Agenda #1
memorandum
to: Mayor and Town Council
from: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
subject: Public Hearing: Bradley Green Subdivision – Application for Preliminary Plat Approval (File No. 7.17..21)
date: October 19, 2005
We have received a request for Preliminary Plat approval of the Bradley Green Subdivision. The 7.0-acre site is located north of Ginger Road and east of Sunrise Road. The site is proposed for development of eight residential lots served by an extension of Amesbury Drive. The property is located outside the Chapel Hill town limits but inside the Urban Services Boundary. The site is located in the Residential-2 (R-2) zoning district, and a portion of the site contains a Resource Conservation District. The property is identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 17, Lot 21.
Tonight’s Public Hearing has been scheduled to receive evidence in support of and in opposition to approval of the application as the Council determines appropriate requirements to include as conditions of approval.
This package of materials has been prepared for the Town Council’s consideration, and is organized as follows:
PROCESS
This is an application for a Preliminary Plat approval. The Land Use Management Ordinance requires the Town Manager to conduct an evaluation of a Preliminary Plat 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.
Review of subdivision proposals differs from review of Special Use Permits in that the question of compliance with regulations and standards is the basis for approval or denial, rather than the four findings of fact listed in Section 4.5.2 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. However, the Council’s review and action on a subdivision is quasi-judicial, with sworn testimony and evidence entered into the record. Please see the attached summary of key differences between legislative and quasi-judicial zoning decisions, prepared by Mr. David Owens of the School of Government.
The standard of review and approval of a Preliminary Plat application involves comparing the application with the regulations and standards in the Land Use Management Ordinance. The review typically focuses on vehicular and pedestrian access and circulation, traffic impact, public improvements, lot standards, and recreation area.
Information regarding this application will be presented at tonight’s Public Hearing. The Land Use Management Ordinance directs that if, after consideration of the information, the Council decides that the application meets all the Land Use Management Ordinance requirements, the application must be approved. If the Council decides that the application does not meet all the Land Use Management Ordinance requirements, the application accordingly must be denied.
BACKGROUND
Concept Plan reviews of this application were conducted by the Community Design Commission on May 19, 2004 and by the Town Council on June 30, 2004. See attached summary and minutes respectively.
Preliminary Plat approval authorizes the division of land. Assuming approval of the Preliminary Plat, we expect the lots in this subdivision to be used for construction of single-family homes. However, we note that two-family dwellings (single-family home with an accessory apartment, and duplex buildings), places of worship, child day care facilities, and non-profit recreation facilities are permitted uses on lots in the Residential-2 zoning district in particular circumstances.
The application is for approval of a Preliminary Plat to subdivide 7.0 acres. The applicant is proposing to create eight lots. The site is located north of Ginger Road and east of Sunrise Road. Access is proposed from Amesbury Drive and Ginger Road. A total of 2.23 acres of open space are proposed for this subdivision.
The site is located in the Residential-2 (R-2) zoning district and a portion of the site includes a Resource Conservation District. The property is located in Orange County and is identified as Chapel Hill Township Map 17, Lot 21.
We have evaluated the application regarding its compliance with the subdivision standards and regulations of the Town’s Land Use Management Ordinance. Based on our evaluation, our preliminary recommendation is that the application, as submitted, complies with the regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and Design Manual, with the conditions in Resolution A.
The Council may find that the proposal meets the subdivision regulations and other pertinent Town regulations, or may find that the proposal does not meet the regulations. Please refer to the attached Staff Report for detail on compliance with subdivision regulations.
Tonight, the Council receives our attached evaluation, and also receives information submitted by the applicant and citizens. The applicant’s materials are included as attachments to this memorandum. All information that is submitted at the hearing will be included in the record.
Based on our evaluation and comments received from Advisory Boards, we believe that the key issues concerning this proposed development are the following:
Ginger Road Improvements: Following discussions with residents in the Chandler’s Green neighborhood, the developer offered to pave Ginger Road from Sunrise Road to Amesbury Drive. In response to this offer, staff revised its initial recommendation for a 12-foot gravel cross section, and recommended that the applicant improve Ginger Road to a town standard including two 11-foot paved travel lanes, shoulders, and ditches. During the October Planning Board meeting, a citizen expressed concerns about paving Ginger Road and how the increased traffic could be dangerous to neighborhood children. In response to this safety issue, the Planning Board recommended that Ginger Road improvements be as indicated in the original staff report; a 12-foot wide gravel road. We understand that the applicant is now proposing to improve Ginger Road, as initially recommended by staff, to a 12-foot gravel cross-section with shoulders and ditch between Sunrise Road and Amesbury Drive.
Comment: At the October Planning Board meeting, the applicant proposed paved improvements to Ginger Road to serve the future Habitat for Humanity proposal. We do not believe that the paving of Ginger Road is proportional or reasonable for the traffic impacts associated with the proposed eight-lot subdivision. We do believe however that it is reasonable to require that this applicant make some improvements to Ginger Road. We recommend that in order to provide adequate access for emergency service vehicles that the applicant improve Ginger Road from the existing 10-foot gravel surface to a minimum width of 12 feet of gravel surface, shoulders, and ditches between Sunrise Road and Amesbury Drive. Resolution A, the Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation, would require improvements to establish a 12-foot wide gravel road. We believe these improvements are proportionately appropriate to the proposed eight-lot subdivision.
Housing Floor Area Restrictions: The Ordinance requires major subdivisions, with five or more lots, to provide floor area restricted dwelling units. Floor area restrictions require that 25 percent of the lots contain dwelling units with no greater than 1,350 square feet of floor area for the initial 30 months following the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Ordinance also provides two alternatives to the floor area restrictions; provisions of affordable housing or a payment-in-lieu of providing affordable dwelling units in the subdivision.
The developer initially offered to provide a payment-in-lieu of affordable housing instead of complying with the floor area restrictions. The applicant also offered to satisfy a portion of the payment-in-lieu of providing affordable housing with an in-kind payment associated with a proposal to pave Ginger Road and extend sanitary sewer infrastructure to the proposed Habitat for Humanity site. We understand the applicant now proposes to meet the Town’s housing floor area restrictions by providing two lots with units containing no more than 1,350 square feet of floor area each.
Comment: The applicant’s initial proposal did not satisfy the Land Use Management Ordinance requirements. The Land Use Management Ordinance does not offer in-kind payments as an option for meeting the floor area restriction requirement. The applicant’s current proposal to provide two lots with no more that 1,350 square feet of floor area fulfills the requirements of the Land Use Management Ordinance. Resolution A, the Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation, stipulates the construction of two floor area restricted dwelling units.
Recreational Requirements: We understand that the applicant has offered a payment-in-lieu of providing 36,590 square feet of recreation area.
Comment: Although the applicant is proposing approximately 118,919 square feet of open space as common area owned by a homeowners association, the open space area does not meet the recreation area requirements of the Land Use Management Ordinance. Recreation area must have at least 50 feet of frontage on a public street to meet the definition in the Ordinance. We have included a stipulation in Resolution A requiring a payment-in-lieu for the required 36,590 square feet of recreation area.
SUMMARY
We have attached a resolution that includes standard conditions of approval as well as special conditions that we recommend. The key special conditions that we recommend are described in detail in the accompanying staff report. With these conditions, we believe that the Council could adopt a resolution to approve. The Manager’s recommendation incorporates input from all Town departments involved in review of the application.
SUBSEQUENT REGULATORY STEPS
Following is a brief outline describing the next steps in the development review process, should the Council approve the Preliminary Plat application:
Applicant submits detailed Final Plans and documentation, complying with Council stipulations. Information is reviewed by Town departments and the following agencies (if applicable):
North Carolina Department of Transportation
North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources
Orange Water and Sewer Authority,
Duke Power Company,
Public Service Company,
Time Warner Cable, and
BellSouth;
Upon demonstration of compliance with remaining Council stipulations, Town staff issues a Zoning Compliance Permit authorizing site work. Permit includes conditions specific to the development and requires pre-construction conferences with Town staff;
Any relevant access easement and right-of-way dedication plat(s) are approved by Town staff, and are recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office;
Engineering Department issues an Engineering Construction Permit, authorizing work within the public right-of-way;
Applicant submits final plat application for Town review and approval. Once approved, the plat is recorded; and
Planning Department issues Zoning Compliance Permits for development on individual lots; Inspections Department issues Building Permits for development on individual lots and Certificates of Occupancy.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Stipulations added to Resolution A, the Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation:
Following Advisory Boards review of the application, the following recommendations were included in Resolution A, the Town Manager’s preliminary recommendation:
1. Floor Area Restrictions: That the development complies with the floor area restrictions as required in Section 3.8.5 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. That the final plans and final plat identify the lots on which the floor area restricted residences will be constructed.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. Please refer to the Key Issues discussion concerning Floor Area Restrictions for additional information.
2. Connection to Amesbury Drive: That the new internal subdivision street shall be constructed and connected to the north end of Amesbury Drive.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. During the Planning Board review an adjoining property owner stated that a fence currently crosses the northern end of Amesbury Drive. Although the site plans submitted by the applicant include a through street connection between Amesbury Drive and the proposed internal subdivision, the Planning Board recommended that the resolution of approval stipulate a roadway connection between the proposed development and Amesbury Drive.
3. Sidewalk Location: That if determined feasible by the Town Manager, the applicant shall redesign the proposed southern end of the new internal roadway near Ginger Road, in order to construct the sidewalk on the west side of the proposed internal street.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. Currently there is a sidewalk on the west side of the portion of Amesbury Drive north of Sweeten Creek Road. The applicant’s proposed plan for the internal subdivision street is designed as an extension of the northern end of Amesbury Drive with a sidewalk on the east side of the new proposed road. We believe that it would be preferred to have this proposed sidewalk on the west side of the roadway as is the existing sidewalk on Amesbury Drive. We believe that there may be an opportunity to modify the proposed street and sidewalk design, near the intersection with Ginger Road and provide adequate space within the existing right-of-way for the sidewalk to be located on the west side of Amesbury Drive.
4. Handicapped Ramps: That the applicant will install a handicap ramp at the north end of the existing Amesbury Drive sidewalk and at the south end of the proposed sidewalk.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. We recommend that regardless of the final location for the proposed sidewalk, that the applicant install a handicap ramp at the north end of the existing Amesbury Drive sidewalk and at the south end of the proposed sidewalk.
5. Stub-out to Adjacent Property: That the applicant will construct a stub-out along the northern property line. In order to align with a proposed stub-out along the north property line, the stub-out location may be modified from the location shown on the approved Preliminary Plat. Prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the final location for the road stub-out shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. We believe that the proposed road stub-out for Bradley Green is in general alignment with the stub-out road shown on the Sunrise Road Habitat for Humanity Concept Plan. We believe that a connection between these two projects is desirable. We recommend that the approval of the Bradley Green project require a stub-out along the north property line. Because a formal application for the adjoining property has not be submitted, we also recommend that the location for this road stub-out along the north property line may be adjusted during final plan review for Bradley Green, if the Town Manager determines an adjustment would provide better access to the adjoining property.
6. Off-Site Construction Easement: If the proposed construction of the subdivision road encroaches onto adjoining private property, the applicant shall provide an off-site construction easement or a plat dedicating the necessary public right-of-way, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. A citizen expressed a concern that the plans submitted by the applicant appear to locate a portion of the applicant’s internal roadway on adjacent property that is not owned by the applicant. The applicant stated at the Planning Board meeting that the road would be constructed on the applicant’s property. Based on our review of the submitted site plans, we believe that the portion of the new roadway in question, near the intersection of Ginger Road and Amesbury Drive, does not intrude on the adjoining private property. In light of the expressed concern, Resolution A includes the above stipulation.
7. Road and Sidewalk Maintenance: Until such time that the area is annexed into the town limits, the Homeowners Association or the North Carolina Department of Transportation shall be responsible for the maintenance of the proposed internal subdivision road, adjacent sidewalk, and the improved portions of Ginger Road. A copy of the maintenance agreement with NCDOT or the Homeowners Association document shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of Zoning Compliance.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. Neither Ginger Road nor the proposed internal subdivision roads are located within Town Limits. Therefore the roads will not be maintained by the Town of Chapel Hill until such time that this area is annexed into the Town Limits. We recommend that Ginger Road and the proposed extension of Amesbury Drive be maintained by either the Bradley Green Homeowners Association or the North Carolina Department of Transportation. If the applicant opts for maintenance by NCDOT, we recommend that the plans for improvements to Ginger Road and the Amesbury Drive extension be approved by NCDOT prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
8. Traffic Calming Plan: That if deemed necessary by the Town Manager, the applicant shall install traffic calming device(s) prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. That the location(s), design and construction standards for the traffic calming device(s) shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including the above stipulation in Resolution A. During the Planning Board review, a citizen expressed a concern with the current traffic conditions in the Chandler’s Green subdivision and suggested that the applicant install some traffic calming features within the existing subdivision. The applicant has committed to installing a traffic calming device at the intersection of Amesbury Drive and Ginger Road. Although we are unable to determine at this time if traffic calming is warranted in the new subdivision or the existing subdivision, we recommend that if the Town Manager determines that traffic calming is warranted during final plan review, the applicant will install a traffic calming device. A stipulation to this effect has been included in Resolution A
Advisory Board Recommendations not incorporated into Resolution A, the Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation:
Following Advisory Boards review of the application, the following stipulation was recommended for Resolution A. This recommendation was not incorporated into Resolution A:
9. Construction Management Phasing Plan: That the Construction Management Plan shall include a construction phasing plan that prohibits construction vehicle traffic from using Chandler’s Green subdivision during the roadway and utility infrastructure phase of the project. That the phasing plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Comment: The Planning Board recommended including a construction phasing plan stipulation in Resolution B. During the Planning Board review, a citizen expressed concern with construction traffic and its impact on the Chandlers Green neighborhood. The citizen asked that the Planning Board amend the Construction Management Plan stipulation and prohibit construction traffic from Chandlers Green during the roadway and utility construction phase of the project. In response, the Planning Board concurred and included a stipulation in Resolution B requiring that the construction phasing plan prohibit construction traffic from the Chandler Green neighborhood.
We do not concur with this recommendation. Prohibiting construction traffic from Chandlers Green would require that Ginger Road be the only construction access to the proposed development site. We do not believe that as currently designed or maintained, Ginger Road can adequately or safely handle the anticipated construction traffic associated with the Bradley Green Subdivision. This stipulation has not been incorporated into Resolution A.
Recommendations from Advisory Boards and the Town Manager are summarized below:
Planning Board: The Planning Board reviewed this subdivision on October 4, 2005. The Board voted 7-0 to recommend that the Council approve the application with the adoption of Resolution B. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.
Transportation Board: The Transportation Board will continue review of this subdivision proposal on October 18, 2005. The Summary of Transportation Board Action will be forwarded to the Council when it is available.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board will review this subdivision proposal on October 25, 2005. The Summary of Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Action will be forwarded to the Council when it is available.
Parks and Recreation Commission: The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed this subdivision proposal on September 21, 2005. The Commission voted 8-0 to recommend that the Council approve the application with the adoption of Resolution C. Please see attached Summary of Parks and Recreation Commission Action.
Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation: Our preliminary recommendation is that the Council approve the Preliminary Plat application with the conditions listed in 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.
Resolution D would deny the application.
Bradley Green Subdivision
Preliminary Plat
DIFFERENCES AMONG RESOLUTIONS
|
ISSUE |
Resolution A Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation |
Resolution B Planning Board Recommendation |
Resolution C Parks and Recreation Recommendation |
|
Floor Area Restrictions
|
Yes |
Yes (or payment-in-lieu of affordable housing ) |
Payment-in-lieu of affordable housing |
|
Prohibit construction traffic from Chandler’s Green |
No |
Yes (during roadway and infrastructure phase of project) |
* |
|
Add stipulation requiring connection to Amesbury Drive |
Yes |
Yes |
* |
|
Sidewalk relocated to the west side of subdivision street |
Yes (if it can be designed within existing right-of-way) |
Yes (if it can be designed within existing right-of-way) |
No requirement to relocate to the west side of street |
|
Handicapped ramps at end of sidewalks |
Yes |
Yes |
* |
|
Stub-out along north property line |
Yes (location determined by Town Manager) |
Yes (location determined by Town Manager) |
Yes (as proposed on the preliminary plat site plans) |
|
Off-site construction easements or right-of-way dedication |
Yes (if necessary) |
Yes (if necessary) |
* |
|
Right-of-way maintained by NCDOT or homeowners association |
Yes |
Yes |
* |
|
Install neighborhood traffic calming device |
Yes (as determined necessary by the Town Manager) |
Yes (as determined necessary by the Town Manager) |
* |
* Issue was not discussed at this particular meeting and is therefore not included in this Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS