SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
MONDAY, MAY 9, 2005, AT 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council members present were Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom, Dorothy Verkerk, and Edith Wiggins.
Council Member Jim Ward was absent, excused.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Town Information Officer Catherine Lazorko, Finance Director Kay Johnson, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Senior Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper, Senior Long Range Planner Chris Berndt, Senior Planner Phil Mason, Transportation Planner David Bonk, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Bill Webster, and Town Clerk Sabrina Oliver.
Item 1 – Ceremonies
1a. Recognition of American Red Cross.
Rosetta Wash, Executive Director of the Orange County Chapter of the America Red Cross, provided an update of programs and services provided by the Red Cross. She thanked residents of Orange County for their response to disaster relief efforts on behalf of tsunami victims, noting that over $220,000 was raised in Orange County in on-line donations. Ms. Wash said another $77,000 was donated directly to the Red Cross. She noted Orange County was third in the State in level of donations, behind Charlotte and Raleigh.
Mayor Foy noted that Ms. Wash had worked previously with the Interfaith Council, and thanked her for her service to the community and for the good work of the Red Cross.
1b. Recognition of A Helping Hand.
Cathy Ahrendsen, Founder and Executive Director, stated that A Helping Hand was created to provide non-medical assistance to senior citizens and the disabled and to provide respite to caregivers of the elderly, disabled, or chronically ill.
Ms. Ahrendsen provided a history of A Helping Hand, an explanation of services, the population served, and awards and recognitions. She welcomed members of the community to volunteer, noting the phone number was 969-7111.
Mayor Foy thanked Ms. Ahrendsen for the work she was doing.
Mayor Foy announced that Council Member Jim Ward was away on business and would not be present for tonight’s meeting.
Item 2 – Public Hearings: None.
Item 3 – Petitions
3a. Petitions by Citizens on Items Not on the Agenda:
3a(1). Ray Gronberg regarding Installation of a Traffic Signal and Turn Lane at the Intersection of Homestead Road and Weaver Dairy Road Extension.
Mr. Gronberg noted that this intersection was a new intersection developed according to a Special Use Permit granted for Vineyard Square in 2001. He specifically requested that the Town direct the staff to seek accident statistics from NCDOT and the NC Highway Patrol, to install a traffic light, to add turn lanes, to annex the intersection into the town, and to notify neighbors of his petition.
Mr. Gronberg provided a brief background of the Vineyard Square development and resulting improvements to Homestead Road. He also offered a description and displayed photos of an accident he had been involved in that had recently occurred at that intersection.
Mr. Gronberg said the lack of a signal or turn lane had created a dangerous situation for eastbound traffic, calling attention to the limited sight lines and limited “bailout space.” He mentioned that he had talked with neighbors in the area and they had noted the many accidents that had occurred in the intersection as well as the need for a turn lane.
Mr. Frank Carr said his concern about changes to the intersection referred to by Mr. Gronberg was safety concerns about what would happen at the other end of Weaver Diary Road Extension at Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. He noted concern for pedestrians and the lack of crosswalks at the Northwood Subdivision. Mr. Carr said if that change was made to Homestead, that a safety analysis be done at the end of Northwood and Weaver Dairy Road to see if a traffic signal was warranted. He noted that they were in the County rather than Chapel Hill, but had been told by County Planning staff that it was an NCDOT issue.
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 (8-0).
3a(2). Interfaith Council for Social Services regarding a Request for Annual Allocation for Residential Services, Food Programs and Community Planning Process.
Ann Henley, Vice President of the Interfaith Council, requested that the Council continue its annual allocation to carry on its residential services, food programs, and community planning process. She said this year they were requesting an allocation of $20,000.
Ms. Henley offered statistical information regarding the number of persons served by the Interfaith Council in the areas of housing, food, utility assistance, and advocacy. Ms. Henley said that financial support helped to safeguard their efforts to reduce homelessness and hunger, and to insure the process that was begun to establish new facilities such as a Men’s Residential Facility.
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3a(3). Dino Lorenzini regarding Sidewalk on South Estes Drive.
Council Member Harrison said that concerned where the Community Center Drive came out on South Estes Drive. He said the Community Center had a lot of use and experienced parking shortages. He said as a bicyclist he knew this was an unsafe area and there were a number of options for how to improve pedestrian movement there. Council Member Harrison asked that the Manager consider what Bond issue projects that might be applied to solutions to improve that area. He said the issue was complicated since it was a State road with State right-of-way, but that a crosswalk and sidewalk were needed to improve safety.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3a(4). Greenways Commission regarding Request to Allow Continued Use of the Greenways Program Logo.
MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3a(5). Susan Levy regarding Small Area Plan Process for the Rogers Road Community.
Susan Levy, Executive Director of Habitat for Humanity, requested that the Town begin the Small Area Plan process for the Rogers Road community. She said the completion of such a process was one of the requirements for planning for the acreage on the Greene tract that had been designated for the development of affordable housing.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3b. Petitions by Citizens on Items on the Agenda.
3b(1). Mike Collins regarding the Neighbors for Responsible Growth (NRG) Mass Transit Bus Technology.
Mr. Collins, representing NRG, noted that the Council would consider tonight a number of issues regarding traffic planning and transit issues. He presented a list of suggestions supported by NRG, and asked that the Council consider them. Mr. Collins read his written petition which provided a full description of NRG’s request.
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 (8-0).
3c. Announcements by Council Members.
Council Member Greene thanked everyone involved for making the dedication of the Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard such a “glorious” success.
Item 4 – Consent Agenda
Mayor Foy noted that citizens had signed up to speak on items #4c – On-Street Parking Restrictions at the End of Coolidge Street, #4f – Response to Concept Plan Review Request from Chapel Hill Kehillah regarding Old Mason Farm Road, and #4j – Response to Petition regarding Increase in Posted Speed Limit on Weaver Dairy Road Extension. He asked if there was agreement that these items be pulled for discussion. There was no objection from the Council.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 1 AS AMENDED TO DELETE ITEMS 4c, 4f, AND 4j. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES (2005-05-09/R-1)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby adopts the following resolutions and ordinances as submitted by the Town Manager in regard to the following:
|
a. |
Nominations to Various Boards and Committees (R-2). |
|
|
b. |
Resolution re: Amendments to Council Calendar (R-3). |
|
|
c. |
Removed. |
|
|
d. |
Lease of Space for a Radio Receiving and Transmitting Antenna on a Town-Owned Light Pole at Scroggs Athletic Field (R-4). |
|
|
e. |
US Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement (R-5). |
|
|
f. |
Removed. |
|
|
g. |
Endorsement of Annual Report for Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (R-7). |
|
|
h. |
Follow-up on Comprehensive Plan re: School Site Designation (R-8). |
|
|
i. |
Smith Avenue Condominiums re: Request for Approval of Condominium Covenants (R-9). |
|
|
j. |
Removed. |
|
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
A RESOLUTION NOMINATING APPLICANTS TO VARIOUS ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMITTEES (2005-05-09/R-2)
WHEREAS, the applications for service on an advisory board or commission or other committees listed below have been received; and
WHEREAS, the applicants have been determined by the Town Clerk to be eligible to serve;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the following names are placed in nomination to serve on an advisory board or commission:
Board of Adjustment
Neal Bench
Jennifer Bennett
Charles Flowers
Susan R. Franklin
Augustin (Yves)Gnamien
Wendy Sarratt
Del Snow
Chapel Hill Public Arts Commission
Mary Ellen Goyer
Ann Kendall
Mark McGrath
Claire Reeder
Lowell H. Roberts
Bonnie Schaefer
Louise D. Stone
Amy White
Community Design Commission
Robin Whitsell
Library Board of Trustees
Kenneth S. Broun
Personnel Appeals Committee
Kathryn J. Carder
Planning Board
Tim Dempsey
Ann Holtzman
Robin Whitsell
Transportation Board
Kathryn J. Carder
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COUNCIL’S 2004-2005 MEETING CALENDAR (2005-05-09/R-3)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council for the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby amends its 2004-2005 meeting calendar to include a Budget Work Session on Thursday, May 12, 2005 at 4 p.m. in Council Chambers and a joint meeting of the Chapel Hill/UNC/Carrboro Transit Partners on Wednesday, September 7, 2005 at 7 p.m. at the Friday Center.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO EXECUTE A TWO-YEAR LEASE AGREEMENT FOR USE OF A TOWN-OWNED LIGHT POLE AT SCROGGS ATHLETIC FIELD FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING PUBLIC GALLERY OF CARRBORO, INC. (WCOM COMMUNITY RADIO) TO MAINTAIN A MAST WITH RADIO RECEIVING AND TRANSMISSION ANTENNA (2005-05-09/R-4)
WHEREAS, Public Gallery of Carrboro, Inc. operates a community-based radio station know as WCOM Community Radio; and
WHEREAS, WCOM Community Radio has attached receiving and transmitting antenna to a Town-owned light pole at Scroggs Athletic Field; and
WHEREAS, WCOM Community Radio provides a service to the citizens of Chapel Hill;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby authorizes the Manager to execute a two-year site lease agreement with Public Gallery of Carrboro, Inc. for the lease of space on a Town-owned light pole at Scroggs Athletic Field for radio receiving and transmission antenna.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council that, at the conclusion of the lease period, the Manager is authorized to evaluate the performance of Public Gallery of Carrboro, Inc. If the performance of Public Gallery of Carrboro, Inc. is satisfactory, the Manager is authorized to execute an additional short-term lease, not to exceed 11 months in length, without further Council action. Upon making the same evaluation at the end of each extension term, the Manager may execute up to four additional extensions at the end of the extended lease period without further Council action.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
LOOK FOR RESOLUTION R-5 REGARDING THE US MAYORS CLIMATE PROTECTION AGREEMENT IN A SEPARATE FILE IN THIS FOLDER.
A RESOLUTION ENDORSING A 2005 ANNUAL REPORT RELATED TO ADMINISTRATION OF THE SCHOOLS ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILILITES ORDINANCE (2005-05-09/R-7)
WHEREAS, Chapel Hill participates with Orange County, Carrboro, and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools in management of a Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a Memorandum of Understanding regarding this ordinance specifies that an Annual Report shall be prepared in the spring of each year for review and approval by the Orange County Board of Commissioners; and
WHEREAS, the Orange County Planning Department, in cooperation with technical staff from Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools has prepared a report for review; and
WHEREAS, the Chairman of the Orange County Board of Commissioners has invited the Chapel Hill Town Council to offer comments on the report;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council endorses the 2005 Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Annual Report for certification by the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council encourages the Orange County Board of Commissioners to arrange for an update projection methodologies as part of preparation of the next, 2006 Annual Report.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN’S 2000 LAND USE PLAN TO DESIGNATE POTENTIAL SCHOOL SITES (2005-05-09/R-8)
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill Comprehensive Plan adopted by the Council on May 8, 2000, designates five potential school sites identified by the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education on the Land Use Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 7, 2005, the Town Council adopted an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan adding and deleting potential sites to the Land Use Plan; and
WHEREAS, on February 14, 2005, the Town Council adopted Sections 4.5.8 and 4.7.8, Reservation of School Sites, as modifications to the Land Use Management Ordinance which extends the time period of reservation for school sites by the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education to other forms of development requiring approval as Site Plans, Special Use Permits or Special Use Permit modifications;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council amends the 2000 Land Use Plan as shown on Map 1 attached to this memorandum to designate the sites on the Plan.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONVERSION OF A FIVE UNIT MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURE, LOCATED AT 409 SMITH AVENUE, TO CONDOMINIUMS (2005-05-9/R-9)
WHEREAS, the 1975 Special Use Permit included a stipulation that the condominium covenants and provision be submitted to and approved by the Board of Aldermen prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy; and
WHEREAS, the property owner now wished to convert to condominiums;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby authorizes conversion to condominiums in accordance with all applicable laws and codes.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
4c. On-Street Parking Restrictions at the End of Coolidge Street:
Wiley Barbour stated his mother and he owned six lots on Coolidge Street, noting his family had lived there since 1929. He stated his and his mother’s support for the proposed ordinance, providing a description of the problems related to recent development on Coolidge Street and agreed that restrictions would improve those problems. Mr. Barbour urged the Council to enact the ordinance.
Zalman Jaffee stated he owned four houses at the end of Coolidge Street that would be directly affected by passage of the ordinance. He asked that the Council delay its decision regarding this proposal until he had an opportunity to discuss it with Planning and Engineering Department staff. Mr. Jaffee said if the ordinance were to be enacted and enforced, his tenants would have no place to park.
Mayor Foy said the staff’s conclusion was that the proposed on-street parking restrictions would improve access and mobility for emergency and routine service vehicles, and would better serve local residents. He suggested that the Council enact the ordinance and modify it later based on residents’ need if warranted.
Council Member Strom said it appeared that Mr. Jaffee needed time to alert his renters, and asked the Town Attorney if the ordinance would be effective 30 days from now rather than immediately. Mr. Karpinos responded yes, but the ordinance would not be effective until the signs were installed. He added that the Manager could administratively delay having the signs put up.
Mayor Foy asked if that was reasonable. Mr. Horton said he would want to have the signs placed within 30 days.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ENACT O-1 AMENDED TO INCLUDE THAT SIGNS BE INSTALLED AT THE END OF 30 DAYS AND AT THE DISCRETION OF THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 21 OF THE TOWN CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING PARKING AS TO PARTICULAR STREETS (2005-05-09/O-1)
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill as follows:
Section 1. Section 21-27 of the Town Code of Ordinances, "No parking as to particular streets:" is hereby amended by inserting the following therein the appropriate alphabetical order:
“Street Side From To
Coolidge Street North Side End A point 230 feet eastward
Coolidge Street South Side End A point 50 feet eastward”
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective on June 9, 2005.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
4f. Response to Concept Plan Review Request from Chapel Hill Kehillah regarding Old Mason Farm Road:
Stanley Robboy, Co-President of Chapel Hill Kehillah, requested that should the Council adopt the resolution to bring the Concept Plan forward for review on June 20, that the Council allow Chapel Hill Kehillah to begin renting parking spaces by the beginning of the academic year to help alleviate some financial concerns.
Mayor Foy asked was it possible to give Chapel Hill Kehillah a permit to begin renting spaces as requested. Mr. Horton replied that there was no provision under the law to grant a temporary permit. He said they would check on that prior to June 20, but he did not believe it would be legally permissible.
Mayor Foy asked the Manager to see if there were some other alternative, noting that he believed Chapel Hill Kehillah had made a good argument that there would be minimal impacts. Mr. Horton cautioned that they may not be able to find a solution, but would take a look at it.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-6 TO BRING THE CONCEPT PLAN FORWARD FOR COUNCIL REVIEW ON JUNE 20. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION GRANTING THE REQUEST FOR TOWN COUNCIL REVIEW OF THE CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW PROPOSAL FOR CHAPEL HILL KEHILLAH AND SCHEDULE THE ITEM FOR THE JUNE 20, 2005 PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA (2005-05-09/R-6)
WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill has received a petition from Chapel Hill Kehillah requesting Town Council review of a Concept Plan Review Proposal for the property at 1200 Mason Farm Road;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Town Manager is directed to schedule Town Council review of the Concept Plan Proposal, for the property at 1200 Mason Farm Road, for the June 20, 2005 Public Hearing agenda.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
4j. Response to Petition regarding Increase in Posted Speed Limit on Weaver Dairy Road Extension.
Mayor Foy noted that this was a proposal by the staff to increase the speed limit on Weaver Dairy Road Extension from 25 mph to 35 mph to better match the nature and geometric design of the roadway, and to be consistent with the existing 35 mph speed limit on the remainder of Weaver Dairy Road to the east.
Vinod Prasad said many emails had been sent to the Mayor and Council regarding this issue from residents expressing their concerns. He offered some statistics regarding the length of the road and the time it took to travel it, adding that if the speed limit were increased it would save less than a minute of travel time.
Mr. Prasad noted that the number one cause of death in children ages one through four was traffic accidents, adding that there was a sharp curve in the road and increasing the speed limit would make it even more dangerous for children playing and for pedestrians in general. He presented others statistics including stopping distances at different speeds and under wet conditions.
Mr. Prasad said if the speed limit were increased just because people were already driving fast, it would be the same as rewarding illegal and bad behavior. He petitioned the Council to not take any action in a rush, and certainly not before a through study was conducted, and to consider traffic calming devices such as a traffic light or speed bump on Weaver Dairy Road Extension as well as Palafox Drive.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO TAKE NO ACTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 5 – Information Reports
Regarding item 5e, Update to Police Response to Teen Parties, Dale Pratt Wilson spoke as a representative of Committee for Alcohol and Drug Free Teenagers of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. She thanked the Council for its support in their efforts, and gave special thanks to Police Chief Gregg Jarvies and the many members of the Police Department for their willingness to partner with the Committee to tackle this health and safety issue.
Referring to the Manager’s report, she asked if it would be possible to find out how many of the eight 19 year-old or younger persons charged in the last six months for possession of alcohol were of high school age or middle school age. She asked that the information be provided in the next update. Mr. Horton replied that the information could be obtained from Police Department, and he would do so.
All information reports were accepted as presented.
Item 6 – Presentation of Manager’s Recommended Budget for 2005-2006
Mr. Horton highlighted key points in the budget document, noting that the Council would hold its first budget work session on the recommended budget on Thursday. Mr. Horton said a major issue in development of the recommended budget for 2005-2006 was a potential tax rate increase for debt service. He said the total current tax rate was 57.5 cents and the total recommended tax rate was 53.27 cents, a reduction of 4.23 cents.
Mr. Horton said in an ordinary year the reduction of 4.23 cents in the tax rate would be something to feel good about, but this was not an ordinary year. He said this year there had been a revaluation of property, and in such a year one of the things that we have done long before the law required it was to calculate an equalization rate. The equalization rate, Mr. Horton explained, was the rate at which we would produce the same revenue that we ordinarily would have produced, taking into account normal increases in property development.
Mr. Horton said we compared that rate which was 49.3 cents, to our base budget rate which was 48.68 cents, resulting in a tax rate increase of 3.97 cents. So, he concluded, on the one hand it was a reduction of about 4 cents, but on the other hand it was an increase of about 4 cents.
Mr. Horton said the total new debt service the Council was facing was $2,035,000, which was equivalent to 3.8 cents on the tax rate. He stated that new debt service was the major portion of the 3.97 cent rate increase.
Mr. Horton noted that the property tax base had increased from $4.5 billion to $5.3 billion, noting that 1 cent on the tax rate is now equivalent to about $530,000. He said they had projected costs for 2005-2006 of about $44 million with revenues of $42.7 million, and appropriated fund balance available at $1.5 million. Mr. Horton said that ordinarily we would have about $800,000 in savings from the current year, but this year because department heads had worked extraordinarily hard to keep costs down and because we have good luck with sales tax revenues principally, we were able to roll forward $1.5 million from the current year and have that available to reduce the tax rate in the coming year.
Including priority options that we recommend for the Council’s consideration, the costs would be about $47 million, and the present revenues would be about $42.7 million. Along with the rollover of $1.5 million and the recommended additional revenues of $518,000 coming from increases in fees, that leaves a shortage of $2.25 million that needed to be covered.
Mr. Horton stated that the fee increases recommended were prompted in great part by the Citizens Budget Review Committee, who challenged us to look at these fees with new eyes. He noted that increases were recommended as follows:
Inspection Fees and Permits $ 92,000
Planning Fees and Permits $ 40,000
Parks and Recreation Fees $ 33,500
Business License Fees $ 60,000
Commercial Garbage Fees $149,000
Non-profit and Governmental Garbage Fees $ 15,000
Compactor and Yard Waste Rentals $ 10,000
Engineering Fees and Permits $ 65,000
Parking Fee Increase – Transfer $ 34,400
Library Out-of-County Fees $ 5,000
Total Fee Options $503,900
Mr. Horton noted the proposed fee increases made up nearly 1 cent equivalency on the tax rate.
Mr. Horton recommended for the Council’s consideration priority additions beyond the base budget, including:
Reserve for Pay Adjustments $ 746,000
Incentives to Retain Police Officers $ 70,000
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) $1,390,000
Information Systems GIS Programmer/Analyst $ 62,000
Budget Analyst $ 50,900
Fire Department Replacement Equipment $ 48,610
Mr. Horton noted the great difficulty the Town had experienced in filling vacancies in the Police Department. He said they believe that the combination of pay changes along with educational incentive pay would make it possible to fill and keep filled all vacant positions, and that would effectively put six to eight more officers on the street during the course of the year.
Mr. Horton stated that regarding the CIP, the Council had made a commitment not only to the new Town Operations Center but also to maintaining existing Town-owned buildings. He noted the much improved condition of the Old Town Hall, currently occupied by the IFC Shelter.
Mr. Horton noted that if the General Assembly provides more funding for fire protection services for State buildings, he would recommend that all of those dollars be used to begin adding positions that are needed to staff the Fire Department and meet the present needs of the community.
Regarding the Transportation Fund, Mr. Horton noted that next year, with priority options, they recommended costs of about $12,300,000, with additional revenues of $12,441,000 that would cover those costs. He said that even with priority additions that would mean that we could reduce the Transportation tax rate by .027 cents, and use it to partially offset the increase that would occur in the General Fund.
Mr. Horton said pay adjustments and priority options for the Transportation Department were as follows:
Reserve for Pay Adjustments $ 192,400
Para-Transit Services Supervisor $ 53,000
Mechanic Specialist $ 59,000
Service Attendant $ 38,000
Mr. Horton said regarding the Stormwater Management Fund, it had gotten off to a slower start that we had hoped. He said it had taken longer to get organized, noting that the Stormwater Advisory Committee had been working with staff to put together a request for proposals for a master plan. Mr. Horton said we had made progress but still had a long way to go. He noted the following priority options necessary in the Stormwater Management Fund:
Accounting Technician $ 49,000
Surveyor $ 14,000
Charges for vacuum Truck and Operator $ 41,000
4-Wheel Drive Utility Truck, 1st Year Financing $ 4,000
Mr. Horton said in summary, the recommended budget for 2005-2006 was as follows:
Base Recommended
Fund Budget Budget
General Fund $44,136,000 $46,968,200
Transportation Fund 11,885,500 12,307,300
Stormwater Management Fund 1,638,900 1,638,900
All Other Funds 13,849,700 13,849,700
Total $71,510,100 $74,764,100
Mr. Horton said he respected that the Council needed to review the recommended budget carefully, and looked forward to working with them in that process. He said as he had mentioned earlier the Council had a budget work session scheduled for May 12, and all department heads would attend that meeting so that they could continue to respond to questions. Mr. Horton said that in addition to the May 12 meeting, we would be pleased to schedule additional work sessions as needed. He noted that the budget was scheduled for adoption on June 27.
Mr. Horton thanked the staff for the work they had done to bring the recommended budget together. He noted that the department heads’ base budgets in sum was 6/10’s of a percent lower than the present base budget. Mr. Horton said they had achieved that by working together with as many staff as possible to put their proposed budgets together. He said they looked forward to continuing the work of the Council.
Mayor Foy noted that the recommended budget was a work in progress and would be discussed at the May 12 work session. He said that meeting was open to the public and would be broadcast. Mayor Foy commended the Manager and staff for bringing forward a base budget that was lower in dollars that the previous budget, even in the face of a 15 percent increase in health care costs and increases in fuel costs, noting it was remarkable that they had been able to achieve that.
Robin Cutson urged the Council to pay closer attention when making contributions to non-profit agencies. She said in times of budget crises, some of the expenditures appeared to be frivolous. For example, Ms. Cutson said that last year the Town donated $11,000 to the Women’s Center, noting they also receive funds from Carrboro, Hillsborough, Orange County, Triangle United Way, private donations, and fees charged for programs. She said that although many of the programs offered by the Women’s Center were worthy, some may not be so worthy. As an example, Ms. Cutson mentioned a work shop offered entitled “Keeping the Heat in Your Relationship,” advertised to “spice up your relationship with advice from mild to quite spicy. She said if the Women’s Center was so flush with funds as to be able to offer such a program, then maybe our dollars would be better spent elsewhere.
As another example, Ms. Cutson mentioned the Family Violence Prevention Center, whom the Town contributed $14,000 to last year. She said no one would disagree that domestic abuse was a huge program and funds were needed to provide emergency shelter, counseling, legal aid, and enough long term funding to get them back on their feet. But, Ms. Cutson said, should funding for violence prevention include jewelry making. Ms. Cutson said the Town already has community centers that offer such classes, adding it appeared that the Family Violence Prevention Center was flush with money and had nothing better to spend it on
Ms. Cutson described similar situations with the Community School for People Under Six and the Franklin Street Teen Center. She asked that the Town take the time to scrutinize what funds were actually being used for, noting there were other needs that could be met with those funds.
Horace Sewell, an employee of the Town’s Transportation Department, said he represented a group of Transit employees who had been meeting and working since January to improve working conditions in that department. He noted the many problems they believed would be difficult to solve without the support of the Mayor and Council. Mr. Sewell said they did not believe that the Employee Forum or discussions with Department officials was enough to assist them with the problems identified and to reach just and fair solutions.
Mr. Sewell said that because of these problems, trust and fairness were at issue. He asked for an extended period of time on the May 18 Council agenda, and on May 23 if necessary, so that employees could make prepared statements and offer documentation and analysis of the issues that they believe have the greatest impact on their working conditions and their ability to provide excellent service to the citizens.
Mr. Sewell said they request that 45 minutes be reserved for their presentation on the May 18 agenda for them to present their issues and documentation.
Virginia Knapp, Associate Director of the Chapel Hill Chamber of Commerce, stated that at their April 21st Board meeting, the Chamber gave full support to the Citizens Budget Review Advisory Committee recommendations. She asked that the Council carefully consider the Committee’s report and implement the recommendations.
Mayor Foy reminded Ms. Knapp and others that the Council would discuss the Committee’s report at its May 12 budget work session.
Council Member Kleinschmidt asked if that was a wholesale endorsement of every recommendation that came from that Committee. Ms. Knapp responded that was correct.
Mayor pro tem Wiggins asked how the Council would respond to the Transit workers’ request. Mayor Foy suggested he would work with the Manager on that and make some sort of accommodation. Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she was not opposed to responded positively to the request.
Council Member Harrison told Mr. Sewell that some concise written materials would be helpful when they appeared back before the Council. Mr. Sewell responded that would be provided.
Item 7 – Town Applications for 2005-2006 Community
Development HOME Programs
Mr. Horton noted that this would be the last presentation Ms. Berndt would be making on Community Development items, as she will be retiring soon from her position with the Town.
Senior Long Range Planning Coordinator Chris Berndt said tonight the Council would receive the Manager’s final recommendations on Town applications for the 2005-2006 Community Development HOME programs. She provided a summary of the Community Development funding:
· Grant Amount: $666,392
· Program Income: $ 17,475
· Residual Funds: $ 2,100
· Total amount available: $685,977
Ms. Berndt said the activities were much the same as what the Council had heard at its March 23 public hearing:
Public Housing $217,000
Renovation of Public Housing $167,000
Refurbishing Program $50,000
Habitat for Humanity – Rusch Hollow Phase II $100,000
Orange Community Housing and Land Trust
Homeownership Assistance/Property Acquisition in Northside $100,000
Sewer Connection Assistance $42,775
Inter Faith Council Development of a Public Facility
(Men’s Residential Facility) $25,000
Community Services $70,700
Chapel Hill Police Dept. Youth Programs $41,700
Chapel Hill Training and Outreach/
Family Resource Center After School Program $15,000
YMCA After School Program $14,000
Administration $130,502
TOTAL $685,977
Ms. Berndt noted that the total o $685,977 was a drop of about $50,000 from the current year allocation.
In the HOME program, Ms. Berndt provided a summary of program funding:
Grant Amount $707,949
25 percent Local Match requirement $159,287
Chapel Hill $65,308
Orange County $63,715
Carrboro $22,300
Hillsborough $ 7,964
Total Amount Available $978,895
Ms. Berndt said the source for the Town’s 25 percent local match was the Housing Loan Trust Fund.
For the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan, Ms. Berndt stated that that this new five-year plan was developed jointly with the Town’s partner, Orange County. She noted the functions of the Consolidated Plan:
1. Identify and prioritize the housing and community development needs of Chapel Hill and Orange County.
2. Serves as an application for federal Community Development and HOME Program funds.
3. Outlines a strategy for carrying out HUD programs.
4. Provides an action plan and basis for assessing performance.
Ms. Berndt noted that adoption of Resolution R-12 would authorize submittal of the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-10. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING ACTIVITIES FOR THE 2005-2006 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM (2005-05-09/R-10)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill held two public hearings to receive ideas from citizens about how Community Development Block Grant funds could be spent in 2005-2006;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that based on the Town’s allocation of $666,392 of Community Development Block Grant funds, $17,475 of Community Development program income, and $2,110 of residual Community Development funds for a total of $685,977, the Town Council approves the following 2005-2006 Community Development Block Grant Program Plan:
Public Housing 217,000
Renovation of Airport Gardens $167,000
Refurbishing Program $ 50,000
Habitat for Humanity – Rusch Hollow Phase II 100,000
Orange Community Housing and Land Trust
Homeownership Assistance/Property Acquisition in Northside 100,000
Sewer Connection Assistance 42,775
Inter Faith Council Development of a Public Facility
(Men’s Shelter) 25,000
Community Services 70,700
Chapel Hill Police Dept. Youth Programs $ 41,700
Chapel Hill Training and Outreach/
Family Resource Center After School Program $15,000
YMCA After School Program $14,000
Administration $130,502
Total $685,977
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the Town receives Community Development Program income during the 2005-2006 program year, the Council authorizes use of up to $40,000 of this program income for the sewer connection assistance program.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes the Manager to incorporate the 2005-2006 Community Development Plan into the Consolidated Plan developed with Orange County, Hillsborough and Carrboro for submittal to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO ADOPT R-11. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ACTIVITIES OF THE 2005-2006 HOME PROGRAM (2005-05-09/R-11)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill held two public hearings to receive citizen comments and proposals regarding the use of $707,949 of federal 2005-2006 HOME Program funds, and $159,287 of local matching funds, and $111,600 of residual funds from previous years for a total of $978,896;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council approves the following activities to be carried out by the members of the Orange County HOME Consortium in 2005-2006:
Rental Assistance HOME Consortium $127,102
Property Acquisition Town of Hillsborough $100,000
Chrysalis Foundation (OPC Mental Health) $100,000
Homeowner Assistance Orange Community Housing and
Land Trust (Pacifica and Northside) $115,000
Habitat for Humanity (Richmond Hills) $ 80,000
EmPOWERment, Inc. (Davie Rd.) $ 75,000
Orange County (Individual Development
Account Program) $ 25,000
Pre-Development Habitat for Humanity (Sunrise Ridge) $ 70,000
InterFaith Council
Men’s Residential Center $ 75,000
New Construction Habitat for Humanity (Rusch Hollow II) $100,000
Rental Assistance Weaver Community Housing Association $ 26,000
Operational Support Orange Community Housing and
Land Trust $ 15,000
Administration Orange County Housing $ 70,794
TOTAL $978,896
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council authorizes this plan to be incorporated into the Annual Update to the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan developed with Orange County, Hillsborough and Carrboro for submittal to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on May 13, 2005.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO ADOPT R-12. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF THE ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE 2005–2010 CONSOLIDATED PLAN (2005-05-09/R-12)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager to submit the Annual Update to the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, including all understandings, assurances, and certifications required therein, for a program of $685,977 of Community Development Block Grant funds and $978,896 of federal HOME Program funds by May 13, 2005.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager is hereby designated as the authorized representative of the Town to act in connection with submittal of a Consolidated Plan to provide such additional information as may be required.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
Item 8 – Report on Potential Process for Addressing Neighborhood
Conservation District Petitions
Ms. Berndt said this report continued the Council’s previous discussion on April 25 on a potential process for addressing petitions for creation of Neighborhood Conservation Districts (NCD), noting that some thoughts were stimulated by that earlier discussion. Ms. Berndt stated that taking into account the requests to undertake projects simultaneously and to streamline the process, they propose to explore the following additional thoughts at the Council’s June 15 meeting:
- Do not assume all neighborhood processes will be like the process followed for Northside.
- Consider a standardized “checklist” approach where staff would develop a template of materials for a neighborhood to develop a proposal working with staff or a consultant.
- Look again at the template process proposed in the April 25 memorandum to see if additional ways can be found to streamline the process of consideration.
- Consult with staff at the City of Raleigh concerning their suggestions based on their experience with developing numerous neighborhood conservation districts.
- Consider the feasibility and legality of an idea of doing a Land Use Ordinance Text Amendment in the fall of 2005 regulating “tear downs” of homes in neighborhoods throughout Chapel Hill.
- Consider adding a Planning staff position devoted exclusively to neighborhood conservation.
Ms. Berndt noted that they would be looking at all of these ideas and would provide the Council with an updated report on June 15.
Marc LeBranche, President of the Coker Hills Neighborhood Association, said they believed that their neighborhood would not be a “huge” burden on the NCD process. He offered the Association’s help in the process, and suggested that the Planning staff conduct training for neighborhoods who were interested in the process. Mr. LeBranche said this training could teach neighborhoods how to assist with the NCD process.
Mr. LeBranche said that covenants that were a part of the neighborhood should be items for discussing during the NCD process, because their neighborhood was more vulnerable since it was older and had larger lots.
Peter Gordon, a resident of Coker Hills, urged the Council to grant a NCD for Coker Hills. He said he knew there were many demands on the Council’s time, but if they would grant an NCD process for Coker Hill now before bigger problems arise then it would be easier to get done.
Janet Kagen, a resident of Coker Hills, endorsed the previous comments by Mr. LeBranche and Mr. Gordon. She said at the heart of this discussion was the issue of infill, such as where was it appropriate, what types of construction should it represent, and what should we deem to be contexturally sensitive. Ms. Kagen encouraged the Council as their started this process to at a minimum hold lots sizes in the existing neighborhoods requesting NCD status to the current size, and to maintain the existing setbacks. She asked that “moratoriums” be placed on those neighborhoods until such time as the Council adds a staff person to the Planning Department who could look at these issues in a thoughtful and comprehensive way.
Ms. Kagen said a simple way to achieve that would be to halt the granting of any building permits for those neighborhoods requesting the NCD process that do not honor the existing setbacks or lot sizes.
Laura Moore, President of the Kings Mill/Morgan Creek Homeowners Association, said her Association would beginning the process of holding neighborhood meetings and preparing a petition to submit to the Council to request an NCD process. She said they would be exploring what types of additional regulations they may want to see on their properties.
Ms. Moore said she believed that one result of their process would be that once the neighborhood meetings were concluded, they would be able to offer a strong group of citizens who could work with the Planning staff to implant an NCD.
Council Member Strom thanked the citizens who spoke, and thanked the Planning staff for beginning to look at more proactive approaches to achieving an NCD process. He said this was scheduled to come back before the Council on June 15, and would like the Planning Board to have an opportunity to review this issue and forward its recommendations to the Council at that time. Council Member Strom said the Planning Board could be a productive part of the process, and they may have some ideas of how we could achieve our goal by doing some things simultaneously without placing a “tremendous” burden on the staff.
Council Member Greene pointed out that the NCD was an implementation of a policy goal in the Comprehensive Plan. She said that the language in the Comprehensive Plan speaks to the issue of simultaneously studying neighborhoods that had common issues. Council Member Greene said she believed it was appropriate to do that, and encouraged interested citizens to read the section of the Comprehensive Plan on Neighborhood Preservation.
Council Member Greene thanked the staff for providing such creative ideas, and asked that when they contacted the City of Raleigh that they obtain copies of their NCD plans for the Council.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ACCEPT THE REPORT ON NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS AND ASK THE PLANNING BOARD TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE REPORT FOR THE JUNE 15 COUNCIL MEETING, AND TO FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL ANY INFORMATION THEY RECEIVE FROM RALEIGH. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 9 – Continuation of a Public Hearing: Southern Community Park
Special Use Permit – Proposed Phasing Plan
Planning Director Roger Waldon noted that tonight the Council continues the public hearing from April 11 for a Special Use Permit to construct the Town’s Southern Community park and associated improvements. He noted that the Council played a dual role in this process, as the applicant and owner and also in a regulatory role. Mr. Waldon noted that he would present his remarks in the role as regulator, and another Planning staff member would present comments in the role as the applicant and owner.
Mr. Waldon noted that on February 21 a series of issues were raised, the first being parking. He said that Council members had questioned whether or not the project would have adequate parking. Mr. Waldon said in response to this concern, the Town as applicant was proposing to add 60 additional parking spaces to the proposed Dogwood Acres Drive parking lot
The next issue, Mr. Waldon noted, was the suggestion by a Council member that a pedestrian activated signal, similar to the one at Umstead Park, be installed at the pedestrian crossing proposed at the Dogwood Acre Drive parking area. He said that they believe that because of the proposal to add parking spaces to the Dogwood Acres Drive parking area, a pedestrian activated signal may be warranted sometime in the future. Mr. Waldon said they believe that the need for a pedestrian signal at this location can be analyzed once the park has been completed. He said they anticipate that the cost to install a pedestrian activated signal was $45,000 to $50,000.
Mr. Waldon stated they recommended that, within a five-year period following the completion of the Dogwood Acres Drive parking area, the Town conduct a traffic study to determine if a pedestrian activated signal on Dogwood Acres Drive was warranted. He said they also recommend that, based on the results of the traffic study, the Town Manager determine if and when a pedestrian activated signal should be installed.
Mr. Waldon said the final issue was a suggestion that a plant rescue be held prior to construction. He stated that the Town as the applicant had agreed to sponsor a plant rescue, noting that Resolution A included a stipulation requiring a plant rescue prior to beginning land disturbance activity.
Mr. Waldon said that there was one adjustment that needed to be made to the stipulations in Resolution A, and called the Council’s attention to stipulation #39 on page 13 of the memorandum. He said that stipulation, regarding off-site utility improvements, was not clear and offered clarifying language regarding the water line extension. Mr. Waldon said the amended language that needed to be inserted was that a “12-inch water line and five fire hydrants along US 15-501 between Southern Village and Dogwood Acres Drive, and along Dogwood Acres Drive from US 15-501 to Merritt Drive shall be required.”
Mr. Waldon said they recommended approval of Resolution A with the noted amendment to stipulation #39.
Mr. Horton, speaking as the applicant, noted that the issues that had been raised had been responded to in the Council’s memorandum. He said they would be pleased to provide more detail if necessary.
Glenn Parks, a member of the Greenways Commission, noted that during their review they had questions regarding the “quality” of parking. He said that Resolution C contained a stipulation that if deemed practical by the Town Manager, that final plans for the parking areas should allow for a possible conversion of the park’s standard parking lots to “parking groves.” Mr. Parks said that in order to achieve greater shading of parking lots, the stipulation stated the Town Manager may approve a reduction in the number of parking spaces.
Janet Newcity, a resident of Southern Village, opposed the addition of 60 parking spaces to the proposed Dogwood Acres Drive parking lot, noting it was unnecessary because of the availability of the nearby Scroggs School and park and ride lot parking areas. She said that on two occasions she had counted the available spaces after 3 p.m., and on both occasions there were in excess of 120 spaces available. Ms. Newcity on the weekends, those lots were empty and available for use.
Ms. Newcity said that Dogwood Acres Drive was a dangerous road regardless of the posted speed limit, noting the danger of children and other pedestrians crossing that road to get to the park. She said if the Council was going to delay consideration of installing a pedestrian activated single, then the parking lot itself should be delayed as well until a need was established.
Coleman Day echoed Ms. Newcity’s comments. He said as a resident of Dogwood Acres Drive, he believed we would need Draconian measures to slow traffic speeds on that road. Mr. Day said the proposed parking lot was too large for the proposed passive recreation on that southern end of the park. He said his primary concerns were the addition of impervious surface on the south side of Dogwood Acres Drive, and pedestrian safety first and foremost.
Mr. Day noted that the Town always wanted sidewalks built with new construction so it could be linked to new construction later. He asked if we had no money for a parking lot, why the Town was building a five-foot-wide sidewalk on Dogwood Acres that would require eight to 10 feet of clearing, when the only people who would use it were residents of Dogwood Acres Drive. Mr. Day said those residents walked in the street for 150 feet or so until they entered the existing trail which would remain during and after construction. He said that “baffled” him.
Mayor Foy asked if someone would refresh the Council’s memory regarding the parking lot near Scroggs Elementary, noting he believed it was a part of the SUP but parks of it would not be built until Phase II. He asked if that was correct. Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Bill Webster, speaking as the applicant, said that it was proposed that the southern parking lot be constructed but not the northern lot simply because funds were not available.
Mayor Foy asked if that meant that none of the northern lot would be constructed during the first phase, just the road. Mr. Webster stated that the road would not be constructed either, stating that they would build a paved pedestrian/bicycle path leading from the northern play and picnic areas to the park and ride lot. He said the cost of the northern parking lot was much higher because of the need to build an access road.
Mayor Foy asked how the Council would be alerted when the parking lot gets built. Mr. Webster said when funding was identified the issue would come back before the Council. He said that a grant had been applied for from the Parks and Recreation Trust Fund Grant which we should be notified about in the next several weeks. Mr. Webster said if funding was not received now, we would have to wait until the next cycle of funding.
Council Member Strom called attention to stipulation #8 on page 9 regarding the Dogwood Acres Drive Traffic Calming Plan. He asked the Manager to describe to the Council the process used to approve such a plan. He asked if there had ever been a case when he had met with neighbors while devising such a plan. Mr. Horton said he did not know of a case where traffic calming devices had been considered that did not involve the neighbors. He said they expected that neighbors would have the opportunity to comment on and participate in the development of a traffic calming plan for this area, noting that some specific ideas had been generated.
Mr. Webster said that no firm plan had been formed, but they believed that a combination of lowered speed limits, speed humps, and specific marked pedestrian crossings, perhaps with different textures, could be used to slow down the traffic. He said it was their goal to slow the traffic as much as possible, noting that road lead to the center of the park and they were well aware of that.
Council Member Strom asked if the Council would see the specific plan for the traffic calming, noting the wording of stipulation #8 empowered the staff to make that plan and implement it. He said he would like to make sure that the neighbors had an opportunity to participate in any traffic calming decisions in a more formal way. Mr. Horton suggested that the way to make that happen would be to require that the traffic calming proposal be brought before the Council for final approval. Council Member Strom agreed that would be an appropriate revision to that stipulation.
Council Member Greene agreed, noting she would like to see what the traffic calming would look like before it was approved.
Mr. Horton suggested that in stipulation #8, that the words “Town Manager” be replaced with the word “Council.”
Council Member Kleinschmidt commented that this may be a good place to test the use of pedestrian flags for crossing, as suggested by Council Member Strom in earlier discussions of traffic calming.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO ADOPT R-13 WITH THE CLARIFICATION OFFERED TO STIPULATION #39, AND WITH STIPULATION #8 MODIFIED TO DELETE THE WORDS “TOWN MANAGER” AND INSERT THE WORD “COUNCIL.”. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, SOUTHERN COMMUNITY PARK (2005-05-09/R-13a)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by the Town of Chapel Hill on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Maps 7.126.A.4J and 128.A.2E, 31, 31A (PIN 9777937966, 9777911333, 977937092 and 977926176), if developed according to the site plans dated April 18, 2005, the Southern Community Park Phase 1 Revision (temporary greenway plan) dated January 18, 2005 and the conditions listed below:
- Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
- Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance;
- Is a use or development that is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, or that the use or development is a public necessity; and
- Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for the Town of Chapel Hill, Southern Community Park in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:
Stipulations Specific to the Development
1. That construction begins by May 11, 2007 and be completed by May 11, 2015.
2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit authorizes a public use facility (community park) and public service facility (community recycling center) with land use intensity requirements and dimensional standards as specified below:
|
Land Use Intensity |
|
|
Net Land Area |
70.54 acres |
|
Total # of Buildings |
3 (not including picnic shelters) |
|
Permitted Floor Area |
5,000 sq ft |
|
Impervious Surface Area |
10.8 acres (approximately) |
|
Maximum # of Parking Spaces |
283 |
|
Minimum # of Bicycle Spaces |
40 |
Stipulations Related to Access and Circulation
3. US 15-501 South Improvements: That the applicant shall construct the following roadway improvements on US 15-501 South:
a) A southbound deceleration lane at the proposed northern connection to the park.
b) A five-foot wide sidewalk along US 15-501 South between Southern Village and the north end of the US 15-501 South sidewalk.
c) A five-foot wide sidewalk along US 15-501 between Dogwood Acres Drive and the south end of the US 15-501 sidewalk.
The design and construction of the improvements must be approved by the Town Manager and the North Carolina Department of Transportation prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
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 within the State maintained roadway right-of-way.
5. Dogwood Acres Drive Improvements: That the applicant shall construct the following roadway improvements on Dogwood Acres Drive:
a. Separate right-turn and left turn lanes at the US 15-501 South intersection.
b. Traffic-calming measures and pedestrian crossings.
c. Five-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of the roadway frontage.
d. Five-foot wide sidewalk on the south side of the roadway frontage, between US 15-501 South and the parking lot near the youth baseball field.
The design and construction of the improvements must be approved by the Town Manager and if applicable the North Carolina Department of Transportation, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
6. Dogwood Acres Drive On-Street Parking Prohibited: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall request that the Town Council prohibit on-street parking along that portion of Dogwood Acres Drive within park limits. If the parking prohibition is approved by the Town Council, No Parking signs shall be installed as soon as practical.
7. Dogwood Acres Drive Speed Limit: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, that applicant shall request that the Town Council reduce speed limits to 25 miles per hour along that portion of Dogwood Acres Drive within park limits.
8. Dogwood Acres Drive Traffic Calming Plan: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the Town Council shall approve a traffic calming and pedestrian crossing plan for the portion of Dogwood Acres Drive within park limits.
9. Dogwood Acres Drive Pedestrian Activated Traffic Signal: That, within a five year period following the completion of the Dogwood Acres Drive parking area, the Town shall conduct a traffic study to determine if a pedestrian activated traffic signal on Dogwood Acres Drive is warranted. That based on the results of the traffic study the Town Manager shall determine if and when a pedestrian activated traffic signal shall be installed.
10. Dogwood Acres Drive Sidewalk: That the sidewalk on the north side of Dogwood Acres Drive shall be located behind the roadside ditch or constructed as a meandering sidewalk. The Town’s Urban Forester/Landscape Architect shall approve the field location of the proposed sidewalk.
11. Internal Public Street: That the internal park road, between US 15-501 South and the Park and Ride Lot, may be dedicated as public right-of-way. Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the Town Manager shall approve the design and construction standards for this roadway, including traffic calming measures.
12. Sight Distance: Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, sight distance triangles at all street intersections and driveways must be approved by the Town Manager.
13. Pavement Marking and Street Sign Plan: Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall submit a pavement marking and street sign plan for approval by the Town Manager. Street signs shall be installed for the opening of the park.
14. Greenway, Paths, Trails: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the Town Manager shall approve design and construction plans for the greenway, pedestrian paths and trails.
15. Parking Lot Standards: That all parking lots, drive aisles and parking spaces shall be constructed to Town standards.
16. Bicycle Parking: That the development shall comply with the Town’s Design Manual for bicycle parking design. Minimum number of bicycle parking spaces shall be provided as:
|
Minimum Number of Spaces |
40 |
|
Number of Class I Spaces |
8 |
|
Number of Class II Spaces |
32 |
Stipulations Related to Landscaping and Architectural Issues
17. Required Buffers: That the following landscape buffers be provided and if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation shall be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:
|
Landscape Buffers |
|
|
Location |
Required Buffers |
|
US 15-501 South |
Variable (30’-100’ wide Type D) |
|
Dogwood Acres Drive |
Variable (25’-100’ wide Type D) Alternate buffer for areas less than 30’ in width |
|
Merritt Drive |
100’ wide Type D |
|
West Property Line (Dogwood Acres) |
Variable (60’-100’ wide Type C) |
|
North Property Line (Southern Village & Park and Ride Lot ) |
Variable (10’-100 wide Type C) Alternate buffer for areas less than 30’ in width |
18. Alternate Buffers: That the Community Design Commission approve all proposed alternate buffers prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
19. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, indicating which rare and specimen trees shall be removed and preserved, and 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. The plan shall also identify construction parking and materials staging/storage areas. This plan shall include rare and specimen trees and associated root zones within the land disturbance area associated with off-site utility infrastructure construction.
20. Plant Rescue: That prior to beginning land disturbance, the applicant shall conduct a plant rescue.
21. Landscaping Plan: That a detailed landscape plan, including a parking lot shading plan in accordance with provisions of Section 5.9.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, and a landscape maintenance plan, shall 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. In areas where existing vegetation is being retained, the landscaping plan shall include supplemental evergreen shrub plantings, where deemed necessary by the Town Manager.
22. Bio-Retention Facility Planting Plan: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the Town Manager shall approve a planting plan for the bio-retention facility located between the Park and Ride Lot and the recycling facility.
23. Tree Protection Fencing: That tree protection fencing be installed along the limits of all land disturbance, including that associated with off-site utility infrastructure construction, and that the location of this fencing be shown on the Landscape Protection Plan, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
24. Parking Lot Screening: That all parking areas shall be screened from view in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The screening plans shall be approval by the Town Manager.
25. Building Elevations: That the Community Design Commission approve building elevations, including fencings around fields, the dog park and the recycling center, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
26. 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
27. Land Disturbance in the Resource Conservation District: That land disturbance in the Resource Conservation District is authorized in accordance with Section 3.6.3 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.
28. Resource Conservation District Location: That the applicant submit Final Plans which show the location of the Resource Conservation District for the off-site construction associated with the sewer line extension into Southern Village.
29. Wetlands Location: That the applicant submit Final Plans which show the location of State or federally regulated wetlands on the site or in off-site locations associated with required infrastructure and roadway improvements. That any proposed disturbance of wetlands shall demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal regulations.
30. Impervious Surface Limits: That the site shall comply with Section 3.8 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.
31. 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 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 percent of total suspended solids and treat the first inch of precipitation utilizing NC Division of Water Quality design standards.
32. Storm Drainageway Easement: That all stormwater management improvements, outside public right-of-way, shall be located inside reserved storm drainageway easements, in accordance with Town guidelines, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
33. Off-Site Storm Drainage/Construction Easements: That the Town Manager approve all off-site construction and stormwater easements and recorded copies of the easements be submitted prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
34. Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan: That the applicant shall provide a Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan for all engineered stormwater facilities.
35. 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.
36. Erosion Control: That a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan (including provisions for maintenance of facilities and modification of the plan if necessary), be reviewed and approved by North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources. That the plan is reviewed by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer and that a copy of comments associated with the review be provided to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
37. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.
38. Lighting Plan Certification: That the final plan application comply with the lighting standards in the Land Use Management Ordinance.
Stipulations Related to Utility and Service Issues
39. Off-Site Utility Improvements: That the applicant shall construct the following utility improvements:
· Water Line: 12-inch water line and five fire hydrants between Southern Village and Dogwood Acres Drive, within the US 15-501 South right-of-way, and between US 15-501 South and Merritt Drive, within the Dogwood Acres Drive right-of-way.
· Sewer Line: 8-inch public sewer main, between Southern Village and the proposed 6-inch private lateral.
40. Sewer Easement: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall dedicate a public sewer easement for the 8-inch public sewer main and a 30-foot sewer easement for a future public sewer line extension to the Dogwood Acres neighborhood.
41. Off-Site Utility Construction: That approval of this Special Use Permit shall authorize the installation of off-site utilities.
42. Off-Site Utility Easement: That all required off-site utility easements, authorizing the installation of the required sewer and water line improvements shall be provided and approved by the Town Manager and OWASA and recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
43. 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.
44. Overhead Obstruction/Utility Lines: That the final plans included details verifying that no overhead obstruction or utility wires will interfere with service vehicle access or operation.
45. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final Utility/Lighting Plan be approved by Progress Energy, Orange Water and Sewer Authority, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
46. Utility Line Placement: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, all new utility lines, including the existing utility line within the Progress Energy easement south of Dogwood Acres Drive, shall be placed underground. Where practical, installation of underground utilities shall be located outside tree protection areas as shown on the submitted site plans. The proposed underground line routing, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
47. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report shall be prepared and sealed by a registered professional engineer, which certifies 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.
48. Fire Apparatus Turning Radii: Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the Town Manager shall approve all parking lot turning radii to ensure that fire apparatus can maneuver within the parking lots.
Stipulations Related to Miscellaneous Issues
49. 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.
50. Traffic and Pedestrian Control Plan: That a Traffic Management Plan for movement of motorized and non-motorized vehicles on any public street that will be disrupted during construction, including detour information and a pedestrian management plan indicating how pedestrian movements will be safely maintained, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
51. Open Burning: That the open burning of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris association 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.
52. 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 shall 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.
53. As-Built Plans: That prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, as-built plans in DXF binary format using State plane coordinates, shall be provided for improvements and all other existing or proposed impervious surfaces.
54. 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.
55. 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.
56. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
57. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions are held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.
BE IT RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for the Special Use Permit application for the Town of Chapel Hill, Southern Community Park in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
COUNCIL MEMBER STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK, TO ADOPT R-14. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MANAGER TO PROCEED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND A BIDDING PROCESS FOR THE SOUTHERN COMMUNITY PARK (2005-05-09/R-14)
WHEREAS, on April 11, 2005 the Council approved a phasing plan for the Southern Community Park; and
WHEREAS, the Council has approved a Special Use Permit for the park;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council authorizes the Manager to proceed with development of construction documents, to apply for all needed permits, and to seek bids for construction of the Southern Community Park.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
Item 10 – Continuation of a Public Hearing: Holy Trinity Lutheran
Church Application for a Special Use Permit
Senior Planner Phil Mason displayed an aerial map of the site for the Special Use Permit (SUP). He said there were two key issues identified from the April 19 public hearing, the wide of Cottage Lane and floor area modifications.
Regarding the width of Cottage Lane, Mr. Mason said the Council had suggested that the staff, applicant, and neighbors meet to discuss the existing width, recommended improvements, and additional options. He noted they had also met and discussed minimum safe street widths with Engineering and Fire Department staffs. Mr. Mason said their revised recommendation was for a 16-foot-wide street and a five-foot-wide sidewalk with a 21-foot right-of-way. Mr. Mason said they believed their revised recommendation was a good balance between Town safety and neighborhood concerns.
Mr. Mason said that regarding modification to floor area, a Council member asked for additional information about the applicant’s request for a modification to floor area as it related to the proposed width of Cottage lane and gross land area of the site. He said the applicant desires to construct a total of 11,540 square feet of floor area, but the Land Use Management Ordinance (LUMO) provides that in this case the maximum floor area allowed is 10,953 square feet. Mr. Mason stated that the applicant had requested a modification to LUMO to exceed the maximum permitted floor area by 587 square feet. Mr. Mason said the Manager recommended approval of this modification to LUMO.
Dan Jewell, speaking as the applicant, said that they were in agreement with the stipulations as noted in Resolution A. He clarified the reason they were asking for the modification in floor area ratio was due to the request by staff to dedicate additional right-of-way on Cottage Lane.
Paul Cheek, a resident of 210 Cottage Lane, stated he was speaking for himself as well as the residents of 209, 208, 206 and 204 Cottage Lane. He said they were in agreement with the proposed stipulations as they currently read, and thanked the Council for the opportunity to comment.
MAYOR PRO TEM WIGGINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0)
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ADOPT R-15. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE HOLY TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH (2005-05-09/R-15a)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by Dan Jewell of Coulter Jewell Thames for the Holy Trinity Lutheran Church on property identified as Orange County Tax Map 80, Block E, Lots 38 and 38A (PIN nos. 9788-48-5503 and 9788-48-6443) if developed according to the site plans dated July 20, 2004, revised November 30, 2004, with supplemental revisions to landscape plan and utility plan presented at April 18 Public Hearing, and the conditions listed below:
1. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance;
3. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and
4. Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council finds, in this particular case, that the following modification satisfies public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:
1. Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance secondary height requirements, to allow a maximum building height of 83 feet;
2. Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance street setback requirements, to allow a minimum street setback of 5’ on the eastern property line; and
3. Modification of Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance landscape buffer requirements, to allow a minimum landscape buffer of 5’ on the Cottage Lane frontage; and
4. Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance floor area requirements, to allow a maximum floor area of 11,540 square feet.
Said public purposes, to an equivalent or greater degree, being, 1) the expansion of an established place of worship and 2) the improvement of an abandoned property in the Franklin-Rosemary Historic District that has fallen into disrepair.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for Holy Trinity Lutheran Church in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:
Stipulations Specific to the Development
1. That construction begin by May 9, 2007 (two years from approval date) and be completed by May 9, 2008 (three years from approval date).
2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit authorizes a place of worship, with associated classrooms, and land use intensity requirements and dimensional standards as specified below:
|
Land Use Intensity |
|
|
Net Land Area |
38,566 s.f. |
|
Total # of Buildings |
1 |
|
Maximum Floor Area |
11,540 s.f. |
|
Maximum Impervious Surface Area |
28,766 s.f. |
|
Maximum # of Parking Spaces Proposed |
28 |
|
Minimum # of Bicycle Spaces |
6 |
Stipulations Related to Transportation Issues
3. Encroachment Permit: The applicant obtain Town approval and record an emergency and service vehicle cross-access easement, across the parking lot at the rear of the site, connecting Friendly and Cottage Lanes, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
4. Cottage Lane Improvements: That the applicant shall improve Cottage Lane to a 16-foot wide street, for approximately 315 linear feet, from East Rosemary Street to the entrance to the rear parking lot, above the built to Town Standard, subject to approval by the Town Manager, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
5. Cottage Lane Sidewalk Improvement: That the applicant shall construct a 5-foot wide turned-down sidewalk, without curb and gutter, on the west side of Cottage Lane adjacent to the new building, for approximately 250 linear feet, from East Rosemary Street to the entrance to the rear parking lot, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
6. Cottage Lane Right-of-Way Dedication: That the applicant shall dedicate right-of-way to the Town, in addition to the existing 10-foot right-of-way, from the eastern edge of the 16-foot wide Cottage Lane pavement to the back edge of the 5-foot wide sidewalk on the west side of the street, to include the entire improved 21-foot street and sidewalk width, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This dedicated right-of-way shall extend approximately 335 linear feet from East Rosemary Street to the back property boundary of the site.
7. Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: That the applicant shall record an easement plat with the Orange County Register of Deeds indicating a 2-foot wide maintenance and access easement from the back edge of the sidewalk on the west side of Cottage Lane, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
8. East Rosemary Street Sidewalk: That the applicant shall construct a 5-foot wide brick sidewalk, built to Town standard, across the East Rosemary Street frontage, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
9. East Rosemary Street Right of Way Dedication: That the applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way on the East Rosemary Street frontage, if necessary, to extend to 1-foot back of the required sidewalk on the East Rosemary Street frontage.
10. Bicycle Parking: That the applicant shall provide six (6) bicycle parking spaces, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
11. Parking Lot Standards: That all parking lots, drive aisles and parking spaces shall be constructed to Town standards.
12. Transportation Management Plan: That the applicant shall prepare and obtain Town Manager approval of a Transportation Management Plan prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The required components of the Transportation Management Plan shall include:
a. Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;
b. Provisions for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;
c. Provision for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;
d. Ridesharing incentives;
e. Public transit incentives; and
f. Other measures subject to approval by the Town Manager.
Stipulations Related to Landscaping and Architectural Issues
13. 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:
Required Landscape Buffers
|
Location |
Required Buffers |
|
Southern Property Line (E. Rosemary St. frontage) |
20 ft. Type ‘C’ Alternative Buffer, may include supplemental plantings if required by the Historic District Commission |
|
Eastern Property Line (Cottage Lane frontage) |
Variable Width Buffer (5-8 ft.) with Modification to Regulations |
|
Northern Property Line (rear of site) |
Variable Width Alternative Buffer (7-20 ft.) with additional fencing or the like, if required by the Historic District Commission |
|
Western Property Line (towards Friendly Lane) |
Variable Width Alternative Buffer (6-10 ft.) with additional fencing, a wall, or the like, if required by the Historic District Commission |
14. Alternative Landscape Buffers: That the applicant shall provide alternative buffers on the southern, northern and western property lines. The applicant shall provide supplemental alternative buffer plantings on the southern property line, fencing (existing) on the northern property line, and additional fencing, a wall, or the like, on the western property line, if required by the Historic District Commission. Alternative landscape buffers shall be approved by the Historic District Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
15. Pecan Tree Replacement: That the applicant shall negotiate an agreement with the neighbors to the west of the proposed development and remove the 18 and 20-inch pecan trees and replace them with a suitable alternative, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
16. Specimen Tree Protection: That the applicant shall protect the three specimen trees, the 25-inch Maple, 30-inch Maple, and 37-inch Willow Oak, from damage on the East Rosemary Street frontage, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
17. Mixed Hardwoods Protection: That the applicant take appropriate measures to preserve the mixed hardwoods ranging from 11 inches to 26 inches in diameter both on-site and immediately off-site near the northern property line, where practicable.
18. Parking Lot Screening Plan: That the parking lot screening plans shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
19. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, clearly indicating which rare and specimen trees shall be removed and preserved, critical root zones of all rare and specimen trees, significant tree stands, detail of protective fencing and construction parking and materials staging/storage areas, and including Town standard landscaping protection notes, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
20. Landscape Plan and Landscape Maintenance Plan: That a detailed Landscape Plan including a Landscape Maintenance Plan, shall 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 as well as the limits of land disturbance and tree protection fencing.
21. Parking Lot Landscape 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 landscape screening plans shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
22. Shading Plan: That prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, a Shading Plan must be submitted and approved by the Town Manager demonstrating compliance with Town regulations.
23. Building Elevations: That the Historic District Commission approve building elevations, lighting, including the location and screening of all HVAC/Air Handling Units for this project, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
24. Lighting Plan: That the Community Design Commission approve a lighting plan for this project prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The Community Design Commission shall take additional care during review to ensure that the proposed lighting plan will minimize 1) upward light pollution and 2) offsite spillage of light.
Stipulations Related to Environmental Issues
25. Resource Conservation District Verification: That the applicant provide 1) a stream determination from the Town Engineering Department and 2) verification from a registered land surveyor that there is no significant Resource Conservation District as part of the final plan submittal.
26. 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 include low-impact stormwater management solutions and best management practices, such as but not limited to bio-retention, pervious pavements, underground storage, infiltration trenches, vegetative swales and similar techniques.
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 percent total suspended solids and treat the first inch of precipitation utilizing NC Division of Water Quality design standards.
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 monitoring and maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be approved by the County Erosion Control Officer and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. That a performance guarantee shall be provided, if more than one acre of land is disturbed, 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. Solid Waste Details: That final plans include dimensioned details as well as appropriate signage and lighting for the refuse area, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
34. Shared Refuse and Recycling Agreement: That the applicant shall provide a refuse and recycling agreement shared among the 1) proposed Holy Trinity Church, 2) existing Church and 3) adjacent Beta Phi Sorority properties, allowing refuse collection services to be shared across property lines, to be approved by the Town Manager and recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The facilities shall be located off-site, across East Rosemary Street, on the boundary of the existing Holy Trinity Church and the adjacent Beta Phi Sorority, to be approved by the Town Manager.
35. Heavy Duty Pavement: That the applicant shall provide heavy-duty pavement in the required emergency and service vehicle access easement, and the pathway to refuse container(s), subject to Town Manager approval.
36. Pavement Damage: That final plans include the following note, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, “The Town of Chapel Hill, its’ assigns or the County shall not be responsible for any pavement damage that may result from service vehicles.”
37. Overhead Obstruction/Utility Lines: That the final plans included details verifying that no overhead obstruction or utility wires will interfere with service vehicle access or operation.
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report for all new construction, shall be prepared and sealed by a registered professional engineer, which demonstrates 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.
41. Fire Hydrant: That the proposed fire hydrant, near the parking lot at the rear of the site, shown on the Utility Plan, Sheet SD 5.0 (dated November 30, 2004), shall not be required as shown on plans.
Stipulations Related to Miscellaneous Issues
42. Recorded Recombination Plat: That the applicant shall provide a recordable recombination plat to the Town Manager for approval for the purpose of recombining the 2 subject parcels of the development assemblage (7.80.E.38 and 7.80.E.38A) into one parcel. The applicant shall provide a copy of the recorded recombination plat to the Town prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
43. 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.
44. Traffic and Pedestrian Control Plan: That a Traffic Management Plan for movement of motorized and non-motorized vehicles on any public street that will be disrupted during construction, including detour information and a pedestrian management plan indicating how pedestrian movements will be safely maintained shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
45. Open Burning: That the open burning of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris association with this development is prohibited.
46. 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.
47. 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.
48. 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.
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
52. 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 by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the application for the Special Use Permit application for Holy Trinity Lutheran Church in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.
This is the 9th day of May, 2005.
Item 11 – Changes to Duplex Provisions
Senior Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper noted that on April 18, the Council considered four parts of this issue:
Part 1. The Council held a Public Hearing to consider changes to the duplex provisions of the Land Use Management Ordinance. We recommend enactment of an ordinance to amend the regulations.
Part 2. The Council held a Public Hearing to consider changes to the duplex component of the Comprehensive Plan Design Guidelines. We recommend adoption of a resolution that would amend the Design Guidelines.
Part 3. The Council received a Report on Possible Changes to Minimum Lot Sizes for Duplexes and for Single Family Houses with Accessory Apartments. On April 18, the Council adopted a resolution that referred that Report to the Planning Board for further consideration. Accordingly, material on that issue is not contained in this agenda package.
Part 4. The Council received a Report on Possible Changes to Accessory Apartment Provisions. We do not recommend pursuing this Community Design Commission initiative.
Ms. Culpepper said that Parts 1, 2, and 4 are discussed further in the Council’s memorandum. She said the Manager’s recommendation was for enactment of Ordinance O-2, amending LUMO regarding dwelling units, two-family-duplex provisions. In addition, Ms. Culpepper said, the Manager recommended adoption of resolution R-16 regarding Design Guidelines for duplex dwellings, to be administered by the Community Design Commission.
Ms. Culpepper said regarding possible changes to the Accessory Apartment provisions of LUMO, the Manager recommended no action.
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ENACT O-2. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL LAND USE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE REGARDING DWELLING UNITS, TWO-FAMILY–dUPLEX PROVISIONS (2005-05-09/O-2)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the proposed text amendments to the Land Use Management Ordinance and finds that the amendments are warranted in order to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill as follows:
Section 1. Section 6.19, Dwelling Units – Duplex, of the Chapel Hill Land Use Management Ordinance is hereby revised to read as follows:
“6.19 Dwelling Units -- Duplex
The following standards shall apply to development of duplexes:
(a) The maximum floor area of the structure may not exceed 3,000 square feet.
(b) The maximum floor area ratio applicable shall be .40.
(c) The maximum number of bedrooms per structure shall be 6.
(d) The Community Design Commission shall approve duplex building elevations and site plans to determine if the elevations/site plans are in accordance with the adopted design guidelines.
(e) No more than four (4) vehicular parking spaces, as defined by landscaping and hardscape materials, shall be permitted.
(f) For Special Use Permit, Special Use Permit Modification, Site Plan Review, and Site Plan Review Applications which authorize construction of Dwelling Units, Two-Family – Duplex Use, the Community Design Commission shall approve duplex building elevations and site plans to determine if the elevations are in accordance with the adopted design guidelines.
(g) That every application for Community Design Commission review of a duplex elevation/site plan shall include a list of owners of properties located within 100 feet of the subject property boundaries with the full name and address of each property owner, with stamped, pre-addressed mailing envelopes for each owner on the mailing list. The stamped, pre-addressed envelopes shall be used to notify the property owners of the meeting date and time during which the Community Design Commission will consider the application.
Every application for Community Design Commission review of duplex structure(s) that are approved by a Special Use Permit, Site Plan Review, or said modifications, shall include a list of owners of properties located within 1,000 feet of the subject property boundaries with the full name and address of each property owner, with stamped, pre-addressed mailing envelopes for each owner on the mailing list. The stamped, pre-addressed envelopes shall be used to notify the property owners of the meeting date and time during which the Community Design Commission will consider the application. ”
Section 2. That all ordinances and portions of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
Section 3. That these amendments shall become effective upon adoption.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO ADOPT R-16. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION REGARDING DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR DUPLEX DWELLINGS, TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DESIGN COMMISSION (2005-05-09/R-16)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby amends the Comprehensive Plan Design Guidelines document to incorporate the following revised design guidelines associated with construction of a duplex, as defined by the Chapel Hill Land Use Management Ordinance, to be administered by the Community Design Commission:
Community Design Commission, Duplex Design Guidelines
1. A
single front door to face street, if practicable;
2. Appearance
to resemble single-family dwelling;
3. Height
of structure comparable to nearby buildings;
4. Garage
doors not facing street, if practicable; and
5. Limit
front yard parking as much as possible.
1. The appearance of a new duplex structure shall be consistent, with respect to building materials, roof forms, and lot siting, to the neighborhood in which such structure is to be built.
2. The size, height, and form of a new duplex structure shall be comparable with other structures in the neighborhood in which such structure is to be built.
3. For purposes of evaluating compliance with items 1 and 2 above, the “neighborhood” to be considered shall include the following:
a. Structures immediately adjacent to and across from the subject property;
b. Structures on the same street (both sides) as the subject property; and
c. Structures within 500 feet of the subject property.
4. Garage doors, if facing the street, should not be the dominant feature of the structure.
5. Entrances should clearly identify important access points.
6. Entrances should provide an introductory statement for dwelling units in the duplex structure, and should be landscaped with plants complementary to the building’s architecture and style.
7. All elevations of a building’s exterior design should be coordinated with regard to color, materials, architectural form and detailing.
8. Lighting shall be designed to provide illumination at entrances and along walkways to entrances, without creating spillover onto adjacent properties.
9. Landscape plantings and hardscape materials shall be incorporated to clearly define parking areas and minimize the visual impact of front yard parking.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
Council Member Greene said she was interested in taking another look at accessory apartment provisions sometime in the fall. She said it seemed to her that there was still a problem but there was disagreement on how to solve it. Council Member Greene said she believed there was room for more discussion regarding this. Mayor Foy asked how she proposed that the Council do that. Council Member Greene said she was out of Town in April when this was discussed, and perhaps the Council felt it had already been discussed enough. Referring to the pictures of houses on page 10 of the memorandum, she said it seemed you could have a house that was basically a duplex but was structured in such a way as to have an accessory apartment in it, and she believed that was still a problem.
Mr. Horton said one way of proceeding would be to refer the issue back to the Planning Board, and allow Council Member Greene to prompt them as to the issues of concern. Council Member Greene said the Community Design Commission should take another look at this as well.
Council Member Kleinschmidt said looking at the pictures on page 10 that Council Member Greene spoke of, it seemed unlikely that what was depicted would actually occur again. He said that was a result of an odd set of circumstances where a developer was “stuck” in the middle of regulation changes. Council Member Kleinschmidt said in the picture on the left, there was only 750 square feet dedicated to an accessory apartment.
Council Member Greene said it appeared to her that there was an issue that had two solutions, with one body favoring one and another favoring something else, with a result of nothing happening. Council Member Kleinschmidt said he was not opposed to taking another look.
COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO REFER THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE COMMUNITY DESIGN COMMISSION FOR FURTHER REVIEW. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 12 – Reconvening and Recessing a Public Hearing
on Parking Regulations
Mayor Foy said the staff had requested that the public hearing be reconvened and then recessed to May 23 to allow the staff to complete its work.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-17. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION OPENING A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PARKING REGULATIONS OF THE LAND USE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE AND RECESSING IT TO MAY 23, 2005 (2005-05-09/R-17)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has been considering revisions to the bicycle and vehicular parking provisions of the Land Use Management Ordinance and held a Public Hearing on February 21, 2005 which was recessed to May 9, 2005;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council opens the public hearing regarding parking regulations and recesses the hearing to May 23, 2005, at 7:00 pm.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
Item 13 – Draft 2006-2012 State Transportation
Improvement Program
Transportation Planner David Bonk stated that we were now in the final stages of review of the Draft State 2006-2012 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program. He stated that the memorandum provided to the Council attempted to summarize the impacts this Program would have on Chapel Hill in particular and on Orange County in general.
Mr. Bonk noted that this was a dual process, in that the State developed a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) which the Council had in draft form, and that the Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program adopt a TIP that was exactly the same as the State TIP both in terms of funding for projects and in terms of scheduling for the projects. Mr. Bonk said that failure of the parties to adopt exact TIP’s would result in no TIP being approved, and then as of October of this year all federal funding to this urban area would cease until such time as a TIP was agreed upon by all parties.
Mr. Bonk said development of the State TIP was completed. He said the Metropolitan Planning Organization would be releasing on May 18 the State draft as the Metropolitan draft. In effect, he said, what the Council was reviewing this evening was the State draft as well as the Metropolitan draft.
Mr. Bonk said beginning on page three of the memorandum we have summarized the status and impacts of selected Chapel Hill projects in the proposed Draft State 2006-2012 TIP compared to the adopted 2004-2010 TIP. He said that generally, all of the projects in Chapel Hill and Orange County had been delayed from one to three years. Mr. Bonk said the funding for most of the projects had been increased, due to two factors. One, he said, was that with the delay cost of construction would increase, and for the first time in the State TIP process the State had listed what it called environmental mitigation. Mr. Bonk said that was an attempt to get a handle on environmental costs that are part of all projects pursued.
Mr. Bonk said they had done an assessment of the funding for Orange County and how the 2006 TIP dealt with several questions related to Orange County. One question, he said, was how does the breakout of populations of the various counties that make up Division 7, of which Orange County was a part. Mr. Bonk called the Council’s attention to the tables on pages 6 and 7 of the memorandum. Table one listed the populations of counties in Division 7, he said, and table two was a comparison of Division 7 funding in the 2004 and 2006 TIP's. Mr. Bonk said that table two showed that the funding for all types of programs had fallen, ranging from 6 percent to 49 percent.
Mr. Bonk stated that he was unaware of any reductions in federal or State transportation funding that would explain the 30 percent reduction in transportation funds for Division 7. He said the counties that made up Division 7, Alamance, Caswell, Guilford, Orange and Rockingham, continue to experience population growth and would require additional transportation funds to maintain mobility. Mr. Bonk said it was not clear why Division 7’s proposed funding had been reduced by 30 percent.
Regarding table four, Mr. Bonk said that in the previous TIP Orange County was listed at 7 percent of Division 7 population, resulting in a share of 7 percent of the funding enough though it was clear that Orange County was actually 15 percent of the Division 7 population. He noted that we had argued for years that Orange County was not receiving its fair allocation.
Mr. Bonk said a critical issue of the TIP was cash flow. He said all of our projects had been delayed, and no new projects had been added. Mr. Bonk said they had looked at how funding was distributed over the first four fiscal years to see if we were high or low in the funding. He stated that in table five, it was obvious that Guilford County continued to receive a healthy share of the funding for Division 7 in the first four years of the program. Based on that analysis, Mr. Bonk said, their recommendation was that the Council pass along several comments and recommendations to the Transportation Advisory Committee as follows:
- Funding proposed in the 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement Program for Orange County remains disproportionate to both population and spending per capita.
- The US 15-501 Superstreet project should be re-bid in the fall of 2005 to ensure a more timely implementation.
- Funding for the South Columbia project should be accelerated, with right-of-way to be purchased in FY 2006 and construction in FY 2008.
- The Chapel Hill signal system upgrade is an important project that should be funded as soon as possible. We recommend that funding for this project, totaling $5 million, should be included in FY 2008.
Mayor Foy thanked Mr. Bonk for the analyses he had provided. He said basically what was happening was we were not getting funding, and if we ever did we would not get our share. Mayor Foy said he believed the Council needed to focus on both of those issues as they move forward. As Mr. Bonk said, Mayor Foy commented, this plan required both local and State agreement. He said the State had presented its view of how this could play out, and we needed to set forth our view of how it should play out. Mayor Foy said he believed the recommendations contained in the resolution were reasonable.
Mr. Horton said we had been in negotiations with the State DOT in the past, and they would not be pleased if the Council proceeded in that manner. He said it was essential that we do so, and believed the discussions could be productive if the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) remained steadfast. Mr. Horton said it would require agreement with our partners in order to get them to stand with Chapel Hill, since the State DOT would bring pressure to get this issue settled.
Mayor Foy said he believed it would be a good idea to forward the resolution not just to the Metropolitan Planning Organization, but to Orange County, Carrboro, Hillsborough, and Durham officials to enlist their support. He said he would hope to enlist the aid of citizens as well, to assist to getting the necessary funding.
Council Member Strom said it was an excellent idea to send the resolution to our partners, and stated he hoped that Mr. Bonk would be prepared to make a similar detailed presentation to our colleagues at the TCC and MPO meetings as well as to Durham County, so that the MPO would understand why we are in a position of “putting our foot down” to try to move some of these projects forward.
Council Member Strom said two additional pieces of information that would be helpful for the public and for the Council was a little more of an explanation of why missing the last funding cycle for South Columbia Street cost us money. He said it was as if we spent the money and received no benefit, and we are forced to allocate new dollars to the same project. Also, Council Member Strom stated, he asked if Mr. Bonk could break down in more detail how the dollars allocated to Orange County were being spent. He said it was his understanding it was not being spent on our priority projects, rather on DOT’s priority projects which was on the interstates. Council Member Strom said even when money was coming here, it was not being spent on what we wanted.
Mayor Foy said on page one of the 2006-2012 TIP, the first project was I.D. number I-3306, described as I-85 in Orange County, and totaled nearly $88 million. He said that no one had asked that that $88 million be spent in Orange County, stating that this was $88 million for something no one wanted, yet there were no funds for what we did want. Mayor Foy said he believed if citizens understood that, they would be concerned.
Council Member Strom said the Council was charged with developing a priority list year after year, yet we were unable to get it funded. He said he was confident that the citizens of Chapel Hill would prefer local improvements.
Council Member Harrison said in view of the fact that we operate the signal system for Carrboro and for an important piece of US 15-501 in Durham, he believed we should send a direct request to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen in Carrboro for strong support, as well as to the Mayor and Council for the City of Durham.
Council Member Verkerk said she would like the help of the Town Information Officer to get the message out to citizens regarding the funding issues.
Council Member Kleinschmidt said when we speak about the money and how it was distributed, he believed that an extraordinary amount of money had gone to Guilford County for the interstate widening projects and the bypass that had been built in the last several years and were still being built. He said that many of the communities along the interstate corridors might join us in that kind of complaint, noting he was sure Greensboro had some level of disappointment of how other non-interstate projects were being addressed in the State’s TIP, just as we do and Durham does as well. Council Member Kleinschmidt said that perhaps we could look towards other interstate corridor communities as allies.
Council Member Strom said that regarding South Columbia Street, he wondered if there were a couple of additional steps that we could take. He said he recalled that when the chiller plant was discussed, there was objection from UNC Hospitals and UNC regarding the South Columbia Street project. Council Member Strom asked the Mayor if he would be willing to ask both UNC Hospitals and UNC to write letters clarifying their position of support for the South Columbia Street project now so there would be no question in Secretary Tippet’s or Chairman Galyon’s mind as to what their position was.
Council Member Strom said that in the last year or two Chairman Galyon had asked Chapel Hill to attend one of DOT’s hearings on the TIP. He said there was a hearing scheduled on this draft, and asked if it would be helpful if representatives of UNC, UNC Hospitals, and the Town presented together at that hearing our position on South Columbia Street as well as the TIP.
Mr. Bonk said the State process was that they would hold public hearings in each Division to receive public comment on the draft TIP. He said it was an opportunity for DOT staff to either ask questions or to react to questions and statements from the public. Mr. Bonk said it was an informal process, and he had attended the last public hearing with former Council Member Pat Evans. He said it was a good opportunity, but in the past we had focused much of our efforts at the MPO level where we believe the real negotiations take place.
Mayor Foy asked when that hearing would take place. Council Member Harrison said it was scheduled for this month and would take place all the way at the other end of the Division, in Kernersville.
Mayor Foy suggested that the Council adopt Resolution R-18, amended to include communication with Carrboro, Hillsborough, Durham, and Orange County regarding lack of funding, acquire support from Carrboro and Durham to show support for participating in the new signal system. He asked if specific support needed to be requested from UNC and UNC Hospitals.
Council Member Strom said he believed we needed to ask for specific support from UNC and UNC Hospitals regarding the South Columbia Street project.
Mayor Foy said he and Chancellor Moeser had met with the DOT Secretary to talk about South Columbia Street and its configuration, and the Chancellor had sent the DOT Secretary a letter of support for the current configuration. He concluded we may need to do something like this again, and said he would assume that what ever support they could put together would be agreeable to the Council. The Council agreed by consensus.
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-18 AS AMENDED TO INCLUDE COMMUNICATION WITH CARRBORO, HILLSBOROUGH, DURHAM, AND ORANGE COUNTY REGARDING LACK OF FUNDING, ACQUIRE SUPPORT FROM CARRBORO AND DURHAM TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE NEW SIGNAL SYSTEM, AND ACQUIRE SUPPORT FROM UNC AND UNC HOSPITALS TO SUPPORT IMPROVEMENTS TO SOUTH COLUMBIA STREET. LETTERS OF SUPPORT TO BE REQUESTED FROM ALL ENTITIES. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION PROVIDING THE DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS COMMENT ON THE DRAFT 2006-2012 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2005-05-09/R-18)
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation has released a draft 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Transportation Advisory Committee is expected to release the State draft as the draft 2006-2012 Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the Transportation Advisory Committee has request public comment on the draft Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has reviewed the draft Program;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council provides the Transportation Advisory Committee with the following comments and recommendations:
- Funding proposed in the 2006-2012 Transportation Improvement Program for Orange County remains disproportionate to both population and spending per capita.
- The US 15-501 Superstreet project should be rebid in the fall of 2005 to ensure more timely implementation.
- Funding for the South Columbia project should be accelerated, with right-of-way to be purchased in FY 2006 and construction in FY 2008.
- The Chapel Hill signal system upgrade is an important project that should be funded as soon as possible. We recommend that funding for this project, totaling $5 million, should be included in FY 2008.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Manager forward a copy of this report to Orange County, and the Towns of Carrboro and Hillsborough for their information.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests that the Town of Carrboro and the City of Durham seek support for the funding of the signal system project.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests that the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the University of North Carolina Hospitals reiterate their support through letters and additional meetings for the South Columbia Street project.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
Item 14 – Energy Ordinance
14a. Proposed Revisions to Town’s Energy Conservation Ordinance.
14b. Council Committee on Sustainability, Energy and Environment Proposal to Review the Town’s Energy Conservation Ordinance.
Assistant Manager Bruce Heflin said the Council Committee on Sustainability, Energy, and Environment (SEE) returns with their recommended changes to the Town’s Energy Conservation ordinance. He said various boards made comments on the proposed changes and those were reviewed by the SEE Committee. Mr. Heflin said the Committee’s recommended ordinance revision would replace the stipulations in the existing ordinance with an approach establishing a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) “Silver” certification standard for new and expanded Town facilities. He said the Committee believed the LEED standard would provide a simplified and standardized approach to meeting performance guidelines for energy conservation and sustainability in new construction and renovations.
Mr. Heflin said following receipt of comments from the boards and the Committee’s deliberations, the Committee recommended several changes to the ordinance:
§ Addition of a Council waiver based on cost determination. In response to concerns about the impact on project costs, the Committee added a Council option to waive the LEED Silver requirement in cases where a LEED-accredited professional determines that achieving the standard would add more than 7 percent to the project costs (see Section 5-124). Seven percent was selected as a threshold because it is greater than the typical 3 to 5 percent increase in project costs related to LEED certification and less than the standard 10 percent project contingency budget. This provision would allow the Council to waive the LEED requirement for projects where Silver certification would be difficult, such as equipment storage sheds, maintenance garages, and vehicle storage buildings.
§ Addition of a Council option of applicability for projects less than 5,000 square feet. The ordinance includes new language giving the Council the option to require new structures of less than 5,000 square feet to achieve LEED Silver certification (see Section 5-123). The February 21 draft required a Council waiver to exempt projects of less than 5,000 square feet.
§ Addition of language stating the ordinance does not apply to public housing units. The Committee added a statement that the ordinance does not apply to the renovation of existing or construction of new public housing units in response to comments that the LEED process could increase construction costs at the same time that federal funds may decline. The ordinance states that the Council encourages the application of LEED principles for these projects.
Mr. Heflin said the Committee recommended that the Council enact Ordinance O-3 revising the Town’s Energy Conservation Ordinance to establish a LEED process for new and expanded Town facilities. He said that the memorandum contained staff comments, and one that should be pointed out was that it should be considered that this kind of policy was perhaps more appropriately handled through a Council policy rather than an ordinance, largely to afford the Council greater flexibility in certain cases that present unforeseen circumstances. Mr. Heflin noted that failure to comply with an ordinance constituted a misdemeanor rather than a less serious violation of a Council policy.
Council Member Verkerk, a member of the SEE Committee, said they had a sustained conversation on whether this should be a policy or an ordinance, and it was unanimous that they wanted to go with an ordinance.
Council Member Harrison asked how the Hargraves Center and Aquatics Center would be handled with the ordinance, if at all. Mr. Heflin said those projects were begun prior to the consideration of this ordinance, so technically would not apply. He said they were proposing that the ordinance be effective July 1. Mr. Heflin said the SEE Committee had discussed and was continuing to consider the Aquatics Center project and was in fact meeting later this week to consider possible elements of the project that would address sustainability concerns. He said the consensus was that because of the late application of standards to a project that was already so far along in design, it would present significant additional costs to attempt to gain LEED Silver certification. Mr. Heflin said they had given the designer and the staff further clarification in order to obtain as many sustainable features as possible.
Council Member Verkerk said in order to obtain a LEED Silver certification for any building you had to have a LEED certified architect, engineer or field manager from the very beginning of the project. She said one note of interest was that they were looking at the aquatics center as a candidate for the Energy Bank Bond. Council Member Verkerk said the question was how we use the Energy Bank money to give something to the aquatics center to make it more sustainable.
Council Member Strom said that on page five of the materials there was a section on the 7 percent waiver. He said that the Committee had talked about that and the staff recommended the 7 percent. He said it could be higher or lower, but basically the 7 percent would trigger that the project would come back to the Council. Council Member Strom said as far as affordable or subsidized housing issue, the Committee had learned that the LEED process lent itself more toward institutional buildings rather than apartments. He said it was great for a library but was not intended for residential refurbishment projects.
Council Member Greene said she believed this was a significant ordinance and thanked the Committee for the good work.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ENACT O-3. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE VII. CHAPTER 5 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TO ESTABLISH A LEADERSHIP IN ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN SILVER CERTIFICATION STANDARD FOR NEW AND EXPANDED TOWN BUILDINGS(2005-05-09/O-3)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill as follows:
Section 1. Amend Article VII., Chapter 5 Energy Conservation in Design and Construction of New and Renovated Town Buildings is hereby added to the Town Code to read as follows:
“ARTICLE VII. ENERGY CONSERVATION IN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW AND RENOVATED TOWN BUILDINGS
Sec. 5-121. Intent.
The Council’s intent is to take steps so that buildings built or substantially renovated by the Town of Chapel Hill are constructed in the most environmentally sound way.
The Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Chapel Hill says that, "The Town shall encourage site planning, landscaping, and structure design which maximizes the potential for energy conservation by reducing the demand for artificial heating, cooling, ventilation and lighting, and facilitating the use of solar and other energy resources."
The Council’s intent is to provide the citizens and employees of the Town of Chapel Hill with new and renovated buildings that will reduce the energy requirements of Town buildings, give the optimum comfort, ensure the durability of investments for the taxpayer, consider the health of building occupants and provide the greatest awareness possible of the environmental impacts of what we do.
Sec. 5-122. Energy conservation goals in building design.
Any new or expanded building constructed by and for the Town of Chapel Hill and meeting the applicability criteria in Section 5-123 shall employ the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System throughout their design, construction, and operation unless the Town Council determines that such certification is not in keeping with the use or purpose of the building or is otherwise inappropriate. The LEED Green Building Rating System refers to the most recent version of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Commercial Green Building Rating System, or other related LEED Rating System, approved by the U. S. Green Building Council.
Each Town building project which meets the applicability criteria of this ordinance shall achieve at least the LEED Silver level of certification, unless the Council grants a waiver based on waiver criteria specified in Section 5-124 of this ordinance.
The Town shall refer to the most current applicable version of the LEED certification system in existence. After registering with the U.S. Green Building Council at the design stage of the project as is required, the Town may adhere to that existing version until completion of the project, regardless of any new LEED version that may be released at a later time.
Sec. 5-123. Applicability.
This ordinance applies to new buildings constructed by and for the Town and additions to existing Town buildings whenever the gross occupied area of the new building construction is equal to or greater than 5,000 square feet. The Council may require new Town buildings and building additions of less than 5,000 square feet of gross occupied area to be built to achieve LEED Silver certification.
This ordinance does not apply to projects involving the retrofit and renovation of the Town’s current buildings, or to the renovation of existing or construction of new public housing units. The Council encourages the application of LEED principles for these projects.
Sec. 5-124. Waiver.
At any time during the design and construction process the Council may waive the LEED Silver requirement based on a determination by a LEED professional on the project design team that the Silver standard could not be met without adding more than 7 percent to the project costs.
Sec. 5-125. Qualification of architects.
Design and project management teams for buildings meeting the criteria of this ordinance shall include a LEED-accredited architect or engineer who is involved directly in the day-to-day management of the project.
The Town will carry out its commitment on this policy by assuring that Town personnel who administer projects are fully understanding of green building principles and will encourage the selected design teams to maintain and employ these principles through every phase. Criteria for choosing designers, architects, construction managers, and consulting teams shall include demonstrated knowledge of green building practices in their specific fields, and as applicable, a familiarity and experience with life cycle cost analysis and LEED ratings.
Sec. 5-126. Energy performance monitoring and reporting.
For new construction and building additions required to achieve LEED certification under this ordinance the Town shall require either the project architect or engineer to monitor the energy performance of the building and assist the staff in optimizing energy use of the building during the first year.
The contract for project design services shall include the requirement to produce a commissioning plan as part of the construction documents. The commissioning plan shall include provisions for initial commissioning upon completion of the construction project and provisions for a commissioning evaluation to take place after the building has a twelve month utility billing history. The 12-month commissioning evaluation will include testing and evaluation of all energy consuming building systems to verify that they are performing as designed, that all required operations and maintenance training has been completed and that the building is being operated and maintained in accordance with the instruction of the designer and equipment manufacturers. The Town Manager may either require these commissioning services of the project architect or the project engineer.
The Town Manager's annual report to Council will include a section reporting the energy consumption performance of each new Town building or Town building addition required to comply with the provisions of this ordinance.
Sec. 5-127. Definitions
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Commercial Green Building Rating System. "LEED Green Building Rating System" means the most recent version of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Commercial Green Building Rating System, or other related LEED Rating System, approved by the U.S. Green Building Council.
LEED Silver Level of Certification. The project must earn a predetermined number of points from a detailed checklist of environmental features to achieve a LEED Silver or other rating as set by the U.S. Green Building Council.”
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective July 1, 2005.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
Item 15 – Serving Alcoholic Beverages at Special Events Downtown
Mr. Horton said this item was a result of a petition on April 5 from the Downtown Economic Development Corporation. He said the staff had prepared an ordinance that the Council could enact if it wishes that would amend the Town Code to permit serving and consumption of beer and unfortified wine at designated special events in Town parking lots and on the top level of the Wallace Parking Plaza. Mr. Horton said a resolution was also included that would establish rules for serving of alcoholic beverages at special events at these locations. He noted that specific dates and locations for such events would require further Council approval.
Mayor Foy said the rules were listed on page 6 and noted as Attachment 2. He said they were extensive and would require responsible efforts, including liability insurance in the amount of $1 million by the sponsoring organization.
Council Member Greene said that item #1 on page two states that the “Downtown Economic Development Corporation, or other community-based public or governmental organization sponsoring the event, would be responsible for applying for and receiving the necessary alcohol permits.” She asked who would be the “other community-based public” organization.
Mayor Foy said it could be the Downtown Commission or the United Way. He asked Mr. Karpinos if that was correct. Mr. Karpinos said he believed the point was that it could not be a private commercial enterprise or a fraternity house, for instance. He said it could be the Town itself.
Council Member Greene said she brought it up because it seemed like a vague phrase and she did not want to open the door up to things that they did not anticipate. She wondered if it was necessary.
Mayor Foy said the Town Manager would issue the permit. Mr. Horton responded that was true, but only to an agency approved by the Council.
Council Member Kleinschmidt said he thought maybe Council Member Greene’s concern was that some group such as the Downtown Economic Development Commission or some other community-based organization could become a “straw man” for a private corporation or other interest that may not be the kind of interest that we were anticipating. Mr. Karpinos said the party on the permit and the party providing the insurance would be the public agency to whom the permit was issued. He said there was some discussion at the previous meeting about having sponsorship, and there may very well be an occasion where there was private sponsorship of an event but the permit would still have to be issued to the public community-based agency.
Mr. Horton added that there was nothing that would compel the Council to authorize the issuance of a permit.
Council Member Greene asked if that meant it would be done on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Horton responded that was correct.
Mayor pro tem Wiggins said she thought she understood why the Downtown Economic Development Corporation felt that this permit would enhance their work in particular. She asked if someone could give her an example of why the Town itself would apply for a permit to do this. Mr. Horton said he could not imagine a circumstance in which he would recommend it to the Council. Mayor pro tem Wiggins said that it was possible. Mr. Horton replied yes.
Council Member Kleinschmidt said that other communities do things like that, for example the City of Asheville held a Friday afternoon event that he had attended where the City brought in bands and beer was sold. He said it was a nice event and he had enjoyed it.
Mayor pro tem Wiggins said it seemed inconsistent with our focus on teenage drinking and the idea that you could not have a good time without alcohol. She said that was her concern, even about the Downtown Economic Development Corporation, adding it appeared that we had two standards.
Council Member Kleinschmidt replied he believed we should have two standards – one for adults and one for children.
Mayor pro tem Wiggins said there was also modeling, and said she believed that “do as I say and not as I do” had not proven to be a good model.
COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ENACT O-4. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL CODE OF ORDINANCES TO PERMIT THE PURCHASE AND CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT SPECIAL EVENTS ON TOWN PROPERTIES UPON DESIGNATION AND APPROVAL BY THE TOWN COUNCIL (2005-05-09/O-4)
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill as follows:
Section 1. Section 3-5 of the Town Code is hereby renumbered Section 3-6.
Section 2. Chapter 3 of the Town Code is hereby amended by adding a new Section 3-5 to read as follows:
“Section 3-5. Possession and Consumption of malt beverages and unfortified wines at special events in municipal parking lots and on the top level of the Wallace Parking Plaza.
Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 3-2, 3-3, and 3-4, of this Code, the sale, purchase, and possession of malt beverages and unfortified wines, the possession of open containers of malt beverages and unfortified wines and their consumption shall be lawful on Town Parking Lots 2, 3 and 5 and on the top level of the Wallace Parking Plaza when approved as part of a special event approved by the Town Council. The Council shall by resolution establish rules and regulations for those events.”
Section. 3. Paragraph (n) of Section 12-3. Rules and regulations for town parks. is hereby revised to read as follows:
“(n)
Except as authorized and permitted by resolution of the Town Council adopted pursuant to Section 3-5 of this Code of Ordinances, Nno
person shall use, consume or possess any alcoholic beverages, beer or wine
within the any park.; nNo person shall
use, consume or possess any narcotic drug or hallucinogen or any other
controlled substance within any park without a valid physician’s prescription
for the substance.”
Section 4. This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER STROM, TO ADOPT R-19. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE SERVING AND CONSUMPTION OF MALT BEVERAGES AND UNFORTIFIED WINE ON SPECIFIED TOWN PROPERTIES (2005-05-09/R-19)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the following rules and regulations are hereby established for the service of malt beverages and unfortified wine on Town properties:
- Permits for the service and consumption of malt beverages and unfortified wine may be issued by the Town Manager for special events at the Town Parking Lots 2, 3 and 5 and the top level of the Wallace Parking Plaza upon approval by the Town Council of the events and their specific dates, times and locations.
- Permits to sponsor such events and provide alcoholic beverages may be issued to the Downtown Economic Development Corporation or other community based public or governmental organization approved by the Chapel Hill Town Council.
- The sponsoring organization shall be responsible for applying for and receiving all necessary permits for the service and consumption of alcoholic beverages.
- Only alcohol provided and served at the designated site may be consumed. Persons may not bring their own alcoholic beverages for consumption.
- The sponsoring organization shall comply with all applicable state and local regulations for the sale, service, possession and consumption of alcoholic beverages and shall provide the Town with evidence of receipt of all required permits.
- Alcoholic beverages shall be poured into appropriate plastic cups for service and consumption and not provided for consumption in their original containers.
- The sponsoring organization shall secure and maintain general liability insurance applicable to the serving of malt beverages and unfortified wine at the event for which the permit has been obtained and shall name the Town of Chapel Hill as an additional insured on the policy with respect to claims arising out of the use of the Town’s property and the issuance of the permit by the Town. A certificate evidencing such insurance shall be provided to the Town Manager’s office prior to the holding of the sponsored event. Insurance shall be in minimum amounts of one million dollars ($1,000,000) (combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage liability).
- The sponsoring organization shall be responsible for the cost of additional security for the event. A security plan shall be prepared and approved by the Town Manager before an event permit may be issued. Permits shall be based on standards developed for outdoor events under Chapter 11, Article IX of the Town Code and appropriate additional standards due to the special nature of these events.
- The sponsoring organization shall provide sufficient perimeter controls to ensure that alcoholic beverages are not carried off the site approved for their service and consumption.
- The sponsoring organization shall be responsible for compliance with any other applicable laws, rules and regulations.
- The sponsoring organization shall provide sufficient staffing to ensure that no alcoholic beverages are provided to underage persons or to intoxicated persons.
- The sponsoring organization shall be responsible for keeping the event area clean of litter associated with the operation of the special event.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Manager is authorized to bring back to the Council for approval any requests for the holding of a special event under the terms of this resolution and enabling ordinance.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
Item 16 – Allocation of Moving Ahead Funding for Homestead Road
Mayor Foy noted that this was a request, along with Carrboro and Orange County, that money previously allocated for Smith Level Road be reallocated to the Homestead Road and High School Road safety improvements.
COUNCIL MEMBER VERKERK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, TO ADOPT R-20. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
A RESOLUTION REQUESTING THAT THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ALLOCATE FUNDING FROM THE MOVING AHEAD PROGRAM FOR BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS ALONG HOMESTEAD ROAD (2005-05-09/R-20)
WHEREAS, representatives from Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Orange County have been developing recommendations for bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Homestead Road as part of the Homestead Road and High School Road Safety Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Transportation had allocated $1.3 million in Moving Ahead funding for proposed improvements along Smith Level Road in Carrboro; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Carrboro and the Department of Transportation have concluded that they will not use Moving Ahead funds for the Smith Level Road project; and
WHEREAS, bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Homestead Road are high priorities for Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Orange County; and
WHEREAS, we believe the proposed improvements along Homestead Road are consistent with the goals of the Moving Ahead Program and eligible for Moving Ahead funds;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council requests that the North Carolina Department of Transportation allocate Moving Ahead funds previously allocated to the Smith Level Road project to the bicycle and pedestrian improvements along Homestead Road consistent with the recommendations of the Homestead Road and High School Road Safety Task Force.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council supports the use of Moving Ahead funding for the purchase of right-of-way as necessary.
This the 9th day of May, 2005.
Item 17 – Appointments
17a. Community Design Commission.
The Council appointed Robin Whitsell to the Community Design Commission.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
Community Design Commission |
Foy |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Verkerk |
Ward |
Wiggins |
TOTAL |
||
|
*George Cianciolo (Planning Board) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ABSENT |
|
|
||
|
Gretchen G. MacNair |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Nancy Morton (Planning Board) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Martin Rody (Planning Board) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Bonnie Schaefer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Shireen Smith (Planning Board) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
1 |
|||
|
*Jaclyn Taaffe (Planning Board) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Robin Whitsell (Planning Board) |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
7 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Other; please list: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
||||||||||||
17b. Planning Board.
The Council appointed George Cianciolo and Tim Dempsey to the Planning Board.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
Planning Board |
Foy |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Verkerk |
Ward |
Wiggins |
TOTAL |
||
|
Anita Badrock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ABSENT |
|
|
||
|
*Ralph Beisner(Technology) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Jessica Bell |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Neal Bench |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Jennifer Bennett |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Lukas Brun |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*George Cianciolo( CDC) |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
8 |
|||
|
Bobby Clapp |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Tim Dempsey |
X |
|
X |
X |
|
X |
X |
|
5 |
|||
|
Charles Flowers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
John Gilmore |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Ann Holtzman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Andrea Hundredmark |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Winkie LaForce |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Bernard Law |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
1 |
|||
|
Gordon Merklein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Alan Polak (Technology) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Martin Rody (CDC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Wendy Sarratt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Matthew Scheer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Shireen Smith (CDC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Wilhelmina Steen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Jaclyn Taaffe (CDC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Shawn Thompson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
*Robin Whitsell (CDC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Other; please list: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
||||||||||||
17c. Technology Board.
The Council appointed Ralph Beisner, Martha Hoylman, David Bradford Lewis, Allan Polak, and Brian Russell to the Technology Board.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
Technology Committee |
Foy |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Verkerk |
Ward |
Wiggins |
TOTAL |
||
|
*Ralph Beisner (Planning) |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
ABSENT |
X |
8 |
||
|
Martha Hoylman |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
8 |
|||
|
David Lewis |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
8 |
|||
|
*Alan Polak (Planning) |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
8 |
|||
|
Brian C. Russell |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
8 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Other; please list: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
||||||||||||
17d. Transportation Board.
The Council appointed Kathryn Carder and Robert Koontz to the Transportation Board.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
Transportation Board |
Foy |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Verkerk |
Ward |
Wiggins |
TOTAL |
||
|
Kathryn J. Carder |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
ABSENT |
X |
8 |
||
|
Robert P. Koontz |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
X |
X |
7 |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Other; please list: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
||||||||||||
Item 18 – Petitions
18a. By the Mayor and Council Members.
18a(1). Mayor Foy regarding Fixed Guideway Alignment.
Mayor Foy said this had to do with the Council’s recent discussion about Franklin Street versus Cameron Avenue, and our concern that there not be planning done that would force the issue so that all the land use planning on one part of the corridor would point straight a Cameron Avenue.
Mayor Foy said the suggestion was that the 2030 Long Range Plan contain a caveat that there should be no land use plans made around a corridor that did not exist.
Council Member Strom asked if Mayor Foy felt that was clear enough for Carrboro. Mayor Foy responded we were trying not to be too specific, but who else would it apply to? Council Member Strom said he believed it was too vague. Mayor Foy said he would be happy to refine the language, but reminded the Council that he had brought this up at the last Assembly of Governments meeting so that all of the Carrboro Board members would know about it.
Council Member Strom said why don’t we adopt it the way it is and send a copy of the language to the Carrboro Manager. Mayor Foy asked the Manager to make sure that happened, and that a copy be sent to their Transportation Committee as well.
Council Member Strom said it was interesting that the petition the Council had received tonight from the Neighbors for Responsible Growth addressed some of the same issues. He said they wanted more discussion regarding the corridor at the 2040 plan was being developed, and he thought that was a good idea.
The Council agreed by consensus to accept the language as presented in the Mayor’s petition, and that the language would be forwarded to the Carrboro Town Manager and the Carrboro Transportation Committee.
18a(2). Council Member Strom regarding Planning Department Workload.
Council Member Strom said that the Council goals were part of the Consent agenda, and the Manager had stated that given the work load in the Planning Department that some of the Council goals would have to be altered. He asked that the Council take a look at that and decide how to reorganize the goals given the staffing realities. Mr. Horton said as soon as they acquired some time they would be bringing the Council a proposal for the reordering of the goals. He said there were some suggestions for reorganization, but we did not consider that the Council had given its blessing to it as yet. Mr. Horton said he would bring a proposal before the Council.
18a(3). Council Member Strom regarding the Streetscape Master Plan.
Council Member Strom said he knew that several of the advisory boards were holding special meetings to consider downtown design streetscape issues. He said it became apparent to him that when we had the presentation on potential streetscape projects for this year that the Streetscape Master Plan could use another look. Council Member Strom said it was focused on uniformity and a consistent look, and had been a remarkably successful project to this point. He said that at this point, he believed the Council should hold a work session on it, or come up with a plan to consider what the next phase of streetscape could be or ought to be to meet our goals for the downtown. Council Member Strom said we were an ambitious Council and he knew it would take some staff time, but he wanted to “get it on the radar.”
Mayor Foy said he was at the Downtown Corporation meeting when this came up, and there was a lot of interest in streetscape and in updating the streetscape master plan. He said he believed the boards and commissions were interested as well.
Council Member Strom said it would be hard for him to spend a half million dollars now without having considered the overall plan again.
Mayor Foy said regarding the issue of Planning Department workloads, he asked the Manager to help the Council determine to what degree that was a budget issue and to what degree it was not, so that during their budget deliberations they could determine what the budget implications are and what the Manager was considering versus what the experience level, matter of fact staffing was. Mr. Horton said he believed the key implication of all the items on the table now was that the Council would need to add a senior level planner in order to take on the very aggressive program of neighborhood conservation districts. He said that would be a substantial cost but the Town would receive a substantial benefit from it. Mr. Horton said he would provide the Council with budgetary information at the next budget work session.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.