TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT:Public Hearing: The Homestead – Application for a Zoning Atlas Amendment
INTRODUCTION
Attached for your consideration is an application for a Zoning Atlas Amendment to rezone a 48.11-acre site. The site is located north of Homestead Road, east of the University Branch Southern Railroad, west of Homestead Park and south of the recently approved Parkside II subdivision. The property is currently located within the Residential-2 (R-2) zoning district. The property is also located in the Town’s Northern Joint Planning Transition Area, outside of the existing Chapel Hill Corporate Limits.
The property owner has requested that the site be rezoned from Residential-2 (R-2) to Residential-4-Conditional (R-4-C). We note that the owner has submitted a letter outlining voluntary limitations regarding the future use of the site, if the Residential-4-Conditional (R-4-C) zoning is approved for this site (please see attached letter).
The applicant has also submitted an accompanying application for a Special Use Permit to authorize construction of a multi-family development on the site. Please refer to the accompanying memorandum for a discussion of this application.
|
This package of material has been prepared for the Town Council’s consideration, and is organized as follows:
¨ Cover Memorandum: Summarizes the application, reviews procedures for review and offers a preliminary recommendation for Council action.
¨ Attachments: Includes an ordinance approving and resolution denying the rezoning, and advisory board recommendations on the application.
|
PROCESS
This is an application for a Zoning Atlas Amendment. The Development Ordinance requires the Town Manager to conduct an evaluation of this Zoning Atlas Amendment 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 Article 20 of the Development Ordinance, we have presented a report to the Planning Board, and tonight we submit our report and preliminary recommendation to the Council.
We note that this site is presently located outside of the Town of Chapel Hill’s Corporate Limits, in the Town’s northern Joint Planning Transition Area (JPA). This Zoning Atlas Amendment was the subject of a Joint Planning Public Hearing on April 11, 2001. Approval of the proposed Zoning Atlas Amendment in the Joint Planning Transition Area will require joint approval by the Chapel Hill Town Council and the Orange County Board of Commissioners.
Zoning determines the type and intensity of uses and development that are allowed on a piece of land. A Zoning Atlas Amendment involves a change to the current zoning, and thus the permitted types and intensity of land uses. In Chapel Hill, a rezoning may be requested in two ways: general use and conditional use rezoning requests. A general use rezoning request is to change the zoning to a different zoning district in which any of several kinds of developments and uses are permissible. A conditional use rezoning request is to allow development and uses only with approval of a Special Use Permit. The Homestead rezoning application is a conditional use rezoning request. Consequently, if the Homestead conditional use rezoning request were to be approved, the applicant would still need to receive approval for a Special Use Permit application prior to development actually occurring on the site.
The zoning designation of a property determines the range of land uses and development intensities permitted on the property. Article 20 of the Development Ordinance establishes the intent of Zoning Atlas Amendments by stating that, “In order to establish and maintain sound, stable, and desirable development within the planning jurisdiction of the Town it is intended that this chapter shall not be amended except:
a)to correct a manifest error in the chapter; or
b) because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the jurisdiction generally; or
c)to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
Article 20.1 further indicates:
It is further intended that, if amended, this chapter be amended only as reasonably necessary to the promotion of the public health, safety, or general welfare, and in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
As related to conditional use zoning, Article 20 of the Development Ordinance stipulates that:
An application for rezoning to a conditional use district may include a request, by the property owner, to limit the uses allowed with approval of a Special Use Permit. An application for rezoning to a conditional use district may be accompanied by an application for a Special Use Permit, as provided in Article 18, and may be reviewed concurrently with the Special Use Permit application.
The Council has discretionary authority to approve or deny a rezoning request. As a conditional use rezoning request, the specific proposal in the accompanying Special Use Permit application is related to the rezoning request. Approval of a conditional use rezoning for a property would mean that no development could occur other than that allowed under the previous Residential-2 zoning on that property, without Council approval of a Special Use Permit. We believe that it is appropriate for the Council to consider a specific Special Use Permit proposal on that application, in tandem with a conditional use zoning hearing. If the Council does not find the Special Use Permit proposal to be an acceptable use of the property, we would recommend that the Council not approve the rezoning request.
BACKGROUND
The applicant’s Concept Plan submittal for this development was reviewed by the Community Design Commission on February 16, 2000. We note that the area considered during the Concept Plan Review included additional land along Homestead Road (please see attached map). Following the Design Commission’s Concept Plan Review, on March 6, 2000, the Mayor appointed a Council Committee to study this area. The Council Committee visited the site and identified several objectives of community interest. The Council endorsed these objectives by adopting a Resolution on April 24, 2000 (please see attached resolution).
The applicant submitted a formal Zoning Atlas Amendment and Special Use Permit application on September 26, 2000. We note that because this development proposes at least 15% of the dwelling units to be affordable to low-moderate income families (80% of the area median income for a family of four), the applicable development fees have been waived. The respective fees for this development application would have been $60,000 for the Special Use Permit (maximum fee) and $2,724 for the Zoning Atlas Amendment.
REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION
Our review of this Zoning Atlas Amendment application is organized around the requirement that the Development Ordinance shall not be amended except a) to correct a manifest error in the chapter; b) because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the jurisdiction generally, or c) to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
A) A rezoning is necessary to correct a manifest error.
We believe the information in the record to date can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support: We were unable to identify any arguments in support of a manifest error.
Preliminary Staff Assessment: We do not believe that evidence has been identified to substantiate the argument that a manifest error justifies the proposed rezoning.
B) A rezoning is necessary because of changed or changing conditions in a particular area or in the jurisdiction generally.
We believe the information in the record thus far can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support: No arguments have been made to date in support of changed or changing conditions in this particular area.
We note that the Council has approved the following developments within 500 feet of The Homestead site, during the past 7 years:
|
|
Date of Approval |
Development Application |
Location |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27, 1994 |
Homestead Village Preliminary Plat |
Southwest |
|
|
July 5, 1994 |
Southern Orange Human Services SUP |
Southeast |
|
|
November 13, 1995 |
Project Homestart SUP Modification |
Southeast |
|
|
March 13, 1996 |
Parkside Preliminary Plat |
Northeast |
|
|
March 13, 1996 |
Homestead Park SUP |
East |
|
|
October 12, 1998 |
United Church of Chapel Hill SUP |
East |
Preliminary Staff Assessment: We agree that Chapel Hill has grown northward over the last 20 years, and that there have been some recent developments in the vicinity of this site. We do not believe that these projects however, substantiate the argument that changed or changing conditions in the area justify the proposed rezoning. We note that the Council may choose to come to a different conclusion on this issue.
C) A rezoning is necessary to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
We believe the information in the record thus far can be summarized as follows:
Arguments in Support: Arguments in support of this finding are offered in the applicant’s Statement of Justification (please see attached Statement).
Arguments in Opposition: To date, no evidence has been submitted indicating that this development would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Preliminary Staff Assessment: We believe that this rezoning could be justified on the grounds that it is necessary to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan, although the Council may choose to come to a different conclusion on this issue.
We note that the Comprehensive Plan, adopted on May 8, 2000, identifies this area as medium density residential (4-8 units per acre), in the adopted Land Use Plan. The accompanying Special Use Permit application proposes 4.0 units per acre.
In addition, the applicant is proposing to provide 30 permanently affordable dwelling units (15.7%) in the accompanying Special Use Permit application, supporting the Comprehensive Plan Goal that 15% of new residential development would consists of “affordable” dwelling units.
We note that further arguments regarding the rezoning proposal will be presented during tonight’s Public Hearing.
Recommendations are summarized below. Please see the attached summaries of board actions and recommendations.
Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board considered this application on April 3, 2001, and voted 8-0 to recommend approval of the Zoning Atlas Amendment application. Please see the attached Summary of Planning Board Action.
Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation: We believe that this rezoning could be justified based on the finding that a rezoning is necessary to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. Our preliminary recommendation is that the Council adopt the attached ordinance, rezoning the property from Residential-2 (R-2) to Residential-4-Conditional (R-4-C).
The attached Resolution would deny the rezoning request.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance – Approving the Rezoning Application (p. 6)
4. Applicant’s Statement of Justification (p. 11)
5. Applicant’s Letter of Rezoning Conditions (p. 13)
6. Certification of Notice to Property Owners (p. 14)
7. Map of Concept Plan Site (p. 15)
8. Resolution adopted by Council on April 24, 2000 (p. 16)
ORDINANCE
(Rezoning to R-4-C zoning)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL ZONING ATLAS FOR THE HOMESTEAD DEVELOPMENT (Chapel Hill Tax Map Number 24, Lot 16 & Portion of Lot 12)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the application of Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc., to amend the Zoning Atlas to rezone property described below from Residential-2 (R-2) to Residential-4-Conditional (R-4-C), and finds that the amendment is warranted, in order to achieve the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Chapel Hill Zoning Atlas be amended as follows:
That the portion of the site identified as now or formerly Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 24, Lot 16 and a portion of Lot 12, that are currently zoned Residential-2 (R-2), located north of Homestead Road, between the University Branch Southern Railroad and Homestead Park, shall be rezoned to Residential-4-Conditional (R-4-C) zoning, with the following limitations on uses:
· That residential development shall be limited to a maximum density of 4.1 units per acre; and
· That a minimum of 15% of the proposed dwelling units shall consist of permanently affordable units available for private ownership. An affordable dwelling unit shall be defined as a unit that is priced at a level affordable to households earning 80% or less of the median income for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), as provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
The description of the site to be rezoned is indicated on the attached map.
SECTION II
That all ordinances and portions of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
This the _____ day of _________, 2001.
Map inserted here.
(Denying R-4-C Rezoning)
A RESOLUTION DENYING AN APPLICATION FOR A ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT FOR THE HOMESTEAD DEVELOPMENT (Chapel Hill Tax Map Number 24, Lot 16 & Portion of Lot 12)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the application of Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc., to amend the Zoning Atlas to rezone property described below from Residential-2 (R-2) to Residential-4-Conditional (R-4-C), and fails to find that the amendment:
a) corrects a manifest error in the chapter, or
b) is justified because of changed or changing conditions in the area of the rezoning site or the community in general, or
c) achieves the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
For the reasons that:
a) the Zoning Atlas is not in error;
b) there have not been changed conditions that would justify this rezoning; and
c) the Land Use Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Plan, identifies this parcel for low-density residential use.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council hereby denies the application of Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc., to amend the Zoning Atlas to rezone the property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 24, Lot 16 and a portion of Lot 12, located north of Homestead Road, between the University Branch Southern Railroad and Homestead Park, to Residential-4-Conditional (R-4-C) zoning. The description of the entire property is as indicated on the attached map.
This the _____ day of _________, 2001.