AGENDA #4

memorandum

to: Mayor and Town Council

from: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

subject: Public Hearing: Aquatic Center at Homestead Park - Application for Special Use Permit Modification (File No. 7.24..19)

date: October 19, 2005

PURPOSE

We have received a request for approval of a Special Use Permit Modification for Homestead Community Park, to add a proposed 27,400 square-foot Aquatic Center. The 40-acre park site is located on the west side of Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., north of Homestead Road, south of Parkside Subdivision and east of Vineyard Square. The site is located in the Residential-2 (R-2) zoning district and contains Resource Conservation District. The property is identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map Number 7.24..19, PIN 9880-12-7274.

Tonight’s Public Hearing has been scheduled to receive evidence in support of and in opposition to approval of the application, and further to receive evidence which the Council may consider as the Council determines any 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:

Cover Memorandum: Introduces application, describes process for review, summarizes staff and advisory board comments, and offers recommendations for Council action.
Summary of Changes: Describes recent revisions to the staff report provided to Advisory Boards.
Staff Report: Offers a detailed description of the site and proposed development, and presents an evaluation of the application regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Land Use Management Ordinance.

Attachments: Includes a checklist of requirements for this development, resolutions of approval and denial, advisory board comments, and the applicant’s materials.

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

A Special Use Permit was originally approved in 1996 for Homestead Community Park (aka Northern Community Park), and included the potential for a 30,000-square-foot community function building, to be approved by a future Special Use Permit Modification.

A Special Use Permit Modification for the park was approved in 1997, to reduce the boundary of the original Special Use Permit by 0.59 acres. The 1997 modification involved the Town’s exchange of a parcel of property with the Freedom House.

Concept Plan reviews of the Aquatic Center application were conducted by the Community Design Commission on June 16, 2004 and by the Town Council on June 21, 2004. See attached summary and minutes respectively.

DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION

The applicant, the Town of Chapel Hill, is proposing an addition to the existing Homestead Community Park with the construction of an Aquatic Center. The Aquatic Center would include two pools, locker rooms, and office space for staff. Proposed landscaping includes the protection of existing trees and required buffers. A stormwater detention pond and a bio-retention area are proposed to manage the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff on the site. The new facility is proposed in the northwest corner of the park, near the existing basketball court, skate park, and batting cage.

The applicant is proposing to increase the existing number of vehicular parking spaces from 274 to 292. The applicant is proposing to increase the existing number of bicycle parking spaces from 28 to 40 with this application.

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 complies with the conditions included in Resolution A, and with the regulations and standards of the Land Use Management Ordinance and Design Manual.

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 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 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 two key issues associated with this development. These issues are discussed below.

Parking Lot Screening: During advisory board review of this application, the applicant asked that the parking lot screening stipulation be deleted from the approval resolution. The applicant stated that no new parking is being proposed adjacent to a property line or street and therefore the stipulation could be deleted. The Transportation Board and the Community Design Commission recommended deleting this stipulation.

Comment: We recommend inclusion of the parking lot screening stipulation. Although no new parking is proposed adjacent to a property line or a street, the stipulation is a reminder that the existing parking lot areas must comply with this standard stipulation. We have included a stipulation to this effect in Resolution A.

Bicycle Parking: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board and the Planning Board both recommended an increase in bicycle parking for the park.

Comment: The original staff report recommended 40 bicycle parking spaces. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommended that the applicant provide 48 bicycle parking spaces and the Planning Board recommended that the applicant provide 60 spaces. We recommend that the applicant provide a minimum of 60 bicycle parking spaces, as recommended by the Planning Board, to reflect the Town’s efforts to promote bicycle access to the park and the Aquatic Center. Resolution A includes a stipulation requiring a minimum of 60 bicycle parking spaces.

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, our preliminary recommendation is that the Council could make the four findings necessary in order to approve the application. The 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 Modification 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 recommendation was included in Resolution A, the Town Manager’s preliminary recommendation:

1. Bicycle Parking: That the development shall comply with the Town’s Design Manual for bicycle parking design. That the development provide, including existing bicycle parking spaces, a minimum of 60 bicycle parking spaces.

Comment: We believe that it would be appropriate to increase bicycle parking at this location beyond the minimum. Resolution A, the Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation, would require at least 60 bicycle parking spaces. Please refer to the Key Issues section of this memorandum for additional information.

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 Resolution A. These recommendations were not incorporated into Resolution A:

2. Traffic Signal Warrant Study: That the applicant complete a traffic signal warrant study at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd./Stateside Drive intersection.

Comment: The Transportation Board recommended a traffic signal warrant study at the Martin Luther King Jr Blvd./Stateside Drive intersection. The Traffic Impact Analysis submitted with this application did not identify this intersection as being within the scope of the Special Use Permit Modification Application. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, does not include this recommendation.

3. Transit/Pedestrian Options: That at the time the Aquatic Center is open, Town staff review options for providing public transit service and expanded pedestrian access to New Stateside Drive.

Comment: The Transportation Board recommended Town staff review transit and pedestrian options. We believe this is a good idea but we do not believe it is necessary as a stipulation in this approval. We believe the staff can review these options at any time. Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation, does not include this recommendation.

4. Homestead Road Crosswalk: That the applicant provide a $1,000 payment toward constructing a pedestrian crossing on Homestead Road.

Comment: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board recommended that the applicant provide a $1,000 payment towards constructing a crosswalk on Homestead Road. The recently approved Southern Orange Senior Center Special Use Permit included a stipulation for a crosswalk on Homestead Road. This recommendation from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board was not incorporated in Resolution A.

5. Parking Lot Screening: That all parking areas shall be screened from view in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.6 of the Land Use Management Ordinance. The screening plans shall be approved by the Town Manager.

Comment: The Transportation Board and the Community Design Commission recommended deleting this stipulation. This stipulation has not been removed from Resolution A. Please refer to the Key Issues section of this memorandum for additional information.

Recommendations from Advisory Boards and the Town Manager are summarized below.

Planning Board: On October 4, 2005, the Planning Board voted 8-0 to recommend that the Council approve this application with the adoption of Resolution A. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.

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 8-0 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.

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, 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.

Homestead Park Aquatic Center – Special Use Permit Modification

Differences Among Resolutions

ISSUES

Resolution A (Approval)

Town Manager’s Preliminary and Planning Board Recommendation

Resolution B

(Approval)

Transportation Board

Recommendation

Resolution C

(Approval)