AGENDA #3

MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor and Town Council

From: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

Subject: Public Hearing: Holy Trinity Lutheran Church - Application for Special Use Permit (File Nos. 7.80.E.38 and 38A)

DATE: April 18, 2005

INTRODUCTION

We have received a request for approval of a Special Use Permit from the Holy Trinity Lutheran Church for a new 11,540 square foot sanctuary building and classrooms to be constructed at the location of the former Theta Chi Sorority House at 227 East Rosemary Street. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 6,108-square-foot Theta Chi Sorority House. The existing 30-space parking area is proposed to be reduced to 28 spaces. The 0.88-acre site is located on the north side of East Rosemary Street between Cottage Lane and Friendly Lane, across the street from the existing Holy Trinity Lutheran Church. The site is located in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district and the Franklin-Rosemary Historic District and is identified as Orange County Tax Map 80, Block E, Lots 38 and 38A.

The applicant is requesting modifications of regulations as a part of this application for 1) the proposed secondary building height; 2) one of the proposed building setbacks, and 3) one of the proposed landscape buffers. The Town Council has the ability to modify the regulations, according to Section 4.5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, where the Council makes a finding in the particular case that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree.

Tonight’s Public Hearing has been scheduled to receive evidence in support of and in opposition to approval of the application, and further to receive evidence which the Council may consider as the Council determines any appropriate requirements to include as conditions of approval.

This package of materials has been prepared for the Town Council’s consideration, and is organized as follows:

¨ Cover Memorandum: Introduces application, describes process for review, summarizes staff and advisory board comments, and offers recommendations for Council action.

¨ Summary of Changes: Describes recent revisions to the staff report provided to Advisory Boards.

¨ Staff Report: Offers a detailed description of the site and proposed development, and presents an evaluation of the application regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

¨ Attachments: Includes a checklist of requirements for this development, resolutions of approval and denial, advisory board comments, and the applicant’s materials.

PROCESS

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 against Town standards; we have presented a report to the Planning Board; and tonight we submit our report and preliminary recommendation to the Council.

The standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit application involves consideration of four findings (description of the findings follows below). Evidence will be presented tonight. If, after consideration of the evidence, 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.

BACKGROUND

Concept Plan reviews of this application were conducted by the Historic District Commission on May 13, 2004, and by the Town Council on July 14, 2004. See attached summary and minutes respectively.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 6,108-square-foot former Theta Chi Sorority House at 227 East Rosemary Street and construct a new 11,540 square-foot, 375 seat sanctuary building, and classrooms. Access to the proposed parking lot, at the rear of the site, is proposed from Cottage Lane and Friendly Lane. The applicant is proposing to reduce the existing 30 space parking lot to 28 spaces.

Proposed on-site improvements for pedestrian travel include a sidewalk on the Cottage Lane frontage of the building. The applicant is also proposing to provide six bicycle parking spaces.

A subsurface sand filter is being proposed for managing stormwater runoff on the site.

EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION

We have evaluated the application regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Town’s Land Use Management Ordinance. Based on our evaluation, our preliminary recommendation is that the application as submitted, complies with the regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and Design Manual with the conditions and modifications of regulations included in Resolution A.

Tonight the Council receives our attached evaluation, and also receives information submitted by the applicant and citizens. The applicant’s materials are included as attachments to this memorandum. All information that is submitted at the hearing will be placed into the record.

Based on the evidence that is submitted, the Council will consider whether or not it can make each of four required findings for the approval of a Special Use Permit.

The four findings are:

Special Use Permit – Required Findings of Fact

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;

Finding #2: That the use or development would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance;

Finding #3: That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, or that the use or development is a public necessity; and

Finding #4: That the use or development conforms to the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

Following the Public Hearing, we will prepare an evaluation of the evidence submitted in support of and in opposition to this application.

KEY ISSUES

We have identified one key issue associated with this development, discussed below.

Cottage Lane Improvements: The existing pavement width of Cottage Lane varies between 17 feet and 22 feet (with a 10-foot wide right-of-way), without a sidewalk, as shown on the applicant’s Existing Conditions Plan. Cottage Lane is classified as a local, two-way street. The recommended Town Standard lane width for a local street is 11 feet for each lane, for a total road width of 22 feet, plus a 5-foot wide sidewalk. Please refer to correspondence from neighbors regarding Cottage Lane (Attachment 19).

Comment: For this two-way street, we recommend a reduced, 10-foot wide lane for a total 20-foot width, plus a 5-foot wide turned-down sidewalk, without curbing. We believe that this reduced street width will be adequate to accommodate emergency vehicles and two-way vehicular traffic because Cottage Lane is a low vehicular volume, one-block-long street. Also, we believe that the provision of a 5-foot wide sidewalk will provide safe pedestrian access between the current church facility on East Rosemary Street and the parking lot at the rear of the proposed facility. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Given that Cottage Lane is one block long and has low vehicular volume, the Council may prefer a narrower cross-section. We offer alternative language for the stipulations pertaining to the width of Cottage Lane that include an 18-foot street width, a 4-foot wide sidewalk, and a 22-foot dedication of right-of-way, as follows:

Cottage Lane Improvements: That the applicant shall improve Cottage Lane to an 18-foot wide street, built to Town Standard, subject to approval by the Town Manager.

Cottage Lane Sidewalk Improvement: That the applicant shall construct a 4-foot wide turned-down sidewalk, without curb and gutter, on the west side of Cottage Lane adjacent to the new building, subject to Town Manager approval.

Cottage Lane Right-of-Way Dedication: That the applicant shall dedicate right-of-way to the Town, in addition to the existing 10-foot right-of-way, from the eastern edge of the 18-foot wide Cottage Lane pavement to the back edge of the 4-foot wide sidewalk on the west side of the street, to contain the entire 22-foot street and sidewalk width, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Staff Report Update: Several changes to Resolution A, comprising the Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation, are discussed in the Staff Report Update. This update is provided as clarification for any recommendations that have changed since the staff report was composed and reviewed by advisory boards. Please see Attachment 1 for additional detail.

PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF REGULATIONS

The applicant is requesting three modifications to regulations from two sections of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The Town Council has the ability to modify the regulations, according to Section 4.5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, as follows:

“Where actions, designs, or solutions proposed by the applicant are not literally in accord with applicable special use regulations, general regulations, or other regulations in this Chapter, but the Town Council makes a finding in the particular case that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree, the Town Council may make specific modification of the regulations in the particular case. Any modification of regulations shall be explicitly indicated in the Special Use Permit or Modification of Special Use Permit.”

1. Section 3.8.1 Height Regulations: Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance permits a secondary maximum building height of 60 feet in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district and an additional 15% height provision for steeples, or 69 feet total. The applicant is proposing a steeple height of 83 feet, and has stated that the additional height is necessary for proper scale and massing (see Summary of Specific Ordinance Modifications Requested, part of Attachment 14).

We believe that the applicant’s request to modify height regulations in Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance to allow a taller steeple is reasonable and that the additional height of the steeple would satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree for the following reasons: 1) the minimal massing of a steeple would not be incongruous with neighborhood architecture, and 2) the minimal massing of a steeple would not cast excessive shadows. Additionally, the Historic District Commission endorsed the proposed 83-foot steeple height during Concept Plan review and will further review elevations during Final Plan approval. We recommend approval of this modification and believe that the Council could make a finding that the modification would satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree.

2. Section 3.8.1 Setback Regulations: Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance requires street building setbacks of 20 feet in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district. The applicant is proposing a variable street setback on the eastern property line, on the Cottage Lane frontage, of 3-8 feet. The applicant states that the additional dedication of right-of-way on Cottage Lane makes the 20-foot building setback untenable (see Summary of Specific Ordinance Modifications Requested, part of Attachment 14).

We believe that the applicant’s request to modify height regulations in Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance to allow narrower street setbacks is reasonable and that the reduced setbacks on Cottage Lane would satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree for the following reasons: 1) the proposed church is required to have sprinklers, which will minimize fire safety concerns due to the building’s proximity to houses across Cottage Lane, and 2) the existing building does not meet setback requirements. We recommend approval of this modification and believe that the Council could make a finding that the modification would satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree.

3. Section 5.6 Landscape Buffer Regulations: Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance requires the following minimum landscape buffers in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district, as shown in the table below. The applicant is requesting a modification to regulations on all boundaries of the site. The applicant has stated that proposing buffer widths will be the same as existing buffers but that they will be augmented with additional plantings. They have also stated that the Historic District Commission may be able to approve alternative landscape buffers (see Summary of Specific Ordinance Modifications Requested, part of Attachment 14).

Landscape Buffers
Location	Ordinance Requirement (Min.)	Proposed Buffers
Southern Property Line (E. Rosemary St. frontage)	20 ft. Type ‘C’ External Buffer	20 ft. Type ‘C’ External Buffer (with encroachment of 45 square-foot brick landing)
Eastern Property Line (Cottage Lane frontage)	20 ft. Type ‘C’ External Buffer	Variable Width External Buffer (3-8 ft.)
Northern Property Line (rear of site)	20 ft. Type ‘C’ Internal Buffer	Variable Width Internal Buffer (7-20 ft.)
Western Property Line (towards Friendly Lane )	20 ft. Type ‘C’ Internal Buffer	Variable Width Internal Buffer (6-10 ft.)

We believe that the applicant’s request to modify the landscape buffer regulations in Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance for the Cottage Lane frontage, given the narrow dimensions of the front of the site, is reasonable. We believe that the applicant will only require a modification to regulations for the eastern (Cottage Lane frontage) landscape buffer whereas alternative buffers can be proposed on the other property lines. We recommend approval of this modification. We believe that the public purpose being satisfied with the proposed modification is the redevelopment of a property that has been vacant and in disrepair.

We believe that the applicant’s request to landscape buffer regulations in Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance to allow narrower landscape buffer widths is reasonable and that the reduced landscape buffers on Cottage Lane would satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree for the following reasons: 1) the proposed landscape buffers would be planted with more appropriate and dense landscaping for the site providing for more aesthetic separation of uses, and 2) the existing building does not meet landscaping requirements and is currently overgrown and is in poor condition. We recommend approval of this modification and believe that the Council could make a finding that the modification would satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree.

Alternatively, the Town Council could reasonably conclude that some or all of the proposed modifications to regulations would not satisfy public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree and could therefore deny the application or require compliance with the particular regulation(s).

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, our preliminary recommendation is that the Council could make the four findings necessary in order to approve the application. The Manager’s recommendation incorporates input from all Town departments involved in review of the application.

SUBSEQUENT REGULATORY STEPS

Following is a brief outline describing the next steps in the development review process, should the Council approve the Special Use Permit application for this site:

1. Applicant accepts and records a Special Use Permit, which incorporates the terms of the Council-adopted resolution.

2. Applicant submits detailed Final Plans and documentation, complying with Council stipulations. Information is reviewed by Town departments and the following agencies:

Orange Water and Sewer Authority,
Duke Power Company,
Public Service Company,
Time Warner, and
BellSouth.

3. Historic District Commission reviews and approves building elevations and site lighting.

4. Upon demonstration of compliance with remaining Council stipulations, Town staff issues a Zoning Compliance Permit authorizing site work. Permit includes conditions specific to the development and requires pre-construction conferences with Town staff.

5. Inspections Department issues Building Permits and Certificates of Occupancy.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations are summarized below. Please see summaries of board actions and recommendations in the attachments.

Planning Board Recommendation: On March 1, 2005, the Planning Board voted 9-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution B with conditions. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.

Resolution B includes the following stipulation:

· Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: That the applicant shall dedicate a maintenance and access easement to the Town, of adequate width to accommodate the additional street width required on Cottage Lane for a 20-foot wide street. This easement shall be approximately 13 feet wide and extend from the edge of existing right-of-way to the edge of the required sidewalk, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Comment: We recommend that Cottage Lane be 20 feet wide with and included in a 25-foot wide right-of-way, rather than a maintenance and access easement. We do not concur with this recommendation. For additional discussion please refer to Staff Report Update (Attachment 1).

Resolution A includes the following stipulations:

· Alternative Landscape Buffers: That the applicant shall provide alternative buffers on the southern, northern and western property lines. The applicant shall provide supplemental alternative buffer plantings on the southern property line, fencing (existing) on the northern property line, and additional fencing, a wall, or the like, on the western property line, if required by the Historic District Commission. Alternative landscape buffers shall be approved by the Historic District Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Comment: We concur with this recommendation. For additional discussion please refer to Staff Report Update (Attachment 1).

· Specimen Tree Protection: That the applicant shall protect the three specimen trees, the 25-inch Maple, 30-inch Maple, and 37-inch Willow Oak, from damage on the East Rosemary Street frontage, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Comment: We concur with this recommendation. For additional discussion please refer to Staff Report Update (Attachment 1).

· Fire Hydrant: That the proposed fire hydrant, near the parking lot at the rear of the site, shown on the Utility Plan, Sheet SD 5.0 (dated November 30, 2004), shall not be required as shown on plans.

Comment: We concur with this recommendation. For additional discussion please refer to Staff Report Update (Attachment 1).

Historic District Commission Recommendation: On March 10, 2005, the Historic District Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution C with conditions. Please see the attached Summary of Historic District Commission Action.

Resolution C includes the following stipulations:

The Historic District Commission recommended revising two stipulations, regarding the width of Cottage Lane, and made an additional recommendation, as follows:

· Cottage Lane Improvements: That the applicant shall improve Cottage Lane to a 15-foot wide street and a 5-foot wide turn-down sidewalk, designed to function as part of the street, to accommodate emergency vehicles, built to Town Standard, subject to approval by the Town Manger, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

· Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: That the applicant shall dedicate a maintenance and access easement to the Town, of adequate width to accommodate the additional street width required on Cottage Lane for a 15-foot wide street. This easement shall extend from the edge of existing right-of-way to the back edge of the required sidewalk, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Comment: We recommend that Cottage Lane be 20 feet wide with a 5-foot sidewalk. We do not concur with this recommendation. For additional discussion please refer to Staff Report Update (Attachment 1).

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Recommendation: On March 22, 2005, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board voted 7-1 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution C. Please see the attached Summary of Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Action.

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommended revising the same two stipulations as the Historic District Commission and the Transportation Board, regarding the width of Cottage Lane. Please see Resolution C and the Historic District Commission recommendations above.

Transportation Board Recommendation: On April 5, 2005, the Transportation Board voted 7-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution C. Please see the attached Summary of Transportation Board Action.

The Transportation Board recommended revising the same two stipulations as the Historic District Commission and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, regarding the width of Cottage Lane. Please see Resolution C and the Historic District Commission recommendations above.

Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation: Based on our evaluation of the application, our preliminary conclusion is that, with the stipulations in Resolution A, the application complies with the standards and regulations of the Land Use Management Ordinance, except for modifications to regulations requested by the applicant.

Following tonight’s Public Hearing, we will prepare an evaluation of the evidence submitted in support of and in opposition to this application. If the Council makes the required findings for approval of a Special Use Permit, we recommend that the application be approved with the adoption of Resolution A.

Resolution B would approve the application as recommended by the Planning Board.

Resolution C would approve the application as recommended by the Historic District Commission, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, and Transportation Board.

Resolution D would deny the application.

Holy Trinity Lutheran Church - Special Use Permit

Differences Among Resolutions

ISSUES	Resolution A (Approval) Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation	Resolution B (Approval) Planning Board Recommendation	Resolution C (Approval) 1) Historic District Commission, 2) Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Board, and 3) Transportation Board Recommendations
Provide 20-foot Cottage Lane Width and a 5-Foot Sidewalk a Total Width of 25-Foot Width	Yes	Yes	No, 15-Foot Wide Street and a 5-Foot Sidewalk a Total Width of 20 Feet
Dedicate Additional Right-Of-Way on Cottage Lane to Include Street and Sidewalk for Total Right-Of-Way of 25 feet	Yes	*	*
Record 2-Foot Maintenance and Access Easement at Back Edge of Proposed Cottage Lane Sidewalk	Yes	*	*
Delete Requirement for Off-Site Buffer Easement on Western Property Line	Yes, Based on New Information	Yes, Based on New Information	*
Delete Requirement to Relocate Existing Waterline on East Rosemary St. Frontage	Yes, Based on New Information	Yes, Based on New Information	*
Delete Requirement for Proposed Fire Hydrant at Rear of Site	Yes, Based on Reevaluation by Fire Marshall	Yes, Based on Reevaluation by Fire Marshall	*

*Issues not raised at Advisory Board meeting.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Staff Report Update, Cover Memo (p. 13)

2. Original Staff Report to Advisory Boards (p. 15).

3. Project Fact Sheet Requirements (p. 28).

4. Resolution A (Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation) (p. 29).

5. Resolution B (Planning Board Recommendation Approving the Application) (p. 37).

6. Resolution C (Historic District Commission, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board and Transportation Board Recommendations, Approving the Application) (p. 39).

7. Resolution D (Denying the Application) (p. 41).

8. Community Design Commission Concept Plan Summary (p. 42).

9. Meeting Minutes, Town Council Concept Plan Review (p. 43).

10. Planning Board Summary of Action (p. 44).

11. Historic District Commission Summary of Action (p.46).

12. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Summary of Action (p. 47).

13. Transportation Board Summary of Action (p. 48).

14. Statement of Justification (p. 49).

15. Project Fact Sheet (p. 52).

16. Traffic Impact Analysis Exemption (p. 54).

17. Area Map (p. 55).

18. Reduced Plans (p. 56).

19. Correspondence (p. 66).

ATTACHMENT 1

STAFF REPORT UPDATE

INTRODUCTION

This update is provided as a clarification for circumstances and/or recommendations that have changed since the Staff Report (Attachment 2) was composed and reviewed by advisory boards, with detailed discussion below. The changes are also noted in the respective sections of the original Staff Report to correspond to discussions in this update. We believe that the applicant is in agreement with each of the recommended changes, except where noted.

Transportation Issues

Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: The original staff report recommended a maintenance and access easement be dedicated to the Town, in-lieu of public right-of-way, on Cottage Lane for a 20-foot wide street and the 5-foot wide proposed sidewalk. The reason for the original recommendation was that the applicant was concerned about dedicating new public right-of-way as the dedication would reduce land area of the narrow lot and its potential impact on the: 1) space for setbacks, 2) space for landscape buffers, and 3) maximum floor area permitted on the site. We believe that these concerns can be managed as the applicant is requesting a modification to regulations for setbacks and landscape buffers on the Cottage Lane frontage and could do so for floor area as well if it is necessary.

Currently, approximately half of Cottage Lane is within the public right-of-way. We believe that the entire Cottage Lane street width and sidewalk should be dedicated to the Town as public right-of-way, as is Town practice for infrastructure improvements, rather than a maintenance and access easement. Therefore, the recommendation has changed. We recommend that the applicant dedicate right-of-way to the Town, in addition to the existing 10-foot right-of-way, from the eastern edge of the 20-foot wide Cottage Lane pavement to the back edge of the 5-foot wide sidewalk on the west side of the street, to include the entire 25-foot street and sidewalk width. Also, to facilitate Town maintenance but not including infrastructure, we recommend that the applicant record a two-foot wide maintenance and access easement extending from the back edge of the sidewalk on the west side of Cottage Lane. The applicant is considering this recommendation at this time and may not agree with it.

Resolution A, the Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation, includes these recommendations.

Landscaping and Architectural Issues

Buffers and Landscaping: The original staff report recommended that the applicant provide off-site landscape buffer easement on the neighboring property on the western property line to augment the inadequate landscape buffer area.

The Planning Board recommended removing language for an off-site buffer easement at the request of the adjacent property owner and recommended alternatively that the applicant provide an Alternative Buffer, to be approved by the Historic District Commission on this property line.

Resolution A, the Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation, includes this recommendation by the Planning Board.

Buffers and Landscaping: The original staff report recommended that the applicant relocate a waterline, that we believed was proposed, outside of the critical root zone of the 25-inch maple tree in front of the church on the East Rosemary Street frontage to improve the tree’s chances of survival. The applicant clarified that the waterline is existing at the Planning Board meeting.

The Planning Board agreed that it would not make sense to relocate the existing waterline and recommended revising the stipulation to remove such language.

Resolution A, the Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation, includes this recommendation by the Planning Board.

Utilities and Service Issues

Utility Plan, Sheet SD 5.0: The applicant originally proposed a fire hydrant at the rear of the proposed sanctuary, towards the northern corner of the lot. This proposed hydrant was not discussed in the original staff report.

The Fire Marshall reevaluated fire prevention measures in the proposed sanctuary as well as existing hydrants, and determined that the proposed hydrant was not necessary. This new information was presented by staff at the Planning Board meeting and the Board recommended that a stipulation be added to Resolution A, specifying that the hydrant shown on the plans at the rear of the proposed sanctuary is not required.

Resolution A, the Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation, includes this recommendation by the Planning Board.

ATTACHMENT 2

ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT TO ADVISORY BOARDS

Some of the circumstances and/or recommendations in the original Staff Report, reviewed by Advisory Boards, have changed. Please refer to the Staff Report Update (Attachment 1) for detailed discussion of changes to recommendations. The changes in this are noted in the respective sections of this Staff Report by a sidebar (I) in the margin.

Subject: Holy Trinity Lutheran Church - Application for Special Use Permit

(File Nos. 7.80.E.38 and 38A)

Date: March 1, 2005 (Planning Board)

March 10, 2005 (Historic District Commission)

March 15, 2005 (Transportation Board)

March 22, 2005 (Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board)

INTRODUCTION

We have received a request for approval of a Special Use Permit from the Holy Trinity Lutheran Church for a new 11,540 square foot sanctuary building and classrooms to be constructed at the location of the former Theta Chi Sorority House at 227 East Rosemary Street. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 6,108 square foot sorority house. The existing 30-space parking area is proposed to be reduced to 28 spaces. The 0.88-acre site is located on the north side of East Rosemary Street between Cottage Lane and Friendly Lane, across the street from the existing Holy Trinity Lutheran Church. The site is located in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district and the Franklin-Rosemary Historic District and is identified as Orange County Tax Map 80, Block E, Lots 38 and 38A.

The applicant is requesting modifications of regulations as a part of this application for the following items: 1) the proposed building height exceeds the maximum secondary height limits; 2) the proposed building setback on the eastern property line falls short of the required minimum setback; and 3) the proposed landscape buffer on the eastern property line falls short of the required minimum required landscape buffer. The Town Council has the ability to modify the regulations, according to Section 4.5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance, if a public purpose finding can be made.

BACKGROUND

June 13, 1966 The Chapel Hill Board of Alderman approved a Special Use Permit for the Theta Chi Sorority House.

1997 – 1999 The sorority house was vacant and the Special Use Permit expired.

November 3, 1999 The Planning Board approved conversion of the sorority house to the 7-unit Cottage Lane Apartments. The applicant did not obtain a Zoning Compliance Permit and accordingly did not develop the site as approved by the Planning Board.

May 13, 2004: A Concept Plan review of this application was conducted by the Historic District Commission (see attached summary).

June 14, 2004: A Concept Plan review of this application was conducted by the Town Council (see attached minutes).

July 20, 2004: A Special Use Permit application was submitted by the applicant.

EVALUATION

The Town staff has reviewed this application for compliance with the standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and the Design Manual and offers the following evaluation.

Existing Conditions

Location: The 0.88 acre site is located at 227 East Rosemary Street, across the street from the existing Holy Trinity Lutheran Church, on the north side of East Rosemary Street at the intersection of Cottage Lane.

Existing Structures: The site includes the vacant 6,108 square-foot former Theta Chi Sorority House.

Vehicular Access: Vehicular access to the site is from both the east and west sides via Cottage Lane and Friendly Lane respectively. Access to the rear parking lot is possible from both streets.

Parking: There is currently a 30-space parking lot on-site.

Pedestrian Circulation: There is an unimproved walkway, of Chapel Hill gravel, along the East Rosemary Street frontage and a concrete sidewalk on the south side of the street, opposite the site.

Bus Stops, Routes: East Rosemary Street is not served by a bus route, however East Franklin and Hillsborough Streets are served by several bus routes, both of which are a short walk from the site.

Topography, Drainage, Vegetative Cover: This site has average slopes of approximately 5 percent. The highest elevation is approximately 465 feet along East Rosemary Street and slopes towards the back of the site where the lowest point is approximately 448 feet.

Stormwater runoff occurs as sheet flow across the site and there are no existing stormwater management devices. The site does not lie within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year floodplain or inside the Watershed Protection District.

There are three specimen trees that have been identified near the northern property line; one 26-inch Maple on-site and two trees immediately off-site, a 20-inch Ash and 21-inch Hackberry.

Development Description

The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing 6,108 square-foot former sorority house, preceding the proposed construction of a new 11,540 square foot, 375 seat sanctuary and classroom building. WE understand that the existing church across East Rosemary Street will continue to be used as a sanctuary except for Sunday services.

Proposed on-site improvements for pedestrian travel include a sidewalk on the Cottage Lane frontage of the building. The applicant is not proposing to expand the parking lot beyond the existing 30 spaces. The applicant is also proposing to provide 6 bicycle parking spaces.

A subsurface sand filter is being proposed for managing stormwater runoff on the site.

Concept Plan / Special Use Permit Application Comparison

The plans for the Holy Trinity Church have changed in minor respects from Concept Plan review by the Historic District Commission (May 13, 2004), the Concept Plan Review by the Town Council (June 14, 2004) and the current Special Use Permit application. Some of those differences are noted in the table below:

Concept Plan / Special Use Permit - Comparison

	Type of Review
	Concept Plan Review: Historic District Commission May 13, 2004	Concept Plan Review: Town Council June 14, 2004	Special Use Permit Review: December 2004
Proposed Floor Area	11,999 s.f.	11,999 s.f.	11,540 s.f.
Existing Floor Area Proposed for Demo	6,108 s.f.	6,108 s.f.	6,108 s.f.
Proposed Impervious Surface	28,766 s.f.	28,766 s.f.	28,766 s.f.
Proposed Impervious Surface*	28,766 s.f. (25.7%)*	28,766 s.f. (25.7%)*	28,766 s.f. (25.7%)*
Proposed Parking Spaces (Existing)	30	30	28
Proposed Bicycle Parking Spaces	0	0	6

*28,766 square feet of impervious surface is 25.7% of the existing pervious area on the site (see Impervious Surface section below for more detail).

Ordinance Requirements

Zoning: The site is located in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district and is adjacent to the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district on a portion of three boundaries towards the front of the site on the east, the East Rosemary Street frontage and the west. The back third of the site is adjacent to the Residential-3 (R-3) zoning district on the east, north and west boundaries. Some of the permitted uses in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district include places of worship and residential duplex dwelling units as well as multi-family dwellings up to 7 units, for example.

Although a place of worship of this size does not require approval of a Special Use Permit, the applicant has chosen to request approval of a Special Use Permit along with several modifications of regulations.

Land Use Plan: The Comprehensive Plan adopted by the Council on May 8, 2000, identifies the front lot of this 2-lot assemblage as High-Density Residential (8-15 units/acre) and the rear lot as Low-Density Residential (1-4 units/acre).

Dimensional Standards: The proposed project meets some of the dimensional standards outlined in the Dimensional Matrix (Table 3.8-1) of the Land Use Management Ordinance for the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district. The applicant is requesting a modification to regulations for the maximum secondary height, the minimum building setback, and the minimum landscape buffer width. Please see Modification to Regulations section for additional detail.

Modifications to Regulations

Section 3.8.1 Height Regulations: Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance permits a secondary maximum building height of 60 feet in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district and an additional 15% height provision for steeples, or 69 feet total. The applicant is proposing a steeple height of 83 feet, and has stated that the additional height is necessary for proper scale and massing (see Attachment 14, Summary of Specific Ordinance Modifications Requested).

We believe that the applicant’s request to modify height regulations in Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance to allow a taller steeple is reasonable. The Historic District Commission endorsed the proposed 83-foot steeple height during Concept Plan review and will further review elevations during Final Plan approval. Based on the support of the Historic District Commission, we recommend approval of this modification. We believe that the public purpose being satisfied with the proposed modification is the redevelopment of a property that has been vacant and in disrepair.

Section 3.8.1 Setback Regulations: Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance requires street building setbacks of 20 feet in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district. The applicant is proposing a variable street setback on eastern property line, on the Cottage Lane frontage, of 8-13 feet. The applicant states that the expanded right-of-way width on Cottage Lane from 10 to 20 feet makes the 20-foot building setback untenable (see Attachment 14, Summary of Specific Ordinance Modifications Requested).

We believe that the applicant’s request to modify street setback regulations in Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance to allow a reduced building setback on Cottage Lane is reasonable, given the expansion of the right of way width as well as the typical street setbacks in this neighborhood. We recommend approval of this modification. We believe that the public purpose being satisfied with the proposed modification is the redevelopment of a property that has been vacant and in disrepair.

Section 5.6 Landscape Buffer Regulations: Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance requires that the following minimum landscape buffers in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district, as shown in the table below. The applicant is requesting a modification to regulations on all boundaries of the site. The applicant has stated that proposing buffer widths will be the same as existing buffers but that they will be augmented with additional plantings. They have also stated that the Historic District Commission may be able to approve alternative landscape buffers (see Attachment 14, Summary of Specific Ordinance Modifications Requested).

Landscape Buffers
Location	Ordinance Requirement (Min.)	Proposed Buffers
Southern Property Line (E. Rosemary St. frontage)	20 ft. Type ‘C’ External Buffer	20 ft. Type ‘C’ External Buffer (with encroachment of 45 square-foot brick landing)
Eastern Property Line (Cottage Lane frontage)	20 ft. Type ‘C’ External Buffer	Variable Width External Buffer (4-8 ft.)
Northern Property Line (rear of site)	20 ft. Type ‘C’ Internal Buffer	Variable Width Internal Buffer (7-20 ft.)
Western Property Line (towards Friendly Lane )	20 ft. Type ‘C’ Internal Buffer	Variable Width Internal Buffer (6-10 ft.)

Transportation Issues

Cottage Lane Improvements: The applicant has proposed to improve Cottage Lane to a 20-foot wide street. We recommend that the applicant construct Cottage Lane 20 feet wide to Town Standard, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Cottage Lane Sidewalk Improvement: The applicant has proposed to construct a 5-foot wide turned-down sidewalk, without curb and gutter, on the west side of Cottage Lane adjacent to the proposed Holy Trinity Sanctuary. We recommend that the applicant construct the 5-foot wide sidewalk on Cottage Lane to Town Standard, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: The applicant has proposed to dedicate a maintenance and access agreement to the Town, of adequate width to accommodate the additional street width required on Cottage Lane for a 20-foot wide street. We recommend that the applicant dedicate a maintenance and access agreement to the Town on Cottage Lane. This easement will be approximately 13 feet wide and extend from the edge of existing right-of-way to the edge of the required sidewalk. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A (This Recommendation Has Changed; Please Refer to Attachment 1, Staff Report Update).

East Rosemary Street Right of Way Dedication: That the applicant dedicate additional right-of-way on the East Rosemary Street frontage, if necessary, to extend to 1-foot back of sidewalk. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Vehicular Access: Changes to the existing vehicular circulation pattern for this site includes a restricted access easement across the parking lot, from Friendly Lane to Cottage Lane. The applicant is proposing to limit vehicular access to emergency vehicles only. We believe that the access easement should be for both emergency and service vehicles. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Vehicular Parking: The minimum required parking in the Residential-6 (R-6) zoning district for the proposed 375 seat Holy Trinity Church would normally be 94 parking spaces, or 1 space per four seats. However, the church is exempt from parking standards because it is located within 1,500 feet of a Town-Center (TC-1 or TC-2) zoning district. The church is proposing a total of 28 parking spaces, including 2 handicapped spaces. This proposal complies with the Land Use Management Ordinance minimum parking requirements.

Bicycle Parking: The applicant is proposing 6 bicycle parking spaces at the rear of the building. Institutional uses are not required to have bicycle parking by the Land Use Management Ordinance however, we recommend that the applicant provide 6 bicycle parking spaces and we have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Pedestrian Circulation: Proposed on-site improvements for pedestrian travel include construction of a 5-foot wide sidewalk on the east side of the proposed building along the Cottage Lane frontage. The applicant is also proposing a 5-foot wide brick sidewalk along the East Rosemary Street frontage. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Bus Stops and Routes: No improvements to the existing bus stop network are proposed or recommended with this application.

Transportation Management Plan: A Transportation Management Plan for this application is warranted. We recommend that the applicant provide a Transportation Management Plan to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit and have included a stipulation to that effect. According to Town guidelines, a comprehensive Transportation Management Plan should include:

· Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;

· Provisions for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;

· Provision for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;

· Ridesharing incentives;

· Public transit incentives; and

· Other measures subject to approval by the Town Manager.

A stipulation to this effect has been included in Resolution A.

Traffic Impact: This development proposal was exempted from the Traffic Impact Analysis requirement. The requirement to prepare a Traffic Impact Analysis may be waived by the Town Manager if all of the following conditions are met:

a) Daily trip generation is less than 500 (or, for a change to an existing property that does not requiring rezoning, difference in daily trip generation is less than 500);

b) No more than 250 vehicles per day (or, for a change to an existing property that does not requiring rezoning, no more than 250 vehicles per day) access an existing collector or local road;

c) The total traffic, including background traffic and additional traffic from proposed new site or redeveloped property does not exceed an average of 150 vehicles per day on any unpaved road;

d) The applicant submits a written request for a Traffic Impact Analysis waiver with appropriate supporting documentation including pedestrian/bicycle analysis, if applicable; and

e) The Town Manager concurs with the request.

This development proposal met all of the above required criteria for a Traffic Impact Analysis waiver.

Landscaping and Architectural Issues

Significant Tree Stands: No significant tree stands have been identified on this site.

Specimen Trees: The applicant has proposed to protect three specimen trees, including a 25-inch Maple, 30-inch Maple, and a 37-inch Willow-Oak, along the East Rosemary Street frontage. We agree and have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Additionally, there are a number of mixed hardwoods ranging from 11 inches to 26 inches in diameter both on-site and immediately off-site near the northern property line. We recommend that these trees be protected, as much as is practicable, as they will serve as good shade trees for the parking area. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Buffers and Landscaping: The table below outlines the minimum landscape buffers requirements for the site and the buffers proposed by the applicant.

Landscape Buffers
Location	Ordinance Requirement (Min.)	Proposed Buffers
Southern Property Line (E. Rosemary St. frontage)	20 ’ Type ‘C’ External Buffer	20 ft. Type ‘C’ External Buffer (with encroachment of 45 square-foot brick landing)
Eastern Property Line (Cottage Lane frontage)	20’ Type ‘C’ External Buffer	Variable Width External Buffer (3-8 ft.)
Northern Property Line (rear of site)	20’ Type ‘C’ Internal Buffer	Variable Width Internal Buffer (7-20 ft.)
Western Property Line (towards Friendly Lane )	20’ Type ‘C’ External Buffer	Variable Width Internal Buffer (6-10 ft.)

We believe that the applicant’s request to modify the landscape buffer regulations in Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance to allow reduced buffer width on the Cottage Lane frontage reasonable, given the narrow dimensions of the front of the site. We believe that the applicant will only require a modification to regulations on the eastern (Cottage Lane frontage) landscape buffer. We recommend approval of this modification with the planting strip proposed along Cottage Lane.

We believe that the proposed southern (East Rosemary Street frontage), northern (rear), and western (towards Friendly Lane) landscape buffers, are appropriate as alternative landscape buffers rather than a modification to remove the buffer requirement. With an alternative buffer, the same degree of screening is provided with final approval of the details of the alternative buffers by the Historic District Commission. The following conditions at these boundaries lend themselves to the alternative buffer approach:

· Near the entrance to the church, a 45 square-foot brick landing encroaches into the landscape buffer on the southern frontage. We recommend that the applicant provide an alternative buffer, with additional plantings on the southern frontage, to compensate for the brick encroachment.

· There is an existing fence on the northern property line that the applicant is proposing to retain, which we recommend function as an alternative buffer.

· The applicant has proposed a fence on a portion of the western property line, which we do not believe is adequate for an alternative buffer. We recommend that the proposed western landscape buffer be augmented with additional fencing, a wall or an off-site buffer easement on the neighboring properties. We have included stipulations to this effect in Resolution A (This Recommendation Has Changed; Please Refer to Attachment 1, Staff Report Update).

We recommend that a detailed Landscape Protection Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This plan must include a detail of protective fencing and construction parking and materials staging/storage areas. This plan must also show all critical root zones of rare and specimen trees affected by proposed construction indicate which labeled trees are proposed for removal, and where tree protection fencing will be installed. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

We recommend that detailed landscape plans (including buffers), landscape maintenance plans, and parking lot shading requirements 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. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

We recommend that all parking areas shall be screened from view in accordance with the provisions of Article 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The screening plans shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

We also recommend that the applicant comply with Town parking landscaping standards in Section 5.9.6(d) of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The shading plan shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

The proposed construction is likely to fatally damage the two large pecan trees on the adjacent lot to the west. We recommend that the applicant negotiate an agreement with the affected neighbors to remove and replace these trees with a suitable alternative to be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

The applicant is proposing a waterline that would run from East Rosemary Street to the church, through the critical root zone of the existing 25-inch maple tree in front of the church. We recommend that the applicant relocate the waterline outside of the critical root zone of the maple tree to improve its chances of survival, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A (This Recommendation Has Changed; Please Refer to Attachment 1, Staff Report Update).

Building Elevations and Lighting Plan: We recommend that detailed building elevations and a lighting plan be approved by the Historic District Commission prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Environmental Issues

Watershed Protection District: The site is not located inside the Watershed Protection District.

Impervious Surface: The Land Use Management Ordinance allows applicants to deduct impervious surface area that existed on a development site as of January 27, 2003 from the proposed impervious surface to calculate the post-development percentage of impervious surface on a site. The post-development impervious surface is calculated by subtracting the existing impervious surface from the proposed impervious surface and divided that figure by the existing pervious surface on the site, as illustrated in the table below:

Existing and Proposed Impervious Surface Data
	Gross Land Area	Existing Impervious Surface	Existing Pervious Surface	Proposed Impervious Surface	Proposed minus Existing Impervious Surface
Area (Square Feet)	42,423 s.f.	24,041 s.f.	18,382 s.f.	28,766 s.f.	4,725 s.f.
Percentage of Gross Land Area	100%	56.7%	43.3%	67.8%	11.1%
Percentage of Existing Pervious Land Area	NA	NA	NA	NA	25.7%

Section 3.6.4-1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance requires proposed development to comply with either a low density option (24% impervious surface limit) or a high density option (50% impervious surface limit). The applicant is proposing 25.7% impervious surface for the site, which exceeds the 24% the low density impervious surface option and therefore must comply with the high density option. The applicant is required to control the first inch of rainfall runoff in according to provisions in Section 3.6.4(g) of the Land Use Management Ordinance. We have included stipulations in Resolution A to this effect.

Floodplain: The 1983 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Floodplain Map does not identify this site as being in the 100-year floodplain.

Resource Conservation District: It appears that there is no Resource Conservation District on the site as associated with the presence of intermittent streams, perennial streams, or as related to an elevation of 3 feet above the 100-year floodplain. However, we recommend that the applicant provide a stream determination from the Town Engineering Department and verification from a registered land surveyor that there is no Resource Conservation District on this site as part of the submittal of final plans. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Stormwater Management: The applicant is proposing to manage stormwater associated with the proposed development by constructing a subsurface sand filter and two stormwater storage units in the northwest corner of the site. The proposed stormwater management facilities are identified on Sheet SD 3.0 of the plans. We believe, based on the preliminary information submitted by the applicant, that the proposed stormwater management facility design will comply with the Land Use Management Plan stormwater standards for rate, quality and volume.

We recommend that, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant submit a Stormwater Management Plan for review and approval by the Town Manager. We recommend that the plan include low-impact stormwater management solutions and best management practices, including but not limited to bio-retention, pervious pavements, underground storage, infiltration trenches, vegetative swales and similar techniques. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

The Stormwater Management Plan shall be based on the 1-year, 2-year, and 25-year frequency, 24-hour duration storms, where the post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate and the post-development stormwater runoff volume shall not exceed the pre-development volume for the local 2-year frequency, 24-hour duration storm event. Engineered stormwater facilities shall also remove 85% total suspended solids and treat the first inch of precipitation utilizing NC Division of Water Quality design standards.

Erosion Control: The regulations require that a soil erosion and sedimentation control plan (including provisions for maintenance of facilities and modification of the plan if necessary), be approved by the County Erosion Control Officer, and that a copy of the approval be provided to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. If more than one acre of land is disturbed, then a performance guarantee, in accordance with Section 5-97.1 Bonds of the Town Code of Ordinances, shall be required prior to final authorization to begin land-disturbing activities. We have included stipulations to this effect in Resolution A.

Utilities and Service Issues

Refuse Management: The Ordinance requires that a Solid Waste Management Plan, including provisions for recycling and for the management and minimizing of construction debris, and demolition waste be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

We recommend that final plans include dimensioned details as well as appropriate signage and lighting for the refuse area, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. These standard stipulations are included in Resolution A.

The applicant has proposed refuse facilities to be shared among 1) the proposed Holy Trinity Church, 2) the existing Church and 3) adjacent Beta Phi Sorority. We recommend that the applicant provide a shared refuse and recycling agreement among the three properties, allowing refuse collection services to be shared across property lines, be approved by the Town and recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

We recommend that heavy-duty pavement be provided within the required emergency and service vehicle access easement, and pathway to refuse container(s), subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

We recommend that the following note be included on the final plans regarding drive-aisles and service vehicles: “The Town of Chapel Hill, its’ assigns or the County, shall not be responsible for any pavement damage, to existing or proposed area that may result from service vehicles.”

We also recommend that final plans confirm that no overhead obstruction or utility wires will interfere with service vehicle access or operation.

Utilities: The Ordinance requires that detailed utility plans be reviewed and approved by OWASA, Duke Power Company, Public Service Company, BellSouth, Time Warner Cable and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. Except for three phase power lines, the Ordinance requires that all new or relocated utility lines be located underground. We have included these standard stipulations in Resolution A.

Fire Safety: The proposal provides a 20-foot wide unobstructed fire apparatus access. We have included our standard stipulation requiring that a fire flow report sealed by a professional engineer, be submitted for review and approval by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, for all proposed fire hydrants. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Miscellaneous Issues

Recombination Plat: We recommend that the applicant provide a recordable recombination plat to the Town for approval for the purpose of recombining the 2 subject parcels of the development assemblage (7.80.E.38 and 7.80.E.38A) into one parcel. The applicant must provide a copy of the recorded recombination plat to the Town prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Traffic and Pedestrian Control Plan: We recommend that a Traffic Management Plan for movement of motorized and non-motorized vehicles on any public streets (maintained and operated by the Town or the NCDOT) that will be disrupted during construction, including detour information and a Pedestrian Management Plan indicating how pedestrian movements on or adjacent to public rights-of-way will be safely maintained be reviewed and approve by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Special Use Permit Findings

For approval of a Special Use Permit, the Council must make the following findings, as set forth in Article 4.5.2 of the Land Use Management Ordinance:

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;

2. That the use or development complies with all required regulations and standards of this Chapter, including all applicable provisions of the Land Use Management Ordinance;

3. That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, or that the use or development is a public necessity; and

4. That the use or development conforms with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

Upon review of the application and information that has been submitted to date, our preliminary recommendation is that these findings can be made.

CONCLUSION

Based on information available at this stage of the application review process, we believe that the proposal, with the conditions in Resolution A, meets the requirements of the applicable sections of the Land Use Management Ordinance and Design Manual, and that the proposal conforms with the Comprehensive Plan.

Resolution A would approve the application with conditions. Resolution B would deny the application.

ATTACHMENT 3

Project Fact Sheet Requirements

Check List of Regulations and Standards

Special Use Permit Application

Holy Trinity Lutheran Church	Compliance	Non-Compliance
Use Permitted	Ö
Min. Gross Land Area	Ö
Min. Lot Size	Ö
Min. Lot Width	Ö
Max. Floor Area	Ö
Impervious Surface Limits	Ö High Density Option with Structural Stormwater Controls
Treatment of Stormwater Quality, Volume, and Rate	Ö
Min. Recreation Area/Space	NA
Min. # Vehicular Parking Spaces	Exempt
Min. # Bicycle Parking Spaces	Exempt
Max. # Dwelling Units	NA
Min. Street Setback	Ö With Modification to Regulations
Min. Interior Setback	Ö
Min. Solar Setback	Ö
Max. Height Limit	Ö With Modification to Regulations
Min. Landscape Buffers	Ö With Modification to Regulations and Alternative Buffers
Steep Slopes	Ö
Resource Conservation District	Require Additional Information
Watershed Protection District	NA
Adequate Public Schools Facilities	NA
Section 6.18 (Planned Developments)	NA

NA = Not Applicable Prepared: February 23, 2005

ATTACHMENT 4

RESOLUTION A

(Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE HOLY TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by Dan Jewell of Coulter Jewell Thames for the Holy Trinity Lutheran Church on property identified as Orange County Tax Map 80, Block E, Lots 38 and 38A (PIN nos. 9788-48-5503 and 9788-48-6443) if developed according to the site plans dated July 20, 2004, revised November 30, 2004, and the conditions listed below:

1. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

2. Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance;

3. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and

4. Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Town Council of Chapel Hill that it finds, in this particular case, that the following modification satisfies public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:

Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance maximum secondary height requirements, to allow a maximum building height of 83 feet;

Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance minimum street setback requirements, to allow minimum a variable width street setback of 8’-13’ on the eastern property line; and

Modification of Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance landscape buffer requirements, to allow a variable width landscape buffer of 4’-8’ on the Cottage Lane frontage.

Said public purposes, to an equivalent or greater degree, being, 1) the expansion of an established place of worship and 2) the improvement of an abandoned property that has fallen into disrepair, in the Franklin-Rosemary Historic District.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for Holy Trinity Lutheran Church in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:

Stipulations Specific to the Development

1. That construction begin (two years from approval date) and be completed by (three years from approval date).

2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit authorizes a place of worship, with associated classrooms, and land use intensity requirements and dimensional standards as specified below:

Land Use Intensity
Net Land Area	38,566 s.f.
Total # of Buildings	1
Maximum Floor Area	11,540 s.f.
Maximum Impervious Surface Area	28,766 s.f.
Maximum # of Parking Spaces Proposed	28
Minimum # of Bicycle Spaces	6

Stipulations Related to Transportation Issues

3. Encroachment Permit: The applicant obtain Town approval and record an emergency and service vehicle cross-access easement, across the parking lot at the rear of the site, connecting Friendly and Cottage Lanes, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

4. Cottage Lane Improvements: That the applicant shall improve Cottage Lane to a 20-foot wide street, built to Town Standard, subject to approval by the Town Manger, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

5. Cottage Lane Sidewalk Improvement: That the applicant shall construct a 5-foot wide turned-down sidewalk, without curb and gutter, on the west side of Cottage Lane adjacent to the new building, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

6. Cottage Lane Right-of-Way Dedication: That the applicant shall dedicate right-of-way to the Town, in addition to the existing 10-foot right-of-way, from the eastern edge of the 20-foot wide Cottage Lane pavement to the back edge of the 5-foot wide sidewalk on the west side of the street, to include the entire 25-foot street and sidewalk width, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

7. Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: That the applicant shall record an easement plat with the Orange County Register of Deeds indicating a 2-foot wide maintenance and access easement from the back edge of the sidewalk on the west side of Cottage Lane, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

8. East Rosemary Street Sidewalk: That the applicant shall construct a 5-foot wide brick sidewalk, built to Town standard, across the East Rosemary Street frontage, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

9. East Rosemary Street Right of Way Dedication: That the applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way on the East Rosemary Street frontage, if necessary, to extend to 1-foot back of the required sidewalk on the East Rosemary Street frontage.

10. Bicycle Parking: That the applicant shall provide six (6) bicycle parking spaces, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

11. Parking Lot Standards: That all parking lots, drive aisles and parking spaces shall be constructed to Town standards.

12. Transportation Management Plan: That the applicant shall prepare and obtain Town Manager approval of a Transportation Management Plan prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The required components of the Transportation Management Plan shall include:

a. Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;

b. Provisions for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;

c. Provision for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;

d. Ridesharing incentives;

e. Public transit incentives; and

f. Other measures subject to approval by the Town Manager.

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 will be protected by fencing from adjacent construction:

Required Landscape Buffers

Location	Required Buffers
Southern Property Line (E. Rosemary St. frontage)	20 ft. Type ‘C’ Alternative Buffer, may include supplemental plantings if required by the Historic District Commission
Eastern Property Line (Cottage Lane frontage)	Variable Width Buffer (3-8 ft.) with Modification to Regulations
Northern Property Line (rear of site)	Variable Width Alternative Buffer (7-20 ft.) with additional fencing or the like, if required by the Historic District Commission
Western Property Line (towards Friendly Lane )	Variable Width Alternative Buffer (6-10 ft.) with additional fencing, a wall, or the like, if required by the Historic District Commission

14. Alternative Landscape Buffers: That the applicant shall provide alternative buffers on the southern, northern and western property lines. The applicant shall provide supplemental alternative buffer plantings on the southern property line, fencing (existing) on the northern property line, and additional fencing, a wall, or the like, on the western property line, if required by the Historic District Commission. Alternative landscape buffers shall be approved by the Historic District Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

15. Pecan Tree Replacement: That the applicant shall negotiate an agreement with the neighbors to the west of the proposed development and remove the 18 and 20-inch pecan trees and replace them with a suitable alternative, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

16. Specimen Tree Protection: That the applicant shall protect the three specimen trees, the 25-inch Maple, 30-inch Maple, and 37-inch Willow Oak, from damage on the East Rosemary Street frontage, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

17. Mixed Hardwoods Protection: That the applicant take appropriate measures to preserve the mixed hardwoods ranging from 11 inches to 26 inches in diameter both on-site and immediately off-site near the northern property line, where practicable.

18. Parking Lot Screening Plan: That the parking lot screening plans shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

19. Landscape Protection Plan: That a detailed Landscape Protection Plan, clearly indicating which rare and specimen trees shall be removed and preserved, critical root zones of all rare and specimen trees, significant tree stands, detail of protective fencing and construction parking and materials staging/storage areas, and including Town standard landscaping protection notes, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

20. Landscape Plan and Landscape Maintenance Plan: That a detailed Landscape Plan including a Landscape Maintenance Plan, shall 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 as well as the limits of land disturbance and tree protection fencing.

21. Parking Lot Landscape Screening: That all parking areas shall be screened from view in accordance with the provisions of Article 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The landscape screening plans shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

22. Shading Plan: That prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, a Shading Plan must be submitted and approved by the Town Manager demonstrating compliance with Town regulations.

23. Building Elevations: That the Historic District Commission approve building elevations, lighting, including the location and screening of all HVAC/Air Handling Units for this project, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

24. Lighting Plan: That the Community Design Commission approve a lighting plan for this project prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The Community Design Commission shall take additional care during review to ensure that the proposed lighting plan will minimize 1) upward light pollution and 2) offsite spillage of light.

Stipulations Related to Environmental Issues

25. Resource Conservation District Verification: That the applicant provide 1) a stream determination from the Town Engineering Department and 2) verification from a registered land surveyor that there is no significant Resource Conservation District as part of the final plan submittal.

26. Stormwater Management Plan: That prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit the applicant shall submit a Stormwater Management Plan for review and approval by the Town Manager. The plan shall include low-impact stormwater management solutions and best management practices, such as but not limited to bio-retention, pervious pavements, underground storage, infiltration trenches, vegetative swales and similar techniques.

The plan shall be based on the 1-year, 2-year, and 25-year frequency, 24-hour duration storms, where the post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate and the post-development stormwater runoff volume shall not exceed the pre-development volume for the local 2-year frequency, 24-hour duration storm event. Engineered stormwater facilities shall also remove 85% total suspended solids and treat the first inch of precipitation utilizing NC Division of Water Quality design standards.

27. Storm Drainageway Easement: That all stormwater management improvements, outside public right-of-way, shall be located inside reserved storm drainageway easements, per Town guidelines, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

28. Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan: That the applicant shall provide a Stormwater Operations and Maintenance Plan for all engineered stormwater facilities. We recommend that the plan include the owner's financial responsibility and include the maintenance schedule of the facilities to ensure that it continues to function as originally intended and shall be approved by the Town Manager, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

29. State or Federal Approvals: That any required State or Federal permits or encroachment agreements must be approved by the appropriate agencies and copies of the approved permits be submitted to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

30. Erosion Control: That a detailed soil erosion and sedimentation control plan, including provision for monitoring and maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be approved by the County Erosion Control Officer and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. That a performance guarantee shall be provided, if more than one acre of land is disturbed, in accordance with Section 5-97.1 of the Town Code of Ordinances prior to issuance of any permit to begin land-disturbing activity.

31. Silt Control: That the applicant takes appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

Stipulations Related to Utility and Service Issues

32. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a Solid Waste Management Plan, including provisions for recycling, and for managing and minimizing construction debris, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

33. Solid Waste Details: That final plans include dimensioned details as well as appropriate signage and lighting for the refuse area, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

34. Shared Refuse and Recycling Agreement: That the applicant shall provide a refuse and recycling agreement shared among the 1) proposed Holy Trinity Church, 2) existing Church and 3) adjacent Beta Phi Sorority properties, allowing refuse collection services to be shared across property lines, to be approved by the Town Manager and recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The facilities shall be located off-site, across East Rosemary Street, on the boundary of the existing Holy Trinity Church and the adjacent Beta Phi Sorority, to be approved by the Town Manager.

35. Heavy Duty Pavement: That the applicant shall provide heavy-duty pavement in the required emergency and service vehicle access easement, and the pathway to refuse container(s), subject to Town Manager approval.

36. Pavement Damage: That final plans include the following note, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, “The Town of Chapel Hill, its’ assigns or the County shall not be responsible for any pavement damage that may result from service vehicles.”

37. Overhead Obstruction/Utility Lines: That the final plans included details verifying that no overhead obstruction or utility wires will interfere with service vehicle access or operation.

38. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final Utility/Lighting Plan be approved by Duke Power Company, Orange Water and Sewer Authority, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

39. Utility Line Placement: That all new utility lines shall be placed underground. The applicant shall indicate proposed off-site utility line routing and upgrades required to service the site on Final Plans, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

40. Fire Flow: That a fire flow report for all new construction, shall be prepared and sealed by a registered professional engineer, which demonstrates that flows meet the minimum requirements of the Town Design Manual, to be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

41. Fire Hydrant: That the proposed fire hydrant, near the parking lot at the rear of the site, shown on the Utility Plan, Sheet SD 5.0 (dated November 30, 2004), shall not be required as shown on plans.

Stipulations Related to Miscellaneous Issues

42. Recorded Recombination Plat: That the applicant shall provide a recordable recombination plat to the Town Manager for approval for the purpose of recombining the 2 subject parcels of the development assemblage (7.80.E.38 and 7.80.E.38A) into one parcel. The applicant shall provide a copy of the recorded recombination plat to the Town prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

43. Construction Management Plan: That a Construction Management Plan, indicating how construction vehicle traffic will be managed, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

44. Traffic and Pedestrian Control Plan: That a Traffic Management Plan for movement of motorized and non-motorized vehicles on any public street that will be disrupted during construction, including detour information and a pedestrian management plan indicating how pedestrian movements will be safely maintained shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

45. Open Burning: That the open burning of trees, limbs, stumps and construction debris association with this development is prohibited.

46. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), and landscape plans and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to the plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and the design standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and the Design Manual.

47. As-Built Plans: That as-built plans in DXF binary format using State plane coordinates, shall be provided for street improvements and all other existing or proposed impervious surfaces prior to issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy.

48. Certificates of Occupancy: That no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued until all required public improvements are completed; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

49. That if the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase, and if applicable a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plan and/or plat.

50. Construction Sign: That the applicant shall post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative and telephone number, the contractor’s representative and telephone number, and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Building Permit, prior to the commencement of any land disturbing activities. The construction sign may have a maximum of 16 square feet of display area and may not exceed 6 feet in height. The sign shall be non-illuminated, and shall consist of light letters on a dark background.

51. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

52. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the application for the Special Use Permit application for Holy Trinity Lutheran Church in accordance with the plans and conditions listed above.

This is the day of , 2005.

ATTACHMENT 5

RESOLUTION B

(Planning Board Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE HOLY TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by Dan Jewell of Coulter Jewell Thames for the Holy Trinity Lutheran Church on property identified as Orange County Tax Map 80, Block E, Lots 38 and 38A (PIN nos. 9788-48-5503 and 9788-48-6443) if developed according to the site plans dated July 20, 2004, revised November 30, 2004, and the conditions listed below:

1. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

2. Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance;

3. Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and

4. Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Town Council of Chapel Hill that it finds, in this particular case, that the following modification satisfies public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:

Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance maximum secondary height requirements, to allow a maximum building height of 83 feet;

Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance minimum street setback requirements, to allow minimum a variable width street setback of 8’-13’ on the eastern property line; and

Modification of Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance landscape buffer requirements, to allow a variable width landscape buffer of 4’-8’ on the Cottage Lane frontage.

1. Resolution A: That all of the stipulations in Resolution A shall apply to the proposed development unless modified or superseded by those stipulations below.

2. Revised Stipulations: That the following stipulations shall be revised:

Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: That the applicant shall dedicate a maintenance and access easement to the Town, of adequate width to accommodate the additional street width required on Cottage Lane for a 20-foot wide street. This easement shall be approximately 13 feet wide and extend from the edge of existing right-of-way to the edge of the required sidewalk, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

· Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: That the applicant shall record an easement plant with the Orange County Register of Deeds indicating a 2-foot wide maintenance and access easement from the back edge of the sidewalk on the west side of Cottage Lane, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

3. Deleted Stipulations: That the following stipulations shall be deleted:

Cottage Lane Right-of-Way Dedication: That the applicant shall dedicate right-of-way to the Town, in addition to the existing 10-foot right-of-way, from the eastern edge of the 20-foot wide Cottage Lane pavement to the back edge of the 5-foot wide sidewalk on the west side of the street, to include the entire 25-foot street and sidewalk width, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

That the following stipulations shall be revised:

This is the day of , 2005

.
ATTACHMENT 6

RESOLUTION C

(Historic District Commission Recommendation, Bicycle and Pedestrian

Advisory Board, and Transportation Board Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE HOLY TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH

Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance;

Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and

Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Town Council of Chapel Hill that it finds, in this particular case, that the following modification satisfies public purposes to an equivalent or greater degree:

Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance maximum secondary height requirements, to allow a maximum building height of 83 feet;

Modification of Section 3.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance minimum street setback requirements, to allow minimum a variable width street setback of 8’-13’ on the eastern property line; and

Modification of Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance landscape buffer requirements, to allow a variable width landscape buffer of 4’-8’ on the Cottage Lane frontage.

1. Resolution A: That all of the stipulations in Resolution A shall apply to the proposed development unless modified or superseded by those stipulations below.

2. Revised Stipulations: That the following stipulations shall be revised:

Cottage Lane Improvements: That the applicant shall improve Cottage Lane to a 20-foot wide street, built to Town Standard, subject to approval by the Town Manger, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

· Cottage Lane Improvements: That the applicant shall improve Cottage Lane to a 15-foot wide street, built to Town Standard, subject to approval by the Town Manger, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: That the applicant shall record an easement plat with the Orange County Register of Deeds indicating a 2-foot wide maintenance and access easement from the back edge of the sidewalk on the west side of Cottage Lane, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

· Cottage Lane Maintenance and Access Easement: That the applicant shall dedicate a maintenance and access easement to the Town, of adequate width to accommodate the additional street width required on Cottage Lane for a 15-foot wide street. This easement shall be approximately 13 feet wide and extend from the edge of existing right-of-way to the edge of the required sidewalk, subject to Town Manger approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

3. Deleted Stipulations: That the following stipulations shall be deleted:

Cottage Lane Right-of-Way Dedication: That the applicant shall dedicate right-of-way to the Town, in addition to the existing 10-foot right-of-way, from the eastern edge of the 20-foot wide Cottage Lane pavement to the back edge of the 5-foot wide sidewalk on the west side of the street, to include the entire 25-foot street and sidewalk width, subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

This is the day of , 2005.

ATTACHMENT 7

RESOLUTION D

(Denying the Special Use Permit Application)

A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE HOLY TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH

1. Would not be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

2. Would not comply with all required regulations and standards of Land Use Management Ordinance;

3. Would not be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and

4. Would not conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby denies the application for a Special Use Permit for Holy Trinity Lutheran Church in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:

(INSERT ADDITIONAL REASONS FOR DENIAL)

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby denies the application for Holy Trinity Lutheran Church as proposed by Dan Jewell of Coulter Jewell Thames for Holy Trinity Lutheran Church.

This is the______day of__________________, 2005.