MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Development Ordinance Text Amendment- Second Draft Development Ordinance
DATE:
INTRODUCTION
This Public Hearing has been
scheduled for the Town Council to consider a Development Ordinance text
amendment for the second draft of the revised Development Ordinance. The Town’s consultant, Mr. Mark White of
Freilich, Leitner, &
We note that because of events of the week of September 10, and because of work on our evaluation of the UNC Development Plan application, we have not been able to provide the depth of description and analysis that is typically included in Public Hearing memoranda. In this memorandum we revisit the background and context for this project, highlight key new ideas that are being proposed with this Development Ordinance Revision, and highlight the changes between Draft #1 and Draft #2.
Paper copies of Draft #2 have previously been distributed, and are available for review in the Town Clerk’s Office, the Planning Department, and the Chapel Hill Public Library. Electronic versions are available on compact disk (available in the Planning Department at no charge) and on the Town’s website: www.townofchapelhill.org.
At the Public Hearing we will hear comments from advisory boards, and citizens, and will report on additional reactions and suggestions that we have compiled. Following the Hearing we will report on all suggestions and offer alternative changes to the draft in response. We expect that we will be able to bring this follow-up report to the Council by the end of October.
BACKGROUND
July 5, 2000 Council hired Lane Kendig to revise the Development Ordinance.
August/Sept. Advisory Boards were asked to offer comments about revision of the Development Ordinance.
November 20, 2000 Council conducted Work Session with consultant to discuss revision to the Development Ordinance.
December 11, 2000 Council terminated services of Lane Kendig.
January 8, 2001 Council adopted a Scope of Services and Budget for a contract with Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle.
January 22, 2001 Council held Work Session with the consultant Mark White of Freilich, Leitner & Carlisle.
April 18, 2001 Consultant Mark White presented a draft annotated outline to the Council.
May 29, 2001 First draft Development Ordinance was presented to the following advisory boards:
June 26, 2001 Council held a Public Hearing on the first draft of the Development Ordinance.
August 28, 2001 Second draft Development Ordinance was presented to the following advisory boards:
DISCUSSION
The Town of Chapel Hill is in the process of revising its Development Ordinance. A key step was Council and community review of a first Draft of the revision, considered by Advisory Boards last spring and by the Town Council at the June 26 Public Hearing.
The second Draft responds to comments made during the spring and at the June Public Hearing. We have also received additional comments over the summer, and have considered those as well. This second Draft, as was the case with the first Draft, is the result of collaboration between a consultant and Town staff.
We offer three types of information in this memorandum. The first section, immediately following, offers comments on how the document is organized. The second section highlights the key elements of change between existing regulations and the ideas that have been proposed over the last year. The third and final section focuses on specific changes that have been made over the summer between the first Draft and the second draft.
ORGANIZATION AND PRESENTATION OF THE SECOND DRAFT
The basic organization of material in this proposed Development Ordinance is as follows:
A detailed Table of Contents appears first. Pages are numbered such that the first page of each Article is page one of that Article (e.g., the first page of “Article 4: Procedures” is numbered 4-1). In the compact disk format, there are links built into the Table of Contents so that the reader can go to the Table of Contents, click on the topic of interest, and the computer will jump directly to that page.
Immediately following the Table of Contents is a short piece called “How to Use This Document.”
Also built into the electronic version of the document are internal links from one topic to another. For example, in the electronic version if a reference to another part of the Ordinance appears in blue, it is “clickable” to be able to go directly to the section cited.
Many who spent time reviewing the
first Draft in great detail have asked that changes between the first and
second Drafts be clearly indicated. We
have done so, using underline for additions and strikethrough for
deletions.
The following table highlights the major new ideas that have been put forward for consideration in revising the Development Ordinance. When the Town Council adopted a new Comprehensive Plan in May, 2000, the Plan included a number of suggestions for changes to regulations. And during the past year, citizens, advisory board members, and the Town Council have all suggested better ways of managing growth in Chapel Hill. Here, then, are some key differences that would adjust the way Chapel Hill regulates development if this new Ordinance is adopted.
|
Change from Existing Regulations
|
Comments |
|
Use Patterns
|
Developers would have a choice: propose development in the conventional way, using conventional standards; or select one of several “Use Patterns” which each have their own standards, and which have been identified by the Town as desirable. The new Ordinance would include incentives to encourage development according to these patterns.
|
|
Development Review Process
|
Two areas of change are proposed. First, it is proposed that the Town Council assume some responsibility for review of Concept Plans (currently being done by the Community Design Commission). Second, procedural incentives are built into the Use Patterns to encourage development of that type.
|
|
Parking Regulations
|
The new Ordinance would contain maximum as well as minimum parking requirements.
|
|
Stormwater Management
|
A key change is to establish impervious surface limits Townwide, instead of just in watershed protection areas.
Another change is to make stormwater management requirements more rigorous.
|
|
Change from Existing Regulations
|
Comments |
|
Inclusionary Housing
|
The new Ordinance would require an affordable housing component to all new residential development over a threshold size. There are differing opinions about whether or not the Town Council has the legislative authority to enact such a regulation. The Town’s consultant has offered arguments that could be used to help justify the requirement and help defend a challenge.
|
|
Transfer of Development Rights
|
The Comprehensive Plan called for including this provision in the Ordinance. Intergovernmental conditions do not currently support use of such a technique; however, inclusion of this technique in the Ordinance may be of future benefit. |
|
Recreation Requirements
|
The new Ordinance would make it easier for a developer to propose, and for the Town to accept, payment in lieu of recreation requirements.
|
|
Resource Conservation District
|
The new Ordinance would tighten restrictions on use of land with the Resource Conservation District.
|
|
Neighborhood Conservation District
|
A new overlay zoning district would be created that would allow residents of an area to request imposition of standards and restrictions above those contained in general zoning regulations (if the area is older and if a threshold level of residents agree).
|
|
Change from Existing Regulations
|
Comments |
|
Mixed Use Zoning District
|
The current mixed-use districts would be merged – the change would offer greater flexibility with expanded design standards.
|
|
New Requirements for a Building Permit
|
In response to concerns about possible development of “old” previously-platted lots, a new provision would require evidence of access to a public maintained road and access to public water and sewer prior to issuance of a building permit.
|
SPECIFIC CHANGES FROM FIRST DRAFT TO SECOND DRAFT
As noted above, the changes that
have been made to create this second Draft are indicated with underline
for additions and strikethrough for deletions. The first Draft was described as a “Work in
Progress” and was intended to get ideas out for discussion. We have received comments from Advisory
Boards, citizens, and Council members, and responded to those with revisions. The following table highlights the
substantive changes that have been made, along with commentary.
|
Changed from First Draft
|
Comments |
|
More Detail in Tables
(Sec. 2.4, page 2-17) (Sec. 3.8, page 3-73) (Sec. 5.9, page 5-64)
|
The 1st Draft contained a number of tables that suggested how regulations might be structured, but which did not contain specific numeric requirements. These are now completed. In addition, some tables have been revised.
Key tables to review for changes:
Table 2.4-1 (TND standards) Table 3.8-1 (Dimensional Matrix) Sec. 5.9.7 (Parking Requirements)
|
|
Changed from First Draft
|
Comments |
|
Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
(temporarily removed from Article 5) |
The Town of Chapel Hill has been working for several years with Carrboro, Hillsborough, and Orange County on a draft Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Language that had been included in the 1st Draft has been removed. Once an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance is ready for adoption by the Town Council, it can be inserted in the appropriate place in this new Development Ordinance.
|
|
Resource Conservation District
(Sec. 3.6.3, page 3-42) |
RCD regulations have been adjusted so that trails and open space are permitted uses everywhere, as are lakes, ponds, and related infrastructure. Play fields are permitted, but not in areas closest to a stream.
|
|
Neighborhood Conservation District
(Sec. 3.6.5, page 3-60) |
The threshold has been changed for owners requesting imposition of stricter standards for their neighborhood. The 1st Draft suggested that an overlay zoning district could be initiated if 50% of property owners in the subject area requested it. The 2nd Draft changes this to 75%.
|
|
Conservation Subdivision
(Sec. 2.3, page 2-7) |
The process for describing land that is suitable for dedication as permanent open space, and required to be dedicated, has been simplified.
|
|
Changed from First Draft
|
Comments |
|
Parking Regulations
(Sec. 5.9 page 5-64) |
Minimum and maximum parking requirements have been adjusted. The maximums specified in the 2nd Draft are slightly higher than current minimums. (Rule of thumb: new maximums are approximately 10% higher than the current minimums, adjusted on a use-by-use basis.) In addition, new minimum requirements are established, lower than the current minimums for nearly all prescribed uses. |
|
Revised Downtown Language
(Sec. 3.3.1, page 3-2) |
The description of the Town Center zoning districts has been expanded, to include specific references to adopted Downtown Design Guidelines.
|
|
Revised Connectivity Ratio
(Sec. 5.8.2, page 5-56) |
The required ratio has been adjusted (lowered) to better reflect local conditions and considerations. The ratio would still require greater connectivity than often is proposed.
|
|
Performance Standards During Construction
(Sec. 5.15, page 5-83)
|
A new section was added to address expectations of developers while construction is ongoing. |
|
Lighting Standards
(Sec. 5.11, page 5-68)
|
New standards are proposed, to minimize spillover of light onto adjacent property. |
As we have reviewed this draft, we (boards and citizens and staff) have identified portions of the draft that warrant additional consideration/adjustment. We expect that additional such comments will be brought to the Council tonight at this Public Hearing.
This Public Hearing has been scheduled to consider this second Draft. Town advisory boards have been invited to discuss the document and to present comment at or immediately following the Public Hearing. Citizen comment, as always, is welcomed.
Following the hearing, Town staff and the consultant will prepare a final draft that responds to comments. The Town Council has established an objective of adopting a new Development Ordinance by the end of November, 2001.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Planning Board Recommendation: The Planning Board considered these items at meetings on August 21, September 4 and September 18. We expect the Planning Board to make a recommendation to the Town Council at the September 20 Public Hearing.
Manager’s Preliminary Recommendation: We recommend that the Town Council provide the consultant with recommended changes tonight and that this item return to the Town Council on November 12 for possible action.
1. Second Draft of the Revised Development Ordinance (previously provided)