SUMMARY MINUTES OF A BUSINESS MEETING
OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2006, AT 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council members present were Laurin Easthom, Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Bill Strom, Bill Thorpe, and Jim Ward.
Council Member Mark Kleinschmidt was absent, excused. Mayor Foy noted that he was out of town on business.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Town Information Officer Catherine Lazorko, Planning Director J. B. Culpepper, Principal Long Range Planner Gordon Sutherland, Principal Transportation Planner David Bonk, Housing Director Tina Vaughn, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, Development Coordinator Gene Poveromo, and Town Clerk Sabrina Oliver.
Item 1 – Ceremony
Mayor Foy introduced the St. Paul AME Men’s Choir. He remarked that the Men’s Choir had opened the recent ceremony honoring Black History Month, and he encouraged everyone to visit the exhibition on display at the Town Hall during February commemorating the role African Americans had played in Chapel Hill’s history. Mayor Foy noted that the Choir was led by Angela Lee, and that Christian Foushee Green, a senior at the NC School for the Arts, would accompany the Choir on keyboard.
The St. Paul AME Men’s Choir performed “Lift Every Voice and Sing.” Mayor Foy offered the Council’s thanks to the Choir.
Item 2 – Public Hearings: None.
Item 3 – Petitions
Mayor Foy, noting that petitions 3a(1) and 3a(6) were related, combined the two petitions.
3a(1). Silver Creek Homeowners Association regarding Brick Speed Humps on Silver Creek Trail.
Chris Corton, a resident of Silver Creek Trail and representing the Silver Creek Homeowners Association, requested that the three speed tables approved by the Council for traffic calming be of a brick design. He provided a brief history of their 2003 petition, which led to approval of the speed tables, adding that at that time the homeowners had decided that brick speed tables were preferable. Unfortunately, Mr. Corton said, that information had not been properly conveyed to the Council. As a result asphalt speed humps were approved, he said.
Mr. Corton requested that the Town approve the homeowners’ request for brick speed tables. He noted that they had agreed to pay the difference in cost in addition to any cost to the Town.
3a(6). Jay Klompmaker regarding Speed Table Proposed with Stamped Asphalt for the Oaks II Neighborhood.
Jay Klompmaker, President of the Oaks II Homeowners Association, thanked the Council for approving traffic calming measures in their neighborhood, and emphasized that they wanted those speed tables installed regardless of their appearance.
Mr. Klompmaker petitioned the Council to approve the installation of speed tables called “Speed Table Proposed with Stamped Asphalt,” described in Attachment 7 of the Traffic Calming Plan the Council had previously approved. He noted that the Homeowners Association had agreed to pay for the incremental costs of installation and ongoing maintenance of the speed tables. Mr. Klompmaker said that should address the Town Manager’s concern that textured pavement would have extra maintenance and replacement costs to the Town over time.
Mr. Klompmaker said their request had nothing to do with safety, rather the Homeowners Association preferred the stamped asphalt because it would be consistent in color and appearance with the three speed tables already on Pinehurst Drive. He stressed the stamped asphalt would not be “safer” and would not make their neighborhood safer than others.
Mr. Klompmaker stated they understood the Town Manager’s opinion but felt the Council should consider the opinion of its constituents. He asked that the Council support the petition.
MAYOR PRO TEM STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO RECEIVE AND REFER BOTH PETITIONS TO THE MANAGER AND THE ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3a(2). Carol Seibert regarding a Change in the Charge for the Housing and Community Development Advisory Board.
Elizabeth Hollers-Welsby, vice-chair of the Housing and Community Development Advisory Board, petitioned the Council on the Board’s behalf to revise the charge of the Board. She said that they functioned primarily as an advisory board for public housing, but the name implied that the scope was much larger. Ms. Hollers-Welsby stated that that misrepresentation of the Board’s focus had made it difficult to retain members, because many times applicants were interested in addressing broader issues such as affordable housing. She said that also caused difficulty in recruiting and retaining members who were passionate and informed about public housing.
Ms. Hollers-Welsby said it was the Board’s opinion that there needed to be two separate boards to adequately advise the Council on the varied housing and community development issues in town. She said one board could be the Community Development and Affordable Housing Advisory Board, whose primary task could be to advise the Council on the Community Development and Block Grant and HOME programs as well as general affordable housing issues. Ms. Hollers-Welsby said this board would be best served if staffed by the Planning Department.
Ms. Hollers-Welsby suggested the second advisory board could be the Public Housing Advisory Board, whose primary focus would be to advise the Council on all issues affecting public housing, including the Public Housing Capital Fund Program and budget, as well as advocate on behalf of the Town’s Housing Department and residents. In addition, she said, the Public Housing Advisory Board could serve as a grievance hearing panel and be staffed by the Housing Department.
Council Member Greene commended the Board for coming forward with their proposal. She said she had witnessed the type of disconnect to which Ms. Hollers-Welsby had referred and she believed their proposal was solid.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM STROM, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND THE ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3a(3). Carolina Realty regarding the Purchase of Town-Owned Property.
Mayor Foy noted that the Council had a printed copy of the petition from Carolina Realty.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND THE ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
3a(4). T. Scott Cobb, Jr. regarding Homeowners’ Responsibility to Maintain Property.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND THE ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3a(5). Rachel Lewis-Marlow regarding Design Changes to the Southern Community Park.
Rachel Lewis-Marlow, a resident of Dogwood Acres, said that she and her neighbors were concerned that the design changes made to the Southern Community Park were a significant deviation from the original park design. She said these changes altered the intention and effect of the park facility and were made, in the words of the Parks and Recreation staff, merely to save money. Ms. Lewis-Marlow noted that the changes significantly increased hazards for people driving to and from the park, pedestrians accessing the park from the parking lot, and residents of Dogwood Drive.
Ms. Lewis-Marlow stated that these changes were made without adequate community input and without complete traffic studies comparing the safety of both the original park design and the current park design. She said that extensive public meetings held by the original design committee had led them to believe that, barring small adaptations, the park design submitted to the Council in 2002 would be the final design. Ms. Lewis-Marlow stated that minimal notice was given of subsequent public hearings and no mention was made of significant design changes in those notices. For those reasons, she said, they had not attended subsequent public hearings before the Council and did not provide vital input regarding the design changes.
Ms. Lewis-Marlow asked that the changes be referred back to the original park design committee for their review and approval.
Council Member Ward said he would move that the petition be received and referred to the staff and wanted clarification from the staff about what the time issues and process issues were related to going back to the original design, noting that design had some 40 or so parking spaces on the south side of Dogwood Acres Drive versus the 125 currently located there. He said he was concerned that the design before the Council at this time was second in quality to the original design.
Council Member Ward noted he had attended recent Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board meetings where members of this neighborhood were present, and by looking at the road he believed it was of unsafe design that was significantly less safe from what was originally planned. He said while this change in direction may result in having to go through the Special Use Permit process again, which could take months, when weighed against the 50 to 75 years of usefulness of this park that time was not a concern.
Council Member Ward said he wanted information from the staff on the reasons why the plan went from the original design of 40 parking spaces to the current design with more parking spaces. He said if it was a funding issue what was the number the Council would need to find to create the original design and what were the process issues related to the Special Use Permit.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EASTHOM, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND REQUEST A RESPONSE AS TO Why the plan went from the original design of 40 parking spaces to the current design with more parking spaces, AND, if it was a funding issue,what was the number the Council would need to find to create the original design, and what wERE the process issues related to the Special Use Permit. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3a(7). Habitat for Humanity regarding Request for Loan Extension.
&
3a(8). Sunrise Coalition regarding Request for Loan Extension.
Mayor Foy commented that the Council had a printed copy of both petitions, and because of their similarity they could be received and referred together.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, TO RECEIVE AND REFER BOTH PETITIONS TO THE MANAGER AND THE ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
3a(9). Edward Jackem, Betsy Malpass, Margaret Vimmersteedt, and Maeda Galinsky regarding a Request for a Crosswalk at Fordham Boulevard and Manning Drive.
Maeda Galinsky, widow of David Galinsky who was recently struck and killed near the intersection, said she wanted to plead for the safety of walkers, bicyclists, joggers and drivers. She said what was needed was road planning that took into account people’s normal behavior whether they were walking, running, biking or driving.
Ms. Galinsky advocated for traffic planning and traffic activities that included:
Ms. Galinsky stated that the Town needed pedestrian bridges at heavily congested intersections like the Manning Drive/15-501 intersection. She said that while they work on that long-term and costly solution, other things could be achieved such as placing safety personnel to direct traffic at unusually busy times such as sporting events and concerts.
Ms. Galinsky said she would work with others to achieve these goals in honor of her husband, and that her three children would as well. She said they hoped that as a result of their actions fewer people would have to suffer as they had.
Edward Jackem, a resident of the Kings Mill/Morgan Creek neighborhood, said the light at that intersection was not of sufficient length to allow a pedestrian to cross the intersection before the yellow caution light came on. He said there were several safety factors that should be addressed, such as the inadequate lighting of the intersection and the road itself and the fact that there were two stoplights on Manning Drive only thirty yards apart.
Mr. Jackem read a statement from the Director of the Ronald McDonald House, which noted that many of the 30,000 visitors and residents of the House each year arrived without transportation and did not have the financial means to obtain adequate transportation. He read that weekday shuttle service was provided but only at particular times, and there was no shuttle on the weekends. Mr. Jackem read that many of the visitors were forced to walk on 15-501 and attempt to cross at the intersection with Manning Drive. He read that they would applaud any efforts made by the Town or the NCDOT to improve pedestrian safety.
Betsy Malpass, who lives near the intersection, said that intersection was not safe for anyone. She said one reason was that many vehicles converge at that intersection that were drawn to the parking garages built by the University and who continued to build them. Ms. Malpass said there had also been a huge influx of out-of-Town traffic, noting that anyone coming from south of Town passes through that area. She said another contributing factor was that just up the hill was the UNC Hospitals, the regions largest employer, which did not take into account the number of patients and visitors.
Ms. Malpass noted that Kenan Stadium and the Dean Smith Student Activities Center were located in the area, bringing even more traffic through that intersection for sporting or cultural events. She noted that the Family Practice Center was nearby, and across the road was an area where many people went to jog. Ms. Malpass said they could jog more safely if they had a way to cross over to the Botanical Garden and on to the golf course.
Ms. Malpass said that 15-501 was no longer a bypass, noting the amount of traffic that used 15-501 to access I-85 and I-40. She said the Town had failed to plan and execute a real bypass that would allow people to access those roads without having to travel through Chapel Hill. Ms. Malpass offered details on how safe travel could be provided for all.
Loren Hintz, a member of the Kings Mill/Morgan Creek Neighborhood Association, stated that the only good that could come out of the recent death was to make Town streets safer for everyone. He said all of the plans and hearings for this area had included suggestions for improvements, and it was sad that a death had to occur before these improvements were taken seriously.
Mr. Hintz said if neighborhoods such as his were to be connected to Chapel Hill, then there needed to be a safer way to travel from those neighborhoods throughout the Town. He urged the Council to create a committee similar to the one born for NC 54/Hamilton Road several years ago. Mr. Hintz said the committee should include representatives from the Botanical Garden, the University, the Town, neighbors and others as appropriate with the objective of improving the safety of this intersection.
Margaret Vimmersteedt said whenever you build a road it was fast and convenient for vehicles but difficult for people. She urged the Council to oppose widening 15-501, and to think about this as being more of a grid system where people could safely cross. Ms. Vimmersteedt said where there are bus stops and apartment buildings where people cross there should be a safe way for them to cross.
Mayor Foy noted that Council Member Ward would step out of his role as a Council member in order to speak on this issue as an employee of the Botanical Garden. He invited Council Member Ward to approach the podium to speak.
Council Member Ward stated that the Botanical Garden felt as an integral part of the Kings Mill/Morgan Creek neighborhood. He said on behalf of Peter White, the Director of the Botanical Garden and the rest of the staff he wanted to publicly express concern and sorrow for the death of Professor Galinsky. Council Member Ward then read a statement by Mr. White that expressed their support for the Galinsky family, and noted that the Botanical Garden would remain a steadfast partner for their neighbors. He read that they would continue to support easy and safe pedestrian and bike access to and from all parts of the community. Council Member Ward read that communities could be designed with vehicles as well as pedestrians in mind. He read that they would support any and all possibilities that would produce people and community friendly connections in the area including an underpass, overpass, and crosswalks with pedestrian and bike signals. Council Member Ward continued, reading that they were eager to participate in a process to find peaceful solutions for this problem.
Mayor Foy noted that he and Town Manager Horton had met today with Representatives Verla Insko and Joe Hackney, the Chair of the Board of the Department of Transportation Doug Galion, Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli, Engineering Director George Small, and three staff members of the NCDOT whose emphasis was on public safety. He stated that the purpose of the meeting, which he said was initiated by Representative Insko, was to discuss traffic safety and pedestrian and bicycle safety in the wake of the rash of pedestrian accidents that had occurred in Chapel Hill.
Mayor Foy remarked that their message to NCDOT was that Chapel Hill was consciously urbanizing and becoming denser, and that the roadway systems still looked like highways even though people used them for other purposes. He said one particular way that Chapel Hill had changed was that its bus system now carried six million passengers a year, double the number of passengers than it carried three or four years ago. Mayor Foy noted that most people who ride the bus walked to and from the bus, and most likely crossed a street in the process. He stated with that much pedestrian traffic as well as increased bicycle use, the point needed to be made clear to NCDOT.
Mayor Foy said that several areas of Town had serious problems, noting particularly the bypass at other points than the Manning Drive intersection, at Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard, and at East and West Franklin Streets.
Mayor Foy said that at the meeting they had made it clear they did not need another study, and that they knew what needed to be done. He said these were all State roads, so what they needed was money and permission from NCDOT to make the necessary improvements to these roads. Mayor Foy said they received a commitment from NCDOT that they would assist the Town in doing that. But, he said, that was in the short term.
Mayor Foy said that other issues would need to be addressed in the long term, and Council Member Greene would offer a specific petition to speak to that.
Council Member Greene stated that the Town needed to support and work hard on any and all ways to get NCDOT to help it as it tries to redesign Chapel Hill into an urban city. She remarked that the notion of a parent walking across 15-501 pushing a stroller was unthinkable because there was not sufficient time to cross safely, and one could not imagine any time it would be possible without a pedestrian tunnel or overhead bridge.
Council Member Greene petitioned the Council to request that the Manager assist them in constructing a committee to consider a process to work on a long-term solution in the form of a bridge or tunnel or some other solution to help people move safely from one point to another. She said the people who needed to be involved in that included a high level NCDOT representative such as a district engineer, a representative of the Botanical Garden, a representative of Ronald McDonald House, a representative of UNC Athletics, neighbors, and any others interested. Council Member Greene stated this would not be easy, but if they want to get something done they have to move forward.
COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO CREATE A COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP A PROCESS RECOMMENDATION FOR PEDESTRIAN SAFETY ISSUES ON FORDHAM BOULEVARD AND MANNING DRIVE, TO INCLUDE AN NCDOT DISTRICT ENGINEER, A RONALD McDONALD HOUSE REPRESENTATIVE, A BOTANICAL GARDEN REPRESENTATIVE, A UNC ATHLETICS REPRESENTATIVE, NEIGHBORS AND OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Announcements by Council Members.
Council Member Thorpe asked that the Manager begin a process to address the issue of persons who sit on roadsides with signs that read “You honk and we drink.” He said he had received a number of phone calls from citizens who expressed concern regarding this, noting it could promote drinking and some of the persons engaged in that activity may not be of legal age to drink. Mr. Horton responded that he did not have any immediate ideas of what might be appropriate within the law, but he would look into it.
Council Member Easthom expressed her deep sympathy to Ms. Galinsky, noting she wanted to expand on Council Member Greene’s petition. She said she wanted to look beyond just the one intersection at 15-501 and Manning Drive, and look at other State roads in Chapel Hill that were equally dangerous. Council Member Easthom added she wanted to hold NCDOT accountable to provide safe intersections all over Town.
Council Member Easthom said that she and Council Member Thorpe had been given the opportunity to work with several departments throughout the Town, noting it had been an enjoyable experience. She said they had toured the Police Department, Public Works, Transit, and the Fire Department. Council Member Easthom observed that they had great employees in this Town and she had a new appreciation for what they do. She said many had worked for the Town for years, and she commended that service to the Town and its citizens. Council Member Easthom said they should remember that their employees were the ones who kept things running smoothly each day and she wanted to express her thanks.
Council Member Easthom noted that the Town had received a letter from Chancellor Moeser stating that Dan Reed of UNC might be interested in providing technical assistance to the Town in its efforts to provide municipal wireless internet. She quoted from that letter, “It struck me that this might be a very fruitful way for us to provide important assistance to the Town in this endeavor. If in fact it would be helpful, please let me know.” Council Member Easthom said it would be of benefit to look into such assistance, and she wanted the Town to respond to that offer of help. Mr. Horton commented that the Council’s Technology Committee was scheduled to report to the Council on February 27, and he believed the Council might want to first receive that report and then decide how such assistance might be appropriate.
Item 4 – Consent Agenda
Council Member Easthom pulled Item #4d, Vehicle Replacement Plan.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM STROM, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-1 WITH ITEM #4d REMOVED. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 5 – Information Reports
Council Member Harrison pulled Item #5e, Response to a Petition Regarding Pope Road Annexation and Speed Limit. He said he had brought this petition forward along with a number of neighbors, and thanked the Manager and Attorney for their effective response. Council Member Harrison said the goal was to make this a safer road, noting it was 24 feet wide with a 40 mph speed limit, and about 95 percent of the road had no sidewalks. He noted he wanted to make sure that the Town controlled what little sidewalk was there, and when sidewalk was built on Old Durham Road that they look into connecting those sidewalks, adding that might require a small annexation but no change in the agreement with Durham. Council Member Harrison said the idea of getting the speed limit lowered would make a difference, since 55 mph seemed to be the average speed on that road.
Council Member Harrison said he had discovered a friend of his had been hit recently while riding his bike on that road to catch a CHT bus, and that concerned him since he frequently traveled by bicycle as well. He thanked the Manager and staff for their work on this.
COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-7. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Remaining information reports were accepted as presented by a consensus of the Council.
Item 6 – Chapel Hill Kehillah Park and Ride Terminal Special Use Permit
Mr. Horton commented that tonight they would focus solely on what they believed were the remaining issues.
Development Coordinator Gene Poveromo stated that this was a continuation of the January 18 Public Hearing regarding a Special Use Permit (SUP) for the Chapel Hill Kehillah parking lot at the corner of Mason Farm Road and Purefoy Road, directly south and west of the UNC campus. He said during the hearing three issues were identified concerning sidewalks, bus shelter and a pedestrian lighting plan. Mr. Poveromo stated that the applicant was objecting to the Manager’s recommendation on these three points, and was requesting that the Council modify the regulations for each of these issues.
Mr. Poveromo said regarding sidewalks, the staff’s recommendation was that sidewalks be constructed along both the Mason Farm Road and Purefoy Road frontages. He said two options for the Council to consider would be to modify the regulations or to consider alternate stipulations. Mr. Poveromo said that page three of the memo listed alternate stipulations.
Mr. Poveromo noted the first alternate stipulation would require the applicant to construct a sidewalk along the portion of Mason Farm Road from the entrance drive to the intersection with Purefoy Road. He said the second alternate stipulation would require that at such time that a sidewalk was constructed on the frontage of adjoining property on Mason Farm Road and on Purefoy Road, the owner of the property encumbered by this SUP would construct or provide payment for the construction of a sidewalk along the frontage of its property along Mason Farm Road and Purefoy Road. Mr. Poveromo stated that the Council could also conclude that no sidewalk construction should be required.
Mr. Poveromo said with respect to the first stipulation the applicant was willing to make a payment-in-lieu of $1,000 to pay part of the cost of constructing a sidewalk along the portion of Mason Farm Road from the entrance drive to the intersection with Purefoy Road. He said Town staff estimated the cost of this sidewalk to be between $2,000 and $4,000, with the higher cost associated with the installation of curb and gutter.
Mr. Poveromo said regarding the issue of a bus shelter, the staff was recommending a payment-in-lieu of $5,000. He said two options the Council might consider were modifying the regulations to require the applicant to set aside an area for a future bus stop or that the provision for a bus shelter site was not necessary.
Mr. Poveromo said the last key issue was the pedestrian lighting plan, noting the staff was recommending that the applicant comply with the requirement for such a plan. He said the applicant opposed providing a lighting plan, noting they believed current lighting was sufficient. Mr. Poveromo said options for the Council to consider was to modify the regulations or to substitute the stipulation noted on page five for Stipulations 16 and 18 in Resolution A, with the substitute stipulation concluding that the existing site lighting satisfied the lighting standards as required in the regulations.
In summary, Mr. Poveromo said there were two options available for the Council. He said one was to modify the regulations for all or each of the key issues, or to substitute the alternate stipulations as noted on pages three through five of the memorandum. Mr. Poveromo stated that if the Council action was to modify the regulations, then focus should be on adoption of Resolution B.
Stanley Robboy, co-president of the Chapel Hill Kehillah, stated they were surprised when they started this process that the Town would require them to include almost $150,000 in improvements, when all they wanted to do was rent out their parking spaces. He said what they were being asked to do was not feasible.
Mr. Robboy noted that Resolution B was recommended by the Planning Board and the Community Design Commission. He asked the Council to accept Resolution B.
Mayor pro tem Strom said people who park in that lot would need to cross Mason Farm Road, and the sidewalk addition to the plan looked like the best way to provide a safe crossing. He asked, without the addition of the sidewalk, how would people move safely from the parking lot to the safe crosswalk? Mr. Robboy responded that it had been suggested that a crosswalk be added on Mason Farm Road at a cost of about $1,500, and they had agreed to bear the cost of that. He said it was then suggested that they place the crosswalk farther up the street. Mr. Robboy said that a walking path could be added consisting of crushed rock or something similar, rather than a cement sidewalk. He noted that it was likely this street be torn up in the future, and it had even been suggested that the road would be made four lanes. Mr. Robboy said it did not seem worthwhile to go to this expense only to have the area potentially torn up later. He said it was their suggestion to place the crosswalk directly in front of the driveway where people would normally walk, or to place the crosswalk at the intersection if the Council believed it was safer.
Mayor pro tem Strom said then the pedestrian movement would be on Mason Farm Road. Mr. Robboy replied they believed that people were going to cross directly out of the parking lot driveway to the sidewalk regardless of where the crosswalk was placed.
Mr. Robboy said regarding the issue of a bus shelter, there was no bus route in this area. He said that the University had built housing across the street and any improvements, such as a bus shelter, would mainly benefit the University. Mr. Robboy said he did not believe they should have to provide a bus stop for the University’s use, when the University had not been required to provide one when they had constructed the housing.
Mayor pro tem Strom said at the last hearing Mr. Robboy had talked about the construction of sidewalks that would require a surveying expense that was prohibitive. Mr. Robboy said that was correct, that if they put in any construction then they would be required to submit a DWF bit map plan, which would cost about $20,000.
Mayor pro tem Strom asked the staff if such a bit map would be required if a sidewalk was constructed along Mason Farm Road. Mr. Robboy responded that the Council had the ability to modify or suspend rules.
Mr. Poveromo said what Mr. Robboy was referring to was a computer generated DWF file required for improvements in a public right-of-way. He said that type of file usually was generated by the surveyor, and he did not believe it was as expensive as Mr. Robboy had stated. Mr. Poveromo said it was required for public improvements so that staff could actually locate the improvements “on the ground.” He added he believed the cost would be around $2,000.
Council Member Hill confirmed with Mr. Poveromo that the cost of a sidewalk from the driveway to the corner was about $2,000 to $4,000. He then confirmed with Mr. Robboy that Chapel Hill Kehillah would be renting the parking spaces. Mr. Robboy noted that the cost of building a sidewalk varied depending on who was building it, adding that the Town could build such a sidewalk at much less expense than they could. Council Member Hill asked what the projected income was for the rental of spaces. Mr. Robboy responded they envisioned renting about 35 to 40 spaces to one or two departments at UNC at a rate of $450 to $500. He said they estimated the annual net income to be around $10,000 to $15,000, but they did expect to have maintenance expenses. Mr. Robboy said they had already spent $11,000 on improvements based on recommendations from the Community Design Commission.
Council Member Hill said that would mean the annual gross income would be somewhere around $15,000 to $20,000. Mr. Robboy said certainly the net would not be that much.
Mayor Foy noted that the permit was for 50 parking spaces to be rented. Mr. Robboy said that was correct, because they did not want to have to come back to the Council for a modification of the SUP if circumstances changed. He said that some programs or other activities might be added or deleted and their pre-school was growing, so the use of the lot might change over time.
Council Member Ward said he was sympathetic to the non-profit nature of the applicant and the significant value it provided to the community. He said he would be willing to support Resolution A with the removal of the requirement for a bus stop shelter, modifying the sidewalk construction to limit it to the short section of sidewalk discussed earlier. Council Member Ward said the safety that sidewalk provided in association with the crosswalk was not something he could ignore. He said that even though the rental of these spaces may not generate significant revenue the first year, it would do so later on. Council Member Ward said he did not believe that would be an undue burden on the project.
Mayor Foy restated the proposal, which was that the permit would require the segment of sidewalk discussed, it would require the payment for the proposed crosswalk, would require the connection to the east if that sidewalk were built, and would not require a bus shelter. Mayor Foy asked if that would include the required lighting plan. Council Member Ward said that was a safety concern for him but he did not feel as strongly about it as he did the sidewalk, but at this point he supported the staff’s recommendation.
Council Member Greene said she wasn’t sure about the lighting plan either, but she wanted to take a different approach and look at the Planning Board’s recommendation. She stated that the Community Church had committed to building a sidewalk on the other side of Purefoy Road, so it was not necessary for the Chapel Hill Kehillah to provide that. Council Member Greene said that would allow the Council to assume that the sidewalk on Purefoy Road would be extended if anything were ever built above it.
Council Member Greene said since the sidewalk on Purefoy would be built on the opposite side of the road, why not move the crosswalk down to that point. She said it made sense to her to have a raised speed table there where people would be crossing from the sidewalk to the existing sidewalk. Council Member Greene said she knew that a larger roadway had been proposed, but that was far into the future so improvement should be made now.
Mayor Foy said that intersection crosswalks as opposed to mid-block crosswalks were discussed during this afternoon’s meeting with NCDOT officials. Traffic Engineer Kumar Neppalli replied that they would follow the Council’s wishes, but they did not normally recommend mid-block crosswalks. He said on this particular street they did expect a lot of students to be walking and using a mid-block crosswalk, and that if a mid-block crosswalk was provided then the Town would have to place them elsewhere as well. Mr. Neppalli said the Town had received numerous requests for mid-block crossings in the past, all of which had been rejected.
Mr. Neppalli noted that the University would soon be adding traffic calming devices to Purefoy Road as part of their Development Plan. He said there already were speed humps on Mason Farm Road installed several years ago.
Mayor Foy said that NCDOT regulations state that pedestrians always have the right-of-way at intersections. Mr. Neppalli stated that was correct.
Council Member Harrison asked if that was only at marked crosswalks. Mr. Horton responded it was at any intersection. Mr. Neppalli added that it was also true for any marked crosswalk, noting that the vehicle had to come to a full stop. He said at unmarked crosswalks, the pedestrian had the right-of-way only if they were already in the crosswalk when a vehicle approached.
Council Member Easthom asked how people who parked in the Chapel Hill Kehillah’s parking lot made their way up to the campus. Mr. Robboy responded they exit the driveway and cross the street and walk on the grass.
Council Member Easthom said they don’t know exactly what will happen to Mason Farm Road when it was expanded, and asked what would be the risk that the sidewalk would be reconfigured when that happened. Mr. Neppalli replied that they had no information on the new road from the University. Mr. Horton noted that the general rule of thumb was that if a sidewalk existed and had to be removed due to State roadway construction, they would have an obligation to replace the sidewalk to serve a similar purpose.
Mr. Robboy said regarding the lighting plan, they had many meetings at night and other times, and no participants had ever commented that the existing lighting was not adequate. He noted that the advisory boards had expressed no concern as well.
MAYOR PRO TEM STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION A, AMENDED TO INCLUDE STIPULATION A AND THE FIRST SENTENCE OF STIPULATION B ON PAGE THREE OF THE MEMORANDUM, AND THAT NO BUS SHELTER BE REQUIRED.
Council Member Ward requested additional information from the staff regarding the lighting plan. Mr. Horton responded they recommended including the requirement for the lighting plan because the Council would be authorizing a different kind of use for the parking lot, and those using the lot may not be as familiar with it as the member of the Chapel Hill Kehillah. Mr. Horton said they also wanted to ensure that the lighting was not violating regulations regarding off-site lighting.
Council Member Ward said with that being said, he would include the requirement for the lighting plan in his motion.
THE AMENDED MOTION WAS SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE.
Council Member Greene asked what types of traffic calming devices currently existed on this road. Mr. Neppalli said there were two speed bumps on Mason Farm Road located between Whitehead Road and Fordham Boulevard. Council Member Greene said she was interested in making the crosswalk a speed table.
Mayor Foy said at this time the stipulations required a marked crosswalk.
Council Member Ward said he believed the stop sign would act in the same way at that location. Council Member Greene agreed.
Mayor pro tem Strom asked what steps the applicant would have to take to comply with the lighting plan stipulation. Mr. Horton responded the applicant would have to hire an engineer who could determine whether or not the lighting plan was sufficient to give a pedestrian safe passage on the property, and to ensure that the lighting did not improperly move off the property.
Mayor pro tem Strom asked if Council Member Harrison would agree to remove the stipulation for a lighting plan from his motion. Council Member Ward said he would not be comfortable doing that.
MAYOR PRO TEM STROM MOVED A SUBSITUTE MOTION, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EASTHOM, TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION BY DELETING THE LANGUAGE REQUIRING A LIGHTING PLAN. THE MOTION TO SUBSTITUTE THE MAIN MOTION WAS ADOPTED 6-2, WITH MAYOR PRO TEM STROM AND COUNCIL MEMBERS EASTHOM, GREENE, HARRISON, HILL, AND THORPE VOTING AYE, AND MAYOR FOY AND COUNCIL MEMBER WARD VOTING NAY.
THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WAS NOW THE MAIN MOTION. THE MAIN MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Mr. Robboy asked if it was possible to have the Town construct the sidewalk, and the Chapel Hill Kehillah would reimburse the Town for the cost. Mr. Horton said he did not want to commit to that at this time, but would be happy to talk with Mr. Robboy about it.
Item 7 – Sidewalk Construction Plan for 2005-2006
Principal Long Range Planner Gordon Sutherland provided information using a PowerPoint presentation on the status of the 2004-2005 Construction Plan and its relevance to the 2005-2006 Construction Plan. Mr. Sutherland stated there were 13 projects remaining on the 2004-2005 list that were unfunded, eight of which had constraints to moving ahead. He said three were on Rosemary Street, but were constrained, waiting for the outcome of the Streetscape Master Plan currently underway.
Mr. Sutherland said for the 2005-2006 Construction Plan, they had $132,000 in available funds remaining from the 2004 bond issue. He said they were recommending that work continue on the list of sidewalks remaining from the 2004-2005 plan, in particular:
Mr. Sutherland said in order to address some constraints to the 2004-2005 list, and to address issues raised by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, they were recommending the following supplementary projects which they believed were reasonable projects to move forward in 2005-2006:
Mr. Sutherland said, all together these projects would cost $230,000 to $300,000, well in excess of the $132,000 available. He said the list would provide the staff the flexibility to look at these projects if constraints arise from the 2004-2005 list.
Mr. Sutherland said, in addition, they recommend that the Town seek State funds from the Surface Transportation Direct Allocation Funds (STDAF) for the following:
Mr. Sutherland said these were smaller projects and would be managed using STDAF and the local match allocation.
Council Member Harrison said they did not have a joint pedestrian and bicycle construction plan, and that when the Town built the sidewalk on Legion Road it locked in the cross section from the road, which meant there was no room to add bicycle facilities on that road. He said that was something they should watch for with these five projects, noting they had limited rights-of-way and turn lanes, and he did not want to add one use to a road at the expense of eliminating another. Council Member Harrison said he trusted the staff and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board to be aware of that, but it was frustrating to see it happen. He said in some cases with Town streets they could shift the centerline and generate room that way.
Council Member Ward asked why the Barbee Chapel Road was on the list, since it was a State road. He said his real goal was to get that project removed and replace it with project number 64, which was a section on Hillsborough Street that was attached to a bus stop. Council Member Ward remarked that he saw people walking on the street with limited sight distance every day. He stated that he was not aware of the pedestrian use on Barbee Chapel Road, but he did not believe it generated the pedestrian use that Hillsborough Street generated. Mr. Sutherland said that there was a precedent for their recommendation. He said last year they had recommended constructing a sidewalk on Estes Drive from Franklin Street to the Community Center, which is a State road, because they believed they should move forward with it. Mr. Sutherland said the logic was that Barbee Chapel Hill was of the same vein. He said it was fairly straight and simple to construct, it was about 1,000 feet long, and would connect neighbors to NC 54 off-road paths and provide potential connectivity with Meadowmont.
Council Member Ward asked if Mr. Sutherland was familiar enough with the Finley Forest neighborhood to know if that community could travel west and get to Friday Center Drive and use those sidewalks. Mr. Sutherland said he was not familiar with the internal workings of the neighborhood.
Council Member Ward said he believed there was a greater safety enhancement by substituting the Hillsborough Street sidewalk for the Barbee Chapel Road sidewalk.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-9, AMENDED THAT #53 BARBEE CHAPEL ROAD BE REMOVED AND REPLACED BY #64 HILLSBOROUGH STREET, WEST SECTION ON THE SIDEWALK PRIORITY LIST.
Council Member Harrison stated he would second the motion, noting he would rather see wider lanes on Barbee Chapel Road for various uses. He said that currently there was only room for vehicles, even through that road was listed as a bicycle route.
COUNCIL MEMBER HARRISON SECONDED THE MOTION.
Mayor Foy asked if the motion were adopted, where would Barbee Chapel Road appear on the revised list. Mr. Sutherland said in terms of the 2005-2006 Construction Plan, they would keep it on the priority list and consider it next year. Mr. Horton said it was possible that once they do the field work and the need for drainage, retaining walls and rights-of-way, it may be determined that they could not build it. But, he said, if the Council did not put it on the list it would not be considered for anything.
Mayor Foy said he was questioning whether the addition of the Hillsborough Street sidewalk would bump all the other projects down on the list by one slot. Mr. Sutherland said they would select from the entire list and determine what can be accomplished with the available funds.
Council Member Ward said, then, that the projects had no priority from one to the other on the list, and that the staff would look at the list and see what they can do. Mr. Sutherland said that was correct. Council Member Ward said that was why he wanted to substitute Hillsborough Road for the Barbee Chapel Road project on the list of five projects noted by Mr. Sutherland, to make sure that it was considered. He said he wanted to keep the number of choices small, but still provide flexibility.
THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 8 – Land Use Management Text Amendment Modifications
to Ordinance Associated with Legislative Change
COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM STROM, ENACTED OF ORDINANCE O-4. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 9 – Follow-up Report on Council Goals
Mr. Horton stated that they had prepared a Statement of Goals, which included the history of each goal. He said beginning with the next quarterly report, they would propose to eliminate unnecessary history to shorten up the document and concentrate on a better spelling out of milestones for the remaining objectives.
Council Member Greene said she had a question about goal #5, Monitor/Evaluate Land Use Management Ordinance, Phase 2 to include Dark Skies Ordinance and Town Center Zoning District Building Envelope Provision. She said she remembered that goal to be for the Tree Ordinance, not the Land Use Management Ordinance. She said she was puzzled, confused, and disappointed. Mr. Horton said he believed she was correct, and that they had made an error.
Planning Director J. B. Culpepper stated that this goal had been combined with #5 referenced by Council Member Greene, and called the Council’s attention to pages 14 and 15 of the memorandum where that combination appeared. Mr. Horton said it did suggest a target completion date for this year on that.
Council Member Greene said she believed that priority goal #5 was the Tree Ordinance only. Mr. Horton said he believed it was listed with other items, but he would check on that and bring a report back at a later meeting.
Council Member Easthom said she had a question about the Comprehensive Parking Strategy goal, adding that she did not know what it meant when it said “higher priority.” She asked what that meant they would do. Mr. Horton said the Council had asked that it be moved up for consideration this year.
Mayor Foy noted that the description of the goal had not changed, but it had only been moved up in priority.
Mayor Foy asked if any action needed to be taken now. Mr. Horton said he would appreciate the opportunity to study the Tree Ordinance issue and report back to the Council on February 27.
Mayor Foy said with regards to the Tree Ordinance, in order to achieve the goal of doing something during 2006 he suggested taking information gathered in the past, including what other cities had done, and sending that to the Planning Board with a request for preliminary comment on the concept of a Tree Ordinance. He said the Town could see what they think as our advisors and what their feel was for it so that the Town does not go down a path that others might not appreciate.
Mayor pro tem Strom said he was in favor of moving forward with significant improvement to tree protection, but he feared that just sending the Planning Board information without some indication of guidance may result in the Council not getting what it needed. He suggested putting a request in an agenda item with specifics about what the Council wanted, then forwarding that written report to the Planning Board with the request for a response.
The Council agreed to that suggestion by consensus.
Item 10 – Appointments
10a(1). HOME Committee.
COUNCIL MEMBER HILL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-11 APPOINTING COUNCIL MEMBER EASTHOM TO THE HOME COMMITTEE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
10a(2). Joint Orange-Chatham Community Action.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-12 APPOINTING MAYOR PRO TEM STROM TO THE JOINT ORANGE-CHATHAM COMMUNITY ACTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
10a(3). Parks and Recreation Commission.
Council members appointed Antonio Thompson to the Parks and Recreation Commission.
|
|
Council Members |
|||||||||||
Parks and Recreation Commission |
Foy |
Easthom |
Greene |
Harrison |
Hill |
Kleinschmidt |
Strom |
Thorpe |
Ward |
TOTAL |
||
|
Vote for 1 Applicant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Elizabeth Anderson |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
||
|
Antonio Baxter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Mary Margaret Carroll |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Charles Hochman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Bryn Smith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Stuart Solomon |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Antonio Thompson |
|
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
X |
X |
X |
7 |
||
|
Kendra Van Pelt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
André Wesson |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Raymond Wong |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Other; please list: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||||||||||||
Item 11 – Discussion of Letter from Chancellor Moeser
Mayor Foy said he had written a letter on February 1 to UNC Chancellor Moeser at the Council’s request that grew out of the Council’s discussion at the January retreat, and the Chancellor had responded to that letter on February 7. He said he believed the Council needed to be clear that the committee being appointed by the University was a University committee formed to discuss land use issues and other issues regarding the proposal for Carolina North.
Mayor Foy said at some point they anticipate that it will be necessary to rezone that property to accommodate the planned development, and that rezoning would be the responsibility of the Town. He said the Council would need to develop a process to devise the appropriate zone for that parcel of land. Mayor Foy said the University’s Leadership Advisory Committee, led by Ken Broun, was a University committee with appointments made by the Chancellor. He said he believed that if the Council forwarded names to the Chancellor, they should be their recommendation for who should serve to represent the viewpoints of the Town.
Mayor Foy said that the Council had articulated its principles and adopted the Horace Williams Citizen Committee’s recommendations as Town policy, and thought it would be wise to continue to advocate for those principles as the University developed its plan. He said that was the framework under which they should proceed in participating on the University’s committee.
Mayor Foy proposed forwarding the names of two Council members and two citizens to serve on that committee. He said there were many citizens that had backgrounds in development proposals, and suggested that one of the citizens they designated be a member of the Planning Board, and the second be a member of the Horace Williams Citizens Committee. Mayor Foy said he had thought about asking citizens to put their names forward, and that was one way they could go. But, he added, they had citizens that the Council knew had particular expertise with development plans, so appointing a member of the Planning Board and the Horace Williams Citizens Committee appeared a likely way to proceed.
Mayor Foy said they needed to come to a decision tonight about what to do, and not necessarily decisions about appointments.
Joyce Brown asked that the Council defer appointments to the UNC committee until more basic information was supplied. She said she had served on the Horace Williams Citizens Committee, and its recommendations had been adopted as Town policy. Ms. Brown said she had several questions, all based on that report.
Ms. Brown said one issue the Committee discussed extensively and was considered of such importance that it made it made it the first basic assumption was a plan and committed funding to clean up the hazardous waste site. She said the Chancellor had not responded to that in his letter to the Mayor dated January 25. Ms. Brown requested that the Council ask for a report from the State and the legislative delegation with up-to-date information on the status of a plan and funding of this vital issue.
Ms. Brown said in the Chancellor’s letter of February 2 it stated that planning was based on the assumption that the airport club would close, adding that this was the second basic assumption. She said this was an important assumption that needed clarification from the State and the legislative delegation.
Ms. Brown stated that the Citizens Committee report asked, among other things, that the Council establish a process to develop a set of standards regarding natural resources and public facilities. She said while UNC was developing a fiscal equity report, that was a far cry from a collaborative and public effort to set standards for the critical issues regarding air, water, and public facilities. Ms. Brown said it was incumbent upon the Council to make sure that developments, particular as large as this one, do not compromise natural and built resources nor unduly burden the citizens of Chapel Hill. She asked that that effort be started now.
Ms. Brown said her last request was for some affirmation from the NC General Assembly that there was a financial commitment to fund Carolina North. She said this had serious tax implications for all. Ms. Brown asked, with cost overruns and delays, how does Carolina North fit into the State budget, particularly in light of its current extensive ongoing building program? She said the Town needed to hear from its legislative delegation and the General Assembly on whether that was a firm commitment for both building and maintenance of Carolina North.
Michael Collins supported the comments made by Ms. Brown, and was pleased to hear the Mayor say that he wanted to appoint citizens to the UNC committee that had experience. He said that was of critical importance. Mr. Collins challenged the Council to find some way with the appointments that are proposed to make this committee different, and have it do something other than a rehash of what had gone before.
Mr. Collins remarked that the citizens whose names were put forward for the committee should be tasked with helping the committee to focus on the issues mentioned by Ms. Brown, because until they were resolved nothing would be accomplished. He asked the Council to keep in mind the issues of the chemical waste site remediation, the old landfill, fiscal equity, funding, and the airport.
Mayor Foy commented that if they did recommend four people, they should ask the Manager to monitor this process
Council Member Ward said the Mayor was suggesting that they submit four names for membership, two Council members and two citizens. He said it was his understanding that the Chancellor had offered the Town only three seats on the committee. Council Member Ward asked if the Mayor believed he would be successful in increasing the Town’s representation. Mayor Foy responded that he had spoken to Ken Broun, the chair of the Committee, and told him that the Council would most likely not appoint three Council members. He said he had indicated that the Council might appoint one or two, and that it was important that at least two citizens be appointed. Mayor Foy said Mr. Broun did not object, so he had spoken to the Chancellor and he said he would agree to that.
Mayor pro tem Strom thanked the Mayor for his comments regarding the Horace Williams Citizen Committee and its report, noting he believed the report was valuable. He said they needed to be clear as a body that the report would serve as the foundation against which any proposal that came before the Council about that property would be evaluated. Mayor pro tem Strom said that he believed the next steps to serve the interests of the community was to do the foundational reports on the transit master plan, the environmental areas, fiscal equity, and so on. He stated these foundations were essential information that this body and the community required. Mayor pro tem Strom stated that people who would be serving on the UNC committee would benefit from those foundation reports so they could understand the capacity for the community to absorb this type of enormous project.
Mayor pro tem Strom said he also wanted to recognize that it was traditionally the Mayor’s job to spearhead Town-Gown relationships from the Town’s side, and he supported Mayor Foy in those efforts. He said he was not sure that the Council was of the same mind as to how they should proceed, but believed it was absolutely important that once they have this discussion that they proceed shoulder to shoulder as a Council and support whoever is placed on the committee. Mayor pro tem Strom said it was important that the Council stay in communication and as united as possible when dealing with Town-Gown issues.
Mayor pro tem Strom said several emails were received today from citizens expressing some concern about the appropriate role that the Council plays in the community. He said he was optimistic that the UNC committee could produce good ideas and some real benefits could emerge from the committee proceeding. Mayor pro tem Strom said his concern was that the Horace Williams proposal could very well come to this body, and it was important that they maintain control and be in a position to act without bias. He said he was concerned that by placing Council members on the committee they would be making it more difficult for them to act without bias and fulfill their legislative role as protectors of health, safety, welfare, and such for the community. Mayor pro tem Strom said it was his preference and recommendation that they proceed without placing Council members onto the committee.
Council Member Easthom asked if this committee would be a committee to reach a consensus, and not a voting committee such that individual members would be voting on particular ideas. Mayor Foy said he did not know because that question had not been asked. He said the committee would be an advisory committee to the Chancellor, and through the Chancellor to the Trustees, adding it was not binding on them.
Council Member Easthom said that non-binding factor was important to consider. She said whatever Council members served on this committee would be voicing an opinion about various aspects, but would not be representing the full Council at those meetings. Council Member Easthom added that they should not be bound by anything that was said during those committee meetings such that when something came to a vote the Council would not be bound by anything that was said or done by a Council or committee member during a committee meeting.
Council Member Easthom said she believed they should insure that the Council members do not have to recuse themselves from any vote or zoning discussion that might occur. She said that should be understood among the Council.
Mayor Foy asked the Town Attorney what the status of a Council member would be in regards to becoming inadvertently disqualified from participating in any development or zoning discussions. Mr. Karpinos responded that legally there would be no problem, but there may be perception issues and policy questions the Council would need to consider. He added this would be no different than a pre-application situation, in that there was nothing before the Council. Mr. Karpinos said it was almost like a pre-concept plan discussion with an applicant, even though they were being asked to assist the applicant in a sense.
Council Member Easthom said she believed that putting Council members on this committee, and she believed two was more appropriate, was a good idea because it was important the Council members appointed take the Horace Williams Citizens Committee report and have that as their “bible” as the committee does its work. She said it was important that the Council’s opinions be voiced within the committee, noting if they did not appoint one or two Council members to the committee and the University developed a plan for Carolina North that was in their opinion substandard, then the University could say that they had been offered a chance to participate and had refused. Council Member Easthom said it was important for the Town to be engaged and to take this as an opportunity for a working relationship regarding what would happen on the Horace Williams tract.
Council Member Easthom said this would be a positive move towards Town-Gown relations. She said that the Council shared the common goal of wanting what was best for the Town, and felt that at least one Council member should be present at the table.
Council Member Ward said he fully understood that this was a University committee and it was designed to articulate guiding principles for whatever would be built at Carolina North. He said they would not be considering any plans in terms of square footage or any more specific plans. Council Member Ward said he believed that to be very different from the role of judge which the Council would eventually be, so he did not see a conflict of interest nor that serving on this committee would in any way prejudice one to serve in a regulatory role.
Council Member Ward said he saw Council participation on this committee as a benefit to the community. He said it was an opportunity to be engaged with the University, and the Town could not do better than to be at the same table with the University and talking about the same issues. Council Member Ward said it was their best opportunity to shape the project’s guiding principles, and he looked forward to having Council representation on the committee.
Mayor Foy said one of the things about this committee that was important to keep in mind was that it is open, and nothing would occur outside of the public’s sight. He said the Council participates in a similar fashion often, when it sits down with applicants to discuss the best use for land. Mayor Foy said that was not seen as prejudicing themselves later on when the project came forward. He said given the magnitude of this project, it was an opportunity to advocate for the principles that they and their committee spent two years devising. Mayor Foy said they need those principles to be embedded in that project when it came forward and this was their opportunity to do that.
Council Member Greene said it was clear this was the University’s committee, but if it were the Town’s committee or they had more of a say in forming it, she would say “not yet” because of the airport if nothing else. She said everyone understood the Chancellor sincerely hopes the airport would be closed, but there were other voices and they did not know what would happen. Council Member Greene said the airport was a huge thing that was in the way of thinking seriously about foundation principles given that it was not the Town’s decision. She said given that the University will move forward with its committee, the Mayor was correct that they needed to have the Horace Williams Citizens Committee’s recommendations deeply embedded in the work that came out of it.
Council Member Greene said that was not to say that the one or two Council members who represent the Council on the committee would be committed to what comes out of that committee, because it was a University committee and the Town would be outnumbered. She said it was somewhat of a dilemma but they were better off being represented than not. Council Member Greene said she agreed with Council Member Easthom that two Council members on the committee would be better than one, and that those members should have a deep understanding of the Horace Williams Citizens Committee’s work from personal experience as well as a deep understanding of the Council’s perspective.
Council Member Greene stated she would like to nominate Mayor pro tem Strom and Council Member Hill to represent the Council on the University’s committee if they were willing to serve.
Council Member Hill stated he would be honored to serve on the committee. He said given the results they would get from foundational studies and the decisions the committee would make, the Council would be far better informed. Council Member Hill said if a transit study was done it would go a long way towards shaping what the project would look like. He said this committee did seem to be a disconnect from the process the Town had been on.
Council Member Hill said calling the committee a community input committee sounded somewhat odd given the makeup of it, and observed that it was heavily weighted towards the University. Council Member Hill said he believed there was no duty that any representative would have other than offering the Horace Williams Citizens Committee report and pushing and explaining its principles, and that would be all they would want any representative to do.
Council Member Hill said he had previously served on a similar Town leadership committee and had served on the Horace Williams Citizens Committee as well. He said he was willing to serve on the University’s committee and had high hopes for it.
Mayor Foy said the first thing they needed to decide was whether or not they were going to appoint two Council members and two citizens.
Council Member Thorpe said he had talked with other Council members as well as citizens who had worked on the report, and he was in agreement to nominate Council Member Hill and Mayor pro tem Strom. He said he was not sold on it, but commented that the statement the Chancellor had made about admitting to the Town’s authority was a great statement. Council Member Thorpe said the Chancellor had commented that he recognized the authority of the Council on zoning matters.
Council Member Thorpe said along with Council Member Hill and Mayor pro tem Strom, he wanted someone to suggest a member of the Planning Board and the Horace Williams Citizens Committee, or possibly some other committee, to serve on the University’s committee. He said they should not spend more time debating this issue but should move forward.
Council Member Thorpe noted that they could not force the General Assembly to make a commitment regarding funding or the potential closing of the airport. He said they should not allow that to keep them from moving forward.
Council Member Easthom said she viewed this as a long concept plan and that the Council members would be providing input to make a better project. She said she also supported the nomination of Council Member Hill and Mayor pro tem Strom.
Mayor Foy said they should appoint two Council members and two citizens, one from the Planning Board and one from the Horace Williams Citizens Committee. He said he would like the Council to ask him to consult with the chairs of those two committees to see who might be willing to serve, and then bring those names back to the Council. Mayor Foy said he did not know if the chairs of the two committees would want to serve.
Mayor pro tem Strom agreed, noting the chairs of those two committees would serve us well. But, he said, he wanted the two committees to have the opportunity to name alternates because there would be many meetings and personal lives sometimes get in the way. Mayor pro tem Strom said it was important to have a second person that was able to attend the meetings, track the conversation and receive the materials, and stay abreast of the proceedings.
Mayor Foy asked if Mayor pro tem Strom was suggesting appointing them and then asking for alternates, or asking if they were willing to make the commitment and then making the appointments. Mayor pro tem Strom responded that when the Mayor spoke with the chairs, he should ask them to have their boards suggest alternates at the same time.
Mayor Foy said that was a good idea, and suggested it was appropriate for Council members to speak with the chairs as well. He said he did believe that someone should be formally designated to contact them and bring names back for the Council’s consideration.
Council Member Thorpe asked when the Mayor anticipated bringing those names forward. Mayor Foy replied at the February 27 Council meeting. He recommended naming the two Council members now, and naming the two citizens and alternates on February 27.
COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER THORPE, TO APPOINT MAYOR PRO TEM STROM AND COUNCIL MEMBER HILL AS THE COUNCIL’S REPRESENTATIVES TO THE COMMITTEE, AND ON FEBRUARY 27 TO APPOINT CITIZEN MEMBERS TO THE COMMITTEE, AS WELL AS ALTERNATES. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 12 – Petitions
12a(1). Mayor Foy regarding Dental Insurance for Council Members.
Mayor Foy stated he was petitioning the Council to consider allowing Council members the ability to purchase dental insurance through the Town’s policy.
Council Member Hill said in the past Council members had that ability. Mayor Foy said that was correct, and that was why this had come up. He said at some point something changed, and Council members were no longer eligible to purchase the dental insurance.
Council Member Hill said he wanted to stress that this would not cost the Town any money. Mr. Horton responded they would have to check the contract, but said he believed that was correct.
COUNCIL MEMBER HILL MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM STROM, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
12a(2). Mayor Foy regarding Police Stops.
Mayor Foy said there had been publicity recently about Town police officers stopping motorists in order to check their registration and driver’s license, and the motorists were contending that there was no other reason for being stopped. He said he wanted to give staff the opportunity to respond to the Council about what our procedures are for stopping motorists. Mayor Foy said there were sobriety check points, there were stops when they were violating rules, but he wanted to know specifically about these stops that allegedly occurred and what the rationale was behind them.
MAYOR PRO TEM STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO RECEIVE AND REFER THE PETITION TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
12a(3). Mayor pro tem Strom regarding the Agricultural and Turf Management Recommendations.
Mayor pro tem Strom said the Council had received copies of the Agricultural Resource Center’s Pesticide Education Program as a result of Council Member Ward’s request for information about turf management issues. He stated he had talked with Alan Spalt who suggested developing a procedure to take small steps towards the direction that report recommended. Mayor pro tem Strom suggested that they refer that letter and the topic of pesticide use application and best management practices to the Sustainability, Energy, and Environment Committee to come up with a way to make some progress.
MAYOR PRO TEM STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, THAT THE AGRICULTURAL AND TURF MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS BE REFERRED TO THE SUSTAINABILITY, ENERGY, AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
12a(4). Mayor pro tem Strom regarding Naming of the Post Office Plaza.
Mayor pro tem Strom said he had talked with Diana McDuffee, who reported that at Joe Straley’s memorial service there was conversation about how much time Joe and Lucy Straley and Charlotte Adams had spent at the plaza with signs and leaflets, which amounted to hundreds of times over decades. He said the idea that was generated at the memorial service was to either name or memorialize Charlotte Adams, Joe and Lucy Straley at that location in some manner. Mayor pro tem Strom suggested receiving this as a petition and referring it to the Town’s Naming Committee.
MAYOR PRO TEM STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER THORPE, THAT THE PETITION REGARDING THE NAMING OF THE POST OFFICE PLAZA IN HONOR OF JOSEPH STRALEY AND CHARLOTTE ADAMS BE REFERRED TO THE NAMING COMMITTEE. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item 13 – Consent Agenda Items for Discussion
Mr. Horton remarked that because no notification was given Item #4d, Vehicle Replacement Plan, was to be removed from the Consent Agenda, the appropriate staff persons were not present for the discussion. He said the item would be placed on the Council’s February 27 agenda for discussion.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:38 p.m.