PUBLIC HEARING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 17, 1996 AT 7:00 P.M.

Mayor Waldorf called the hearing to order at 7:00 p.m. Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Richard Franck, Lee Pavão, and Barbara Powell. Also in attendance were Acting Town Manager Florentine Miller, Assistant Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Planning Director Roger Waldon, and Long Range Planner J.B. Culpepper.

Item 1 Preliminary Plat Approval Request for Zapata Subdivision

Persons wishing to testify in the matter were sworn by the Deputy Town Clerk. Acting Manager Florentine Miller presented a brief overview of the request. Planning Director Roger Waldon described the location of the property under consideration. Mr. Waldon indicated that the proposed subdivision would contain single-family homes. He also noted that no water or sewer service was currently available to this property. Mr. Waldon said that since public water and sewer lines were located so far away, alternate means to serve this property might need to be considered. He also said that the developer proposed that the initial seven lots in the subdivision be served by individual water wells and septic systems. Mr. Waldon stated that the developer had expressed his willingness to install dry water and sewer lines, so that this infrastructure would be in place when water and sewer mains became available in the future. Mr. Waldon stated that neither the Orange Water and Sewer Authority staff or Board had agreed to the developer's proposal. He also said that the developer proposed that the main entry street to the property be designed to connect to the property to the north.

John Hanson, the applicant, said that existing homes on the site currently used well water and septic systems and had experienced no water or septic problems to date. He also said that the cost of extending water and sewer service to this site was great, and was not practical for a seven lot subdivision. Mr. Hanson stated that although the property was bordered to the west and the north by properties having existing sewer lines, costs for possibly accessing these lines were prohibitive. He also said that the absence of readily available water and sewer service to the area would help to keep the density of the area very low. Mr. Hanson requested that the Council approve his application as soon as possible based on the information presented this evening.

Mary Reeb, Planning Board Chair, said that the Planning Board had voted 5 to 1 to approve this application with conditions. She stated that the Board agreed that well and septic tank systems might be the only way to provide water and sewer service to the proposed subdivision.

Council Member Julie Andresen asked Mr. Waldon whether the nearest sewer line was indeed about 2,000 feet away. Mr. Waldon said this was correct, adding that this distance presented service access problems. Council Member Andresen inquired whether the proposed greenway might also serve as a bikeway. Mr. Waldon said he believed that the greenway would be suitable as a pedestrian trail, but not a bikeway. Council Member Andresen inquired about site topographic constraints due to steep slopes in the area. Mr. Waldon said special construction techniques would be used to mitigate slope-related concerns.

Council Member Brown stated that one landowner abutting the subject property had indicated his parcel would be landlocked if the proposed development were approved. Mr. Waldon said he did not believe that the property would be landlocked, based on the information provided by the applicant.

Mayor Waldorf requested that a transcript of this evening's discussion should be forwarded to the Orange Water and Sewer Authority for the Board's use when they considered the developer's application.

Council Member Andresen said she believed that any developments proposed which did not propose the use of public water and sewer infrastructure should be examined carefully during Council deliberations.

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING UNTIL FEBRUARY 12, 1996. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 2 Preliminary Plat Approval Request for Knollwood Subdivision

Persons wishing to testify in the matter were sworn by the Deputy Town Clerk. Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper presented a brief overview of the proposal. She said that if the preliminary plat were approved, it was anticipated that single-family homes would be constructed in the subdivision. Ms. Culpepper said key issues related to the application were roadway width and the proposed payment-in-lieu of providing an on-site recreation area.

Greg Shephard, the applicant's representative, stated that the Transportation Board and Planning Board had both supported the applicant's proposal. Mr. Shephard said that the applicant was requesting permission to make a payment-in-lieu of providing an

on-site recreation area.

Mary Reeb, Planning Board Chair, stated that the Board had voted

6-3 to recommend approval of the applicant's proposal.

Bruce Guild, a resident of the White Oak neighborhood, said his neighborhood supported the proposal as a good use of the property.

Mr. Guild said if the payment-in-lieu arrangement were approved, it could be use to make improvements to an existing half-acre lot earmarked for a recreation area in the White Oak neighborhood.

Council Member Evans inquired who owned the half-acre lot. Mr. Guild stated that the lot was owned by the developers of the White Oak neighborhood. He stated that although the ownership was supposed to have reverted to the homeowners association, this never occurred because the developed never sought formation of the association. Noting that the subject parcel was in tax delinquency and was on the verge of being sold, Mr. Guild requested that the Council give serious consideration to his proposal.

Council Member Brown asked how the matter of back taxes could be addressed. Mr. Guild stated that his neighborhood was in the process of forming a homeowners association in order to take possession of the half-acre lot. He stated that the homeowners association would likely have to pay back taxes for the property.

Peter Moody, a neighborhood resident, said he concurred with Mr. Guild and requested the Town's help regarding the proposed recreation area.

Council Member Franck requested staff comment on Mr. Guild's proposal. Ms. Culpepper said staff would evaluate the proposal.

Council Member Franck inquired how much the payment-in-lieu amount would be. Ms. Culpepper said staff could formulate an estimate, using guidelines in the Town's Development Ordinance.

Council Member Andresen said she would support the homeowners proposal to develop a recreation area and asked the staff to evaluate the proposal.

Mr. Shephard said he concurred with the stipulations proposed in Resolution A.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO FEBRUARY 12, 1996. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO FORWARD TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION THE REQUEST FOR A PAYMENT-IN-LIEU OF ON-SITE RECREATION AREA FOR THE HALF-ACRE LOT CURRENTLY EXISTING IN THE WHITE OAK NEIGHBORHOOD. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 3 Request for Rezoning of Dobbins Property

Mayor Waldorf stated that Dr. Dobbins, the applicant, had asked to make a statement before the hearing began.

Dr. Jimmy Dobbins made a short statement expressing his desire to withdraw his application for rezoning of the subject property. He stated that when it became clear he would be responsible for the family property, he had many ideas about how it might be utilized. Dr. Dobbins stated that because of the intense objections of neighbors, as well as Town staff's recommendation that the proposed rezoning was not desirable because it did not meet the purposes of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, he requested that the Council allow him to withdraw his request for rezoning of the property. Dr. Dobbins proposed that the Planning Department study this property and offer alternative uses for it.

Alice Ingram indicated that she agreed with Dr. Dobbins' request to withdraw the rezoning request. Ms. Ingram said she hoped that members of the older neighborhoods in Town, including historic districts, could come together and discuss options for use of land such as Dr. Dobbins' property. Ms. Ingram stated that if their houses were destroyed, they would not be able to rebuild based on current standards.

Council Member Brown said she believed that the Historic District Commission was currently addressing the issue raised by Ms. Ingram.

Mayor Waldorf stated that the application to withdraw was accepted by acclamation of the Council.

Item 4 Request for Special Use Permit for Southern Assisted

Living Group Care Home

Persons wishing to testify in the matter were sworn by the Deputy Town Clerk.

Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper stated that the applicant proposed to build a three-story, 32,148 square-foot building to be used as an assisted living group care home on a 1.6 acre lot at the intersection of Lanark Drive and Hayes Road in the Glen Lennox area. She stated that key issues were the function and appearance of the stormwater detention pond and potential noise from traffic on Fordham Boulevard. Ms. Culpepper said the applicant was proposing to construct a detention basin in the southern part of the site where the first inch of rainwater runoff would be retained. She stated that the gravel detention basin would be landscaped with hedges around the perimeter to serve as screening.

David Ripperton, the project architect, gave a brief description of the proposal. He said the proposal included thirty-two parking spaces, a detention pond, and walkways to and from the building. Mr. Ripperton said the property was adjacent to residential property. He also said screening would be provided on the property to present a courtyard effect. Mr. Ripperton stated a walkway connector was proposed to the existing Glen Lennox shopping area.

He noted that many existing trees would remain on the site, although some trees would need to be removed. Mr. Ripperton said the building would be screened entirely along the U.S. 15-501 side of the building, as well as the detention pond. He also said that thirty-two parking spaces were proposed, although only fifteen employees would be working in the facility at any one time. Mr. Ripperton stated that employees would be encouraged to use the bus system or car pools, lessening traffic impacts on neighborhoods.

He also stated that proposed project conformed to all Town development standards.

Mary Reeb, Planning Board Chair, stated that the Board had voted unanimously (8-0) to approve the development proposal.

Council Member Andresen asked Mr. Ripperton how many residents would be accommodated in the proposed facility. Mr. Ripperton stated that the facility would have sixty-two beds and approximately thirty employees, with only fifteen employees present at any one time. Council Member Andresen inquired about the proposed points of access. Mr. Ripperton said the two points were located off NC 54, near Village Family Medicine and Fire Station Number Two on Hamilton Road, and off U.S. 15-501. Council Member Andresen said she believed that two points of access were needed.

Council Member Andresen also expressed concern about potential runoff problems. She requested that the Council consider requiring the applicant to maintain the detention pond so that flooding in adjacent areas would be minimized. Council Member Andresen requested that the amenities referenced by the applicant, such as the proposed walkway to the Glen Lennox shopping area be included in the special use permit's conditions of approval.

Council Member Evans said she believed that the building's appearance would be enhanced if gables were added to the U.S. 15-501 side of the building. She inquired whether the Appearance Commission had reviewed the proposal. Mr. Ripperton said yes. Council Member Evans said she favored having the sidewalk extend all the way down the property line. Mr. Ripperton said the applicant would consider this possibility.

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO FEBRUARY 12, 1996. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

Item 5 Preliminary Plat Modification Request for Forest Creek

Subdivision, Phase II

Persons wishing to testify in the matter were sworn by the Deputy Town Clerk.

Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper stated that in 1988 the Council had approved a twenty-eight lot subdivision on about 32.5 acres of land located at the corner of Piney Mountain and Eastwood Roads. She noted that the developer had proceeded with construction plans and filed a plat in 1989. Ms. Culpepper said that when the developer, J. P. Goforth, died in the spring of 1990, it was discovered that the letter of credit held by the Town was not sufficient to ensure the completion of the required public improvements including construction of internal roadways and off-site improvements to existing public roadways. She also stated that representatives of the Goforth estate had worked with the Town to develop a plan for phasing the development of the subdivision, and subsequently all internal roadways were constructed and all but four lots were sold. Ms. Culpepper indicated these four lots were not to be sold until the remaining public improvements were completed. She stated that in order for the four lots to be marketable, outstanding liens needed to be paid off. Ms. Culpepper also stated that although the liens had been paid, the remaining funds set aside in 1988 for public improvements were not sufficient to complete the public improvements agreed to by the developer in the subdivision's original approval.

Tom Heffner, the agent for Goforth Properties, stated that he had worked for quite some time to come up with the best possible proposal for this property. Mr. Heffner said he proposed that Piney Mountain Road be improved from Collinson Drive north along the site's frontage and that Eastwood Road be improved to one-half of a 33-foot-wide cross-section with curb and guttering along the site's frontage excluding the frontage of lot sixteen.

Mary Reeb, Planning Board Chair, indicated that the Planning Board had voted 5 to 3 to approve the proposal, with a condition that the sidewalk down Piney Mountain Road be extended as far as possible, and that Piney Mountain Road not be widened.

Robert Avery, a resident of Collinson Drive, stated that he and his neighbors had met with the developer to discover the best way to develop the balance of the proposed subdivision. Mr. Avery said he objected to the Town's proposal to widen Piney Mountain Road, because it would add a third travel lane in front of his subdivision. Mr. Avery said the Town's proposal for a bus pulloff was not included in the original proposal. Mr. Avery also said he felt that the pulloff might create an unsafe intersection. Mr. Avery asked that the road be maintained at its existing width.

Claire Prudhomme, a resident of Collinson Drive, said she believed that placing a second sidewalk along the site's frontage would be redundant and unnecessary. She indicated that pedestrian traffic in the area was very light. Ms. Prudhomme suggested that funds be used to improve existing sidewalks and curb and guttering.

Robert Nau, 100 Collinson Drive, said he was concerned about preserving the existing landscape buffer along Piney Mountain Road, particularly in front of the proposed development. He said that south of Collinson Drive and farther north, there was a significant dropoff. He also said there was another dropoff further north, which would make widening the roadway very difficult. Mr. Nau stated that widening the road would mean moving a power pole which would necessitate removing a rather large beech tree which he would like to see retained. Mr. Nau also said that removing a large number of trees during development would be undesirable and he was concerned that decisions not be made that would be greatly out of character for the existing neighborhood.

Bob Gilgor, 204 Collinson Drive, speaking for the Forest Creek II subdivision neighbors, indicated all of the residents had signed a petition expressing their support for Resolution B. He said the neighbors were opposed to having a second sidewalk along Eastwood Road because the existing sidewalk was rarely used and was unnecessary, that none of the homes in Forest Creek II subdivision would face Eastwood Road and the proposed sidewalk would not connect to another sidewalk. Mr. Gilgor said two sidewalks were not currently available on other area streets. Mr. Gilgor also said he favored the inclusion of curb and guttering.

Steven Hall stated he would like to see sidewalks extended all along Piney Mountain Road. Mr. Hall said he believed the proposed bus turnoff in the Town's plan would be a safety hazard and should not be included. Mr. Hall also said a bus pull off would block access to the neighborhood at an important access point. Mr. Hall indicated his desire to retain the existing large beech tree referenced earlier by Mr. Gilgor.

Laura Gaulden, 202 Collinson Drive, stated that the number of bus riders from her neighborhood would not justify widening the road to provide a bus turnaround/pulloff. She stated that widening Piney Mountain Road was both expensive and unnecessary. Ms. Gaulden said she would prefer that the money be spent on the construction of a sidewalk along Piney Mountain Road.

Council Member Brown asked whether there were sufficient funds to address the stipulations in Resolution B, which seemed to be favored by area residents. Mr. Heffner said he believed there was sufficient money to complete the proposed stipulations in Resolution A and B.

Council Member Capowski said he was surprised that there was no recommendation for a bicycle path to extend to the new high school on Weaver Dairy Road. He asked Ms. Culpepper whether it would be possible to provide some public funds for such a bicycle path. Ms. Culpepper said staff could investigate this possibility.

Council Member Andresen urged Council Members to keep the comments of neighborhood residents in mind as they evaluated the development proposal. She concurred that an additional sidewalk along Eastwood Road was unnecessary and that the large beech tree should be retained, if possible. Council Member Andresen also agreed that widening Piney Mountain Road was not necessary and requested more Council discussion about the proposed bus pulloff.

Council Member Brown said it was her understanding that the proposed sidewalk would necessitate removal of the beech tree and relocation of power poles. Ms. Culpepper said although she did not believe that the proposed sidewalk would jeopardize the tree or necessitate the relocation of power poles, she would check into these matters further.

Emphasizing the importance of pedestrians having a safe area to travel, Council Member Evans said she favored construction of a retaining wall and sidewalks if funding for these items were available.

Mr. Heffner agreed that the provision of curb and guttering and a sidewalk toward Airport Road would be desirable, but would be quite costly. He stated that cost considerations were the primary reason that these items were not included in the Manager's or applicant's proposals. Mr. Heffner asked the Council to look closely at his proposal and said he would work with staff to explore alternatives.

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVÃO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER POWELL, TO RECESS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO FEBRUARY 12, 1996. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).

The hearings concluded at 9:20 p.m.