AGENDA #9a

MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor and Town Council

FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

SUBJECT: Cedars of Chapel Hill Retirement Community of Meadowmont – Special Use Permit Application (File No. 479-1-1B)

DATE: May 8, 2000

INTRODUCTION

An application has been filed by the Meadowmont Retirement Community, LLC, seeking approval of a Special Use Permit to construct a retirement community and health care center east of Meadowmont Lane at Barbee Chapel Road in the Meadowmont Development on the north side of Highway NC 54. The proposal includes 250 apartments with a clubhouse, 50 single-family homes, and a 84-bed health care facility. Approximately 683 parking spaces would be provided. Tonight’s Public Hearing has been scheduled to receive evidence in support of and in opposition to approval of this application, and further to receive evidence which the Council may consider as it determines any appropriate conditions to impose upon the proposed development, if approved.

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 Towns’ 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 resolutions of approval and denial, comments on issues raised during the April 17^th Public Hearing, and a copy of the Public Hearing memorandum and its related attachments.

BACKGROUND

On April 17, 2000, a Public Hearing was held for consideration of a Special Use Permit application for the Cedars of Chapel Hill Retirement Community at Meadowmont, off Meadowmont Lane, north of NC Highway 54. Questions and concerns regarding this application were raised during the Public Hearing, and the Hearing is being opened tonight to receive the staff response to these issues. We note that on April 17^th, the Council determined that contiguous property would be defined as those properties within 500 feet of this site.

This is an application for a Special Use Permit. The Development 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 regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Development Ordinance; we have present a report to the Planning Board and on April 17 we submitted our report and recommendation to the Council.

EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION

The standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit application involves consideration of four findings of fact that the Council must consider for granting a Special Use Permit. However, the standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit application pursuant to an approved Master Plan involves consideration of consistency with the Master Plan and compliance with the Town’s regulations and standards. Evidence was presented on April 17^th and additional evidence may be presented tonight. If, after consideration of the evidence, the Council decides that it can make the necessary findings, the Development Ordinance directs that the Special Use Permit shall then be approved. If the Council decides that the evidence does not support making the findings, then the application cannot be approved and accordingly should be denied by the Council.

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

Evidence in support: The Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan indicated either a retirement center or a multi-family development at this location, with a health care facility. We believe the proposed development would qualify as a retirement center.

The site layout differs somewhat from that on the Master Plan, due partly to the Town Council’s requirement that the transit corridor be realigned. As a result, the transit corridor crosses the north end of this site. The health care center is now proposed on the parcel north of the transit corridor, rather than in the center of the site. The residential units are arranged together on the south side of the transit corridor. We believe that the overall concept is in similar to that shown on the Master Plan and that the revised arrangement of buildings is acceptable, given the realignment of the transit corridor.

The Master Plan Modification, which included reduced traffic impact, authorized the construction of 350 dwelling units on this site. The applicant proposes 300 dwelling units with 728,603 square feet of floor area, including a health care facility with 84 beds. We believe the proposal falls within the land use intensity parameters described in the Master Plan.

Please see the attached letter from the applicant describing similarities and differences between the Master Plan and this development application.

We believe the proposal is generally consistent with the Master Plan.

Evidence in opposition: No one spoke at the Public Hearing or 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.

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

Evidence in support: Evidence in support of this finding for the application has been provided by the applicant’s Statement of Justification (provided as an attachment to this memorandum – page 50 of the April 17 memorandum). We note the following key point raised by the applicant.

¨ The site meets or exceeds all of the dimensional, land use intensity rations, and other specific provisions of the Development Ordinance including open space, livability space, recreation space, impervious surface, traffic impact, and floor area within the context of the Meadowmont Development.

Evidence in opposition: No one spoke at the Public Hearing or 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 brought forth during the April 17 Public Hearing were related to floor area, affordable housing, access to the Lloyd property and the adjacent undeveloped commercial property, the number of parking spaces, vehicular access for the central green, tree preservation and replanting, and notifying buyers of proximity to transit corridor. We have provided additional information on these issues, including responses from the Town Staff, as an attachment to this memorandum.

RECOMMENDATIONS

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

Planning Board’s Recommendation: The Planning Board met on April 4, 2000 to review this application and voted 7-0 to recommend approval with conditions. The Planning Board recommended provision of 683 parking spaces, a temporary pedestrian crossing across the transit corridor, no access easement for an adjacent parcel, no additional tree preservation areas, and street trees at 2.5 inch caliper. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action. This recommendation is reflected in Resolution B. (Please note that the issue of size (caliper) of trees is discussed in Attachment A.)

Transportation Board’s Recommendation: The Transportation Board met on April 4, 2000 and voted 4-2 to recommend approval with conditions. The Transportation Board recommended that 640 parking spaces be provided. Please see the attached Summary of Transportation Board action. This recommendation is reflected in Resolution C.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board’s Recommendation: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board met on April 11, 2000 to review the application. The Board recommended 564 parking spaces, a pedestrian crossing at the transit corridor, shared driveways, contrasting paving at curb cuts, and a perimeter sidewalk instead of a road around the central green. Please see the attached Summary of Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Action. This recommendation is reflected in Resolution D.

Community Design Commission’s Recommendation: The Community Design Commission met on March 22, 2000 to review the application and voted 9-0 to recommend approval with conditions. Please see the attached Summary of Community Design Commission Action. This recommendation is reflected in Resolution A.

Parks and Recreation Commission’s Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Commission will meet on April 19, 2000 to review this application. The Commission voted 6-0 to recommended approval of the application with a stipulation that requires at least 109,379 square feet of recreation space. All of the resolution of approval include this stipulation.

Manager’s Revised Recommendation: Based on our evaluation of the application, we conclude that the application complies with standards and regulations of the Development Ordinance and is consistent with the Meadowmont Master Plan.

If the Council makes the findings required to approve the Special Use Permit, we recommend that the application be approved with adoption of Resolution A. Resolution A stipulates a maximum of 568 parking spaces, a temporary pedestrian crossing at the transit corridor, pedestrian/bike connections to the eastern property line, additional tree preservation areas, planting of new 4 inch caliper magnolias in front of the health care facility, and 3.5 inch caliper street trees along public street, requiring a note on plats about the proposed transit corridor, and authorizing an additional driveway across the central green. (All 8 of these issues are discussed in Attachment A).

Resolution F would deny the application.

DIFFERENCES AMONG RESOLUTIONS

ISSUE	RES. A Community Design Commission’s and Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation	RES. B Planning Board Recommendation	RES. C Transportation Board Recommendation	RES. D Bicycle and Pedestrian Board Recommendation	RES. E Parks and Recreation Commission’s Recommendation
Number of Parking Spaces	568	683	640	564
Temporary pedestrian crossing at transit corridor	Yes	Yes	*	Yes
Bike and Pedestrian connection to commercial tract to the south	Yes	*	*	Yes
Additional tree preservation areas	Yes	No	*	*
Diameter of street trees along public roads	3.5 inches	2.5 inches	*	*
Bike and Pedestrian connections to Lloyd Property	Yes	*	*	*
Shared Driveways	No	*	*	Yes
Contrasting Pavement at Curb Cuts	No	*	*	Yes
Around Central Green, Replace Perimeter Road with Sidewalk	No	*	*	Yes

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

ATTACHMENTS

A. List of Issues Raised during the April 17,2000 Public Hearing (p.7)

B. Manager’s Memorandum Regarding Application of the New Mixed Housing Ordinance to The Cedars (p.14)

C. Summary of Parks and Recreation Commission Action (p.16)

D. May 2 letter from Robert Woodruff (p. 17)

E. May 3 memorandum from John R. McAdams (p. 19)

F. Resolution A (p.21)

G. Resolution B (p.27 )

H. Resolution C (p. 29)

I. Resolution D (p. 30)

J. Resolution E (p. 32)

K. Resolution F (p. 33)

L. April 17, 2000 Public Hearing Memorandum and Related Attachments (begin new page 1)

ATTACHMENT A

CEDARS OF CHAPEL HILL RETIREMENT CENTER

AT MEADOWMONT

Questions/Issues Raised at the April 17, 2000 Public Hearing

FLOOR AREA

1. At the Public Hearing, a Council member asked about the impact of the Cedars floor area on the overall floor area calculations for the Meadowmont development.

Staff Comment: The applicant’s Fact Sheet indicates that the proposal would meet all land use intensity standards for the Residential-1 and Residential-5-Conditional zoning districts, except floor area. The maximum floor area for an independent, stand-alone site of this size would be 662,706 square feet. The applicant proposes 728,603 square feet of floor area, a difference of 65,897 square feet.

The applicant proposes that the floor area for this development be reviewed in the context of the entire Meadowmont development, rather than as a stand-alone project, in the same manner used for the review and approval of the Meadowmont Apartments and the Meadowmont Hilton Garden Inn.

With each phase of Meadowmont, the applicant has prepared a tally sheet showing the cumulative impact on all aspects of land use intensity for all of Meadowmont. This tool was required for monitoring compliance with the Town’s land use intensity regulations and the minimums and maximums agreed to in the Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan. The current tally sheet, submitted with the Cedars application, indicates that in several areas of Meadowmont, the permitted floor area exceeds the floor area that is proposed to be construction. The applicant wishes to apply some of the surplus permitted floor area to the retirement center. Three of these “sending areas” with surplus floor area capacity, for which Special Use Permits have been approved, are the Village Center, the Swim Club, and the Wellness Center. The total surplus from these three sites is 162,000 square feet. In addition, there is an additional 167,000 square feet of surplus from the approved Meadowmont Offices on the south side of NC 54. (Note: approximately 25,000 square feet of floor are at the Meadowmont Office development as “given up” as part of negotiations related to litigation, and should not be counted as “surplus.”) This means that the total amount of surplus from “sending areas,” in terms of the Development Ordinance’s Floor Area Rations, is approximately 300,000 square feet.

The “receiving areas” that need to borrow floor area allocations, for which Special Use Permits have been approved, are the Affordable Housing Townhomes and the Hotel sites. The total “borrow” a pproved so far adds up to l11,600 square feet of floor area. This Congregate Care application proposes a “borrow” of approximately 66,000 square feet. If this proposal is approved, the total “borrow” of the three receiving areas to date would be approximately 77,600 square feet; as noted above the current “surplus” is approximately 300,000 square feet.

We believe that by reviewing the cumulative tally sheets with each development application, we will be able to ensure the floor area and other land use intensity standards balance out for the Meadowmont development as a whole. We believe the applicant’s request to apply about 66,000 square feet of surplus Meadowmont floor area to this Congregate Care development is reasonable.

Please see the attached chart showing the floor area calculations for the Meadowmont development. This chart identifies areas with floor area deficits and floor area surpluses. Please also see the explanatory memorandum from the developer.

2. At the Public Hearing, a Council member wondered if all the Cedars floor area could be characterized as residential floor area. After the Public Hearing, a Council member had similar questions, questioning if health care facilities and dining facilities count as residential floor area.

Staff Comment: We note that independent health care facilities and club buildings, not associated with residential developments, are classified as non-residential floor area. Examples include the UNC Wellness Center at Medowmont, and the Swim Club at Meadowmont.

However, these facilities, when placed in the context of residential developments, have been historically considered in the residential context. We have researched previous residential development approvals and have confirmed that for all previously approved residential developments with clubhouses, the clubhouses have been considered accessory to the residential uses. In the Development Ordinance, an accessory use is defined as “a use on the same lot or in the same structure with, and of a nature and extent customarily incidental and subordinate to, the principal use of the lot or structure.”

For over 20 years, we have considered clubhouses as accessory uses to the multi-family residential complexes. We note that the floor area for the clubhouse accessory use has been considered residential floor area in the following apartment complexes in Chapel Hill:

Colony Apartments

The Estates

Foxcroft Apartments

Meadowmont Apartments

Presque Isle

Providence Glen Apartments

Shadowoods Apartments

Southern Village Apartments

Sterling Ridge Apartments

Timber Hollow Apartments

Walden at Greenfields

We believe it would be appropriate to consider the Cedars clubhouse as an accessory use and as residential floor area, consistent with other apartment community approvals.

In considering the floor area category for the Cedars’ on-site health care facility, we have researched the record on Carol Woods Retirement Community, the only comparable retirement center in Chapel Hill. Carol Woods, like the Cedars, was proposed as a Planned Development-Housing. Carol Woods includes dwelling units, health care facility, dining facilities, and recreation and exercise facilities. All the floor area was considered residential. To consider the Cedars’ health care facility as an accessory use and as residential floor area would be consistent with the approval of the Carol Woods Retirement Community.

MIXED HOUSING

3. At the Public Hearing, it was noted that the new Mixed Housing Ordinance would not apply to this development unless single-family or two-family lots were created. The applicant asked that Stipulation #3, regarding mixed housing, be deleted.

Staff Comment: We have amended Stipulation #3 to read that the provisions of mixed housing would only be required if single-family or two-family lots are created.

4. A Council member asked if the applicant was willing to provide affordable housing within the Cedars Retirement Community and noted that a mix of housing types would help promote diversity within the development and the Town. The Council member asked for more information on the anticipated cost for a typical resident at the Cedars.

Staff Comment: Please see the attached response from the applicant.

ACCESS

5. At the Public Hearing, the applicant indicated his objection to Stipulation # 12 which calls for bicycle and pedestrian access to the adjacent undeveloped commercial site.

Staff Comment: We believe it would be desirable to have bicycle and pedestrian access to the adjacent site, and have retained Stipulation #12.

6. At the Public Hearing, the applicant indicated his objection to Stipulation #16, the fifth bullet, which called for sidewalk/bikepaths in two locations to the Lloyd property to the east. One location was south of the transit corridor, the other near the clubhouse.

Staff Comment: We believe it would be desirable to have these two bicycle and pedestrian connections to the eastern property line and continue to recommend their inclusion in Stipulation #16.

7. Several suggestions were made as to how to improve vehicular circulation around the central green, particularly at the eastern end. There were concerns that a driver dropping off a passenger at the clubhouse would have to encircle the central green entirely in order to reach the nearby parking lot.

Staff Comment: Should the Council decide that a shorter drive to the parking lot is necessary, we believe the most workable idea would be to provide a drive across the upper (eastern) end of the central green. /we have added a stipulation to Resolution A authorizing (but not requiring) a crossing drive at the eastern end of the green>

PARKING

8. At the Public Hearing, the applicant indicated his objection to the parking maximum recommended by the Town Manager. Council members asked questions about parking minimums and parking needs.

Staff Comment: The Development Ordinance requires 1 parking space per two beds for a group care facility, 2 parking spaces per single family dwelling, and 1.5 spaces per 1 or 2 bedroom apartment. For a development which includes an 84-bed health care facility, 50 single-family residences, and 250 apartments, the minimum required number of spaces is 517. The applicant proposes 683 parking spaces, stating that the retirement community will require more than the standard number of parking spaces for a typical residential development. The applicant states that additional parking will be needed for anticipated community gatherings and for employees of the healthcare facility and apartment complex. The applicant also notes that some of the parking spaces (170, according to the plans) are located under apartment buildings, a feature which may offset some of the negative impacts of 683 parking. The Planning Board, in Resolution B, recommends this number of spaces be provided.

We understand that the applicant proposes to provide taxi and shuttle services for the residents and that golf carts will be used within the retirement community. We believe this will further reduce the need for parking spaces.

We have recommended that the number of parking spaces be reduced.

We believe that by reducing the number of parking spaces, the applicant could preserve more existing large trees and other vegetation, resulting in a more attractive view from the roadways and a more pleasant living environment for the residents. We note that recently the Council has considered mandating a parking space maximum of 10% over the required minimum number. We have taken this counsel and used it a a base for our recomendation for this application. For this project, 10% over the required minimum number of spaces would be 568. We have included a stipulation in Resolution A which limits the parking space number to 568 spaces.

The Transportation Board, in Resolution C, recommends provision of 640 spaces.

The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board in Resolution D, recommends provision of 564 spaces.

We understand the arguments for 683 parking spaces made by the applicant, and find them also to be reasonable. If the Council wishes to permit the higher number of spaces, it can by changing the number of spaces included in stipulation #2 or 17 in Resolution A.

TREE PRESERVATION

9. At the Public Hearing, the applicant noted his objection to the requirement to preserve the magnolias near the proposed health center and on both sides of the main entrance drive into the Cedars development.

Staff Comment: There is a stand of magnolias west of the proposed health care facility, and several large trees on each side of the main entrance to the development off of Meadowmont Lane. Resolution A, presented at the Public Hearing, stipulated that trees be preserved in both of these areas.

We continue to believe that it is highly desirable to save some of the existing large trees on both sides of the development’s proposed main entrance drive. The attached Resolution A contains this as a requirement. We have changed our recommendation, however, regarding the magnolias. The applicant is now suggesting that new large-caliper magnolias be planted in the vicinity of where the existing magnolias would be removed. We believe this is a reasonable proposal, and have changed our recommended condition in Resolution A to require replanting of large-caliper magnolias instead of preserving the existing magnolias.

Resolution A stipulates trees will be preserved in these two areas.

10. At the Public Hearing, the applicant objected to the recommended caliper size for the trees to be replanted along the public streets.

Staff Comment: At the Public Hearing, we recommended that where clearing is proposed between this development and the existing public streets and stormwater pond, the planting plan include the installation of large (at least 3.5-inch caliper) shade trees and a mix of shrubs and understory trees.

We continue to recommend that the new trees be at least 3.5 inches in caliper, and continue to include this a stipulation in Resolution A. There is no Development Ordinance minimum regarding tree planting. A typical tree planting program would involve trees of at least 2.5 inches in caliper, and there is language in the Town’s Design Manual about planting requirements. However, we have consistently recommended (and the Council has required) larger-than-typical size for Meadowmont plantings, in part because of selected areas of widespread clearing (of which this site is an example). We note that the Infrastructure Special Use Permit for Meadowmont contains the following language as a condition of approval: “That alal street trees along public streets, adjacent to selected multi-family and commercial areas, be 3 ½ to 4 inch caliper when planted or as approved by the Town Manager.” The identical language appears in the Meadowmont Village Center Special Use Permit, and the Meadowmont Apartments Special Use Permit. We have included the same requirement in this application for The Cedars, and believe that requirement is appropriate and reasonable.

We also continue to recommend that where clearing is proposed between this development and the existing public streets and stormwater pond, the planting plan include the installation of large (at least 3.5-inch caliper) shade trees and a mix of shrubs and understory trees. All resolutions of approval include this stipulation, except Resolution B, as the Planning Board specified a tree size of 2.5-inch caliper.

SIZE OF UNITS

At the Public Hearing, a question was raised about the range of sizes of the proposed units.

Staff Comment: The applicant has indicated the following range of unit sizes:

Villa Apartments 980 - 2,400 square feet

Veranda Units 1,600 - 2,300 square feet

Cottage Units 1,500 - 2,800 square feet

TWO POINTS OF ACCESS TO LLOYD PROPERTY

At the Public Hearing a Council member asked if there is a requirement in the Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan for two points of access to the Lloyd Property, which abuts Meadowmont to the east.

Staff Comment: The Master Plan resolution of approval contains the following condition: “That at least two access points be provided to the Lloyd property adjacent to the east, the locations of which shall be subject to Town Council or Town Manager approval, as appropriate.”

The Meadowmont Infrastructure Special Use Permit provided these two points of access. One of these is a public street that bisects The Cedars and stubs out to the Lloyd property (shown on The Cedars site plan). The second is to the north, off of Meadowmont Lane, in the northeast corner of Meadowmont (behind the UNC Rizzo Center).

TRANSIT CORRIDOR NOTE

At the Public Hearing, a Council member noted the proximity of some of the proposed garages to the reserved Transit Corridor and recommended that buyers of lots adjacent to the Corridor be forewarned.

Staff Comment: We have included a stipulation in Resolution A that would require that notes be placed on plats, alerting potential buyers to the proximity of the Transit Corridor.

OTHER

11. At the Public Hearing, a Council member noted the proximity of some of the proposed garages to the reserved Transit Corridor and recommend that buyers of lots adjacent to the Corridor be forewarned.

Staff Comment:

ATTACHMENT B

RESOLUTION A

(Community Design Commission’s and Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE CEDARS OF CHAPEL HILL RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT MEADOWMONT (SUP 479.1.1B) (2000-05-08/R-13a)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by the Meadowmont Retirement Community, LLC, on property identified as Durham Township Tax Map 479-1-1B, if developed according to the plans dated November, 1999 (revised February 1, 2000), the Meadowmont Master Land Use Plan, 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. That construction begin by May 8, 2002, (two years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by May 8, 2002, (ten years from the date of Council approval).

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

· 67 Buildings, with a maximum of 728,603 square feet of floor area, for 300 residential dwelling units, (250 multi-family dwelling units and 50 single-family dwelling units) a clubhouse, and a health care facility;

· 109,379 square feet of recreation space; and

· A maximum of 568 parking spaces.

3. Mixed Housing: If single-family or two-family residential lots are created for dwelling units as part of this development, then the provisions of Section 13.11, “Major Subdivision and Planned Development-Housing floor Area Restrictions” shall apply to those lots, and final plans and plats shall indicate the specific lots on which size limitations are placed.

4. Land Use: That the use of this development be restricted to retirement community use only.

5. Land Use Intensity Calculations: That the applicant provide calculations confirming Meadowmont’s overall compliance with Land Use Intensity Ratios.

6. Recreation Area: That the proposed indoor and outdoor recreation areas meet the Town’s standards for Planned Development-Housing recreation area, and that the details be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

7. Boundaries of the Meadowmont Development: That buildings and parking shall be at least 40 feet from the eastern property line, with a landscape buffer width of at least 20 feet.

8. Northernmost Entrance Off Meadowmont Lane: The main upper entrance off Meadowmont Lane, leading to the health care facility, shall be a right-in, right-out only access point.

9. Pavement Design and Construction: That the streets, the drive aisles, and parking lots be designed and constructed to Town standards.

10. Private Streets: That if the internal streets are privately owned, the Homeowners’ Association will be responsible for street and drainage maintenance. In addition, if a private entity responsible for the streets proposes to dedicate the streets for public use and maintenance, the private entity shall repair and upgrade the streets to Town standards prior to acceptance by the Town. Notes to this effect shall be placed on the final plans and final plat.

11. Heavy Duty Pavement: That along the refuse/recycling service vehicle routes, heavy duty pavement, with a 10” base course, be installed; or that notes on the plats and plans indicate that the Town will not be responsible for any pavement damage that may result from service vehicles at such time as public collection is requested.

12. Pedestrian/Bicycle Access: That pedestrian/bicycle access be provided to the Meadowmont commercial site adjacent to the south.

13. Pedestrian Crossing at the Transit Corridor: That a temporary pedestrian crossing be provided across the transit corridor, until the transit infrastructure is constructed.

14. Public Improvements:

A. That Meadowmont Lane be constructed according to the approved Meadowmont Infrastructure Special Use Permit plans, from NC 54 to the northern property line of this site, prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy.

B. That Barbee Chapel Hill Road be constructed along the entire length of the site’s frontage and in accordance with the approved Meadowmont Infrastructure Special Use Permit plans prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy.

C. That this development be coordinated with the NC 54 construction and traffic signal improvements.

D. That a bus stop be provided on Meadowmont Lane or Barbee Chapel Road, with the location and design to be approved by the Town Manager.

15. Bike Racks: That covered bike racks be provided at the health center, the clubhouse, and with the underground parking areas in the apartment complex, as well as other locations on site, with number, type, and locations to be approved by the Town Manager.

16. Sidewalks: That the ease of use of sidewalks shall be a primary consideration in the site layout and sidewalk construction/design, and that sidewalks be provided in the following locations:

· sidewalks along both sides of Barbee Chapel Road and Meadowmont Lane, in accordance with the Meadowmont Infrastructure Special Use Permit;

· sidewalks along at least one side of all the internal, private drives, except Cedar Pond Lane (a drive aisle between apartment buildings) and the access drive directly off Barbee Chapel Road;

· sidewalks from the parking lots to the apartment buildings;

sidewalk from the southern section of single-family houses to the clubhouse area;

· pedestrian trails in the vicinity of the retention ponds; and

· sidewalk/bikepaths in two locations to the Lloyd property: south of the transit corridor and near the clubhouse.

17. Parking:

A. That 568 parking spaces be provided, 170 of which shall be placed under buildings.

B. Heavy Duty Pavement: That heavy duty pavement be installed under the refuse service vehicle access route and under the dumpster pads and compactor area, with pavement specifications, the location, and configuration to be approved by the Town Manager.

C. 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.

D. 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.

E. Possible Additional Drive: That an additional driveway may be constructed across the eastern end of the central green.

18. Permanent Retention Basin Installation:

A. That stormwater retention ponds be in place prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy.

B. Compliance with the Town Watershed Protection District regulations shall be demonstrated with the provision of permanent ponds. Permanent stormwater retention shall be required in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance.

C. The size, accessibility, location, and design of each pond shall be approved by the Town Manager.

D. These wet retention ponds shall meet or exceed the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management requirements and shall be designed so as to be approved by the Division of Environmental Management, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Town Manager.

E. The property owner shall post a performance bond or other surety instrument satisfactory to the Town, in an amount approved by the Town Manager, to assure maintenance, repair, or reconstruction necessary for adequate performance of the engineered stormwater controls.

F. The Owners’ or Homeowners’ Association shall be responsible for arranging for annual inspections of all ponds by an appropriately certified engineer, to determine whether the ponds and associated structures are operating acceptably according to design requirements, and to report findings of said inspections to the Town manger, with such recommendations for maintenance or repair as may be warranted. Any needed repairs shall be completed within 120 days unless otherwise approved by the Town Manager. Restrictive covenants shall be recorded which shall identify these responsibilities of the Owners’ or Homeowners’ Association, including pond maintenance.

G. Maintenance of the ponds shall be the responsibility of the applicant or a property/homeowners’ association. A maintenance plan shall be provided for each of the retention ponds, to be approved by the Town Manager. The plans shall address inspection, maintenance intervals, type of equipment required, access to each pond, and related matters.

H. As part of the application for Final Plan Approval, the applicant shall provide an up-to-date cumulative total of impervious surfaces within the sub-basin.

I. The minimum permanent pool depth shall be at least three (3) feet in addition to enough volume to store the accumulated sediment between clean out periods.

J. All sediment deposited in the ponds during construction activity on contributing sites must be removed before “normal” pond operation begins.

K. Emergency drains shall be installed in all ponds to allow access for repairs and sediment removal as necessary.

L. Anti-seepage collars shall be used on any structures penetrating dams or water retaining embankments.

M. Public storm drainage systems, or other utilities, shall not be located within a pond or dam structure.

N. That no ponds be created within the perimeter landscape buffer required for Meadowmont development.

O. That the ponds be located and designed such that damage to existing large trees can be minimized.

P. That the retention ponds and outlets be contained within stormwater drainage easements and that maintenance access with easements be provided prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

19. Ownership and Responsibilities of Common Areas:

A. That an owners’ association be created for the maintenance and regulation of the private (residential, office, park, landscape, and commercial) areas including privately maintained streets and alleys. All property owners owning land within the area of the Master Land Use Plan approval, excluding governmental bodies, shall be represented in the owners’ association. This owners’ association shall have maintenance responsibilities for commonly owner development elements which affect the entire development including the stormwater management facilities.

B. In addition, a separate neighborhood association(s) and/or owners/ association(s) shall be created for the maintenance and regulation of the residential, office, and commercial areas. The documents creating these entities shall be reviewed for approval by the Town manager, and shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

C. The responsibilities of these entities shall include the ownership and maintenance of the private alleys, private green spaces, private parks and recreation space, private retention and detention basins, and the landscape buffers.

D. These entities shall also be responsible for an “add-on fees” charged by Duke Power for special street lighting.

E. These entities shall have the ability to place a lien on property for nonpayment of dues or fees.

20. Dedication of Right-of-Way and Sight Triangle Easements: That right-of-way and 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

21. Landscape Protection Plan:

A. That a complete and accurate tree survey be provided with the first submittal of Final Plans.

B. 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.

C. That the plan indicate the critical root area (1 foot radius for every inch caliper dbh) for the large trees adjacent to construction areas.

E. No erosion control devices shall be allowed within the designated tree preservation areas.

E. That existing trees be preserved in the following areas:

· Along the eastern property line;

· The northeast corner of the site near the transit corridor;

· A segment of Meadowmont Lane frontage;

· Along the Barbee Chapel Road frontage northwest and west of the retention pond;

· Within most of the reserved transit corridor;

· Several magnolias west of the health care facility;

· On either side of the main entrance off Meadowmont Lane.

22. 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 Master Landscape Plan for landscaping and preservation of vegetation.

C. That where clearing is proposed between this development and the existing public streets and stormwater pond, the planting plan shall include the installation of large (at least 3.5-inch caliper) shade trees and a mix of shrubs and understory trees.

D. Eight new Magnolia trees, 4 inch caliper, shall be planted, along the entrance drive to the health center, near Meadowmont Lane.

23. Landscape Buffers: That a Type “C” landscape buffer (20 feet minimum width) be provided along the eastern property. Existing vegetation shall be supplemented with evergreen shrubs and trees as necessary to fulfill landscape buffer planting requirements. The landscape buffer plan shall be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Stipulations Related to Building Elevations

24. 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

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

26. Placement of Utility Lines Underground: That the final plans indicate that all utility lines shall be placed underground.

27. Fire Flow: 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.

28. Fire Hydrant Locations: That the fire hydrant connections be installed on the street side of buildings in easily visible and accessible locations to be approved by the Town Manager.

Miscellaneous Stipulations

29. 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. All plans and final plats shall include dedication of permanent easements and construction of a paved or gravel drive for ingress/egress as necessary for construction, maintenance operations and equipment. The drive shall be in a location to be approved by the Town Manager.

30. 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.

31. Solid Waste Management Plan:

A. That the refuse and recycling collection services be private.

B. That a second recycling area be provided on the site, somewhere near the multifamily units, if deemed necessary by the Town Manager.

C. That glass recycling containers be rollout carts rather than dumpsters.

D. That space be provided for segregated grease rendering/recycling and for segregated food waste.

E. 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.

32. 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.

33. Plant Rescue: That the developer consider conducting plant rescue activities on the site prior to initiation of development activity.

34. Certificates of Occupancy: That no Certificates of Occupancy be issued until all required public improvements are completed; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

If the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase, and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plat.

35. Erosion Control:

A. 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.

B. That a performance guarantee be provided in accordance with Section 5-97.1 Bonds of the Town Code of Ordinances prior to issuance of any permit to begin land-disturbing activity.

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

37. 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 phone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information at the time of issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

38. Notice about Transit Corridor: That a note be placed on all recorded plats in the vicinity of the transitcorridor, noting the presence of the proposed transit corridor.

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

40. 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 application for the Cedars of Chapel Hill Retirement Community at Meadowmont.

This the 8th day of May, 2000.

ATTACHMENT C

RESOLUTION B

(Planning Board’s Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE CEDARS OF CHAPEL HILL RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT MEADOWMONT (SUP 479.1.1B) (2000-05-08/R-13b)

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.

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

Stipulations Specific to the Development

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 683 parking spaces be provided.

3. That no access easement for the adjacent parcel be required of this developer.

4. That additional tree preservation not be required in the following areas:

· Several magnolias west of the health care facility; and

· On either side of the main entrance off Meadowmont Lane.

5. That the minimum size of the trees to be installed between the development and public streets shall be 2.5-inch caliper.

This the 8th day of May, 2000.

ATTACHMENT D

RESOLUTION C

(Transportation Board’s Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE CEDARS OF CHAPEL HILL RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT MEADOWMONT (SUP 479.1.1B) (2000-05-08/R-13c)

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.

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

Stipulations Specific to the Development

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 640 parking spaces be provided.

This the 8th day of May, 2000.

ATTACHMENT E

RESOLUTION D

(Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board’s Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE CEDARS OF CHAPEL HILL RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT MEADOWMONT (SUP 479.1.1B) (2000-05-08/R-13d)

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.

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

Stipulations Specific to the Development

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 a maximum of 564 parking spaces be provided.

3. That driveways be combined where possible to reduce impervious surface and the number of curb cuts.

4. That contrasting pavement be used at curb cuts, so that sidewalks are visually and topographically continuous, uninterrupted by driveway pavement.

5. That the private street encircling the central green be replaced with a 10-foot wide sidewalk/bike path.

6. That pedestrian/bicycle access be provided to the Meadowmont commercial site adjacent to the south.

This the 8th day of May, 2000.

ATTACHMENT F

RESOLUTION E

(Parks and Recreation Commission’s Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE CEDARS OF CHAPEL HILL RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT MEADOWMONT (SUP 479.1.1B) (2000-05-08/R-13e)

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.

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

Stipulations Specific to the Development

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 ………

This the 8th day of May, 2000.

ATTACHMENT G

RESOLUTION F

(Denying the Application)

A RESOLUTION DENYING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE CEDARS AT CHAPEL HILL RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT MEADOWMONT (SUP 479.1.1B) (2000-05-08/R-14)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by the Meadowmont Retirement Community, LLC, on property identified as Durham Township Tax Map 479, Block 1, Lot 1B, if developed according to the plans dated November 1999 (revised February 1, 2000), and 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 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 application for the Cedars of Chapel Hill Retirement Community at Meadowmont.

This the 8th day of May, 2000.