AGENDA #2a
|
TO: |
Roger L. Stancil, Town Manager |
|
FROM: |
J.B. Culpepper, Planning Director Gene Poveromo, Development Coordinator |
|
DATE: |
June 18, 2007 |
|
SUBJECT: |
Public Hearing: Downtown Economic Development Initiative – Parking Lot 5, Application for a Zoning Atlas Amendment (File No. 9788-27-3068) |
Tonight, the Council is considering a request for a Zoning Atlas Amendment to rezone a 1.97-acre site, owned by the Town of Chapel Hill, from Town Center-2 (TC-2) to the Town Center-3-Conditional (TC-3-C) zoning district. The site is located on the east side of Church Street between West Franklin and Rosemary Streets and is currently occupied by Town of Chapel Hill Parking Lot No. 5. The site is identified as Orange County Property Identifier Numbers 9788-06-5324, 9788-06-6325, 9788-06-6235, 9788-06-6277, 9788-06-6297, 9788-06-7213, and 9788-06-7383.
The applicant has submitted an accompanying Special Use Permit application. Please see the accompanying memorandum for additional information.
This package of material has been prepared for the Town Council’s consideration, and is organized as follows:
Zoning determines the type and intensity of uses and development that are allowed on a piece of land. A Zoning Atlas Amendment involves a change to the current zoning, and thus the permitted types and intensity of land uses. In Chapel Hill, a rezoning may be requested in two ways: general use and conditional use rezoning requests. A general use rezoning request is to change the zoning to a different zoning district in which any of several kinds of developments and uses are permissible. A conditional use rezoning request is to allow development and uses only with approval of a Special Use Permit. This rezoning application is a conditional use rezoning request and is therefore accompanied by a Special Use Permit application.
The zoning designation of a property determines the range of land uses and development intensities permitted on the property. Article 4.4 of the Land Use Management Ordinance establishes the intent of Zoning Atlas Amendments by stating that, “In order to establish and maintain sound, stable, and desirable development within the planning jurisdiction of the Town it is intended that this chapter shall not be amended except:
Article 4.4 further indicates:
It is further intended that, if amended, this chapter be amended only as reasonably necessary to the promotion of the public health, safety, or general welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
The Council has discretionary authority to approve or deny a rezoning request. With a conditional use rezoning request, the specific proposal in the accompanying Special Use Permit application is related to the rezoning request. We believe it is appropriate for the Council to consider a specific Special Use Permit proposal on that application, in tandem with a rezoning hearing. If the Council does not find the Special Use Permit proposal to be an acceptable use of the property, we recommend that the Council not approve the rezoning request.
Opportunity for a protest petition to a proposed amendment to the Zoning Atlas is provided for under North Carolina Statutes. If a protest petition is filed with the Town Clerk, the proposed rezoning shall not become effective except by favorable vote of not less than seven (7) members of the Town Council. Copies of protest petition forms and additional information are available from the Planning Department.
Analysis of this application is organized around the requirement of the Land Use Management Ordinance that Article 4.4 of the Land Use Management Ordinance shall not be amended except: a) to correct a manifest error in the chapter; or b) because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the jurisdiction generally; or c) to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Comment: We believe the information in the record to date can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support: We were unable to identify any arguments in support of a manifest error.
Staff Comment: We believe the information in the record thus far can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support: No arguments have been made to date in support of changed or changing conditions in this particular area.
Staff Comment: We believe the information in the record thus far can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support: Arguments in support of this finding are offered in the applicant’s Statement of Justification (Attachment 4), which provides several references to the Comprehensive Plan. Portions of the applicant’s Statement of Justification are copied below:
“By redeveloping a Downtown site rather than challenge the buffer with additional suburban track development, the Lot 5 project alleviates suburban sprawl by providing a significant choice for new residential and commercial development on one of the few remaining sites where such development is encouraged and appropriate for the comprehensive plan. Additionally, this new opportunity is created with little additional infrastructure required since the utilities and base services are already present in the Downtown Area.” [Applicant’s Statement]
“As recognized and detailed by the Town’s Downtown Small Area Plan, no better location exists than on Lot 5 for a unique, mixed use redevelopment project like this one.” [Applicant’s Statement]
“By incorporating the retail component directly into the Downtown residential components of Lot 5, we create an integrated project from which both the commercial and residential components benefit. Furthermore, there can be no more desirable form of a required public parking deck than one hidden from view by an expansive public plaza and surrounded by pedestrian amenities.” [Applicant’s Statement]
“This proposal includes 21 new affordable condominiums on site and Ram has pledged an additional $25,000 to the Town of Chapel Hill to study strategies for keeping affordable housing affordable.” [Applicant’s Statement]
Arguments in Opposition: To date, no arguments in opposition have been submitted indicating that this development would not be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Additional Information: We note that the Comprehensive Plan, adopted on May 8, 2000, identifies this area as town/village center, in the adopted Land Use Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Plan.
Citizens opposed to this proposed rezoning could file a protest petition. A petition protesting a proposed amendment shall be subject to the provisions of North Carolina General Statutes Sections 160A-385 and 386, as may be amended. Any petition shall:
We did not receive any protest petitions for the Zoning Atlas Amendment application. The deadline for filing a protest petition was 5:00 p.m. Wednesday, June 13, 2007. We will report to the Council tonight if a valid petition was filed.
Planning Board Recommendation: On May 22, 2007, the Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the Zoning Atlas Amendment application. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.
Preliminary Recommendation: We believe that the rezoning could be justified based on finding C, as described above, as enhancing the downtown’s role as the center of the community. Our preliminary recommendation is that the Council enact the attached ordinance, rezoning the property from Town Center-2 (TC-2) to Town Center-3-Conditional (TC-3-C).
The attached Resolution would deny the rezoning request.
