AGENDA #2

MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor and Town Council

FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager

SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Eastwood Lake – Application for Special Use Permit

DATE: February 19, 2001

INTRODUCTION

An application seeking approval of a Special Use Permit has been filed by the Lake Forest Association, Inc. The application proposes the removal of sediment from Eastwood Lake. The 48-acre lake is located in the Lake Forest Neighborhood between North Lakeshore and South Lakeshore Drives. Booker Creek and Cedar Creek flow into Eastwood Lake. The site is currently located within the Residential-1 zoning district, and the Resource Conservation District (RCD). The site is located in Orange County and is identified on Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 28, 40, 41A, 42, and 43.

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 that the Council may consider as it determines any appropriate conditions to impose upon the proposed development.

PROCESS

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 against Town standards; we have presented a report to the Planning Board; and tonight we submit our report and preliminary recommendation to the Council.

The standard for review and approval of a Special Use Permit application involves consideration of four findings (description of the findings follows below). Evidence will be presented tonight. If, after consideration of the evidence, the Council decides that it can make each of the four findings, the Development Ordinance directs that the Special Use Permit shall then be approved. If the Council decides that the evidence does not support making one or more of the findings, then the application cannot be approved and, accordingly, should be denied by the Council.

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

¨ Cover Memorandum: Introduces application, describes process for review, summarizes staff and advisory board comments, and offers recommendations for Council action.

¨ Staff Report: Offers a detailed description of the site and proposed development, and presents an evaluation of the application regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Development Ordinance.

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

CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY

One of the findings that the Council must make when considering a Special Use Permit application is:

That the use of 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.

The Development Ordinance defines contiguous property as follows:

Contiguous Property: Property adjoining, neighboring, and nearby the outer boundary of a proposed development. For development proposals that are small in scale and similar in proposed use to existing uses in the immediate vicinity, contiguous property shall be construed to be those properties immediately adjacent. For large development proposals and/or proposed uses that are significantly different from existing uses nearby, or proposals that have significant topographic features that could impact nearby properties, contiguous property shall be construed to include those properties in a larger area, and those likely to experience negative impacts resulting from the proposed development. But in every case, for a proposal over 10 acres but less than 100 acres, at a minimum all property within 500 feet shall be considered contiguous; for development proposals that are over 100 acres, at a minimum all properties within 1,000 feet shall be considered contiguous.

The Town Attorney has advised that the Council should specify what area it considers to be contiguous property for each Special Use Permit application that comes before the Council for consideration. Therefore, based on the Town Attorney’s advice to the Council, we suggest that prior to recessing the hearing this evening the Council discuss and determine by vote what should be considered contiguous property for this application. The attached Resolution F provides a format for determining the definition of contiguous property for this application.

Description of the Application

The 48.1-acre site is located in the Lake Forest Neighborhood between North Lakeshore and South Lakeshore Drives. The property is located in the Residential-1 (R-1) zoning district and the Resource Conservation District (RCD).

Existing Conditions: The project site is Eastwood Lake, the contiguous lands of the Lake Forest Association and portions of the adjacent residential lots. Eastwood Lake is located in the Lake Forest neighborhood. The 48.1-acre lake was created in 1937 with construction of the present dam. The surrounding area is almost entirely developed with single-family residences, mostly built in the 1960’s and 1970’s. Land contiguous to the lake is owned either by lakefront homeowners or the Lake Forest Association. Adjacent land use is primarily single family. The lake provides recreational activities for adjacent residents and members of the Association.

The lake’s watershed area is approximately 4.3 square miles, of which 2.7 square miles is in the Booker Creek watershed and 1.1 square miles is in the Cedar Fork watershed. The outflow of the lake is the continuation of Booker Creek as it flows towards the Eastgate Shopping Center and eventually flows into Jordan Lake.

Wetlands exist at the southwest end of the Lake Forest Association property. This area has been identified and certified by the US Army Corps of Engineers. The wetlands are primarily comprised of shrub and tree thickets. The area is primarily soggy, vegetated ground slightly above the normal lake area. Seasonal drying is common in the summer. According to the applicant’s submission, the wetland area has not existed long enough for unique wetland vegetation to become established.

Development Description: The Special Use Permit application proposes: a) to restore the lake for stormwater retention, b) to contain and periodically remove sediment entering the lake from Booker Creek and Cedar Fork Creek, c) to enhance animal habitat, and d) to continue the active recreational use of the lake for residents and Association members.

A Special Use Permit is required for this proposal because the land disturbance proposed is greater than 40,000 square feet. This Development Ordinance requirement regarding land disturbance was adopted after the 1984 lake excavation project.

The applicant is proposing to remove approximately 50,000 cubic yards of sediment from the lake bottom and restore portions of the lakebed to a minimum depth of four (4) feet. This proposal includes construction of a permanent sediment forebay in the lakebed below the point where Cedar Fork Creek discharges into the lake. A temporary sediment trap and storage area is proposed in the lakebed behind the existing dam. Three (3) access/haul roads (Access Road # 1, #2, & #3) into the lakebed are also contemplated.

Additional activities proposed by the Special Use Permit application include:

Ø Partial draining of the lake by controlled water discharge at the dam.

Ø Excavation, and temporary storage of sediment in the lakebed.

Ø Hauling away of lakebed sediment from the site.

Ø Possible construction of a second forebay at the Booker Creek inlet if the forebay is not installed as part of the Town’s bridge replacement project.

Ø Construction of a standpipe at the dam.

Ø Maintenance of the dam and its adjacent area.

Ø Maintenance or construction of bank stabilization, docks, and shoreline facilities, including regrading and filling of lake edges for lakefront property owners.

Ø Improvements to the Lake Forest Association beach, boat storage and recreation area including new picnic shelter and landscaping.

Excavation of sediment will take place after a period of drying once the lake has been drained. Earthmoving equipment will most likely be trackhoes, bulldozers, and front loaders. To reduce the volume of water in the sediment, prior to loading it on the trucks for removal from the site, the applicant is proposing that the sediment will be laid out in windrows for air-drying and gravity water drainage.

Storage of construction materials and sediment will take place mostly in the drained lakebed. Some storage of sediment barrier and standpipe may take place on the grass area at the Lake Forest Association parkland located at the termination of South Lakeshore Drive.

The sediment removal area is beneath the surface of the lake. The soils to be removed as sediment are of unclassified soil types. They are a mixture of silt and clay with sands and gravels. Lab analysis of the sediment showed no detectable levels of pesticides, herbicides, or metals of concern under Environmental Protection Agency or State guidelines.

We believe that the wetland area will remain basically undisturbed. Access Road #1, accessible from North Lakeshore Drive near the southwest corner of the lake, crosses a portion of the wetlands. A partial access lane already exists in this area. In order for this access road to accommodate anticipated construction traffic, minor clearing and some additional stone on the access road is proposed.

We note that during the construction and sediment removal activity, Booker Creek and Cedar Fork Creek will continue to flow in a channel through the lakebed. It is anticipated that the construction activity will not hinder the flow of these streams through the drained lakebed.

The boundary of the proposed Special Use Permit extends onto individual residential lots, beyond the edge of the existing lake, the wetlands, beach and recreations areas. We note that the applicant is proposing that the Special Use Permit encumber portions of adjoining single-family residential lots in order to allow land disturbance activities on private properties where homeowners wish to have individual work done to their lakefront property. We anticipate that land disturbance on residential lots would typically involve construction of bank stabilization, docks, and shoreline facilities. Other authorized activities could involve regrading and filling of lake edges for lakefront property owners.

We recommend that, as a condition of the Special Use Permit, all homeowners who wish to have additional work done to their lots provide their authorization (signature) to allow the work to occur, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

The applicant is also proposing that the Special Use Permit approval allow the Lake Forest Association to drop the level of water in the lake and conduct periodic lake maintenance activities. Such future maintenance activities associated with the lake could involve:

Ø Excavation and hauling away of sediment collected in the forebays.

Ø Maintenance of the dam and its adjacent area, if necessary.

Ø Maintenance or construction of bank stabilization, docks, and shoreline facilities.

Ø Pond vegetation maintenance.

A Special Use Permit is required for this development, because of the proposed amount of land disturbance.

Evaluation of the Application

We have evaluated the application regarding its compliance with the standards and regulations of the Development Ordinance. We have prepared a Planning Staff Report that discusses access and circulation, a Construction Traffic Management Plan, tree protection, stormwater management, sediment management, utilities, and erosion control. A checklist describing compliance with regulations is also provided as an attachment to this memorandum.

Based on our evaluation, our preliminary recommendation is that the application as submitted complies with the regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance.

Tonight the Council receives our attached evaluation, and also receives information submitted by the applicant and others. The applicant’s materials are included as attachments to this memorandum. We have not received any other written information from any other citizens as yet. Staff, applicant, and others may provide information at the Public Hearing. All information that is submitted will be placed into the record of this Public Hearing.

Based on the evidence that is accumulated, the Council will consider whether or not it can make each of four required findings for the approval of a Special Use Permit. The four findings are:

Special Use Permit – Required Findings of Fact

Finding #1: That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare.

Finding #2: That the use or development 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.

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.

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.

Following the Public Hearing, we will prepare an evaluation of the evidence submitted in support of, and in opposition to this application. If, after consideration of the evidence, the Council decides that it can make each of the four 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 one or more of the findings, then the application cannot be approved and, accordingly, should be denied by the Council.

KEY ISSUE

Based on the review of this development application by Town advisory boards and the Town staff, we believe that a key issue has been identified. This issue is further discussed as follows:

Construction Traffic Management Plan and Hauling Route Plan: A site destination for the sediment disposal has not been confirmed. We recommend that the trucks be routed to a state-maintained public road as quickly as possible. We recommend that a schedule and route be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit. This recommendation is included in the Manager’s preliminary recommendation.

We note that a Town bridge replacement project may impact the routing of the trucks. The Lakeshore bridge replacement project is anticipated to begin this spring.

The Transportation Board had the following recommendations regarding routing:

· The route taken by trucks should preferentially avoid passing by elementary or middle schools;

· Most of the work should be undertaken during periods when school is not in session;

· Town staff should consider the potential damage to roads in determining appropriate routes; and

· If routes are chosen that would impact schools, there should be consultation with school administration.

These items are identified in the attached Summary of Transportation Board Action.

Because a final destination for the sediment has not been confirmed, we recommend that schedule and routing be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of the Zoning Compliance Permit. In order to minimize damage to Town streets, we recommend that the trucks be routed to a state-maintained public road as quickly as possible. We have not included restrictions on the specific truck routes or on the time of year that the proposed work is to occur in the Manager’s preliminary recommendation.

Summary of Comments

We have attached a resolution that includes standard conditions of approval, as well as special conditions that we recommend for this application. The key special conditions that we recommend are summarized here and described in detail in the accompanying staff report. With these conditions, we believe that the Council could make the findings regarding health, safety and general welfare, property values, and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:

· That a Construction Traffic Management Plan, including an approved Hauling Route Plan for travel on public streets within the Town of Chapel Hill, be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The plan must address vehicle weight limits, hours of travel, responsibility for damage to public roads, and material leakage and deposit of sediment on roadways.

· That prior to beginning any land disturbance on private lakefront properties, other than properties owned by Lake Forest Association, Inc., the lakefront property owner(s) must provide authorization (signature) for the land disturbance.

· That the access easement for Access Road #2 be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.

· That cut and fill calculations for land disturbance activities outside the edge of the lake shore line must be provided with the submission of the Final Plan application.

· That a No Rise certification be submitted by a registered engineer.

· That prior to final refilling of the lake, a dam inspection report from a registered engineer must be submitted to the Town Manager.

The Manager’s preliminary recommendation incorporates input from all Town departments involved in review of the application.

SUBSEQUENT REGULATORY STEPS

Following is a brief outline describing the next steps in the development review process, should the Council approve the Special Use Permit application:

1. Applicant accepts and records the Special Use Permit, which incorporates the terms of the Council-adopted resolution;

2. Applicant submits detailed Final Plans and documentation, complying with Council stipulations: Information is reviewed by Town departments and the Orange County Erosion Control Officer.

3. Final Plat is reviewed and approved by Town staff. Plat is recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds office.

4. Upon demonstration of compliance with remaining Council stipulations, Town staff issues a Zoning Compliance Permit authorizing site work. Permit includes conditions specific to the development and requires pre-construction conferences with Town staff.

Recommendations

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

Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board reviewed this application on February 6, 2001, and voted 8-0 to recommend that the Council approve the application with adoption of Resolution A. There were no significant issues raised at the meeting. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.

Transportation Board Recommendation: The Transportation Board reviewed this application on February 6, 2001 and voted 5-1 to recommend that the Council approve the application with adoption of Resolution A. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.

The Transportation Board had the following recommendations regarding routing:

· The route taken by trucks should preferentially avoid passing by elementary or middle schools.

· Most of the work should be undertaken during periods when school is not in session.

· Town staff should consider the potential damage to roads in determining appropriate routes.

· If routes are chosen that would impact schools, there should be consultation with school administration.

Staff Comment: We note the concern of the Transportation Board, however, the routing cannot be determined until a destination(s) has been confirmed. Resolution A includes a stipulation that the Town Manager approve a routing plan and that the plan address vehicle weight limits, hours of travel, responsibility for damage to public roads, and material leakage and deposit of sediment on roadways. As part of the plan approval, we will notify the school administration of the truck routing plan.

Community Design Commission Recommendation: The Community Design Commission reviewed this application on February 7, 2001, and voted 8-0 to recommend that the Council approve the application without reference to a specific Resolution. Please see the attached Summary of Community Design Commission Action. The Commission recommended the Council approve this application for a Special Use Permit with the condition that the following six (6) concerns identified at Concept Plan Review be addressed:

1. The Commission supported a thorough review of this project by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Town Stormwater Engineer.

2. One Commission member expressed concern regarding damage to the wetlands on the site during construction.

3. The Commission expressed concern regarding the upstream impact that this project would have on Booker Creek and Cedar Fork Creek.

4. Several Commission members noted concern regarding the maintenance of the proposed forebays.

5. One Commission member expressed concern regarding trucks hauling “muck” away from the site, which would drip and leave dirt on the neighboring roads.

6. The Commission supported better detention of sediments upstream, as part of future development projects in this basin.

Staff Comment: We believe the Resolution A, the Manager’s preliminary recommendation addresses concerns 1-5. Concern #6 cannot be addressed as part of this Special Use Permit application.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Recommendation: The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board reviewed this application on February 13, 2001. We will provide the Summary of Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Board Action to the Council, as soon as it is available.

Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation: Based on our evaluation of the application, our preliminary conclusion is that the application complies with standards and regulations of the Development Ordinance.

Following tonight’s Public Hearing, we will prepare an evaluation of the evidence submitted in support of, and in opposition to this application. If the Council makes the four required findings for the approval of a Special Use Permit, we recommend that the application be approved with the adoption of Resolution A.

Resolution A would approve the application based on the Manager’s preliminary recommendation and the recommendations of the Planning Board, Transportation Board and Community Design Commission.

Resolution B would deny the application.

Resolution C would determine the definition of contiguous property for this application.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Planning Staff Report (p. 11).

2. Checklist of Project Fact Sheet Requirements (p. 17).

3. Resolution A – Approving the Application (p. 18).

4. Resolution B – Denying the Application (p. 22).

5. Resolution C – Defining Contiguous Property for this Application (p. 23).

6. Summary of Planning Board Action (p. 24).

7. Summary of Transportation Board Action (p. 25).

8. Summary of Community Design Commission Action (p. 26).

9. Applicant’s Statement of Justification (p. 27).

10. Traffic Impact Statement (p. 34).

11. Detailed Site Analysis (p. 35).

12. Landscape Protection Plan (p. 36).

13. Statement on Resource Conservation District (p. 39).

14. Stormwater Impact Statement (p. 43).

15. Construction Traffic Management Plan (p. 44).

16. Reduced Area Map (p. 45).

17. Reduced Site Plans (p. 46).

ATTACHMENT 1

Planning Staff Report

SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Eastwood Lake Project – Application for a Special Use Permit (File No. 28..)

DATE: February 19, 2001

INTRODUCTION

Attached for your consideration is an application for a Special Use Permit to allow the removal of approximately 50,000 cubic yards of sediment from Eastwood Lake. The application proposes to excavate the lakebed to a minimum depth of four (4) feet, at normal water surface elevation. Additional construction activities include two sediment forebays, and three lake access/haul roads. The 48-acre lake is located in the Lake Forest Neighborhood between North Lakeshore and South Lakeshore Drives. Booker Creek and Cedar Fork Creek flow into Eastwood Lake. The site is currently located within the Residential-1 zoning district, and the Resource Conservation District (RCD). The site is located in Orange County and is identified on Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 28, 40, 41A, 42 and 43. The applicant is Lake Forest Association, Inc.

EVALUATION

On December 11, 2000 the Town Council approved a request to waive the development fees for the Eastwood Lake Project Special Use Permit and Final Plan applications. In addition, the project has been granted expedited processing.

The Town staff has reviewed this application for compliance with the standards of the Development Ordinance and offers the following evaluation:

Wetlands exist at the southwest end of the Lake Forest Association property. This area has been identified and certified by the US Army Corps of Engineers. The wetlands are primarily comprised of shrub and tree thickets. The area is primarily soggy, vegetated ground slightly above the normal lake area. Seasonal drying is common in the summer. According to the applicants submission, the wetland area has not existed long enough for unique wetland vegetation to become established.

The wetland area and lake provides habitat for birds, small mammals, turtles, and frogs. The applicant has indicated that the existing lake waters contain bass.

The applicant is proposing to remove approximately 50,000 cubic yards of sediment from the lake bottom and restore portions of the lakebed to a minimum depth of four (4) feet. This proposal includes construction of a permanent sediment forebay in the lakebed below the point where Cedar Fork Creek discharges into the lake and a second where Booker Creek discharges into the lake. Construction of a temporary sediment trap and storage area is proposed in the lakebed behind the existing dam. There are three (3) access/haul roads (Access Road # 1, #2, & #3) into the lakebed.

Additional activities proposed by the Special Use Permit application include:

Ø Partial draining of the lake by controlled water discharge at the dam.

Ø Excavation, and temporary storage of sediment in the lakebed.

Ø Hauling away of lakebed sediment from the site.

Ø Construction of a second forebay at the Booker Creek inlet.

Ø Temporary storage of sediment barrier and standpipe in the Lake Forest Association parkland.

Ø Construction of a standpipe at the dam.

Ø Maintenance of the dam and its adjacent area.

Ø Maintenance or construction of bank stabilization, docks, and shoreline facilities, including regrading and filling of lake edges for lakefront property owners.

Ø Excavation and hauling away of sediment collected in the Booker Creek and Cedar Fork Creek forebays.

Ø Aquatic weed management.

Ø Improvements to the Lake Forest Association beach, boat storage and recreation area.

Ø Construction of boardwalks and similar structures, if permitted under federal and state regulations regarding protection of wetlands.

Ø Grading of residential yards.

As the lake is drained it is anticipated that the fish currently in the pond will swim out the drainpipe at the base of the dam and continue on downstream into Booker Creek.

We note that during the construction and sediment removal activity, Booker Creek and Cedar Fork Creek will continue to flow into the lake. It is anticipated that the construction activity will not hinder the flow of these streams through the drained lakebed.

The boundary of the proposed Special Use Permit extends onto individual residential lots beyond the edge of the existing lake, encompasses the wetlands, beach and recreations areas. We note that the applicant is proposing that the Special Use Permit encumber portions of adjoining single-family residential lots in order to allow land disturbance activities on private properties where homeowners wish to have individual work done to their lakefront property. We anticipate that land disturbance on residential lots would typically involve construction of bank stabilization, docks, and shoreline facilities. Other authorized activities could involve regrading and filling of lake edges for lakefront property owners.

We recommend that, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, all homeowners who wish to have additional work done to their lots provide their authorization (signature) to allow the work to occur.

Ø Excavation and hauling away of sediment collected in the forebays.

Ø Maintenance of the dam and its adjacent area, if necessary.

Ø Maintenance or construction of bank stabilization, docks, and shoreline facilities.

Ø Pond vegetation maintenance.

We believe this request is reasonable.

Intensity Standards: Land use intensity standards do not apply for this type of activity.

Access and Circulation: The applicant is proposing three access/haul roads, providing earthmoving equipment access into and out of the drained lakebed. Access to the lake site for sediment removal would also be accomplished by using two access roads proposed off North Lakeshore Drive and a single access road (dam maintenance road) at the north end of South Lakeshore Drive. We note that the proposed access roads are the same routes used during the last lake restoration in 1984. The applicant is proposing that the three haul roads be reinstated for use by removing overhanging branches, removing small saplings in the access roads, and installing additional gravel on the road. We believe this is a reasonable request.

Access Road #1 is located on the east side of North Lakeshore Drive, approximately 400 feet north of Rock Creek Road. Access Road #1 will provide access to the southern end of the lake. Access Road #2 is also located on the east side of North Lakeshore Drive, approximately 250 feet north of Kenmore Road. This road will provide access to the northern half of the lake. Access Road #3, also known as the dam maintenance access road, is located at the north end of South Lakeshore Drive and will provide access to the beach and recreation area as well as the temporary sediment trap and storage area behind the dam.

It will be necessary for the applicant to obtain an access easement for Access Road #2 located on private property. Access Road # 1 and Access road #3 are owned by the Lake Forest Association and an access easement would not be necessary. We recommend, that prior to the issuance of Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant obtain an access easement for Access Road #2 and have it recorded with the Orange County Register of Deeds.

Construction Traffic Management Plan: A site destination for the sediment disposal has not yet been confirmed. At this time we believe that the greatest amount of material removal is planned for the two access roads on North Lakeshore Drive. Please see the attached Construction Traffic Management Plan submitted by the applicant.

We recommend that the applicant designate the hauling routes and schedule for removed sediment transport to disposal sites for Town Manager approval prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Resource Conservation District: The proposed Special Use Permit boundary generally follows the Resource Conservation District (RCD) boundary line along the perimeter of the lake.

The Resource Conservation District’s intent is to preserve the water-carrying capacity of the lake and to protect the watercourses from erosion and sedimentation. This proposal involves no change to the drainage patterns or relocation or alteration of the watercourse of the creeks.

Additional cut and fill done within the Resource Conservation District and Special Use Permit boundary will need to be identified with the Final Plan application. We have included a stipulation in Resolution A requiring a “no rise” certification for all work done in the floodway and accompanying support documentation.

Tree Protection: For any property owner who wishes to have lake excavation activity occur on their property, tree protection fencing will not be required. The Tree Ordinance requirements do not apply to single-family lots. Otherwise, we anticipate that tree protection will be limited to land owned by the Association. In cases where critical root zones are identified for significant trees near the shoreline, the applicant indicates that excavation will be restricted and tree protection fencing would be required. Tree protection fencing is to be placed along the construction limit lines adjacent to the Access Roads # 1 and #2, and the construction limits for the installation of the southern forebay. We recommend that the location of the tree protection fencing be approved by the Town Manager.

Stormwater Management: The excavation project proposes to dredge to achieve a minimum of four-foot water depth (some areas deeper for fish holes). We understand this depth has been determined to be the minimum depth necessary to avoid aquatic weed growth. Near the shoreline the applicant proposes gradual contouring to avoid sudden drop-offs and bank stability problems. The water surface level will remain the same at 296 feet above sea level. The shoreline is not proposed to expand beyond its current location.

The lake functions as an impoundment basin. During storm events, the water flow rates from the incoming streams are reduced downstream as the lake level rises naturally above its usual level of the low point of the dam spillway. The applicant notes that the rate of rise of floodwaters will be mitigated by the additional water-holding capacity of the lake. Approximately 50,000 cubic yards of sediment has accumulated since the last excavation was done. The construction of forebays at both entries of the creeks, Booker Creek and Cedar Fork Creek, is intended to trap sediment as it enters the lake. The Association anticipates that future maintenance will be confined to excavating of the forebays rather than the entire lake.

Sediment Management: A location for disposal of the sediment from the lake has not been identified. Research of potential disposal sites has included both private and public sites. Discussions are currently underway with Orange County about the landfill as a possible destination. The excavated material has been deemed to be suitable for disposal in any permitted landfill or on public or private land at the request of the property owner.

Utilities: The only utility lines present on the site are sanitary sewer lines that are controlled and maintained by the Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA).

Erosion Control: We recommend that the applicant obtain an Erosion Control Permit prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Special Use Permit Findings: For approval of a Special Use Permit, the Council must make the following findings, as set forth in Section 18.2 of the Development Ordinance:

(a) 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;

(b) 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;

(c) That the use or development is located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property, or that the use or development is a public necessity; and

(d) 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.

Upon review of the application and information that has been submitted to date, our preliminary recommendation is that these findings can be made.

CONCLUSION

Based on information available at this stage of the application review process, we believe that the proposal, with the conditions in Resolution A, meets the requirements of the applicable sections of the Development Ordinance and Design Manual, and that the proposal fulfills the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.

Resolution A would approve the application for Special Use Permit

Resolution B would deny the application.

ATTACHMENT 2

Project Fact Sheet Requirements

Check List of Regulations and Standards

Special Use Permit Application

EASTWOOD LAKE	STAFF EVALUATION
EASTWOOD LAKE	Compliance	Non-Compliance
Use Permitted	Ö
Min. Gross Land Area	N/A
Min. Lot Width	N/A
Max. Floor Area	N/A
Min. Outdoor Space	N/A
Min. Livability Space	N/A
Min. Recreation Space	N/A
Impervious Surface Limits	N/A
Min. # Parking Spaces	N/A
Min. # Loading Spaces	N/A
Min. # Handicap Spaces	N/A
Max. # Dwelling Units	N/A
Min. Street Setback	N/A
Min. Interior Setback	N/A
Min. Solar Setback	N/A
Max. Height Limit	N/A
Min. Landscape Buffers	N/A
Public Water and Sewer	N/A

N/A = Not Applicable Prepared: February 9, 2001

ATTACHMENT 3

RESOLUTION A

(Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE EASTWOOD LAKE PROJECT

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application proposed by Lake Forest Association, Inc. on properties identified as Chapel Hill Township, part of Tax Maps 28, 40, 41A, 42 and 43 if developed according to the site plan prepared on January 24, 2001, and 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;

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 Town Council hereby approves the application for a Special Use Permit for Eastwood Lake in accordance with the plans listed above and with the conditions listed below:

Stipulations Specific to the Development

1. That construction begin by ________________ (two years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by ____________ (three years from the date of Council approval).

2. Land Use: This Special Use Permit authorizes:

Ø The restoration of the lake for stormwater retention, recreational purposes and wildlife enhancement; and

Ø Periodic future maintenance including sediment removal, shoreline stabilization, vegetative control and dam maintenance/management.

Permitted land disturbance, construction and maintenance activities include:

Draining of the lake by controlled water discharge.
Construction of (3) access/haul roads.
Construction of a temporary sediment trap and storage area.
Excavation, and temporary storage of sediment in the lakebed.
Hauling away of lakebed sediment from the site.
Temporary storage of sediment barrier and standpipe in the Lake Forest Association parkland.
Construction of two permanent sediment forebays.
Construction of a standpipe at the dam.
Improvements to the Lake Forest Association beach, boat storage and recreation area.
Maintenance of the dam and its’ adjacent area.
Maintenance or construction associated with bank stabilization, docks, and shoreline facilities, including regrading and filling of lake edges for lakefront property owners.
Excavation and hauling away of sediment collected in the Booker Creek and Cedar Fork Creek forebays.
Aquatic weed management.

3. Special Use Permit Boundary: That the Special Use Permit boundary for this project generally follows the Resource Conservation District (RCD) boundary as located on the submitted Site Plan dated January 24, 2001 with the following exception: For those private residential lakefront properties, upon which no associated land disturbing activities occur, the Special Use Permit boundary follows the Lake Forest Association, Inc. property line therefore leaving said lakefront property owners outside of the Special Use Permit boundary.

4. Land Disturbance on Private Lakefront Properties: That prior to beginning any land disturbance on private lakefront properties, other that properties owned by Lake Forest Association, Inc., said lakefront property owner(s) shall provide authorization (signature) for such land disturbance. This authorization shall be submitted to the Town Manager prior to beginning any site work on such properties.

Stipulations Related to Access and Circulation

5. Access/Haul Road Easements: That access easements for Access Road #1 and Access Road #2 be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager. The approved access easements shall be recorded with the in Orange County Register of Deeds prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

6. Construction Traffic Management Plan: That a Construction Traffic Management Plan, including an approved Hauling Route Plan for travel on public streets within the Town of Chapel Hill, shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The plan shall address vehicle weight limits, hours of travel, responsibility for damage to public roads, and material leakage and deposit of sediment on roadways.

Stipulations Related to Resource Conservation District

7. Cut and Fill in the Resource Conservation District: That cut and fill calculations, for land disturbance activities outside the edge of the lake shore line shall be provided with the submission of the Final Plan application.

8. No Rise Certification: That prior to beginning any land disturbing activities, a registered engineer must submit a no rise Certification, for review and approval by the Town Manager, stating that this project will not cause a rise to the 100-year regulatory base flood elevation, including a description of the project with supporting documentation for the no rise certification.

Stipulations Related to Tree Protection Fencing

9. Tree Protection Fence: That tree protection fencing shall be required in the following locations:

Ø Along the construction limits lines adjacent to the three Access Roads and the southern forebay; and

Ø Along the perimeter of the wetland areas; and.

Ø Around critical root zones of significant trees near the shoreline.

The location of tree protection fencing shall be approved by the Town Manager.

Stipulations Related to State and Federal Approvals

10. State or Federal Approvals: That any required state or federal permits or encroachment agreements for development in the wetlands be approved by the appropriate agencies and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

Miscellaneous Stipulations

11. Dam Inspection: That prior to final re-filling of the lake, a dam inspection report from a registered engineer shall be submitted to the Town Manager.

12. Detailed Plans: That final detailed site 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.

13. 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.

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

15. 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.

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

17. 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 application for a Special Use Permit for Eastwood Lake Project.

This the _________ day of _______________, 2001.

ATTACHMENT 4

RESOLUTION B

(Resolution of Denial)

A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR EASTWOOD LAKE (File Number 28)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit application, proposed by Lake Forest Association, Inc. on properties identified as Chapel Hill Township, part of Tax Maps 28, 40, 41A, 42 and 43 if developed according to the site plan dated January 24, 2001 and the 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 REASONS FOR DENIAL)

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby denies the application for a Special Use Permit for Eastwood Lake Project.

This the ____ day of ____________, 2001.

ATTACHMENT 5

RESOLUTION C

(Defining Contiguous Property)

ARESOLUTION DETERMINING CONTIGUOUS PROPERTY WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR EASTWOOD LAKE PROJECT (2001-02-19/R-1)

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council, having considered the evidence submitted in the Public Hearing thus far pertaining to the application for Special Use Permit for the Eastwood Lake Project, hereby determines, for purposes of Development Ordinance Section 18.3, Finding of Fact c) contiguous property to the site of the development proposed by this Special Use Permit application to be that property described as follows:

All properties within _______feet of the site.

This the 19th day of February, 2001.