Mayor Kevin Foy called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Council members present were Laurin Easthom, Sally Greene, Ed Harrison, Cam Hill, Mark Kleinschmidt, Bill Strom, Bill Thorpe, and Jim Ward.
Staff members present were Town Manager Roger Stancil, Deputy Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Bruce Heflin, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Town Information Officer Catherine Lazorko, Planning Director J. B. Culpepper, Development Coordinator Gene Poveromo, Senior Planner Kay Pearlstein, and Deputy Town Clerk Sandy Cook.
Mayor Foy announced that the agenda would be modified to include a Closed Session at the end of the meeting. Also, he said, Gene Poveromo wanted to make a clarification about an item that was on the agenda.
Development Coordinator Gene Poveromo displayed a site map for Townhouse Apartments, also known as The Residences at Grove Park, stating that this was on the agenda as a Concept Plan. Mr. Poveromo noted that there was a project south of this one referred to as the MLKB project that had been scheduled for this evening, and notifications were sent to residences within the 1,000-foot notification area. He stated that the applicant had requested that review of that development be postponed until October 4.
Mr. Poveromo noted this was a preliminary plat proposal for a 4.7-acre site located on the east side of Pinehurst Drive, between Burning Tree Drive and Driskel Court. He said the applicant proposed a new street and four residential lots with access from Pinehurst Drive. Mr. Poveromo displayed an area map of the proposed development. He said the site was located in the R-1 zoning district with a portion of the site in the Resource Conservation District (RCD).
Mr. Poveromo said one key issue had been identified during review of this proposal, relating to stormwater features. He said the applicant was proposing to manage the stormwater by constructing stormwater facilities within the Pinehurst Drive public street right-of-way and in the streamside zone of the RCD. Mr. Poveromo said the Land Use Management Ordinance (LUMO) prohibited these types of facilities in the streamside section of the RCD, and they believed that allowing construction of retention facilities in the right-of-way would equate to providing the facilities off-site, which does not comply with LUMO regulations.
Mr. Poveromo stated that the staff recommendation was adoption of Resolution A, with conditions.
John Mackowiak, the applicant, noted they had lived on the property for the last seven years, and they were requesting subdivision of the property primarily because of rising property taxes. He stated their plan was to create the new lot 2 for their “emptying nester” home, adding that two of their three children were not in college. Mr. Mackowiak said the plan was to sell the current home on lot 3 and retain lots 1 and 4. He said the proposed new road would present four long driveways from emptying onto Pinehurst Drive from four long, skinny lots.
Mr. Mackowiak stated their request was approval of Resolution A to allow them to proceed to the construction drawing phase and obtain a Zoning Compliance Permit (ZCP). He asked the Council to consider three enhancements to the proposed Resolution A:
Rain Garden placement, referred to in Stipulations 7, 27 and 29.
Homeowners Association and maintenance of the buffer, referred to in Stipulation 16.
Recreation credit for the path to the fields, referred to in Stipulations 12 and 14.
Mr. Mackowiak said, regarding the new recreation payment-in-lieu formula referred to in Stipulations 12 and 14, it would require a payment-in-lieu of $106,465 or about $35,488 for each of the newly created three lots. He said they were asking for credit for the approximately 900 square feet of pedestrian path to the soccer fields/school/park, which amounted to $6,000. Mr. Mackowiak stated the credit would encourage future pedestrian paths.
Mr. Mackowiak requested that Stipulation 16 regarding buffer ownership be
removed, which would require the Homeowners Association to own and maintain
half of the backyard on lots 2 and 3. He noted that conditions could be added
to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Mr. Mackowiak stated that
LUMO did not require Homeowners Association ownership of a buffer, and dual
ownership and maintenance of a backyard may not ensure compliance.
Mr. Mackowiak explained the proposed enhancement to Resolution A regarding the management of stormwater, noting they wanted to minimize increases in stormwater runoff and minimize increases in pollution, just as the Town did. He discussed the rain garden proposal, noting it would not be experimental since it had been proven to work, as noted by Bill Hunt from NC State University. Mr. Mackowiak provided some comparisons of rain garden standards, and stated that the real question for the Council to decide was whether or not they should maximize the amount of stormwater treated. He stated that the rain garden would do that.
Mr. Mackowiak provided some information on issues raised by the Planning Board, quoting that it had recommended that they investigate an encroachment agreement if that was a better environmental and practical solution.
Mr. Mackowiak said the policy question for the Council to decide was, what was the best possible use for the Town’s unused right-of-way area at 1025 Pinehurst Drive. He stated their proposal would treat up to 50 percent more stormwater, would prevent untreated water from entering rapidly into the RCD, and would use improved technology. He said the Homeowners Association would maintain the rain garden, adding that it could serve as an education site for school science classes, would require an easement to use the right-of-way, and would cost them more to build.
Mike Shepper, Mr. Mackowiak’s neighbor, spoke in favor of the proposal made by Mr. Mackowiak. He said there should be some type of natural buffer to help protect his property from the dust and noise that would occur with the grading and construction during the period when Aquabella was developed. Mr. Shepper said that Pinehurst Drive in that area was very attractive, and he hoped that whatever changes were made would not destroy the aesthetics of area.
Council Member Ward asked for the staff’s opinion on the proposed stormwater treatment plan. Mr. Poveromo stated they did not have enough information to determine if the applicant’s proposal would meet LUMO regulations. He said such determinations were usually made when final plans were submitted.
Council Member Ward said rain gardens were not new technology. He said he wanted Chapel Hill to be nimble enough and smart enough to realize that one size did not fit all, and while there were various limitations on what could and could not be done in the RCD, sometimes there were other factors that must be recognized. Council Member Ward said he wanted the Council to recognize and respond to those times when the regulations did not make the most sense.
Council Member Ward said he believed it was clear that the applicant would be able to treat his stormwater as well as additional stormwater from Pinehurst Drive with his proposal. He asked if it were possible to enter into a Performance Agreement with Mr. Mackowiak so that if the proposal did not meet or exceed LUMO then steps would have to be taken to do so.
Council Member Thorpe asked about what the right-of-way would look like if the Council accepted Mr. Mackowiak’s proposal to install a rain garden. Mr. Mackowiak displayed a photograph of an existing rain garden and explained what it would look like. He said the regulations required that stormwater be treated “on site,” but his proposal would put it in the right-of-way.
Council Member Thorpe commended Mr. Mackowiak for his work to gather the information to be presented tonight.
Mayor pro tem Strom said he believed there was a compelling argument being made that the right-of-way was the most logical place for the stormwater facility. He said he would be interested in seeing language to that effect so that the Council could approve the applicant’s request. Mayor pro tem Strom said he believed it was “silly” to include a stipulation to require a buffer to a fairway on a golf course, since a large buffer already existed.
Mayor pro tem Strom asked Mr. Shepper if he was asking for a temporary buffer during construction or a permanent buffer from the development. Mr. Shepper said it would be preferable to enjoy the continued peace and quiet that he had enjoyed as a neighbor of Mr. Mackowiak. Mayor pro tem Strom said he would like to ask Mr. Mackowiak to consider some sort of buffer when this came back to the Council.
Council Member Harrison said he had recently heard a presentation regarding stormwater facilities, and he had realized that the Town’s LUMO regulations did not incorporate low impact design (LID). He stated that this was an established technology that was not addressed in the Town’s regulations. Council Member Harrison said this was a good chance for them to think about how to move forward with that.
Council Member Harrison said the buffer was an issue, and it was unclear to him how to deal with that. Mr. Karpinos said this was a subdivision, and the opportunity for the Council to impose conditions and have flexibility was much more limited that in the case of a SUP application. Council Member Harrison said that perhaps Mr. Mackowiak would be willing to address that issue on his own.
Council Member Ward commented that Resolution A was requesting a two- to three-foot path to connect it to the Rayfield property. He said he would like to see a map of where that footpath proposed and how it would connect. Mr. Mackowiak displayed a site plan and pointed out the proposed location of the footpath.
Council Member Ward said he did not believe asking for this narrow footpath would not provide the type of connectivity that he wanted for the community. He said if the Town required five-foot sidewalks so that two people could walk side by side, then this footpath should be that width as well. Council Member Ward said he wanted to make sure that bicycles would not be excluded from using the bike path, and wanted language to that effect incorporated into the resolution.
Council Member Easthom asked for more information regarding rain gardens in general, and specifically how they would work here. She asked also for options to consider if a rain garden was not proposed.
MAYOR PRO TEM STROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO OCTOBER 9 AND REFER ALL COMMENTS TO THE MANAGER AND ATTORNEY. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Planning Director J. B. Culpepper stated that the applicant was proposing an increase in floor area to 133,000 square feet to include a Parish Center, gymnasium, athletic field, library, classrooms, and an Art and Music Building. She said the applicant also proposed a change to access and circulation with a new road alignment for Carmichael Street and a new second driveway for the campus. Ms. Culpepper noted that the site was located on 21.5 acres at 940 Carmichael Street between Laurel Hill Road and Raleigh Road. She said the Concept Plan proposed to modify LUMO and the SUP for the campus.
Phil Post, with Phil Post and Associations, Inc. and speaking for the applicant, asked the Council to have a careful and patient view of this project. He noted that the new facilities being proposed were a part of the master plan formed 10 years ago. Mr. Post displayed an aerial view of the campus, noting the facilities now totaled about 80,000 square feet and they were proposing an additional 53,000 square feet, for a total of 133,000 square feet.
Mr. Post said the facilities proposed that would fulfill the master plan were not an expansion of the church, in that there would be no increase in the number of students or in the capacity of the sanctuary. He said the new facilities were to enhance the services of the Church, such as additional classrooms, administrative and storage space, and an Art and Music Building.
Mr. Post noted that there was a driveway on the site that was shared with Aldersgate United Methodist Church, and that shared driveway was contained within the UNC public right-of-way that had been conveyed by St. Thomas More to the original Country Club to provide access to the campus. He said currently there were 273 parking spaces, and with the number of Masses held on Saturdays and Sundays there were not enough parking spaces on site. Mr. Post said they proposed to add an additional 150 parking spaces to alleviate that problem. He said by redesigning the existing parking for more efficiency and adding a small amount of paving, those additional parking spaces could be accommodated.
Mr. Post pointed out the location of the existing stormwater control facility, noting that because good planning had taken place when the facility was first built it would continue to operate efficiently with the proposed additions.
Mr. Post pointed out the location on the site plan of a third driveway on Carmichael Street to help the circulation pattern. He indicated that one of the problems was that the existing intersection at Carmichael Street at 15-501 was awkward, noting that if you wanted to travel north at the traffic light traffic tended to stack up because vehicles had to make a 180-degree turn, which allowed only a small number of vehicles to exit during each light cycle. Mr. Post stated that Aldersgate had suggested that St. Thomas More encourage its visitors to use an alternate exit to relieve pressure on that lighted intersection.
Mr. Post said they had talked with Town staff and NCDOT officials, and had conceptually worked out an alternate traffic pattern. He said the new pattern would abandoned a portion of Carmichael and reroute the public road to come out at a 90-degree angle to the existing intersection, allowing traffic to make a left or right hand turn and improving efficiency. Mr. Post said they did have issues to work out with the neighbors, particularly with residents on Laurel Hill Road who feared opposing traffic would predominate, allowing traffic to backup onto Laurel Hill Road. He said some of that concern could be alleviated by resignalizing the intersection to give Laurel Hill Road a portion of the signal time to allow that traffic only to move.
Mr. Post said the second issue had to do with the existing driveway from Aldersgate. He said they had discussed the issue with Aldersgate and several proposals were being considered to alleviate that concern, including human traffic control to allowing the traffic stream to continue to move.
Mr. Post said the residents of St. James Place had also expressed concern about clearing in the corridor. He said they wanted to preserve that green corridor as much as possible to buffer the homes on St. James Place. Mr. Post said there had been talk about noise nearer to the homes, but with 40,000 to 50,000 trips per day on 15-501, if they could get the cars off of the site more quickly and efficiently they believe that would be a win-win situation. He said they believed that all, or nearly all, of the existing green corridor could be preserved.
Mayor pro tem Strom asked for a clearer explanation of the UNC access point. Mr. Post said UNC had indicated they had no intention of using the access but wanted to preserve their option for future access to its athletic facilities. He said St. Thomas More had offered to build the access to a point, so that if in the future UNC wanted to extend it, they would be able to do so.
Council Member Harrison asked if all of Carmichael Street was a Town-maintained road. Mr. Post stated it was an NCDOT-maintained service road, located within the right-of-way of Highway 15-501. He indicated that neighbors had asked about the possibility of extending the dead-end to connect to Raleigh Road, and NCDOT had stated flatly that would not be allowed.
Council Member Kleinschmidt asked what the degree of confidence was that the new signalization could be accomplished. Mr. Post said they were very confident, noting it had been discussed conceptually during meetings with NCDOT and it had been well received.
Wes McClure, the project architect, reiterated that there would be a net new gain of 53,000 square feet. He displayed a site plan, and pointed out the existing facilities and the proposed new facilities on the campus. Mr. McClure also pointed out proposed ingress and egress points. Mr. McClure exhibited a three-dimensional drawing of the campus, and pointed out the existing structures on the site and where new structures were planned. He displayed an aerial view as well as an oblique view of the campus, pointing out existing components and indicating proposed special features.
David Kirkman, representing the Trustees of Aldersgate United Methodist Church, stated that the Church had an objection to the new conceived exit point for the southern end of the St. Thomas More property, which abutted their property. He noted that was the only means of egress from their property. Mr. Kirkman said one of the “great shames” in all of this was that about 12 years ago the two churches had stood in harmony in matters of safety and easy ingress and egress of traffic from the two properties and from surrounding neighborhoods. He said that harmony no longer existed.
Mr. Kirkman said it was a shame they had had to write the letter to the Town that was included in tonight’s materials, but they had not written it precipitously. He said they had studied the plans for this project, and had attended neighborhood meetings and expressed their opinions. Mr. Kirkman said they had been assured that their opinions would be considered, but had learned that there would not be much of a change to accommodate their opinions. He stated that it appeared that the simple solutions had been ignored, and they wanted to continue dialogue with St. Thomas More, to which they had agreed.
Mr. Kirkman said they were encouraged by the proposal to resignalize the intersection to reduce many of the problems stated tonight, but were concerned that it may be difficult to accomplish. He said they wanted to “come to the table” to discuss concrete suggestions the concerns regarding the safety of their children, their elderly as well as other parishioners, and to find a way to avoid the threat of cut-through traffic.
Deil Wright, a member of Aldersgate United Methodist Church, said the details of this project were crucial aspects from the standpoint of signalization, the access, the configuration on the property, and especially the nature of the intersection at 15-501. He said it was equally important to minimize the amount of driver confusion experienced. Mr. Wright said the number of joggers were also a concern, who often tried to cross from Laurel Hill to Mason Farm and the Golf Course. He said if was important that the two churches work out the specific details of how the flow would exit from the respective driveways, and how it would move from there.
Carol Hazard, a resident of Laurel Hill Road and a member of St. Thomas More Church, said about 19 years ago she had led the drive to get the stoplight at the intersection. She said she was encouraged by the dual signalization proposed since that was such a complicated intersection.
Winston Liao, also a resident of the Laurel Hill neighborhood, said he was encouraged by the collaboration amongst the parties to share information and find solutions. He said he wanted to see safety and preservation of the environment, and that the sense of neighborhood remain. Mr. Liao said he wanted to see that collaboration continued.
Council Member Kleinschmidt asked what exactly the controversy was here. He said he understood the traffic concern and the safety issue, but what exactly was the problem. Council Member Kleinschmidt asked if there was concern that the traffic light would not work. Mr. Post said the Council understood that this was just a broad conceptual plan at this point, but was not sure if others understood that. He said one issue from Laurel Hill was how to get out into traffic safely, and they believed the suggested configuration at the traffic light would provide relief to that issue.
Mr. Post said the other issue was with Aldersgate, which was their one-way gravel driveway system. He said they park along that gravel driveway, and this plan would cause them to lose some of that existing parking. Mr. Post said since it was a one-way drive out, it had been suggested that people would try to use that drive in the opposite direction if traffic were to back up at the intersection. He said Aldersgate believed that anything that would promote that use of their driveway could be catastrophic. Mr. Post said as they move into final design that issue would have to be address.
Mr. Post said the third issue was that on Sunday mornings, there were several services held at both churches, and at times many vehicles were trying to exit at the same time, which created backup. He said the backup lasted for only about fifteen minutes, and that situation would be addressed as they moved forward. Mr. Post said he felt sure that they would be able to come forward with design solutions to address all of these issues.
Council Member Ward asked about the number of additional parking spaces. Mr. Post noted that currently there were 273, and they were proposing an additional 190, for a total of 463. He said that number was in general conformance with the original master plan, and they had been able to design the site so that very little additional paving would be required.
Council Member Ward said he was employed by the Botanical Garden, and he was not aware that the Church had approached the Botanical Garden to apprise them of what was planned and he was disappointed about that. He stated that the traffic backed up so severely that it was to the point of being dangerous at that entrance, noting the cars took all of the capacity of the exit ramp on 15-501 with bumpers frequently sticking out into the road. Council Member Ward said he could not conceive how they could put more traffic onto this site and it not become even more dangerous. He said he also encouraged people to drive vehicles.
Council Member Ward said that Christopher Road was a two-lane road, but was used as a three-lane road since many times people parked along the roadway. He said he did not believe the additional parking would alleviate that. Council Member Ward stated that they had a capacity of 450 in the school, 1000 in the sanctuary, and a new social hall with a capacity of 500 people sitting and 1,000 standing. He said if you projected the number of cars needed to get that many people to the site, that was worrisome.
Council Member Ward said with a project like this, there needed to be a concept strategy at the concept stage to deal with traffic management, and he did not see that being accomplished with new turning lanes and new signalization. He said he did not see how the Church could be comfortable not addressing that with a reduction in the number of vehicles accessing the site. Council Member Ward said the Church needed to take steps internally with its congregation to address these problems. He said that having a parent drop a child off at school was the “old way” of doing business, and it could not continue. Council Member Ward said other ways of transporting children and parishioners to the site should be considered. He said the road system was failing on a daily basis.
Mr. Post said in their discussions with NCDOT and Town staff, the stacking on 15-501 had been discussed. He said they had designed the site so that the stacking Council Member Ward had mentioned would take place internally on the site rather than on the roadway itself. Mr. Post said they had a plan to completely eliminate that backup onto 15-501.
Mr. Post said the issue about shoulder parking on Christopher Road should be eliminated with the additional parking provided on site. He said there might be some shoulder parking during heavy usage times, such as the Christmas holidays.
Council Member Ward commented that the illustration displayed by Mr. Post did not adequately represent the issues this project must deal with. He said the intersection at Old Mason Farm Road was an issue, since many vehicles used that road as 15-501 failed. Council Member Ward said the community needed to know what the impacts were and what solutions might be used to address that.
Council Member Harrison said when this project came back before the Council, they would have to demonstrate that this plan could address the most over-capacity service road in the 15-mile 15-501 corridor. He said there were also a list of things that the applicant was asking NCDOT to do with its road, and some assurance was needed that NCDOT would accept the improvements proposed. Mr. Post said thus far they had received a good reception from NCDOT, and they would continue to work with them.
Council Member Hill said the comment had been made that they were making preparations for the next twenty years. He suggested that they consider severing Carmichael Drive from their property, and working with NCDOT to see if access to 15-501 could be provided at the right-in, right-out access to the campus. He said that could be signalized so that during non-peak hours it could be a flashing light and operate as a stoplight during peak times.
Council Member Hill said the intersection was failing, adding there was a contemplated development at the other end of Finley Goal Course Road that would increase traffic dramatically if it were approved. He said it appeared that the present proposal would change a 180 degree turn into a 90 degree turn, but it was not reducing traffic at the light. Council Member Hill asked if that might be a better solution for the long-term.
Council Member Greene said the Church should seriously consider Council Member Hill’s suggestion for either the existing entrance or the proposed new entrance. She stated that when school let out people came out of the existing right turn and performed a U-turn at Mason Farm Road, which created backup in the regular lanes. Council Member Greene said it was good to divert traffic off the access road to take pressure off the intersection, but they were potentially introducing more pressure to perform the U-turn. She asked that they seriously consider Council Member Hill’s suggestion.
Mr. Post responded that they had raised that issue with NCDOT, and it had been summarily rejected. He said from what he had heard tonight, he was convinced they should approach NCDOT again, and perhaps with the staff and the Council’s help they may have more success.
Council Member Ward reiterated that he wanted the applicant to look at ways to reduce the number of cars attracted to the site. He suggested using the Church’s regular bulletin or its web site to address that. Council Member Ward said steps should be taken to increase the number of people in each vehicle that visited the site.
Council Member Ward asked about the planned long-term capacity for the school. Carlos Lima, Parish Administrator, responded that the current capacity was 470 students, and currently there were 460 enrolled. He said there were no plans, long-term or otherwise, to increase the capacity of the school. Mr. Lima said they planned to increase the number of classrooms for each grade level, but not the total number of students.
Mayor Foy agreed that the Church needed to look at ways to try to minimize the traffic impacts of the campus. He said increasing the number of parking spaces only encouraged people to drive their cars, and he believed there were other solutions. Mayor Foy said the Church should consider promoting other forms of transportation. He said he would like to hear when this came back how the Church would respond to that.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER GREENE, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-1. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Mr. Poveromo stated that this 19.5-acre site was located on the north side of Purefoy Road approximately 700 feet east of the intersection of Rogers Road and Purefoy Road. He stated the proposal included construction of 52 single-family affordable dwelling units by Habitat for Humanity in collaboration with Orange Community Housing and Land Trust and EmPOWERment, Inc. Mr. Poveromo displayed a map and pointed out the location of the proposed development.
Susan Levy, Executive Director of Habitat for Humanity, clarified that in their application they mentioned they hoped to provide a mixed income development, and that Habitat served persons with incomes at the 50 percent of median or below. She stated they did not yet have formal agreements with Orange Community Housing or EmPOWERment, although they were in discussions with them.
Ms. Levy stated the following:
Orange County had the highest housing cost in the State.
Most Habitat applicants lived and worked in Chapel Hill or Carrboro.
Habitat applicants performed vital services to our community.
Living close to work saves $100-$500 each month in transportation costs.
Land is increasingly scarce in the urban services boundary.
Ms. Levy stated that the Town’s 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan for Housing and Community Development programs in Orange County had as one of its highest priorities to facilitate the construction of new or rehabilitated housing for families earning less than 60 percent of the area median income. She noted that Habitat was the only organization that consistently met that goal.
Ms. Levy displayed a series of photographs of Rusch Hollow as an example of the types of housing built by Habitat.
Mike Neal, engineer for the project, noted that the site was currently undeveloped land comprised of several parcels totaling 19.31 acres in the R-1 zoning district. He displayed a site map and pointed out the location of the proposed project. Mr. Neal said one of the concerns expressed by the Community Design Commission (CDC) was that all of the recreation area was located in the northwest portion of the project. The CDC, he stated, suggested relocating some of the recreation space in the northeast corner. Mr. Neal said they had now relocated a play area in the northeastern quadrant of the property.
Mr. Neal displayed several photographs of the site, looking north as well as south along Edgar Road and along Purefoy Road.
Mr. Neal indicated the three main topics, which were traffic, stormwater management, and recreation and open space. Regarding traffic, he noted that a single-family home was estimated to generate 10 trips per day. Mr. Neal said this 52-lot subdivision would generate 520 trips per day, and of those 520 trips, 350 would be new trips. He said the Town’s standards regarding traffic management and control would be met.
Mr. Neal stated that regarding stormwater management, the project was not located within the University or Jordan Lake protected watersheds. He said they would be using the regional approach to stormwater management, and that impacts on stormwater rate, volume, and quality would be mitigated using accepted methods.
Regarding recreation and open space, Mr. Neal stated that more than five acres of recreation and open space would be provided to this neighborhood, with active recreational elements integrated into the development. He added that recreational elements for all age groups would be provided.
Mayor pro tem Strom commented that he and Council Member Kleinschmidt had begun work on the Green Tract Small Area Plan effort. He said the 18 acres to the east of that site was the section planned to be used for an amalgam of affordable housing. Mayor pro tem Strom said he wanted staff to keep the Council apprised of how the two sites were working together, and hoped that Habitat would keep an eye on the plans for the Green Tract.
Council Member Easthom said the Town needed to think about providing transit service closer to the residents of this area. She said if they wanted to reduce the 520 car trips per day and serve others living in the area, there was a strong need for transit service to the area.
Council Member Ward said he hoped that a mix of affordable housing would be provided in this development. He said he hoped that there was some internal connectivity with the Green Tract, perhaps at the cul-de-sac in the far right corner of the site, so that people on foot and on bicycles could move about without having to use the streets.
Council Member Ward asked for a description of the five acres of recreation area and what amenities might be provided on them. Ms. Levy said that was to be determined, but it was clear that there was not enough recreational amenities of any kind in the neighborhood. She said while they could not solve all of the issues, they would provide amenities for small children as well as adults, by providing play structures as well as picnic areas.
Council Member Ward said he was pleased that they had responded to the comments from the CDC regarding providing recreational elements in other areas of the site. He said he was concerned about the proximity of any activities that might be near electrical high voltage lines. Council Member Ward said he believed any impacts such as that should be avoided.
Council Member Ward said regarding sidewalks, he wanted to make sure they were encouraging people to walk by providing that infrastructure.
Mayor Foy said when looking at the plat, the two lots numbered 14 and 15 seemed odd to him. Ms. Levy agreed, noting when they had purchased one of the parcels from Mr. Purefoy the contract contained a stipulation that he be able to repurchase those two lots for his use. She said one was meant for open space and the other for a relative to build a home. Ms. Levy said he may or may not buy the lots, but the agreement called for those lots to be created.
Mayor Foy asked if there was an access easement going from those lots down to Purefoy Road. Ms. Levy said yes, that it was an existing easement. Mayor Foy asked about the 14-foot setback noted on the plat. Mr. Neal responded that was the required setback in the R-1 zoning district from the neighborhood property line.
Mayor Foy asked if transit service were provided, would it travel up Purefoy and around the new road then down Edgar Street. Mr. Neal said that was correct, adding that the street would be built to Town standards and would be capable of handling buses.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM STROM, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-2. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Mr. Poveromo stated that this was a consideration for renovations and construction at the Chapel Hill Country Club. He said the site was located on the corner of Lancaster Drive and New Castle Drive. He said the applicant was proposing an outdoor pavilion, an addition to the existing clubhouse, two additions to the bathhouse and parking lot renovations to the 155.54-acre site. Mr. Poveromo displayed an area map and an aerial photograph of the site.
Ed Kiser, speaking on behalf of the Country Club, provided some background on the Concept Plan:
They propose to renovate and expand the existing clubhouse and bathhouse – to upgrade the facilities to serve the existing membership and to modernize appearances so that the facilities were more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
The Country Club is not currently encumbered by an SUP.
A recent survey of the 700+ members indicated that over 90 percent agreed with plans for the planned renovations and additions.
The intent of the improvements is to fulfill the needs of the existing members.
Mr. Kiser said regarding the clubhouse, they plan to add 4,200 square feet to the eastern façade, 2,100 to each floor, to include enlarging the dining hall and enlarging the changing rooms. He said they plan to add an open-air pavilion to the northwest corner, and renovate the porte cochere. Regarding the bathhouse, Mr. Kiser said they plan to add 493 square feet to the north façade and add 192 square feet to the south façade. He said these additions would expand the changing rooms and allow for a lifeguard station, check-in counter, and storage at the south end.
Mr. Kiser noted several important points as determined by the Country Club:
The perimeter landscaping yards would not be altered or changed.
The existing parking areas would not be changed, although a small 15-space area near the pool would be re-striped.
Renovation of the porte cochere included much needed ADA improvements for handicap access from the parking lot.
The natural areas would not be impacted by the proposed changes.
An increase of membership was not intended or anticipated.
The traffic patterns would not be changed, and it was anticipated that the current traffic volume would not increase.
The proposed changes should have no effect on housing values.
No significant increase or draw on municipal services was anticipated.
The CDC on May 17 had voted unanimously for the proposed renovations and improvements.
Mr. Kiser exhibited a site plan of the existing Country Club, and pointed out the location of planned renovations and additions. He displayed photos of existing roadways and structures, pointing out their plans for improvements.
Council Member Ward said he did not believe there were any obvious conflicts in what had been presented. He asked that the Country Club ensure that the daily lives of those living near the facilities be disrupted in the least possible manner during the renovations and construction.
COUNCIL MEMBER WARD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-3. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Mayor Foy said he believed there had been some misinformation regarding what the Council was doing tonight. He said tonight the Council was taking a first look at the project and offering feedback, but were making no decisions.
Ms. Culpepper stated that the site was located at 425 Hillsborough Street between Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard and Hillsborough Street on the property currently occupied by the Town House Apartments. She said the proposal was for demolition of the existing apartment complex and construction of 332 multi-family units in eight buildings with 524 parking spaces, including some underground parking.
John Florian, Vice President of RAM Development Company, noted that the current buildings were outdated. He displayed an aerial view of the site as well as a site plan. Mr. Florian said the site had good proximity to the downtown and its amenities as well as to the University. He said this site also provided accessibility to transit and pedestrian routes as well as bicycle paths. Mr. Florian said they had improvements planned to increase the walkability and connectivity of this site to the community.
Mr. Florian said this project presented a good opportunity for Chapel Hill to grow within its internal service boundaries. He said they wanted to increase the current residential density to the allowed density for the current zoning. Mr. Florian said Chapel Hill’s Comprehensive Plan indicated the projected growth of the Town, and much of that growth would come from redevelopments such as this one. He said this project would be a model for smart growth and sustainable urban infill.
Mr. Florian noted the benefits of higher-density development, such as fewer families with children resulting in less demand on schools, it supported other public services, and required less extensive infrastructure. He noted that in the New Urbanism: Comprehensive Report and Best Practices Guide, the design firm of LGA developed standards regarding densities and development which supported town core development of above 35 units per acre, neighborhood center development of 18-35 units per acre, neighborhood general development of 6-18 units per acre, and neighborhood edge development of 3-6 units per acre. Mr. Florian said in order to protect many of the existing residential neighborhoods, the growth in order to achieve a vital urban core needed to take place in selected locations. He added that the Urban Land Institute had noted that the minimum average of 15 units per acre over a two square mile area was needed to support frequent bus service.
Mr. Florian noted that the Town’s Land Use Management Ordinance stated that, “The District allows for a more intense and efficient use of land at increased densities for the mutual reinforcement of public investments and private development.” He said this project was an example of how that should be applied.
Mr. Florian displayed photographs that depicted the current conditions of the site, pointing out the outdated buildings and amenities. He said the buffers around the site made it virtually impossible to view the buildings unless one were internal to the site. Mr. Florian displayed a conceptual site plan, pointing how the buildings would be placed on the site.
Mr. Florian said in their meetings with the CDC, one public concern expressed regarded increased traffic on Hillsborough Street. In response, he said, they had reduced the density along Hillsborough Street, eliminated one of the Hillsborough Street entrances into the development, were proposing a signalized light at MLK, Jr. Boulevard for convenience and pedestrian safety, redirected traffic flow towards the MLK, Jr. entrance by reorienting their plans, taken measures to discourage thru traffic, would change the address of the development to MLK, Jr. to further redirect traffic, and would provide new bus stops and pedestrian connections to discourage automobile use.
Mr. Florian said another public concern was that there was too much density and that the buildings were too tall. In response, he said they had reduced the density and parking along the Hillsborough Street edge, and placed the larger buildings on the MLK side of the site. Mr. Florian stated that the buildings along the Hillsborough Street edge were in scale with neighboring buildings, and that all of the buildings were well below the existing tree line.
Mr. Florian said sensitivity to the Rosemary/Franklin Historic District was of concern, and noted that they were reducing the density and surface parking along Hillsborough Street. He noted that 72 of the proposed parking spaces were located in two-car garages, and 30 others were parallel parking spaces along the streets. Mr. Florian said they had reduced the height of building “D” by two stories in response to public concerns, blocking it from view by the adjacent townhouses. He said all the residences along Hillsborough Street would be in small scale in keeping with the Historic District.
Mr. Florian proposed an increase to 524 parking spaces, which equated to 1.6 per unit. He said they were proposing that some parking be allowed beneath the height of the three buildings along the edge of the RCD. Mr. Florian said that would result in 89 percent of their parking being either in garages within buildings, or in garages within individual units.
Mr. Florian said their vision was to create a community with quality open space, quality setbacks, and screening much of the parking from view. He said they would provide a large amount of landscape plantings to further enhance the property. Mr. Florian said they were proposing a wide variety of housing types: 72 one-bedroom units, 61 one-bedroom units with a den, 119 two-bedroom units, 40 three-bedroom units, and 40 townhouses. He said they were proposing that 15 percent of units be affordable housing units, and they would continue to work with Robert Dowling with Orange Community Housing and Land Trust to achieve that goal.
Mr. Florian stated that the majority of the residential units were contained in buildings A, B, and C, the farthest from Hillsborough Street and set back from the RCD by over 300 feet. He said that represented about 72 percent of the residences on the site.
Mr. Florian reiterated the changes made to address public concerns and comments by the CDC. He noted the goals of the Comprehensive Plan that they believed this development fulfilled, including identifying creative development opportunities, maintaining the Urban Services Area with internal growth, participating in the regional planning process, respecting and enhancing surrounding neighborhoods, protecting the natural setting, completing the greenway and sidewalk system, and working for a balanced transportation system.
Caroline Donnan, a resident of Hillsborough Street, expressed concern about the height of the planned buildings. She said she was also concerned that the spring garden at the edge of her property might be endangered.
Dick Donnan said their garden was a wildflower garden that ran on each side of the creek. He said it was important to look at not only this development but the Northampton Terrace development as well, noting that these two developments were adding approximately 321 additional housing units to the neighborhood. Mr. Donnan said they were concerned about the number of people, which could be as many as 700 additional people.
Mr. Donnan said if there was no protection provided to keep people from coming up the OWASA right-of-way at the back of their property, then people would come directly through their wildflower garden and cross the Cheek property to come out on Cottage Lane. He said they believed a wooden fence was needed across the back of property line to protect the homes located there. Mr. Donnan asked that if this project was approved, that a condition be included that would require that a six-foot wooden fence be provided with a lockable gate, to allow OWASA access to maintain their easement.
Philip Denfey, a resident of Hillsborough Street, presented the Council with a petition that expressed the neighbors’ concerns about not only this development but all development along Hillsborough Street. He said the developer had been responsive to their concerns, nevertheless there remained concerned about two main points. The first, Mr. Denfey said, was the potential for increased traffic along Hillsborough Street. He said they strongly recommended that this development be separated into two developments with no access between the two. Mr. Denfey said the overall density was also of concern, and asked the Council to carefully look at that.
Mr. Denfey said the second major concern was that however the area was
developed, that improvements be made to make these areas primary pedestrian
accesses, including connected sidewalks. He said he believed that one could
make a connection from the Bolin Creek Greenway and bring it up through these
developments, and that would make a huge difference.
Nicole Calakos, a resident of Hillsborough Street, said that area was located in an historic district, and as such contained elements of historic value that should be preserved. She said this development would increase housing, and therefore increase traffic. Ms. Calakos described the blind curves and lack of traffic calming to slow traffic to a safe speed. She said she was concerned that with a significant increase in traffic, the roadway would become less safe.
Ms. Calakos proposed that the buildings that were townhomes not have street access between the units. She suggested that street bollards would allow emergency vehicles to access the buildings from both sides. Ms. Calakos said that would decrease traffic on Hillsborough Street.
Ms. Calakos stated that the scale of this project was enormous relative to the current neighborhood, and was concerned about the height of the buildings. She said she expected to see some viable solutions proposed to address these issues.
Paul Cheek, a resident of Cottage Lane, said he believed that there was a problem of people cutting through their properties, and with increased density that problem would only increase as well. He said this brought up some issues of liability, and he supported the idea of providing a fence across the back of the property.
Laura Cole, a resident of the current Town House Apartments, said the people who live there would be displaced. She said she did not know how much units in the new development would cost, but she doubted that current residents would be able to afford to live in the new development. Ms. Cole wondered if there was some other site where this development could be placed and the same goals achieved.
Ms. Cole said the current townhouses were outdated but were well built, and could possibly be upgraded through renovation. She asked if any provisions would be made for those residents who would be displaced by this project, or if they had any rights in that regard. Ms. Cole said she was concerned about the density of the project, and asked if air quality rules would be adhered to.
Faye Kalman, a resident of Hillsborough Street, said she lived directly across the street from this development. She said putting such a project amidst neighborhood homes was out of character for the Historic District, noting it was too imposing. Ms. Kalman said she was most concerned about Hillsborough Street, noting it was a busy street with many blind curves and hills. She said it should be kept in mind that when the University developed Carolina North, Hillsborough Street would be the most logical access to that satellite campus.
Susan Page Davis, a resident of Town House Apartments, said she had lived in these apartments for 26 years. She said she was afraid that the developers were trying to sell the concept that in order to save Chapel Hill it had to be destroyed. Ms. Davis asked if there was any member of the community who would gain from such a concept.
Tonya Freeman, a resident of Hillsborough Street, said all of the residents of Hillsborough Street were concerned about this project. She pointed out the number of small children who lived there and the difficulties in crossing the street. Ms. Freeman asked that safety be taken into account if plans for this development moved forward. She also asked that the Council consider whether this development would become student housing, noting the amount of noise in the area at 2 a.m.
Bill Bracey, a nearby resident of the project, said he was very concerned about the impact of this development on Hillsborough Street. He said speeding was already a problem, even in the narrower portions. Mr. Bracey said connectivity for pedestrians was also important. He asked the Council to make sure everything was done correctly and for the greater good, and to look at what effect these changes would have in the long term.
Council Member Hill said he was troubled by the statements made by Ms. Cole. He said this development would have 15 percent affordable housing, and perhaps that would be an opportunity for people who now lived there to move into these new units. Council Member Hill said he hoped that would be something that could be explored.
Council Member Hill said that Hillsborough Street presented difficult problems, noting that the planned developments along that corridor would be a “drop in the bucket” compared to Carolina North. He said Hillsborough Street defied the normal traffic calming methods. Council Member Hill asked that the developer and staff consider the effects of all of these developments as a whole.
Council Member Kleinschmidt said RAM had made an excellent presentation, noting this was probably what needed to happen. He said he believed that the proposed development was appropriate for the space that was that close to the downtown. Council Member Kleinschmidt said he was glad to hear from the neighbors that RAM had been responsive to their concerns, and he would like that to continue.
Council Member Kleinschmidt said there were several aspects of the proposal that he would like to see preserved. He said he liked the density and liked the fact that the taller buildings reduced the footprint. Council Member Kleinschmidt said he liked the fact that the buildings had been pushed away from Hillsborough Street, and liked that they were lowering the number of cars on the Hillsborough Street side, which provided the potential to lower the number of cars exiting onto Hillsborough Street. He said he wanted to hear more details about how the west side of the project was oriented to the east side, and how the proposed stub out to Northampton Terrace would help move traffic to MLK. Council Member Kleinschmidt said he was not in favor of cutting off the artery totally. He said he did not believe that the project would be used as a “cut through” if the design elements noted tonight were put into place. Council Member Kleinschmidt said that traffic calming would also be added to Hillsborough Street to make it less attractive.
Council Member Kleinschmidt said one thing the Council had discussed several months ago was asking developers to help pay for the impacts of their developments. He said RAM had mentioned that the project would have no impact on schools, but it would certainly have a huge impact on our transportation system. Council Member Kleinschmidt said he was pleased to see the proposal to improve the bus stop on Hillsborough Street, but asked the developer to consider also the stress being placed on a finite number of buses. He asked RAM to work with the staff to see what kinds of assistance they could provide with the impact on the transit system.
Council Member Easthom said she was sensitive to the concerns regarding speeding on Hillsborough Street, noting the number of hills and blind curves. She said she would like to entertain the idea of bollards and a disconnect between the two sides of the development. Council Member Easthom said she also wanted to encourage the developer to provide not only one-bedroom affordable units but two-bedroom affordable units as well, noting she would push for that as this project moved forward.
Council Member Easthom said she could not imagine what the traffic would be like at the intersection at MLK, and needed assurances that that traffic light would be installed.
Council Member Ward said traffic flow was the most critical issue for him. He said he was consistently a strong supporter of connectivity of any kind, and had started out wanting the developer to push as much traffic as possible onto MLK. Council Member Ward said after thinking about it, he did not believe one could not do enough of that. He asked for feedback from fire and safety staff to discover if bollards were a viable option, or should there be some circuitous route similar to what existed now. Council Member Ward said if the issue of existing traffic onto Hillsborough Street reached a certain level, there should be some plans in place to cut that connectivity and move to another plan.
Council Member Ward said in order for this development to exit onto MLK, a traffic light was a necessity. He said the Town needed to take advantage of increasing the pedestrian connectivity between one side of MLK to the other, noting it was a dangerous abyss as it now operated. Council Member Ward suggested a pedestrian island or crosswalks, signal heads, or other options. He voiced agreement with adding to the connectivity from Bolin Creek, and noted he wanted to hear more about recreation.
Council Member Ward said that NCDOT would not automatically agree to place a signal at that location, and suggested that a compelling argument would be if Northampton Terrace and this development had a shared access, which was a greater demand that NCDOT would have to pay attention to.
Council Member Ward said he did not yet understand the views of the building, and wanted to visit the area and see what the impacts might be. He said he certainly would want the rooftops of the buildings to have attractive gables and not mechanical equipment visible to the neighbors. Council Member Ward asked the developer to take advantage of green building, green infrastructure and porous pavement, noting if you did it up front it did not cost more and it was better for the community in many ways.
Council Member Harrison asked whether this project was envisioned to need a rezoning. Mr. Florian responded yes, they did envision requesting a rezoning of the property. Council Member Harrison said in that case, then a lot of what they were discussing needed to be thought of in terms of what the developer would offer the Town, and with the complex of issues he believed that there was funding that needed to come from them rather than from the State or other sources.
Council Member Harrison said he bicycled in that area frequently. He said that Hillsborough Street had been a troublesome area for some time, and was in need of traffic calming methods that worked. Council Member Harrison asked the developer to consider that as they moved forward with their plans.
Council Member Harrison said that this was the second development planned for this area, and a third one was in the works for the same area. To the staff, he said these projects should be carefully coordinated and the impacts considered as a whole. Council Member Harrison said he was also concerned about loosing student housing that close to the campus.
Mayor Foy said they needed advice about that stating it was true that they had to consider these projects comprehensively and study their impacts on Hillsborough Street as well as MLK. He encouraged the staff to help the Council do that.
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER WARD, ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION R-4. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
Item 6 – Closed Session
COUNCIL MEMBER KLEINSCHMIDT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER HILL, TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION AS AUTHORIZED BY NC GENERAL STATUTE SECTION 143-318.11(a)(6) TO CONSIDER PERSONNEL MATTERS RELATED TO THE PERFORMANCE OF INDIVIDUAL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m.