AGENDA #3

memorandum

to:Mayor and Town Council

from:W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

subject: Public Hearing: Family House at UNC Hospitals - Application for Special Use
Permit (File No. 7.73..1, PIN #9788-54-5304)

date:October 19, 2005

PURPOSE

We have received a request for approval of a Special Use Permit to construct the 34,140 square-foot Family House, a Residential Support Facility associated with the University of North Carolina (UNC) Hospital System. The proposal is to provide a Residential Support Facility for 40 families who have family members at the UNC Hospital System. There would also be one care taker unit. The site is located on Old Mason Farm Road, adjacent to the Ronald McDonald House and south of the Highland Woods neighborhood. The applicant proposes to encumber a 6.15 acre (268,026 square feet) portion of a 19.73-acre lot with a Special Use Permit. The Ronald McDonald House is also on the same lot, and has its own Site Plan Review approval. The applicant is proposing 59 parking spaces. The site is located in the Office/Institutional-2 (OI-2) zoning district. The site is located in Orange County is identified as a portion of Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 73, Lot 1 (PIN # 9788-54-5304).

The applicant is requesting modification to regulations that establish minimum parking requirements. The applicant is proposing an accompanying Land Use Management Ordinance Text Amendment to change the number of families permitted in a Residential Support Facility.

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 the appropriate requirements to include as conditions of approval.

PROCESS

The Land Use Management Ordinance requires the Town Manager to conduct an evaluation of this Special Use Permit 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 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 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

Concept Plan reviews of this application were conducted by the Community Design Commission on December 17, 2003 and by the Town Council on March 15, 2004. See attached summary and minutes respectively.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

The applicant is proposing to construct a two-story Residential Support Facility, for use by families with members at the UNC Hospital. The proposal includes 34,140 square feet of floor area and accommodations for 40 families.

The applicant is proposing to provide 59 vehicular parking spaces, including two handicapped spaces, as well as six bicycle parking spaces.

The applicant is proposing three bio-retention features located in the southwestern part of the site, for managing increased stormwater runoff associated with the proposed development.

EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION

We have evaluated the application regarding its compliance with the 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 and modifications of regulations included in Resolution A.

Tonight the Council receives our attached evaluation and 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 of the hearing.

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 and whether it chooses to approve the proposed modification of regulations.

The four findings are:

Special Use Permit – 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 would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance; 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; and Finding #4: That the use or development conforms to the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Land Use Management Ordinance 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.

KEY ISSUES

We have identified one key issue associated with this development, discussed below.

Left Turn Lane on Old Mason Farm Road: We are recommending a left-turn lane on Old Mason Farm Road. The applicant has indicated disagreement with this stipulation but has not provided evidence, such as trip analysis, to support its position.

Comment: We recommend a left-turn lane at the entry drive to the site on Old Mason Farm Road to improve traffic circulation in order to:

• Reduce traffic back-up on Old Mason Farm Road at Fordham Boulevard due to proximity of the driveways and streets in the area;
• Reduce delay to eastbound through vehicles on Old Mason Farm Road during peak hours; and
• Reduce potential for accidents involving left-turn movements into the site.

The applicant applied for a Transportation Impact Assessment Waiver and it was granted by the Town. The construction of a turn lane was a condition of the Transportation Impact Assessment waiver granted to the applicant. If the applicant provides a Traffic Impact Assessment, or other reasonable data to support their position, the Council may choose to not require the left-turn lane. Without such data from the applicant, we continue to recommend the provision of the left-turn lane.

PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF REGULATIONS

The Town Council has the ability to modify the regulations, according to Section 4.5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance if the Town Council makes a finding in the particular case that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree.

The applicant is requesting modification to regulations from minimum parking regulations (Article 5.9) of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The applicant is proposing 59 parking spaces, including two handicapped spaces. The applicant requests that regulations be modified to allow the provision of 59 parking spaces, rather than the 68 required. The applicant is proposing fewer parking spaces than required by the Ordinance based on the assumption that most families will be coming to the Family House from out of town with one car and that there is existing shuttle bus service offered between the Ronald McDonald House and UNC Hospital.

Comment: We believe that the applicant’s request to modify minimum vehicular parking regulations to allow a reduced number of parking spaces is reasonable. We believe that the Council could find that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree because the Family House facility 1) will have a shuttle bus available to UNC Hospitals, and 2) is located in the Watershed Protection District where reducing impervious surface is especially desirable.

In summary, the Town Council may modify the proposed modification to regulations if it makes a finding in the particular case, that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree. The Town Council may deny the proposed modifications from regulations at its discretion. If the Council chooses to deny a request for modification to regulations, the applicant’s alternative is to comply with the regulation.

LAND USE MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE TEXT AMENDMENT

In a separate agenda item, the applicant is proposing a Land Use Management Ordinance Text Amendment to change the number of families permitted in a Residential Support Facility. The Ordinance definition of Residential Support Facility currently permits a 30-family occupancy limit and the applicant is requesting a text amendment that would increase the limit to 40 families. If the Council chooses not to approve the text amendment, the applicant will be required to reduce the size of the proposed development to the current 30-family occupancy limit. Please see the accompanying memorandum, “Land Use Management Ordinance Text Amendment/Modification to the Definition of a Residential Support Facility,” for additional information.

SUMMARY

We have attached a resolution that includes standard conditions of approval as well as special conditions that we recommend for this application. With these conditions, and modification of regulations discussed above, our preliminary recommendation is that the Council could make the four findings necessary in order to approve the application. The Town Manager’s recommendation, Resolution A 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 Special Use Permit application for this site:

1. Applicant receives copy of Council-adopted resolution.

2. 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 Environment and Natural Resources,
   • Orange Water and Sewer Authority,
   • Duke Power Company,
   • Public Service Company,
   • Time Warner Cable, and
   • BellSouth.

3. Community Design Commission reviews and approves building elevations and site lighting plans.

4. 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.

5. Upon applicant’s 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.

6. Engineering Department issues an Engineering Construction Permit, authorizing any work within the public right-of-way.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Stipulations Added to Resolution A, the Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation:

Following advisory board review of the application, the following recommendations were included in Resolution A, the Town Manager’s preliminary recommendation:

1.      Surety Guarantee for Old Mason Farm Road Improvements: That the applicant shall provide a surety guarantee for 125% for the estimated value of the required Old Mason Farm Road infrastructure improvements, prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit, for the sidewalk, curb and gutter, three-foot wide grass strip and two-foot widening of pavement, should the applicant choose not to complete these infrastructure improvements prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The improvements shall be completed no later than one year after the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

Comment: The applicant has requested that they be allowed to delay the construction of improvements along the north side of Old Mason Farm Road because of proposed utility work by OWASA. The time-frame for the work has not been specified by OWASA. The Transportation Board recommended, in Resolution B, that the applicant provide a payment-in-lieu of construction to allow flexibility. We believe that a surety guarantee is preferable to a payment-in-lieu because it provides assurance that the work will be completed by the applicant. The stipulation above allows the applicant to delay Old Mason Farm Road infrastructure improvements for an additional year, in order to potentially avoid disruption by proposed OWASA utility work, and the Town is provided a guarantee that the work will be completed.

Advisory Board Recommendations not incorporated into Resolution A, the Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation:

Following advisory board review of the application, the following stipulations were recommended for omission from Resolution A. The stipulations continue to be included in Resolution A, the Town Manager’s preliminary recommendation:

2.      Left Turn Lane: Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall provide an 11-foot wide center turn lane from the intersection of U.S. 15-501 at Old Mason Farm Road, to the western-most driveway entrance to the site. Furthermore, a 295-foot transition taper shall be extended in an eastern direction from the driveway entrance. The design must be approved by the Town Manager and the North Carolina Department of Transportation prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Comment:  The Transportation Board, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, and the Community Design Commission recommended deleting the above stipulation from Resolution A. The Transportation Board, in Resolution B, and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board, in Resolution D, recommended that the left-turn lane not be required. The Community Design Commission recommended that the applicant make a proportional payment-in-lieu of constructing the turn lane, in Resolution C. We do not concur. We believe that the construction of a left-hand turn lane on Old Mason Farm Road will improve traffic circulation and safety. Please refer to the Key Issues discussion concerning the Traffic Impact Analysis for additional information. The above stipulation has been retained in Resolution A.

3.      Widen Old Mason Farm Road: That the applicant shall widen Old Mason Farm Road two feet, on the north side, adjacent to the property frontage subject to Town Manager approval, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Comment:  The Transportation Board recommended deleting the above stipulation in Resolution B. We do not concur. Old Mason Farm Road will require two feet of additional width to provide for a bicycle lane on the north side of the road. The Town’s 2007-2013 Transportation Improvement Priority List calls for bicycle lanes along Old Mason Farm Road and Finley Golf Course Road. The adopted Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan also identifies the street as a corridor for bicycle and pedestrian improvement. The above stipulation has been retained in Resolution A.

4.      Traffic Impact Analysis: That a Traffic Impact Analysis shall be provided if more than 40 families are proposed to be accommodated on the site.

Comment: The Transportation Board noted at their October 4 meeting that there was a caretaker unit in addition to accommodations for 40 families, and the applicant agreed. The Transportation Board recommended, in Resolution B, revising the above stipulation to increase the threshold to for the applicant to provide a Traffic Impact Analysis from 40 families to 41 families. The applicant has responded by submitting a revised Traffic Impact Analysis Waiver request with a 41 family threshold and it is currently being processed. We concur with the recommendation pending the results of the waiver request. In the interim, the above stipulation has not been revised in Resolution A.

Recommendations From Advisory Boards and the Town Manager are Summarized Below:

Planning Board:  On October 18, 2005, the Planning Board will meet and make recommendations on this application. The Summary of Planning Board Action will be forwarded to the Council when it is available.

Transportation Board:  On October 4, 2005, the Transportation Board voted 6-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution B. Please see the attached Summary of Transportation Board Action.

Community Design Commission:On September 28, 2005, the Community Design Commission voted 8-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution C. Please see the attached Summary of Community Design Commission Action.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board:  On September 27, 2005, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board voted 5-3 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution D. 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 conclusion is that, with the stipulations in Resolution A, the application complies with the standards and regulations of the Land Use Management Ordinance, except for the proposed modification to regulations.

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, and modification to regulations as previously described, we recommend that the application be approved with the adoption of Resolution A.

Resolution E would deny the application.

Family House at UNC Hospitals - Special Use Permit
Differences Among Resolutions

Issues	Resolution A (Approval) Town Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation	Resolution B (Approval)   Transportation Board Recommendation	Resolution C (Approval)   Community Design Commission Recommendation	Resolution D (Approval)   Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Recommendation
Delay Old Mason Farm Road Improvements as Well as Improvements Adjacent to the road	Yes (Surety Guarantee)	Yes (Payment-In-Lieu)	*	*
Require Left-Turn Lane into site Entrance	Yes	No	Yes (Proportional Payment-In-Lieu)	No
Widen Old Mason Farm Road 2 Feet for Bicycles	Yes	No	*	*
Change the Threshold Number of Families for a Traffic Impact Analysis From 40 to 41	Yes (Pending Approval of Revised Traffic Impact Analysis Waiver)	Yes	*	*