Room for all

I looked at the agenda for tonight’s Town Council meeting and got that same sort of funny feeling in my heart I got when I saw my first gray hair or when I realized my child had grown too big for me to pick up and carry. Time was moving on, and life would never be the same. It wasn’t a bad feeling, more like an equal mix of excitement and dread.

The public hearing tonight includes some development projects in key areas of town. We ease into the evening with a request to transfer four residential lots totaling 2.15 acres to the Rizzo Conference Center to allow for it to expand its facilities and parking. The project would add a four-story building containing 65 guest rooms and office space for a total of nearly 73,000 square feet. The plan calls for an additional 99 parking spaces.

After a peek at the revised taxi ordinance, we dive into one of the most heated issues of the night: the request for rezoning of the re-jiggered properties that make room for Charterwood. The entire MLK Jr. Boulevard corridor is ripe for redevelopment, a fact that makes many of us nervous, and Charterwood leads the way. As any first-born child can tell you, going first has its advantages and disadvantages. Charterwood developers should be toughened by their previous experience before council and frightened neighbors, but expect the opposition to be intense.

We wrap up with a concept review of The Park, 800 upscale apartments to replace the 189 affordable units of the Colony Apartments on Ephesus Church Road, on the Fordham Boulevard side of Ephesus Elementary School.

Taken altogether, the agenda bodes a lot of change for our ever-growing town. We’ve made Chapel Hill a nice place to live; of course, we’ve got to share. We need places for newcomers. We just need to make sure we create spaces for modest-income newcomers, not just the wealthy ones.
– Nancy Oates

by on June 18, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Housing
Tagged , ,
Posted by Nancy Oates on June 18, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/06/18/room-for-all/

Good neighbor in good faith

The IFC has a Good Neighbor Plan and a lease for its Homestead Road facility. And Lee Storrow came into his own at last night’s Town Council meeting, standing up tentatively but tenaciously for certain safeguards to be added into each document.

Homestead Road neighbors have held IFC’s toes to the fire throughout the process of approving what started out as a transitional housing facility, then grew into an emergency shelter as well. One point of contention in crafting a Good Neighbor Plan was whether IFC could change the terms without council’s blessing. IFC executive director Chris Moran stressed that any proposed changes would be brought back before council; that was implied in the wording, he said. Storrow said, in effect, spell out in the document “for approval” by council.

Similarly, Storrow wanted to make sure the Community House Advisory Committee would not disband, leaving no mechanism for resolving future complaints. He pressed for specific language in the Good Neighbor Plan that said the CHAC would continue to meet throughout the term of the lease.

Donna Bell disagreed. In her best social work voice, she said she didn’t want the document to lock in a programmatic solution by requiring a committee to meet when there was no need for it to meet. Storrow softened his stance, dropping a set schedule for the meetings, but insisted, cushioned by ample verbiage, that the document codify the existence of CHAC as the problem-solving mechanism. He prevailed in both instances.

When it came to the lease, Matt Czajkowski suggested including a time frame for IFC to vacate the Rosemary Street building. In the course of the discussion that evening, it became apparent that though the town presumed moving the shelter to Homestead Road would clear the problem off Rosemary Street, IFC planned to make the current shelter into an admissions office for shelter applicants. So the Homestead Road neighbors would lose its peace of mind, and the downtown merchants and customers would continue to be plagued by problems from shelter guests.

Jim Ward sided with Czajkowski, saying that the town needed to “apply nurturing pressure” to the IFC to move on and allow other uses for that property. Unfortunately, Ward and Czajkowski were the only two on the dais in favor of that tough love, and the measure failed. The lease that finally passed has no provision for the IFC to do anything other than business as usual on Rosemary Street.
– Nancy Oates

by on June 12, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Uncategorized
Posted by NancyDon on June 12, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/06/12/good-neighbor-in-good-faith/

Respect for good neighbors

The bulk of tonight’s Town Council meeting will consist of discussion about the Good Neighbor Plan in connection with the IFC’s transitional housing facility and emergency shelter that will open next year on Homestead Road. The negotiations have been excruciating for both sides, and passions continue to run hot. Expect many people to speak out for and against many aspects of this plan.

For a productive discussion tonight, we’re hoping that people put aside politics and focus on the issues. The transitional housing piece has garnered no real opposition. The people selected for transitional housing likely will be high functioning and motivated to comply with societal norms.

The sticking points all originate from the oversight of the emergency shelter beds. Who fills those will be a crapshoot, and shelter staff can only exert so much control over guests’ behaviors. Without any real alternative place for the homeless on white-flag nights, the shelter of course will take in men who have not been vetted. It would be inhumane not to. The risk from inviting in strangers concerns the neighbors.

No list of rules can cover all eventualities or guarantee that no regrettable incidents will take place. Both sides need to recognize that truth and work together to stack the deck in favor of safety. Both sides need to exhibit attitudes and behavior that foster trust.

We, as a town, are asking the people who live near the new shelter to take one for the team. They will be hosts to some guests the rest of us are relieved we won’t have to think about. All of us, townfolk and IFC leadership alike, owe the Homestead Road neighbors big time. They deserve our respect and gratitude. I trust that will be apparent in everyone who comes to the mike to speak.
– Nancy Oates

by on June 11, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Homeless Shelter
Posted by Nancy Oates on June 11, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/06/11/respect-for-good-neighbors/

Torches waiting to be lit

Lauren Easthom isn’t the only one who has to gaze upon dead trees under Duke Energy power lines. Every time I walk along Piney Mountain Road, I stroll by a copse of trees that Duke has topped, treated and left to die, all in the name of “managing non-compatible vegetation.” (The photos at right are of trees under a power line that runs along Piney Mountain Road, near Booker Creek.)

In 2008, Duke Energy agreed to forgo using herbicides under power transmission lines. But at the May 30 Town Council meeting, a Duke Energy representative announced that the corporation planned to resuming using the toxic sprays to kill shoots that come up from the stumps of trees that Duke has chopped down to keep away from power lines. He included photos of areas that had been sprayed, comparing them with areas that had not been treated, to show that in the past four years, little trees have re-emerged in places Duke workers had cleared but not sprayed.

But Easthom countered with photos of her own, showing areas near her home where Duke had sprayed trees 20 to 30 feet tall and left them there to die, becoming potential torches that the Chapel Hill fire chief agreed were a hazard. Easthom told of a fire near her home that started when someone tossed a lit cigarette butt that ignited a dead tree, and the fire had spread along the line of dead trees.

Town Council can’t do anything to prevent Duke from spraying herbicides. The Duke rep said that people who don’t want an area sprayed that is contiguous to their private property could call Duke to make that request. But Easthom said when her neighbors have done that, no one at Duke knows anything about that or even whom to direct the call to.

Jim Ward suggested painting the stumps rather than spraying a chemical. The Duke rep had never heard of that option. Matt Czajkowski sounded almost lawyerly as he pinned the rep to admit that saving money was the only reason Duke did not haul away trees it had cut down. Given that Duke’s top executives receive multimillion-dollar compensation packages annually, Duke should be able to afford to hire a few extra workers to paint rather than spray toxins. Czajkowski pointed out that if Chapel Hill’s fire chief considered the dead trees to be fire hazards, the town was obligated to remove them, costing taxpayers money.

Duke is supposed to notify Public Works before spraying, and the town is supposed to notify nearby homeowners, but the Duke rep and Public Works director Lance Norris hedged. Lee Storrow pointed out that sending out a notice should be easy as the town does it frequently for other information items.

Nearly every council member had a question for the Duke rep, who had few answers. He promised to return to council later this month to respond. Czajkowski suggested Duke bring the person who can make decisions.
– Nancy Oates

by on June 6, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Trees
Tagged
Posted by Nancy Oates on June 6, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/06/06/torches-waiting-to-be-lit/

Signs of ill will

You know those times when everything seems poised for success, then some hours later, relationships have frayed, the evening is in shambles, and everyone goes to bed angry? Town council had one of those nights last night.

When the meeting opened, everyone seemed in fine fettle. In talking about the proposed downtown business incubator, council members tossed around words such as “amazing,” “inspiring,” “transformative.” Later, during the discussion of amending the commercial property section of the Glen Lennox Neighborhood Conservation District, council members crowed about the process that was similarly amazing, inspiring and transformative.

Things bogged down a bit during the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan update, and the mood soured noticeably during a discussion about Duke Energy’s decision to resume spraying herbicide to “manage non-compatible vegetation.”

But the turning point came at 10:30 p.m., when council has the option of calling it a night. Much as members hate to do that when people have waited three and a half hours to speak, most were willing to postpone the remaining items on the agenda – a couple of budget items, the towing ordinance change and a mysterious petition put forth by Penny Rich, who did not show up for the meeting – because they would need considerable discussion.

But town attorney Ralph Karpinos had to file a response in the lawsuit brought against the town over the cell phone ban’s impact on tow truck operators. He volunteered to file and response and amend it later, after the town took action at its next meeting Monday, but the mayor pushed for a resolution. The discussion went on and on and brought in tangentially related topics, as those sorts of discussions do as they begin to deteriorate: Can we limit the signage to downtown lots only? Put one sign per five spaces not per three? Make lot owners pay for the signs, instead of towing businesses footing the bill? Standardize a time limit before towing? Give towing companies time to comply?

As the tempers flared and each comment generated multiple responses, even the generally even-keel Karpinos had an edge in his voice. Understandable, given that unlike private lawyers who bill by the hour, he is on straight salary. Because of his looming deadline to file a response, he wouldn’t even be able to come in late the next day.

Around 11:30, Gene Pease pleaded for council to pass the ordinance due to the lateness of the hour and set up a task force to handle the details. Lee Storrow made a motion; Jim Ward amended it; Storrow objected; Mark Kleinschmidt overruled; Donna Bell wanted wording about compliance. Matt Czajkowski suggested the three changes be voted on separately, which Kleinschmidt sort of allowed, in a lawyerly sleight of hand, but called for the vote in reverse order: Bell’s change first, Ward’s second and Storrow’s original motion last.

All three passed, but no one seemed happy.
– Nancy Oates

by on May 31, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Parking
Tagged
Posted by Nancy Oates on May 31, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/05/31/signs-of-ill-will/

Tax increase

I told you so. Not that I like rubbing anyone’s nose in bad decisions, but going ahead with the library renovation without thinking through what we would have to give up to make it happen was a bad decision you could smell before you stepped in it.

On the last lap of what was a lengthy and exhausting council meeting last night, Town Council members gave their feedback on the budget. After devoting nearly three hours to the CH2020 plan, every one of the council members looked whupped. Those who wore contact lenses, popped them out and put on glasses. Those who wore suit jackets had shrugged them off long before. Those who usually talk a lot kept more or less silent.

And then came the bad news about the budget. Some weeks back, county tax administrator Jenks Crayton told council to prepare for a decrease in property tax revenue when property values were sure to come in lower should the county proceed with the revaluation schedule that would commence a revaluation this year, four years after the real estate market went bust. Chapel Hill taxpayers braced for a tax rate increase but consoled themselves that county residents would be taking on a bit more of the tax burden because property values in Chapel Hill had fallen faster than in the county.

Costs of running our town at the level of services we’ve come to enjoy continued to rise, and town manager Roger Stancil began talking openly of tax rate increases, beginning with a half-cent per $100 of property value to cover transit costs.

When the county decided to put off the property revaluation for a few years, the talk of tax rate increases didn’t get shelved. Now Chapel Hill taxpayers must continue to pay tax on property valuations way higher than they could ever sell their homes for, and still have a tax rate increase.

This is where priority budgeting would be useful, Matt Czajkowski said. If we’ve decided that maintaining a high level of service in our fare-free bus system, then we need to know what lower priorities to cut from to offset the transit increase. But without prioritizing services, we don’t know what that low-service-on-the-totem-pole would be.

So let me begin the discussion: Public art should be cut. Stancil is reluctant to touch that department because the bulk of its cost comes from personnel – the arts czar and his assistant – and Stancil has vowed not to layoff town workers. But in an economy of tough budget choices, public art is a luxury we can’t afford. Boom. We’ve saved about $130,000 a year.

What would you cut next?
– Nancy Oates

by on May 22, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Library, Lifestyle, Taxes, Transportation
Tagged
Posted by Nancy Oates on May 22, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/05/22/tax-increase/

Pile on the public hearings

Stock up on the popcorn. Tonight’s public hearing will likely be a two-bagger.

First up, St. Paul’s AME Church wants to build a village on Purefoy Road, across from Phoenix Place, to serve the Rogers Road community. The proposed mixed-use development on a 20-acre parcel would consist of a church, a health center, a cultural facility, a fitness center, a childcare center and 87 units of multifamily housing, and still have room for a cemetery and a park-and-ride lot. The project will require rezoning approval from R-1 (allowing only single-family housing) to R-5-C, as well as a special use permit.

The process has been complicated by needing county and town approval for rezoning. The county does not allow protest petitions to be filed. If approved, St. Paul’s Village would like to be annexed by the town.

Next, Town Council will hear public comment on the more-or-less final draft of the CH2020 Comprehensive Plan. People take the CH2020 document seriously because it will be the document future Town Councils will use to bolster their development decisions. Over the next few decades, development and redevelopment issues will keep the council busy. No plan will make everyone happy, of course, and this document raises some anxieties. It apparently has dropped the protections to retain the character of a neighborhood and ignores student housing. Expect residents to line up to point out these failings and more.

Finally, the budget. Who doesn’t want to talk about money? Town manager Roger Stancil has done a yeoman’s job of keeping our day-to-day spending at a reasonable level, trimming costs and searching for coins under the sofa cushions, but the “big rocks”– such as the library renovation bonds that took us to our debt ceiling, the $7 million and counting for parking spaces and site cleanup at 140 West Franklin, and the liability for pensions and benefits for retiring municipal employees – look all the more threatening. With the county putting off the property revaluation that would have lowered property values closer to their market value, combined with Stancil’s recommendation of a half-cent transit tax, our property tax bills will continue to climb. Taxpayers aren’t likely to shrug that off without comment.
– Nancy Oates

by on May 21, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in 140 West, Budget, CH2020, Housing, Library, Taxes
Tagged ,
Posted by Nancy Oates on May 21, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/05/21/pile-on-the-public-hearings/

Phone tree of health

Nancy and I have decided to implement a new phone system, inspired by the Town of Chapel Hill phone system.

I’ll set it up so that my phone automatically directs a caller to my message center, which will inform the caller that if I can’t answer, the caller should contact Nancy. At the same time, Nancy’s phone will respond with a message that the caller should contact me.

That set-up will make for a nice little loop that will keep the two of us from ever having to answer the phones. If we feel overworked and stressed out, we could simply delete the messages.

This system was inspired by my efforts Thursday morning to contact someone, anyone, in the Chapel Hill transportation department because I had a question about a town budget item that dealt with transit funding. Manager Roger Stancil indicated during his budget presentation Monday night that a half-cent property tax increase might be needed to meet the costs of running the town’s fare-free bus system. I was curious about just how much money that would be. The presentation before council and the news stories didn’t give a dollar figure in their reports.

So I called Steve Spade, the transit director. He didn’t answer, but I got a nice extended tour of the phone tree that, for some reason, included a stop with Triangle Transit. Since Spade couldn’t come to the phone, I called Brian Litchfield, the assistant transit director. He also was not available.

Ever resourceful, I thought I’d go to the main line. The receptionist was super-efficient and, as soon as she heard the word “bus” transferred me to Anita Hackney. She also was not available.

I left messages with Litchfield and Hackney, and Litchfield called me back around 3 p.m. He told me the half-cent increase would generate $350,000 in revenue. Apparently the town doesn’t have the option of cutting bus service because it already did that the year before last. The other contributors to the transit fund – Carrboro and UNC – have indicated they will meet their increased obligation, with Carrboro not leaning toward a tax-rate hike.

I guess town budget belt-tightening has made it more difficult to man the phones – fewer bodies to pick up the receiver. Spade, Litchfield and Hackney probably were all out exercising or attending a smoking cessation class or learning to eat healthy in an effort to reduce town costs for health care.

I’m glad town workers are getting healthier. But I do miss talking to them on the phone.
–Don Evans

by on May 18, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Transportation
Tagged
Posted by Don Evans on May 18, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/05/18/phone-tree-of-health/

Towing the law

At tonight’s meeting, Town Council intends to fix a law of unintended consequences. In February, council enacted a law governing tow trucks and included a stipulation that a sign in the tow-truck enforced parking lot include a phone number that would be answered immediately by the towing company. A month later council passed a misguided law put forward by Penny Rich, before she became a lame duck, that limited certain drivers who use cell phones in their vehicles. Misguided because the law will not make our streets safer. According to Donna Bell and Ed Harrison, people can continue to talk on their cell phones while driving, but if they cause a horrific, perhaps fatal, accident while on the phone, it will cost them an extra $25. The cell phone law will cost taxpayers thousands of dollars to put up signs at all points of entry to the town explaining the impotent law, and it will cost us even more in legal bills. The law has already been challenged, and a judge has ordered a stay.

The cell phone law enacted in March is in direct conflict with the towing law passed in February. Whereas the cell phone law ostensibly prohibits everyone except members of a nuclear family (providing the spouses are of the opposite gender) from talking on the phone while driving, the towing law requires that the tow truck driver, regardless of his or her family status, answer the phone, even while driving.

The fix proposed tonight would give tow-truck operators a 15-minute grace period to return phone calls and would relax the signage requirements for parking lots. Instead of one sign for every three parking spaces, the lot can get by with prominently displayed “No Parking” signs. That would be an improvement over the signs in Panera’s parking lot that read “Video Surveillance in Effect,” but makes no link to private parking. One is left with the impression that the video surveillance is to discourage muggers not thieves who steal a few minutes of free parking.

The new language in the towing ordinance is all well and good. But what would make more sense is to tear up the cell phone ordinance before it costs the town more time and the taxpayers more money.
– Nancy Oates

by on May 14, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Downtown Chapel Hill, Parking
Tagged
Posted by Nancy Oates on May 14, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/05/14/towing-the-law/

Rich no more

Soon we won’t have Penny Rich to kick around anymore. In yesterday’s primary, Rich edged out county commissioner incumbent Pam Hemminger and came in second behind Mark Dorosin. Because no Republican candidate is running for a seat on the Board of County Commissioners, Rich and Dorosin will fill the two open seats come December.

A volunteer handing out Dorosin and Rich postcards (I won’t use his name because I didn’t tell him I’d quote him) said he was tired of the current commissioners allowing the county manager to lead them around by the rings in their noses. We’ll grant you that Rich probably doesn’t let anyone lead her around by any of her jewelry. Watching the fireworks of Rich and Orange County manager Frank Clifton battle for power will be more entertaining than anything the town can come up with for the July 4th shows it plans to resume.

Rich’s departure will leave an open seat on Town Council. Chapel Hill residents who want a shot at it must notify the town in writing that they’d like to be considered. Each applicant will address Town Council at a meeting in November, and the Town will vote on who will finish out Rich’s term.

Despite a valiant effort by Orange County voters to keep the state from embarrassing itself, voters across the state came out 3 to 2 in favor of the state’s first constitutional amendment, a shrill screed that defines narrowly who can and can’t enjoy the benefits and protections of marriage. Voters in Orange County voted more than 4 to 1 against Amendment One. Same sex couples married in one of the eight states or the District of Columbia that have laws on the books allowing marriage between people of the same gender must surrender their marriage licenses at the border. Though Amendment One can’t stop people from falling in love, making a lifelong commitment to one another and creating a family together, it can prevent businesses from offering benefits to spouses of workers who don’t fit North Carolina’s narrow definition. Thus the amendment is expected to have a negative effect on our state economy because companies will be averse to setting up shop in a state that discriminates against some of their talent.

It almost makes you want to move to Arizona.
– Nancy Oates

by on May 9, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Elections
Posted by Nancy Oates on May 9, 2012

https://chapelhillwatch.com/2012/05/09/rich-no-more/

« Older Posts
Newer Posts »