ATTACHMENT 1

WESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING SUMMARY MINUTES
HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 2008, 7:30 P.M.

Commission members present were Susan Smith, Sarah David, Stephen Rich, Louise Winstanly, Jim White, and Jennifer Koach. University representative Bruce Runberg was present. Staff members present were Dana Stidham and Kay Tapp.

WESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD PETITION

On March 26, 2007, the Chapel Hill Town Council received a petition from the Westside Neighborhood Association regarding the University of North Carolina purchase of Wilson Court/Cameron Avenue Property. The item was referred by Council to the Historic District Commission for further study, as well as general discussion of protection for the Westside Neighborhood/Cameron-McCauley Local Historic District.

STAFF INTRODUCTION

Staff Liaison Dana Stidham introduced the memoranda and petition above, explaining that the purpose of the meeting was for the Commission to hear the concerns of the Westside neighborhood, to hear from the University, and to discuss potential solutions/responses to those concerns. The Commission could choose to either: 1) refer the issue to staff (for zoning-type questions/research) and/or 2) create a subcommittee for further discussion/research, or 3) submit comments to the Council (without further discussion).

CITIZEN COMMENTS

  1. Joyce Brown expressed the neighborhood’s interest in keeping the R-3 zoning, and indicated that they would not support institutional use nor a parking lot.
  2. Kurt Ribisl said he would like to keep as much residential as possible;he said the neighborhood is starting to get a critical mass of [nonstudent] residents that the downtown really benefits from; it would be nice to have some kind of faculty/staff housing at this location (in which a covenant would limit ownership to faculty); would like to see Dobbins property as neighborhood park.
  3. Associate Chancellor of UNC Bruce Runberg said when they bought the property they knew there were constraints, that it was zoned R-3 and in the historic district and therefore there were requirements to be met; When they bought the property in April, they didn’t have a plan, and they still don’t.

    4. Mr. Runberg added that the University has met with the Preservation Society and neighbors;

    Mr. Runberg believes there are opportunities for common goals such as those achieved in the preservation of the “Love House” (Center for the Study of the American South, at East Franklin Street and Battle Lane);

    Mr. Runberg said that a park on portion of property would be a good idea; that they would like a small amount of parking on the site;

    When asked if they were envisioning something on the scale of the Center for Public Service on Cameron Avenue (other side of Wilson Street), Mr. Runberg replied yes, something that would not have a heavy demand for parking.

    He concluded that the aim is for the eventual proper development of the property realizing certain historic, preservation factors that the University needs to regard.

    Questions for Mr. Runberg:

    1. What about the house on the south end of the property? The smaller house is currently rented, and they expect to continue to do that.
    2. What is the time frame? They are not in a rush, and do not foresee taking action any time soon.
    3. Would the University consider faculty housing at that location? Yes.
    4. What’s the likelihood of a 1.5-acre parking lot on the site [between the two buildings]? He does not think that will happen.
  4. Joyce Brown expressed concern that the meeting was becoming a planning session for the Dobbins property, but would like more discussion of rules, regulations, and protections that could be afforded the neighborhood for whatever contingencies there are. Since the Dobbins property issue has come up, the issue of the Wesley Foundation property has also arisen, and there will probably be others. It is protections [rather than simply the plans for the Dobbins property] that the neighborhood would like to discuss.
  5. Catherine Frank expressed that the Dobbins property is very important (and the reason that she got involved with preservation; the issue of rezoning was important at the time she was on the Historic District Commission) and it is important that this corner stays residential; This neighborhood is a residential neighborhood and no one piece can change without changing the whole character of the neighborhood. Rezoning should be taken very seriously.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS

  1. Commissioner Jim White said that the Commission’s ability to protect the neighborhood is a nebulous concept. Any proposal that comes before the Commission for that property will have to have a Certificate of Appropriateness approve – the only guarantee the Commission can make is that if it’s inappropriate, they can say no. Commissioner White asked what is appropriate? What is consistent with the neighborhood?

    2. Commissioner White said he would think that plans to turn the Dobbins property into a parking lot is inconsistent with the historic nature of the neighborhood. Other people might differ. That’s the best that can be offered.

  2. Catherine Frank indicated that she thought the discussion was going to relate to the issue of the possibility of establishing a Neighborhood Conservation District as an overlay on top of the existing local historic district that does provide additional protection, more than an appearance commission.
  3. Commissioner Benjamin Brodey responded that the University is part of the State and that State law trumps Town law. He said there is a limit to what the Council can offer as protection.
  4. Commissioner Sarah David asked staff whether the University has to comply with local zoning, and staff responded not unless a building is involved, but that they would still need a Certificate of Appropriateness.

    5. Commissioner David added that although National Register listing would not offer much protection unless federal funds were involved, State statute DS 121-12 speaks to the State’s use of National Register properties.

  5. Commissioner Benjamin Brodey asked if there were any other thoughts about how the neighborhood could protect itself.
  6. Commissioner Susan Smith asked how a Neighborhood Conservation District would be established, and staff responded that the neighborhood would need to contact staff [and/or petition Council].

    7. Commissioner Smith then asked what protections an NCD would afford, to which staff responded that NCDs have been most successfully used to change dimensional requirements, but have not been the best tool for dealing with the issue of renter versus owner-occupied housing. Staff indicated uncertainty whether it fit the issues that the neighborhood was facing, but said it would be worth considering.

  7. Commissioner David said it seems like zoning is the best protection.
  8. Commissioner Brodey then asked whether a rezoning would come before the Historic District Commission.

    9. Commissioner Brodey asked what action the HDC should take, adding that without something definitive and concrete it was difficult to make a decision.

  9. Commissioner David said that it looked like the Planning Department memos were pretty thorough on what types of protection could be afforded.
  10. Commissioner Brodey then asked the neighborhood what they would like the Historic District Commission to do, to which the response (from the audience) was that the Historic District Commission commit to not recommending approval of any rezoning application in the neighborhood.

CITIZEN COMMENTS:

  1. Bruce Runberg reiterated that the University would like to come up with some solution.
  2. Joyce Brown said that the Commission had mentioned a number of possibilities that they could take and asked what the interest of the group was to continue the discussion.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:

Commissioner Jennifer Koach expressed that the Planning Department had already done significant research into things like special use districts and that the Neighborhood Conservation District would be neighborhood’s initiative. She reiterated that there is a limited amount that the Historic District Commission can do before anything specific has been proposed, but expressed that she is hopeful that the neighborhood will remain residential.

Commissioner Benjamin Brodey said there should be continuing dialogue between the neighborhood and the University.

Commissioner Susan Smith asked if it would be appropriate for an HDC member to be included in such dialogue.

Commissioner Sarah David responded that if so, that person would have to recuse themselves from any application that would come before the HDC; She expressed her belief in the importance of maintaining the character of the neighborhood, reminding them that in general the Commission is supportive of the neighborhood taking steps to protect itself and that the best way to do so might be with the Neighborhood Conservation District.

Commissioner White made a motion that the Commission submit comments to the Council.

Stephen Rich seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously.

 

Prepared for:    Benjamin Brodey, Chair

Prepared by:     Dana Stidham, Staff