AGENDA #6a & b

MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor and Town Council

FROM: Sonna M. Loewenthal, Assistant Town Manager

SUBJECT: YMCA - Application for Special Use Permit Modification

(File No. 29 – 11)

DATE: April 10, 2000

INTRODUCTION

Tonight the Council continues the Public Hearing from March 20, 2000, regarding the Special Use Permit Modification application for construction of 27,899 square feet of additional floor area at the Airport Road facility. Adoption of Resolution A, B, C, or D would approve a Special Use Permit Modification. Adoption of Resolution E would deny the request.

This package of materials has been prepared for the Town Council’s consideration, and is organized as follows:

¨ Cover Memorandum: Provides background information on the development proposal and the Town’s review process, presents evidence in the record thus far in support of and in opposition to approval of the application, and offers recommendations for Council action.

¨ Attachments: Includes the resolutions of approval and denial, comments on issues raised during the March 20^th Public Hearing, and a copy of the Public Hearing memorandum and its related attachments.

BACKGROUND

On March 20, 2000, a Public Hearing was held for consideration of a Special Use Permit Modification application to authorize expansion of the YMCA, which would include an expanded gym and indoor track, a new swimming pool, a new youth center, and new playing fields on the east side of Airport Road, south of Estes Drive. Several concerns were raised during the Public Hearing, and the Hearing is being opened tonight to receive the staff responses. We note that on March 20, the Council determined that contiguous property would be defined as those properties adjacent to this site.

This is an application for a Special Use Permit Modification. The Development Ordinance requires the Town Manager to conduct an evaluation of this Special Use Permit Modification application to the Town Council. We have reviewed the application and evaluated it regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Development Ordinance; we have presented a report to the Planning Board; and on March 20 we submitted our report and recommendation to the Council.

EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION

The standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit Modification application is essentially the same as that for approval of a Special Use Permit. It involves consideration of four findings of fact that the Council must consider for granting a Special Use Permit. Based on the evidence that is accumulated during the Public Hearing, the Council will consider whether or not it can make each of four required findings for the approval of a Special Use Permit Modification.

If, after consideration of the evidence submitted at the Public Hearing, the Council decides that it can make each of the four findings, the Development 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, the application cannot be approved and, accordingly, should be denied by the Council.

Tonight, based on the evidence presently in the record thus far, we provide the following evaluation of this application based around the four findings of facts that the Council must consider for granting a Special Use Permit Modification.

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.

We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #1 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (provided as an attachment to this memorandum). We note the following key points raised by the applicant:

· The YMCA provides needed services to the community;

· The site is served by utilities;

· The building additions will improve safety and accessibility on the site;

· The YMCA intends to provide a second means of vehicular access to improve safety and site accessibility.

Evidence in opposition: No one who spoke at the Public Hearing offered evidence in opposition.

We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.

Finding #2: That the use or development complies with all required regulations and standards of this chapter, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, and 14 and with all other applicable regulations.

We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #2 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (provided as an attachment to this memorandum). We note the following key points raised by the applicant:

· The proposal meets all Town standards and regulations; and

· The land use will remain the same.

Evidence in opposition: No one who spoke at the Public Hearing offered evidence in opposition.

We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.

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;

We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #3 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (provided as an attachment to this memorandum). We note the following key point raised by the applicant:

The use of the property will remain the same; and
The visual impact on neighbors will be minimal.

Evidence in opposition: No one who spoke at the Public Hearing offered evidence in opposition.

We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.

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.

We believe the evidence in the record to date can be summarized as follows:

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of Finding #4 for this application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (provided as an attachment to this memorandum). We note the following key point raised by the applicant:

The YMCA fulfills a community need; and
The land use is in conformance with the Land Use Map.

Evidence in opposition: No one who spoke at the Public Hearing offered evidence in opposition.

We anticipate that further evidence may be presented for the Council’s consideration as part of the continued Public Hearing process.

KEY ISSUES

We believe that the key issues raised during the March 20 Public Hearing were related to vehicular access, number of parking spaces, bicycle parking, and stormwater drainage. We have provided additional information on these issues, including responses from the Town staff, as an attachment to this memorandum. (Please see page 8.)

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations are summarized below. Please see the attached summaries of board actions and recommendations.

Planning Board’s Recommendation: The Planning Board met on February 1, 2000, to review this application and voted 7-0 to recommend approval with conditions. The Planning Board strongly supported a second means of access, and recommended that the second access be coordinated with a phasing plan for construction of the new building additions such that the second access would be completed at the time of construction of the second phase. This recommendation is reflected in Resolution B. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.

Transportation Board’s Recommendation: The Transportation Board met on March 7, 2000, and voted 7-0 to recommend approval with conditions. The Transportation Board recommends that the second point of access be completed at the time of construction of the second phase. Please see the attached Summary of Transportation Board action.

This recommendation is reflected in Resolution B.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board’s Recommendation: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board met on March 14, 2000, to review the application and voted 6-0 to recommend approval with conditions, including the following:

1. Provide secured, covered, illuminated bicycle parking to accommodate approximately 16 bicycles using wave-type racks.

2. Use contrasting paving surface along with painted lines at all internal pedestrian crosswalks.

3. Use contrasting paving at Airport Road entrance along with painted lines.

4. Place warning signs at entrances/exits.

Please see the attached Summary of Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Action.

This recommendation is reflected in Resolution C.

Community Design Commission’s Recommendation: The Community Design Commission met on February 2, 2000, to review the application and voted 7-0 to recommend approval with conditions. The Commission recommended providing flexibility as to the paving surface for the internal drive and parking lot behind the building, and recommended shifting the traffic turnaround to the west. Please see the attached Summary of Community Design Commission Action.

This recommendation is reflected in Resolution D.

Manager’s Revised Recommendation: Based on the information in the record to date, we believe the Council could make the findings required to approve the Special Use Permit Modification. However, we note that the purpose of tonight’s hearing is to receive additional information.

Our revised recommendation is that the Council adopt Resolution A, approving the application with conditions. The following features have been added to Resolution A since the public hearing:

Accommodation of at least 16 bicycles; and
The second vehicular access easement be dedicated with the first phase of construction, and the construction of the access drive be tied to the second phase of development.

Resolution B would approve the application with the Planning Board’s and Transportation Board’s recommended conditions.

Resolution C would approve the application with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Board’s recommended conditions.

Resolution D would approve the application with the Community Design Commission’s recommended conditions.

Resolution E would deny the application.

DIFFERENCES AMONG RESOLUTIONS

ISSUE	RESOLUTION A Manager’s Revised Recommendation	RESOLUTION B Planning Board And Transportation Board Recommendations	RESOLUTION C Bicycle and Pedestrian Board Recommendation	RESOLUTION D Community Design Commission Recommendation
Second vehicular access	Easement Dedication with Phase I; Access Construction With Phase II	Access Construction with Phase II	*	*
Choice of pave-ment for rear portion of site	No	*	*	Yes
Deletion of 2 parking spaces, shift of traffic circle	No	*	*	Yes
Bike racks re-quired	Yes, for at least 16 bikes	*	Yes (for 16 bikes)	*
Contrasting pavement	No	*	Yes	*
Warning signs	No	*	Yes	*

* Not discussed during this advisory board’s review of the application, therefore not included in this resolution.

ATTACHMENTS

1. List of Issues Raised during the March 20, 2000 Public Hearing (p.8)

2. Resolution A (p.9)

3. Resolution B (p.15)

4. Resolution C (p.16)

5. Resolution D (p 17)

6. Resolution E (p.18)

7. Letter from Mr. James Carnahan (p.19)

Applicant’s Statement of Justification (p. 20)

9. March 20, 2000, Public Hearing Memorandum and Related Attachments (begin new

page 1)

CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO YMCA

Questions/Issues Raised at the March 20, 2000 Public Hearing

Site Access

1. There was discussion as to the timing of the requirement for a second vehicular access point.

Staff Comment: Early in the review of this project, we recommended the second means of access be required with the initiation of the expansion. Both the Planning Board and the Transportation Board recommended that the second access be provided with Phase II of construction.

At the Public Hearing, the applicant’s attorney indicated that the YMCA intended to provide the second access, but that an easement to Estes Drive had not yet been secured and would not be secured by the time of the hearing continuation. The applicant requested that construction of the second access be delayed to the second phase of construction.

Given the peak hour traffic queuing on Airport Road and the accident history at the YMCA driveway, we continue to be concerned about the safety issues associated with all YMCA vehicular traffic using a single access point on Airport Road. The applicant has indicated that much of the programming for the proposed YMCA facilities would be geared for children, and that a significant amount of the new vehicular traffic would be parents dropping their children off and picking them up. We believe the “dropoff traffic” (two trips for dropoff, two trips at pickup) would generate more vehicle trips at the single access point than typical YMCA traffic. We believe that a second access point is necessary to reduce queuing and conflicting turn movements at the Airport Road driveway.

We understand that obtaining an access easement will take time and construction of the access point will require additional funds. Considering the continuing safety issues with the logistical challenges associated with obtaining a second access, we believe it is important to obtain with the first phase of construction a guarantee of a future second access point. Because the new gym will not be restricted to children’s programs and thus would not generate dropoff only traffic, we recommend that the first phase of construction be restricted to construction of the new gym.

More specifically, we recommend that the applicant be required to dedicate and record an access easement, with access from the YMCA to Estes Drive, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Phase I (the gym only). We further recommend that the access drive be constructed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any additional building(s). We have included these recommendations in Resolution A.

NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES

2. A Council member asked about the need for the proposed number of parking spaces.

Staff Comment: The Development Ordinance does not specify a minimum number of parking spaces for a non-profit recreation center such as the YMCA. The YMCA is currently operating with 67 parking spaces and we understand that this number is insufficient for the YMCA’s current needs. The applicant proposes to double the building’s floor area and add 90 parking spaces, for a total of 157 spaces. We believe that the applicant’s proposal to provide 157 spaces is reasonable.

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

3. A Council member asked about the existing pond and stormwater received by and exiting the site.

Staff Comment: The YMCA site receives drainage from the Amity Church site to the north. This drainage flows south to a low area behind the YMCA building. This low area is a former farm pond which has over the years filled with silt and does not store stormwater. A drainage swale now carries the combined stormwater from Amity Church and the YMCA to property south of the YMCA site, within the Resource Conservation District, then to a tributary that eventually flows into Bolin Creek.

Under this development proposal, stormwater would be piped from the YMCA’s front parking lot and building to a detention point near the southeast corner of the building. The water would be stored in the new pond and released at a controlled rate onto property to the south.

With the review of final plans, we will receive stormwater calculations and a more detailed stormwater management plan. The final plans will need to show pertinent off-site drainage features. We note that it may be necessary to detain stormwater in the easternmost parking lot. We recommend that the owner include a bio-retention basin in this location.

We recommend that a detailed stormwater management plan be submitted to the Town Manager for review and approval prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. We have included these stipulations in Resolution A.

BICYCLE PARKING

4. A Council member asked about the proposed number of bicycle parking spaces, wondering if 16 bicycles was a reasonable number to accommodate.

Staff Comment: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Board recommended that provisions be made to accommodate about 16 bicycles. The Town Manager recommended bike racks, with the number of bicycles to be determined at Final Plan approval. We have revised the Town Manager’s recommendation to state that provisions shall be made for at least 16 bicycles.

RESOLUTION A

(Manager’s Revised Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR THE YMCA RECREATION CENTER (SUP 29..11) (2000-04-10/R-11a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit Modification application proposed by the Chapel Hill-Carrboro YMCA, on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 29, Lot 11, if developed according to the plans dated December 1, 1999, and 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 the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, and 14, and with all other applicable regulations, with the modifications listed below;

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 Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these findings are conditioned on the following:

Stipulations Specific to the Development

1. Relationship to the 1975 Special Use Permit: That this permit supersedes the 1975 Special Use Permit for this development.

2. Second Vehicular Access: That a second point of vehicular access be provided, with the design and location along Estes Drive to be approved by the Town Manager, by grantors of any necessary easements, and by NCDOT, if applicable.

The dedication and recordation of an access easement must occur prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for Phase I (the new gym). The construction of the second access point, on Estes Drive, must occur prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any additional building(s).

3. That construction begin by April 10, 2002 and be completed by April 10, 2005.

4. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit authorizes the following:

· Two buildings, with 55,862 square feet of floor area, for a health and recreation facility; and

· A parking lot of at least 157 spaces.

5. Vehicular Access Improvement: That a left turn lane be added to the Airport Road driveway.

6. Sidewalks: That pedestrian walkways be provided in the following locations:

· sidewalks from Airport Road through the parking lot to the building;

· sidewalk along the western and northern sides of the building;

· sidewalk along the south side of the parking areas near the northern property line; and

· sidewalk along one side of the new second driveway.

The sidewalks shall be handicap accessible.

7. Bike Racks: That covered bike racks be provided on site, with the number and location to be approved by the Town Manager. The bike racks shall accommodate at least 16 bikes.

8. Parking:

a. Heavy Duty Pavement: That heavy duty pavement be installed under the entire refuse service vehicle access route and under the dumpster pad, with pavement specifications, the location, and configuration to be approved by the Town Manager. Alternatively, the applicant must add a note to the plans indicating the Town will not be held responsible for pavement damage due to public refuse/recycling collection vehicles.

b. Parking Area Screening: That all parking areas be screened from public road view, and that screening plans shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

c. Parking Lot Design and Construction: That all parking lots shall be designed and constructed to meet Town standards unless an alternate design is approved by the Town Manager.

d. Parking Lot Layout: That the parking lot be redesigned if necessary to accommodate full width landscape buffers, unless alternative landscape buffers are approved by the Community Design Commission.

9. Swimming Pool Drainage: That the drainage from the swimming pool not be routed to the sanitary sewer system. The drainage plans must be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.

10. Maintenance/Repair of Private Sewer Facilities: That the owner shall be responsible for maintenance and repair of the private lift station and force main.

11. Relocation of Water Line or Dumpster Area: That the water line or the dumpster area be relocated so that they no longer overlap.

12. Utility Easements as Related to Landscape Buffers: That all utility easement locations be verified and shown on the plans. No landscape buffers shall overlap the utility easements, unless the utility lines are buried and landscape easements can be obtained from the appropriate utility companies.

13. Dedication of Sight Triangle Easements: That sight triangle easements, as required by NCDOT or the Town, be dedicated prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements

14. Landscape Protection Plan:

A. That a Landscape Protection Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This plan shall include areas of vegetation to be preserved; the anticipated clearing limit lines; proposed grading; proposed utility lines a detail of protective fencing; and construction parking and materials storage/staging areas. The plan shall show the use of tree protection fencing, unless alternate protection measures are approved by the Town Manager, between construction and existing vegetation.

B. That the following existing trees be located on the plans:

· In the area between the front parking lot and Airport Road, all trees over 12 inches in diameter; and

· The large pine near the interim youth center.

C. That the group of large pines near the proposed pool addition be retained, and the drainage lines be relocated to preserve the pines’ root zones.

15. Landscape Plan:

A. That a detailed landscape plan and landscape maintenance plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

B. Detailed final plans shall include:

· Demonstration that parking lot shading and screening requirements will be met;

· Demonstration of compliance with the Entranceways Master Landscape Plan.

· Retention and/or provision of trees in/around the playground for shade.

C. The following landscape buffers:

· Type “B“ landscape buffer (10 feet minimum width) along the northern property line;

· Type “C“ landscape buffer (20 feet minimum width) along the eastern and southern property lines;

· Type “D“ landscape buffer (30 feet minimum width) along the Airport Road frontage; and

Alternative landscape buffers may be substituted along the northern and eastern property lines if they are approved by the Community Design Commission and Town Manager.

Stipulations Related to Building Elevations

16. Building Elevations/Site Lighting: That the detailed building elevations and lighting plan be approved by the Community Design Commission prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer, and Other Utilities

17. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Duke Power Company, Orange Water and Sewer Authority, BellSouth, Public Service Company, Time Warner Cable, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

18. Placement of Utility Lines Underground: That the final plans indicate that all utility lines, other than three-phase power lines, shall be placed underground, where possible (e.g., along the eastern property line).

19. Fire Flow:

A. That a fire flow report, prepared by a registered professional engineer, and showing that flows meet the minimum requirements of the Design Manual, be approved prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

B. That a fire suppression sprinkler system shall be installed in the building.

C. That the fire department connection(s) shall be located on the west side of the building. The fire hydrant(s) shall be located within 50 feet of the fire department connections

Miscellaneous Stipulations

20. Stormwater Management Plan:

A. That a Stormwater Management Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. Based on a 25-year storm, the post-development stormwater run-off rate should not exceed the pre-development rate. The plan must show how stormwater detention for this site will be achieved.

B. Design and construction of any stormwater management facility shall be approved by the Town Manager.

C. That the applicant show pertinent off-site drainage features.

D. If stormwater detention is required in the easternmost parking lot, that the owner shall install bio-retention pond(s) in this location.

21. Transportation Management Plan: That a Transportation Management Plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. This plan shall be updated and approved annually by the Town Manager. The required components of the Transportation Management Plan shall include:

Provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;

Provisions for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;

Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;

Ridesharing incentives; and

Public transit incentives.

22. Solid Waste Management Plan: That a detailed solid waste management plan, including a recycling plan and a plan for managing construction debris, be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. Provision shall be made for an additional dumpster (for cardboard recycling) and for at least 9 rollout carts for recyclable materials, subject to Town Manager approval.

23. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), and landscape plans and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to the plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable conditions and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.

24. Erosion Control: That a detailed soil erosion and sedimentation control plan, including provision for maintenance of facilities and modifications of the plan if necessary, be approved by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

25. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

26. Construction Sign Required: That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number, the contractor’s representative, with a telephone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The construction sign shall be non-illuminated, and may have a maximum of 32 square feet of display area, with a maximum height of 8 feet.

27. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above

28. Non-severability: That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the Special Use Permit Modification application for the YMCA Recreation Center.

This the 10th day of April, 2000.

RESOLUTION B

(Planning Board Recommendation

and Transportation Board Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR THE YMCA RECREATION CENTER (SUP 29..11) (2000-04-10/R-11b)

1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

3. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and

5. Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro YMCA in accordance with the plans listed above and the conditions listed below:

1. Resolution A: That all of the stipulations in Resolution A shall apply to the proposed development, unless modified or superseded by those stipulations below.

2. That the YMCA to construct the new gym facility only as Phase I without requiring second means of egress. The remainder of the proposed project should be considered Phase II and require the access to Estes Drive.

3. That final plans address requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro YMCA.

This the 10th day of April, 2000.

RESOLUTION C

(Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR THE YMCA RECREATION CENTER (SUP 29..11) (2000-04-10/R-11c)

1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

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 Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

1. Resolution A: That all of the stipulations in Resolution A shall apply to the proposed development, unless modified or superseded by those stipulations below.

2. That final plans for this development include the following features:

a. Secured, covered, illuminated bicycle parking to accommodate approximately 16 bicycles (i.e., 10% of parking provided for autos) using wave-type racks, and distributed to at least two separate locations on site. Installation of bicycle parking should be phased in conjunction with construction.

b. Contrasting pavement surface along with painted lines at all internal pedestrian crosswalks.

c. Contrasting pavement at Airport Road entrance along with painted lines.

d. Warning signs at entrances/exits.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro YMCA.

This the 10th day of April, 2000.

RESOLUTION D

(Community Design Commission Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR THE YMCA RECREATION CENTER (SUP 29..11) (2000-04-10/R-11d)

1. Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

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 Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

1. Resolution A: That all of the stipulations in Resolution A shall apply to the proposed development, unless modified or superseded by those stipulations below.

2. That the YMCA Board of Directors have the option of choosing whether the parking and drive aisles at the rear of the site should be constructed with pavement, gravel, or alternative porous material.

3. That two parking spaces be deleted at the rear of the site, so that the traffic circle may be shifted to the west (outside of the 30 foot Type ‘C’ buffer.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit Modification for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro YMCA.

This the 10th day of April, 2000.

RESOLUTION E

(Denying the Application)

A RESOLUTION DENYING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION APPLICATION FOR THE YMCA RECREATION CENTER (SUP 29..11) (2000-04-10/R-11e)

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 the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Articles 12, 13, and 14, 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 Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council finds:

(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 Special Use Permit Modification application for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro YMCA.

This the 10th day of April, 2000.