TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
Ralph Karpinos, Town Attorney
SUBJECT: Response to Petitions – US 15-501/Erwin Road/Sage Road Moratorium
DATE: September 24, 2001
This report provides information in response to three petitions:
A neighborhood petition received May 21, 2001, requesting that the Council consider enacting a moratorium on development in the U.S. 15-501/Erwin Road/Sage Road corridor (copy attached).
A petition received June 25, 2001, from the Transportation Advisory Board requesting a similar moratorium (see attached Summary of Transportation Board Action).
A petition received June 25, 2001, from the Community Design Commission requesting that a moratorium be called while a study is conducted to address growth in northeast Chapel Hill (copy attached).
We note the concerns that have been raised by neighbors about traffic impacts associated with rezoning proposals that have been submitted, and recommend that those potential impacts be carefully studied and analyzed as part of the review of any rezoning application that goes forward in this area. We note, also, that rezonings are decided by the Council as legislative issues, and that the Council has discretion to approve or deny rezonings, based on the Council’s assessment of what is in the best interests of the community.
If the Council wishes to consider enacting a moratorium, the attached Resolution C would call a public hearing for a date to be determined by the Council to consider an Ordinance that would establish a moratorium.
An alternative response could be for the Council to schedule a work session to discuss information contained in this memorandum more fully. We recommend that the Council conduct such a work session before deciding on a course of action. Resolution A would schedule a Work Session for a date to be determined by the Town Council. We recommend that the Council also adopt Resolution B which would instruct the Town Manager not to schedule any Public Hearings on rezoning applications in the areas described in the petitions until the Council conducts such a Work Session.
The subject of a development moratorium in this area of Town as well as other areas has been considered by the Council on a few occasions over the past several years. Most recently, the Council considered enacting a development moratorium in the Town’s Historic Districts and the Northside Conservation District (June, 1998) and in the N.C. 54 Corridor near Meadowmont (December, 1998).
CURRENT PETITIONS
The three petitions are similar and related, but each describes a different area for a possible moratorium. Maps are attached that illustrate each of these areas.
The neighborhood petition asks for a moratorium on unapproved construction in the area bordered by Interstate 40, Dobbins Road, and Erwin Road until currently approved construction projects have been completed. Map 1 illustrates this area. The status of currently approved construction projects is discussed below.
The recommendation from the Transportation Board is that the Council institute a 6-12 month moratorium on new development in the US 15-501 corridor, between Erwin Road and Sage Road. The Board requests that the Council appoint a transportation task force to assess the transportation impacts on key intersections and make recommendations to the Council. Map 2 illustrates this area.
The recommendation from the Community Design Commission is that the Council consider a moratorium on new development along Erwin Road. Map 3 illustrates this request. The Commission asks for a study that will provide a better vision for growth and development in this area.
A. Procedural Steps
As noted in previous memoranda from the Town Attorney, a temporary development moratorium is in effect an interim Development Ordinance map amendment. As such, it should be enacted in accordance with the same procedure required for any other map amendment, including notice by first class mail to property owners within and adjacent to the area considered for the moratorium, newspaper notice, review by the Planning Board and a public hearing.
B. Substantive Requirements
The substantive justification necessary for any moratorium is discussed in the attached article by David Owens. If the Council wishes to consider enacting a moratorium and calls a hearing to do so, it would be up to the Council to determine, after considering relevant information presented at the hearing, whether a temporary development ordinance establishing a moratorium should be adopted. In addition, based on the attached article, there would need to be some plan of action for addressing the concerns that warranted enactment of the temporary moratorium.
The attached article outlines the following key points that need to be part of a moratorium ordinance:
Reasons for calling the moratorium, expressed in terms of a problem or problems that are of a nature such that ongoing development without some intervening action will result in public harm.
Identification of a geographic area to be covered by the moratorium, along with a specific time frame for the moratorium.
Statement of the actions to be taken during the moratorium that will address the stated problem(s).
Clarification that the moratorium would generally not affect vested rights (such as those established by approval of a "site specific development plan"). Under the Town’s Development Ordinance, a special use permit constitutes a "site specific development plan."
Identification of what, if any, pending or proposed development, would be allowed during the period of the moratorium. (This was a concern discussed during the recent consideration of a moratorium in neighborhoods near the downtown.)
Identification of a specific effective date, and whether or not pending applications would need to be considered if a moratorium were to be established.
C. Related Matters Under Consideration.
The Council is presently considering, or has recently considered, a number of general policy matters and land use matters involving this area of Town, which are related to the petitions for a moratorium. These include:
The following applications for development in this northeast area of Chapel Hill, as described in the petitions, are pending or are expected to be filed soon:
Europa Office Building (Special Use Permit): An office building is proposed at the Europa Drive/Legion Road intersection. The proposal includes a 38,000 square foot building with 108 parking space. A Public Hearing was held on June 25, 2001, for this Special Use Permit application. Contiguous property was determined to be 2,000 feet. This item is scheduled to return to the Town Council for possible action on November 12, 2001.
Eastowne 501 Office Building (Special Use Permit): An office building is proposed at the corner of Old Sterling Drive and Eastowne Drive. The proposal includes a 36,709 square foot building with 131 parking spaces. A Public Hearing is scheduled for October 17, 2001, to consider this proposal.
Marriott Residence Inn (Rezoning and Special Use Permit): A hotel is proposed on a 13.4 acre site that is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Erwin Road and Dobbins Drive. The proposed hotel would include 126 lodging units, and a total of 133 parking spaces. This site is diagonally across US 15-501 from the Sheraton Hotel. This development, as currently proposed, would require Council approval of Zoning Atlas Amendment and Special Use Permit applications.
The Community Design Commission conducted a concept plan review of this development on January 24, 2001. Applications for a Special Use Permit and Zoning Atlas Amendment, including a traffic impact statement, were received and accepted by Town staff in April and an initial staff review was completed in May.
The next step in the review process is for the applicant to resubmit plans and documentation for presentation to advisory boards and the Council. As of this writing, the applicant has not provided staff with the necessary application materials for review by advisory boards or the Council. Meeting dates before advisory boards and the Council on this development proposal have not been scheduled.
Jefferson Commons at Chapel Hill (Rezoning and Special Use Permit): A mixed-use development is proposed on a 19.5 acre site located northeast of the intersection of Erwin Road and Dobbins Drive and on the west side of Sage Road. The proposed development consists of 50,268 square feet of retail/office space, 173 multi-family dwelling units and 656 parking spaces. This site is within 1,000 feet of the Erwin Road/US 15-501 intersection. This development, as currently proposed, would require Council approval of Zoning Atlas Amendment and Special Use Permit applications.
The Community Design Commission conducted a concept plan review of this development on May 8, 2001.
On August 31, 2001, we received formal applications for Special Use Permit and Zoning Atlas Amendment. Meeting dates before advisory boards and the Council on this development proposal have not been scheduled.
Notting Hill II (Rezoning and Special Use Permit): A multi-family development is proposed on a 33.6 acre site that is located north of the Englewood Subdivision on the east side of Erwin Road. The proposed development includes 186 dwelling units with 259,590 square feet of floor area. A total of 325 parking spaces are proposed. This site is within 1 mile of the Erwin Road/US 15-501 intersection. The development, as currently proposed, would require Council approval of Zoning Atlas Amendment and Special Use Permit applications.
The Community Design Commission conducted a concept plan review of this development on May 16, 2001.
The next step for the applicant is to submit formal Special Use Permit and Zoning Atlas Amendment applications. As of this writing, we have not received these applications. Meeting dates before advisory boards and the Council on this development proposal, therefore, have not been scheduled.
2. Approved developments not yet under construction, or for which construction has begun but a Certificate of Occupancy has not been issued.
The following developments in this northeast area of Chapel Hill have been approved by the Town Council and are either not yet under construction, or are under construction but have not received a Certificate of Occupancy:
Providence Glen Condominiums: A development with 192 dwelling units and 383 parking spaces was authorized by the Town Council on May 15, 2000. Construction activity has begun on the site, located on the south side of Old Sterling Drive near Sage Road.
Sage Road Offices: On April 9, 2001, the Town Council issued a Special Use Permit for two office/clinic buildings to be located at the corner of Sage Road and Old Sterling Drive. The development includes 62,000 square feet of floor area and 238 parking spaces.
3. A proposal to modify the Development Ordinance.
The Council held a Public Hearing on September 20, 2001, on a proposal to revise the Development Ordinance. New regulations are being considered that may impact development proposals.
4.Proposal for transportation improvements in the area.
Two major transportation improvements are planned in the area being discussed for a moratorium. These include the proposed US 15-501 superstreet, and proposed improvements to Weaver Dairy Road.
Regarding the superstreet, it is our expectation that the proposed superstreet improvements, if approved by the Council and the NCDOT and subsequently constructed, would be capable of handling expected traffic growth in the area at an acceptable level of service. The present design and construction schedule indicates an anticipated construction cost of approximately $2 million for the superstreet, with funding from the State. Construction start-up is noted as fiscal year 2004.
Regarding the Weaver Dairy Road improvements, we note that this project is in the State Transportation Improvement Program. The work is expected to begin in 2003 with right-of-way acquisition and with construction scheduled for 2004. These improvements, which include connection to the Sage Road/Erwin Road intersection, are expected to be completed in 2006.
EVALUATION OF CURRENT REQUESTS FOR MORATORIUM
We have reviewed these three requests and the current conditions that exist in the northeast portions of Chapel Hill, and offer the following evaluation.
The moratorium tool can be an important mechanism to manage growth in situations where new development threatens to outpace the expansion of public infrastructure that is necessary to support the development. A moratorium can serve to temporarily postpone development while infrastructure capacity is expanded, or while plans are put in place for how land should be developed.
In this case, we note that considerable planning has already taken place. In 1986, Chapel Hill established an Urban Services Boundary that designated areas for urban development, and a boundary beyond which urban development would not be allowed to spread. The areas addressed in the petitions are all included within this Urban Services Boundary, and designated for urban development.
In 1989 the Town Council adopted a Comprehensive Plan that designated this area for development, mostly in the form of offices and residences, with selected areas of commercial activity. And last year the Town Council revised and updated the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, including adopting a new Land Use Plan, reaffirming the vision for office, residential, and commercial development in this area. Zoning designations of properties here and elsewhere in Chapel Hill have followed these land use designations.
Throughout the last decade, capital improvements plans have been developed, adopted, and implemented by the Town of Chapel Hill, the Orange Water and Sewer Authority, the NC Department of Transportation, and the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District. All these plans have been based on projections of development patterns and intensities as included in the Town’s Land Use Plan and Zoning Atlas, anticipating additional office, commercial, and residential development in these areas. We believe that careful thought and policy consideration has gone into the planning for land use and public infrastructure continuously over the last 15 years. Development patterns have evolved as planned. We do not believe that a moratorium can be justified on the basis that development must be halted to allow planning to occur.
Regarding infrastructure, we believe that all needed components of public infrastructure in this area are adequate and being appropriately planned-for to provide expansion of capacity to accompany expected future growth - - water, sewer, streets, schools, parks, recreation facilities, public safety. We do not believe that a moratorium can be justified because of infrastructure deficiencies, arguing that development must be halted to allow needed infrastructure expansions to catch up.
We note that of the five pending development applications in this area, two are proposing development that is consistent with adopted land use plans and zoning. We do not believe that it is reasonable to enact a moratorium on the basis that these proposed developments should be delayed until further study or planning occurs. These two applications propose an office building of approximately 38,000 square feet, on land zoned for office development. The other three applications all propose rezoning to allow use and/or intensity different that that which current zoning would allow. We believe that if the Town Council has concerns that different intensities and/or uses would represent undue demands on infrastructure capacity, the Council can deny the rezoning requests and dispose of the applications that are in conflict with the Council’s adopted policies and the community’s adopted plans.
We also note that there are few parcels of land in this part of Chapel Hill that are not either already developed, approved for development, or in Town ownership. The five applications that have been mentioned in the petition cover most of the undeveloped land in these corridors.
POSSIBLE IMPACTS OF A MORATORIUM
The process of considering and enacting a moratorium would have implications related to staff time and workload. Calling a public hearing on a moratorium carries with it a responsibility to produce staff reports on infrastructure capacities, demands, projections, and analysis of proposed development, in order to establish whether or not a moratorium is justified. During the period of a moratorium, work would need to be scheduled on whatever the topic is that triggered the moratorium. There is currently no additional staff time to devote to such a project without releasing work on other Council-directed priorities. We note that work is ongoing or scheduled on the following special assignments (in addition to regular, ongoing work) that would constrain our ability to produce work associated with a moratorium public hearing, or require guidance from the Council about rescheduling work on these tasks:
UNC Development Plan
Revision of Development Ordinance
Downtown Housing/Visioning Initiative
Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
New “Mobility Report Card”
New system for arranging for independent traffic analyses for developments
15-501 Major Investment Study
NC 54 Corridor Study
Writing new Historic District Guidelines
Million Solar Roofs Initiative
Rental Licensing Program
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
We believe that it would be reasonable for the Town Council to schedule a Work Session for the purpose of further discussing the existing and projected conditions in the northeast section of Chapel Hill. We suggest that the Council consider scheduling such a session at the beginning of January, either early in the evening of an already scheduled meeting, or as a stand-alone evening. We also believe that it would be reasonable for the Council to instruct the Town Manager not to schedule any public hearings on rezoning requests in the areas described in the petitions until the Council has conducted the Work Session.
We note that issues raised by the petitions are being addressed in the context of the other initiatives underway in this area, including the Development Ordinance revisions and transportation improvements associated with Weaver Dairy Road and the US 15-501 superstreet.
We also note that of the five pending developments in this area, three are seeking rezoning. We believe that if the Council concludes that conditions are not suitable for development at intensities higher than currently allowed by existing zoning, the Council can deny the rezoning requests. For the two proposals that match existing land use plans and existing zoning, we do not believe that a moratorium could be justified.
Three resolutions are attached. The first, Resolution A, would schedule a Work Session. The second, Resolution B, would instruct the Town Manager not to schedule any public hearings on rezoning applications in the areas described in the petitions until the Council conducts such a Work Session. We recommend that the Council adopt these two resolutions.
The third attached resolution, Resolution C, would call a Public Hearing on a moratorium. Resolution C includes blanks that would need to be filled in to set the boundaries of the area to be considered for a moratorium and set a date for a public hearing. The resolution would also direct the Manager to provide the required advertisements and mailed notices to owners of property within the area proposed for the moratorium and adjacent thereto, as well as to prepare an evaluation of the proposed moratorium. If the Council wishes to call this hearing, it will need to identify the boundaries of the area under consideration for a moratorium and set a date for the public hearing.
RESOLUTION A
A RESOLUTION CALLING A WORK SESSION TO DISCUSS ISSUES RAISED BY PETITIONS (2001-09-24/R-9a)
WHEREAS, the Town Council has received requests for study of areas in the northeast sections of Chapel Hill, as described in a neighborhood petition received May 21, 2001, a petition received June 25, 2001, from the Transportation Advisory Board, and a petition received June 25, 2001, from the Community Design Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to have an opportunity to review information describing current and projected conditions in these areas;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council schedules a Work Session for January ___, 2002, at _____ p.m., to review such information.
This the 24th day of September, 2001.
RESOLUTION B
A RESOLUTION WITH INSTRUCTIONS TO TOWN MANAGER REGARDING SCHEDULING PUBLIC HEARINGS (2001-09-24/R-9b)
WHEREAS, the Town Council has received requests for study of areas in the northeast sections of Chapel Hill, as described in a neighborhood petition received May 21, 2001, a petition received June 25, 2001, from the Transportation Advisory Board, and a petition received June 25, 2001, from the Community Design Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council wishes to have an opportunity to review information describing current and projected conditions in these areas, and has scheduled a Work Session for this purpose;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council instructs the Town Manager not to schedule Public Hearings on rezoning applications for the areas described in the petitions until after the Town Council has conducted this Work Session.
This the 24th day of September, 2001.
RESOLUTION C
A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO ESTABLISH A MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA OF THE US HWY. 15/501 AND ERWIN ROAD AND DOBBINS ROAD IN CHAPEL HILL (2001-09-24/R-9c)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council calls a public hearing for insert date here, to consider a moratorium on development within the Hwy. 15/501/Erwin Road/Dobbins Road area of Chapel Hill, more specifically defined as follows:
(INSERT DESCRIPTION OF AREA HERE)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to prepare the advertisement and provide notices required by law to property owners regarding the Council’s consideration of this moratorium and the public hearing.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to prepare an evaluation of the moratorium on development proposal and to provide the report to the Planning Board and the Town Council.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council invites all interested persons to attend the public hearing and to offer comment on the need and justification for a moratorium on development within this area.
This the 24th day of September, 2001.