AGENDA #5a
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Report: Beechridge Development Special Use Permit – Request to Extend Completion Time Limit
DATE: October 11, 2000
The attached Resolution A would approve the request from Beechridge Development Company to extend the completion time limit for the Beechridge Development Special Use Permit. The subject property is located on Bayberry Drive near Azalea Drive in Morgan Creek Subdivision.
Resolution B would deny the request.
On September 11, 2000, the Council considered a request for an extension of the completion date for the Beechridge Development (a copy of the September 11 memorandum is attached). Several questions were raised at the September 11 meeting, and the Council deferred action to allow response to a citizen petition.
We continue to believe that the Council can make these three findings (please refer to attached September 11 Memorandum for discussion).
Also on September 11, the Council received and referred a petition from Thomas and Karen Traut who reside at 400 Bayberry Drive adjacent to the Beechridge development.
The concerns expressed by the Trauts are as follows:
PETITION CONCERN: Roadway shoulder areas and driveway entrances on Bayberry Drive were not properly repaired following utility installations by the Beechridge developer.
Staff Comment: We inspected the shoulder areas and driveways along Bayberry Drive. The shoulders and ditch lines have been shaped and seeded and were in good condition at the time of our inspection. The driveway entrance sections which were disturbed have been replaced with new concrete and are set to proper line and grade. No settlement is apparent at this time.
A small area near the Traut’s property has recently been disturbed for installation of an electrical power transformer. We have contacted the power company to ask that the disturbed area be promptly dressed out and reseeded.
PETITION CONCERN: A 25 mph speed limit sign along Bayberry Drive was removed at some point during construction and was not replaced.
Staff Comment: This neighborhood is not within the Town limits, and the roads are controlled by the State. We contacted the State Traffic Engineer who agreed to have this sign replaced as soon as possible.
The Beechridge development is being constructed near an existing residential area. We are aware of the potential for conflicts between the existing residents and contractors working on new construction in the area. Town inspectors will continue efforts to mitigate such conflicts and to assure that new construction is promptly and properly completed with the least possible disturbance of existing residents.
In discussing this matter with Mr. Traut, we understand that he is also concerned about the developer’s reluctance and/or failure to respond promptly and fairly to residents’ concerns which have been expressed to the developer as work has continued on the development.
We understand legal action occurred on the part of the Trauts to get some damages properly repaired, and Mr. Traut wants the developer to reimburse him for those legal costs. We believe that is a civil matter between the Trauts and the developer.
Another issue involves replacement of a damaged tree on the Traut’s property. We will attempt to work with the Beechridge developer to the extent possible to have this tree replaced to the satisfaction of the Trauts. However, we believe this is a private property issue to be settled by the Trauts and the developer.
We think that the Town can assist the neighbors by assuring that the Beechridge development is constructed in accordance with the approved plans and that the workmanship meets acceptable standards. According to our review of the project and inspection records, we think that the current Beechridge development and workmanship meets Town standards. We will continue to monitor the work as we normally do on development projects within the Town’s planning jurisdiction.
Article 18.6.3 of the Development Ordinance sets forth the requirements for the completion time limit of Special Use Permits:
If all construction and actions authorized or required by a Special Use Permit or Modification of Special Use Permit are not completed by the completion date stipulated in the Permit or Modification, the permit holder may request an extension of the completion time limit from the Town Manager. The Town Manager may grant a single extension of the time limit for up to twelve (12) months if he determines that: a) the permit holder submitted the request within sixty (60) days of the completion date; b) the permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and c) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Council reconsideration of the approved development.
If all of the construction and actions authorized or required by a Special Use Permit or Modification of Special Use Permit are still not completed by the extended completion date granted by the Town Manager, the permit holder may, within 60 days of the revised completion date, request additional extensions of the completion time limit from the Council. The Council may grant extensions of the time limit for periods of up to twelve (12) months if it makes determinations a) ‑ c) above.
As noted above, the Town Manager has granted one twelve-month extension. This request is before the Town Council.
In order to grant the extension request, the Council must determine that:
A) The permit holder has submitted the request within 60 days of the completion date;
B) The permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and
C) Conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Council reconsideration of the approved development.
Determination A: The permit holder has submitted the request within 60 days of the completion date. The request was filed August 22, 2000, which is within 60 days of June 24, 2000.
Determination B: Work on this development has been ongoing. The Phase III Zoning Compliance Permit was approved on August 1, 2000. We believe that the Council could make the finding that the applicant has proceeded with due diligence and good faith toward the completion of this project.
Determination C: The Special Use Permit was approved by the Council in 1996. At this point, evidence has been presented regarding changing conditions. We believe that the Council could make the finding that conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Council reconsideration of the approved development.
We believe that the Council can make the three necessary determinations and grant the extension.
Based on our observations and understanding of the issues, we believe that the Town does not have a legal basis to withhold extension of the Beechridge Special Use Permit.
Manager’s Recommendation: We recommend that the Council adopt Resolution A, approving the request for an extension of the completion date of the Beechridge Development.
Resolution B would deny the request.
1. September 11, 2000 Memorandum (Begin new page 1).
RESOLUTION A
(Manager’s Recommendation)
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE COMPLETION DATE FOR BEECHRIDGE DEVELOPMENT (2000-10-11/R-5a)
WHEREAS, Wood Partners has requested an extension of the completion time limit for Beechridge Development; and
WHEREAS, Article 18.6.3 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance requires Council to make the determination that a) the permit holder submits the request within 60 days of the completion time limit; b) the permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and c) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Council reconsideration of the approved development; and
WHEREAS, a) the permit holder submitted the request within 60 days of the completion date; b) the permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and c) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Council reconsideration of the approved development;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council approves the request of Beechridge Development Company for the extension of the completion date of the Beechridge Development to June 24, 2001.
This the 11th day of October, 2000.
RESOLUTION B
(Denying the Request)
A RESOLUTION DENYING A REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE COMPLETION DATE FOR BEECHRIDGE DEVELOPMENT (2000-10-11/R-5b)
WHEREAS, Beechridge Development Corporation has requested an extension of the completion time limit for Beechridge Development; and
WHEREAS, Article 18.6.3 of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance requires Council to make the determination that a) the permit holder submits the request within 60 days of the completion time limit; b) the permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and c) conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Council reconsideration of the approved development; and
WHEREAS, the permit holder has not proceeded with due diligence and good faith toward the completion of this project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council denies the request of Beechridge Development Company for the extension of the completion date of the Beechridge Development, and refers Beechridge Development Company to the Special Use Permit Modification process to reactivate the development proposal.
This the 11th day of October, 2000.