to: Roger L. Stancil, Town Manager
from: J.B. Culpeper, Planning Director
Gene Poveromo, Planning Manager
subject: Public Hearing: Residences at Grove Park, 425 Hillsborough Street: Revised Zoning Atlas Amendment
date: September 17, 2008
INTRODUCTION
Tonight’s public hearing is to consider an application from Ram Development Company for a conditional use rezoning for Residences at Grove Park. The application proposes to rezone the property from Residential-4 and Residential-6 to Residential-Special Standards-Conditional (R-SS-C). We recommend that the Council enact the attached Ordinance amending the zoning atlas as proposed by the applicant, if the associated text amendment is enacted.
Accompanying this memorandum is an application to amend the Residential-Special Standards-Conditional zoning district. Tonight the Council continues consideration of the Zoning Atlas Amendment application for the proposed Residences at Grove Park. The applicant initially proposed rezoning the subject property to a new residential (Residential-Higher Density) zoning district. Because the Council did not approve the Land Use Management Ordinance text amendment creating the new residential zoning district, the applicant has changed the rezoning request from Residential-4 and Residential-6 to Residential-Special Standards-Conditional (R-SS-C).
The applicant has also submitted an accompanying application for a Special Use Permit to construct a multi-family development with 346 units and 580 parking spaces. A public hearing on the Special Use Permit was held on March 10, 2008. The Special Use Permit is scheduled to return to the Council on October 10, 2008.
We recently received a letter from a neighbor residing at 301B Hillsborough Street expressing concern with the proposed development. A copy of the letter is attached.
Zoning determines the type and intensity of uses and development that are allowed on a piece of land. An application for a Zoning Atlas Amendment for rezoning involves a change to the current zoning, and thus the permitted types and intensity of land uses.
The site is located between Hillsborough Street and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. at 624 and 626 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and at 425 and 429 Hillsborough Street. The site includes four lots and is identified as Parcel Identifier Numbers 9788-49-1706, 9788-49-4924, and portions of 624 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. 9788-39-4941, and 626 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. 9788-39-4857.
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. The applicant, Ram Development Company, has submitted a Conditional Use Zoning application and a Special Use Permit application.
With respect to conditional use rezoning requests, the Council has adopted two Resolutions (attached) stating the Council’s expectations associated with the accompanying Special Use Permit application. The first Resolution outlines the Council’s desire for the submission of an energy management plan with the Special Use Permit application associated with a rezoning. The second Resolution states the Council expectation that the Special Use Permit associated with a rezoning application include an affordable housing component.
Opportunity for a protest petition to a proposed amendment to the Zoning Atlas is provided for under North Carolina Statutes. If a sufficient protest petition is filed with the Town Clerk at least 2 business days prior to the date of the Public Hearing, the proposed rezoning(s) shall not become effective except by favorable vote of not less than three-fourths of the Town Council. Copies of protest petition forms and additional information are available from the Planning Department or the Town Clerk. A copy of the signed statement certifying mailed notice and posted sign verification is attached.
On September 5, 2008 the Town Clerk received a petition protesting the proposed amendment to the Zoning Atlas. On September 8, 2008, staff confirmed that the petition is valid and sufficient under State Statutes. Because a valid petition (attached), protesting the proposed rezoning has been presented to the Town Clerk, State Statutes require an affirmative supermajority (7) vote by the Council in order to approve the Zoning Atlas Amendment.
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, 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 would recommend that the Council not approve the rezoning request.
Analysis of an application to amend the zoning atlas is organized around the requirement of the Land Use Management Ordinance as stated in Article 4.4 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. Article 4.4 states that the Land Use Management Ordinance (including the zoning atlas) shall not be amended except:
We have evaluated the application as a request for rezoning to the Residential-Special Standards-Conditional (R-SS-C) zoning district.
Each of these requirements, with respect to this proposed rezoning application, is discussed below:
Staff Comment: We believe the information in the record to date can be summarized as follows:
Staff Comment: We believe the information in the record thus far can be summarized as follows:
Staff Comment: We believe the information in the record thus far can be summarized as follows:
“Maintain the Urban Services Area/Rural Buffer Boundary – By redeveloping a Downtown site rather than challenging the buffer with additional suburban track development, the Residences at Grove Park project alleviates suburban sprawl by providing a significant choice for new residential development on one of the few remaining sites where such development is encouraged and appropriate. Additionally, this new opportunity for healthy density is created with little additional infrastructure required since the utilities and base services are already present.” [Applicant’s Statement]
“Conserve and protect existing neighborhoods - Since the area inside the Urban Services Area is approximately 94% built out, one of the few remaining opportunities for Chapel Hill to accommodate the nearly 50% population growth forecast in the 2035 Long Range Plan is to seek out sustainable urban redevelopment sites like 425 Hillsborough St. With developments like Grove Park handling the new growth, the character, and nature of Chapel Hill’s historic neighborhoods can be protected.” [Applicant’s Statement]
“Create and preserve affordable housing opportunities – In cooperation with Orange Community Housing and Land Trust, we will provide our 15% affordable housing requirement with 52 affordable bedrooms in a mix of one and two bedroom condominiums in order to provide a flexible affordable housing opportunity that meets the needs of the community.” [Applicant’s Statement]
“Work toward a balanced transportation system - By design, the Residences at Grove Park brings more residents to the walkable Downtown environment. The proximity of these new residents to downtown should reduce overall automobile trips as well as providing the necessary density to properly support the growing bus system provided by Chapel Hill. More directly though, the improvements Grove Park brings to the pedestrian connections already on our site and the bus corridors it borders will encourage pedestrians, bikes, and bus ridership throughout the area and be a model for other developments along the Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. transit corridor.” [Applicant’s Statement]
“Complete the bikeway/greenway/sidewalk system – The new pedestrian and bicycle amenities provided by the Grove Park design are built specifically to provide connectivity to Downtown and encourage its revitalization. Along with the Downtown connections and our RCD improvements, we are dedicating a greenway easement to improve connectivity to the Bolin Creek Greenway system and other established pathways for the Town.” [Applicant’s Statement]
“Provide quality community facilities and services – From the well-lit and secure subterranean parking decks to the expansive green spaces and active recreation areas enjoyed by all our residences, the Grove Park project will improve the RCD and the currently clear-cut site to make it a model community for sustainable infill and renewal.” [Applicant’s Statement]
The Planning Board recommended that the Council deny the revised Zoning Atlas Amendment application. For additional information please refer to the Recommendation section of the memorandum and the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.
Additional Information: We note that the Land Use Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Plan identifies this area for residential density of 8-15 units/acre.
Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board met on August 19, 2008 and voted 4-2 that the Council deny the revised Zoning Atlas Amendment application for Residences at Grove Park. The Planning Board stated that the proposed text amendment to the Residential-Special Standards District and rezoning applications would set a precedent for creating special zoning districts for individual projects.
Further, the Board wished to communicate to Council their continued support for the Special Use Permit application but not the Text Amendment associated with the revised Zoning Atlas Amendment for Residences at Grove Park, with a 6-0 vote.
Staff’s Preliminary Recommendation: We recommend that the Council enact the attached Ordinance, rezoning the site from Residential-4 (R-4) and Residential-6 (R-6) to Residential–Special Standards-Conditional (R-SS-C) zoning district. We believe that the rezoning could be justified based on finding C, as described above, associated with goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan.
The attached Resolution would deny the rezoning request.
