Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout12-14-2009 Regular MeetingMINUTES HILLSBOROUGH TOWN BOARD December 14, 2009 7:00 PM, Town Barn December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 1 of 53 PRESENT: Mayor Tom Stevens, Commissioners Frances Dancy, Mike Gering, L. Eric Hallman (via telephone), Evelyn Lloyd, and Brian Lowen. 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 Hauth, Finance Director Greg Siler, Town Attorney Bob Hornik, Police Lieutenant Davis Trimmer, Police Lieutenant Brad Whitted, Police Officer James Riley, Planner Stephanie Trueblood, and Planner Aspen Price. Mayor Stevens called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 1. PUBLIC CHARGE 7:01:25 PM Mayor Stevens did not read the public charge but indicated it would be followed. 2. COMMENTS FROM MAYOR STEVENS 7:02:02 PM Mayor Stevens stated that Commissioner Hallman was out of Town but would be calling in to participate in the substantive portion of the Agenda. Mayor Stevens stated that when he looked around the room he saw an extraordinary group of people who were all working to create an extraordinary place. He said it was wonderful to be in his particular chair and was grateful, but was under no illusions that all the good things that happened in their Town was because of all of the chairs that were filled. Mayor Stevens said they were not perfect and their Town was not perfect, but they were all doing a magnificent job of working together and expressed his gratitude for everyone who made the Town a very special place. He recognized his wife, Debbie, who kept him out and ready to go, as did all of their families. Mayor Stevens said the staff did wonderful things for the Town, from the Police to the Planning Office to those who collected the water bills. He thanked Town Manager Eric Peterson for all that he did to contribute to the Town. Mayor Stevens thanked all of those who volunteered their time to the Town by serving on advisory boards, as well as to those who gave their time to non - profits. He said he knew he spoke for his fellow Board members when he said they were absolutely grateful and privileged to be a part of the Town and working together. Mayor Stevens congratulated Commissioner Gering and Commissioner Dancy on their re- election to the Board, and offered them a chance to comment. 7:04:28 PM Commissioner Gering said he was very grateful for the opportunity to serve the Town for 8 years, and was now looking forward to 4 more years. He said at this particular time of the year it was a time for reflection and to be thankful for all that they had and all that they could do in the future. Commissioner Gering said there were many issues in Hillsborough that needed working on, but there were also so many prospects for good opportunities, and those were the things he was looking forward to in the coming years. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 2 of 53 7:05:08 PM Commissioner Dancy echoed the Mayor's and Commissioner Gering's remarks, noting this were her 4 term so she must love the job. She said she was looking forward to serving the citizens and serving on the Board for the next 4 years. Commissioner Dancy said it took a lot of work and a lot of time, and appreciated the citizens' vote of confidence in her. OATHS OF OFFICE 7:05:52 PM The Honorable Patricia DeVine administered the Oaths of Office. 1. MAYOR TOM STEVENS 2. COMMISSIONER FRANCES DANCY 3. COMMISSIONER MICHAEL GERING 7:12:21 PM Mayor Stevens invited those in attendance to attend a reception in honor of those just sworn in. He noted the Board would take a brief recess before continuing with the Agenda. RECEPTION FOLLOWING THE OATHS OF OFFICE 7:28:16 PM Mayor Stevens called the meeting back to order. 3. PRESENTATIONS A. Presentation of Advanced Law Enforcement Certification to Officer James Riley 7:28:32 PM Town Manager Eric Peterson stated that police officers in the State had to be certified and achieve a great deal of training and ongoing education. He said the highest level of certification an officer could receive was the Advanced Law Enforcement Certification from the NC Training Standards Commission. Mr. Peterson said he believed only Chief Birkhead and perhaps one other had achieved that advanced certification up to this point, and it was something rare that not a lot of officers achieved and sometimes took their entire career to do. Mr. Peterson said he was pleased tonight to recognized Officer James A. Riley, Jr. who had been with the Town for 5 years and was an Orange County Deputy Sheriff for 5 years prior to that, because he had achieved the Advanced Law Enforcement Certification. He congratulated Officer Riley on a job well done. Mr. Peterson said a combination of education, training hours, experience, and some other criteria were required to reach that benchmark. He said that Officer Riley was passionate about taking care of people and took his time to be patient and go the extra mile, and the Town was fortunate to have him December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 3 of 53 7:32:14 PM Police Lieutenant Brad Whitted congratulated Officer Riley on his achievement, noting that was only a small token of what he had achieved. He agreed that he went above and beyond on a daily basis, and thanked him for his devotion to the Town. 7:32:40 PM Police Lieutenant David Trimmer, on behalf of Chief Clarence Birkhead, extended his congratulations and that of the entire Police Department. He said it was a huge milestone in any officer's career, and they were very proud to have him in Hillsborough and working for the Police Department. 7:33:13 PM Police Officer James Riley thanked everyone for their kind comments, and introduced his family and thanked them for their support. B. Presentation by the Cultural Center Committee 7:34:00 PM Margo Pinkerton, Cultural Center Committee Board member, said that 2 years ago the Hillsborough Arts Council had hosted a summit to pre - visualize what would happen in the arts in the next 5 years. She said they had agreed that some sort of cultural center was needed to provide studio and display space for art and culture as well as for outreach programs for education at both the adult and school levels, adding that the arts organizations that currently existed did not serve the whole of the County. Ms. Pinkerton said the Center that they envisioned would be 35,000 square feet with an annual budget of about $500,000, but they were not asking for funding from the Town. She said what they were seeking was a declaration of a show of support for the formation and development of a Cultural Center that would serve all of Orange County. Ms. Pinkerton said she and John Delconte, president of the Cultural Center Committee, had met with Brendan Greaves, the Public Art/Community Design Director of the NC Arts Council, to discuss their Creating Place Arts Facility feasibility grant for their project. She said the grant was for $10,000 for a feasibility study with $2,500 required as a matching grant, noting they already had the $2,500. Ms. Pinkerton said that Mr. Greaves had indicated that because their vision would serve the entire County and they were committed to education at all levels, that they had a very good chance of receiving the grant. Ms. Pinkerton said during these difficult economic times, the question on everyone's minds was if the project was economically feasible, and the answer was yes. She said during their research they had met with various arts groups in the State to determine what was necessary for space, and Mr. Greaves indicated that the 35,000 square feet they had envisioned was a reasonable goal. Ms. Pinkerton said that the Orange County Visitor's Bureau had reported that spending by domestic U.S. travelers in 2008 totaled $152.22 million in Orange County, a 3.2% increase over 2007 and that ranked Orange County 24 out of the State's 100 counties in travel expenditures. She said that increase in a down economy was something to keep in mind, and if you read the research you would see that arts bring in a lot of money into a community and brought money in from outside the community. Ms. Pinkerton said communities that had a strong cultural and arts base did very well financially. She asked that Hillsborough, as the County seat and as a community full of creators, support their efforts in any way possible, through a proclamation or some other declaration of support. Ms. Pinkerton stated that would enable them to go out into December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 4 of 53 the community and seek support from various factions, as well as to seek out grants. She said meanwhile, she hoped they could work with the Town to look for temporary space. 7:41:25 PM Commissioner Gering stated he had participated in the Cultural Center processes and fully supported the objectives of what the Committee was trying to accomplish. He said he wanted to go on record in support of a Cultural Center for Orange County, and invited Ms. Pinkerton to come back to the Board with other suggestions of how they might help. Ms. Pinkerton said they would welcome any input from the Town Board as well, noting it had to be a collaborative effort in order to succeed. Mayor Stevens said he believed he was speaking for the Board when he said that they supported their effort and offered to work with Ms. Pinkerton to craft a proclamation of support of a Cultural Center for the Board to adopt, perhaps in January. 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS REGARDING MATTERS NOT ON THE PRINTED AGENDA 7:43:11 PM No citizens signed up to speak on items not on the printed Agenda. 5. AGENDA CHANGES & AGENDA APPROVAL 7:43:26 PM Commissioner Gering suggested moving Item 11.D regarding Elizabeth Brady Road to be heard just prior to Item 11.A. There was no objection from the Board. Mayor Stevens stated if necessary they could delay that item until Commissioner Hallman called in by phone. 7:44:09 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Lowen, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to approve the Agenda as amended by a vote of 4 -0. The motion was declared passed. 6. APPOINTMENTS A. Selection of Mayor pro tem 7:44:28 PM Commissioner Gering thanked the Board for allowing him the opportunity to serve as Mayor pro tem for the last 2 years. 7:44:50 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to appoint Commissioner Brian Lowen as the Mayor pro tem by a vote of 4 -0. The motion was declared passed. B. Committee Assignments for the Mayor and Town Board 7:45:32 PM Mayor Stevens said a list of Committee Assignments had been provided to the Town Board, and suggested that they proceed with the current list and talk only about any specific changes that should be made. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 5 of 53 Commissioner Gering stated that his term on the Tourism Board had ended, but he would like to continue working on tourism- related issues. He suggested that he and Commissioner Dancy swap assignments, with him taking her seat on the Orange County Visitor's Bureau and she taking his seat on the Hillsborough Tourism Board. Commissioner Dancy agreed to that swap. 7:46:23 PM Mayor Stevens said that Commissioner Hallman had asked that someone replace him on the Orange County Economic Development Commission, and he offered to do that if someone would take his seat on the Upper Neuse River Basin Association. Commissioner Gering volunteered to take Mayor Stevens' seat on the Upper Neuse River Basin Association. Mayor Stevens said then he would take the Orange County EDC seat with Commissioner Hallman as an alternate. Commissioner Lloyd said that she would be unable to attend meetings of committees that met prior to 7 p.m. because of her work schedule. 7:48:10 PM Commissioner Dancy noted that Commissioner Hallman had indicated he wanted to keep his current committee assignments with the exception of the monthly EDC meetings, which Mayor Stevens had agreed to take on. Commissioner Lloyd asked about the Chatham /Orange Joint Planning Task Force. Planning Director Margaret Hauth stated that was a new task force that was just formed, and at present the plan was to meet alternating months and for the meeting locations to rotate among the various jurisdictions, so at times the meetings may be in Chatham County. She said the plan was to meet at 9 a.m., and it would be rare that the Town would have an item of interest on the agenda. Commissioner Dancy said Commissioner Hallman had indicated he wanted to alternate attendance on that bi- monthly task force. Commissioner Lloyd said she would be happy to share that responsibility if the meetings were held in Orange County. Ms. Hauth said they had determined that there was no conflict if Commissioner Hallman wanted to serve on both the HOME Review Committee and the Land Trust Board, because the HOME Review Committee only made recommendations to elected boards so had no real authority. 7:50:04 PM Commissioner Lowen said he had wanted to step down from the Land Trust Board because of his schedule, but if Commissioner Hallman was the primary member then he would be happy to serve as the alternate. Commissioner Lloyd said she would be willing to take Commissioner Hallman's two alternating meeting commitments to the Water Sewer Advisory Board if it would be of help to him Commissioner Gering said there was one committee not on the list, and that was the Rail Station Task Force. He said that may not be an issue because that committee would likely finish its work by this time next year. Mayor Stevens said it should be added to the list, and asked was Commissioner Gering willing to keep his seat. Commissioner Gering agreed to do so. 7:51:54 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Lowen, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd, the Board moved to approve the Committee Assignments for the Mayor and Town Board as amended by a vote of 4 -0. The motion was declared passed. C. Reappoint Kathleen Faherty to 2 term on Planning Board 7:52:24 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd, the Board moved to reappoint Kathleen Faherty to a 2nd term on the Planning Board by a vote of 4 -0. The motion was declared passed. 7. COMMITTEE REPORTS (Critical) 7:52:38 PM No committee reports were offered. 8. REPORT FROM THE TOWN MANAGER December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 6 of 53 7:52:59 PM Mr. Peterson said that each year the Orange Rural Fire Department's highest recognition for service to the Fire Department was called the Ben Franklin Award, and this year's winner was Commissioner Lloyd. He said that Commissioner Lloyd served on the Orange Rural Fire Department Board and that did take up a lot of time, noting the fire service was complex and took a lot of management. Mr. Peterson said the Town had again received the Governors Finance Officers Association Distinguished Budget Presentation Award, which was good news. He offered his thanks to the Board and the staff that had made that award possible. Mr. Peterson said that in regards to the audit, the good news was that the Fund Balance in the General Fund was much better than projected. He said they would have another rough year coming up and that good news gave them more flexibility. Mr. Peterson said the good news in the Water and Sewer Fund was that the drop in Fund Balance was not as bad as first thought although it was still a tough year for them as revenues were about one -half million below what was expected. Mr. Peterson said the County had made a decision on the Waste Transfer Station, and they were working towards sending Hillsborough's waste to Durham. He said it would be a little more expensive to send their trash to Durham, but it was much better than having to travel to the 54 West site. Mr. Peterson said he believed the tipping fees in Durham were less so there may be some offsetting savings there. He said he would keep the Board updated as the situation progressed. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 7 of 53 7:56:25 PM Assistant Town Manager /Public Works Director Nicole Ard provided an update on the Nash Street Sidewalk project. She said that the Board had allowed them to submit to NCDOT the contract award notification for that project, and they were now moving forward with S. T. Wooten as the lowest responsible bidder. Ms. Ard said the S. T. Wooten proposal was for $1,045,741.80, and NCDOT had added 15% for contingency for such things a construction inspection and administration, and believed they would be moving forward with that project in January 2010 with project completion planned by May 2011. She offered her thanks to all who had made that project possible, including their design engineer Michael Neal. Ms. Ard said more information would be forthcoming in the months to come. Mayor Stevens asked would portions of the sidewalk be opened as it was completed, or not. Ms. Ard said they would be talking about sectioning it off because there were two schools in that vicinity as well as some day care facilities, noting they had talked about starting at one end of the project and working their way through while coordinating with the schools. 7:58:47 PM Mayor Stevens said for those not familiar with that project, the sidewalk would go from the Fairview community all the way down across US 70A down Nash Street to where the pedestrian access would be to Gold Park, and would connect Hillsborough School and Central Elementary School. He said that would go a long way in building connectivity with a whole range of neighborhoods. Commissioner Lowen said it was a much needed project, noting that there was a significant amount of pedestrian traffic along the planned corridor of the new sidewalk. 9. DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS 7:59:46 PM Commissioner Gering asked a brief status report on the Wayfinding Signage program. Ms. Hauth responded that they were waiting a formal response from the County that they expected at their January meeting in terms of what their cost participation would be so that they could move forward. Mr. Peterson said he had thought they were going to put together a proposal. Ms. Hauth said they would, and it would be put forth at the County Commissioner's January meeting. Mr. Peterson said the Mayor had talked with the County Commissioner's Chair and made her aware of the Town's intentions, and staff would be working on a proposal that was based on formulas and what percentage of the signs the County would benefit from, and had asked for their participation. 8:00:53 PM Planner Stephanie Trueblood stated that the Town Board had agreed to let the County use the design for the signs at the new County campus, and that new campus sign had been installed today. She invited the Board to go by the County office building to see what it looked like, noting it was a free - standing sign that was the same dimensions and color as the new Wayfinding sign package. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 8 of 53 Commissioner Gering said then once they received a response from Orange County, the Board would talk about financing options so that they could move forward with it quickly. Mr. Peterson said that would be the plan, noting that once they determined if Orange County would participate and to what level, the next thing would be to identify financing options for the Board to discuss. 8:01:50 PM Finance Director Greg Siler said that the Town Board had been provided with a copy of the finished 2009 Financial Report and would receive details of that report at its next meeting. Mr. Peterson noted that the General Assembly had passed new Ethics criteria, noting that everyone had to have 2 hours of ethics class work for every term, and that was effective January 1, 2011, so the Board members had a year to do that. He said the School of Government and the League of Municipalities were working together to schedule classes, and there would be multiple course offerings over the next year which would hopefully fit everyone's schedule. 10. ITEMS FOR DECISION — CONSENT AGENDA A. Consider Approval of the Minutes of the October, 12, 2009 Regular Town Board Meeting Closed Session; the Octoberl 5, 2009 Joint Public Hearing; the October 26, 2009 Monthly Workshop; the October 26, 2009 Monthly Workshop Closed Session; the October 29, 2009 Emergency Meeting; the October 29, 2009 Emergency Meeting Closed Session; the November 9, 2009 Regular Town Board Meeting; and the November 9, 2009 Regular Town Board Meeting Closed Session B. Approval of consistency finding and an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to remove automatic approval provisions for Certificate of Appropriateness applications not acted upon within 60 days of application C. Approval of modification to Master Plan condition to require the dedication of Waterstone Park to the Town no later than the dedication to the Town of the portion of Cates Creek Parkway from College Park Road to Lafayette Drive rather than December 31, 2009 D. Consider Approval of an Ordinance to amend Chapter 4, Section 57 Retirement Benefits of the Town Code to allow for continuation of dependent health insurance benefits at the expense of the retiree E. Consider Approval of Various Budget Amendments F. Consider Approval of an amendment to the Town Board 2009 Meeting Schedule to cancel the December 28, 2009 Monthly Workshop G. Consider Approval of an amendment to the Town Board 2010 Meeting Schedule to incorporate the Budget Workshop dates H. Consideration of an Addendum to the Interlocal Agreement between Orange County and the towns of Hillsborough, Carrboro, and Chapel Hill with regard to new tax billing and collection software 8:03:28 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Dancy, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd, the Board moved to approve the Consent Agenda by a vote of 4 -0. The motion was declared passed. 11. ITEMS FOR DECISION — REGULAR AGENDA December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 9 of 53 8:04:36 PM Commissioner Hallman joined the meeting by speaker phone. He offered his congratulations to Mayor Stevens and to Commissioners Dancy and Gering on their re- election. Item D - Consideration of a Resolution to NCDOT detailing the Town's comments as part of the public comment period on U -3808 — Elizabeth Brady Road 8:04:56 PM Ms. Hauth stated in the packet the Board had received a draft resolution, noting that the County Commissioners would be taking up a resolution to support a "No Build" alternative at its meeting tomorrow night which she would attend. She said based on the outcome from the Town Board's public hearing on November 30 and feedback from the meeting last week hosted by NCDOT, the direction to staff was to craft a resolution in support of a No Build alternative, which may be amended as the Board saw fit. Mayor Stevens noted that several citizens had signed up to speak on this issue. 8:06:21 PM Commissioner Gering said that citizens had now had two opportunities to speak on the issue. He pointed out Elizabeth Brady Road had been an issue for the entire 8 years he had served on the Board, and he had always had concerns from the beginning but had been willing to keep an open mind primarily because he had wanted to wait for the Environmental Impact Study and to continue to hear from citizens about the project. Commissioner Gering said he had heard the comments made at the public hearing and at NCDOT's meeting, and understood that the issue affected many people both inside and outside of Town. He said though those outside of Town had no vote, he considered them a part of the extended community. Commissioner Gering said the draft EIS had a few surprises for him, for example he was surprised by the noise impacts, and that it indicated that there were no identified archaeological resources even though they knew they existed, most recently from the Ashton Hall application. He said the draft EIS also somehow missed 7 tributaries at Poplar Ridge, and did not consider that the entire 265 acres owned by Classical American Homes would qualify for the Section 2 -F restrictions by federal regulations. Commissioner Gering said he knew there were other problems with the draft EIS, but had learned enough and heard enough now to make a decision. He said for himself, the impacts and the expense far outweighed any benefits, and the only responsible choice, he believed, was the No Build option. Commissioner Gering said everyone was aware that downtown was a problem that could not be ignored, but he did not believe it had been ignored. He said choosing the No Build option meant that they must be more aggressive and creative about solving the problem of downtown traffic, and there was already on the Town's plans five projects that would mitigate traffic downtown and staff was very creative in coming up with six additional possibilities to explore. Commissioner Gering said not all of those projects would necessitate building roads or spending large amounts of money, and sometimes the simpler and cheaper solutions were the most effective. He said he was hopeful that the NCDOT was willing to be flexible and work with the Town. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 10 of 53 8:09:14 PM Commissioner Lloyd said the County Commissioners had not yet voted on this issue, but they had sent out two documents today that indicated they were willing to support the Town. She said the County had also offered some help through the MPO. Ms. Hauth said the County had requested the same list of projects as the Town. Ms. Hauth noted two issues with the resolution, first that the acreage should be 256 acres rather than 265 acres and in the Now, Therefore paragraph the word "Anticipates" was misspelled. 8:10:27 PM Motion made by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd to approve the resolution to NCDOT detailing the Town's comments as part of the public comment period on U -3808 — Elizabeth Brady Road, as amended. Mayor Stevens said that part of the No Build option included other "unspecified" and asked if that should be included in the resolution. Ms. Hauth said they could, noting that when there had been seven options there was some alternative that spoke of other traffic demand management improvements, but those had never been specified. She said that had been Alternative 2 in the original comparison and would have supported some of the build alternatives, but NCDOT had never specifically indicated what those projects would be. Ms. Hauth said she would imagine it had to do with turn lanes and protected signal turns, the optimization of traffic signals and things of that nature. 8:11:42 PM Commissioner Dancy said it was a 30- year -old plan and the Town was growing, but the plan had not grown. She said now, there was no room for a build option. Commissioner Lowen said he had supported Elizabeth Brady Road for years and had stated he had supported it because there were no other options to get traffic through the main corridor through Town. He said he was now glad that some options had been identified, and although they may not solve the problem they hopefully would alleviate some of the problem. Commissioner Lowen said based on the EIS he agreed it was not likely the best alternative and certainly did not support tearing down someone's home to build a road. He said some traffic was good because it brought business into the Town, but they needed to keep their eye on solutions to that traffic and make it a high priority. Commissioner Lowen said at this time he supported the No Build option. Mayor Stevens said he believed it would be very important that the resolution be adopted unanimously as a show of support. 8:13:54 PM Commissioner Hallman, via telephone, agreed with Commissioner Gering's and Commissioner Lowen's statements, noting this was another step in finding a solution. He suggested including language in the resolution urging NCDOT to consider funding a package of alternative improvements specified in the No Build option. Ms. Hauth said language to that effect could be included in 1) in the Now, Therefore paragraph, noting that she could pull the language directly from the EIS. She said it would then read that the Town only supported the No Build option included in the draft EIS which included other incidental projects, noting she would get the exact language from the EIS to be inserted. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 11 of 53 8:14:54 PM Commissioner Gering said he would accept that change as a friendly amendment. Commissioner Lloyd agreed as well. Mayor Stevens said the Town Board had listened to comments on both sides of the issue and considered all options, and understood that they did need to mitigate traffic. He said that central parkland, the number of homes, and the environmental impacts made the build option untenable. Mayor Stevens said it was important to have options as they moved forward, and believed the Board would move expediently on those. He said since they had the County's support as they met with the MPO in January, he was guardedly optimistic that they could continue to work on traffic congestion and fulfill the intent of the project. Commissioner Lloyd said the project as proposed by NCDOT would cost an extraordinary amount of money and would not have mitigated traffic for a long enough period of time. She said for that reason she supported the No Build option. 8:17:23 PM The vote was 5 -0. The motion was declared passed. A. Consideration of an ordinance amending the Zoning Map to rezone .99 acres at 1020 US 70 A East from Office Institutional to Neighborhood Business to allow retail uses (TMBL 4.40.B.5) 8:18:58 PM Ms. Hauth stated this was a request from Brent Lockwood to rezone .99 acres at 1020 US 70A from Office Institutional to Neighborhood Business. She said that one neighbor had spoken at the public hearing to remind the Board of the impacts of growing traffic concerns in the vicinity. Ms. Hauth said the Future Land Use Map called for the area to be mixed use employment, and Neighborhood Business was the least permissive commercial zone but did add retail sales that were not currently allowed under Office Institutional. She said that was the reason for the rezoning request. Ms. Hauth said the Planning Board did find that the request was consistent with the Future Land Use Plan, and a Consistency Statement and a draft ordinance had been provided in the packet for the Board's consideration. 8:20:15 PM Commissioner Gering raised the question of a possibility the Board had recently been made aware of for a different road access for Forest Ridge that would be adjacent to this property. He said he would like to have some discussion with the applicant about what the impact would be from a different road access. Ms. Hauth said they had not yet been able to schedule a meeting of all the parties, which would be the owners of Forest Ridge, Mr. Sain who was an adjacent property owner, and Mr. Lockwood. She said some of those people had approached individual Board members about the possibility of adjusting the alignment into the Forest Ridge project so that it would align with Meadowland Drive, noting that was a possibility. 8:21:20 PM Commissioner Lowen asked if Commissioner Gering was suggesting that meeting take place before the Board voted on the rezoning request. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 12 of 53 Commissioner Gering replied he would like to know the outcome of that discussion so that he would be comfortable with exactly what was planned for the property and the possibility of a road realignment before the Board voted on it. Commissioner Lowen said then was he proposing that the Board table it. Commissioner Gering replied yes. 8:21:51 PM Mayor Stevens asked would there be any issue with tabling it. Town Attorney Bob Hornik stated there was no issue with tabling it, in that the Board was on no timetable. He said the Board was suppose to be looking at the suitability of this property for all the uses that were permitted in the Neighborhood Business district, and it could be that the alignment of that road somehow played into whether this property was suitable for all of those uses. Mr. Hornik said it may be useful information for the Board to have before it made a determination. Commissioner Lowen asked was there a possibility that such a meeting would take place prior to the Board's January meeting. Ms. Hauth said she had no way to know, and she was waiting to hear from the property owner in order to schedule a meeting. She added it was unlikely that it would take place prior to Christmas. Commissioner Lowen said he wondered if the owner had anything planned, and was waiting on action from the Board before moving forward with a specific tenant or something of that sort. Ms. Hauth said that had been the case when the application was filed in June, but did not know what the status of that was. 8:23:57 PM Mayor Stevens said he recalled from the public hearing that the applicant had a specific business in mind. Ms. Hauth said it may be that in the time that had lapsed that the potential tenant had gone elsewhere. Mr. Hornik said technically speaking, the Board was not allowed at this stage to rely on any representation the applicant might make about a specific use of the property. He said the Board had to consider every use that was allowed in the Neighborhood Business district and whether or not those were possible for this site. Mr. Hornik said that was why where the road might be would have some bearing on the Board's consideration of the suitability of the requested rezoning. 8:25:33 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Gering, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd, the Board moved to table the item indefinitely by a vote of 5 -0. The motion was declared passed. B. Consideration of Preliminary Plan for Major Subdivision from Housewright Builders to create 8 lots on a new public road on the north side of Rencher Street 8:25:59 PM Ms. Hauth stated this was a Preliminary Plan for a Major Subdivision which was a request to subdivide the land consistent with the current zoning to create 8 lots on a new public road on the north side of Rencher Street. She said the property was currently zoned R -40 which was a 40,000 square foot minimum lot size, and all of the proposed lots met that minimum requirement. Ms. Hauth said that NCDOT had reviewed the project and as such some modifications had been made to the stormwater plan, and as a consequence NCDOT was willing to accept the road as a State road and assume ownership and maintenance responsibility for both December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 13 of 53 the road and the stormwater related to the road. Ms. Hauth said the Planning Board had reviewed the plan over the course of two meetings, and had recommended denial of the project by a 7 -1 vote. She said the owner was asking to provide fees in lieu of dedication of parks and recreation land, which was acceptable to the Parks and Recreation Board as this project was in the ETJ as opposed to the Town limits. 8:28:06 PM Mr. Hornik said there were a couple of important points to bring out, the first of which was that there was no requirement for traffic impact analysis until you get to 21 lots, so it was not required with this application. He said it was his understanding that with 8 lots they were perhaps adding 80 trips a day to the existing road network, and the evidence in the record from NCDOT was that that would not affect the road network at NC 57, NC 86, and Rencher Street. Mr. Hornik said from what he had read and gathered from the record was that it appeared that the applicant had satisfied its burden of showing that it met the Subdivision Ordinance requirements with respect to roads and traffic. He said he would not want to spend a lot of time trying to defend the denial based on the record. Mr. Hornik said understandably the neighbors were concerned because they said there were already traffic issues there, and did not doubt that that was true. But, he said, the fact that that was true did not, under the Town's ordinance, provide a basis for denial of the use of the property which was permitted in the district since the applicant had satisfied all required criteria under the Subdivision Ordinance. 8:29:47 PM Mayor Stevens said then the assumption was that as long as the applicant met the standards, the subdivision could be approved. Mr. Hornik said that was correct, noting it was like other discretionary decisions the Board had to make. He said unless neighbors or others came up with substantial competent evidence to support a finding that the plan was not in compliance with the Subdivision Ordinance, the plan should be approved. Mr. Hornik said once the applicant had satisfied all the requirements, then the burden shifted to opponents to provide competent evidence that the plan did not satisfy the standards of the ordinance. He said unless that occurred, the Town was compelled to approve. Mr. Hornik said from his reading of what NCDOT had provided, they had said that the functionality of the intersection and the street network in the area would not be negatively impacted in any significant or measurable way. Ms. Hauth said the applicant was present and had some additional transportation information to provide. 8:31:16 PM Michael Neal, the design engineer for the project and representing the applicant, read a prepared statement into the record: "As this is a quasi-judicial process, we respectfully request that if the Town takes public input on this submittal that all speakers be sworn in and that all testimony be under oath." Mr. Neal said that would apply to him as well and he would like to be sworn in before he testifies. He asked what the Board's pleasure would be on that request. Mr. Hornik said it was entirely up to the Board. Mayor Stevens said he had no problem with the request. Commissioner Lowen agreed as well. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 14 of 53 Mr. Hornik asked that each speaker be sworn by stating, "I swear or affirm that the testimony I am about to give is the whole truth, so help me God." 8:32:53 PM Mr. Neal was sworn in by repeating the oath. He stated that the subdivision request was a conforming R -40 subdivision and complied in all respects with the Town's Subdivision Ordinance including the design standards in Section 4. Mr. Neal said according to the staff review and agenda form, which he entered into the record, the site met the ordinance requirements in terms of lot size and other technical concerns. He said for the record, they were not aware nor had they been made aware of any aspect of this submittal that did not meet Town ordinance standards. Mr. Neal said the Town adopted a Future Land Use Plan and Map which he entered into the record, and it showed that area and that property to be low to medium density residential, allowing a density of 2 to 4 units per acre. He said they were submitting a conforming R -40 subdivision of less than 1 unit per acre. Mr. Neal said they were in compliance with the current adopted plans and with the Future Land Use Plans and Maps. Mr. Neal said that Section 3.5 of the Town's Subdivision Ordinance established that a traffic impact analysis was not required for residential projects less than 20 lots. He said that was a legislative determination by the Town that recognized that a subdivision of that size did not impact traffic in a way that adversely affected the public health, safety or welfare. Mr. Neal said however, due to concerns raised at the Planning Board meeting they had conducted a traffic impact analysis which they submitted for the record. He said that analysis reflected that the cumulative effect of the subdivision of 8 lots on Rencher Street and with the intersection of NC 57 was negligible and well below any measurable threshold. Mr. Neal said the traffic generated by this subdivision would not affect the public health, safety, or welfare in any measurable way, and in fact the subdivision design included a stub out to the adjacent property that when developed would allow a future alternative route from Rencher Street to NC 57. He said that was the first step in addressing the neighbors' concerns about the existing traffic issues. Mr. Neal said that the intersection of Rencher Street and NC 57 had not shown up on any NCDOT list and to their knowledge NCDOT had not programmed any improvements due to safety concerns. 8:35:45 PM Don Morton, of Morton & Morton Engineers, specializing in traffic engineering, was sworn by repeating the oath. He stated his firm was retained to conduct a traffic impact analysis for the Rencher Oaks subdivision and were to determine the potential impacts to the surrounding streets and roadways and to identify levels of service of operation. Mr. Morton said his report represented trip generations created by the subdivision and traffic capacity analysis with findings and conclusions, based on three different scenarios: the existing traffic conditions; a three -year build out period to 2013 with a 3% growth per year in traffic for the intersection at NC 57/NC 86 and the two intersections that were stop sign controlled; and, by adding the traffic generated by the proposed subdivision they had developed the third scenario which was the build year of 2013. He said the level of service of operation for the a.m. peak period was level of service C; in three years using 3% growth in traffic the level of service would remain at C. Mr. Morton said if the subdivision was built out in 2013, the level of service would remain at C. He December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 15 of 53 said the existing p.m. level of service for NC 57/NC 86 was level of service B. Mr. Morton said using the same scenarios, in three years the level of service would be C, and if the subdivision were built it would remain at level of service C which was a very acceptable level of operation by NCDOT and the engineering industry. Mr. Morton submitted a copy of the traffic impact analysis for the record. He added that he had been pleased to hear that the optimization of traffic signals in the downtown had helped the traffic situation. Mr. Morton said he had been given the opportunity to program the signal system at Eno River and Churton Street as well as the traffic signal design upgrades for the Nash Street sidewalk project. He said if there were any other traffic concerns to be addressed there was always the option for other kinds of traffic control measures such as speed humps and the like. 8:39:17 PM Mr. Neal stated that the Planning Board's recommendation to deny the project was not based on competent material or substantial evidence. He said the minutes of the Planning Board meeting show that no factual evidence was presented at that meeting that supported the neighbors concerns of the potential impacts of the subdivision. Mr. Neal said all comments presented at that Planning Board meeting as stated by the Planning Board in its motion was based on speculative concerns and generalized opinions about existing traffic. He quoted the staff's comments from the agenda form: "The recommendation for denial by the Planning Board is not well supported by the technical facts and application materials." Mr. Neal said a municipality may not as a conditional approval of a subdivision plat require a developer to improve streets abutting the subdivision. He said likewise, it may not impose upon the owner of property the correction of problems not of their making as a condition of a lawful use of their land. Mr. Neal said denial of this project would deny the applicant the use of the land as authorized by the Town's ordinance itself. He said that denial would render a regulatory taking of property by the Town of Hillsborough. Mr. Neal said they were prepared to meet the letter of the ordinance. Mr. Neal entered his prepared statement into the record. 8:41:09 PM Commissioner Gering said he might have had questions had he been given the opportunity to study the information that had been presented this evening. He said he was not pleased with the idea that the Board was presented with new material at the same time they were expected to make a decision. Mr. Neal responded that it was his understanding that the Town Attorney had indicated they were not required to submit that information, only to enter it into the record. Commissioner Gering said if he was to make a decision that the record supported then he would have to have knowledge of the record. Mr. Hornik said that was a fair comment, noting that now that the information had been submitted for the record it was fair to allow the Board they were asking to make a quasi - judicial decision the opportunity to review thoroughly the evidence that had been submitted tonight. Mr. Neal said they had no objection to that, and were happy to allow the Board the time to do a thorough review of the record. He said they would voluntarily agree to a month to two month extension prior to the Board making a decision. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 16 of 53 8:42:35 PM Commissioner Lowen agreed with Commissioner Gering's comments, and said he found it troubling. He said he wanted to go on record that he knew people who lived on Rencher Street and understood how they felt. However, he said, he also believed in property rights and the Board would put themselves in a difficult situation when someone was "legally" entitled to develop their property. Commissioner Lowen said he would like to review the traffic impact analysis and other information and believed the Board should take the time to do so. Motion made by Commissioner Lowen, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd, to table the item. Commissioner Lloyd said she had the same concerns expressed by Commissioners Gering and Lowen, and she also wanted to review the stub out at the Davis property for future access that Mr. Neal had described. She stated that in regards to the Craig property along the river, the owners had continued to pay their taxes and would not allow the Town to purchase it which had caused them to change the Riverwalk project. Commissioner Lloyd said some people would never consider giving up their property, and believed that the Davis family would be one of them. She said she wanted the opportunity to review all of the information before making a decision. Mr. Neal stated that in regards to the Davis property, they had no way to know how that would develop. But, he said, the stub out they had provided did afford an opportunity for the residents of Rencher Street to have an alternative route. Mr. Neal said they would provide the stub out and it may stay there forever and never be used, but at the least they had done their part. He said they had no objection to having their application tabled and would supply as many copies of the information presented as the Board required. Mr. Neal asked would it be enough time if this issue was brought back before the Board in January. 8:46:06 PM Commissioner Gering responded that may not be enough time since the holidays were fast approaching. Mayor Stevens said he had two people who had signed up to speak, and there was a motion on the table that needed action. Mr. Hornik said it may be appropriate for the Board to rule on the motion, and then those wanting to comment could speak when the issue was back before the Board. Or, he said, the Board could withdraw the motion and allow the public to speak who wanted to do so this evening and then entertain a motion. Mayor Stevens said he would want to avoid comments being made and then having to delay action any further. He asked the Board if it would make sense to withdraw the motion and allow people to speak. Commissioner Gering said he believed the public should be given the opportunity to speak. Commissioner Lowen agreed. 8:47:20 PM Mayor Stevens said he would prefer to swear speakers in tonight and let their comments become part of the record. Commissioner Lowen withdrew his motion. Commissioner Lloyd withdrew her second. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 17 of 53 Beverly Walton, after taking the oath, stated she was a lifelong resident of Rencher Street. She said the new subdivision proposed to be built had taken Rencher Street as part of its name and said with the new residents coming in they were unsure what the impacts would be. Ms. Walton said that the children in the neighborhood played in a nearby parking lot and in the street, and this subdivision would be bringing in additional traffic. She said the two businesses on Rencher Street already brought in much traffic, but those drivers knew that children were about and were careful when coming down the road. But, she said, they did not know that new residents coming in would take the same care. Ms. Walton said living in a neighborhood your whole life and then having a new community coming into that neighborhood would impact the existing neighborhood. She said she did not know what the law was in regards to what that new community could impose on them, so they were concerned with the traffic and of what would be imposed on their existing neighborhood. Ms. Walton said that they could not hire a lawyer or a traffic consultant to do an analysis, but that intersection was dangerous as it was and adding more vehicles would only make it more dangerous. She said there were many small children in the neighborhood and the neighbors looked out for them, but who was to say that the new residents would watch out for those children. Ms. Walton said that new community would be coming through their neighborhood and built on the other side and that impacted them dearly. 8:50:08 PM Tommy Sykes, after taking the oath, stated that he was a member of the Board of Adjustment but was present tonight as an adjacent property owner, noting his property was directly to the north of this property. He said the applicant /property owner had been more than gracious with requests from his neighborhood, Cameron Estates, and specifically his request as far as extending some of the setbacks. Mr. Sykes pointed out to the Board, as it contemplated an ordinance rewrite, that the setback requirement for subdivisions was 100 feet wide from where the house was situated. He said in situations such as this one where there were two cul de sacs that backed up to one another with the lots being naturally triangular in shape, that it pushed the houses on both sides way back onto the lot. Mr. Sykes said that caused you to run into the issue that had happened here, where his home was very close to the rear of his lot because of that 100 - foot setback, and as well the house directly behind him was pushed way back onto the lot. He said that gave you a good setback from the front but the backs of the houses were very close together. Mr. Sykes said there was a lot of natural hardwood growth there and it was a very attractive lot. Mr. Sykes said in regards to traffic, he stated as a matter of fact that there were two subdivisions that he knew of just off of NC 57 that had not been developed fully, one being Willow Bend which was about 500 yards away on the opposite side of NC 57 and other being what had been known as Sterling Farms just next to Pathaway's Elementary. He said those two developments had many residential lots that he would assume would access NC 57 to come into Town, and did not know what the potential traffic impact would be of those sites but it was important to remember that they were there and had not yet been developed, and they had not been taken into consideration on the traffic impact analysis. 8:53:31 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Lowen, seconded by Commissioner Lloyd, the Board moved to table the item by a vote of 5 -0. The motion was declared passed. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 18 of 53 8:54:05 PM The Board agreed by consensus to take a short recess. The meeting was reconvened at 9:00 p.m. C. Presentation of Downtown Parking Study preliminary results and recommendations 9:00:52 PM Mayor Stevens called the meeting to order and noted that Commissioner Hallman was participating via telephone. 9:01:00 PM Ms. Trueblood introduced Planner Aspen Price to those present, noting she had been an intern in the Planning Department last summer and had invited her to come back as a temporary Planner. She said that Ms. Price would present the details of the Downtown Parking Study using a PowerPoint presentation. Ms. Price said in response to requests from downtown property owners and others, they had investigated the current and future parking needs in downtown Hillsborough. She said the Downtown Parking Study aimed to measure the current parking situation, project the effect of future development on parking availability and accessibility, and develop recommendations to improve downtown parking in such way that it met the needs of all stakeholders. Ms. Price said the study involved various methods of data collection and public input, and provided the following data and comments. Existing Conditions: • The study area encompassed all the parcels zoned Central Commercial or Office Institutional along Church Street, King Street, Margaret Lane, Nash and Kollock Streets, Court Street and Cameron Street. Also included in the study was on- street parking in those areas. • On- street parking was free and Town- maintained on Churton Street, King Street, Margaret Lane, Cameron Street and Court Street, and parking in those areas was restricted by time limits of some sort. • The Town owned the Mayo Park lot located on West King Street, and that lot was open to the public at all times. Several of those spaces had time -limit restrictions. • There were two privately owned lots that were open for public use, one behind of and owned by the Bank of America and leased by the Town for public use; the spaces were free but some had time restrictions. The second lot was the Eno River Parking Deck on Nash and Kollock Streets. There were 200 spaces available and had no time restrictions, but there was a fee of $1 per hour or $5 per day. • There were several privately owned parking lots throughout the downtown. Those lots were typically used by employees and customers of businesses that they abutted and /or were leased by other downtown businesses for employee and customer parking. • Parking time restrictions included 15 minutes and 1, 2, or 3 hours. On- street parking was mostly 2 hours with several 15- minute spaces in front of SunTrust Bank, the Post Office, and the Link Government Services Center. Lot parking was not time restricted or was 1, 2, or 3 hours. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 19 of 53 • For existing traffic patterns, the Bank of America lot was convenient and easy to find but hard to navigate particularly for those not familiar with it. The lot had elements that made it confusing such as dead -end aisles and aisles that were one -way only. Public Input: • Town staff met with members of the Downtown Merchants Association in September 2009 to discuss the strengths and issues of downtown parking as well as possible solutions. • Surveys were distributed to downtown business owners of which 59% were returned. The surveys indicated that 85% of respondents believed that parking was insufficient downtown, and of that 85% almost half believed there should be more public parking downtown. • For the customer survey, survey boxes were placed in various locations downtown for a 2- week period, with 58 surveys received. The majority indicated they visited downtown for shopping or dining, with 48% indicating they experienced difficulty finding parking and 47% indicating that they had no trouble finding parking. • The surveys were useful in measuring parking perception, and because the public perception of parking availability was very different from that of business owners indicated that they may need to work more closely with business owners to address specific concerns with downtown parking. Data Collection: • A parking inventory was taken using a GPS unit, which claimed accuracy of 1 to 3 meters from the actual location and attributes were selected to describe the specific characteristics. The categories were location, type, access, surface type, space marked, time limit, fee, ownership, restriction, restricted time, and restriction marked. • A space was considered marked if it had white lines painted, if there was a curb stop, or if there was a sign posted. • Any privately owned parking spaces located behind businesses were considered restricted for employee /customer use unless specifically signed otherwise. • Restricted time detailed what timeframe the restriction was valid, so if a space was restricted during certain times for customer /employee use but available after business hours for the public, then that was noted. • The spaces inside the parking deck were considered differently, because a GPS signal could not be received inside the deck. Three points of measurement were taken from the top level of the deck; one point accounted for the five handicap spaces, one point for the 209 spaces reserved for Orange County use, and one point for the remaining 195 public spaces. • There was a total 1,348 spaces, the majority of which were on surface lots and were privately owned, with a small percentage carrying a time limit restriction. • Two traffic flow counters were installed at the Bank of America lot for one week, one at the entrance off West King Street for incoming vehicles, which totaled 2,965 vehicles. The second counter was placed at the Churton Street entrance which counted vehicles coming in and going out each hour. The Churton Street site had 4,792 vehicles going in and out, and the peak times were around the lunch hour, as expected. • The hand -count of availability was conducted over the course of two Tuesdays and two Fridays at 10 a.m., 12:15 p.m., and 2 p.m. in mid October. All empty spaces observed December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 20 of 53 were counted in the Bank of America lot, the Mayo Park lot, as well as on- street spaces. As expected, the lunch hour was the time of greatest congestion but overall spaces were still available at lunch time on a Friday. • On average 75 to 100 spaces were available at any given time within a couple of blocks of downtown restaurants and businesses. • The places with the most availability were found on West King Street and South Cameron Street. Parking Supply Analysis: • First they analyzed the parking supply from a quantitative standpoint. Off - street parking standards were applied from the current Zoning Ordinance, and it was determined that 1,877 spaces were required. However, they noted that the current parking standards were considered by some to be "parking heavy" and did not always account for the shared parking that occurred in the downtown area. • Parking standards were then applied from the 21 Century Land Development Code, which was intended to provide guidelines for a code update based on contemporary regulatory needs. Those were applied in two ways, the first being the commercial center standard based on the total square footage of an area, which indicated that 1,288 spaces would be required. If you then applied that by use types in a similar manner in which the Town's current zoning standards were developed, that resulted in a requirement of 1,387 spaces. • In general, the parking supply in the downtown was within reason for what was recommended for a district such as Hillsborough. Observed Parking Supply: • From observations, there appeared to be adequate parking available throughout the day. Hand counts indicated 80 or more spaces available at any given time. Hand counts included only Town - maintained public parking; it did not include private lots, the County lots or the parking deck. From observation, those were not at full capacity. • From that they could conclude that an adequate amount of parking was available in downtown although some spaces may be hard to find or to navigate. Accessibility: • Survey responses indicated that people did not want to walk far from where they had parked. • A survey from 1990 indicated that people walked about 1/3 of a mile when shopping. Based on those findings, pedestrian- oriented developments typically restricted themselves to a half -mile radius or a 10- minute walk. Taking those into account and comparing Hillsborough to other shopping areas such as The Streets at Southpoint, downtown Hillsborough was very compact in that it was a quarter mile long by a quarter mile wide with a central retail strip of about one - eighth mile. • Parking in Town was scattered throughout the downtown area and not just around the edges as it was in most shopping areas, so visitors should be made aware that parking a block away from a destination in Hillsborough was not an unrealistic distance to walk. • Availability and distribution of handicap spaces were surveyed. There were currently 50 handicap spaces out of the total 1,348 spaces in the downtown, which exceeded the ADA December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 21 of 53 standard of 24. However, the corner of East King Street and Cameron Street near the Visitors Center was lacking handicap spaces. • From the hand counts, on average 10 handicap spaces were available throughout the day in various areas of the downtown, and at least one was open in each area of the downtown in all but one of the times counted. Parking Spaces Markings: • Many of the parking signs in Town, for both public and private parking, could be described as unclear, outdated, faded, dirty, hidden behind vegetation, falling down, or in excess. • In several areas of Town, the signage was not consistent which made understanding them and enforcement difficult. Some signs were in disrepair and some indicated restrictions for businesses that not longer existed. In several places there was an excess of signs that led to visual clutter and ultimately reduced their effectiveness. • Pavement markings were generally worn and faded which could lead to inefficient parking conditions in some areas of Town. In general they needed to be made more consistent and visible while also reducing signage clutter. • Pavement markings were generally preferred as they reduced visual clutter; they could eliminate the need for signage, and were also more compatible with the aesthetics of the historic district. Signage: • Signage was useful in some context, for instance with on- street parking it might be useful and effective to have clearly marked spaces on the pavement with occasional signage that described restrictions with arrows pointing to the area they applied to. • As a cost savings, pavement markings reduced the need for signage, estimated to cost $60 per sign as opposed to $2 for pavement markings. Enforcement: • The Police Department was responsible for the enforcement of parking issues in public parking areas; private lots were the responsibility of the property owner. • Some respondents to the survey felt that the unstructured parking for the Town was an asset for downtown businesses; others felt that parking would not work effectively unless there was consistent enforcement. • Enforcement issues in the downtown may stem from unclear inconsistent signage, and improvements in the visibility and availability of public parking may reduce those issues in private lots. However, enforcement issues should continue to be monitored to determine if a different policy was needed in the future. Alternative Transportation Options: • Triangle Transit Route 420 connected downtown Hillsborough to downtown Chapel Hill and the UNC campus. • An in -Town circulator route was planned to provide service to residential areas and businesses in Hillsborough. The planned route was 16 miles long with 10 fixed bus stops. • Carpooling and vanpooling was noted as a great alternative commuting option, particularly for people who worked consistent schedules. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 22 of 53 • Walking and bicycling were also options, as Hillsborough was considered a pedestrian and bicycle friendly area because of its compact size. • Some survey respondents revealed that some commuters were using downtown parking areas as a park and ride lot for the TTA route. The existing park and rode lots needed to be clearly marked and advertised to discourage commuters from using downtown parking as park and ride lots. • Those alternatives, even if used infrequently, should be encouraged because they would help to alleviate traffic and parking congestion downtown. Recommendations for Orange County: • Encouraged to develop a parking plan for the downtown County campuses that should consider the following elements: ♦ Encourage employees to use alternative transportation options. ♦ Educate customers about where to park when they come to County offices in Town. ♦ Provide off -site parking options for jury pool candidates. ♦ Coordinate parking signage with the Wayfinding Signage Plan to ensure clarity. ♦ Develop a parking enforcement policy. Recommendations for Private Parking Lot Owners: • Encouraged to maintain parking space markings and signage. • Remove parking signs for businesses that no longer exist. • Encourage shared parking and ensure that the lot was well -used; lease empty spaces to nearby business owners or employees. • Allow public parking after business hours and clearly indicate that with signage. • Develop an enforcement policy and enforce parking lots consistently. Recommendations for Business Owners and Employees: • Ask employees to park at more distant locations to leave the more convenient spaces open for customers. • Carpool, take the bus, or use other forms of transportation when possible. • Work out shared parking agreements with co- workers and neighboring businesses. • Lease parking spaces if concerned about finding a convenient place to park. • Respect the time limits and reserved spaces that exist downtown. • If regular parking violations were observed, notify the appropriate party to enforce it. Recommendations for the Town of Hillsborough: • The Town's public parking lots, the Mayo Park lot and the Bank of America lot, could use improvements to make them easier to find and easier to use. • The Town should maintain all on- street parking. • Time limits were important to ensure that spaces close to downtown shops and restaurants turn over quickly and were available throughout the day. Time limits need to be consistent to make understanding and enforcement easier. Employees should be encouraged to park at the outer edges of the downtown area because they were usually parked for long periods of time and often come before and leave after mid -day when parking was at a premium. With those factors in mind, the following was recommended: ♦ 15 minute parking: December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 23 of 53 • Keep two on- street spaces on Churton Street in front of SunTrust Bank. • One hour and two hour parking: • Remove all one -hour and two -hour time limits. • Three hour parking: • All spaces in the Bank of American public parking lot. • All spaces in the Mayo Park public parking lot. • All on- street parking on Churton Street, with the exception of the two 15- minute spaces in front of SunTrust Bank. • On- street parking on West King Street from Churton Street to the Eagle Masonic Lodge and Elsewhere /Lyell Cash Properties. • On- street parking on East King Street from Churton Street to the Embarq driveway. • No time limits: • On- street parking on West King Street from Eagle Masonic Lodge and Elsewhere /Lyell Cash Properties to Wake Street. • On- street parking on East King Street from the Embarq driveway to Cameron Street. • All on- street parking on Cameron Street • All on- street parking on East Margaret Lane. • Improve signage and markings. • Repaint the pavement markings for all on- street and public lot parking spaces. • Paint the curbs of all "no parking" areas yellow and remove "No Parking" signs where possible to reduce sign clutter. • Paint all spaces in the parking lot adjacent to the Police Department with "3 -hour time limit." • Remove excess time limit signage and, on each block or parking section, replace with signs that indicate the time limits and arrows that show where the limits were applicable. • Improve parking lot visibility: • Formally name the two public parking lots so they can be identified and referenced easily. • Install parking identification signs for each lot as part of the Wayfinding Signage Plan. • Install parking directional signs as indicated in the Wayfinding Signage Plan. Ensure that parking directional signs are installed on Churton Street before King Street and near the Graham Building to direct visitors off Churton Street to the public parking lots. • Improve operation: • Maintain parking striping and signage. • Provide information about downtown parking on the Town's Website and other communication channels. • Continue communicating and coordinating with downtown businesses and visitors about parking and traffic flow downtown. • Provide information about reporting parking violations to downtown businesses and customers. • Investigate enforcement policy improvements if necessary. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 24 of 53 9:21:23 PM Ms. Price stated that in general the Town should investigate opportunities for improvement of parking spaces that currently existed. She said for additional parking spaces, they recommended that 10 to 20 spaces be added to the Bank of America lot as well as 4 spaces in the Mayo Park lot. Ms. Price recommended that the existing spaces along Cameron Street between King Street and Margaret Lane be striped to make the area more efficient for parking, and to add 4 parking spaces of which 2 would be handicap spaces in front of the Visitors Center on the south side of East King Street. She said also recommended was that a tour bus parking area be created in that area that would take up two spaces when in use, which could be operated by a folding sign that the Visitors Center staff would display when a tour bus was expected. Ms. Price said lastly, it was recommended that the last parking space on Churton Street near the King Street intersection be re- striped to accommodate several motorcycle parking slots. Ms. Price said regarding handicap spaces, it was recommended to convert all but 2 of the handicap spaces in front of the Link Government Services Center on South Cameron Street to regular parking, as well as creating the 2 handicap spaces recommended in front of the Visitors Center mentioned previously. 9:22:50 PM Ms. Trueblood provided some urban design - related recommendations included in the study for the two public parking lots. She said during the survey process they learned that the general pattern of traffic from visitors coming into Town was to come north on Churton Street and then left onto West King Street. Ms. Trueblood said the survey indicated that was the first place they looked for parking, and that lot had some major issues in terms of circulation and organization. She said that was also the area that delivery trucks used during the day to park and make deliveries, adding to the difficulties in navigating that lot. Ms. Trueblood said as a spin -off to the Parking Study they began to look at ways to improve that area rather than trying to create new parking. She said through using basic standards for diagonal parking and one -way traffic circulation they were able to find space for between 10 and 20 additional spaces in the Bank of America lot. Ms. Trueblood said that would be a great benefit in terms of pulling people into a lot that they preferred to park in anyway, and in terms of creating a better traffic circulation pattern. She displayed a slide that depicted one way that might be accomplished. Ms. Trueblood said also recommended was the creation of an actual delivery zone on West King Street. She said after studying the area, staff believed that having two dedicated truck delivery zones in that area would be the most beneficial. Ms. Trueblood said another opportunity for improvement would be looking at the location of the dumpster in that parking lot, noting at present it was at the northwest corner which meant that the trash trucks had to navigate the lot to reach the backmost corner. She suggested that locating the dumpster closer to the main access point would be easier in terms of how wide the drive aisle would need to be in the lot. Ms. Trueblood suggested that further investigation would be needed on how to improve that lot in order to gain the additional spaces noted earlier. 9:26:54 PM Commissioner Gering asked had they thought about possibly connecting the annex parking lot to the Police parking lot, noting that right now there was just one sign and a 6" berm. Ms. Trueblood said she believed it was definitely worth investigating, noting staff had December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 25 of 53 discussed it. She said creating connectivity in those lots and providing more routes for access was preferable, but one of the complications at the annex was that the Tryon Street access was "entrance only" so they would not want to send traffic out that way unless they really looked at changing the pattern at the annex. Ms. Trueblood said regarding the Mayo Park lot, they had observed that at times of congestion people parallel parked along the lower section even though no formal parking spaces existed. She said to address that the study recommended that they repave and re -stripe the lower parking section, that they add 4 parallel parking spaces along the east side of the lower parking section, and that the time limits be changed for all spaces in that lot to 3 hours. Ms. Trueblood said one of the interesting things about the Parking Study was that as they were analyzing the parking situation it became evidence how interconnected parking was to everything else. She said improving parking was an integral part of the Connectivity Plan, the Wayfinding Signage Plan, the Vision 2010 Plan, and the Churton Street Corridor Plan. Ms. Trueblood said it had become apparent to her during work on the Parking Study that the connection between those various plans was a design element. She said in addition to improving signage and improving parking lots, they also needed to change the mindset by creating a pedestrian - friendly environment in the downtown that would allow people to feel safe to walk those distances that they automatically walked without thinking about it at places like The Streets at Southpoint. Ms. Trueblood said they had a compact downtown, but according to the survey information most people were not willing to park on Cameron Street and walk downtown. She said that was one of the biggest hurdles they were facing, and she believed the way to respond to that was to create a safer pedestrian environment. Ms. Trueblood said she and Ms. Price had brainstormed about some possible ways to do that and had talked with Mr. Peterson and Ms. Hauth about improving the basic urban design principles downtown. She said the idea was to draw on plans such as the Vision 2010 Plan and Churton Street Corridor Plan and downtown streetscapes, creating pedestrian - friendly crosswalks and sidewalk patterns, and starting to think about ways to improve traffic circulation in the area. Ms. Trueblood said there were many opportunities and options for improving the downtown area, but they would need to work in coordination with traffic engineers to evaluate what changes should be considered and what the domino effect might be to other areas. She said one of the things they had kept going back to was the incredibly dangerous situation they had currently with the on- street parking on Churton Street, and that came up a lot in terms of complaints received. Ms. Trueblood said those spaces were also the highest priced parking because they were the closest to the businesses, so there needed to be a full evaluation. She said part of her excitement in discovering that they may be able to get up to 20 additional parking spaces in the Bank of America lot was that they may be able to consider removing some on- street parking on Churton Street, widening the sidewalks and creating a more pedestrian - friendly environment, as well as providing outdoor seating for restaurants. Ms. Trueblood said all of that had been discussed in the Wayfinding Signage Plan and other plans in that they could be pulled together in a way to create a better environment and yet still retain the amount of parking in the downtown area. She said investigating future improvements was very important and should be December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 26 of 53 looked at closely, noting that NCDOT representatives had suggested evaluating things like the possibility of one -way streets and looking at traffic circulation patterns and addressing timing. 9:32:34 PM Mayor Stevens said that was the point of the "complete streets' philosophy and policy. Ms. Trueblood responded having that happening and coming on line with NCDOT was the best possible time to work on that relationship with them. She said NCDOT had been excited about the Parking Study Plan and to see where their research might take time. Ms. Trueblood said she would say that it would be impossible to give a full, valid analysis of the traffic circulation and parking design elements downtown without the help of a traffic consultant /engineer. Mayor Stevens offered his congratulations to Ms. Price and Trueblood on their excellent work on the Parking Study. Commissioner Gering offered his congratulations as well. He said the point was made in the analysis that they did not have any enforcement ability for private lots, and perhaps they needed to educate business owners about that. Commissioner Gering asked could they enforce lots that they leased, such as the Bank of America Lot. Mr. Hornik responded yes. Commissioner Gering said the Rail Station Task Force was planning a future use area for parking, and with the plans for a circulator bus route it seemed that that would be a great opportunity to partner with the County on providing parking for the courthouse facility or for County employees, if there was a convenient way for them to get from the parking location back to the downtown, or even for the general public. Ms. Trueblood said although it was always good to be looking at future needs, one of the limitations of the Parking Study was that the new Justice Facility and the new library were not yet opened, and some of the hand counts had been done even before the County office complex had opened. She said one of the recommendations in the plan was to revisit that part of the analysis 6 months from now, or July of 2010, once those buildings were opened. Ms. Trueblood said at that time she believed they would certainly see the parking deck with more spaces filled than the current hand counts had indicated, and they would need to work closely with the County once all of those facilities were opened because that would drastically change some of the results of the Study. But, she said, there was no way to anticipate that now. 9:35:40 PM Commissioner Gering said they had a great asset that they could begin utilizing very soon as far as additional parking at the Collins property. He said that changing the circulation for the Bank of America lot where the Churton Street entrance became a right in/right out and in conjunction with removing some of the on- street parking spaces on Churton Street appeared to be ways to improve traffic congestion on Churton Street. Commissioner Gering said that was another possibility to help traffic flow. Ms. Trueblood agreed. 9:36:45 PM Mayor Stevens wondered if it would be worthwhile to provide the Board with a briefing on street policies. Ms. Trueblood said she had recently attended a regional Wayfinding meeting where they had received an update from Ron King with NCDOT. She said it appeared that NCDOT was moving towards a system of evaluating future projects that was based on multi -modal transportation as opposed to the quickest and best way to move vehicles, which had December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 27 of 53 been the operating policy in the past. Ms. Trueblood said there were now new standards for evaluating new projects that included pedestrian, bicycle, carpooling, van pooling, bus routes, and really thinking of a more complete system of movement. Mayor Stevens said that was tied to land use as well, noting it was difficult to discuss one of those things without talking about the other things as well. Ms. Trueblood agreed, noting that some of the urban design elements that the NCDOT tended to frown on in the past such as patterned crosswalks were now becoming acceptable on State roads. She said there had been occurrences, such as in downtown Greensboro, where herringbone brick crosswalks were being installed throughout the entire historic district downtown. Ms. Trueblood noted that as the staff liaison to the Historic District Commission, one of its guidelines for the historic district was to reduce traffic signage as much as possible to protect the integrity of the district. She said there had certainly been concerns that just the parking signs had grown past the point of abundant, and knew that the Historic District Commission would be pleased to see a different pattern of pavement markings in lieu of signage in the future. 9:39:17 PM Commissioner Gering asked had the Parking Study results been provided to the downtown merchants. Ms. Price said she had provided the Study on the downtown merchants' list serve and it was also posted on the Town's Website. 9:40:00 PM Mayor Stevens indicated that there were citizens who had signed up to speak. He noted that the Parking Study should be provided for viewing at the Town Hall to make sure the public was aware of it. Elizabeth Read, representing the Alliance for Historic Hillsborough, noted that the Parking Study had shown that the Town and its staff took the issue seriously. She said changing the traffic pattern into the Bank of America lot would improve it not only for the reasons already stated but for pedestrians as well. Ms. Read said it was difficult to see pedestrians particularly with the on- street dining on the sidewalk, so making that a one -way in would be a great advantage. Ms. Read said she believed the County was a large part of the Study, and having the County inform everyone using its public facilities to park in specified areas would be an improvement. She said in addition to visual clutter improvements that could be made with pavement markings, having all of those parking signs created the appearance that they did not want people coming at all. Ms. Read said having a policy of consistent pavement markings removed that "don't park here" mentality. 9:42:30 PM Ms. Read agreed that changes in the Bank of America lot were warranted including a time limit of 3 hours, noting her belief that some people used that lot for all -day parking and having that lot turn over more frequently would increase traffic to downtown businesses. She said in regards to Visitors Center issues, they were encouraged about the handicap spaces being suggested and asked that that be done as soon as possible to aid people visiting the Center. Ms. Read said they would also very much like to see a tour bus parking area, noting they in the past had had to have someone standing out on the street to hold spaces for an December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 28 of 53 expected tour bus. She said having an official way to address that would be most helpful for both tour buses as well as school buses. Ms. Read said at a staff level, they were prepared that if other spaces in Town went to a shorter time limit and that the spaces at the Visitor Centers be all day parking, that they would adjust to how that happened. She said they had 3 staff present from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. every day and had arranged a back -up plan at a private lot if they no longer had those available spaces. Ms. Read said if it turned out that commuters used those spaces to park all day and there were no nearby spaces for visitors on an ongoing basis, they may come back to the Board at a future date and ask them to consider the option of making some of those on- street spaces for visitors to Hillsborough only. 9:45:08 PM Peggy Randall, Vice - President of the Orange County Bar Association, said she had been impressed by the presentation, but would very much like her organization to be kept in the loop when talking about downtown parking. She said Bar members came to Hillsborough en masse and either left in about an hour or where there all day. Ms. Randall said they had to haul heavy boxes of files, audiovisual equipment, law books, and the like and it was difficult to do that when having to walk long distances. She said they had to have access to the courthouse and they had to have the ability to get into the courthouse to try their cases, and that should be taken into consideration. Ms. Randall said they also needed more handicap parking for persons attending court as well as for those working in the courthouse. She said now it was impossible to get from the parking lot to the courthouse if you were handicapped because the Sheriff's Department was there and they had an elevator that you could not use. So, she said, it was up to the Town to provide them a way in. Ms. Randall said she was not handicapped, but it was very difficult to haul heavy files, books, and boxes containing everything she needed for court. Ms. Randall said she and her fellow Bar members enjoyed coming to Hillsborough and spent money when they were there, but when they had to park three blocks away in a parking deck it made it difficult, noting sometimes they needed only a few minutes to run in and file a paper. She said it would be most convenient to have a few spaces reserved for attorneys to come into the courthouse and conduct quick business. Ms. Randall said parking was of great concern to them and appreciated all the considerations that court business was shown by the Town, but they would like the Board's help in providing them some convenience to conduct their work. Ms. Randall reiterated her desire to have her organization kept in the loop of information as work on the recommendations of the Study progressed. She said that Chief District Court Judge Joe Buckner had been very active in trying to make the planning work well for the justice system, and her organization would be glad to help as well. 9:49:15 PM Melody Dees, Senior Assistant to the Clerk of Superior Court, stated that she was the "go to" person when someone with a handicap came into the building. She said there was an elevator but it went down to the Sheriff's Office, and even she did not have access to it by the Sheriff's choice. Ms. Dees said when a handicapped person came to the courthouse there was an unloading area but no parking. But, she said, because in most cases a handicapped person needed to have assistance the person bringing them in parked in that area. She said there was nowhere else for them to park unless they went around to the parking area in front of the December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 29 of 53 Sheriff's Department which had 4 spaces, but those were usually full. Ms. Dees said they then had to exit their car, walk up the steps, walk down the sidewalk and enter through the front door. She said once the entered the front door, they went down the hall, turned and went down another long hall. Ms. Dees said for a handicapped person or an elderly person that was way too much walking even if you got to park on the street. Ms. Dees stated they needed the street parking, noting there were three handicapped employees in her office alone. She said one person in particular was unable to walk long distances and they had to accommodate that. Ms. Dees said she had observed the area today, and if one of the large parking spaces right at the shelter used by people to wait for the bus but was not a bus stop was used for unloading for the handicapped, that would be helpful. She said the rest of the parking spaces from that point to where you turned to go into the Sheriff's Department could be handicapped, which would be 5 to 8 spaces. Ms. Dees added that they all were aware that Court Street was full of signs, and agreed that those signs were clutter and did not need to be there. Ms. Dees said once the massive amounts of people they would have coming into the Clerk's Office when construction was completed resumed, they would have severe parking problems. She said last week in downtown Chapel Hill they had a one day a month criminal traffic court docket that generated 1,600 people. Ms. Dees said that did not include the cases where attorneys had been hired, and once that docket came back to Hillsborough in March or April the number of people coming into court that one day a month would be massive. Ms. Dees said she believed that 5 to 8 handicap parking spaces on East Margaret Lane were warranted in the location she had described. She said gratefully the Hillsborough Police Department was not ticketing them at present, which was of great help to the 3 handicap employees in her office. Ms. Dees said there were also members of the general public that were in need of those handicap spaces. 9:56:02 PM Mr. Hornik said when the building was being designed, did anyone ever come and talk to her or any court officials about what the needs were for handicap access and parking. Ms. Dees they had not talked to them about handicap parking that she knew of. Mr. Hornik asked had she ever been asked for input and had she ever said that handicap parking and /or access was needed. Ms. Dees said the focus at that time was on the building, and did not believe anyone had realized where the elevator would be located and that there would not be access. She said when the other older courtroom was renovated and opened there would be accessibility to the upstairs and downstairs because there was another elevator there, but right now there was no access. Mr. Hornik said then in March or April the situation would change for the better. Ms. Dees said that was her hope, but it was a matter of the transfer of money by the County. She said construction had been stopped at present, but hoped that work would begin again soon. Mr. Hornik said the Town and the Planning Board had spent many months talking with the County about plans for the expansion of the Justice Center, and it seemed to him that that was the kind of issue that should have been dealt with during that time period so that the architects or whoever could have considered access during the process. Ms. Dees said at one point there were handicap parking signs there but those signs had been replaced with "unloading" signs. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 30 of 53 9:58:42 PM Mayor Stevens suggested that the Board clearly heard Ms. Dees' point, but they may be limited in what their jurisdiction might be. Ms. Hauth said they were expecting a parking plan from the County to meet its permit requirement before they could occupy the new part of the building, and she would let them know that the issue had been raised and that the Town wanted to know how that would be addressed. Ms. Dees said she would like very much for her and other employees to be contacted, noting they saw what occurred on a day -to -day basis. Ms. Hauth said to clarify what staff was asking from the Board, if they had anything in particular that they wanted to have addressed in the final plan that could be included by sending that information to staff. She said as had been mentioned by Ms. Trueblood, many of the Town's documents overlapped and many pointed in the same direction, and if the Board were interested staff could go over the variety of documents adopted over the last several years and pull out those things that were related. Ms. Hauth said they could put that information in a memo and include suggestions on how those closely related issues could be matched up for implementation purposes. 10:00:33 PM Commissioner Lloyd said when they had looked at Court Street and the parking for judges, were there also spaces for Deputies. Ms. Price said there was Sheriff parking as well as for judges, noting there were about 5 to 8 spaces that had no signage at all. She said there were people who were parking where they should not, creating sight visibility problems. Commissioner Lloyd asked if Court Street was a Town street. Ms. Price replied yes. Commissioner Lloyd asked was there some way to provide handicap parking there. Ms. Price replied there was one space there now. Commissioner Lloyd asked could more be provided. Ms. Price responded there was one on King Street at the corner, and one on Court Street, but not that many that were near the courthouse. She said they could include adding more as a possibility, noting there were a lot of restrictions on that one street that could be improved. D. Consideration of a Resolution to NCDOT detailing the Town's comments as part of the public comment period on U -3808 - Elizabeth Brady Road 10:02:12 PM This Item was moved up on the Agenda and heard as the first Item for Decision. E. ITEM REMOVED FROM AGENDA 10:02:15 PM Commissioner Hallman was excused by the Board to leave the meeting via phone. F. Receive request from Habitat for Humanity to investigate a road connection from the Fairview Community to NC 86 10:02:17 PM Ms. Hauth said that the Board had at various times heard requests or interests from Habitat and some residents of the Fairview community to have an access road connected December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 31 of 53 out to NC 86. She said Habitat had expressed interest in having the Board direct staff to spend some time in studying options for the location and construction of such an access point. 10:02:54 PM John Sehon, a member of the Board of the Habitat for Humanity of Orange County, stated that they had been successful in the Fairview community and were currently looking at acquiring some 80 acres from 3 owners. He said when they had first began working in the Fairview community they had agreed not to ask for an access to NC 86 at that point in time. Mr. Sehon said in looking towards the future and what might be done with that 80 acres and with possibly some partners, it would appear that access to NC 86 would be desirable. He said their request was to ask that access to NC 86 be placed on the planning calendar for next year and have the Planning Department begin to look at what the options might be to accomplish that access. Mr. Sehon stated that they were not asking for any funding or commitment, only for planning to be done. 10:05:02 PM Commissioner Lloyd said she had thought that Mr. Sehon had indicated at one time that they would need funding from the Town, but there was no money set aside in the CIP. Ms. Hauth said that Habitat had never said that they were willing to construct the road if one was planned, noting she believed Habitat would expect the Town to eventually construct the road at its expense. Mr. Sehon said he would expect that as they moved forward and looked at development of that property that those kinds of things would be negotiated with the Town. Commissioner Lloyd said for people who had sold some of those lots, it would be nice if they would perhaps consider making a contribution towards the cost of a road. She said otherwise, the land may have sat there for quite some time and never developed. Mr. Sehon said that was an idea. 10:06:26 PM Mayor Stevens commented that the access point made a little bit of sense for the existing neighborhoods. He said he did have a concern about an 80 -acre development in general, noting it went against the Strategic Plan for the Town which was to put those size developments south of Town. Mayor Stevens said in those terms, in looking at building a road in the Fairview community he was not convinced that was a particularly good idea for the Town as a whole, regardless of the developer. Mr. Sehon said as he had expressed in the past, the issue of Habitat building south of Town was the affordability of land, which was double and sometimes triple what land north of Town would cost. He said that would put Habitat development out of the range of feasibility. Commissioner Gering said the Town had been approached by another gentleman who had proposed a project called Eno Haven, which would be low- income senior housing. He said one of the things he had told that gentleman about potential future projects, which he believed applied equally well to Habitat, was that affordable housing or low- income housing should be well integrated with a variety of housing in the neighborhood. Commissioner Gering said making an entire subdivision affordable housing seemed a non - integrated approach, and that troubled him somewhat. Mr. Sehon responded that they were looking at the possibility of integrating with other developers in the area, which was one of the ways they would address that. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 32 of 53 He said they were not far enough along in their planning efforts, but noted they certainly believed that having integrated neighborhoods with mixed development was the way to go. He said that would also represent a way for Habitat to recover costs to help pay for the affordable housing. Mr. Sehon said when they got to the planning stage, he would think that would be the type of thing that would be on the table. Commissioner Gering said then what they were proposing would be an 80 -acre subdivision, only part of which would be affordable housing. Mr. Sehon said that was correct. Commissioner Lowen asked how many overall homes he would think would go on that 80 -acre parcel. Mr. Sehon said they would need to look at the current zoning and the regulations that were currently being rewritten, and that would determine what might be proposed. He said they had done some preliminary studies and the grey area on the map indicated streams in the area which caused a considerable amount of land to be unusable. Mr. Sehon said they could either wait for a developer to come along and make a proposal and then Habitat take the small pieces there were left, they could do infill such as they were doing today in the middle of the Fairview community which was working well in terms of purchasing some properties for affordable housing, or, they could begin to act like a developer and ask the private sector to come in and partner with Habitat. Mr. Sehon said that Habitat was just beginning a development in Chapel Hill which would last about 4 years, and they would then be ready to begin building elsewhere. 10:11:12 PM Commissioner Lloyd said in planning such a development, they needed to think about what else that would require, such as additional police officers. Commissioner Lowen said he had talked with the Board some time ago about affordable housing in Fairview, and believed that even without that 80 acres being developed there still needed to be some further access because it would make it safer for the entire community. He said that if some development like Mr. Sehon had suggested were to be added to that community then they would not need only additional access out to NC 86 but also something going out to Faucette Mill. He said such a development would require some serious road networking, and reminded the Board that residents of that area had asked for access out to NC 86 even without the possibility of future development. Commissioner Lowen said he had told the residents that it was on the Board's radar, noting that if there were an emergency of some kind that blocked the road there was no other way to get out. So, he said, for him it was a safety issue. 10:13:14 PM Commissioner Dancy agreed, noting that the safety issue needed to be looked at. She said she shared Commissioner Gering's concern about development of those 80 acres, noting that with a mixed use development on that acreage more traffic would be generated which would create other safety issues. 10:13:42 PM Commissioner Lowen asked on the east side how many pieces of property were back there. Ms. Hauth said it depended on whether you extended the line of Locust Road straight or whether you followed a contour. She said there were only one or two property owners, but they had not looked at it to see if there were any buildings in the way or any other issues. Ms. Hauth said it was not a long distance, but there were some topography issues. She December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 33 of 53 said if they could cut due east and come down the Duke Power right -of -way it would be relatively simple, but when you got to NC 86 you had to provide enough time for that steep slope. Ms. Hauth said that would be the easiest path from an acquisition standpoint; otherwise, you would need to deal with a couple of property owners. 10:14:48 PM Commissioner Lloyd asked would any proposed homes be built on Locust Street. Ms. Sehon said those lots already were developed and contained houses. Commissioner Lloyd said those areas would need to be patrolled and believed that area needed help as far as a police presence. She said if the area grew then it would become even more important to increase patrols, which may mean increasing staff. Mr. Sehon said that the Police Chief had indicated to Habitat that the number of calls in that neighborhood had dropped by 50% since Habitat had come in, so it had been a positive in terms of what was happening in the neighborhood. 10:16:26 PM Mayor Stevens said he had a similar concern with a development model or acting like a developer. He said if any developer came and said they were thinking about developing that 80 acres he did not believe it would be well received just in terms of the Town wanting to see limited development in that area. Ms. Sehon said the Town had put a sizable investment into the sewer that was already there, and to take advantage of the capacity would be a plus, so it was a chance to maximize on the investment the Town had already made. Mr. Peterson said it would be good if an access road would be put through, but at what cost was the question. He said the Board would need to think about how much money it was willing to spend to find out how much such a road would cost. Mr. Peterson said he had met today with Susan Levy and an engineer and he had thrown out a number of $500,000 as the cost of the road. He said the engineer had responded it may not be that much if you did not include property acquisition. Mr. Peterson said then the comment was made that NCDOT would not just let you punch right into their road, they would need to have a punch out which was at least $150,000. So, he said, the Board might what to think about whether it made a difference if the cost of a road was $400,000 or $800,000. Mr. Peterson said he would like to recoup some of the expense for the sewer line but did not want to spend another $800,000. He said he believed they would want to say to any developer that if they wanted the access then they would have to build the road, noting he believed the chances were low on getting on the NCDOT list to punch that road in. Mr. Peterson said if the Town financed such a road, at the least it would mean raising everyone's taxes by a penny. He said you could also spend between $20,000 and $30,000 on a feasibility study to come back and say it would cost $700,000, so the Board would need to determine how much it was willing to spend in order to determine the cost of the road. For instance, Mr. Peterson said, was $1,000 too much to say a road would go from point A to point B and the range was whatever it was, or was it worth even pursuing at this point. 10:19:26 PM Commissioner Gering said if any developer came to him with a proposal such as this one it would be a given that the developer would have to pay for the road. Commissioner Lloyd agreed. Mr. Sehon said he did not believe that was unfair, and did not come tonight asking that the Town put the road in. He said he came to ask that the Board ask its Planning Department to look at the feasibility of putting a road in and what it might take. Mr. Sehon said he only wanted it placed on the Planning calendar. G. Discussion of Fee Policy associated with Water /Sewer Disconnection December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 34 of 53 Commissioner Gering said it was something that was talked about in January at the planning retreat. 10:20:26 PM Mr. Peterson said he understood that Mr. Sehon was not asking for the road, but his comments were based on how much money the Board was willing to spend to find out what the feasibility and cost of such a road might be. Commissioner Lowen said that $30,000 was a lot of money to find out that such a road would cost $800,000 or close to one million, and they were not in a position to do that. But, he said, if Mr. Sehon could have a round table discussion with some people who could give him some preliminary cost estimates for, say, $1,200, that would not break the bank. Commissioner Lowen said that would not provide them any details but it would certainly give them some idea about the cost. Mr. Peterson said they could talk about some inexpensive ways to determine the feasibility as well as a ballpark cost. He reiterated that it did not matter if the cost was determined to be $600,000 or $800,000; it was still a great deal of money. Mr. Peterson said possible routes would need to be studied as well. 10:21:59 PM Finance Director Greg Siler noted the Town Manager had requested that he gather some data in regards to their neighboring utility fees, noting that had been brought up by the Board due to concerns expressed by members of the public. He said he had not attempted to summarize the information, and had only collected the data so the Board would have a comparison. Commissioner Lowen thanked Mr. Siler for the research, noting it was very thorough and it was good to discover the wide span of fees in the area. He said the $75 disconnect fee was harsh especially in today's economy if someone was caught in a tough situation. He said if that person could not pay their bill they certainly could not pay the $75 disconnect fee. Mr. Siler agreed it was a "catch 22." 10:23:24 PM Mr. Peterson said for OWASA the chart said that the penalty for one month was $2.40 and 5 %, so was it $2.40 plus 5% or was $2.40 the minimum. Mr. Siler said it was $2.40 plus 5 %. Commissioner Gering said there were interesting variations. He said it appeared that Durham's fee was rather punitive, but it might be that one aspect for the Town would be to add a penalty and required deposit based on payment history but reduce that for good payment behavior. Mr. Siler said their deposit requirements were already set up along those lines, noting it was done on credit scoring, in -Town versus out -of -Town, with in -Town having a minimum of $25 with a maximum of $175. Commissioner Gering said that depended on the credit score. Mr. Siler said that was correct, noting that what they received from the credit agency was a good, best, or better, or good, bad, or worst, so it did not give an actual score but just placed the customer in a particular category. Mayor Stevens said he liked that idea. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 35 of 53 10:24:51 PM Commissioner Gering said then his analysis was that to at least administer all the processing the cost was $31.00 to reconnect or disconnect. Mr. Siler said responded that was correct, adding that they were looking at just breaking even and recouping costs. He said that $31.00 for a round trip would cover the cost, but for some homes they had to make multiple trips. Mr. Siler said their policy was that once they reconnected the water and if the meter dial continued to spin, they would turn the water back off so that they did not risk flooding in the home. He said it happened infrequently but when it did happen it could be disastrous for the Town. Mr. Siler said staff would go out once and if no one was home they would leave a sticker on the door that they had to turn the water off or be at home when the staff came the second time. Commissioner Gering said it seemed that from the data collected that the Town's fee of $75 was out of line, and if the objective was to recover administrative costs then that made the $75 appear excessive as well. 10:26:10 PM Mayor Stevens said he believed a $35 to $50 fee would be more reasonable. Commissioner Gering agreed. Mr. Peterson said by comparison the 15% penalty was high as well. He said that one option for the Board would be to refer this to the Water Sewer Advisory Board for discussion and recommendations or alternatives, which would give the Board some options to consider. Commissioner Lowen said he liked that idea as well, but he would like to send it with the directive that they come back with something as soon as possible. He said much of the leg work had already been done for them, so it should not take too long to make a recommendation or provide some options. Commissioner Lowen said he would like the Water Sewer Advisory Board to come back with something in January so that the Board could make a decision by February. 10:27:37 PM Commissioner Gering said he liked that idea, and hoped that the Water Sewer Advisory Board did not feel that the Board was imposing on them. He said essentially to him this was a policy level decision and hoped that board would agree that it was in their purview. Joe Phelps, a member of the Water Sewer Advisory Board, said they would be meeting just after the first of the year. He said if the Town Board wanted them to act quickly then he would ask that staff provide them with all the information beforehand so that members could make a determination at their January meeting. Commissioner Gering asked if he thought this was something that the Water Sewer Advisory Board would feel was in their area. Mr. Phelps said they had discussed similar issues many times, so did not believe that would be an issue. He asked that staff provide them with the information and a summary of exactly what the Town Board wanted in terms of a recommendation. 10:29:02 PM Mayor Stevens said they would want a fee recommendation or a series of options. Mr. Siler asked if the Board wanted the Water Sewer Advisory Board to provide their recommendations to him to bring to the Board, or to provide them to the Board themselves. Mayor Stevens said both. Mr. Siler said since they had done the legwork they could conceivably be ready for the Board's January meeting. Commissioner Lowen said it would be helpful for the Water Sewer Advisory Board to know that Mayor Stevens had suggested a range between $35 and $50 dollars and to get their opinion on that. Mayor Stevens said it was obvious the Town Board wanted a reduction in the current $75 fee, but knew that it needed to be more than $31. H. Discuss Cemetery Proposal from Chapel Hill Memorial Gardens December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 36 of 53 10:29:56 PM Commissioner Gering stated that he had questions about the information provided by the Town Attorney. He said the idea of contracting with Chapel Hill Memorial Gardens to provide cemetery services seemed somewhat more involved than what he had believed the Board had been talking about. Mr. Hornik said he was not suggesting that they do that. He said what he was trying to get at was that the statute would allow the Town to contract with someone to operate a cemetery on the Town's behalf. Mr. Hornik said the suggestion that had been made was something less than operating a cemetery, and therefore he believed the statute authorized the Town to have some kind of relationship with an outside entity that operated a cemetery. Commissioner Gering said then they could consider saying something as minimal as that the Town had a contract with them and paid them $1 a year to provide its services to Town residents. Mr. Hornik said the believed under the statute that would be acceptable. 10:31:29 PM Commissioner Lowen said he had not written out a proposal but had only provided information that he had been given by the entity, and was not suggesting in any way that the Town should enter into a contract. He said since that was the closest private cemetery to the Hillsborough city limits that could offer that service to their residents, then let them do it. Commissioner Lowen said all the Board would be saying was the Town had no more plots to sell but this entity did, and then provide that information to citizens when they called the Town to inquire about a cemetery plot. He said citizens still had the opportunity to purchase a plot anywhere of their choosing, and the Town was saying nothing more and nothing less. Mr. Hornik said what the Town would be doing was simply offering a referral to its citizens. 10:32:33 PM Mayor Stevens said perhaps they could have an agreement that simply said that the Town would make non - exclusive referrals to that entity, in that other entities could have similar agreements with the Town. Mr. Peterson said just as a thought, that entity could be listed on the Town's Website as a contact, along with anyone else who wanted to provide the service that the Town could no longer provide. He said they could limit it to a certain range from Town if necessary to contain it to a reasonable number of entities. 10:33:35 PM Commissioner Lowen said he would have the gentleman he had spoken with contact the Town Attorney. Mr. Hornik agreed, and said he would come back to the Board when he had something on paper for consideration. Commissioner Gering thanked Commissioner Lowen for bringing that to the attention of the Board. 12. CLOSED SESSION December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 37 of 53 A. Closed Session as authorized by North Carolina General Statute Section 143 - 318.11 (a)(3) regarding Orange Grove Street & Board Of Adjustment appeal under Attorney- Client Privilege B. Closed Session as authorized by North Carolina General Statute Section 143 - 318.11 (a)(3) regarding question of roadway ownership under Attorney - Client Privilege C. Closed Session as authorized by North Carolina General Statute Section 143 - 318.11 (a)(6) regarding Personnel Matters. 10:34:04 PM Upon a motion by Commissioner Lowen, seconded by Commissioner Dancy, the Board moved to go into Closed Session by a vote of 4 -0. The motion was declared passed. 13. ADJOURN Upon returning to Open Session, and upon a motion by Commissioner Dancy, seconded by Commissioner Gering, the Board moved to adjourn at 11:17 by a vote of 5 -0. The motion was declared passed. Respectfully submitted, Donna F. Annbrister, MMC Town Clerk Board Member Responsible" 2010 I Aouea I Aouea 1 6upao U Aouea Stevens Hallman Gering_, Hallman t3uieo Lloyd & Lowen Shared with Lloyd also covering Hallman's rotation 6uueO I uamoj Stevens & Lloyd Stevens Stevens I 6uua0 I ueualleH pAo Stevens & Hallman HallmanlLowen (Alternate) Hallman/Stevens (Alternate) 6upaO MeettngslYr I 1 et ZL Zt• 1111 Ealli MEIN d91 sang W£ Zt , PeM PUZ Zl Sn41 PuZ 1 $ 1 POM I 4417 1 5 Z6 rn41 asl Zl wn41 PEE 1111 tr 1 PeM I w£ Set at each meeting I IMO I I 11 1 APProx.4 Zl I PeM 1 lel I Z 4 1 -uoW El e t I 111110 1. PeM I 41 Ell 1 peM:T not PeM 1 w€ F uov, 2s, a I P `I oint c Day of Pt ,I • 1 W£ SM Wu, ittee Seat Ap Meeting Freq 111111 Alyµtowi8 14tuPuile r �14tuoW Aitp A141uopy Monthly Monthly Monthly Quarterly r dpapenp Monthly As Needed Monthly II lipapena A14tum As Needed ill dpelnbaul ) 6ltauo$1 ) .IUtuotAi 111 li�guoW papuegsta AI4tuoW Comm Committee Appointment ITJ -COG Board of Delegates ITJ -COG Executive Committee IOC Visitors Bureau (Hillsborough Tourism Board (Hillsborough Business t.iason OC Economic Development Commission Transportation Advisory Board Hillsborough Parks and Rec OC HOME Review Committee IOC Intergovernmental Parks Work Group I Orange Rural Fire Dept. Orange Rural Fire Dept(Long Range Planning) Hillsborough Water Sewer Advisory Board Il 1pper Reuse River Basin Assoc [Solid Waste Advisory Board Work Group I Joint Orange - Alamance, Orange County, and Town of Hillsborough Lake Orange Water Usage Committee Orange County Environment & Resource Conservation Greenhouse Gas Emissions Project 'Orange County Child Care Task Force (Library Services Task Force (Partnership to End Homelessness IThe Fairview Initiative Orange County Farmers Market Interim Oversight Committee Orange County Housing and Land Trust Board Chatham /Orange Joint Planning Task Force (Rail Station Task Force to December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 38 of 53 December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 39 of 53 Town Board's Statement per N.C. Gen. Stat. 160A- 383 The Town of Hillsborough Town Board his received and reviewed the application of planning department staff to amend the Town of Hillsborough Zoning Ordinance as follows (insert general description of proposed amendment): Amend portions of Section 21 that require the action of the Historic District Commission on applications for Certificates of Appropriateness within 60 days of application. The Hillsborough Town Board has determined that the proposed action is consistent with the Town of Hillsborough's comprehensive plan, and the Town Board's proposed action on the amendment is reasonable and in the public interest for the following reason(s): The current language provides a bypass to the stated review process that could lead to development inconsistent with the ordinance and comprehensive plan. Th meeting schedule for the Commission has been modified to be once a month rathe than twi a month, making a 60 -day review period more difficult. No other development review processes provide for automatic approval 'if not acted upon by a reviewing authority within a designated timeframe Adopted by the To of Hillsborough Board of Commissioners this ay of . , 200, o1 Cler December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 40 of 53 THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH ORDAINS; Section 1. Section 21.5.3.4 of the Hillsborough Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by deleting "The Board shall act on all applications before it within sixty (60) days of receipt of the application" from the second paragraph, Section 2. Section 21.6.9 of the Hillsborough Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended by deleting "Upon failure of the Commission to take final action upon an application within sixty (60) days after the application is submitted, the case shall be deemed approved, except where mutual agreement has been made for an extension of the time limit" from the third paragraph. Section 3. All provisions of any town ordinance in conflict with this ordinance are repealed. Section 4. Ayes ; Noes- Absent or Excus AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. 00 AO The foregoing ordinance having been submitted to a vote, received the following vote and was duly adopted this 14 day of December, 2009. Donna F. Armbrister, To Clerk December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 41 of 53 ORDINANCE 20091214 -10.D AN ORDINAN AMENDING CHAPTER 4 OF THE TOWN CODE OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH ORDAINS: Section 1. Chapter 4 — Personnel, of the Hillsborough Code is hereby amended to read: Section 2. Section 4-57 Retirement Benefits a) The town provides retirement benefits for its employees. The town provides a retirement program for employees through the North Carolina Local Governmental Employees' Retirement System. b) Each employee appointed to a regular position shall be required to join the North Carolina Local Governmental Employees' Retirement System upon hire c) Employees hired after February 9, 2009, who are regular employees, at age 60 years, and sworn law enforcement employees, at age 57 years, who retire from town employment with at least 30 years of continuous service may, upon request and upon agreement to cooperate with the town as to information and document requests, and the health insurance carrier will permit, continue to receive hospitalization insurance coverage comparable to that being provided for fulltime employees without cost for the life of the employee until such time as they become eligible for Medicare. Employees hired before February 9, 2009, are grandfathered in at age 55 for regular employees and age 52 for law enforcement with 20 years of continuous service. At the time the employee becomes eligible for Medicare, or if the employee accepts other full -time employment following retirement, this hospitalization insurance coverage will terminate. If an employee meeting the above mentioned requirements wishes to continue covering a dependent on their insurance, this may be allowed to continue, at the employees expense, if they have had the dependent covered on their policy for a period of 12 months prior to retirement (coverage will end either at the time the employee becomes eligible for Medicare, or at the time the dependent becomes eligible for Medicare), and the employee enters into a bank draft agreement with the Town to pay the dependent coverage on the first of each month. The employee will be required to pay the first months premium in advance and bring proof to the town (finance) that they have set up an automatic draft with their bank for deposit to the town's account Of a bank draft is declined due to insufficient fiords, the insurance policy will be cancelled immediately and the dependent will not be eligible for coverage). The employee cannot add any dependents t the policy after retirement and if they choose to cancel coverage on a covered dependent at anytime during their retirement, the dependent cannot be added back on the policy. Once the retiree becomes, eligible for Medicare, coverage on themselves and all covered dependents will be t erminate d. Ali provisions of any Town Ordinance in conflict with this Ordinance are Repealed. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 42 of 53 ORDINANCE 20091214 -10.D Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. The foregoing ordinance having been submitted to a vote, received the following vote and was duly adopted this 14th day of December, 2009. Ayes: 4 Noes: 0 Absent or Excused: 1 Donna F. Armbrister, Town Clerk GENERAL FUND Expenditures 10 -20 -5300- 5700 -573 Fire Inspections - Tax/Tags 10-20-5300-5700-740 Fire Inspections Capital 10-00-9990-5300-000 Contingency - General Fund To fund the replacement of the 2007 Chevrolet Hybrid Tru 2. Expenditures 10-00- 2200 - 2200 -022 Deferred Rev- Kenion Grove Sidewalk Imprc $ - $ 3,763 $ 3,763 10-00- 9990 - 5300 -000 Contingency - General Fund 90,977 (3,763) 87.214 90.977 $ - $ 90.977 To correct FY08 Kenion Grove developer 3. Expenditures 10 -20- 5100 -5300 -338 Police Admin. 10 -20- 5100 -5300 -360 Police Admin. 10 -20- 5100 -5300 -465 Police Admin. 10 -20- 5100 -5300 -575 Police Admin, 10 -20- 5100 -5300 -460 Police Admin. - To establish and fund services and supplies not in depa nation designated for sidewalk repair Supplies/Data Processing $ Uniforms and Clothing C.S. /Eastern Data Accreditation /Fees/Supplies C.S./Driver Safety 4. Expenditures 10-20- 5110 -5300 -571 Police Patrol - Misc./Auxiliary Officers 10-20-5110-5300-350 Police Patrol - Uniforms ental budget To establish and fund auxiliary officers expenses not in departmental budge 5. Expenditures 10- 20- 5350 -5300 -310 Fire Protection - Fuel 10 -20- 5350 -5300 -110 Fire Protection - Teleponeflntemet To minimally fund reim sable fuel expense. 137 No Churton S. 5,000 2.500 7.500 December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 43 of 53 /0- BUDGET AMENDMENTS December. 2009 BEFORE ADJ. AFTER $ $ 375 $ 375 3,023 3,023 94,000 (3.398) 90.602 94.000 1 $ 100 100 1 0(3' 1,050 1 ,050 (450) 4,550 (800) 1.700 $ 7.500 $ 625 $ 625 10,000 (625) 9.375 - $ 10:000 $ 10 $ 10 4.600 (10) 4,590 4.600 $ - $ 4.600 $ 94.000 $ used for fire inspections - recalled by manufa P.O. Box 429 • Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 919- 732 -2104 • Fax 919 - 732 -1028 December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 44 of 53 6. Expenditures 10-30- 5600-5300-112 Street - Postage $ - $ 300 $ 300 10-30 -5600- 5300 -570 Street - Miscellaneous 3,500 (300) 3.200 - $ 3`500 To establish and fund postage expense not in departmental budget WATER FUND 7. Expenditures 30-80- 7200 -5350 -580 Admin. of Enterprise- Cust.Serv./Innovation $ $ 3,850 $ 3,850 30-80-9990-5300-000 Contingency (Water Fund) 144,906 (3.850) 141.056 $ 144.906 -$ - $ 144.906 To establish and fund customer service innovations awards for the water fund. Expenditures 30 -80- 7220 - 5300 -452 Engineering - C.S./Update Sewer CFF 30-80-9990-5300-000 Contingency (Water Fund) $, $ 2,465 $ 2,465 141.056 (2.465) 138.591 $ 141.056 $ 141.056 To fund expenses (invoices) received after year end closeout related to FY09 sewer capital facility fee study 9. Expenditures 30-80- 7240 -5300 -112 Billing and Collection - Postage $ $ 200 $ 200 30-80 -7240- 5300 -570 Billing and Collection - Miscellaneous 1,000 (2001 800 R 1.000 $ 1.000 To establish and fund postage expense not in departmental budget 0. Expenditures 30-80- 8140- 5300 -112 Water Distribution - Postage $ - $ 100 $ 100 30-80-8140-5300-570 Water Distribution - Miscellaneous 3,000 (100) 2.900 3.000 $ 3.000 To establish and fund postage expense not in departmental budget 11. Expenditures 30-80- 8200- 5300 -112 Water Collection - Postage $ - $ 100 $ 100 30-80-8200-5300-150 Water Collection - Miscellaneous 8.497 (100) 8.397 8.497 $ $ 8.497 To establish and fund postage expense not in departmental budget Expenditure 60 -30- 5600 - 5700 -730 Nash Stree idewaik Project To remove the Nash Street, Sidewalk Project FY09 budget, part of the General Fund Capital Improvement Fund, due to duplicate budgeting in FY10 in a separate capital projects fund December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 45 of 53 GENERAL FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 12. Revenue 60 -70 -3700- 3700 -000 Grant -STPDA $ 623,600 $ (623,600) $ Transfer From General Fund:P.Biil 186.923 (155,9001 $ 810,52Q $ (779.50nl $ 31.02 1,023 $ 779,500 $ (779.5001 $ UTILITIES CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 13. Revenue 69 -70- 3870 -3872 -001 Transfer from Sewer Capital Reserve Fund $ 300,000 $ (300,000) $ 69 -70- 3870 - 3870 -000 Transfer From Water /Sewer Fund 694,000 (200,000) 494,000 69 -70 -3700- 3700 -001 Grant(State) /Clean Water Mgmt Trust 500,000 (500,0001 51.494,000 $ (1,000.0001 $ 494,000 Expenditur 69 -80- 8220. 5700-735 New WWTP $1.000.000 $ (1.000.0001 $ - To move the Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Project, part of the Utility Capital Improvement Fund, to a separately created fund (68) WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT EXPANSION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 14. Revenue 68-70-3870-3872-001 Transfer from Sewer Capital Reserve Fund $ - $ 300,000 $ 300,000 68 -70 -3870- 3870 -100 Transfer From Water /Sewer Fund 200,000 200,000 68 -70- 3700 - 3700 -001 Grant(State) /Clean Water Mgmt Trust - 500.000 500,000 $ $ 1.000 000 $ 1,000,000 Expenditure 68 -80 -8220- 5700 -045 Design 6—.35.1111Q 1 1.00 Z-1.422,11101/ To move the Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Project, part of the Utility Capital improvement Fund, to a separately created fund (68) WATER/SEWER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 15. Revenue 65-70-3870-3870-100 Gold Park/Riverwalk - Transfer from GF Expenditures 65. 10.6200 -5700 -720 Gold Park/Riverwalk - Construction 288 5 50. 161232 1 7{X1:000 $ 60.00; t 1.280.000 To fund additional work at Gold Park for the pedestrian trail and trestle approved by the board at the July 13, 2009 meeting GENERAL CAPITAL RESERVE FUND 16. Revenue 71 -20 -3700- 3701-000 Waterstone Developers Contrib- Police 71 -20- 3700 -3701 -001 Waterstone Developers Contrib -Fire 71 -20- 3700 -3701 -002 Waterstone Developers Contrib -Wtr Tower 71-00-3850-3850-000 Interest Earned December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 46 of 53 Expenditure 71- 20- 6900 - 5700 -740 71- 20- 6900 -5700 -741 71- 20- 6900 -5700 -742 APPROVED: /2 - 'O VERIFIED: 4 D na F. Armibrister, Town Clerk aterstone Capital Improv - Police aterstone Capital Improv Fire aterstone Capital Improv - Wtr Tower $ 70,000 200,000 100,000 10:62 $ 380:628 $ 72,216 $ 206,303 102.109 380.628 To increase the Waterstone budget due to developer donation and fund interest earn 35,000 100,000 100,000 1.357 236.357 S 35,258 100,733 100.366 236.357 ough October, 2009 105,000 300,000 200,000 11:985 616.985 $ 107,474 307,036 202.475 616.985 December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 47 of 53 (`All meetings will be held in subject to change). Monday, January 11, 2010 Thursday, January 21, 2010 Monday, January 25, 2010 Saturday, January 30, 2010 Monday, February 8, 2010 Thursday, February 18, 2010 Monday, February 22, 2010 Monday, March 8, 2010 Monday, March 22, 2010 Thursday, March 25, 2010 Monday, April 12, 2010 Thursday, April 15, 2010 Monday, April 26, 2010 Monday, May 10, 2010 Monday, May 24, 2010 Thursday, May 27, 2010 Tuesday, June 1, 2010 Monday, June 14, 2010 Monday, June 28, 2010 TOWN OF HILLSBOROUGH BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 2010 Meeting Schedul e Town Elam bated at 101 E. Orange Street, unless otherwise noted. Ado ed:10- 12.2009 Amended: 11-09-2009 Amertded: 12-14-2009 s and dates Regular Board Meeting (7:00 PM) Joint Public Hearing with the Planning Board (7 :00 P M) Town Board Monthly Work Session (7 :00 PM) Town Board Annual Goal Setting Retreat (9 :00 AM) Hwy 86 N. Facility Regular Board Meeting (7:00 PM) Joint Meeting with Orange County (7:30 PM) *Location TBD Town Board Monthly Work Session (7:00 PM) Regular Board Meeting (7:00 PM) Town Board Monthly Work Session (7 :00 PM) Assembly of Governments Meeting (7:30 PM) *Orange County Southern Human Services Building Regular Board Meeting (7:00 PM) Joint Public Hearing with the Planning Board (7 :00 PM) Town Board Monthly Work Session (7:00 PM) Regular Board Meeting (7 :00 PM) Town Board Budget Work Session GENERAL FUND(7:00 PM) Town Board Budget Work Session WATER/SEWER FUND (7:00 PM) To Board Budget Work Session (if needed) (7:00 PM) Regular Board Meeting (7 :00 PM) Town Board Monthly Work Session (7:00 PM) Regular Board Meeting (7:00 PM) Joint Public Hearing with the Planning Board (7:00 PM) December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 48 of 53 Monday, July 12, 2010 Thursday, July 15, 2010 Monday, July 26, 2010 August 2010 Monday, September 13, 2010 Thursday, September 16, 2010 Monday, September 27, 2010 Monday, October 11, 2010 Thursday, October 21, 2010 Monday, October 25, 2010 Monday, November 8, 2010 Monday, November 22, 2010 Monday, December 13, 2010 Tuesday, December 28, 2010 Town Board Monthly Work Session (7:00 PM) No, Meetings Regular Board Meeting (7 :00 PM) Assembly of Governments Meeting (7 :30 PM) *Orange County Southern Human Services Building Town Board Monthly Work Session (7 :00 PM) Regular Board Meeting (7:00 PM) Joint Public Hearing with Planning Board (7 :00 PM) Town Board Monthly Work Session {7:00 PM) Regular Board Meeting (7 :00 PM) Town Board Monthly Work Session (7 :00 PM) Regular Board Meeting (7 :00 PM) Town Board Monthly Work Session (7 :00 PM) ADDENDUM TO THE INTER -LOCAL AGREEMENT FOR TAX COLLECTIONS December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 49 of 53 /. /J This is an ADDENDUM to the Inter -local Agreement for Tax Collections entered into on July 3, 2006, by Orange County (referred to as "County "), the Town of Carrboro, the Town of Chapel Hill, and the Town of Hillsborough (individually and collectively referred to as "Town" or "Towns "). This ADDENDUM sets forth the terms and conditions for the shared costs between the County and the Towns for the purchase and yearly maintenance costs of a centralized and systemized tax billing and collection software system for the Joint Tax Collection System. The parties to this Addendum, pursuant to the authority contained in Article 20, of Chapter 160A of the North Carolina General Statutes, this the day of October, 2009, do hereby agree as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to Article VI of the Inter -Local Agreement, the Towns agreed to pay a surcharge to be credited toward the purchase and yearly maintenance of a comprehensive software package to support and maintain the collection of tax revenues due to the Towns; and WHEREAS, the County has identified and secured funding for the first installment of the acquisition and installation of comprehensive billing and collections software that will ;support and maintain the collection of tax revenues; and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that the County will seek and acquire additional financing during fiscal year 2010 -11, with repayment to begin in fiscal year 2011 -12; and WHEREAS, the surcharge collected will used for acquisition and installation of the comprehensive tax billing and collection portion of the software acquisition calculated based upon an formula agreed upon by the parties (see attachment A), and a yearly support and maintenance cost which is to be determined by staff from all jurisdictions no later than November 30 of each year and approved by the Manager of each jurisdiction, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the following mutual promises, covenants, and conditions, The County of Orange, the Towns of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Hillsborough agree as follows: The County Responsibilir The County will provide the initial funding for the acquisition of the comprehensive tax billing and collection software system and all related requirements; the total cost for the acquisition and installation of the software WHEREAS, on July 3, 2006, the County and the Towns entered into an, Inter -local Agreement to provide for centralized and systemized collection of property taxes in Orange County benefiting the units of ;government contracting both in costs and information services; and December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 50 of 53 shall not exceed $2.5 million. The County will acquire the financing for both the County and the Towns' portion of the cost of the acquisition and installation of the tax billing and collection software and related requirements. b. The County will finance the cost of the tax billing and collection software system in two installments: the first financing installment shall be for $1.5 mIlion over a 64 month period; and the second financing installment, shall occur, during fiscal year 2010 -2011, for the balance needed to complete the project not to exceed $1 million and financed for a period of 54 to 64 months. c. The County will bill the Towns for their portion of the cost of the acquisition and installation of the software in two yearly installments beginning in fiscal year 2010- 2011. d. The County will bill the Towns beginning in fiscal year 2010, and every year thereafter. On June 30 the County will bill the Towns for an interest and principal payment. t?n November 30 th of the same year the County will bill the Towns for an interest only payment. The County will bill the Towns for the cost software system until the Towns' portion of the costs is paid in full. The Towns Responsibilities: a. The Towns will pay the County a surcharge toward the purchase and yearly maintenance of the comprehensive software package to support and maintain the collection of tax revenues due to the Towns. b. Each Town will repay the County their portion of the cast of the acquisition and installation of the tax billing and collection software based upon a formula agreed upon by the parties (see attachment A). c Each To will repay the County in two yearly payments: on or by July 31 of each year the Towns will pay the County a principal and interest payment and on or by December 31" of each year, the Town will pay an interest only payment, beginning July 31, 2010; d. Each Town will pay a yearly support and maintenance cost which will be determined by staff from all jurisdictions no later than November 30 of each year and approved by the Manager of each jurisdiction. This cost will be in addition to the cost of acquisition and installation of the software. The Parties Responsibilities: a Each party within this ADDENDUM agrees that requested customization of reports or software will be the sole financial responsibility of the requesting, entity. December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 51 of 53 ATTEST: Donna Baker, Clerk to the Boards ofCornrnissioners TOWN OF CARRBORO BY: Al 'F ST: CLERK A "ITEST: CLERK 4 Each year the Towns and County will convene prior to November 15 to review prior year expenditures and coming year estimates for expenditures in preparing cost projections for the yearly maintenance costs for the next fiscal. This information will then be brought forward to each jurisdiction's review. This ADDENDUM shall become effective when properly executed by all parties pursuant to Resolutions adopted by the governing board of each. The parties hereto have caused this ADDENDUM to ' be executed in accordance with resolutions of their respective governing bodies this the day of , 2009. COUNTY OF ORANGE BY: BY: Valerie P. Foushee, Chair, Orange County Board of Commissioners ark Chilton Mayor TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL To Manager, Chapel Hi Gary Humphreys, Orange CountyFjnance Officer L. Bing Roenigk, Town ofCarrboro Finance Officer Kenneth C. Pennoyer, To December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 52 of 53 TOWN F HI BY: ( 71, - Tom Stevens, Mayor ()ROUGH This addendum has been prreaudited in the manner required by the 'Local Government And Fiscal Control Act: Greg Siler, To of Hillsborough Finance Office udget hapel Hill Finance Officer Resolution in Support of the No Build Alternative for U -3808 Whereas, Elizabeth Brady Road extension (U3808) is a component o Plan and has been since approximately 1969, and the Town of Hillsborough has routinely requested funding for Transportation Improvement Plan process as a top priority, and Whereas, the Town received and reviewed the draft Environmental Impact Stater the Depai intent of Transportation in November 2009, and the Draft Environmental Impact S on Churton Street through downto analyzed, and Whereas, the Department of Transportation amended the statement of purpose and need for this project due to findings of the Draft EIS, and Whereas, the documented impacts in the Draft EIS to the natural, human, and cultural environment benefits, and of Hillsborough and Oran$e County the out Whereas, specific impacts to natural, human, and cultural environment include division of 265 acres of publically accessible green space that forms a central park for Hillsborough, disruption of neighborhoods, and long -term impacts to river from run -off. Now, Therefore be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners for the Town of Hillsborough that the Town of Hillsborough: 1) Only supports the No Build Option, including other NCDOT progra ed improvements as described in the Draft EIS, 2) Will be working to remove the project from Transportation Improvement Plan requests as well as local and regional transportation plans, and Urges NCDOT to consider funding a package of alternative improvements which will be submitted consistent with MPO processes 4),+,,, Anticipates working closely N DOT and the MPO to develop new ways of doing business . 1 j L . th� address our our transportation and traffic issues under a complete stree philosophy. Z‘ 9 44 , ; is t rough T 101 East Orange Street • P.O. Box 429 • Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 919 - 732 -1270 • Fax 919 - 644 -2390 December 14, 2009 Regular Meeting Approved: February 8, 2010 Page 53 of 53 sportation ect through the nt report from ent shows minor positive impacts to congestion llsborough for the three build alternatives Tom Stevens, -Mayor