ATTACHMENT 1

 



 

PLANNING
Town of Chapel Hill
405 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Chapel Hill, NC  27514 
                                             

phone (919) 968-2728    fax (919) 969-2014
www.townofchapelhill.org

 

CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW SUMMARY MINUTES

COMMUNITY DESIGN COMMISSION

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2007, 7:00 P.M.

 

Chairperson Jonathan Whitney called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Commission members present were Mark Broadwell, Mary Margaret Carroll, George Cianciolo, Chris Culbreth, Kathryn James, Gretchen MacNair, Scott Nilsen, Amy Ryan, Jonathan Whitney (Chair), Robin Whitsell (Vice-Chair). Staff members present were Renee Zimmermann, Administrative Clerk and Kay Pearlstein, Senior Planner.

 

 

INNOVATION CENTER AT CAROLINA NORTH (File No.  9779-88-6375)

 

The Town has received a request for a Concept Plan Review which proposes to construct an 85,000 square foot 3-story building on approximately 7.4 acres on a portion of the University of North Carolina - Carolina North campus. Vehicular access is proposed from Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. across from Piney Mountain Road. Parking spaces for 210 vehicle parking spaces are proposed. The site is located on the west side of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. north of Estes Drive and south of Municipal Drive (see area map on back).  The site is located in the Office/Institutional-2  (OI-2) zoning district.  The site is identified as Orange County Parcel Identifier Number 9779-88-6375.

 

 

CONCEPT PLAN PRESENTATION

 

The applicants for the University of North Carolina Innovation Center presented a power point presentation of the proposed building, access, and parking locations. A concept plan was presented for a research and office building to be LEED Silver rated and designed for future growth. The applicants presented a plan for the berm along Martin Luther King Jr., Blvd to be removed to make the proposed building visible. The applicant stressed the significance of the Innovation Center to the University and Carolina North.

 

CITIZEN COMMENTS

  1. Ruby Sinreich, a member of the Planning Board, believed that the building would establish the entranceway to Carolina North early on without a Master Plan in place. She noted that this location is extremely important at the entranceway into the campus. She wanted to know where the internal campus roads and green space are planned. She stated that a Master Plan was necessary for understanding the proposal for the Innovation Center.
  2. Scott Radway liked the vision and idea that was presented with the Innovation Center for Carolina North. Mr. Radway described several positive aspects of the application including: a) the current driveway to be used as access to the Innovation Center; b) the proposed building “respects” Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.; c) parking is proposed behind the building; d) the building is attractive and key to the location; and e) the building establishes a quality building at the corner. He is encouraged by what he sees presented.
  3. A resident of Glen Heights is concerned about traffic and air quality. He could not find information on bus operations with the proposal. He encouraged the community to be innovative concerning parking and suggested eliminating additional parking and traffic coming in to town from the inception of the project. He believes that the development will meet the status quo unless the Innovation Center is innovative with parking. 
  4. Mike Collins, a Planning Board member, resident of Colonial Heights, and co-chair of Neighborhoods for Responsible Growth sees conflicts between the piecemeal approach and a Master Plan approach. He feels that the Innovation Center Concept Plan presented before a Master Plan does not bode well for a Comprehensive process. He believes that this application has the potential for setting the tone for the rest of the campus process and this may not be the best model for the Town to follow. 
  5. David Zanaleta, a resident of Colonial Heights, was surprised to get a notice for this project. There are no good traffic impacts and no commitment to make a difference to traffic around town. The piecemeal way the project is being presented with no transit planning is not friendly and transportation will get worse. He is excited and interested by the prospect of the Innovation Center but wants better traffic plans.

 

COMMUNITY DESIGN COMMISSION QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

  1. Commissioner George Cianciolo thinks that the Innovation Center is a great idea and it will benefit faculty, the community, and the region. He noted that lab space is difficult to find and this project will help with that. However he has concerns with impervious surface proposed to cover 75% of a 7.2 acre area and only 15% is for the building. Most of the impervious area is developed for parking. He wants to see a better and more creative solution to parking - perhaps putting parking underground. He likes the idea of 75% of the lot undeveloped with density, but not in parking either.

    2. Commissioner Cianciolo believes this is a perfect site for a transit station. He wants the University to encourage people to walk or ride their bicycles to Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. to a transit stop. He further suggested a bus that would loop through the campus taking people to the transit stop. He believes the potential for an attractive site is possible but that it is hard to know if this is the best building for the site until we know what else is being proposed.

  2. Commissioner Gretchen MacNair believes that the building is out of context and that it is difficult to offer comments when there is not context or the building. She does not see information on proposed vehicular of pedestrian traffic. She wants to see the building engage the street and make Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. more interesting for pedestrians. She suggests retail on the ground floor.
  3. Commissioner Scott Nilsen wants to see a more innovative site design. He stated that it looks like Research Triangle Park and needs to be better integrated into the community.
  4. Commissioner Robin Whitsell suggests that the applicant pay attention to neighbors concerns and also believes that the building looks like it belongs in Research Triangle Park instead of Chapel Hill.
  5. Commissioner Amy Ryan wants to see overall planning of the whole campus. She is concerned about impervious surface and site design. She would like to see the project be innovative and “out there” rather than a suburban office complex.

    6. She wants landscaping on Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. to retain the existing berm. She stated that removing the berm destroys part of the Chapel Hill character along this stretch of road and will add to the semi-highway feeling and enhances the natural feeling of the area. Also, the berm helps create a pedestrian streetscape which she pointed out is difficult to establish. 

  6. Commissioner Kathryn James wants a more spectacular entrance. She wants to know what the Silver LEED aspects the project is focusing on. She wants to see a better effort made toward contributing pedestrian-friendly aspects for the streetscape along Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. She suggests a winding greenway path incorporated with the berm.

    7. Commissioner James believes that bus stops are being ignored, especially the southern one. She recommends a better connection to the stop.

    Commissioner James wants information on tree protection and shared parking proposed by the applicant. She wanted to know what was being proposed on the opposite corner.

  7. Commissioner Jonathan Whitney wants the architecture to be more interesting. He also expressed concern with the impervious surface area proposed.
  8. Commissioner Mary Margaret Carroll wants to see the Innovation Center being innovative and did not believe that it was. She believes the impervious surface is too great and to make transit easier.
  9. Commissioner Chris Culbreth wants to have more information for the entire plan – how will the building appear form Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. He also did not see any proposed outdoor spaces for the users of the building and thought that should be considered.

 

Anna Wu, Director of Facilities Planning for the University, stated that impervious surface was being reduced from what currently exists on site. She stated that the University intends to provide a transit stop and wants the relationship of a transit stop to function with the building.

 

Bruce Runberg, Associate Vice Chancellor for the University, stated that there was an urgent need for the Innovation Center facility. He explained that the University needs to come to the Town now because of a critical time shortage to select the architect of choice for the building. Mr. Runberg stated that he would have preferred to present the Master Plan first, however, he did not believe that the Innovation Center will be detrimental with what is being proposed with the Master Plan.

 

Commissioner Cianciolo wanted to know why the location changed from the Giles Horney site on S. Estes Road. Mr. Runberg explained that as the cornerstone building the Innovation Center is strategic and represents what Carolina North is all about – mixed use and innovative. He explained that the University has done a lot of planning and this development will be transit oriented.  He thanked the Commission and public for their comments and his intention to have future meetings with the Commission.

 

SUMMARY

Citizen and Commission major concerns of this project including:

 

 

Citizens and the Commission supported the use and lab space that will be created with the Innovation Center and are excited and interested to learn more about the proposal.

 

 

Prepared for:    Jonathan Whitney, Chair

Prepared by:     Kay Pearlstein, Staff