PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN
COUNCIL
MONDAY, MAY 15, 1995 AT 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Broun called
the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council Members in attendance were Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark
Chilton, Pat Evans, Lee Pavão, Jim Protzman, and Rosemary Waldorf. Council Member Barbara Powell was absent
excused. Also in attendance were Town
Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine
Miller, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Assistant to the Manager Greg Feller,
Planning Director Roger Waldon, and Planning Design Coordinator Dave Roesler.
Mr. Horton presented
a brief description of a beating of a UNC student on North Street this past
Friday evening. He stated that the
beating was apparently administered by "skin heads", was apparently
unprovoked and resulted in serious injuries to the student. Mr. Horton stated that all necessary
resources would be used to solve this crime.
Mr. Horton also stated that the student had graduated from the University
this weekend with highest honors and had received a scholarship to Vanderbilt
School of Law. Mayor Broun stated that
he had visited the student in the hospital and was encouraged that his
prognosis for recovery was good.
Item #1 Hearing on Proposed Amendment to
Comprehensive Plan for
East Entranceway (N.C. 54) Corridor
Persons wishing to
testify in the matter were sworn.
Planning Director
Roger Waldon stated that this evening's hearing had been scheduled to receive
public comments on the proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan concerning
the NC 54 East Entranceway corridor into the Town. He stated that the Council had established the East Entranceway
Group to draft a planning document for the NC 54 corridor. Mr. Waldon noted that the Council had held a
public hearing on April 26th to receive citizen comment on the draft plan.
He also noted that
the Council had discussed the report's recommendations on May 8th and
recommended three substantive changes:
(1) deletion of references to specific details such as particular
streets and acreage figures, (2) addition of a preamble setting forth basic
land-use principles and (3) clarifying language in several places throughout
the document.
Mayor Broun asked
whether there was a representative of the Work Group at this evening's
meeting. Mr. Waldon answered that no
further comment was desired by the Work Group to the Council and there was no
official representative in attendance.
Alice Ingram,
representing the Design Review Board, stated that members of the Design Review
Board were members of the Work Group.
She stated that they unanimously supported the findings of the Work
Group's report. Ms. Ingram said they
believe there was sufficient time and information available for the Work Group
to complete a useable report, and stated the report was never intended to be
accepted with no adjustments. Ms.
Ingram said they looked forward to a rigorous review of the document.
Cynthia Wise stated
that many Town citizens did not realize they were in danger of losing the
meadows, streams and trees along this entranceway. She said when they reached this realization, they would blame the
Town Council for not protecting citizens from this massive development. Ms. Wise said the Town did not need more
shopping areas, apartments, and traffic.
She said the Council
should be more
concerned with the interest of Town citizens than those of outside developers.
Bill Davis,
representing the Alliance of Neighborhoods, said the proposed amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan was unnecessary, He
also said it appeared that the Council was representing developers rather than
the interests of Town residents. Mr.
Davis urged the Council to consider changes to the Comprehensive Plan
independently from the other hearings scheduled this evening. He also asked the Council to place the least
dense development possible on this property.
Philip Goodman
expressed concern about the short time frame for citizens to review materials
for this evening's hearing. He said
many citizens did not have sufficient to adequately prepare for the
hearing. Mr. Goodman said it was unfair
to assume that citizens needed only a few days to review the materials.
Victor Friedman said
he believed the overall process was being driven by the needs of the developer
rather than the needs of Town residents.
Mr. Friedman expressed his displeasure with the Council's decision to
hold a work session on May 8th, rather than the public hearing which was
anticipated by some citizens. Mr.
Friedman requested that the Council listen more closely to what citizens were
saying which was to slow down and study the proposed development with a greater
level of scrutiny.
Peter Todd, speaking
for Orange County Greens, urged the Council to amend the Comprehensive Plan and
to take a closer look at the rezoning request for the proposed
development. He asked the Council to
look at all alternatives before making any decisions.
Kevin Foy, a resident
of Rogerson Drive, said the entire community would be affected by any changes
in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Foy said
he did not believe one group should be able to make the changes proposed by the
developers. Mr. Foy also stated that a
small area plan was needed for the entranceway.
Bernadette Pelissier,
representing the Sierra Club, stated that the Sierra Club would like to see an
architectural grid laid out, that the transportation goal be to reduce auto
trips and to facilitate and promote a transportation infrastructure. Ms. Pelissier said they would like to see
any areas around retail commercial areas be pedestrian friendly, and that
businesses serve as a means of neighborhood integration, meaning that the
businesses be small and serve the needs of the nearby neighborhoods. Ms. Pelissier said residential areas should
not neglect the need for public housing.
Julie Andresen stated
there are three flaws in the proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan, the
first being that you can't preserve the vistas with buildings in the meadows,
the second that there are no limits on mixed use, and third the high density
gives nothing in return.
Jane Williams, a
member of the Alliance of Neighborhoods, said she is disturbed that we are
talking about changes to the Comprehensive Plan without first discussing the
rezoning of the DuBose property. She
said the Meadowmont application seems to be directing and influencing this
process. She stated the Manager had
recommended approval of these applications, and feels that we are moving ahead
too quickly.
Tom Gunn asked that
his comments of the April 26th public hearing be entered into the record of
this evening's hearing. He stated that
he did not believe the Council should be considering changes to the
Comprehensive Plan until after the rezoning issue had been decided. Mr. Gunn said the Comprehensive Plan should
not be amended to satisfy the desires of a developer, and that the changes
proposed would destroy the scenic vistas along NC 54. He said changing the Comprehensive Plan in context with a
particular development would set a bad precedent. Mr. Gunn asked the Council not to amend the Comprehensive Plan.
Diane Bloom, speaking
for the Alliance of Neighborhoods, said there was a flaw in the Manager's
memorandum, which was that you can not preserve the meadows with a building
situated in the middle of it. She
stated that any buildings should be along the edges of the meadows rather than
in the meadows themselves. Ms. Bloom
said it was not possible to have things both ways. She also said the Comprehensive Plan should protect vistas and
the Town should move to do so. Ms.
Bloom urged the Council to preserve this last scenic entranceway into the Town,
and to say no to buildings within the meadows.
Toni Jo Friedman, a
resident of the Oaks, said she believed the amendments to the Comprehensive
Plan were proposed for the wrong reasons.
She said the Comprehensive Plan should not be changed in order to rezone
the DuBose property, as the Meadowmont developers had requested.
Edmund Wise, a
resident of Burning Tree Drive, said the proposed development left a lot to be
desired. Mr. Wise said although he had
great respect for the Council, he was appalled at the speed with which the
Council was trying to move this project through the development review
process. He requested that the process
be slowed down to give citizens an opportunity to more fully study the
development proposals.
Jan Halle stated that
NC 54 was the last pristine entranceway into the Town and inquired why the
Meadowmont development proposal and related matters were being pushed through
the review process. Ms. Halle stated
that the review process needed to slowed down immediately to provide for
critical review of the applicant's proposal.
Ruby Sinreich, a
member of the East Entranceway Work Group, said she agreed with the comments
made by Ms. Pellisier on behalf of the
Sierra Club. She also said it was unfortunate that some
people only supported certain types of neighborhoods. Ms. Sinreich stated that all types of neighborhoods should be
encouraged through mixed-use developments.
Ms. Sinreich expressed her support for the proposed amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan. She also noted that
she did not favor the applicant's request for rezoning or master land use plan
approval.
Valerie Broadwell, a
resident of Rogerson Drive, said there were a number of irregularities in the
Work Group's report. She stated it had
been basically rewritten by Town staff and in the process of rewriting the
report it appeared that history was also rewritten. Ms. Broadwell briefly described changes which had been made to
the report without the Work Group's consent.
She also inquired why the Meadowmont proposal was being pushed through
the development review process.
Mark Broadwell said
he believed the current process was flawed.
He expressed concern that the public's right to participate in the
review process had been stymied. Mr.
Broadwell said although he did not know where the process got off track, the
East Entranceway Work Group had not been given sufficient time or information
to prepare a thorough report to the Council.
Mr. Broadwell stated that in order to talk about mixed use, the public
needed to be able to fully understand this concept. Mr. Broadwell said he believed the review process should be
restarted.
Council Member Brown
said she was very appreciative of the need to move slowly with this process,
and did not necessarily agree with all the recommendations made in the staff's
report. She said the Council should be
very careful in drafting language for the Comprehensive Plan amendment and move
slowly through the process.
Council Member
Chilton stated that the goals outlined in the Manager's report were not very
different from what the Council had approved for the Southern Village
development. Council Member Chilton
said he believed the proposed plan contained some flaws. Council Member Chilton said that on several
occasions members of the Work Group had spoken to the Council about their goals
and objectives when they had developed their report and he did not believe the
public was ready to accept the changes that had been made without a great deal
more discussion on the effects this development would potentially have on the
Town.
Council Member
Chilton said he understood the public's frustration with the process and felt
that the Council needed to slow down to give everyone a chance to fully
understand the proposed development and its implications. Council Member Chilton stated that on page 3
of the study (page 7 of the report), the second item had been stricken
entirely, based, he believed, on his comments made at an earlier meeting. Council Member Chilton stated that he did
not intend for this item to be taken out of the report. Council Member Chilton also said this was an
indication that the Council needed to look more closely at the proposed
language and to make sure the Council and the public understood the Council's
intent. Council Member Chilton said he
was glad to see language included under the fourth item addressing scale and
relationship to other uses in the area.
Council Member Chilton stated that the Council should not simply approve
commercial development along the NC 54 entranceway with development behind it
without first considering all of the implications.
Council Member Brown
stated that she wanted to have a process put in place so that the Council could
gather input from citizens and groups such as the Sierra Club and others so
that all pertinent information could be studied.
Council Member
Capowski said he believed when a process became so big you could not understand
it, you should step back and evaluate exactly what was taking place. Council Member Capowski said although he
liked the idea of mixed-use in general, it was important that it be balanced to
support the needs of the neighborhood's residents. He also urged the Council to be careful in defining density
levels, with special attention being focused on automobile parking, in
neighborhoods and commercial areas.
Council Member Capowski also suggested that the Council outline its
intent about the possibility of a roadway connection to U.S. 15-501. He requested that staff develop a report on
what could be developed on the subject property if the zoning remained
R-1. Council Member Evans inquired
whether staff could respond to this question this evening. Mr. Waldon stated that mixed use development
was permitted in any zoning designation in some form depending on the size of
the tract. He noted that R-1 zoning
permitted up to three units per acre.
Mr. Waldon stated that this meant up to 1,278 units could be constructed
on the 426 acre tract. He also noted
that commercial developments in R-1 areas were governed by floor area ratios.
Council Member Protzman
said he believed that this process had been flawed and that the Comprehensive
Plan was also flawed. He suggested that
the Council discuss the desirable density for this area as soon as possible.
Council Member
Protzman stated the changes made to the Work Group's report by the Manager had
been made based on recommendations of the Council.
Council Member Brown
said she had a sense that the Council did not want to develop a process to go
over the Manager's recommendations line by line. Council Member Brown noted one suggestion she had made which had
been reworded, changing her original intention. Council Member Brown said she agreed with the comments made by
the Sierra Club. She also said the
Council needed to clearly define exactly what was meant by the term "mixed
use". Council Member Brown
suggested that the Council not move forward while a number of important
questions remained unanswered.
Council Member
Protzman said he believed the Council should go over the report line by line
this evening.
Council Member
Waldorf said she believed the Council should go over the report line by line
some time in the near future. She
suggested discussing the matter at the Council's May 22nd meeting.
COUNCIL MEMBER
WALDORF MOVED THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE MANAGER.
Council Member Brown
said she believed the public needed to have additional time to study the
proposals and to discuss them with the Council.
COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN
SECONDED THE MOTION TO REFER.
Mayor Broun commented
that the changes made to the Work Group's report were made at the request of
the Council, not by the Town Manager.
Mayor Broun stated that his intention was to provide a fair forum for
both citizens and the applicants. Mayor
Broun said that regarding process, the Council needed to be concerned about the
impact of non-action. He said there was
a cost of action which was too hasty, as well as a cost of non-action. Mayor Broun said it was his intention to
move forward at a reasonable pace.
THE MOTION TO REFER
WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item #2 - Requests to Rezone 426 Acres
North and South
of NC 54 Between Burning Tree Drive and
Barbee Chapel Road
Mr. Waldon stated
that the Town had received two rezoning applications, one for Residential-5
Conditional (for 364.4 acres) and one for Mixed Use-Residential-1 (for 61.6
acres). He stated that 8.6 acres would
not be rezoned and would remain R-1.
Mr. Waldon said one of the key components of the Comprehensive Plan for
this area of Town was the Entranceway Report for this area. He said one of the things noted in this
evening's memorandum was the implications of rezoning the property and the
recommended amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Waldon said that on balance the rezoning would work towards
achieving the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Waldon explained
the consequences of the two rezoning requests.
He stated that if a Special Use Permit for a Planned Development were
approved, the new zoning designations would allow a variety of residential and
non-residential land uses. Mr. Waldon
stated that with these types of rezoning, a developer commits to specific uses
and specific site layouts, subject to the Special Use Permit stipulations.
Mayor Broun asked in
the MU-R-1 area, what would the requirement be of that zoning compared to
R-1. Mr. Waldon said under R-1, you
would generally see residential development.
He said under MU-R-1 for a tract this size, you would probably see
commercial development governed by the floor area ratio stipulations. Mr. Waldon said in MU-R-1 with office or
commercial space proposed, the floor area allowed would be much higher, which
meant the density would be more intense.
Land Planner Scott
Murray, the applicant's representative, stated that over the past four years,
his firm had initiated work shops, site visits and approximately seventy-five
public meetings to inform the public and the Town about the developer's
proposal.
He also said the
applicant had made a great deal of effort to recognize the concerns of citizens
and to explore the site analysis of the area itself, as well as the constraints
of the site.
Mr. Murray presented
a brief overview of the work performed over the last four years to develop the
proposed land plan. He discussed the
surrounding property, both developed and undeveloped, and pointed out the
watershed and the natural flow of drainage on the property. Mr. Murray described the soils on the
property and the slope categories on the site.
Mr. Murray also identified the location of the meadows and the types of
trees and the tree line found on the property.
He reviewed the natural features of the site and described what it would
take to make the proposed development a true village center with its own
neighborhood character. Mr. Murray explained
the proposed street pattern within the proposed development and the various
open space areas. He described the
Master Land Use Plan for the area and the different uses proposed within the
development. Mr. Murray said the
proposed park area was a seventy acre area on the north end of the property,
much of which was suitable for a variety of recreational uses.
Mr. Perry stated this
development would provide many advantages to the Town, such as a mass transit
corridor, funding for a large portion of roadway improvements, recreational
areas exceeding regulatory requirements, affordable housing opportunities, a
dramatic increase in both the commercial and residential tax bases, a
cooperative effort with UNC Hospitals to develop a Wellness Center, and a
pedestrian orientation for working and living.
Mr. Perry stated that he and his staff were meeting with representatives
of the school district to explore the possibility of assisting with providing
an area for a school within the proposed development. He urged the Council to favorably consider cluster developments
close to the University campus and the Town, where services existed and the
proper pedestrian and transit were already in place.
Bruce Ballentine,
speaking as a representative of the Design Review Board, stated that the Board
support approval of the rezoning of this property. He stated that the Board believed mixed use allowed people to
live, work and shop in the same area, thereby reducing the need for automobile
trips. He also stated this development
would increase the Town's tax base. Mr.
Ballentine said mixed use also meant more control, because it would require the
developer of the property to apply for permits in order to develop the
property.
Larry Daquioag,
representing the Housing and Community Development Board, said the Board
supported the rezoning request. He said
if development was permitted at the R-1 density, it would not lend itself to
affordable housing. Mr. Daquioag said
higher densities were needed to support affordable housing. He also commented that the developer has
offered more affordable housing than was required by Town regulations.
Victor Friedman said
that rezoning the property to MU-R-1 and R-5-C would not give the Town the
control necessary for the development of this property. He said the zoning allowed denser commercial
areas, which he believed the developer wanted, and the denser residential area
in mixed use districts was an added bonus.
He said rezoning would not reduce traffic. Mr. Friedman requested that the Council not approve the
applicant's rezoning request.
Toni Jo Friedman said
she believed a comparative study of R-1 zoning and the proposed MU-R-1 and
R-5-C zoning was needed. She
urged the Council not
to give the developer the opportunity to develop to the maximum extent of the
zoning eventually approved. Ms.
Friedman said she believed R-1 zoning would meet the needs of Town residents.
Philip Goodman agreed
with Ms. Friedman, saying it was important to have safeguards regarding
development in the Town. Mr. Goodman
said he wanted to see a report outlining what could be built with R-1 zoning on
the property. He also stated that the
Town's residents could not rely on the good intentions of the developer
because the applicant
might choose to sell the property to another owner in the future.
Ted Wolf, a resident
of the Oaks III subdivision, said he was impressed with the level of detail
presented by the developer. Mr. Wolf
said he believed growth in this area was inevitable and believed this type of
development was preferable to another Southern Village type development. Mr. Wolf requested that the Council initiate
a small area plan for the east entranceway corridor before any action was
taken.
Bob Woodruff, also a
resident of the Oaks III subdivision, agreed with Mr. Wolf's statements, saying
he believed the developer and the Council were proceeding in a careful
fashion. Mr. Woodruff said he was
pleased that affordable housing was being included in the proposed development
and felt that the overall process was working well.
Catherine Newbury, a
resident of Longleaf Drive, said there was a great possibility of a more
intense development if the rezoning was approved. Ms. Newbury said she was concerned about the overcrowding already
experienced by area schools, as well as the traffic impact of this proposed
project. Ms. Newbury said the subject
property drained into an area which already experienced serious flooding. She expressed concern that the flooding
situation could worsen if the development were constructed. Ms. Newbury urged the Council to use strong
safeguards in proceeding with review of the proposal.
Julie Andresen said
she believed the decision on the rezoning request was very important. She said that the application for the Master
Land Use Plan came in at the same time as the request for the rezoning. Ms. Andresen said if there was a gap between
the time of the rezoning request and the request for a Special Use Permit,
there was no time for negotiations. She
said the public needed to be provided with a fair process, and reminded the
Council that what they are told was not necessarily what would be built.
Tom Gunn said the he
believed the rezoning proposal had to be reviewed in a larger context than just
the DuBose property. He said it must
make sense not just for this property but for the Town's Development Ordinance
as well. Mr. Gunn said there were not
enough provisions to protect the meadows, and said the Council did not have to
change the zoning to allow a mix of development on this property.
Peter Todd,
representing the Orange County Greens, encouraged the Council to amend the
Comprehensive Plan but to deny the rezoning and master land use plan requests.
Bill Davis encouraged
the Council to deny any request for rezoning.
Mr. Davis said he believed the proposed development was too dense and
intense for this property. Mr. Davis
asked the Council to be proactive and look at alternatives for the use of this
property. He commented that the impact
on traffic was probably the most substantial element to consider in reviewing
the proposal.
Diane Bloom commented
on the undefined concept of mixed use.
She presented a brief outline of what she believed the definition of
mixed use was. Ms. Bloom said she
believed the development would be inclined to be automobile-intensive.
Edmund Wise said he
believed R-1 zoning would permit appropriate development of this property. He also expressed concern that no special
use permit details had been received from the developer. Mr. Wise also expressed concern that the
Council would not have enough control over the developer once the zoning was
approved.
Livy Ludington urged
the Council to start over again. Ms.
Ludington said although she knew the developer had been working on this
development for several years, the citizens needed to have a substantial role
in determining the type of development which would occur in this area. She also expressed concern about current
overcrowding in local schools and the potential additional impact of this
development.
Mike Rose said she
had many concerns, one of which was the rush to approve this development. She also expressed concern about the lack of
time for the public to review the report for this evening's meeting. Ms. Rose stated that she did not believe the
issues raised by residents who spoke at previous meetings had been adequately
addressed. Ms. Rose said she believed
that the applicant's rezoning request should be denied based on traffic impacts
alone.
Ruby Sinreich agreed
with Diane Bloom's earlier comments.
Ms. Sinreich commented that she did not believe the development would
support mixed use if it was restricted in its size; and, if it was left as R-1
it could be developed as suburbs. Ms.
Sinreich said although the master land use plan did provide limits, it needed
to be revised to fit the Council's definition of mixed use.
Paul Aliosio,
representing the Orange-Chatham Sierra Club, said he believed the Council should
deny the request for rezoning. Mr.
Aliosio said the Sierra Club believed mixed use needed to be much more
well-defined before any rezoning took place.
Mr. Aliosio also said the Sierra Club believed the developer should
redesign this project and come up with a better plan.
Bob Reda, a member of
the Alliance of Neighborhoods, said the Council needed to represent the Town,
not the developer. He said the Council
needed to take matters into their own hands, and if that meant rezoning the
property, then so be it. Mr. Reda said
the Council must protect the interests of Town citizens.
John Anderson, a
resident of Rogerson Drive, said he believed the Council has undertaken a very
difficult task and should be commended.
Mr. Anderson said he believed more ideas and information were needed
before this development was approved.
He encouraged the Council to study this proposal more closely before any
mistakes were made. Mr. Anderson also
encouraged the Council to hire professionals to assist them in this effort.
John Kent said
although he believed the developer had made an effort to inform the public
about the proposed development, the public was generally still suspicious. Mr. Kent said that fairness to the applicant
must be weighed against the size of the development, and this development was a
large one.
Council Member
Capowski asked Town Attorney Karpinos about Council tools to limit the scope of
the development. Mr. Karpinos commented
that the rezoning was to a conditional use zoning, which means it did not
actually become this zoning until a special use permit was approved by the
Council. He said a possible scenario
was that the next hearing on the master land use plan would take place and it
would cover the site proposed for development which would be rezoned. Mr. Karpinos said the developer would then
be asked for their comments on the conditions proposed by the Council. He said if the developer accepted the
conditions, the Council would then take up the rezoning requests. Mr. Karpinos said the development would then
have to be in compliance with the master land use plan in order to be
approved. Council Member Capowski asked
if this would be binding on the property.
Mr. Karpinos said yes.
Mr. Waldon said that
the Master Plan was absolute, and the Council would not lose control if the
Master Land Use Plan established limits as to commercial and residential
development, regardless of the zoning designation eventually placed on the
development.
Council Member
Waldorf asked whether special use permits were required for both R-5-C and
MU-R-1 zoning. Mr. Waldon said this was correct within the context of a master
planned development.
Council Member
Capowski commented that there was one major difference between the Southern
Village and the proposed Meadowmont development, which was that when the
Southern Village was approved a downzoning was simultaneously approved. He noted that downzoning was not proposed
for the Meadowmont development.
Council Member Brown
said this proposed project would not support sustainable development. She inquired whether the Town presently had
a zoning category for mixed use including large and small residences and small
businesses in a village center area.
Mr. Horton said there was presently no such designation. Council Member Brown asked whether the
development would have to meet a particular zoning designation. Mr. Horton stated that the Master Land Use
Plan would afford some flexibility in this regard. Council Member Brown stated that the Council should consider this
type of zoning.
COUNCIL MEMBER
PROTZMAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING
AND REFER COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER. THE
MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (8-0).
Item #3 - Continuation of Public Hearing
on Proposed
Master Land Use Plan for the Meadowmont
Development
Planning Director
Waldon gave a brief overview of the item before the Council. He stated there were several key issues
regarding the Master Land Use Plan, among them the blend of commercial and
residential development within the site, the recreation and open space areas,
and the traffic patterns connecting the various areas within the site. Mr. Waldon said that on the Master Land Use
Plan it is important to focus on the road connections, and we believe that
additional analysis should be required as additional details are provided with
each Special Use Permit application.
Mr. Waldon commented that school impacts has also been considered and
discussions were ongoing between the applicant and the school board.
Bruce Ballentine,
representing the Design Review Board, said they had discussed the link between
the rezoning and the adoption of a Master Land Use Plan with conditions. He stated they also discussed the
reservation of land for civic uses which is not included, but could be a
condition of the land use plan, as well as reserved land for a school. Mr. Ballentine said they believed this was a
ideal site for the proposed development and supported the rezoning
request. He also stated they were not
sure what type of roadway this corridor would be. Mr. Ballentine said they support the greenway plan that is
included in the Master Land Use Plan.
Ruby Sinreich,
representing the Transportation Board, stated they had reviewed the Master Land
Use Plan and their main concern was the density of the project. She said the Transportation Board was
concerned about Meadowmont Lane and its designation on the Fixed Guideway
system. The Board recommends that the
Council approve the Master Land Use Plan, but only if the roadway system is
improved.
Council Member
Waldorf asked the Design Review Board and the Transportation Board to forward
to the Council any sketches for improvements they might like to see made.
Donald Patterson,
president of the Oaks Villa Homeowners' Association, said that on the Lancaster
border of the development, which is where the wetlands are located, he was
concerned that Lancaster will become another Cleland Drive, which on any given
Saturday morning is overrun with cars and children darting in and out. He asked that the Council look closely at
this problem.
Victor Friedman
commented he was concerned about the traffic impact to this development. He believes the traffic flow will double,
even under the R-1 zoning. Mr. Friedman
stated that he and his wife had undertaken their own traffic study and had
previously submitted that information to the Council. Mr. Friedman reminded the Council of that study and asked that
they take it into consideration when deliberating the Master Land Use Plan for
this project.
Philip Goodman said
he believes that with the applicants' presentation, we see only what they want
us to see. He said he believes we need
more details, and not broad generalizations of what is proposed. Mr. Goodman said the Council should be aware
of the lack of power to change a development once the property is rezoned.
Peter Todd said the
Orange County Greens do not feel this is really a mixed use as they understand
it. He said they encourage the Council
to redefine the term mixed use and to develop a new zoning code to support the
new definition of mixed use.
Jane Williams stated
the commercial and retail area proposed in Meadowmont is very similar to the
Timberlyne shopping area. She said that
area is in no way a village center, and therefore she does not understand how
the applicant can present the proposed commercial and retail area of Meadowmont
as a village center. Ms. Williams said
what we are really getting is a strip mall located on a scenic entranceway.
Julie Andresen said
she is in favor of affordable housing in this area, but there is no guarantee
in anything she has heard tonight. She
also commented that the impact of this development is enormous, and we should
be careful when considering this project.
Ms. Andresen said if we continue to grow at this rapid rate, all Chapel
Hill citizens will eventually have to pay for a new wastewater treatment plant
which will be necessary. She said
traffic is a big concern, and that alone does not allow this development to meet
conditions of the Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Andresen said the Council must be very careful in approving the
Master Land Use Plan, because their control will be very limited.
Edmund Wise said he
did not think we needed fast food restaurants with drive-thru windows along
this corridor. He also said he saw no
need for more gas stations, as several already exist in the area. Mr. Wise also commented that there is no
need for large office or commercial buildings in this area, and said the Master
Land Use Plan should have a high amount of detail. Mr. Wise said he does not believe we need to have this type of
massive commercial and retail development in this location. He said this development would add 26,000
daily trips to NC 54, which has a capacity of 40,000 and already has 20,000
daily trips. Mr. Wise said this will
cause major blockage along this corridor, and also stated that the speed with
which this development is built should be carefully controlled.
Tom Gunn said he was
concerned about the traffic generated by this proposed development, especially
along its four major intersections. He
stated the traffic impact study included in the information is not user
friendly, and is very hard to decipher.
Toni Jo Friedman said
she also was concerned about the traffic generated by this development. She commented on the traffic jams she had
observed on 15-501 and on NC 54 during rush hours, and she said this traffic
intensity will probably double if the Meadowmont development is built. Ms. Friedman said these problems must be
dealt with before any more development occurs along this corridor.
Ben Zaitz, a resident
of Pinehurst Drive, said he was concerned about the road connection from this
development to Pinehurst Drive. He said
if traffic is increased on NC 54, Pinehurst Drive could become a shortcut. Mr. Zaitz said this would ruin the character
of his neighborhood by turning it into a boulevard. He said just the construction traffic over the next few years
would affect their lives. Mr. Zaitz
asked the Council to protect his neighborhood from these unwanted changes, and
that they consider alternative traffic patterns within the development.
Valerie Broadwell
said she does not believe the Council should even be discussing the Master Land
Use Plan. She said she believes we
should have come up with appropriate zoning and the proper amendments to the
Comprehensive Plan, then discussed the Master Land Use Plan.
Mary Bushnell, a
member of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education, commented on two
resolutions recently adopted by the Board.
She said one dealt with the Southern Village, and the second was a
request that the East West Partners, developers of Meadowmont, reserve 25 acres
as a potential site for a new middle school.
Ann Rex, a resident
of Pinehurst Drive, said she believed it was possible to build Meadowmont
without destroying her neighborhood.
She asked that the Council protect her neighborhood from through
traffic, and not to turn Pinehurst Drive into a boulevard. Ms. Rex said her neighborhood is a very fine
one, and they would like to keep it that way by limiting traffic access.
John Kent stated his
hope that this process will be slowed down and looked at very carefully.
Mayor Broun stated
that because of the late hour, he suggested the Council discuss the proposed
schedule for consideration of the Meadowmont development applications before
discussion of the Master Land Use Plan.
Town Manager Horton
stated it would be appropriate to receive comments from advisory boards no
later than the first of June, so that June 5 could be a possible follow-up
date. He also stated that the Council
had asked for an additional hearing date, and June 14 is proposed for this
discussion.
Council Member Evans
said she would be unable to attend the June 26 meeting.
Council Member Brown
asked if the advisory boards would also be discussing the Comprehensive
Plan? Mr. Horton said they certainly
could if the Council asked them to.
Council Member Evans
said we should encourage them to discuss this and not postpone it for whatever
reasons.
Mayor Broun asked if
this would give them time for adequate discussion? Mayor Broun also said he would not be able to attend a June 7
meeting. Mayor Broun said we should get
responses from the advisory boards and discuss the Comprehensive Plan after
that time. He suggested that June 21
was an appropriate date.
Council Member Brown
said she believed the Council should hold another public hearing on the Comprehensive
Plan before any action was taken.
Mayor Broun said that
if no new information is presented, there is no reason why they could not vote
on June 12 on the Comprehensive Plan.
Council Member
Chilton asked if we were going to have a work session on the Comprehensive
Plan? Mayor Broun said yes.
Council Member Brown
said she did not believe the Council could vote on the Comprehensive Plan
without another hearing to receive public comment.
Council Member
Protzman suggested that the Council move forward with these proposed dates, and
modify them later, if necessary.
Council Member
Capowski said no action should be taken at the May 22nd meeting because the
advisory boards would not have had time to meet and discuss the proposed
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
He said that since some fundamental changes might be proposed which
merited advisory board review, the Council could vote on this matter June 12th.
Council Member
Waldorf suggested that the document presented this evening be modified to include
the public comments received as well as Council comment, with a follow-up
review on May 22nd, followed by referral to advisory boards and commissions for
comments.
Council Member Brown
said she would agree to this approach only if another public hearing was
scheduled when comments from the advisory boards were received.
Mayor Broun stated
that the May 22nd item would be a work session on the Comprehensive Plan and decisions
could be made at that point concerning follow-up actions.
Mr. Karpinos
suggested that the Council recess the Master Land Use Plan hearing to a date
certain.
The Council, by
acclamation, set June 12th as a tentative date to bring the rezoning and
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan back to the Council for possible action.
COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO RECESS THE MASTER LAND USE PLAN
PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED
UNANIMOUSLY.
The meeting was
adjourned at 11:48 p.m.