AGENDA #9c(2)
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Follow-up from January 23, 2002 Work Session
DATE: January 28, 2002
This memorandum responds to issues and questions raised during a Council Work Session on January 23, 2002. A set of resolutions are attached that would alternatively:
Three petitions were presented to the Town Council during May-June of 2001, all asking that the Council consider enacting a moratorium on development approvals in the northeast area of Chapel Hill.
On September 24, 2001, the Council adopted two resolutions: 1) Calling a work session to discuss issues raised by petitions requesting study of areas in the northeast section of Chapel Hill; and 2) Instructing 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 the work session.
On January 14, the Town Council reviewed work on a 2nd Draft of a proposed new Development Ordinance, and requested that the Town Manager propose a series of work sessions and community workshops between now and June, to allow the Council and the community to better understand and evaluate what new regulations are being proposed.
On January 23, at its Work Session on the Northeast Area, Council members discussed the desirability of looking Town wide, not just for the Northeast Area, at the schedule for review of development applications, and to consider this in the context of the Council’s schedule for consideration of change to development regulations.
I have asked our Planning Director, Roger Waldon, to prepare a summary of the key issues that were raised on January 23, and to offer comments and responses where possible. Given the limited time between January 23 and tonight’s discussion, the set of responses is not as comprehensive and fully developed as is normally the case with memoranda that we present to the Town Council. However, given the Council’s need to continue discussion on this topic at tonight’s meeting, we considered it appropriate to offer what information we can. Mr. Waldon’s report is attached.
In addition, several questions were addressed specifically to the Town Attorney. His response is provided in a separate memorandum.
The Council specifically asked for staff comment on four issues:
Exemptions: If a moratorium were to be enacted, could certain types of projects be exempted from delay? (E.g., affordable housing, UNC applications, school applications.)
Staff Comment: We do not believe that this question can be answered in general, without knowing what kind of moratorium is under consideration, for what areas, for what reasons, and for what duration. These are the kinds of questions that would be addressed in a public hearing on a proposed moratorium, should the Council decide to call such a hearing. We note that a memorandum has been prepared for tonight’s meeting by the Town Attorney that discusses what is possible and required in considering a moratorium.
What applications are in the “pipeline,” and at what stage of review?
Staff Comment: Please see Mr. Waldon’s report, which contains a summary of pending applications for Planning Board or Council action, indicating how far each has gone through the application review process.
What does the upcoming Public Hearing Schedule look like, with and without a moratorium proposal?
Staff Comment: We offer three alternative Public Hearing Schedules for review, shown in an attached table. The first schedule shows what has been tentatively scheduled for hearing dates, February through September. This tentative schedule was prepared prior to the Council’s Work Session on January 23. A second schedule shows how the Council’s work schedule can be arranged to focus maximum attention on the proposed new Development Ordinance. We recommend that the Council select this approach. Resolution A is attached which would do so. The third schedule shows a calendar that might result from the Council’s initiation of the process to consider a moratorium. Resolution B would set this process in motion.
What options might the Council consider for addressing the issue of pending applications with respect to proposed changes to regulations?
Staff Comment: The Town Attorney’s memorandum to the Council tonight discusses the issue of moratoria, in general. We note again that it is difficult to state with any accuracy what might happen or what options might be available in the absence of a specific moratorium proposal. However, we offer the general opinion that it is reasonable, when considering a substantial change to development regulations, to give highest priority to discussion of those proposed changes. Giving priority to ordinance discussions may result in delay of applications making their way to a public hearing calendar, as is shown in the attached table of alternative calendar options.
We believe that there are three alternative options available for the Council to consider tonight:
We note that possible moratorium options could be limited (e.g., no rezonings for a certain period of time) to comprehensive (e.g., no building permits issued for a certain period of time). We refer to the Town Attorney’s memorandum on tonight’s agenda for discussion of moratorium options.
After review of the current circumstances, and in consideration of the Council’s discussion at its January 23 Work Session, we recommend that the Council decide to adjust the work schedule and public hearing calendar to maximize attention devoted to review of new development regulations. Adoption of Resolution A would do so.
ATTACHMENTS
Each of these items has had a Public Hearing(s) opened that has been recessed to a specific date:
Europa items – February 11, 2002
Larkspur Cluster Subdivision – February 25, 2002
Orange United Methodist Church – February 11, 2002
Orange Regional Landfill – February 11, 2002
We attach two tables, immediately following. The first lists the status of applications that would require final action by the Town Council; the second lists the status of applications that would require final action by the Planning Board. We note for each which steps in the process have already been completed.
ATTACHMENTS
Pending Applications for Review by Council
(prepared January 25, 2002)
A RESOLUTION SCHEDULING WORK ITEMS FOR TOWN COUNCIL CONSIDERATION (2002-01-28/R-10a)
WHEREAS, the Town Council has initiated a revision of Chapel Hill’s Development Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a draft Ordinance was prepared for review in spring, 2001, and a 2nd Draft has been prepared and is currently under review; and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined that careful review of the current draft, by the Council and the community, is necessary in order to fully understand and evaluate the proposed changes to development regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Council considers it to be a high priority to give attention to revising the Development Ordinance, in order to assure that regulations reflect community values as articulated in the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council establishes the following calendar for review of the 2nd Draft Development Ordinance and other changes to regulations that are currently pending before the Council:
|
Date of Hearing
|
Item for Review |
|
February 18, 2002
|
Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Small House Ordinance Morgan Creek Neighborhood Designation |
|
March 18, 2002 |
Development Ordinance Work Session |
|
April 15, 2002 |
Development Ordinance Work Session |
|
May 20, 2002 |
Development Ordinance Work Session |
|
June 17, 2002 |
Sign Ordinance Changes Review of Projects with Expedited Processing Status |
|
September 18, 2002 |
Development Ordinance 3rd Draft |
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council directs the Town Manager to arrange for the following series of meetings:
· A series of 7 Council Work Sessions, each 90 minutes in length, each scheduled at 5:30 pm on the date of a regularly-scheduled 7 pm Council meeting. Each of the first six sessions would have the format of a 45-minute presentation on a section of the second draft, followed by a 45-minute discussion period. The final Work Session would be a wrap-up.
· Three citizen forums, each two hours in length, 7-9 pm, to present and discuss the same information that will be presented to the Town Council. The first forum will be scheduled after the first three Council Work Sessions, the second citizen forum after the next three work sessions.
· Two workshops to focus on infill development and redevelopment and residential areas. The session would be scheduled from 9 am-12 pm on a Saturday morning.
This the 28th day of January, 2002.
Amended 1-29-02.
Resolution B
A RESOLUTION CALLING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A POSSIBLE DEVELOPMENT MORATORIUM (2002-01-28/R-10b)
WHEREAS, the Town Council has initiated a revision of Chapel Hill’s Development Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a draft Ordinance was prepared for review in spring, 2001, and a 2nd Draft has been prepared and is currently under review; and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined that careful review of the current draft, by the Council and the community, is necessary in order to fully understand and evaluate the proposed changes to development regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Council considers it to be a high priority to give attention to revising the Development Ordinance, in order to assure that regulations reflect community values as articulated in the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Council wishes to consider whether current conditions deem it appropriate to call a moratorium on new development until the regulatory changes under consideration are enacted;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council calls a Public Hearing for March 18, 2002, at 7:00 pm in the Town Hall Council Chamber, for the purpose of considering a proposal to enact a temporary development ordinance establishing a Town-wide moratorium on issuance of any permits or approvals of applications for development with the exception of building permits for new single family houses on existing lots or additions to existing single family or two-family structures on existing lots.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this moratorium proposal shall be referred to the Town Manager and Planning Board for recommendation.
This the 28th day of January, 2002.
ATTACHMENT 1
Alternative Work Schedule Options
|
Date of Hearing
|
Current Schedule
(Option 1) |
Focus on Changing Development Ordinance (Option 2) |
Call Hearing to Consider Moratorium
(Option 3)
|
|
February 18
|
Schools APF Ordinance Small House Ordinance Meadowmont Condos Cross Creek Subdivision Morgan Creek Neighborhood Designation
|
Schools APF Ordinance Small House Ordinance Morgan Creek Neighborhood Designation
|
Schools APF Ordinance Small House Ordinance Morgan Creek Neighborhood Designation
|
|
March 18
|
Rosemary St Mixed Use SUP Other pending applications |
Development Ordinance Work Session |
Moratorium Public Hearing |
|
April 15
|
Sign Ordinance Changes Other pending applications |
Development Ordinance Work Session |
Devt. Ordinance Work Session |
|
May 20
|
Devt. Ordinance 3rd Draft |
Development Ordinance Work Session |
Devt. Ordinance Work Session |
|
June 17
|
Other pending applications |
Sign Ordinance Changes Expedited Status Items |
Sign Ordinance Changes
|
|
September 18
|
Other pending applications |
Development Ordinance 3rd Draft |
Devt. Ordinance 3rd Draft
|