HomeMy Public PortalAbout01-26-2009 Workshop MeetingJanuary 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
~m ~~ approved: l~7arch 9, 2009
Pale 1 of 12
P
_ Minutes
,~; ~_ Board of Commissioners Monthly Workshop
January 26, 2009 at 7:00 PM
Town Barn
PRESENT Mayor Tom Stevens, Commissioners Evelyn Lloyd, Frances Dancy, Brian Lowen, L.
Eric Hallman, and Mike Gering.
STAFF PRESENT: Town Manager Eric Peterson, Assistant Town Manager/Public Works Director
Nicole Ard, Town Clerk/Director of Administration and Human Resources Donna Armbrister,
Planning Director Margaret HaLrth, and Senior Planner Tom King.
1. Open the Workshop
Mayor Tom Stevens called the workshop to order at 7:02 p.m. He stated that tonight was a workshop
and was not intended to be a public hearing, although he knew that those present were very interested
in the topic regarding Item #4, Discussion of Road hnprovements and Congestion Mitigation Project
Priorities for Inclusion in the Regional Priority List for NCDOT Funding. He said if it seemed that it
was appropriate to accept continents they would endeavor to do so, or to set up a time for that at some
later meeting. Mayor Stevens said they did want to make sure that there was public involvement, but
that was not the purpose of tonight's meeting.
2. Agenda Changes & Agenda Approval
7:03:07 PM Planning Director Margaret HaLrth added an item related to recent information received
from the County that the State had indicated to them that the Town did need to be a co-applicant with
the County for the PARTF grant application for Fairview Park, because the Town owned some of that
property that would be developed with the grant funds. She said because that was not what the Board
had authorized she would ask that the Board consider formally authorizing the Mayor to add his
signature to the County's application on behalf of the Town so that the application could go forward.
Ms. Hauth stated beconung a co-applicant did not obligate the Town to any matching fiords or other
costs, nor would it endanger any application the Town might make.
Mayor Stevens suggested the Board vote on that as soon as the agenda had been set.
Assistant Town Manager/Public Works Director Nicole Ard added a Closed Session item regarding a
Personnel Matter.
7:04:11 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Hallman, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the
Board moved to approve the agenda as amended by a vote of 5-0. The motion was declared passed.
Mayor Stevens asked that the Board consider formal authorization for the Town to be a co-applicant on
the County's PARTF grant application as Ms. Hauth had outlined.
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: l~7arch 9, 2009
Pale 2 of 12
Upon a motion by Commissioner Hallman, seconded by Commissioner Lowen, the Board moved to
authorize the Mayor to sign the County's application for a PARTF Grant for Fairview Park, indicating
the Town as a co-applicant on that grant application, by a vote of 5-0. The motion was declared
passed..
3. Committee Updates and Reports
7:05:06 PM Conunissioner Lowen said that he had planned to provide an update on the Orange
Community Land Tnist, but because Ms. Hauth had provided the Board with copies of the quarterly
report that would not be necessary.
Mayor Stevens stated he had wanted to thank everyone for their participation in the Board's recent
budget retreat, noting he believed it had been very successful and the time spent was valuable.
4. Discussion of Road Improvements and Congestion Mitigation Project Priorities for Inclusion
in the Regional Priority List for NCDOT Funding
7:06:20 PM Ms. Hauth provided some history of how they had reached this point as well as an
overview of where they were now. She said in late 2008 they had been awaiting the environmental
document on the three options for the Elizabeth Brady Road project, and as a draft document was
being readied for release the Federal Highway Administration had expressed some concern about how
the analysis was playing out in terms of whether any of the options really addressed the Statement of
Purpose and Need. Ms. Hauth said there were two items in the Statement of Purpose of Need, one
which said to reduce traffic congestion and improve the level of service in the central business district
including Churton Street and St. Mary's Road; and, the second being to improve traffic safety along
Churton Street and NC 86. She said because that term "level of service" was included and the
alternatives as they were being analyzed were not showing a change in letter grade in congestion in the
downtown, the Federal Highway Administration had concerns. Ms. Hauth said even though they were
showing documented improvement in reducing the wait time, they could not conquer bringing the
letter grade up.
Ms. Hauth said they had discussed some time ago whether they should change the purpose and need,
or change their priorities, or start all over and do something different. She said the Federal Highway
Administration had backed down some and was willing to look at other descriptors and other
benchmarks and criteria to show whether or not the project looked at the Statement of Purpose and
Need, so the federal issue was now off the table. Ms. Hauth said that did raise an interesting question
for the Town Board and for the Town of was there a package of smaller projects when taken together
might get them the same or better results than any of the alternatives looked at for Elizabeth Brady
Road. She said in doing that, when the Board adopted their priority list that went to the MPO they had
placed the projects in an order such that a group of road projects were placed in higher priority than
Elizabeth Brady Road. Ms. Hauth said those projects included South Churton Street, the Orange
Grove Road extension, and the alignment of Eno Mountain and Mayo Streets, thinking that those three
projects together along with perhaps some others might yield similar results to Elizabeth Brady Road
and allow the Town to no longer include Elizabeth Brady Road. She said when that priority list went
to the MPO and all the projects had points assigned to them, Elizabeth Brady Road came higher in
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: l~7arch 9, 2009
Pale 3 of 12
point criteria than some of the other projects. Ms. Hauth said according to the models it appeared to
generate higher benefits and have more need associated with it than some of the others.
Ms. Hauth said it was traditional in the MPO that when they took the individual priorities and merged
them with others to create a regional priority list, to respect the priority lists that were sent in from each
of the individual jurisdictions. So, she said, if the criteria assigned 15 points to Elizabeth Brady Road,
but it was the Town's fourth priority, and the Town's number one priority only generated 12 points,
the board of representatives that ran the TAC would allow the substitution of that number one priority
in that higher slot, basically placing a project with 12 points ahead of a project with 15 points because
it was the Town's number one priority. She said that was the point they were at now.
Ms. Hauth said located in the packets was the priority list for highway projects in Division 7 and it
could be seen that was exactly what had happened. She said when they ranked the highway projects
Elizabeth Brady Road would have been the third highest priority for Division 7, which for the purposes
of their region was everyone in Orange County. Ms. Hauth said because the Orange Grove Road
extension and others were higher priorities, the TAC had switched the priorities and put Elizabeth
Brady Road down to number eight and moved Orange Grove Road extension which had more points
into that number three slot.
7:12:10 PM Commissioner Hallman said Orange County also had a weighted priority list that went
into that. Ms. Hauth said that was correct, adding that the list contained Orange County, Chapel Hill,
Carrboro, and Hillsborough projects. Commissioner Hallman said his point was that Orange County
had in its own TIP list some of those improvements that they had ranked in their list.
Ms. Hauth said at this point the MPO was considering the projects in that priority order, with Elizabeth
Brady Road being reduced to represent the priority list that the Town had sent in. She said they were
close to finalizing that priority list that would then be sent to the Department of Transportation so that
the State could begin to create a State TIP. Ms. Hauth said just because something appeared on a
priority list did not guarantee it a slot in the TIl' because of funding limitations, but they did want to
recognize all of the local criteria and priorities as well as the point system.
Ms. Hauth said while it was on the regional calendar for possible adoption in Febniary, it was unlikely
they would take action the first time it was reviewed. She said the MPO generally would take two
meetings to look at the priority list, so they were much more likely to adopt the regional priority list on
March 1 L Ms. Hauth said if the Town Board wanted to offer anything more than what they had
already, then those needed to come to the MPO board no later than March 11, and of course sooner
was better.
Ms. Hauth said they could go forward exactly as it was now and they would not have to make a final
decision about whether they wanted to take Elizabeth Brady Road off the list completely, because at
some point it would come down to whether or not they wanted to leave it on or take it off the list. She
said at some point the State would ask that question so that if the Town wanted it taken off the list then
that finding could be appropriated to other projects. Ms. Hauth said at some point that decision would
have to be made, but it did not necessarily have to be made before March 11. She said it would need to
be made at some point either before or shortly after the State released its draft TIP sometime between
November 2009 and June 2010.
January 26, 2009 l~lonthly Workshop
approved: l~larch 9, 2009
Page 4 of 12
Ms. Hauth said what she had wanted to get to tonight was what data would the Board like to have to
make that decision. She said if that was what they were going to do, then they would want to make
sure that list was complete and they got as much benefit from a traffic congestion elimination stance as
possible. Ms. Hauth said she did not have the technical expertise to tell the Board which list of
projects was the best, but she could tell them what sort of information they needed to be able to make
that analysis.
7:16:39 PM Commissioner Dancy asked what the timeframe was for Elizabeth Brady Road as well
as the estimated cost. Ms. Hauth replied the timeframe continued to slide, because of the wait for the
environmental documents, and those documents needed to be out for at least a year in a draft format
before it was finalized. She said at this point, she could not give a potential start date.
Commissioner Dancy stated she was looking at the costs associated with each project, and wanted to
make sure that whatever the estimated cost was for Elizabeth Brady Road that that financial benefit
could be retained for the other projects. Ms. Hauth stated that was one reason she had provided the
chart with the packet, so that the Board could see what those projects added up to. She said if moving
the projects on the list was a tnie swap, then the Town needed to come from the standpoint that there
was $48 million on the table, and the Town needed to get $48 million worth of commitment for new
constriction. Ms. Hauth said that was not uncommon, noting the State had done that before, and it
sounded as if the MPO would support the Town if they wanted to undertake reprioritizing the projects.
Commissioner Dancy stated the main thing was to nutigate as much traffic on Churton Street as
possible, but also to make sure that they got their money's worth.
7:18:57 PM Commissioner Hallman stated they had Elizabeth Brady Road partially funded at $29
million, with nothing else allocated at this point.
Commissioner Dancy said then they would want to keep that $29 million allocation.
Commissioner Hallman responded no, they would want to go for the entire $48 million. He said he
had added up the estimated cost of competing projects and they came to $51 million. Commissioner
Hallman said the TAC staff was looking at how those three projects Ms. Hauth had outlined would line
up if they were combined, and that would be done this month to see how the ratings would fall when
looked at as a single project.
Ms. Hauth said the TAC was also pulling some data out of the regional model to tell them what those
three projects did with and without Elizabeth Brady Road as alternatives. She said she was also
working with the State who had developed a more fine-grained model for the Hillsborough area
directly related to Elizabeth Brady Road, to see whether they would at least release the underlying
traffic model that they had developed that was more specific and specialized to Hillsborough at a finer
grain than the Triangle regional model, and suggested that if the Town were to contract that same firm
to do some analysis for the Town they would benefit from the work that was paid for by DOT. Ms.
Hauth said it was possible they would not get access to it, but she would at least make the request since
it was apublicly-funded study of the Hillsborough area. She said if the Town were to contract with the
same firm, it seemed like that contractor would be able to use a tool that they had developed. Ms.
Hauth said she believed they would find more detailed local information that was not captured in the
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: l~7arch 9, 2009
Pale ~ of 12
regional model, although it was not inconsistent. She said if the outcomes were the same on the major
roads, Churton Street, NC 86 and US 70, then hopefiilly that more specialized model would give them
information on other streets such as Margaret Lane, Hassell Street and Wake Street. Ms. Hauth said
that specialized and finer-grained model might do a better job of telling them local impacts and help
them highlight smaller, more fined-grained places to focus on that the regional model would not
capture.
7:22:21 PM Commissioner Hallman said there were a couple of other pieces that played into that.
He said he believed everyone knew that the overpass over I-85 on new NC 86 was already a real issue,
and the finding for those improvements were out beyond 2015.
Mayor Stevens stated the real time sensitive issue was whether the Town Board wanted to support a
swap and the issue of going on record of whether it was a no-build or to go forward with Elizabeth
Brady Road. He said in any case there were limited resources. Ms. Hauth said at this point, while they
wanted to be clear in their intent to do a swap by leaving Elizabeth Brady Road on the list at this point,
if they did some intervening study and could not find a package of better improvements, and the Board
decided that they did need to see that environmental document, that it did not put them in a bind where
they had potentially lost that finding. She said that fiill commitment to the real swap and the wallcing
away from Elizabeth Brady Road could be done at a later time. Ms. Hauth said it may make their
negotiations somewhat more difficult, but it would reserve an option since they did not have enough
information at this time to make sure they were satisfied with the results.
7:24: l7 PM Commissioner Lloyd said in thinking about the traffic flow, she did not believe there
had been a study of the intersection of new NC 86 and US 70A. She said that intersection was not as
safe as it could be with the amount of traffic that went through it, especially considering they did not
know what would happen down US 70A to the east. Commissioner Lloyd said that intersection should
be improved if Elizabeth Brady Road did not come. Ms. Hauth said that was why they needed a model
that showed what traffic would look like without Elizabeth Brady Road in the mix, and they would
then be able to zoom in on that intersection to see if there was some realignment or adjusting of lanes
that would allow it to fimction better without getting into the Elizabeth Brady Road extension.
Conullissioner Lloyd said Ms. Hauth had suggested using the same contractor that the State had used,
and asked was she suggesting that the Town pay for that. Ms. HaLrth stated it was likely the Town
would have to pay for it, because if they asked the State to pay for that it would chip away at the $48
million allocation.
Conunissioner Lloyd said regarding Orange Grove Road to US 70A, she wondered exactly where that
would go. Ms. Hauth stated that was an unknown and did not know if it would be known at the time
they committed to it. She said you would not necessarily have to, noting that if they wanted to go to
that level and have a feasibility study done to determine the cost, and if they believed that cost was too
high and they wanted to maximize their money, it might be worth the Town spending some local
money to have it better studied if they believed they could save some finds on the back end.
Commissioner Lloyd said the Orange Grove Task Force had tallced about that but no exact plans had
been shown to them.
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: l~7arch 9, 2009
Pale 6 of 12
7:27:44 PM Commissioner Hallman stated at the last TAC meeting they had discussed that, and it
had resonated with the other municipalities in that they had also been fnistrated with the lack of local
control over projects, and cited several projects in Durham and Chapel Hill. He said they had
recognized that with the new State administration and the mandate that there would be changes at the
DOT, as well as the Executive Order enacted regarding the DOT and the willing support of the MPO
to stand behind them if they chose to take that route, that the timing was right for something like that.
Mayor Stevens stated Commissioner Hallman as well as Ms. Hauth had spent a lot of time developing
relationships and the Town had a lot of support, and offered his thanks for that work.
Commissioner Hallman stated that was the only federal highway money the Town had seen in years
and all that they would likely see for some time, and they needed to make the right choice and use the
money wisely.
7:29:02 PM Commissioner Gering said in thinking about the local control option, that was important
to him because it was not simply a matter of traffic counts and if those three projects reduced the same
amount of traffic as what was projected for the Elizabeth Brady Road project. He said since that was
where they lived they had other considerations to factor into that, such as environmental and
neighborhood considerations. Commissioner Gering said it was more than just an engineering exercise
to figure out which package reduced traffic more. He said if they did have an opportunity for a level of
local control that was exactly one of the reasons why he believed that even if the other three projects
did not add to what was projected for Elizabeth Brady Road it was still more appealing to him.
Commissioner Gering wondered if dropping Elizabeth Brady Road at this stage enhanced or reduced
their bargaining power with pushing forward the three options, adding he saw arguments on both sides
of that. Ms. Hauth stated at this point she was unsure who they would be bargaining with. She said
regarding Governor Purdue's Executive Order, the current DOT Board was sitting but there was no
way to know if those members would continue to sit. She said the Governor was delaying appointing a
new Department of Transportation Board until there was some analysis of DOT operations and what
other improvements might be needed. Ms. Hauth said there was a new Secretary of Transportation
who knew nothing about the Elizabeth Brady Road project, and who had now been charged with
malting those decisions and malting them based on technical data and not persuasion from DOT Board
members. She said that would make it more challenging.
7:31:10 PM Commissioner Gering stated the factors that had him wondering were that since they
had money allocated for the Elizabeth Brady Road project, if they were to take it off the list at this
stage then someone else could make the argument that they did not have to place any priority at all on
any of the other projects. Ms. Hauth stated it could throw the finding back into the mix for
reallocation, noting if they wallted away it could mean that others would see that finding as fiiture
allocation for other projects.
Commissioner Gering stated if they kept that project on the list for the time being, it might give them
some maneuverability later on if they had to adjust the list again to make the decision about whether or
not to keep Elizabeth Brady Road in light of other projects.
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: l~7arch 9, 2009
Pale 7 of 12
7:31:55 PM Mayor Stevens stated that would seem to be a default decision based on the information
they had now could change as new data came to light.
Commissioner Lowen stated that was a valid point, noting he had always said that if there were other
alternatives they should be considered, but he did not want to back out if it meant loosing the fiiture
funding already allocated. He stated the State could always shift the money in any way they saw fit,
and then they could really have a fight on their hands.
Commissioner Gering stated they would only be delaying the discussion. Commissioner Lowen
agreed.
Conunissioner Gering said he had been involved in the Elizabeth Brady Road planning for seven years,
and for him it had always hinged critically on the environmental impact study. He said it seemed
strange to him that he was in the position of having to make a decision by weighing the merits in the
absence of the environmental impact study, and it appeared that they would still not have access to that
information before they had to make that decision. Commissioner Gering asked what the chances were
that they could get that draft document. Ms. Hauth stated she would try, adding that certainly they all
wanted to see the data it contained. She said there was a reason somewhere as to why it had taken so
long to prepare the document and she believed it contained valuable information. But, she said,
whether or not they could get it was another matter.
Commissioner Dancy stated it should be public record since it was paid for with State dollars.
7:33:53 PM Mayor Stevens stated he believed they were all very concerned, as Commissioner
Gering had voiced, about the environmental and social impact and the impact on historic sites. He said
those concerns were above and beyond just mitigating traffic, and it was a delicate negotiation issue.
Mayor Stevens said the Town Board had already expressed that concern when they had been given the
opportunity several months ago to move forward with Elizabeth Brady Road and they had declined to
do so because they wanted to keep the option of looking at alternatives. He said what he was hearing
from the Board tonight was that they needed to get very specific information but they needed to do that
quicltly. Mayor Stevens asked what the turnaround time was. Ms. Hauth stated she believed they had
until at least November, noting the list could go forward as is and they could notify the State that that
was what they intended to do so that the State did not inadvertently let a new contract for something
that would decrease that $48 million that the Town wanted for other things.
Ms. Hauth said they needed to begin the discussion on whether to contract with the same contractor the
State had used and get access to that data, or did they need to go to someone else, as well as to spend
some time thinking about exactly what the scope of the study would be, what exact questions they
wanted answered, and what level of data they would be comfortable with in malting the analysis. Ms.
Hauth said they could select the firm and go forward or they could get someone else to help them make
that list. She said the Board could begin malting that list tonight if they were so inclined.
7:36:07 PM Mayor Stevens stated one step would be to provide some direction to staff. Ms. Hauth
agreed, noting that fiords were currently budgeted for a road analysis that was meant to be used for the
street analysis related to the Cornelius Street Plan, and that could be used to contract with someone.
January 26, 2009 l~lonthly Workshop
approved: l~larch 9, 2009
Page R of 12
Commissioner Hallman stated he would like to see them approach the County regarding sharing the
cost of that analysis, since most of those impacted in those road alignments were County residents.
Mayor Stevens asked should that be placed on the agenda for the joint meeting.
Conunissioner Gering responded yes. He said he did not see the need to spend a lot of money on the
engineering analysis of those priorities, noting for him it was more important to get the level of data
that was convincing to whomever they dealt with about the Town's level of priorities. Commissioner
Gering said he was not sure what that level of certainty might be.
Mayor Stevens said the list now reflected the Town's priorities as best they could from a non-
professional and non-technical point of view. He said they now needed to see how they stood up to
that professional and technical point of view. Ms. Hauth stated she would asked the State what level of
information they would want to see to be convinced that the group of three projects was a reasonable
and fair swap for the Elizabeth Brady Road project.
7:38:11 PM Commissioner Hallman said the direction about the reprioritization for the TIP had
already gone forward to the TAC, so for TAC purposes he believed they were okay for now. Ms.
Hauth agreed.
Mayor Stevens stated then they could go forward with the TAC and put this discussion on the joint
agenda with the County. Ms. Hauth stated staff needed some direction regarding beginning work on a
scope of services with an engineering firm, either the one used by the State or someone different in an
effort to move forward and meet the State's requirements. She said that would likely come back at the
Board's March meeting.
Commissioner Lowen asked if at that time they would have an estimated cost. Ms. HaLrth replied yes.
Mayor Stevens stated the joint meeting with the County was scheduled for Febniary 19, and he
believed the issue had been settled from the Board's point of view.
Ms. Hauth stated that she did not know how many of the Board had had the opportunity to met Tom
King, who was present tonight and was the Town's Senior Planner. She said Mr. King represented the
Town at the TCC which was the staff version of the TAC, and they would likely have Mr. King begin
attending a few of the TAC meetings when the agenda looked to be of interest to the Town. Ms. HaLrth
stated that Mr. King had previously worked for Orange County and was local to Mebane, so he knew
and understood the Town's issues.
7:40:06 PM Mayor Stevens indicated there were several members of the public who wanted to speak
to this issue. He said he was happy to take a few comments but they needed to be kept brief at just a
minute or two.
7:40:46 PM Bill Crowther stated he believed tonight's meeting had been fniitful. He said they had
been fnistrated with the situation regarding Elizabeth Brady Road, mainly because it was an old project
which had appeared and disappeared over the years. Mr. Crowther said the residents, including
himself, had been in limbo and every time the alignment shifted new lives were put on hold. He said
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: l~7arch 9, 2009
Page 9 of 12
another reason was that of the current three alignments, most if not all of the citizens affected were not
in the Town's limits although some were in the ETJ, and it was fnistrating to those residents that they
had to speak to the County Commissioners to represent them. So, he said, they were happy to hear that
the Town Board would be tallcing with the County Commissioners very soon.
Mr. Crowther said the last reason was that they had watched the project from two directions, which
was confiising as a citizen to see that the finding came from Division 7 which was aTriad-focused
region. And, he said, that the planning for the project came from Division 5, which was the Triangle
area. Mr. Crowther said it was confusing as a citizen to have to deal with the project as it came from
those two directions.
Mr. Crowther said they understood the condition the Board was considering, even though they were
not considering a no-build they were taking what he believed was a big step in the right direction. He
stated the neighbors in that area had been enduring this dark cloud long enough and they were glad to
see that it was being discussed. Mr. Crowther said perhaps the Town Board and the County
Commissioners could determine a solution that would allow the residents to be more at ease.
7:43:50 PM Robin Barnhill, a resident of Ivy Drive, stated the project as it now existed would come
through her living room and take away her home on the Eno River. She said when tallcing about the
swap, she had thought there were improvements to the bridge on Lawrence Road that would factor in
to that.
Mayor Stevens stated it was not in their planning area, noting they were not tallcing about trying to
move traffic around but rather how traffic would flow better along Churton Street.
Commissioner Hallman stated he believed the improvements on Lawrence Road were already fimded.
Ms. Barnhill said as far as getting around, the idea of looking at a situation that would take her home
but improve someone's drive time by a few minutes was disturbing. She said the improvement of the
Lawrence Road bridge would make that situation better as far as getting around the area, and she did
not understand why that had not been in the mix.
Commissioner Hallman stated it was outside of their purview, noting that was up to Orange County.
7:45:16 PM Commissioner Gering said it was likely part of the mix, but was not on the list of things
that the Town was tallcing about. Ms. Barnhill said for those who lived there, the no-build option made
the most sense.
7:45:38 PM Commissioner Lloyd said she thought at one time that Lawrence Road was one of the
options.
Commissioner Hallman stated it was, as well as the western bypass, but both had been removed early
on.
7:45:59 PM Renee Price presented to the Board a petition that had been circulating for nearly two
years and contained almost 1,000 signatures. She said the petition explained the views of those who
had signed.
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: b4arch 9, 2009
Pale 10 of 12
Mr. Gephart stated he was president of the Poplar Ridge Homeowners Association, and it was his
understand that much of the data was very old and flawed. He said the idea of tearing up historic and
residential areas on information that outdated was something the residents were very opposed to. Mr.
Gephart stated that current information was needed in order to make logical decisions, and the idea
discussed tonight of combining the three projects to replace the Elizabeth Brady Road project made
much more sense.
7:47:44 PM Cranford Goodwin provided some history, noting he was part of a group in 1991 who
had a vision for Hillsborough, which was of a Town that surrounding a wonderfiil central park on the
river. He said on the basis of that vision they had persuaded a number of private citizens and
institutions, mainly the Johnston Foundation which had given them close to $900,000, and Classical
American Homes who had provided the rest, to purchase the land from the France family. Mr.
Goodwin said they had all accepted the vision of what an extraordinary opportunity that was for the
Town to create that central park. He said it was important to keep that in mind as the Board tallced
about the calculations, because it would be a tragedy to bisect that marvelous piece of land.
7:48:57 PM Mayor Stevens thanked Mr. Goodwin for reminding them of the vision of that
incredible greenway on the Eno River and what that meant to Hillsborough and to the larger Orange
County. He thanked all who had attended tonight and offered comments.
5. Other -Closed Session
7:49:17 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Conunissioner Dancy, the Board
moved to go into Closed Session to discuss a Personnel Matter as authorized by North Carolina
General Statute Section 143-318.11 (6) regarding Personnel Matters by a vote of 5-0. The
motion was declared passed.
6. Adjourn
Upon returning to Open Session, and upon a motion by Commissioner Lowen, seconded by
Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to adjourn the workshop at 8:20 p.m. The motion was
declared passed.
Respectfull~~ submitted,
Donna F. Aimbrister, MMC
Town Clerk
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: b4arch 9, 2009
Pale 11 of 12
January 26, 2009 l~7onthly Workshop
approved: b4arch 9, 2009
Pale 12 of 12