AGENDA #14
|
TO: |
Roger L. Stancil, Town Manager |
|
FROM: |
J.B. Culpepper, Planning Director Gene Poveromo, Development Coordinator |
|
SUBJECT: |
Follow-up: Response to Petition Regarding University Use of Property Located at Wilson Court/Cameron Avenue |
|
DATE: |
June 11, 2007 |
The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to questions posed by the Council on April 11, 2007 in response to a March 26 petition submitted by the Westside Neighborhood Association. The subject of the petition was potential use by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill of property located at Wilson Court/Cameron Avenue.
Our recommendation is for no further action.
On March 26, 2007, the Council received the attached petition from the Westside Neighborhood Association. The petition refers to the potential purchase by the University of North Carolina of property located at the southwest corner of the Wilson Court and Cameron Avenue intersection.
The petitioners expressed concern over the University’s plans for the future use of this site, which the petitioners believe to be off-site parking. The petitioners requested information from the Council regarding what Town or State regulations apply and/or could apply to University development at this location. The site is located within the Cameron-McCauley Local Historic District and the West Chapel Hill National Register District (see attached map).
On April 11, 2007, staff presented a memorandum responding to the issue of applicable Town and State regulations. The response included an outline of the regulatory authority of Town Ordinances and state regulatory powers as they relate to land use by the University in local historic districts and National Register Districts. The memorandum briefly discussed: a) Land Use and the Town Code; b) local historic districts and Certificates of Appropriateness; c) local historic districts as separate use districts; and d) the National Register District. The staff reported that the University is currently subject to the requirement for Certificate of Appropriateness, but is only subject to the general zoning regulations of the Land Use Management Ordinance enacted under State law if a building is involved.
The petitioners also requested information regarding the advantages and disadvantages of establishing a separate use historic district, whether a separate use district could coincide with the existing local historic overlay district (Cameron-McCauley), and what protection was currently provided by the (R-3) zoning district. The Council asked the staff to return with additional information on the creation of an historic district as a separate use district.
On April 11, the Council also adopted a Resolution requesting additional information from the University regarding purchase of the property. A response letter from Chancellor Moeser is attached.
During the meeting, a citizen asked for further staff response to the following: Does the current Residential-3 zoning district protect the neighborhood from the development of large institutional buildings?
The Cameron-McCauley Historic District includes Residential-2, Residential-3, Residential-4 and Residential-6 zoning districts (the property in question is in the Residential-3 district). A college or university use is not a permitted use in the Residential-3 zoning district. The following land use categories are permitted uses in the Residential-3 zoning district:
In most circumstances, the above land use categories are permitted with either an administrative Zoning Compliance Permit (single-family / two family dwellings) or through Site Plan Review approval by the Planning Board.
With respect to large development (land use intensities in excess of 20,000 square feet of floor area or 40,000 of land disturbance) or planned developments (which may include “institutional development” such as a college or university if a five-acre land area requirement is met), approval requires Special Use Permit approval by the Town Council.
Comment: We believe that the existing residential zoning districts in the Cameron-McCauley Historic District as well as the land use intensity thresholds requiring Council review and public involvement provide a level of neighborhood protection from large institutional buildings.
During the April 11 meeting, the Council asked the staff to return with additional information on the creation of an historic district as a separate use district.
Two Historic District separate use districts exist in the state of North Carolina:
Both districts are located in Winston-Salem and were established in accordance with State law to preserve land uses which existed during the period sought to be restored. A brief description of the history of these two districts, the process used to establish the districts and the ordinance regulating the districts follows.
Old Salem and Bethabara were both built by Moravian settlers – Bethabara was built first (1753) and many settlers moved on to the planned community of Old Salem (1766). Old Salem was designated as a historic district by the Winston-Salem Board of Aldermen in 1948; Bethabara was designated in 1966.
Both districts include contributing as well as noncontributing structures. The ownership of the buildings in Old Salem is divided among the following entities: single family property owners, the Moravian church, Old Salem, Inc. (the museum), and Salem College.
In order to establish an historic district as a separate use district, N.C. law requires that:
The Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Unified Development Ordinance includes the following as permitted uses in a separate use district:
Please see attached sections of the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County ordinance on the establishment and requirements of a separate use district.
We believe that the advantages of establishing a time-period-historic district would include the ability to regulate the land uses of State entities such as the University in a historic district.
However, we do not believe an historic separate use district is the appropriate tool in this situation. The only precedents are two historic districts with very clear established time period uses, for which the State enabling legislation was written (originally referred to as the “Old Salem Act”). We also believe that pursuing establishment, including preparation of a detailed report regarding the significance of buildings and structures from the time period sought to be restored, would require considerable time and expense on the part of the neighborhood to go through the establishment process, which would include hiring a consultant, setting up an evaluation committee, and funding the rezoning application.
The existing local Cameron-McCauley Historic District is an overlay district, as defined by State Statute 160A-400.4. The question was posed whether a separate use district could coincide with the existing local historic overlay district. We believe the answer is yes, but that rather than have both types of local historic district, they would be combined into one.
Based on our research and discussions with Winston-Salem/Forsyth County staff, we recommend no further action.
If the Council desires further information, we recommend that the neighborhood petition be brought before the Historic District Commission for comment and that the Town invite the historic preservation planner from Winston-Salem/Forsyth County as well as the State Historic Preservation Officer to discuss the intent of historic separate use districts.
