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