AGENDA #2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Red Hot and Blue (Whole Foods Plaza): Application for Special Use Permit Modification (File No. 7.46.B.8)
DATE: September 15, 2003
INTRODUCTION
We have reviewed a request for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Red Hot and Blue Restaurant at the Whole Foods Plaza Shopping Center. The applicant is proposing to modify the existing Special Use Permit to allow daytime dining at the Red Hot and Blue Restaurant. The property is located in the Community Commercial (CC) zoning district. The site is identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 46, Block B, Lot 8.
Tonight’s Public Hearing has been scheduled to receive evidence in support of and in opposition to approval of the application.
This package of materials has been prepared for the Town Council’s consideration, and is organized as follows:
· Cover Memorandum: Introduces application, describes process for review, summarizes staff and advisory board comments, and offers recommendations for Council action.
· Attachments: Includes a checklist of requirements for this development, resolutions of approval and denial, advisory board comments, and applicant’s materials.
The current application is before the Council because of questions asked during consideration of a proposed expansion of Plaza Theaters on the adjacent property. During that consideration, earlier this year, questions were asked about the approved permit for this adjacent Kroger Plaza (Whole Foods Plaza) property. When we reviewed the 1969 permit to answer these questions, we noted the “night time dining” restrictions.
On June 9, 2003, the Council granted expedited review for the Red Hot and Blue applicant for this Special Use Permit Modification. In so doing, the Council noted that the Special Use Permit Modification application should be limited in scope to the condition related to “night time dining.” This report to the Council reflects that limited scope.
PROCESS
The Land Use Management Ordinance requires the Town Manager to conduct an evaluation of this Special Use Permit Modification application, to present a report to the Planning Board, and to present a report and recommendation to the Town Council. We have reviewed the application and evaluated it against Town standards; we have presented a report to the Planning Board; and tonight we submit our report and preliminary recommendation to the Council.
The standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit Modification application involves consideration of four findings (description of the findings follows below). Evidence will be presented tonight. If, after consideration of the evidence, the Council decides that it can make each of the four findings, the Land Use Management Ordinance directs that the Special Use Permit Modification shall then be approved. If the Council decides that the evidence does not support making one or more of the findings, then the application cannot be approved and, accordingly, should be denied by the Council.
BACKGROUND
On March 10, 1969, the Town Council approved a Special Use Permit for development on this property (Kroger Plaza Shopping Center). The Special Use Permit restricted the use of the building, currently occupied by the Red Hot and Blue restaurant, to “a dry cleaners or night time eating establishment” (see Attachment 3). This Special Use Permit Modification proposes to amend the Special Use Permit and allow daytime dining in the structure occupied by Red Hot and Blue.
The 1969 Special Use Permit has been modified a number of times. The following summarizes each Special Use Permit Modification for this property since 1969:
q November 17, 1975: Special Use Permit Modification approved to revise the Unified Sign Plan.
q June 13, 1977: Special Use Permit Modification approved to permit a small building for a photo business to be located in the parking lot.
q June 12, 1978: Special Use Permit Modification approved to extend the approval of the June 13, 1977 SUP Modification. This SUP Modification expired on December 31, 1978.
q January 14, 1980: Special Use Permit Modification approved to revise the Unified Sign Plan.
q October 13, 1980: Special Use Permit Modification approved to permit construction of a photo facility with a condition that it be attached to the main shopping center building.
q October 27, 1980: Special Use Permit Modification approved to permit construction of a photo facility that would not be attached to the main building.
q February 9, 1981: Special Use Permit Modification approved to permit the addition of 7,200 square feet of floor area on the Franklin Street side of the shopping center.
q October 26, 1981: Special Use Permit Modification approved to permit a drive-in teller for the bank on the property.
q June 1984: Zoning Compliance Permit issued for a 1,086 square foot addition to the restaurant building (now Red Hot and Blue).
q February 23, 1987: Zoning Compliance Permit issued for addition to the restaurant building.
q July 20, 1990: Zoning Compliance Permit issued to enclose a patio on the restaurant and to make façade changes.
On June 9, 2003, the Council granted expedited review to the Red Hot and Blue applicant for this Special Use Permit Modification.
This Special Use Permit Modification proposes to delete Condition #4 of the original 1969 Special Use Permit, allowing daytime dining. Condition #4 currently reads:
“(4) That the use of the second building be restricted to a dry cleaner or night time dining establishment and if neither of these uses appears practical that the developer resubmit plans for modification of a special use permit to allow another use.”
We recommend deleting Condition #4 as part of this application. If this condition were deleted, any of the permitted or accessory uses in the Community Commercial (CC) zoning district would be allowed if parking requirements can be satisfied.
We have evaluated the application regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Town’s Land Use Management Ordinance. Based on our review, our preliminary opinion is that the application as submitted complies with the regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and Design Manual.
We have also evaluated the application regarding its conformance with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan. We believe that the application is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Plan.
Tonight the Council receives our evaluation, and also receives information submitted by the applicant and other citizens. The applicant’s materials are included as attachments to this memorandum. All information that is submitted at the hearing will be placed into the record.
Based on the evidence that is submitted, the Council will consider whether or not it can make each of four required findings for the approval of a Special Use Permit Modification. The four findings are:
|
Special Use Permit Modification – Required Findings of Fact
Finding #1: That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare.
Finding #2: That the use or development complies with all required regulations and standards of this chapter, including all applicable provisions of Articles 3 and 5, the specific standards contained in the Supplemental Use Regulations (Article 6), and with all other applicable regulations.
Finding #3: That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, or that the use or development is a public necessity;
Finding #4: That the use or development conforms with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in this Chapter and in the Comprehensive Plan.
|
Following the Public Hearing, we will prepare an evaluation of the evidence submitted in support of and in opposition to this application. If, after consideration of the evidence, the Council decides that it can make each of the four findings, the Land Use Management Ordinance directs that the Special Use Permit Modification shall then be approved. If the Council decides that the evidence does not support making one or more of the findings, then the application cannot be approved, and accordingly, should be denied by the Council.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations are summarized below. Please see summaries of board actions and recommendations in the attachments.
Planning Board’s Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed this proposal on September 2 , 2003, and voted unanimously to recommend that the Council approve the application. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.
Transportation Board’s Recommendation: The Transportation Board reviewed this proposal on September 2, 2003, and voted unanimously to recommend that the Council approve the application. Please see the attached Summary of Transportation Board Action.
Community Design Commission’s Recommendation: The Community Design Commission is scheduled to review this proposal on September 17, 2003. We will provide the Council with a summary of the Commission’s action as soon as it is available.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board’s Recommendation: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board reviewed this proposal on August 26, 2003, and voted unanimously to recommend that the Council approve the application. Please see the attached Summary of Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Action.
Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation: Based on our evaluation of the application, our preliminary recommendation is that the Council approve the application by adopting Resolution A.
Following tonight’s Public Hearing, we will prepare an evaluation of the evidence submitted in support of and in opposition to this application. If the Council makes the required findings for approval of a Special Use Permit Modification, we recommend that the application be approved with the adoption of Resolution A.
Resolution B would deny the application.
1. Resolution A (Approving the application) (p. 6).
2. Resolution B (Denying the application) (p. 7).
3. October 26, 1981 SUP Modification Resolution (p. 8).
4. Summary of Action – Planning Board (p. 12).
5. Summary of Action – Transportation Board (p. 13).
6. Summary of Action – Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board (p. 14).
7. Correspondence from Bill Wilson, September 2, 2003 (p. 15).
8. Statement of Justification (p. 17).
9. Project Fact Sheet (p. 19).
10. Area Map (p. 21).
11. Site Plan (p. 22).
RESOLUTION A
(Approving the Application)
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION FOR THE WHOLE FOODS PLAZA PROPERTY
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit Modification application proposed by Ginn and Company, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 46, Block B, Lot 8 (PIN 9799-14-7917), if developed according to the conditions listed below, would:
1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of this chapter, including all applicable provisions of Articles 3 and 5, the specific standards contained in the Supplemental Use Regulations (Article 6), and with all other applicable regulations;
3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and
4. Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for the Special Use Permit Modification for the Whole Foods Plaza property in accordance with the condition listed below:
1. That the Special Use Permit Modifications approved by the Town Council on February 9, 1981 (Deed Book 359, Page 224) and October 26, 1981 (Resolution of Approval) be amended to delete Condition A(4), imposed originally on March 10, 1969 (Deed Book 261, Page 557).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Whole Foods Plaza property in accordance with the condition listed above.
This the _______ day of ______________, 2003.
RESOLUTION B
(Denying the Application)
A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION FOR THE WHOLE FOODS PLAZA PROPERTY
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit Modification application proposed by Ginn and Company, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 46, Block B, Lot 8 (PIN 9799-14-7917), if developed according to the conditions listed below, would not:
1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
2. Comply with all required regulations and standards of this chapter, including all applicable provisions of Articles 3 and 5, the specific standards contained in the Supplemental Use Regulations (Article 6), and with all other applicable regulations;
3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, or that the use or development is a public necessity;
4. Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.
(INSERT ADDITIONAL REASONS FOR DENIAL)
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby denies the application for the Whole Foods Plaza property as proposed by Ginn and Company.
This the _________ day of _______________, 2003.