AGENDA #7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Discussion of Ideas to make the Development Review Process Less Adversarial,
DATE: December 11, 2000
At the Council’s January 2000 Planning Session, the Council articulated a goal of making Chapel Hill’s development review process less adversarial. We proposed bringing a report on this topic to the Council by year’s end, and tonight offer this memorandum.
In addition to discussing this topic we offer a resolution which, if adopted, would authorize the Town Manager to negotiate a scope of services for continuing work on the project to revise Chapel Hill’s Development Ordinance.
BACKGROUND
Many in the Chapel Hill community characterize the Town’s process for review of and action on development applications as adversarial. In January of 2000, the Council decided to consider ways that the process might be adjusted to make it less adversarial.
In May, 2000, the Council adopted a new Comprehensive Plan for Chapel Hill. The goal of making the development review process less adversarial was also articulated in that Plan.
In July 2000, the Council selected a team of planning consultants to work on a revision of Chapel Hill’s Development Ordinance. One of the objectives given to the consultant was to consider ways to make the development review process less adversarial.
During the consultant’s visits with the Council in September and October, the consultant offered an opinion that a special use permit process is by its nature and statutory base inherently adversarial. The consultant suggested that part of the reason Chapel Hill’s process is perceived as being adversarial is due to the Town’s extensive reliance on the special use permit process for most new development applications. The special use permit process, with its requirements for quasi-judicial proceedings, forces adversarial positions and limits the Town Council’s ability to interact with interested parties.
One idea that has emerged out of these discussions is a possible realignment of the development review process, to increase input by the Town Council during early stages of a project review. Chapel Hill has a Concept Plan review process, but currently review is only by the Community Design Commission, with no Council or staff input, and limited citizen input.
We note that there is some Chapel Hill precedent, however, for the idea of early Council review of a development concept. The Council’s recent work on the University Mall expansion for example, using a Council committee in a pre-application stage and early review of concepts by the full Council, may prove to be a useful model to replicate.
One idea would be to revise the development review process such that early review by the Town Council would be required and routine as a pre-application step for all major development applications. As we have understood the Council’s preferences on these procedural points, we believe that a system with the following characteristics may be desirable:
· Pre-application stage: Concept plan review by the Town Council, with the ability of Council members to interact freely with a developer and/or citizens as Council members choose, with the Council acting in a non-binding role toward the proposed development (not quasi-judicial).
· Enhanced performance standards to more specifically prescribe what needs to be included as part of a development proposal.
· Possible increase in the size threshold for what defines special uses.
We note that developing a set of more specific performance standards might best be approached as an enhancement to, not a substitute for, the special use permit process for major development applications.
We continue to believe that the best mechanism for addressing the concerns of the Council regarding the adversarial nature of Chapel Hill’s development review process would be to incorporate procedural changes into the new Development Ordinance. We believe that the ideas outlined above have merit and are worthy of consideration as the Development Ordinance revision project continues. Explicit attention to this issue of making processes less adversarial would be included in any continuing work.
We suggest consideration of two specific next steps in this process. First, in a related item on tonight’s consent agenda, we offer a resolution that would conclude current consultant work on the Development Ordinance.
Looking ahead to work still to be done, we suggest consideration of a new contract with the firm Freilich, Leitner, & Carlisle. The Council received information from this firm last spring, and a committee of Council members conducted a telephone interview with Mr. Mark White from this firm. (Information about the Freilich, Leitner, and Carlisle firm and their experience is attached.) We believe that this firm may be a good match with the remaining tasks needed on the Development Ordinance project. We recommend that the Council adopt the attached resolution, which would authorize the Town Manager to negotiate a scope of services for the Council’s consideration in January.
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO PREPARE A SCOPE OF WORK FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES (2000-12-11/R-12)
WHEREAS the Chapel Hill Town Council seeks assistance in the task of revising Chapel Hill’s Development Ordinance; and
WHEREAS the Council has received information describing consultant services available from the firm Freilich, Leitner, and Carlisle, and has concluded that this firm is qualified to provide the services needed for this project;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council directs the Town Manager to enter into discussions with representatives from this firm, to develop a proposed Scope of Services.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill requests that this draft Scope of Services be presented to the Council during January, 2001, for consideration.
This the 11th day of December, 2000.