MEMORANDUM

TO:	Roger L. Stancil, Town Manager

From:	J. B. Culpepper, Planning Director
	George Small, Director of Engineering
	Gene Poveromo, Development Coordinator

Subject:	Chapel Hill Bible Church Park/Ride Terminal - Application for Special Use Permit Modification (File No. 9890-51-8534)

DATE:	December 4, 2006

PURPOSE

Tonight, the Council continues the Public Hearing from November 13, 2006, regarding a Special Use Permit Modification for the Chapel Hill Bible Church Park/Ride Terminal, at the northeast corner of Sage Road and Erwin Road. The application is for a proposed Park /Ride Terminal that would authorize the applicant, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, to lease from the Chapel Hill Bible Church 241 existing parking spaces to University employees. The site is located in the Residential-3-C (R-3-C) zoning district and is identified as Orange County Parcel Identifier Number 9890-51-8534. The site is currently used by the Chapel Hill Bible Church and its associated uses.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the information in the record to date, we believe that the Council could make the findings required to approve the Special Use Permit application. We recommend that the Council adopt Resolution A, approving the application.

This package of materials has been prepared for the Town Council’s consideration, and is organized as follows:

1. Cover Memorandum: Provides background on the development proposal, discusses key issues raised at the November 13, 2006 Public Hearing, presents evidence in the record thus far in support of and in opposition to approval of the application, and offers recommendations for Council action and includes resolutions of approval and denial.

Attachments: Includes the November 13, 2006 Public Hearing memorandum and correspondence received since the November 13, 2006 Public Hearing.

KEY ISSUES

We have identified several key issues associated with this development.

Park/Ride Terminal Expiration Date: A stipulation in the November 13 Public Hearing item recommended that the Park/Ride facility be approved for a time period of five years from the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. During the November 13 Public Hearing, the applicant expressed concern with a stipulation limiting the operation of the Park/Ride facility to a five-year period. The applicant asked if the time period for the Special Use Permit could be linked to the term of the lease agreement between the University and the Church, rather than be limited to five years, as proposed by Town staff. A draft copy of the proposed lease is attached.

Comment: We believe the concerns of the applicant can be accommodated, if the Council wishes, by modifying the proposed language of Stipulation 4 to read as follows:

Park/Ride Terminal Expiration: That this accessory use approval authorizes a Park/Ride Terminal to provide bus service to the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and shall expire when that service has been discontinued for more than 30 days, or five (5) years from the initial date of operation, whichever comes first unless the permit holder requests an extension of the Special Use Permit expiration time limit from the Town Manager. The Town Manager may grant additional extensions of the time limit for up to twenty-four (24) months each if he/she determines that:

The permit holder submitted the request within sixty (60) days of the expiration date;
The permit holder has proceeded with due diligence and good faith; and
Conditions have not changed so substantially as to warrant Town Council reconsideration of the approved development.

This proposed language is similar to other ordinance language regarding extension requests. The revised Resolution A includes this revised stipulation. We understand that the University is in agreement with this stipulation.

Special Use Permit Modification – Findings of Fact: The standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit Modification application involves consideration of four findings as stated in Section 4.5.2 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. During the Public Hearing a citizen stated that the applicant had not present evidence in support of the following finding:

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;

Comment: Please refer to the Statement of Justification prepared by the applicant (Attachment 16 to the November 13 materials). Please also refer to Attachment 6, page 2, for additional evidence as presented by the University. We anticipate that the applicant will present further evidence at tonight’s meeting.

Traffic Impact and Pedestrian Safety

During the Public Hearing there were several questions about traffic impact and pedestrian safety.

Traffic Signal and Pedestrian/Bicycle Movements at Sage Road/Erwin Road Intersection: With respect to the proposed North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) traffic signal at the Sage Road/Erwin Road intersection, several Council Members asked the staff to address the safe movement of pedestrians at this intersection after the signal is installed and operating. A Council Member also asked the staff to investigate the possible installation of bicycle activated sensors to accommodate bicycle riders.

Comment: A copy of the traffic signal design is provided in Attachment 1 which indicates the location of the pedestrian head signals. The NCDOT staff indicated that the construction of the traffic signal will start after the first of the year and is expected to be completed before summer. We have requested that the State consider installing bicycle activated loops on Sage Road at this intersection. Please refer to the applicants’ response letter, Attachment 6, for additional comment.

Sage Road and Erwin Road Traffic Signal: A Council Member suggested that the proposed traffic signal for the Sage Road and Erwin Road intersection should be installed and operating prior to the opening of the Park/Ride facility.

Comment: The NCDOT recognized the existing safety and operational problems at the intersection of Sage Road/Erwin Road and agreed to install a traffic signal. Design of the traffic signal has been completed by NCDOT and a copy of the design is provided in Attachment 1. Based on the recent information from NCDOT, the construction of the traffic signal will start after the first of the year and is expected to be completed before summer.

Traffic Impact Analysis: Eastowne Drive and US 15-501 Intersection: A Council Member expressed concern that the Transportation Impact Analysis did not evaluate potential traffic impacts on the Eastowne Drive/US 15-501 intersection.

Comment: The Town Traffic Impact Analysis Consultant revised the report and analyzed the following additional intersections:

US 15-501 and Eastowne Drive/Lakeview Drive
Old Sterling Drive and Eastowne Drive

A copy of the revised Traffic Impact Analysis Executive Summary is provided as Attachment 3. The Town’s Consultant concluded that the impact of the proposed Park/Ride traffic is negligible on the surrounding street network. The Town’s Consultant will be present at tonight’s Council meeting and can respond to further questions from the Council, if desired.

Traffic Impact Analysis: Level of Service at the Sage Road/US 15-501 Intersection: A Council Member noted the that the Traffic Impact Analysis indicated the Level of Service for the Sage Road/ US 15-501 intersection improves after the Park/Ride facility is operating. The Council Member asked the staff to explain why the results of the Traffic Impact Analysis indicated improved level of service at this intersection.

Comment: We have investigated these results and found that the redistribution of traffic volumes from routes that normally serve Park/Ride traffic to and from the University of North Carolina (US 15-501, Erwin Road, and Weaver Dairy Road) cause some intersections to operate better in the 2008 Build Scenario than they do in the 2008 No-Build Scenario. An example is that the proposed Park/Ride lot trips are assigned in existing and “No-Build” morning peak conditions as through movement on US 15-501 but in the “Build” scenario, they are assigned as right-turns from US 15-501 to Eastowne Drive.

Pedestrian Movements Across Sage Road: A Council Member expressed concern with increased pedestrian movements across Sage Road and asked the staff to report on possible improvements to accommodate pedestrian traffic.

Comment: The Town staff is recommending crosswalks, pedestrian warning signs, and a refuge island on Sage Road at Old Sterling Drive. These items are included in a separate report on the Consent Agenda at tonight’s Council meeting for your review and approval. Please see the Consent Item #4h – Resolution Authorizing the Installation of Improvements on Sage Road and Old Sterling Drive for additional information.

Pedestrian/Bicycle Improvements on Old Sterling Drive: A Council Member asked the staff about bicycle lanes and traffic calming features on Old Sterling Drive.

Comment: Town staff is recommending that prior to the use as a Park/Ride Terminal, the applicant shall provide a payment-in-lieu of $5,000.00 for the following improvements on Old Sterling Drive:

Pavement markings on Old Sterling Drive at the Sage Road intersection to provide a left turn with approximately 100 feet of storage and a combination through and right turn lane.
Striped bike lanes on both sides Old Sterling Drive between Sage Road and Eastowne Drive.
Double yellow centerline striping on Old Sterling Drive between Sage Road and Eastowne Drive.

We believe that the University agrees with this stipulation.

Police Call Box and Impact on Police Force: Several Council Members asked if the applicant intended or was willing to install University police call boxes in the parking lot. The Council Members also asked the applicant to contact the Town of Chapel Hill Police Department to discuss how to accommodate a call box at this location. A Council Member requested additional information on how this proposed Park/Ride facility might impact the police force.

Comment: We understand it is uncertain at this time if it is technically feasible to locate a call box at this location. Also, based on recent discussions with police department staff, we understand that because of the increased use of cellular phones, the usefulness of call boxes is being evaluated.

Since the lot is in the Town limits and not on University of North Carolina property, the Chapel Hill Police would be the responding agency. The Police Department responds to calls at other Town Park/Ride facilities. The calls to those locations are usually property crimes - break-ins to vehicles and vandalism. We would not expect the addition of this Park/Ride lot would have a significant impact on the department's workload. Please refer to the applicants’ response letter, Attachment 6, for additional comment.

Lighting Plan: A Council Member questioned if the applicant is proposing to install adequate lighting for pedestrian movements between the parking lot and the bus shelter on Old Sterling Drive.

Comment: Section 5.11 of the Land Use Management Ordinance requires that “all streets, driveways, bikeways, sidewalks, pedestrian paths, parking areas, and other common areas and facilities shall be lighted where necessary to ensure the security of property and the safety of persons using such streets, driveways, bikeways, sidewalks, pedestrian paths, parking areas, and other common areas and facilities.” We recommend that, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant submit site plans and other required documents to satisfy the lighting requirements in Section 5.11 including the submission of a lighting plan sealed by a Professional Engineer. This stipulation is included in Resolution A.

Please refer to the applicants’ response letter, Attachment 6, for additional comment.

Bus Shelters: A Council Member expressed concern that the proposed bus shelters may not adequately accommodate all of the anticipated bus riders.

Comment: Comparing demand to other Park/Ride facilities in the area, we anticipate an average of eight passengers waiting for each bus with a peak demand of 13 passengers. We recommend that the applicant provide two regular-sized bus shelters at the Old Sterling Drive bus stop location. We have revised Resolution A to incorporate this recommendation.

Parking Lot Monitoring Program: Several Council Members suggested that the Council’s approval include a requirement that the University patrol and monitor the use of the parking lot in order to ensure that the lot is being used only by authorized employees.

Comment: Resolution A includes a stipulation requiring that the University report to the Council on the Park/Ride system during the University’s Semi-Annual Report in 2007 (February/September). We recommend that the University include results of their monitoring in the Semi-Annual Report to the Town Council. Please refer to the applicants’ response letter, Attachment 6, for additional comment.

Status Report on Park/Ride Facility: A Council Member recommended that once the Park/Ride facility has been operational for several months that the University report back to the Council and community on the status of the facility.

Comment: Revised Resolution A includes a stipulation requiring that the University report to the Council on the Park/Ride system during the University’s Semi-Annual Report in 2007 (February/September). We also recommend that this report provide the Council with an update on the results of the Park/Ride lot monitoring.

Response to Citizen Letters, Emails, and Statements: During the review of this proposal, citizen correspondence has been delivered or presented to Advisory Board and the Council (Attachment 4). The correspondence has been forwarded to staff, the applicant, and Church representatives.

Comment: Town staff responses to questions are included with Attachment 5. On November 29, 2006, the University provided responses to the following items: Citizen Comments; Duration of Special Use Permit; Lighting; Monitoring; Timing; and Four Findings. Please refer to the applicants’ response letter, Attachment 6, for additional comment.

EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION

The standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit Modification application involves consideration of four findings of fact that the Council must consider for granting a Special Use Permit Modification. Based on the evidence accumulated during the Public Hearing, the Council will consider whether it can make each of the four required findings for the approval of a Special Use Permit Modification. If, after consideration of the evidence submitted at the Public Hearing, the Council decides that it can make each of the four findings, the Land Use Management Ordinance directs that the Special Use Permit Modification 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.

Tonight, based on the evidence in the record thus far, we provide the following evaluation of this application based on the four findings of facts that the Council must consider for granting a Special Use Permit Modification.

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.

We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of this finding for the application includes the following:

We note the following points from the applicant’s Statement of Justification:

“The intent of the project is to provide alternate means of transportation for commuters to reach the UNC Campus” [Applicant’s Statement]
‘This project supports the University and Town’s shared commitment to reducing traffic congestion and exhaust emissions by providing strategically placed mass transit connections” [Applicant’s Statement]

Please refer to Attachment 6, page 2, for additional evidence as presented by the University

Evidence in opposition: We have not identified any evidence offered in opposition to Finding #1.

We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.

Finding #2: That the use or development complies with all required regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 3 and 5, the applicable specific standards in the Supplemental Use Regulations (Article 6) and with all other applicable regulations.

We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #2 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (part of Attachment 7).

We note the following point from the applicant’s Statement of Justification:

“The project will not affect any of the standards previously approved with the original Special Use Permit.” [Applicant’s Statement]

Please refer to Attachment 6, page 2, for additional evidence as presented by the University

Evidence in opposition: We have not identified any evidence offered in opposition to Finding #2.

We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.

Finding #3: That the use would be 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.

We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #3 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (part of Attachment 7).

We note the following point from the applicant’s Statement of Justification:

“The proposed change in use allows existing surface parking proximate to a major north-south commuter corridor (15-501) to provide alternative transit for commuters to the UNC at Chapel Hill campus” [Applicant’s Statement]

Please also refer to Attachment 6, page 2, for additional evidence as presented by the University

Evidence in opposition: At the Public Hearing, a citizen raised concerns about Finding #3. See the Key Issues section of this memorandum for additional information.

We anticipate that further evidence will be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process. Please see the applicant’s Statement of Justification for additional evidence in support of the application (part of Attachment 7) and Attachment 6, page 2.

Finding #4: That the use or development conforms with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #4 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (Part of Attachment 7).

We note the following key point from the applicant’s Statement of Justification:

“The addition of a park and ride use further supports the goals of the Comprehensive Plan by encouraging a balanced transportation plan, by providing services that enhance the mobility of town residents and employees by expanding the park and ride system.” [Applicant’s Statement]

Please refer to Attachment 6, page 2, for additional evidence as presented by the University

Evidence in opposition: We have not identified any evidence offered in opposition to Finding #4.

We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process. Please see the applicant’s Statement of Justification for additional evidence in support of the application (part of Attachment 7).

SUMMARY

We have attached a resolution that includes standard conditions of approval as well as special conditions that we recommend for this application. With these conditions, we believe that the Council could make the findings regarding health, safety and general welfare, and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The staff’s recommendation incorporates input from all Town departments involved in review of the application.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Revisions incorporated into revised Resolution A, since the November 13 Public Hearing

Subsequent to the November 13, 2006 Public Hearing, the following stipulations have been added to or revised and incorporated into revised Resolution A:

· Park/Ride Terminal Expiration – revised to authorize the Town Manager to approve two year extensions to the Special Use Permit deadline.

· Park/Ride Status Report– new stipulation requiring the applicant report back to the Council on the success of the park/ride program, neighborhood impacts and parking lot monitoring program.

· Old Sterling Drive/Sage Road Intersection Improvements – revised to include a payment-in-lieu for travel and bicycle lane striping.

· Old Sterling Drive Bus Stop Shelters – revised to require the installation of two regular size bus shelters.

Following public hearing review of the application, the Town staff’s recommendation has been revised, as outlined in revised Resolution A. Based on our evaluation of the application and the information in the record, our recommendation is that, with the stipulations in revised Resolution A, the application complies with the standards and regulations of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

Resolution B would approve the application as recommended by the Planning Board.

Resolution C would approve the application as recommended by the Transportation Board.

Resolution D would approve the application as recommended by the Community Design Commission.

Resolution E would approve the application as recommended by the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board.

Resolution F would deny the application.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Sage Road/Erwin Road Traffic Signal Design (p. 28).

2. Draft Lease Agreement (p. 29).

3. Traffic Impact Study Addendum (p. 34).

4. Letters from citizens (p. 42).

5. Staff responses to letters from citizens (p. 50).

6. Applicant’s response (p. 53).

7. November 13, 2006 Public Hearing Memorandum and Related Attachments (begin new page 1).

Chapel Hill Bible Church Park/Ride Terminal

Special Use Permit Modification

Differences among Resolutions

Issues	Resolution A Staff’s Revised Recommendation	Resolution B Planning Board Recommendation	Resolution C Transportation Board Recommendation	Resolution D Community Design Commission Recommendation	Resolution E Bicycle and Pedestrian Board Recommendation
Bus Stop Location on Old Sterling Drive	east of entrance	east of entrance	* (west of entrance)	* (west of entrance)	* (west of entrance)
Use limited to 5 year period	Yes (unless Town Manger grants extensions) **	* (no time limit)	Yes	* (no time limit)	* (no time limit)
Larger Bus Shelters	No, provide two standard size shelters**	* (standard size)	* (standard size)	Yes, Old Sterling Dr and Sage Rd	* (standard size)
Improve lighting to bus stop/shelter	Yes, if determined necessary during final plan review	* (no)	* (no)	Yes	* (no)
Bus Shelter lighting	No	* (no)	Yes	* (no)	* (no)
Bus pull-off on Old Sterling Dr and Sage Rd	Yes (on Old Sterling Dr only)	* (no)	* (no)	Yes	* (no)
Report to Council on neighborhood impacts and monitoring program	Yes (part of University’s semi-annual report)**	*	*	*	*
Revised TIA (Erwin Road)	No	* (no)	* (no)	Yes	* (no)
Bicycle Parking	25 spaces Class II	25 spaces Class II	* (6 spaces)	* (6 spaces)	* (6 spaces)
Old Sterling Dr Striping Improvements	Payment-in-lieu**	* (no)	* (no)	* (no)	* (no)

* Not discussed during Advisory Board meeting.

** Recommendation Revised since November 13 Public Hearing.