIC FORUM ON JUNE 14, 2004, TO DISCUSS AND RECEIVE COMMENTS ABOUT PROPOSED POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR RECEIVING, EVALUATING, PRIORITIZING AND FUNDING TRAFFIC CALMING REQUESTS (2004-05-10/R-14a)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill is concerned about vehicular and non-vehicular safety and mobility on Town streets; and
WHEREAS, the Council held a work session on November 24, 2003, and received a staff report including draft policy and procedures for dealing with traffic calming requests; and
WHEREAS, the Council referred the staff report to the Transportation Board for review and recommendations; and
WHEREAS, the Council received a staff report on May 10, 2004 including recommendations from the Transportation Board and including two options for policy and procedures for receiving, evaluating, prioritizing, and funding traffic calming requests without assessment of costs to property owners;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby schedules a Public Forum at 7:00 pm on June 14.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
Item 8 - Consideration of the Proposed Orange County
Solid Waste Management Plan Three-Year Update
Mayor Foy noted that the Manager was recommending further discussion between the Council and the County Board of Commissioners. R-15 would authorize the Mayor to communicate with the Board of Commissioners and request such additional discussion, he said.
Council Member Strom agreed with the idea but said that the resolution, as written, accepted that the Town needed a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF). He commented that the Town might need a MRF, but he was more interested in having pay-as-you-throw and additional recycling options.
Mayor Foy suggested changing the first bullet to say, "including the ability to handle both co-mingled recycled materials and additional material," rather than "the possibility of including the construction of a Materials Recovery Facility."
Council Member Strom replied that this was exactly the way he was planning to reword it.
Mayor Foy asked who would like to serve on this committee, and Council Members Strom, Ward and Foy volunteered. Mr. Horton explained that County Manager John Link had asked for prompt consideration because they need to move ahead as quickly as possible.
MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO ADOPT R-15, AS AMENDED TO REMOVE LANGUAGE REFERRING TO A MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY FROM THE FIRST BULLET AND SUBSTITUTING "INCLUDING THE ABILITY TO HANDLE BOTH CO-MINGLED RECYCLED MATERIALS AND ADDITIONAL MATERIAL" INSTEAD, AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS STROM, WARD AND FOY AS DELEGATES. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO COMMUNICATE WITH THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS REQUESTING ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED ORANGE COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANGEMENT PLAN THREE-YEAR UPDATE (2004-05-10/R-15)
WHEREAS, the Town Council has received and reviewed the proposed Orange County Solid Waste Management Plan Three-year Update; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to have further discussion of two issues in the proposed Orange County Solid Waste Management Plan Three-year Update including:
WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to have further discussion with the Orange County Board of Commissioners about the proposed amended Solid Waste Management Plan and proposed materials recovery fee before it is submitted to the State;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Mayor to communicate with the Orange County Board of County Commissioners to request further discussion with the Board concerning the Plan and fees and requests that the Board of County Commissioners authorizes representatives of the Board to meet with representatives of the Town Council.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council appoints Council Member Strom, Council Member Ward, and Mayor Foy to represent the Town in such discussions.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
Item 9 - Recommended 2004-2005 Public Art Plan
a. Chapel Hill Public Arts Commission Report and Recommendations on 2004-2005 Annual Public Art Plan.
Commission Co-chair Janet Kagan said that the Public Arts commission had voted to recommend attachment 9A for Council approval. She asked Council members to consider approving the reallocation of previously identified and approved pooled funds to the new Percent for Art Funds. These would include:
· Tennis and Basketball Courts ($2400)
· Sidewalk and Bicycle Facilities ($500)
· Streetscape ($3220)
· Greenways ($550)
· Small Park Improvements ($200)
Ms. Kagan asked the Council to approve the Manager's recommended resolution.
Mayor pro tem Wiggins inquired about a previously discussed plan to use public art to draw attention to some of the sustainable features of the Town Operations Center (TOC). She also asked if the Town was using all $420,000 there. Ms. Kagan replied that the funding would be divided between transit facilities and public works facilities since those were two different budgets with distinct funding sources. Mayor pro tem Wiggins ascertained that the Commission intended to spend all of that money at that location, with a reserve for maintenance. She also verified that the selection committee would meet in June and that Council Member Hill was on that committee.
b. Recommended 2004-2005 Public Art Plan
MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO ADOPT R-16. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED (9-0).
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PUBLIC ART PLAN FOR 2004-05 (2004-05-10/R-16)
WHEREAS the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill adopted a Percent for Art Program on March 4, 2002; and
WHEREAS, this program includes an annual consideration by the Town Council of a Public Art Plan to be recommended by the Chapel Hill Public Arts Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Public Arts Commission has recommended such a program, including several projects which should include 1% of the project budget for public art; all eligible Capital Improvement Program projects which should allocate one percent of their proposed budget to create a Percent for Art Fund defined as pooled funds for public art commission, acquisition, maintenance and/or conservation; and several previously identified projects and approved pooled funds to this new Percent for Art fund;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager in conjunction with the Public Arts Commission is authorized to implement the following Public Art Plan:
All eligible Capital Improvements Program projects allocate one percent of their appropriated budget to create a Percent for Art Fund defined as pooled funds for public art commission, acquisition, maintenance and/or conservation.
Allocate one percent of funding appropriated for large planned capital projects. These include:
Previously identified and approved pooled funds reappropriated to this new Percent for Art fund. Previously approved FY03-04 pooled project funds include:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the program will be implemented according to the guidelines adopted in Resolution 2002-03-04/R-8, and only to the extent that funding is appropriated for the capital projects, and that the source of funding allows expenditures for public art.
This the 10th day of May, 2004.
Item 10 - Additional Information on the Possibility of
Conservation Easements on Town-Owned Open Space
Mayor Foy noted that Johnny Randall had suggested that the Council do a conservation easement on part of Morgan Creek, and after discussion, Council Member Greene had remarked that the Town cannot ask others to do this if it is not willing to do so itself. He explained that this item had come back for the Council for a more detailed discussion. Mayor Foy noted a series of questions that Mr. Karpinos had posed. He pointed out that the staff had not offered a recommendation since the Council needed to reach a conclusion first.
Council Member Strom urged Council members to pursue using the conservation easement tool to permanently preserve additional Town properties.
Mayor Foy agreed that the Town should want to make it permanent and have restrictions when they buy open space, but the conservation easement in Attachment 6 is to the State of North Carolina.
Council Member Harrison commented that Attachment 6 was a declaration of covenants and restrictions, not an easement. Mr. Karpinos said that it amounts to the same thing as a conservation easement.
Mayor Foy stated that he was not comfortable thinking that the State of North Carolina would be better at conserving Town property than the Town would be. "We need to think about who will hold it in trust for us," he said.
Council Member Strom noted Mr. Marino’s comment that it makes sense to try and find an entity that has the powers of eminent domain that might protect the Town's rights further. But conservation easements are flexible and allow the Town to achieve different goals for different parcels, Council Member Strom pointed out. He stated that the Town might have to grant its conservation easements to different groups, depending on the parcel. Council Member Strom noted that it was a tool that allows the Town to look at each piece, decide what its goals are, and grant the easement in a way that meets Town goals.
Mayor Foy remarked that that granting easements to an entity that has more power or greater eminent domain than the Town would not necessarily protect the Town. On the other hand, if they do not do that then the Town is not protected, he pointed out.
Council Member Ward expressed support for pursuing this further and getting answers to Mr. Marino’s eight questions.
Council Member Greene continued to believe that the Town needed to be willing and able to do this if they intend to ask other parties to do so, she said. She noted that easements along Morgan Creek had been given to the Botanical Garden Foundation. The important thing is that the entity be someone other than the Town and one that would prevent a future Council from taking the land out of conservation, said Council Member Greene.
Council Member Harrison thanked Mr. Karpinos for laying out the questions. He proposed that none of the restrictions placed on the Leon Carrol property through the Clean Water Management Trust Fund were such that the Town could not stand having them its own property. This would allow for reasonable use of open space money, Council Member Harrison said.
Mayor Foy stated that the Council seemed to support the concept but did not know how to proceed. Council Members Greene, Harrison and Ward agreed to serve on a subcommittee to develop a recommendation for the Council.
Item 10.1 - Request for Further Detail: Legislative Proposal
Mr. Karpinos explained that the Mayor had sent a letter and a list of the Council's adopted legislative requests to its Legislative Delegation in April. He said one of those requests was to consider a State-wide bill to increase the value of property to be excluded from taxation under the Homestead Exemption statute. Late last week the legislative drafting staff had contacted the Town and asked what the Town wanted that changed to, Mr. Karpinos said. He explained that he had not had an answer for them because the Council had not discussed it. Mr. Karpinos noted that this was a short legislative session and that the chances for getting a statewide bill introduced this year were fairly slim. The Council might consider proposing some issues for the legislature and see if they go ahead with some studies, he said.
With regard to the statute, Mr. Karpinos noted that the amount of property that can be excluded is set by the statute at $20,000, or 50% of the appraised value of the residence, whichever is greater. So, a fairly large amount of the property value could be protected from taxation, he said. Mr. Karpinos noted that it was limited by the one-acre provision. He explained that the exclusion was limited to elderly people, or to people who are totally and permanently disabled, and who have an income limit of $18,000, with cost of living adjustments based on changes in the Social Security Act.
Mr. Karpinos noted that there were a number of things the Council might wish to say in response to this. They might recommend increasing the income limit, perhaps graduating it so that citizens could enjoy some of the exemption if they have higher incomes or greater value in the property. The legislative drafting staff wanted to know if the Council had anything specific to propose, Mr. Karpinos said. He noted that the impact of changing the amount of property tax value exempted from 50% to 75% would be a fairly insignificant amount in Chapel Hill, but the staff had no way of knowing what the impact would be of changing the income level from $18,000 to something higher without a considerable amount of study.
Mayor Foy said the Council had been concerned about people whose income levels were not high enough to support the property taxes. He proposed that a graduated income scale with declining exemption would help address that.
Council Member Strom pointed out that he was the one who had brought this up, but it was more complicated than he had thought. He expressed interest in having the exemption go up to a $25,000 income receiving a 75% exemption, and perhaps higher. Council Member Strom asked Mr. Karpinos if the Town would be better off filling in the blanks or just asking that the issue be studied. Mr. Karpinos deferred to Council Member Harrison on that.
Council Member Harrison said that the legislature might agree to consider this as a study bill if only to get rid of it.
Council Member Ward suggested asking the legislative delegation to provide some guidance.
Mayor Foy determined from Mr. Karpinos that Representative Verla Insko had passed it on to the Bill Drafting Division and the attorney there had contacted Council Member Strom who had referred it to him. He suggested that a letter from Mayor Foy to the delegation outlining the Town's concerns, with a copy to the Drafting Division attorney, would be the best way to address the issue. Mr. Karpinos offered to draft that letter and the Council agreed to proceed in that manner.
Item 11 - Appointments:
11a. Planning Board. The Council appointed Gene Pease and Ruby Sinreich.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
Planning Board |
Foy |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Verkerk |
Ward |
Wiggins |
TOTAL |
||
|
Anita Badrock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Gary Barnes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bobby Clapp |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Yolanda Donaldson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Glenn Gerding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Matt Hapgood |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Tom Jenson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Rudy Juliano |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bernard Law |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
1 |
||
|
Richard Loeber |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Donna Manley |
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
|
2 |
||
|
Stephen Manton |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bud Matthews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Gordon Merklein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Morgan Metcalf |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Gene Pease |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
|
|
6 |
||
|
Donna Riechmann |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Martin Rody |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Matthew Scheer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Stephanie Schmitt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Rudy Sinriech |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
9 |
||
|
Wilhelmina Steen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Jaclyn Taaffe |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Shawn Thompson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Richard Williams |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||||||||||||
11b. Transportation Board. The Council appointed Laurin Easthom, Rudy Juliano and Gary Barnes.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
Transportation Board |
Foy |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Verkerk |
Ward |
Wiggins |
TOTAL |
||
|
Gary Barnes |
X |
|
X |
|
|
|
X |
X |
X |
5 |
||
|
Laurin Easthom |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
9 |
||
|
Glenn Gerding |
|
|
|
|
X |
X |
|
|
|
2 |
||
|
Matt Hapgood |
|
|
|
X |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
||
|
Rudy Juliano |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
8 |
||
|
Morgan Metcalf |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Brandon Perkins |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Brandon Rector |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||||||||||||
Mayor Foy noted that Council Member Ward had agreed to be the convener of the Conservation Easements Committee.
Item 12 - Petitions: None.
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.