MINUTES OF A WORK SESSION HELD BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21, 1995, 5:30 P.M.

Mayor Broun called the work session to order at 5:43 p.m. Council Members in attendance were Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Lee Pavão, Barbara Powell, Jim Protzman and Rosemary Waldorf. Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Manager Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon and Development Coordinator Jennie Bob Culpepper.

Mr. Horton presented an overview of the Council's process to date for reviewing the proposed Meadowmont development. He noted that this evening's work session was an opportunity for the Mayor and Town Council to have direct interchange with the applicants.

Roger Perry of East-West Partners, the applicant, said he and his colleagues were enthusiastic about the proposed plan and the related opportunities for public/private cooperation. Mr. Perry also said he hoped that it would be possible to convey the logic of the proposed plan this evening. He stated that a mixed-use development plan would be no more profitable than a single-family development on the proposed site. Mr. Perry said his firm and associates would be good stewards of the land.

Scott Murray presented an overview of the proposed land-use plan, including brief descriptions of proposed open spaces and topography of the site. Mr. Murray stated that 60% of all proposed residential units would be located within a quarter mile radius of the proposed village center and 80% of all residential units would be located within a one-half mile radius.

Mayor Broun suggested that the Council's discussion be separated into six parts: entranceways & vistas, road network and transit matters, preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, designation of public spaces, pattern of residential/office/commercial development and the level/densities for the same. Hearing no objections, Mayor Broun suggested that the Council proceed in this manner.

Entranceways/Vistas

Scott Murray displayed conceptual illustrations of trees and green space along the NC 54 entranceway corridor. Mr. Murray also showed a rendering of a proposed building on the northern portion of the site in the portion of the site proposed for mixed-use development.

Council Member Brown inquired about the scope of the areas proposed for trees and meadows. Mr. Murray stated that this area on the south side of NC 54 would vary in width between 170 and 450 feet from the right-of-way and from 200 to 600 feet in width on the north side of NC 54. Council Member Brown inquired about the length of the area proposed for preservation. Mr. Waldon said he believed this area would be a few hundred feet in length. Mr. Waldon indicated that he could provide a more specific answer once he had the opportunity to review scales of appropriate maps. Mr. Perry noted that he and his staff would be pleased to provide acreage counts for visible versus non-visible preservation areas in its follow-up work session with the Council on July 6th.

Council Member Waldorf said she was troubled that there might be too much surface parking proposed on the southern portion of the proposed development. She inquired whether Mr. Perry had considered compressing buildings and putting more parking behind them. Mr. Perry stated that the vast majority of parking on the south side of NC 54 would be behind or underneath buildings or screened by vegetation. Council Member Waldorf inquired whether Mr. Perry had considered the possibility of providing decked parking. Mr. Perry stated that the incremental cost of decked versus surface parking was approximately an additional $6,000 to $8,000 per space. He also said that the provision of deck parking generally made the viability of office space somewhat more difficult. Brad Davis stated that there would be an area approximately two football fields wide between NC 54 and an area in which parking spaces might be visible from the roadway.

Noting that his firm had once thought of relocating to an area along the NC 54 but could not due to parking deck-related concerns, Council Member Protzman suggested that Mr. Perry and his colleagues possibly consider reducing the amount of office space proposed for the area south of NC 54.

Council Member Evans said she very strongly favored preserving as many trees as possible between NC 54 and proposed buildings on the site. Mr. Perry said he appreciated the Council's guidance on matters such as whether the entranceway should feature pastoral or some other type of landscaping. Stating that a significant amount of money was earmarked for meadows restoration, Mr. Perry said the meadows could be dedicated to the homeowners association in perpetuity or to the Town.

Council Member Protzman said he felt it was important for the Council to provide guidance on the landscaping of entranceways. Council Member Brown stated that the Council had previously given direction that its preference was for natural, preserved pastoral landscapes, rather than sculpted landscaping. Council Member Pavão said it was also important for the Council to agree on the degree of preservation of existing landscaping and vegetation in the area.

Council Member Chilton said he favored landscaping similar to the current state of Merritt's Pasture. Brad Davis said the developers could restore the landscaping and meadows to a pastoral state, including planting of natural fescue grasses, if the Council wished to do so.

Council Member Brown inquired whether Mr. Waldon had been able to discern additional detail information about the proposed provision of dedicated open space along the NC 54 corridor in the Town's Entranceway and Land-Use Plans. Mr. Waldon stated that the Town's 1986 land-use plan contained a conceptually-based straight line of 600 feet from NC 54. He also said the Town's detailed master plan for entranceways depicted widths of between 150 and 750 or 800 feet along the entranceway corridor.

Council Member Brown said it would be helpful to see the proposed lines overlaid on the actual terrain of the proposed site plan. Mr. Waldon stated that the proposed lines in the Town's entranceway plan were taken from aerial photographs, rather than being surveyed lines. Mr. Perry stated that it had always been his intention to build buildings on the edge of the meadow, with approximately 22 of the 35 acres in the meadow area being preserved. He added that a number of public/private facility trade-offs would be needed to restore the meadow lands. Mr. Perry also stated that if a subdivision developer wished to do so, it way legally permissible to build houses fifty feet from the NC 54 right-of-way in the future.

Council Member Capowski inquired about the total amount of building square footage proposed south of NC 54. Mr. Perry stated that combined building square footage west of Friday Lane would be 225,000 square feet, while a 140,000 square foot hotel and 19,800 of commercial/office/retail space was proposed east of Friday Lane. Council Member Capowski inquired about the number of parking spaces proposed on the south side of NC 54. Mr. Perry said there would a total of approximately one thousand parking spaces on the south side of NC 54. Council Member Capowski inquired about the total amount of asphalt coverage for the proposed project. Mr. Perry said he and his staff would need to calculate this figure. Council Member Capowski inquired about the scope of the site on the south side of NC 54. Mr. Murray said this site would be approximately thirty acres. Mr. Perry stated that a significant number of parking spaces would be located under office buildings on the south side of NC 54.

Mayor Broun inquired whether the Council had any additional comments concerning green space and meadow lands. Council Member Protzman said it appeared that the Council concurred that the entrance corridor should emphasize a lush, rich green environment.

Mr. Perry raised the possibility of locating an amphitheater near the lake in the meadow as a venue for Sunday afternoon concerts and other events.

Council Member Brown requested a clarification concerning the possibility of a subdivision developer constructed homes within fifty feet of the right-of-way along NC 54. Mr. Waldon stated that Town development regulations concerning subdivisions would permit such a development to occur. Council Member Brown inquired whether the Town had any mechanisms to require the dedication of open space by developers. Mr. Horton said although there was no mechanism to require developers to set aside open space in a particular place, this matter was certainly negotiable on individual projects. Council Member Brown asked whether it would be possible to preserve a six hundred foot buffer along the corridor within the context of the Town's special use permit process. Mr. Horton said the six hundred foot buffer was a general guideline, rather than a requirement having the backing of an ordinance.

Council Member Evans said she favored a pastoral landscape. She also suggested the possibility of having jogging paths in the meadows area and around the adjacent pond. Mr. Davis said it was the applicant's intent to provide pedestrian and bicycle paths without disrupting the meadow's visual continuity and including the planting of shade trees along pathways.

Council Member Powell inquired about the plans for tunnelway under NC 54. Mr. Perry stated that the diameter of the existing tunnel was insufficient to accommodate pedestrians or bicyclists. Mr. Perry said he hoped to receive approval from the North Carolina Department of Transportation to temporarily reroute traffic around this section of NC 54 in order to construct a larger underpass for pedestrians and bicyclists. Council Member Capowski said without such a pedestrian/bicycle tunnel under NC 54, the project would be divided into north and south projects. Mr. Perry expressed his concurrence.

Council Member Capowski inquired whether the proposed buildings on the south side of NC 54, if considered as a separate project, would meet floor area and related requirements. Mr. Waldon said since the project was one parcel, staff did not have this information immediately available.

Noting that there were currently four traffic signals within the span of 1.1 miles on NC 54, Council Member Capowski inquired about the possibility of avoiding the need for a fifth signal at the proposed intersection with Meadowmont Lane. Mr. Perry stated that current projections were that a fifth signal would be necessary.

Mayor Broun noted that even if the Council did not require installation of a traffic signal, the NCDOT could mandate such a requirement in the future. Council Member Evans inquired whether the applicant had explored the possibility of alternate access

to office buildings as a means of decreasing the need for traffic signals. Mr. Perry stated that the University had agreed to permit access to the buildings from the east but would not approve dual access from Finley Golf Course Road.

Council Member Brown said it would be very helpful to have an overlay map of ridge lines and slopes on the site. Mr. Murray showed a display of such a map. Council Member Brown said it would be helpful for the Council to have copies of the ridge line and slope maps in order to explore these matters in greater detail.

Mayor Broun inquired about the Council's wishes for applicant follow-up on entranceway-related matters prior to the July 6th work session.

Referencing an earlier site rendering shown as an exhibit by the applicant, Council Member Chilton inquired whether the entire elevation of this building would be visible from NC 54. Mr. Perry said the proposed building would be a visible piece of architecture, located on a ridge top behind the main meadow. Mr. Davis said it would be most desirable to embed the proposed building into the hillside.

Council Member Brown said she was very serious about language concerning the preservation of landscaping and vistas. Council Member Brown also said she wanted to see topographical and ridge line maps before reaching any decisions in these matters. She inquired how the applicant's illustrative plan related to the master land-use plan. Mr. Waldon said the applicant had two separation applications: one for rezoning and the master land-use/illustrative plan.

Council Member Waldorf inquired whether it was correct that the master land-use plan would have documentation about details on matters agreed upon the Town Council. Mr. Waldon said this was correct, noting that specific conditions could be attached to the master plan approval.

Council Member Brown requested that the applicant provide a map showing the proposed building sites overlaid on a topographical map. Mr. Perry said he would do so.

Mayor Broun asked whether there was anything the Council did not want the applicant to do in terms of entranceways and vistas. Council Member Powell said it would be desirable for the applicant to explore options to the need for a fifth traffic signal along the NC 54 corridor. Council Member Brown said some of her current reservations might be allayed by information from the applicant at the July 6th follow-up work session.

Council Member Pavão requested that Planning staff provide Mr. Perry with a copy of the recent report on development sustainability presented to the Council by Dr. David Brower and his Planning graduate students. Mr. Waldon said he would do so.

Council Member Waldorf said she would find it helpful for the applicant to provide additional renderings of proposed buildings in relation to the site's conditions. Mr. Perry said his staff would be pleased to do so.

Road Network and Transit

Council Member Chilton stated that the design of the proposed Meadowmont Lane was very important. He inquired whether it was correct that thirty to forty lots would have driveways directly accessing on to Meadowmont Lane. Mr. Perry stated that this number might be somewhat less if a school were located on Meadowmont Lane. He said that Meadowmont Lane would effectively be two one-way streets, with driveways being right-in and right-out only, with each turnaround-type driveway serving two lots. Mr. Perry added that the site's topographical and environmental sensitivity made it impractical to have alleyways behind homes along Meadowmont Lane.

Council Member Chilton said although he had not done as much deep thinking as the applicant on this matter, he believed it would be best not to have any driveways directly access on to Meadowmont Lane.

Council Member Evans inquired whether the applicant was proposing a bicycle lane along Meadowmont Lane. She also asked where visitors to Meadowmont Lane residents would park their vehicles.

George Kirchbaum said also Meadowmont Lane was proposed to ultimately connect to U.S. 15-501, it was not contemplated to be more than a two-lane road, with bicycle lanes. Mr. Davis stated that the applicant envisioned a roadway patterned after Queens Road West in Charlotte, featuring a well-designed landscaped median down the middle of the Meadowmont Lane corridor.

Council Member Waldorf inquired whether alleyways could be accommodated if the Council deemed them to be desirable. Mr. Perry said yes, noting that topography generally precluded alleyways to the east of Meadowmont Lane. He added that East-West Partners would make every effort to minimize impervious coverage and runoff on the site.

Council Member Brown said it was very important for the Council to take proposed language seriously about the proposed connector road between NC 54 and U.S. 15-501. She stated that placing driveways directly on to a connector road (Meadowmont Lane) could be very dangerous. Council Member Capowski expressed his concurrence with both points. Noting the Triangle Transit Authority's long-term plan for light rail along the NC 54 corridor, Council Member Capowski inquired about the applicant's plans in this regard.

Mr. Kirchbaum said there was sufficient width to the proposed median

to accommodate the possibility of a light-rail system. Council Member Evans asked whether there was sufficient room to preserve trees in addition to the possibility of light rail. Mr. Perry said no, noting that trees were proposed on both sides of Meadowmont Lane. Mike Horn noted that landscaping and light rail systems were generally incompatible partners.

Mayor Broun inquired about the conceptual fit of a light rail line down a parkway. Mr. Perry said he had met with Jim Ritchey of the Triangle Transit Authority to examine options including extra deep home sites, a well-divided roadway and the cost of light rail per mile versus fixed rubber tire buses. Mr. Perry said he did not think that a bus lane would be incompatible with the proposed parkway. Mr. Davis said he was envisioning a trolley system, rather than a light rail system. He stated that the City of San Jose, California has a people mover mass transit system which

runs down the middle of residential streets. Council Member Evans said it would be preferable to preserve groves of trees whenever possible. Mr. Perry said this would be manageable in most instances.

Council Member Capowski said it was unlikely that a road other than Meadowmont Lane would be used to connect U.S. 15-501 to NC 54.

Council Member Waldorf inquired whether staff could elaborate on the proposed roadway alignment. Mr. Waldon presented an overview of the proposed alignment, noting that the actual alignment had not been finalized. Mr. Perry said the route resulting in the shortest crossing of Little Creek would be the most desirable.

Council Member Brown said it would be desirable to have as few driveways as possible directly on to Meadowmont Lane. Mr. Kirchbaum said he did not believe that Meadowmont Lane would be a high-volume four lane roadway in the future. Council Member Brown asked whether Meadowmont Lane would be a collector road. Mr. Kirchbaum said no. Council Member Brown inquired about the Town's definition of a collector road. Mr. Waldon said under existing definitions, Meadowmont Lane would be a collector road at present and an arterial in the future. Council Member Brown said it appeared that Meadowmont Lane would be a main collector road for the area.

Council Member Evans said she hoped a large sign could be posted at the end of the proposed Meadowmont Lane, indicating that a future roadway extension was proposed as part of the State thoroughfare plan. Mr. Perry said he would be pleased to do so.

Council Member Evans inquired whether any thought had been given to the proposed subdivision entranceway off NC 54. Mr. Perry said no specific plan had been articulated to date. Council Member Capowski inquired whether it would be fair to say that if there were five nay votes against the development of Laurel Hill Parkway/Meadowmont Lane that this would not take place. Mr. Horton said he believed this would be fair to say, subject to changes by the North Carolina Department of Transportation.

Council Member Chilton inquired whether it was correct that little if any connection to the Lloyd property was proposed in the future. Mr. Perry said this was correct. He added that the Lloyd property was a narrow one located in a relatively steep area. Council Member Chilton inquired about the possibility of a future stubout to the Lloyd property in an area with two ponds near the eastern property line. Mr. Perry said he could look into this possibility.

Council Member Chilton inquired about the possibility of a connection to Pinehurst Drive. Mr. Perry said at the request of Pinehurst Drive residents, Meadowmont was planning to have only emergency access to Pinehurst Drive to facilitate access by police and fire personnel. He noted that this decision was ultimately in the Council's hands.

Council Member Capowski said it was important for the Council to assure that the impact on surrounding neighborhoods was minimal.

He inquired what steps would be taken to assure that Lancaster Drive did not become a parking lot for nearby soccer fields. Mr. Perry said he proposed to give a strip of land to the homeowners association as a means of restricting access to the area. Mr. Perry also said he was confident that no one would use Lancaster Drive for pedestrian access to the soccer fields and baseball diamonds since it would involve a very long and damp walk across wet fields. Council Member Capowski asked whether proposed parking facilities near the soccer facility would be adequate. Mr. Perry said he believed so. Council Member Pavão added that if a proposed school were located nearby, this parking lot might also be used for parking for the soccer fields.

Council Member Waldorf inquired about the applicant's proposed circulation plan for walkways and transit stops. Mr. Murray showed an overlay of the proposed overall circulation plan for buses, bicyclists and pedestrians. Mr. Perry stated that all streets would be interconnected with the exception of dead end streets into Corp of Engineers land and the adjoining golf course. Mr. Davis said the applicant was trying to develop a better street layout using a modified grid-type system. He added that special attention had been paid to providing a well-connected set of streets on a pedestrian scale. Council Member Brown stated that although the proposed street grid pattern appeared to be a conventional one, she would reserve final judgement on this matter. Mr. Perry said he looked forward to the Council's examination of the plan in terms of streets and topography. Mr. Perry also said he very strongly disagreed with the statement that the proposed street pattern was not a traditional layout. Mr. Davis said the applicant could provide information about historic street patterns in other communities having hilly terrain.

Council Member Evans said it was particularly important that Pinehurst Drive be extended if a school were to be so closely located to a residential area. She stated that one way to protect Burning Tree Drive residents would be to eliminate a direct route from Meadowmont Lane to Pinehurst Drive. Council Member Evans asked about the possibility of crossing the Resource Conservation District further down the current proposal. Mr. Perry said this was a possibility. Council Member Evans inquired whether there would be left turn lanes along Meadowmont Lane. Mr. Kirchbaum stated that left turn lanes would be provided to facilitate turning movements. Mr. Perry added that a left turn lane might also be needed to accommodate a possible school site.

Stating that it was important not to impinge on existing neighborhoods, Council Member Capowski suggested not connecting Pinehurst Drive to Meadowmont Lane. Mayor Broun said this matter could be decided by the Council in the future. Council Member Capowski inquired how bicyclists could access the UNC campus from the proposed Meadowmont development. Mr. Murray said bicycle lanes would be constructed along Meadowmont Lane. Mr. Kirchbaum said staff was recommending that the applicant provide disconnected bicycle lanes across the full frontage of the proposed Meadowmont development. Council Member Capowski suggested that the applicant might also wish to consider constructing a bicycle lane on the south side of NC 54.

Mayor Broun noted that there was an existing bicycle & jogging path near the Friday Center which might be extended with cooperation between the applicant and the University. Mr. Perry noted that he had been in contact with the University about development in the Mason Farm area. Council Member Waldorf said she would encourage the applicant to continue talking to the University about possible cooperative ventures on the southern portion of the site. Mr. Perry said he felt that the ultimate design and types of uses on the southern part of the property should be designed in conjunction with the University's plans. He expressed hope that NCDOT would permit a pedestrian/bicycle connection under NC 54.

Mayor Broun reviewed concerns noted by Council Members this evening including the proposal for direct driveways on to Meadowmont Lane, the need for clarification of street grid patterns in relation to topography, road patterns in relation to land uses, future access to the Lloyd property and the interconnection of bicycle path.

Council Member Brown said she thought it was very important that the Council discuss the provision of narrower streets in neighborhoods as a traffic calming technique. Mr. Perry said he and his colleagues concurred that this was an important component of proper character for the proposed community. Mr. Perry noted that he and his colleagues looked forward to discussing this matter in further detail with the Council.

Preservation of Environmentally Sensitive Areas

Mr. Perry stated that there were two environmentally sensitive areas on the proposed site. He noted that there was a Corp of Engineers flowage easement in the far northern portion of the property which was proposed for wetlands preservation. Mr. Perry stated that the only possible use of this area would be a nature trail, with minimal impact on this environmentally sensitive area.

Noting that he had recently walked in this area, Council Member Chilton said he believed there were some utility easements in the area. Mr. Murray stated that there were two or three natural gas lines in the area. Mr. Kirchbaum noted that the vast majority of this area was heavily wooded. Council Member Chilton asked whether the applicant proposed to use the same alignment for a nature trail as the existing deteriorated and little used trail. Mr. Perry said this was correct. Council Member Chilton asked about the possibility of using Chapel Hill gravel for the trail. Mr. Kirchbaum said he believed that a boardwalk would be a preferable approach in the sensitive wetlands area. Council Member Chilton asked whether two crossings of Little Creek were proposed. Mr. Kirchbaum said the applicant proposed a loop type trail which would require only one crossing of the creek. He noted that the Corp of Engineers evaluation of the wetlands area would be completed in the near term. Council Member Evans said she hoped tree preservation would be foremost in the applicant's mind. Mr. Perry stated that all steps would be taken to preserve as many trees as possible.

Council Member Brown requested clarification of how the specific dimensions of the wetlands area would be designated. Mr. Kirchbaum said the specific metes and bounds would be certified by the Army Corp of Engineers.

Mr. Perry stated that the second environmentally sensitive area was the Resource Conservation District area running north and south through the proposed Village Center to the Corp of Engineers easement. He noted that there was another RCD area near the Chapel Hill Country Club. Mr. Perry stated that a drawing with survey lines to delineate the area could be provided to the Council.

Mayor Broun inquired about anticipated stormwater impacts on surrounding properties. Mr. Kirchbaum said this was a difficult question to answer, given its complexity. He stated that all necessary steps would be taken to comply with the Town's impervious surface limitations, especially in sensitive areas. Mr. Waldon stated that the staff's preliminary analysis was that there would be more water quality, rather than water quantity, concerns to address. He noted that the maintenance of stormwater detention basins would be an important matter to be resolved.

Council Member Waldorf inquired how close the proposed development was to Jordan Lake water quality restrictions. Mr. Murray said the maximum impervious surface coverage for the southern portion of the site was fifty percent and twenty-four percent for the northern area. Mr. Perry said he believed the density of the proposed project was more constrained by impervious surface restrictions than zoning or other regulatory powers. He stated that impervious surface restrictions were an effective to safeguard against overdevelopment.

Council Member Brown inquired whether the applicant had given consideration to cluster developments. Mayor Broun suggested that this would be a good starting point for discussions at the next work session on Thursday, July 6th at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber. Mr. Davis inquired whether Council Member Brown could provide examples of desirable cluster developments. Council Member Brown said she would attempt to do so.

Council Member Waldorf inquired about the projected profitability of the plan. Mr. Perry said his firm had downscaled the retail and office component by about twenty percent. Mr. Perry stated that any further reductions in intensity would necessitate cost savings

tradeoffs in order for the project to remain fiscally viable. Council Member Waldorf inquired approximately how many R-1 lots might be developed in lieu of a mixed-use development. Mr. Perry said approximately six hundred and fifty. Mayor Broun said it might be useful to discuss cost saving options at the July 6th work session. Mr. Perry said he would be pleased to do so.

The work session concluded at 8:39 p.m.