AGENDA #1

memorandum

to: Mayor and Town Council

from: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

subject: Public Hearing: Chapel Hill Kehillah Parking Lot - Application for Special Use Permit

date: January 18, 2006

PURPOSE

We have received a request for approval of a Special Use Permit for a proposed Park/Ride Facility at the Chapel Hill Kehillah, at the corner of Mason Farm Road and Purefoy Road. This site is also adjacent to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill main campus. The site is located in the Residential-4 (R-4) zoning district, and is identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map Number 7.71.C.11, PIN 9788-51-0886.

The application proposes to rent 50 existing parking spaces to commuters. Commercial parking lots are not permitted in a residential zoning district. The applicant requests approval of a Special Use Permit as a Park/Ride Facility.

The applicant is requesting several modifications in the Land Use Management Ordinance. The applicant is requesting the Council modify the regulations and exempt the applicant from constructing a sidewalk and installing a bus shelter. The applicant is also requesting that the Council modify the regulations and exempt the applicant from having to submit various site plan details required by the Land Use Management Ordinance. The Town Council has the ability to modify the regulations, according to Section 4.5.6 in 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 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

The Kehillah is located on the site formally occupied by the Chapel Hill Bible Church. In 1978, the Town Council authorized a Special Use Permit for on-site parking for Chapel Hill Bible Church in a residential zoning district. The Special Use Permit was abandoned in 1986 because the ordinance no longer required a Special Use Permit for the place of worship parking. A Concept Plan for the proposed Park/Ride facility was reviewed by the Community Design Commission on April 20, 2005, and by the Town Council on June 20, 2005. Summary Comments and Council Minutes from June 20 are attached to this memorandum. The Special Use Permit application was submitted July 18, 2005.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

We believe that the primary use of the existing parking lot is by individuals attending activities at the Kehillah. The applicant is proposing to rent 50 parking spaces in the Kehillah parking lot. We believe that individuals attending activities on the University of North Carolina main campus will be the likely users of this proposed commercial parking lot.

The applicant is not proposing any changes to the existing gravel parking lot. Recently the applicant re-surfaced the lot with new gravel and installed wheel stops. The applicant is also proposing a $500 payment to the Town towards a pedestrian crosswalk on Mason Farm Road.

EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION

The applicant is proposing to use 50 existing parking spaces as a commercial parking lot at the Kehillah place of worship. The Chapel Hill Kehillah site is located in a Residential-4 (R-4) zoning district. The current use of the property, a place of worship with associated on-site parking, is a permitted use. The applicant’s proposed change in use, to convert 50 of the existing 82 parking spaces into rental parking for individuals attending activities away from the Kehillah property, is not a permitted use in a residential zoning district.

To establish a commercial parking lot in a residential zoning district, the Land Use Management Ordinance requires:

1. A rezoning of the property to a non-residential zone; or

2. Authorization from the Council of a Special Use Permit as a Park/Ride Terminal.

In lieu of pursuing an application to rezone the property, the applicant has submitted an application for a Special Use Permit for a Park/Ride Terminal. We anticipate that other places of worship located in residential zoning districts may request similar consideration.

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, would comply with the regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and Design Manual, with the conditions 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 and whether it chooses to approve the proposed modifications of regulations.

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 five key issues associated with this development: 1) Sidewalks; 2) Bus stop and shelter; 3) Mason Farm crosswalk; 4) Refuse/Recycling facility; and 5) Modifications to the regulations. Each is discussed below.

1. Sidewalks (on Mason Farm Road and Purefoy Road): No sidewalks are proposed as part of this application. We believe that due to the increased traffic generated by this proposed use and the associated pedestrian activity, that sidewalks should be constructed along the frontage of this site. We recommend that the applicant construct sidewalks on the property frontage on the south side of Mason Farm Road and east side of Purefoy Road. We believe that portions of this recommended sidewalk will require that the applicant construct curb and gutter. Curb and gutter requirements would be based on limitations due to existing landscaping and an existing drainage swale.

The applicant is objecting to the recommendation to provide sidewalks along the site’s street frontages on Purefoy Road and Mason Farm Road. The applicant believes that the proposed development does not generate enough traffic to warrant a sidewalk along the site’s Purefoy Road frontage and that the existing sidewalk on the opposite side of Mason Farm Road negates the need for a sidewalk along Mason Farm Road.

The applicant is asking the Town Council to modify the regulations in the Land Use Management Ordinance with respect to the construction of sidewalk along Mason Farm Road and Purefoy Road. Please refer to key issue number 5 for additional discussion on this subject.

Comment: Section 5.8.1 of the Land Use Management Ordinance requires that “… pedestrian systems in the vicinity of the development site shall be extended to the site to the extent practical.”

We believe that in this particular case the construction of the sidewalks is necessary to comply with the Land Use Management Ordinance requirements regarding external circulation for bicycles and pedestrians. Although the lack of sidewalks along this site frontage is an existing nonconformity, we believe the increased site activity associated with the addition of the rental parking spaces will increase the extent of the nonconformity. Information submitted by the applicant estimated that this proposed Park/Ride facility will generate approximately 200 vehicle trips per day.

Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, includes a stipulation that would require the applicant to construct sidewalks along the site’s street frontages. We believe removal of the sidewalk stipulation would require that the Council modify the regulations in the Land Use Management Ordinance.

2. Bus shelter and bus stop: The Land Use Management Ordinance requires that a Park/Ride Terminal be accessible by public bus transportation and that bus shelters be provided (Section 6.8). The closest existing bus stop to the site (approximately 1,000 feet) is at the intersection of Mason Farm Road and East Drive, near the University of North Carolina Hospitals parking deck. A copy of bus routes and stops/shelter is attached to this memorandum. The applicant is not proposing any bus stop/shelter improvements. The applicant is asking the Town Council to modify the regulations in the Land Use Management Ordinance with respect to the bus shelter. Please refer to key issue number 5 for additional discussion on this subject.

Comment: Article 6.8 (Park/Ride Terminal) in the Land Use Management Ordinance requires that: “The proposed facility shall be accessible by public transportation and bus passenger shelter shall be provided.”

In this case there are no immediate plans to provide bus service to this section of Mason Farm Road, we anticipate that service along this corridor will be considered to accommodate the recently opened student family housing and continued construction in the South Campus area. If this Park/Ride facility is approved, we anticipate that it would also increase demand for the provision of transit service along this corridor. We anticipate service along the Mason Farm corridor would require that a shelter be placed on the Kehillah site or on the side opposite of the Kehillah, to transport riders to campus. Therefore, we recommend that the applicant provide a $5,000 payment-in-lieu for a bus shelter.

We recommend that the applicant provide a bus shelter as required by the Land Use Management Ordinance. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, includes a stipulation that would have the applicant provide a payment-in-lieu of $5,000 for a bus shelter. If not acceptable to the applicant, we recommend that a bus shelter be provided as required by the Land Use Management Ordinance. Removal of the bus shelter stipulation would require that the Council modify the regulations in the Land Use Management Ordinance.

3. Mason Farm Road crosswalk and speed table: There are no crosswalks on Mason Farm Road in the vicinity of this proposed Park/Ride facility. The site plan submitted by the applicant includes a proposed crosswalk on Mason Farm Road near the Kehillah driveway on Mason Farm Road. The applicant is proposing to provide a $500 payment-in-lieu to the Town of Chapel Hill for the installation of the crosswalk.

Comment: We believe that the due to the increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic generated by this proposed Park/Ride Facility, that the applicant should be responsible for a greater portion of the cost of the proposed crosswalk. We recommend that the applicant provide a crosswalk made of thermoplastic material or inlay tape. Thermoplastic material or inlay tape is customarily used by the Town. It is recommended over paint because it is more durable, lasting 5-6 times longer than paint. We estimate that the cost to install this crosswalk is approximately $2,000.

We recommend that the applicant be required to provide a $1,500 payment-in-lieu, to cover a portion of the costs of installing the crosswalk. We also believe that in order to better accommodate pedestrian movements, the preferred location for a crosswalk is at the Purefoy Road/Mason Farm Road intersection as opposed to the mid-block location proposed by the applicant.

Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, includes a stipulation that would require the applicant to provide a payment-in-lieu of $1,500 for a crosswalk on Mason Farm Road. We also recommend that prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit that the Manager review and approve the final design and location of this crosswalk. We have included this recommendation in Resolution A.

4. Alternate Refuse/Recycling Collection Area

Until recently, the Town of Chapel Hill collected refuse from this property by servicing a side-loading dumpster. Last July, the Town began to phase out servicing side-loading dumpsters. In response, the applicant located a front-loading dumpster in the southeast corner of the parking lot.

Due to the geometric design of the parking lot and the applicant’s proposal to rent parking spaces, and therefore increase the intensity of use, we are concerned that the Town will not be able to service the front-loading dumpster at its current location. We recommend that the applicant submit plans for an alternate location, or contract with a private company for refuse service, at such time that the Town is unable to service the applicant’s refuse facility.

The applicant is asking the Town Council to modify the regulations in the Land Use Management Ordinance with respect to providing a plan for an alternate refuse collection area. Please refer to key issue number 5 for additional discussion on this subject.

Comment: Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, requires the applicant to submit a site plan for an alternate site for refuse facility, or provide for private collection service, at such time that the Town is unable to access the refuse container. The Resolution also includes a stipulation that the alternate refuse facility is designed and construction to comply with the Town’s Design Manual with respect to dimensions and improvements including a concrete pad, bollards and screening.

5. Modifications to the Regulations

The applicant requests modification to regulations in the Land Use Management Ordinance for each issue identified above. The Town Council has the ability to modify the regulations, according to Section 4.5.6 in 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.”

Comment: The applicant is proposing to modify the regulations in the Land Use Management Ordinance as they relate to the following requirements: sidewalks, bus shelter, and refuse facilities. We recommend that the applicant comply with the regulations.

The applicant believes that the the Council could find that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree because:

“The Chapel Hill Kehillah promotes the health and welfare of the Chapel Hill populace through its spiritual and community activities for its congregants and through its social action and social justice activities for the Chapel Hill community at large. These activities and the house of worship itself require financial support which a new congregation such as the Kehillah is hard pressed to secure. A Special Use Permit for renting out parking spaces will help provide the resources to enable the Kehillah to continue to provide its spiritual and community action programs.”

[Applicant’s Statement]

In summary, the Town Council may modify one or more of the proposed modifications to regulations if it makes a finding in the particular case, that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree. The Town Council may deny one or more of the proposed modifications from regulations at its discretion. If the Council chooses to deny a request for modification to regulations, the applicant’s alternative is to comply with regulations.

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 receives copy of Council-adopted resolution and Special Use Permit document for recordation.

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

· North Carolina Department of Transportation,

· North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources,

· Orange Water and Sewer Authority,

· Duke Power Company,

· Public Service Company,

· Time Warner Cable, and

· BellSouth.

3. Community Design Commission reviews and approves site lighting plan and alternate landscape buffer yard (if required by Council-adopted Resolution).

4. Any relevant access easement and right-of-way dedication plat(s) are approved by Town staff, and are recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office.

5. Upon applicant’s 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.

6. Engineering Department issues an Engineering Construction Permit, authorizing any work within the public right-of-way.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Stipulations added to Resolution A, the Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation:

Following Advisory Boards review of the application, the following recommendations were included in Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation:

1. Mason Farm Road crosswalk payment-in-lieu: That the applicant provides a payment-in-lieu, not to exceed $1,500 towards a highly visible, thermal-plastic crosswalk on Mason Farm Road.

Comment: The Planning Board and Community Design Commission recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation includes a stipulation for a $1,500 payment-in-lieu for the crosswalk. Please refer to the Key Issues discussion concerning the Mason Farm cross walk for additional information.

2. Bus Shelter site and payment-in-lieu: That the applicant provide a payment-in-lieu for a bus shelter and set aside an area on the site for a potential future bus stop.

Comment: The Transportation Board recommended that the applicant designate a portion of the site for a future bus stop in lieu of providing a bus shelter. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, includes a stipulation requiring that the need and location for a future bus stop on this site, and the need for signage identifying the closest bus stops are to be determined during final plan review. We also recommend a payment-in-lieu of providing a bus shelter. The payment could be used to provide a shelter on the Kehillah property or on a public street, as appropriate. Please refer to the Key Issues discussion concerning bus stop and bus shelter for additional information.

3. Uncovered bicycle parking: That the approval of this Special Use Permit shall not require the applicant to provide covered bicycle parking spaces.

Comment: The Transportation Board and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommended deleting the stipulation requiring the applicant to comply with the Town’s Design Manual for Class I (covered) bicycle parking spaces. The existing site includes an uncovered bicycle rack for 30 bicycles in the center of the parking area. The Land Use Management Ordinance requires a minimum of eight (8) bicycle parking spaces. The Town’s Design Manual requires that seven of the parking spaces comply with Class I bicycle parking standards. As an existing nonconforming feature, we believe that this existing bicycle parking can be allowed to remain. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, does not require the applicant to comply with the Class I design standards.

4. Gravel parking area: That the proposed parking lot may continue to existing with a gravel surface area.

Comment: The Planning Board and the Community Design Commission recommended that the applicant be permitted to operate the proposed Park/Ride Facility with a gravel surface area. We believe that gravel is an all-weather material and, in this particular case, complies with the provision in the Town’s Design Manual permitting alternate design options for parking lots on a case by case basis. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, allows the operation of this proposed Park/Ride facility with a gravel parking lot.

Advisory Board Recommendations not incorporated into Resolution A, the Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation:

Following Advisory Boards review of the application, the following stipulations were recommended for Resolution A. These recommendations were not incorporated into Resolution A:

5. No Sidewalk on Mason Farm Road or Purefoy Road: That the approval of this Special Use Permit shall not require the applicant to construct a sidewalk along the site’s frontage on Purefoy Road or Mason Farm Road.

Comment: The Planning Board, Transportation Board, Community Design Commission, and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommendations deleted the stipulation requiring the applicant to construct a sidewalk on Purefoy and Mason Farm Roads. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation includes a stipulation requiring the applicant to construct the sidewalks. Please refer to the Key Issues discussion concerning sidewalks for additional information.

6. Mason Farm Road Speed Table: That if determined practical, that the design of the crosswalk shall include a speed table.

Comment: The Planning Board and Community Design Commission recommended the incorporation of a speed table into the design of the Mason Farm Road cross walk. Traffic calming features for this area of Town are considered in the context of a yearly traffic report associated with Development Plan for the University of North Carolina main campus. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation does not includes this recommendation.

7. No bus stop shelter or signage identifying closest bus stops: That the approval of this Special Use Permit shall not require the applicant to provide a bus shelter or bus stop sign.

Comment: The Planning Board, Transportation Board, Community Design Commission, and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommendations deleted the stipulation requiring the applicant to provide a bus shelter. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation includes a stipulation requiring the applicant to provide a payment-in-lieu towards a bus shelter. Please refer to the Key Issues discussion concerning bus shelter for additional information.

Recommendations from Advisory Boards and the Manager are summarized below.

Planning Board: On December 6, 2005, the Planning Board voted 10-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution B. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.

Transportation Board: On November 1, 2005, the Transportation Board voted 7-2 to recommend that the Council approve the application with the adoption of Resolution C. Please see the attached Summary of Transportation Board Action.

Community Design Commission: On December 14, 2005, the Community Design Commission voted 8-1 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution B. Please see the attached Summary of Community Design Commission Action.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board: On November 22, 2005, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board voted to recommend that the Council approve the application with the adoption of Resolution D. Please see the attached Summary of Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Action.

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 in the Land Use Management Ordinance.

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, and modification to regulations as previously described, we recommend that the application be approved with the adoption of Resolution A.

Resolution B is proposed by the Planning Board and Community Design Commission.

Resolution C is proposed by the Transportation Board.

Resolution D is proposed by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board.

Resolution E would deny the application.

Kehillah Park/Ride Facility – Special Use Permit

Differences Among Resolutions

ISSUES

Resolution A (Approval)

Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation

Resolution B

(Approval)

Planning Board & Community Design Commission