AGENDA #6c
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Town Operations Center: Application for Special Use Permit
DATE: April 14, 2004
INTRODUCTION
Tonight the Council continues the Public Hearing from March 15, 2004, regarding a Special Use Permit application in the Joint Planning Transition Area for a public service and public use facility on a 53.78-acre site between Interstate 40 and Millhouse Road. Located approximately 2,000 feet north of Eubanks Road on the east side of Millhouse Road, the proposal includes the construction of a new Town Transportation Department and a Public Works Department to replace the existing Municipal Operations Facility on Airport Road. The Transportation Department provides bus services to all areas of the Town. The Public Works Department provides trash collection, fleet maintenance, maintenance of road and other public facilities, all road service and maintenance activities for the residential areas of the Town.
The applicant, the Town of Chapel Hill, is proposing to construct six buildings, associated outbuildings and structures, employee/visitor parking spaces, bus storage spaces and storage areas for Town-owned vehicles and equipment. The proposed development includes building heights that exceed the maximum secondary height limits and parking space numbers that are below the minimum parking space requirements. The applicant is requesting modifications of regulations as a part of this application. This application has been reviewed for compliance with the Land Use Management Ordinance. The site is located in the Mixed-Use Residential-1 (MU-R-1) zoning district, in the Resource Conservation District and is identified as Orange County Tax Maps 7.18..4, 7.19..23, 7.19..23G, and 7.19..23H
MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
Based on the information in the record to date, we believe that the Council could make the findings required to approve the Special Use Permit application with the requested modification of the regulations. We recommend that the Council adopt Resolution A, approving the application with conditions.
|
This package of materials has been prepared for the Town Council’s consideration, and is organized as follows:
¨ Cover Memorandum: Provides background on the development proposal and the Town’s review process, presents evidence in the record thus far in support of and in opposition to approval of the application, discusses key issues raised at the March 15, 2004 Public Hearing, and offers recommendations for Council action and includes resolutions of approval and denial.
¨ Attachments: Includes advisory board summaries, citizen email correspondence, a copy of the March 15, 2004 Public Hearing memorandum and other attachments. |
background
On September 8, 2003, the Town Council granted expedited processing for review of this Special Use Permit application. A Concept Plan review of this application was conducted by the Community Design Commission on October 22, 2003, and by the Council on November 17, 2003. On March 15, 2004, the Council held a Public Hearing to consider the Special Use Permit for a public service and public use facility on a 53.78-acre site. The applicant, the Town of Chapel Hill, is proposing to construct six buildings, associated outbuildings and structures, including: approximately 168,600 square feet of building area; 287 employee/visitor parking spaces; 125 bus storage spaces; and storage areas for Town-owned vehicles and equipment. The entire proposed facility will contain approximately 20 acres of impervious surface area. The Public Hearing on the Special Use Permit application was recessed until April 14, 2004.
This is an application for a Special Use Permit. The Land Use Management Ordinance requires the Town Manager to conduct an evaluation of this Special Use Permit application, to present a report to the Planning Board, and to present a report and recommendation to the Town Council. We have reviewed the application and evaluated it regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Town’s Land Use Management Ordinance; we have presented a report to the Planning Board; and on March 15, 2004, we submitted our report and recommendation to the Council.
The site proposed to be covered by this Special Use Permit is in the Chapel Hill Transition Area of the Joint Planning Area. The Joint Planning Agreement, executed by Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Orange County, establishes this area as one for which the County has adopted Chapel Hill’s Land Use Management Ordinance and Zoning Atlas to regulate land use, and for which the County has delegated approval authority for Special Use Permits to the Chapel Hill Town Council. The Agreement directs that, when a Special Use Permit is proposed in the Chapel Hill Transition Area, the Town shall transmit a copy of the application to the County to invite courtesy comments. Final action to approve, approve with conditions, or deny rests with the Town Council.
We transmitted plans for the Town Operations Center to Orange County, and expect to receive comments in advance of the Council’s reconvening of this Public Hearing tonight. When we receive the comments, we will transmit them to the Council.
KEY ISSUES
We have identified six key issues related to this proposed development. These issues are discussed below.
1) Improvements to Eubanks Road: During the Public Hearing a citizen expressed a concern with the proposed roadway improvements at the Eubanks Road/Airport Road intersection. The citizen, suggesting that future commercial development along Eubanks Road may necessitate additional intersection improvements beyond what is proposed with this application, asked that the applicant consider an alternate intersection design to accommodate future traffic.
Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing to improve the Eubanks Road/Airport Road intersection as recommended by the Traffic Impact Analysis submitted with its’ Special Use Permit application. We believe additional improvement to the intersection beyond what the applicant is proposing is not warranted by the impacts of this proposed development.
2) Fence between the proposed development and the adjacent 10.3-acre residential parcel in the southern portion of the site: During the Public Hearing a Council member suggested that the proposed fence along the neighboring residential parcel be designed to allow small animals to move between the two properties. A Council member also questioned whether or not the owners of the property actually desired to have a fence.
Staff Comment: In response to the concern of small animals, the applicant is proposing to design the fence with gaps between the bottom of the fencing and ground level. We recommend that the final fence design include the applicant’s proposal to provide openings between the bottom of the fence and the ground. We recommend that this design be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This requirement has been included in Resolution A.
In response to the question about the property owners desired to have a fence, the applicant has stated that, if during future discussions with the owners Town staff are informed that the property owners do not want sections of the fencing to be constructed, the applicant will eliminate these sections of fence. Resolution A includes a stipulation that provides for this flexibility.
3) Requirement for a Transportation Management Plan: A Council member recalled recent discussions questioning the effectiveness of the Town’s Transportation Management Plan. The Council member suggested that the stipulation be deleted from the Resolution of approval.
Staff Comment: We are currently working on a report for the Council concerning the effectiveness of Transportation Management Plans. Prior to the presentation of this report to the Council, and subsequent Council action in response to the report, we recommend that the standard stipulation requiring Transportation Management Plans remain.
4) Aeration of the stormwater ponds: Expressing a concern with the two proposed stormwater management ponds and the potential for water stagnation and mosquito habitat, the Planning Board recommended that the applicant install aeration devices in the two stormwater management ponds.
Staff Comment: Based on preliminary stormwater management plans for this proposed development, we believe that the installation and operation of aeration devices, or similar water circulation equipment, in the two proposed stormwater management ponds is feasible. We understand that keeping water moving in an acceptable strategy to help minimize mosquito populations, as the mosquito larvae cannot easily survive in turbulent water. Resolution A includes a stipulation stating that the applicant shall install aeration devices, or similar water circulation equipment. The final type and design of the aeration device is to be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.
5) Planting strip and shade trees along Millhouse Road: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommended that the proposed sidewalk along the east side of Millhouse Road be separated from the road by planting strips with shade trees.
Staff Comment: The applicant is proposing the following improvements between Eubanks Road and the proposed development site:
a) Widen roadway to accommodate two 12-foot wide travel lanes;
b) Two 5-foot wide striped bike lanes, curb and gutter on both sides of the road; and
c) A 5-foot wide sidewalk along the east side of the roadway.
Additionally, in those areas with adequate right-of-way, the applicant is proposing to include a three foot wide planting strip between the sidewalk and the curb. Street trees are not proposed within the three foot wide planting strip.
We believe that, at a minimum, a seven to ten foot wide planting strip is preferred in order to successfully accommodate shade trees between a street and sidewalk. Projects previously approved by the Council with this planting width standard include Southern Village and Meadowmont. It is our understanding, based on the roadway improvement design proposed by the applicant and described above, that there is not adequate right-of-way along Millhouse Road to accommodate a planting strip wider than three feet.
The recommendation by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, for shade trees along Millhouse Road, has not been incorporated into the Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A.
6) Ten foot path between future greenway and internal parking areas: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommended that a ten foot multi-use path(s) be provided to connect the future greenway to the secure and unsecured parking area.
Staff Comment: Three walking paths are proposed between the building areas and future Rail and North Trails greenway corridor. We understand that the applicant is considering combining the walking paths with an on-site educational exhibit highlighting some of the site’s proposed sustainable development techniques such as the wet ponds, bio-retention facilities, porous pavement areas and the rain water recycling systems.
We believe that a requirement for ten foot multi-use paths could be achieved by either converting all or portions of the proposed three walking paths or by constructing a separate path. We believe that both options create undesirable impacts as described below:
a) A redesign of the proposed walking path(s) into a ten foot wide multi-use path(s), or construction of new separate path would result in additional clearing and grading, including land disturbance in the Resource Conservations District and tree removal in the Significant Tree Stand areas.
b) Increased public access to secured areas in the proposed development presents additional security issues.
c) Increased amount of impervious surface.
Additionally, we do not believe that the volume of bicycle traffic along this portion of the future Rail and North Trails greenway warrants a multi-use path through the proposed development. The three proposed paths provide access and connectivity as proposed.
The recommendation by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, for a 10 foot wide multi-use path between the parking areas, has not been incorporated into the Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A.
During the Public Hearing additional questions and issues were raised. Accompanying this document is a memorandum from the applicant addressing these concerns.
EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION
The standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit application involves consideration of four findings of fact that the Council must consider for granting a Special Use Permit. Based on the evidence that is accumulated during the Public Hearing, the Council will consider whether it can make each of the four required findings for the approval of a Special Use Permit. If, after consideration of the evidence submitted at the Public Hearing, the Council decides that it can make each of the four findings, the Land Use Management Ordinance directs that the Special Use Permit shall then be approved. If the Council decides that the evidence does not support making one or more of the findings, then the application cannot be approved and, accordingly, should be denied by the Council.
Tonight, based on the evidence in the record thus far, we provide the following evaluation of this application based on the four findings of facts that the Council must consider for granting a Special Use Permit.
|
Finding #1: That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare. |
We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:
Evidence in support: Evidence in support of this finding for the application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (provided as Attachment #8 to the March 15, 2004 memorandum).
We note the following points from the applicant’s Statement of Justification:
· “The site will allow preservation of existing buffers of woods around its perimeter. The layout of the site will keep the large truck and bus storage areas next to I-40 to keep high noise levels as far away as possible, and away from office facilities and the few houses to the west of the site.” [Applicant’s Statement]
· “There are two separate entrances into the facility to allow for separate movements by the buses and the Public Works vehicles. This separate arrangement will improve intersecting traffic along Millhouse Road and minimize potential vehicular conflicts on site. There will be a new traffic signal installed at Millhouse and Eubanks Road to improve safety. The compound areas for Public Works and Transportation are enclosed and gated to protect Town vehicles and isolate the area from the public.” [Applicant’s Statement]
Evidence in opposition: Three citizens spoke during the Public Hearing on this application, stating opinions that the propose development would result in worsening traffic conditions, an increase in noise and light pollution, and would be visually unattractive.
We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.
|
Finding #2: That the use or development complies with all required regulations and standards of this chapter, including all applicable provisions of Articles 3 and 5, the applicable specific standards in the Supplemental Use Regulations (Article 6) and with all other applicable regulations.
|
We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:
Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #2 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification.
We note the following points from the applicant’s Statement of Justification:
· “This project will comply with all required regulations as specified in Finding #2, with the exception of two items. The first item involves Article 5.9.7, Minimum Off-Street Parking Requirement". This project proposes a total of 287 parking spaces to be built-in Phase I, whereas, by the regulation table, the minimum number should be 391 spaces. We feel this amount will meet the existing and future needs of the facility and can preserve trees and natural areas if these spaces are not built at this time. Parking spaces will not spill onto adjacent streets or properties. The locations of additional spaces have been designed for construction in Phase II, anticipated to be built in the next 49 years.” [Applicant’s Statement]
· “The other non-complying item is the secondary height of the new buildings. The fleet buildings for this project will require a height sufficient to allow daylighting components. Table 3.8-1 , Dimensional Matrix, has a maximum secondary height of 40'. These maintenance buildings require high bays to work on Town buses and large Public Works vehicles, such as, fire trucks and trash trucks. Additional heights are required to accommodate the clerestories needed for daylighting the workspace, which could be as high as 55'” [Applicant’s Statement]
Evidence in opposition: The applicant does not meet two standards and has requested that the Council modify the regulations.
We note that the applicant is asking for modifications to the regulations for this site. We believe that in this particular case the Council could make the finding that the proposed modifications satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree necessary to approve the modifications. If the Council does not make the finding, then the applicant will be required to comply with the standards and regulations in the Land Use Management Ordinance. For additional discussion on the requested modifications, please see “Requested Modification of Regulations” section below.
We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.
|
Finding #3: That the use or development is a public necessity.
|
We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:
Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #3 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification.
We note the following key point from the applicant’s Statement of Justification:
· “The new Town Operations Center is a public necessity. The Transportation Department provides bus services to all areas of the Town. The Public Works Department provides trash collection, fleet maintenance, maintenance of road and other public facilities, all road service and maintenance activities for the residential areas of the Town.” [Applicant’s Statement]
Evidence in opposition: We have not identified any evidence offered in opposition to Finding #3.
We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.
|
Finding #4: That the use or development conforms with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in this Chapter and in the Comprehensive Plan.
|
We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:
Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #4 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification.
We note the following key points from the applicant’s Statement of Justification:
· “The Town Operations Center conforms with the general plans for the development of the Town as if falls within an existing property zoned MU-R-1, which permits construction of a public use facility. The site is designated on the Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan as "Public Works Site". [Applicant’s Statement]
· “The project addresses the Comprehensive Plan as follows:
Ø The project meets the objectives of Section 11 A-9, specifically to develop and implement a long-term solution for the Municipal Operations Facility.
Ø The proposed center encourages the economic development goals expressed in the plan by providing for "institutional employees of medium scale" located in transit service areas. The proposed center incorporates sustainable development elements, such as, daylighting, water re-use, energy-efficient systems, recycling and re-use of materials.
Ø The proposed center is designed to promote environmental sensitivity by utilizing already cleared areas to for the majority of the construction. The proposed center is designed to provide state-of-the-art treatment for stormwater runoff to minimize the effects of development at the site.
Ø The buildings that are proposed take advantage of the natural areas that remain and create pedestrian connections and access to other parts of the site and the future Greenway system.
Ø Bus stops and bike/motorcycle racks will accommodate alternate modes of transportation to the site.” [Applicant’s Statement]
Evidence in opposition: We have not identified any evidence offered in opposition to Finding #4.
We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.
PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF REGULATIONS
The applicant is requesting modification to regulations in Section 5.9.7 (minimum parking requirements) and Section 3.8.1 (building heights) of the Land Use Management Ordinance:
1. Parking, Section 5.9.7: This project proposes a total of 287 employee/visitor parking spaces. The Land Use Management Ordinance requires a minimum number of 391 spaces. The applicant believes that the proposed 287 parking spaces will meet the existing and future needs of the facility and can preserve trees and natural areas.
We understand that the number of proposed parking spaces is based on an actual needs assessment that the applicant conducted specifically for this project. The assessment was based on the number and time-of-day scheduling of current and projected employees. The assessment determined that if the applicant calculated the parking spaces using the formula outline in the Land Use Management Ordinance (1 space for every 350 square feet of floor area for a Public Use Facility), the result would require more spaces than needed.
Staff Comment: We believe that the applicant’s requests to modify the parking regulations of Section 5.9.7 of the Land Use Management Ordinance are supported by the following reasons:
a) The proposed number of parking spaces is based on a vehicle needs study that specifically addressed the employee and visitor parking space requirements for the proposed development;
b) According to the vehicle needs study, the proposed 287 parking spaces will meet the existing and future needs of the facility; and
c) Minimizing the number of parking spaces will preserve trees, natural areas and decrease the amount of impervious surface area and stormwater runoff.
2. Secondary Building Height, Section 3.8: The other non-complying item is the secondary height of the new buildings. The vehicle maintenance buildings for this project proposes a height sufficient to allow daylighting components. Table 3.8-1, Dimensional Matrix, has a maximum secondary height of 40 feet. These maintenance buildings require high bays to work on Town buses and large Public Works vehicles, such as fire trucks and refuse trucks. Additional height is required to accommodate the upper story space needed for daylighting the workspace, which could be as high as 55 feet.
Staff Comment: We believe that the applicant’s requests to modify the secondary building height regulations in Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance are supported by the following reasons:
a) Construction of vehicle maintenance buildings in excess of the maximum secondary building height would permit sufficient height to allow daylighting components including upper story space for windows;
b) Additional height would allow the construction of vehicle maintenance buildings that permit the installation of high vehicle service bays necessary to work on large vehicles such as Town buses, and large Public Works vehicles such as fire trucks and refuse trucks; and
c) Lower building heights would not permit the construction of a sloped roof, which requires less long term maintenance than a flat roof and facilitates construction of a rainwater collection system.
Accordingly, we recommend that the Council modify the regulations as follows:
1. Modification of the minimum parking regulations in Section 5.9.7 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, to allow a minimum of 287 parking spaces.
2. Modification of the dimensional regulations in Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, to allow a secondary height of 55 feet.
SUMMARY
We have attached a resolution that includes standard conditions of approval as well as special conditions that we recommend for this application. With these conditions, we believe that the Council could make the findings regarding health, safety and general welfare, and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The Manager’s recommendation incorporates input from all Town departments involved in review of the application.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations are summarized below. Please see summaries of board actions and recommendations in the attachments.
Planning Board Recommendation: On March 2, 2004, the Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution B. Resolution B includes the five recommended conditions on the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.
All five conditions, recommended by the Planning Board, have been incorporated into the Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A.
Transportation Board Recommendation: On March 2, 2004, the Transportation Board voted 6-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution C. Please see the attached Summary of Transportation Board Action.
All of the conditions of approval, endorsed by the Transportation Board, have been included into the Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A.
Community Design Commission Recommendation: On March 17, 2004, the Community Design Commission voted 10-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution B. Resolution B includes the five stipulations recommended stipulations on the attached Summary of Community Design Commission Action.
All five conditions, recommended by Community Design Commission, have been incorporated into the Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Recommendation: On March 23, 2004, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board voted 7-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution D. Please see that attached Summary of Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Action
Resolution D includes three stipulations:
1. Marked crosswalks shall be provided between internal sidewalks and parking blocks in the public/staff parking areas.
Staff Comment: This recommendation has been incorporated into the Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A.
2. Sidewalks constructed parallel to roadways shall be separated from the road by planting strips with shade trees.
3. 10 foot multi use path(s) shall be provided to connect the future greenway to the secure and unsecured parking areas.
Staff Comment: The above two stipulations have not been incorporated into the Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A. Please refer to the Key Issues section of this memorandum for additional information.
Greenways Commission Recommendation: On March 24, 2004, the Greenways Commission voted 5-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution C. Please see the attached Summary of Greenways Commission Action.
All of the conditions of approval, endorsed by the Greenways Commission, have been incorporated into the Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A.
Manager’s Revised Recommendation: Since the March 15, 2004, Public Hearing, the following stipulations have been added to the Manager’s Recommendation.
a) That if during future discussions with the owners of the 10.3 acre residential parcel, Town staff are informed that the property owners do not want sections of the fencing to be constructed, the applicant will eliminate these sections of fence (Added to Stipulation #14: Installation of Solid Fence Along Neighboring 10.3 Acre Residential Parcel).
b) That the design of the fence shall included gaps between the bottom of the fence and ground level. The design of the fence shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit (Added to Stipulation #14: Installation of Solid Fence Along Neighboring 10.3 Acre Residential Parcel).
c) That the parking lot striping plans shall include marked crosswalks between internal sidewalks and parking areas. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit (inserted as Stipulation #6: Marked Crosswalks).
Based on the information in the record to date, we believe that the Council could make the findings required to approve the Special Use Permit application with the requested modification of the regulations. We recommend that the Council adopt Resolution A, approving the application with conditions.
Resolution B would approve the application with the additional stipulations recommended by the Planning Board and the Community Design Commission.
Resolution C would approve the application as recommended by the Transportation Board and Greenways Commission.
Resolution D would approve the application with the additional stipulations recommended by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board.
Resolution E would deny the application.
Town Operations Facility Special Use Permit - Differences between Resolutions
|
ISSUES |
Resolution A (Approval)
Town Manager’s Revised Recommendation |
Resolution B (Approval)
Planning Board & Community Design Recommendation |
Resolution C (Approval)
Transportation Board & Greenway’s Recommendation |
Resolution D (Approval)
Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Board Recommendation |
|
Traffic management policy for operations vehicles on Millhouse Road |
Yes |
Yes |
* |
* |
|
Perimeter fence adjacent to 10.3 acre residential property |
Yes (Solid, with gaps between bottom of fence and ground and where desired by adjacent property owner.)
|
Yes
(Solid Wood) |
* |
* |
|
Aeration device in stormwater management ponds |
Yes |
Yes
|
*
|
*
|
|
Noise and Light certifications |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Specific lighting plan for Transportation employee walkway |
Yes |
Yes |
* |
* |
|
Bus shelter, bench, pad in Public Works portion |
Yes |
* |
* |
* |
|
Millhouse Road planting strip & shade trees |
No |
*
|
*
|
Yes |
|
Marked crosswalks between internal sidewalks and parking areas |
Yes |
* |
* |
Yes |
|
Multi-use path between future greenway and internal parking areas |
No
|
* |
* |
Yes |
* - Issues not raised at advisory board meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Board Summary of Action (p. 31).
2. Transportation Board Summary of Action (p. 33).
3. Community Design Commission Summary of Action (p. 34).
4. Bicycle and Pedestrian Board Summary of Action (p. 35).
5. Greenways Commission Summary of Action (p. 36)
6. E-mail correspondence from Wayne Pein (p. 37).
7. March 15, 2004 Public Hearing Memorandum and related attachments (p. 38).
RESOLUTION A
(Manager’s Revised Recommendation)
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, TOWN OPERATIONS CENTER (2004-04-14/ R-12a)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by The Town of Chapel Hill on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Maps 7.18..4, 7.19..23, 7.19..23G, and 7.19..23H (PIN 9870890971, 9871728102, 9871806829, and 9871809160), if developed according to the site plans dated February 25, 2004,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council finds, in this particular case, pursuant to Section 4.5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, that the following specific modifications of regulations satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:
Said public purposes being that: a) The proposed number of parking spaces is based on a vehicle needs study that specifically addressed the employee and visitor parking space requirements for the proposed development and does not justify the need for additional parking spaces; b) The study indicates that the proposed 287 parking spaces will meet the existing and future needs of the facility; c) Minimizing the number of parking spaces will preserve trees, natural areas and decrease the amount of impervious surface area and stormwater runoff; d) Construction of vehicle maintenance buildings in excess of the maximum secondary building height will permit sufficient height to allow daylighting components including upper story space for windows; e) Additional height will allows the construction of vehicle maintenance buildings that permit the installation of high vehicle service bay necessary to work on large vehicles such as Town buses, and large Public Works vehicles such as fire trucks, and refuse trucks; and f) Lower building heights would not permit the construction of a sloped roof, which requires less long term maintenance than a flat roof and facilitates construction of a rainwater collection system.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for the Town of Chapel Hill, Town Operations Center in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:
Stipulations Specific to the Development
1. That construction begins April 14, 2006 and be completed April 14, 2034.
2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit authorizes a public service facility and a public use facility with land use intensity requirements and dimensional standards as specified below:
|
Land Use Intensity |
|
|
Net Land Area |
53.78 acres |
|
Total # of Buildings |
6 (not including secondary outbuildings and storage areas) |
|
Permitted Building Area |
168,632 sq ft (including 137,034 sq ft of floor area) |
|
Permitted Floor Area |
137,034 sq ft |
|
Impervious Surface Area |
870,875 sq ft |
|
Minimum # of Parking Spaces |
287 |
|
Minimum # of Bicycle Spaces |
57 |
|
Maximum Building Height (Public Works and Transportation Vehicle Maintenance Buildings) |
55 feet |
3. Off-Site Roadway Improvements: That prior to occupancy, subject to approval from the North Carolina Department of Transportation and if adequate right-of-way can be obtained, the applicant shall construct the following roadway improvements:
· Eubanks Road:
a) Improve the turning radii at the Airport Road intersection as necessary to accommodate buses and large service vehicles.
b) Construct a 300-foot east bound left-turn storage lane at the Airport Road intersection.
c) Construct a westbound right-turn lane onto Millhouse Road.
· Millhouse Road:
a) Improvements at the southbound approach to Eubanks Road shall include: Widen roadway (36-foot pavement width) to accommodate three travel lanes-- one 12-foot wide northbound travel lane, one 12-foot wide southbound left-turn lane onto Eubanks Road, and one 12-foot wide southbound right-turn lane onto Eubanks Road.
b) Improvements between Eubanks Road and the proposed development site shall include: Widen roadway to accommodate two 12-foot wide travel lanes, two 5-foot wide striped bike lanes, curb and gutter on both sides of the road, and a 5-foot wide sidewalk -along the east side of the roadway.
c) Relocate the railroad crossing to realign with the proposed northern entrance to the development. Install a four-way stop at the intersection.
· Traffic Signal:
That a fully activated traffic signal shall be installed at the Eubanks Road/Millhouse Road intersection.
That the final design of roadway improvements, including the traffic signal, must be reviewed and approved by the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Town Manager, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
4. Encroachment Permit: Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall secure and provide an encroachment agreement from the North Carolina Department of Transportation for all work within the State maintained roadway right-of-way.
5. Parking Lot Standards: That all parking lots, drive aisles and parking spaces shall be constructed to Town standards.
6. Marked crosswalks: That the parking lot striping plans shall include marked crosswalks between internal sidewalks and parking areas. This plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
7. Greenway Trail: That the approval of this Special Use Permit shall approve the conceptual location for that portion of the Rail and North Trails greenway network, adjacent to Interstate 40, as shown on the submitted site plans. That in those areas where it is anticipated that the final location of the future greenway trail will be adjacent to land disturbance associated with the initial phase development of the Operations Center, clearing and grading for the anticipated greenway corridor is permitted.
8. Lighting of Internal Sidewalk: That the proposed boardwalk, between the employee parking area and administration building on the Transportation portion of the site, shall comply with Section 5.11 (Lighting Standards) of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The lighting plan details must specify how the plan intends to provide adequate lighting to ensure the safety of pedestrians and security of property.
9. Bicycle Parking: That the development shall comply with the Town’s Design Manual for bicycle parking design. Minimum number of bicycle parking spaces shall be provided as:
|
Minimum Number of Spaces |
57 |
|
Number of Class I Spaces |
29 |
|
Number of Class II Spaces |
28 |
10. Transportation Management Plan: That prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant prepare a Transportation Management Plan for approval by the Town Manager. The required components of the Transportation Management Plan shall include:
a) Provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;
b) Provisions for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;
c) Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;
d) Ridesharing incentives;
e) Public transit incentives; and
f) Other measures determined appropriate by the Town Manager.
11. Traffic Control on Millhouse Road: That the applicant establishes a policy that restricts Town owned vehicles from traveling on that portion of Millhouse Road, north of the proposed entrance into the Public Works portion of the site, with exceptions for emergency conditions. The policy shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
12. Bus Shelter, Bench and Pad: At such time that bus service is extended into the Public Works portion of the facility, the applicant shall install shelters with bench and pads at the two proposed bus stops, subject to Town Manager approval.
Stipulations Related to Landscaping and Architectural Issues
13. Required Buffers: That the following landscape buffer be provided; and if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation shall be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:
|
Location |
Required Buffers |
|
Interstate-40 |
100’ wide Type E (including Conceptual Buffer Section B-B) |
|
Millhouse Road |
50’ wide Type D (including Conceptual Buffer Section A-A) |
|
Three property lines adjacent to Nunn property |
Nunn north & east property lines 30’ wide Type C |
|
Nunn south property line 30’ to 50’ wide Type C |
|
|
Southern property line between Millhouse Road and I-40 |
50’ wide Type C
|
14. Installation of Solid Fence Along Neighboring 10.3 Acre Residential Parcel: That, except in the Resource Conservation District and near significant trees, the applicant shall install a solid fence long the north, east and south property line of the 10.3 acre parcel adjacent to the southern half of the proposed development site.
a. In those areas where the installation could negatively impact significant or notable stands of trees, the fence shall not be installed and instead may be located within the applicant’s landscape buffer area. Prior to installation, final location of the fence shall be field located and approved by the Town’s Urban Forester.
b. That the design of the fence shall included gaps between the bottom of the fence and ground level. The design of the fence shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
c. That if during future discussions with the owners of the 10.3 acre residential parcel, Town staff are informed that the property owner do not want sections of the fencing to be constructed, the applicant will eliminate these sections of fence.
15. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, indicating which rare and specimen trees shall be removed and preserved, as well as all significant tree stands, and including Town standard landscaping protection notes, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This plan shall also include rare and specimen trees and associated root zones within the land disturbance area associated with off-site utility infrastructure construction
16. Landscaping Plan: That a detailed landscape plan including a landscape maintenance plan, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The landscape plan shall indicate the size, type, and location of all proposed plantings.
17. Tree Protection Fencing: That tree protection fencing be installed along the limits of all land disturbance, including that associated with off-site utility infrastructure construction, and that the location of this fencing be shown on the Landscape Protection Plan, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
18. Parking Lot Screening: That all parking areas shall be screened from view in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The screening plans shall be approval by the Town Manager.
19. Building Elevations: That the Community Design Commission approve building elevations, including the location and screening of all HVAC/Air Handling Units, for this project, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
20. Lighting Plan: That the Community Design Commission approve a lighting plan for this project prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Stipulations Related to Environmental Issues
21. Land Disturbance in the Resource Conservation District: That land disturbance in the Resource Conservation District is authorized in accordance with Section 3.6.3 of the Land Use Management Ordinance.
22. Wetlands Location: That the applicant submits Final Plans which show the location of State or federally regulated wetlands on the site or in off-site locations associated with required infrastructure and roadway improvements. That any proposed disturbance of wetlands shall demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal regulations.
23. Impervious Surface Limits: That the site shall comply with Section 3.8 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. Impervious surface area is authorized at 870,875 square feet.