SUMMARY MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
MONDAY, MAY 17, 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, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli and Acting Town Clerk Sandy Cook.
Item 1 - Public Hearing on UNC Development Plan Modification No. 2
Town Manager Cal Horton explained that the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) would present a proposal tonight for modification of its Development Plan. He noted that UNC had proposed one other modification since the Council approved the Development Plan in October of 2001.
Town Planning Director Roger Waldon pointed out that UNC's proposed changes included a 130,000 square-foot Physicians Building as well as additions to Morehead Planetarium, Fetzer Gymnasium, and the James Love House. He noted that the most complex change would be at the Bell Tower parking lot. The University was asking to reorient three buildings there, Mr. Waldon explained, and they also wanted to add a chiller plant. He pointed out that there would be 600 more parking spaces at the Bell Tower location than UNC had originally requested. Mr. Waldon stated that the changes were all within Land Use Management Ordinance (LUMO) parameters for the Office/Institutional-4 zoning district. The process for making those changes would be a modification of the Development Plan, he said.
Nancy Suttenfield, Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration, stated that four of the University's proposed changes would be interior to the campus and two would be on the campus edge. She introduced several of her colleagues to continue the presentation.
Bruce Runberg, Associate Vice Chancellor for Facilities Planning and Construction, explained that changes in the University's plans had led to changes in the six projects. With regard to the James Love House, he said, UNC was requesting 1,600 square feet rather than 900, due to a request from the Preservation Society that the house include two period rooms, and the University had cleared this expansion with the Love House neighbors. Mr. Runberg stated that UNC would accept the Town's stipulations.
Anna Wu, Director of Facilities Planning, briefly reviewed the six projects. She reminded Council members that a 600-car parking deck and a 10,000-ton chiller plant had been deleted from the Science Complex in Phase II. The current proposal was to relocate them to the Bell Tower, she said, pointing out that the Bell Tower development would increase therefore to 1,600 parking spaces. Ms. Wu told Council members that adding 600 spaces meant that UNC would have to employ strategies other than a "green roof" to meet its stormwater management goals.
Ms. Wu outlined the University’s plans for pedestrian walkways. She discussed the Morehead Planetarium renovations, the Physicians Office Building construction, and the additions to Fetzer Gymnasium and the James Love House. With regard to an earlier Council question about the height of the Physicians Office Building, Ms. Wu said that it would be five floors with a mechanical penthouse, for a total height of approximately 85 feet. The building would be taller than the Dogwood Deck, she said, noting that it would screen the Jackson Circle Deck from Manning Drive.
George Alexiou, Transportation and Traffic Consultant for UNC, replied to an earlier Council question about translating traffic volume into level of service and delay. He noted that a table on that material was in the report that had been provided to the Town. If an intersection is working at or better than Level of Service C then the average delay to vehicles at peak periods would be less than 35 seconds, Mr. Alexiou said. He explained that the range of delay is 35-55 seconds for Level of Service D and 55-80 seconds for E. Mr. Alexiou said an average delay of more than 80 seconds would put the street in a Level of Service F.
Mr. Alexiou then converted that information into numbers of vehicles. He stated that the South Road/South Columbia Street intersection, at just over a Level of Service C to D, could handle about 2,200-2,250 vehicles in one hour. Taking it to the brink of E would allow handling another 300 cars, he said. At the South Road/Country Club Road intersection, a Level of Service D would mean it could handle about 3,000 vehicles, and at E it could handle almost another 500, Mr. Alexiou explained. He pointed out that this was an example of a larger intersection being able to go one complete letter grade and still be able to accommodate more traffic than a smaller intersection.
Mr. Horton pointed out that the agenda had omitted the swearing in of those giving testimony. He asked that those who had spoken swear in with the clerk before leaving the room tonight. Mr. Horton mentioned that all information submitted tonight would become part of the record.
Council Member Verkerk inquired about the proposed elimination of the right turn lane onto South Road, as indicated in Attachment 12 and asked how buses would be accommodated. Mr. Alexiou explained that UNC would eliminate the "slip lane" and redesign the intersection to provide a radius for buses and larger trucks to turn.
Council Member Verkerk, describing pedestrian bridges as aesthetically and visually not appealing, inquired about the need for them, particularly from the Pit to Fetzer Gym. She noted that the Pit was considered sacred territory for students. Mr. Alexiou replied that having pedestrians cross at a higher level would improve safety as well as traffic conditions on the ground.
Council Member Verkerk stated that pedestrians currently dominate that area, which means that drivers must crawl along. She likes things the way they are, she said, and she expressed concern about providing a walkway that would make it less safe for those who choose not to use it. Council Member Verkerk pointed out that existing studies had demonstrated this problem. Mr. Alexiou replied that some pedestrians would still choose to cross at the lower level, but the walkways were intended to provide convenience for those who start at an upper level.
Ms. Wu explained that the University was looking at bridge designs that would not require people to use them to cross the road. They did not intend to sacrifice pedestrian circulation up and down South Road, she said. Council Member Verkerk asked if the pedestrian walkways would look like those on Manning Drive. Ms. Wu replied that the ones on South Road would not be covered and would be more in scale to the bridge under construction at The Ram's Head than to those on Manning Drive.
Council Member Harrison ascertained that the pedestrian bridges would be in place when the parking deck opens in 2008. He recommended placing "please dismount bicycle" signs at the walkways. Council Member Harrison asked Mr. Waldon about pedestrian circulation improvements at the Physicians Building. Mr. Waldon showed the location of the Physicians Building and the crosswalk on a map. He explained that, even though they were not immediately adjacent, UNC expected more pedestrian movement at the crosswalk.
Council Member Kleinschmidt inquired about the University’s options for meeting its stormwater management goals now that the "green roof" on the parking deck had been eliminated. Ms. Wu replied that they were considering a storage and reuse system such as a vertical cistern that would become part of the structure or perhaps an underground tank. Once they know the amount of cubic feet of storage required the designers will be more specific, she said. Ms. Wu told Council members that such information would be part of the University’s site development application.
Council Member Greene inquired about the future of Stadium Drive near the Fetzer Gym. She noted that it looked as though some parking would be displaced. Ms. Wu replied that the footprint shown was very diagrammatic. The footprint had not been finally settled, she said, but she emphasized that they would not displace any parking in that area. Council Member Greene confirmed that Stadium Drive was currently one way due to construction at The Ram's Head, but would run both ways again after construction.
Council Member Greene verified that UNC would abide by Stipulation 10 regarding the transit corridor even though the Planning Board had asked that it be deleted. She asked if UNC intended to address comments that the Historic District Commission (HDC) had made about the proposed scale and mass of the James Love House. Ms. Wu replied that they would address those comments and would also revise their plan and delete a small addition on Battle Lane. Mayor Foy verified that UNC had presented their plan to the HDC, and said that the Town had not yet received the HDC's report.
Mayor Foy asked how UNC would handle safety issue, such as people throwing things of the bridge, if the pedestrian bridges were not enclosed. Ms. Wu noted that the bridges crossing Manning Drive were not enclosed either, but Mayor Foy pointed out that a more adult population uses the Manning Drive bridges and they do so during the day. He agreed that it would be more aesthetically pleasing to have a lighter looking structure, but questioned the wisdom of leaving it open.
Mayor Foy asked if safety had been an issue on other campuses. Ms. Wu mentioned that Loyola University has had an open bridge for a number of years. She understood Mayor Foy's concern, she said, and noted that UNC's public safety staff would review the drawings. There are code requirements to safeguard against people falling off at certain elevations, Ms. Wu said, and she agreed to consider Mayor Foy's comments, but said that it was not the University's intent to make cages crossing over South Road. Mayor Foy ascertained that there might be programmatic reasons why UNC would want pedestrian bridges even if the traffic on South Road were not an issue.
Council Member Hill asked what the advantage would be of eliminating the right turn lane at Columbia Street and South Road. Mr. Alexiou replied that creating a tighter intersection with traffic having to stop at a signal would slow traffic down. Council Member Hill remarked that South Road would become the last road that anyone would ever want to drive on after all of the changes have been made. He inquired about potential upgrading on the intersection of Country Club Road, Battle Lane, and Boundary Street. Mr. Alexiou explained that the Town had stipulated during the first modification that the University look at improvements to that location and make it less confusing. They had presented a number of alternatives to the Town staff and were discussing which to choose, he said.
Mr. Alexiou commented that there is an uncovered pedestrian overpass over a four-lane road at the University of Arizona at Tempe. He offered to find out if there had been any enforcement or management issues there. Council Member Hill pointed out that most uncovered overpasses have graffiti on their sides.
Council Member Ward asked the University to make sure that the overpass design would accommodate walked bicycles. Ms. Wu replied that much depends on the area that people would be moving from and to. She noted that it would be very difficult at peak times to ride a bicycle through The Pit, for example. Ms. Wu said that the University had not yet designed any dismount zones, but they might discuss that with the Public Safety Department later in the process.
With regard to stipulation 8B on page 19, Council Member Ward expressed hope that the upgrade in signals would include bike activation or something similar. He stated that the Town continued to push for this despite resistance from the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT). Council Member Ward urged the University to push with the Town rather than against it. Mr. Alexiou replied that Council Member Ward's comment should be passed on to NCDOT as they redesign the South Columbia Street/Mason Farm Road intersection. With regard to other locations on campus, he said, UNC had not looked specifically at bicycle activation. Council Member Ward commented that things that are minor hurdles for some are deal-breakers for others when they start looking at alternatives to taking their cars.
Mr. Alexiou clarified that Council Member Ward was talking specifically about having bike-sensitive loops imbedded in the pavement. He asked if there were any in Town, and Council Member Ward replied that the Town would be creating one on Cameron Avenue and Ransom Street in the near future. Mr. Alexiou agreed to come back with locations to discuss, but remarked that it was not something that UNC had been specifically looking at.
Council Member Ward expressed concern about the plan's impact on the South Columbia Street improvements that were scheduled to be made within the next couple of years. He also worried that NCDOT might refuse to invest in those improvements with Columbia Street at a lower level of service. Mr. Alexiou pointed out that moving 600 parking spaces from the north side of South Road to the south side would not create any noticeable change in the direction of traffic coming up South Columbia Street.
Council Member Ward asked what the Town or University would do if the level of service did begin to drop. Mr. Alexiou replied that some intersections would drop below the desired level of service D. The only discussion about adding lanes, he said, had been at South Road and Country Club Road, where it is being achieved by re-striping the pavement. Mr. Alexiou pointed out that the amount of traffic the Development Plan would add was not large compared to the amount of square footage that it would add. He stated that the University and the Town were doing everything they could to minimize the amount of traffic, and that traffic actually had decreased over the last couple of years. Mr. Alexiou said that the University was striving to avoid a situation where it must make changes that are not very attractive.
Council Member Ward asked the staff if they had identified an unacceptable level of service. Mr. Horton replied that doing so would be a policy decision for the Council to make. He noted that the Council's present policy was to tolerate congestion rather than widen roads and devote more traffic lanes to more cars. He said that he thought there would eventually be some streets on campus where only buses and official vehicles would be allowed, unless the Council changes its policy.
Council Member Verkerk commented that the current arrangement at South Road and South Columbia Street acts as a little pedestrian island, which she would like to see remain as it is. She expressed concern that the proposed pedestrian bridges might create safety issues, adding that she would rather have more elevators for better wheelchair access. Council Member Verkerk also suggested that UNC take the following comment from the Transportation Board's recommendation very seriously: "The Board reiterates its concerns about the need to maintain a fixed guideway corridor in the area of the proposed medical building. This corridor should be preserved to allow future connections between north and south campus."
Council Member Harrison stated that he too fully agreed with the Transportation Board's comment, but that there should be a much longer discussion regarding that than was possible tonight. He asked if the modified South Columbia intersection must be a NCDOT design since it was a State primary highway. Mr. Alexiou replied that NCDOT would have to approve the design but that NCDOT was sensitive to urban areas. They do have certain minimum standards, but they have been flexible in the past, he said. Mr. Alexiou added that NCDOT would also confer with the Town regarding the appropriate level of service.
Council Member Harrison suggested that the University start considering bicycle dismount zones. He expressed relief that the suburban approach to parking ratios was not being used on UNC's campus and said that the Council was asking that they not use it on any other UNC land.
Lynn Kane reminded Council members and UNC representatives that retired people are involved in many and varied activities at the University and do not want to see parking diminished from the current plans.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO JUNE 14, 2004 AND TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Item 2 - Public Hearing on UNC Softball Complex
Application for Special Use Permit Modification
Mr. Waldon outlined the proposal to add a new team building, new restrooms, and minor site changes to a softball field that was being used regularly and extensively. Little had changed since the Council reviewed the Concept Plan, he said. Mr. Waldon recommended approval with the stipulations indicated in Resolution A.
Mike Hammersley, of Corely Redfoot Zack Inc, said that the playing fields had been moved to their current location in November 2000. The University is now improving those fields in order to have permanent facilities for the team to change clothes, shower, and work out at, he said. Mr. Hammersley explained that the proposal also included building permanent restrooms for the team and their fans. He pointed out that the team had a joint parking agreement with an administration building next door. Mr. Hammersley proposed paving the gravel driveway, adding a green bioretention area, and relocating a dumpster. Wastewater would be treated for quality as well as quantity, he said, as he indicated on a map where the bioretention area and the storm receptors would be.
UNC Softball Coach Donna Papa explained that the girls had no place to change their clothes, were having to use port-a-johns, and had nowhere to meet in the way that they need to do at their level. She had been the women's softball coach for 19 years, she said, and there had never been any permanent facilities or seating for the team in that time. Ms. Papa pointed out that the Town's high school teams also use that field and that her team would like to host the ACC tournament there.
Mayor Foy asked Mr. Hammersley to repeat what he had said during the Concept Plan hearing about new impervious surface. Mr. Hammersley replied that the amount of impervious surface would be the same after development as it is now because they would reduce it in areas within the parking lots and the concourse area. Mayor Foy noted that this was outlined in Attachment 10, but asked specifically about the road and parking lot. Mr. Hammersley replied that the road was gravel and that the applicant intended to build an asphalt road to Town standards.
Mayor Foy recalled that the Council had inquired about using a porous material. Mr. Hammersley replied that the applicant was planning instead to reduce the asphalt to what was necessary and not adding any more impervious surface. He pointed out that Item 2 in Resolution A provides the amount of allowed impervious surface, and that amount is the same as what is there now.
Council Member Strom commented that the volume of water the retention pond could hold was modest compared to the amount of water that will come off the site. Mr. Hammersley replied that they were not counting on that pond for stormwater management because it is in the steam side of the Resource Conservation District (RCD). Rather, their approach would be to treat everything upstream, including the parking area, before it is released down to that point, he said. Mr. Hammersley indicated on the map how this would work. Council Member Strom stated, however, that it still seemed as though the vast majority of the water on the site would be point loaded into the pond. Mr. Hammersley replied that water coming down from the forest near the chancellor's house does not mix in with the development flows on the site being discussed.
Council Member Strom asked Mr. Hammersley if he thought this would be an acceptable approach, given what he knows about the LUMO. Mr. Hammersley replied that they were planning to do their stormwater management outside of the pond area because of the pond's location and proximity to the stream. Council Member Strom commented that the pond seemed dramatically inadequate and asked Mr. Hammersley if he understood why the pond had been sized that way when installed. Mr. Hammersley replied that the area had been wooded and that there had been less need for storage with a field than there is with a parking lot.
Mr. Hammersley stated that modifying the pond would not serve as well as going up high on the site and treating the water before it goes down. Council Member Strom pointed out that the applicant had done a lot for the structures it plans to build but not much to improve the overall conditions in the area. Mr. Hammersley offered to continue looking at that to see if they could divert and treat more of the water. Council Member Strom commented that doing so would be a real benefit to the Town.
Council Member Ward praised Mr. Hammersley for being so receptive to Council Member Strom's suggestions. He encouraged them to examine the possibility of capturing more water along left field, and Mr. Hammersley agreed to look into that.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO JUNE 14, 2004 AND TO REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m.