From: Elisabeth Benfey
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 11:48 AM
To: Town Council
Cc: Gene Poveromo; Roger Stancil; Renee Zimmermann
Subject:
Honorable Members of the Chapel Hill Planning Board,
Honorable Mayor of Chapel Hill, and Town Council
Roger L. Stancil, Town Manager
Gene Poveromo, Coordinator Current Development
My neighbors and I received notice last month for a land use management ordinance text amendment, rezoning and special use permit applications for the projected re-development of the Townhouse Apartment at 425 and 429 Hillsborough Street. We wish to express some concerns over the developer’s new proposal, particularly over the number of parking spaces, the access to Hillsborough Street, and the request to apply for a rezoning of the site.
Parking Spaces
When the concept plan originally came under review in front of the Town Council on September 18th, 2007, 524 parking spaces were planned for this project. My neighbors and I opposed the number of parking spaces as excessive, and asked the developer (John Florian), both privately and during Citizens’ Comments in the Town Meeting, to reconsider the number of parking spaces. We felt that since most of the vehicles would be going through the Historic District, the addition of so many vehicles would worsen the traffic congestion on our street and in our part of town. This time, the notice we received mentions 586 parking spaces, an increase of 62 parking spaces since the previous concept plan. We find the increase in parking space number puzzling in view of the fact that the developer is well aware of our concerns.
Access to Hillsborough Street
During previous conversations with John Florian, and during Citizens’ Comments, we expressed the wish that all traffic to and from the proposed apartment complex be directed to Martin Luther King Boulevard. We explained to the developer that we were greatly worried about the added traffic volume to Hillsborough Street, a small road whose traffic will, in the near future, bear the brunt of the Carolina North development. Mr. Florian explained that he wanted to give the complex to have access to Hillsborough Street. The proposed concept plan, however, showed two distinct types of developments: one, consisting of taller buildings, nearest MLK Boulevard. The second, consisting of town houses, facing Hillsborough Street. We suggested that the traffic flow to and from the buildings be directed toward MLK Boulevard, while the town houses’ traffic could use Hillsborough as their access road. Mr. Florian explained that he wanted “connectivity” between the two sides, allowing traffic to flow between MLK and Hillsborough through the development. We feel that there is no reason to allow all traffic to have access to Hillsborough Street, especially in view of the staggering 586 new parking spaces (i.e. vehicles) that the developer intends to build for the residents of the complex. Our street is not meant to accommodate this kind of volume. We therefore reiterate our request that the developers reconsider their plan to give access to Hillsborough Street from all units in the proposed complex. We also would like to respectfully reiterate our request that a comprehensive traffic study for Hillsborough Street (in which projected Carolina North traffic would be factored in) be done to evaluate the impact of this project on adjacent neighborhoods.
Rezoning
In their new Concept Plan for “The Residences at Grove Park” the developer is applying for a rezoning the site from medium density (Residential-4) to a high-density residential district. We are very concerned by the consequences of a change of zoning on the adjacent Historic District, where we live. We believe that the goal of the developer by applying for a rezoning, is to allow for greater building height for the projected development. The developer’s request for a Special Use Permit is another cause for concern, for the same reason. We would like to point out that the proposed development is closer to the Historic District (an R-4), which it directly abuts, than to the center of Town (an R-13). In effect, the site would be assimilated to the center of town, as opposed to our neighborhoods. Rezoning the site would have two perilous consequences on the environment of Chapel Hill: one on the scope and style of the proposed buildings, the other on the traffic volume and pattern.
Building regulations: Granting the developers their request to change the zoning, means that the developer will be able to build according to guidelines that regulate the center of Chapel Hill, instead of the more stringent guidelines that regulate medium-density neighborhoods, like ours. The danger is that the development will not fit in with its environment in terms of its scope (six story-buildings were proposed last year). The proposed development will not “maintain or enhance the value of contiguous properties” in the Historic District, as stated in the guidelines for the Council to approve a Special Use Permit application.
Traffic: The concept of higher density zoning is, in the letter, an appealing one: if more people live close to the center of a town, they are more likely to walk to it than to drive, therefore diminishing the amount of traffic plaguing a town. In reality, however, higher density housing means more cars, as evident in the present request for rezoning. Although the residents of the projected buildings will, indeed, be able to walk to town for dinner or a movie, they will very likely use their cars everyday to go to work, or to go shopping. The consequence would be increased traffic, the possibility of having hundreds of cars entering and exiting the site on Hillsborough Street and on Martin Luther King Highway (a dangerous proposition if they take a left turn on it), and increased air pollution. None of these effects agree with the spirit of high-density zoning, which intends to alleviate traffic and pollution problems in cities.
We therefore oppose the proposed rezoning, and the Special Use Permit application for the Residences at Grove Park on 425 and 429 Hillsborough Street.
We intend to voice our concerns when the developer presents its plan to Town Council.
Most respectfully,
Elisabeth Benfey
Elisabeth Benfey and HIllsborough Street Neighbors