PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CHAPEL HILL TOWN COUNCIL

                                        MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1996 AT 7:00 P.M.

 

Mayor Waldorf called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

Council Members present were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Richard Franck, Lee Pavao, and Edith Wiggins.  Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Manager Sonna Loewenthal, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Engineering Director George Small, and Assistant to the Manager Greg Feller.

 

                     Item 1a - Resolution Opposing Proposed North Carolina Bond Issue

                                                    for Highway and Road Projects

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown gave a brief overview of the resolution before the Council, stating she and Council Member Franck were concerned about the bond issue before the voters because it contained no funds for maintenance for proposed roads or roads already built.  She noted that the proposed roads are already funded in the Highway Trust Fund and passage of the bond issue will only add interest expenses to the cost of the proposed roads.  Mayor Pro tem Brown stated that the bond issue does not contain provisions for mass transit, bicycles, or sidewalks.  She said that because of these concerns, she and Council Member Franck ask that the Council adopt Resolution R-1.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-1.

 

Council Member Evans stated she wished her letter on this issue be added to the record of tonight's meeting.  The Council agreed by acclamation.

 

Council Member Capowski stated his disappointment that the proposed highway bond included no funds for alternative transportation, but said the Town must continuously negotiate with the Department of Transportation concerning roads, cars, bikes, pedestrians, sidewalks, traffic lights, and other transportation related issues.  He said there is a procedure in place for this negotiation through our participation on the Transit Advisory Commission, with Mayor Waldorf as the Town's representative.  Council Member Capowski said Mayor Waldorf needed the Council's full support and the Council's credibility in order to carry the clout necessary to negotiate.  He stated he believes passage of this resolution may weaken Chapel Hill's ability to negotiate with the Department of Transportation, and that it is not appropriate for the Town to take a position on the bonds, either for or against.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO TABLE RESOLUTION R-1.  THE MOTION FAILED 3-6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CAPOWSKI, EVANS, AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE.

 

Council Member Andresen said the Council was elected to make decisions on behalf of citizens, and she does not feel that just because the Council takes a position on this issue it will weaken our position with the Department of Transportation.

 

Council Member Franck said in the past it had been difficult to negotiate with the Department of Transportation, and did not believe the Council's adoption of the resolution would have a negative impact on our ability to conduct business with them.

 

Council Member Wiggins said the voters would have their chance to comment on the issue at the polls, and agrees that it may not be appropriate for the Council to act on this issue.  She added it may make it more difficult for our legislative delegation to conduct business on the Town's behalf if the Council passes the resolution opposing the bond issue.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown reminded the Council that all of the roads on the proposed bond issue were already funded through the Highway Trust Fund.

 

Council Member Evans said in the past the Council had had some very constructive dealings with the Department of Transportation, and felt it was fair to say passage of this resolution would damage the Council's relationship with them.

 

Council Member Capowski offered a friendly amendment, proposing that the second "WHEREAS" clause be deleted.  The Mover and Seconder did not agree.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO DELETE THE CLAUSE AS NOTED ABOVE.  THE MOTION FAILED 4-5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CAPOWSKI, EVANS, WALDORF AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE.

 

Mayor Waldorf offered another friendly amendment, suggesting that in the second "WHEREAS" clause, the phrase "is an expensive waste of taxpayer money, costing" be replaced with the words "would cost".  The Mover and Seconder concurred.

 

THE MOTION, AS AMENDED, WAS ADOPTED 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS VOTING NAY.

 

A RESOLUTION OPPOSING THE $950 MILLION STATE HIGHWAY BOND (96-11-4/R-1)

 

WHEREAS, the North Carolina General Assembly has placed a referendum for the issuance of $950 Million in bonds for highway construction on the November 5, 1996 ballot; and

 

WHEREAS, this proposed bond would cost $500 million in interest payments to build roads which are already planned and funded under the Highway Trust Fund; and

 

WHEREAS, this proposed bond includes no money for public transit, bikeways or pedestrian facilities and precedes the issuing of policy recommendations by the Governor’s Transit 2001 Commission; and

 

WHEREAS, most of the money will be used to construct urban loop highways, which increase urban sprawl and its detrimental side-effects, such as increased air pollution, loss of farmland and open space, and decreased viability of public transit; and

 

WHEREAS, the Town of Chapel Hill, in order to achieve its vision of the future of Chapel Hill, requires a partnership with the North Carolina Department of Transportation which is based on a recognition of the importance of alternate modes of travel, and the proposed bond continues the current practices of NCDOT of funding highways to the virtual exclusion of other modes;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council opposes the passage of the $950 Million State highway bonds, and urges all citizens of Chapel Hill to vote against these bonds in the General Election on November 5, 1996.

 

This the 4th day of November, 1996.

 

                              Item 1b - Resolution Supporting the Proposed Bond Issue

                                                             for Public Education

 

Mayor Waldorf remarked she believed it was important that the Council go on record in support of this bond issue, as it would bring about $17 million into Orange County for school capital projects, with about $11 million going to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro schools.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-2.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED STATE BOND ISSUE FOR SCHOOL CAPITAL PROJECTS (96-11-4/R-2)

 

WHEREAS, the voters will have the opportunity on November 5, 1996, to approve $1.8 billion of State bonds for public school capital projects; and

 

WHEREAS, the proposed State school bonds would provide a total of $17 million for school capital projects for the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools and County Schools, and would thereby be a significant source of funding to meet County-wide school needs; and

 

WHEREAS, the State bonds would be an alternative to raising local funds to pay for school projects;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council supports and encourages the voters of Chapel Hill to vote in favor of the proposed State-wide school bonds on the ballot for the November 5, 1996, elections.

 

This the 4th day of November, 1996.

 

                          Item 2 - Continuation of Public Hearings on Southern Village

                                                        Development Applications

 

Town Manager Cal Horton commented that because this item had been before the Council in the past and that actions and modifications had taken place, he has requested that Planning Director Roger Waldon present a detailed overview of the items before the Council this evening, commenting on the key issues as well as giving a general review of the entire project.

 

Planning Director Waldon stated his presentation would touch on five points: a brief description of the context, the items before the Council this evening, the changes made to these items since the last public hearing, several key issues, and the recommended resolutions before the Council.

 

Mr. Waldon stated in 1993, the Council approved a Master Plan for a village development on the south side of Town, known as Southern Village, as well as the first set of Special Use Permits.  He said that some time ago, a package of eight requests, discussed in Reports 1 through 8, were received requesting some changes and additions to the Southern Village development.  Mr. Waldon said the first four reports dealt with modifications of actions taken by the Council in 1993: Report 1 was a request for modification to the Master Land Use Plan, Report 2 was a request for modification of the Special Use Permit for the northeast tract, Report 3 was a request for modification of the Special Use Permit for the Village Core, and Report 4 was a request for modification of the Special Use Permit for the apartments under construction.  He stated that last May and June the Council held public hearings on these requests and the four new requests, known as Reports 5 through 8, for the western half of the tract.  Mr. Waldon said last month the Council acted on the first four requests, and these actions have been incorporated where appropriate in the items before the Council this evening.

 

Mr. Waldon said that the second set of four reports requests the following:  Report 5 requests rezoning portions of the West Tract from R-2 to R-5-C, Report 6 requests a new Special Use Permit for the West Tract neighborhoods, Report 7 requests a new Special Use Permit for a recreation center, and Report 8 requests a new Special Use Permit for the West Tract multi-family housing.

 

Mr. Waldon stated the Council had previously approved rezoning for the Village Core as well as the eastern side of Southern Village.  He said the original request asked that zoning be put in place on the west side to allow development similar to what was taking place on the east side.  Mr. Waldon remarked that because of concern expressed at previous public hearings, the developer tapered the density of multi-family development on the fringes of the West Tract to reflect a more single-family type of development, and moved the more dense townhouse type of housing further into the West tract, leaving the fringe areas at their current R-2 zoning.  Mr. Waldon stated the Manager's recommendation is to adopt the rezoning request.

 

Mr. Waldon stated a request for a Special Use Permit for the West Tract is included in tonight's materials.  He stated that what is proposed is a pair of roads that would cross Fan Branch and have a development form similar to what is taking place in the northeast tract.  Mr. Waldon commented that what is proposed is a set of townhouses and a village district surrounding by single-family areas.  He said there had been extensive discussion concerning use of ponds versus a central lake, and the current proposal reflects the pond option recently approved by the Council.  Mr. Waldon said another major change from the previous proposal is a shifting of the location of the central building on this tract, which will be a small retail shop serving the recreational needs of the area.  He commented that the pool and tennis facility would be private, but the multi-purpose field, basketball and volleyball courts would be public in nature, owned by the homeowners' association but not requiring membership to use.  Mr. Waldon noted that the multi-family site is adjacent to the Village Core, and plans call for the buildings to front the street, with parking courts hidden behind and a few buildings facing the playing fields and greenway.

 

Mr. Waldon stated that some key issues noted in the previous public hearings included concern about where in Southern Village roads would be connected to existing streets, and where it would have roads that stub out to property that might be developed in the future.  He noted that there are four access points to Southern Village, two on US 15-501, one that is proposed from the north that would connect with a phase of Cobbleridge and continued on to Culbreth Road, and another one proposed to the west.

 

Mr. Waldon said in terms of density, much discussion had taken place in the previous public hearings.  He reiterated the key points are the development would have a maximum of 1388 dwelling units on 312 acres, with an overall density of 4.4 units per acre.

 

Mr. Waldon stated that Ordinance O-5a before the Council tonight would rezone portions of the West Tract from R-2 to R-5-C, and staff recommends approval.  He stated that Resolution R-6a would approve a new Special Use Permit for the West Tract neighborhoods, noting this last item was the most comprehensive and complex of the items to be considered.  He stated that a memorandum from him was distributed to the Council early this evening which described four technical corrections which needed to be included in Resolution R 6a: (1) on page 19, condition 2d - "Non residential" should be changed to "Commercial" in two places; (2) page 22, condition 7b - "1)" should be deleted, and the phrase "west of Fan Branch" added to the end of the sentence; (3) page 25, condition 10a, third sentence - the word "may" replaced with "shall"; the phrase "which affect the entire development" replaced with "for which the owners' association retains ownership"; and (4) page 33, condition 31 - delete the entire condition 31 and replace with a new condition 31 which reads "Landscaping Around Permanent Detention Ponds: That landscaping approved by the Town Manager shall be provided around the permanent detention ponds, and that such landscaping shall be in accordance with local and State watershed protection regulations."

 

Mr. Waldon stated that one other issue was the condition regarding road widths in the West Tract.  He said Brookgreen Road comes out of the Village Core and crosses Fan Branch, which serves to provide access to much of the West Tract.  Mr. Waldon stated this is a 37-foot road which continues on to the recreation area, and at issue is what should its width be from there.  He remarked that the Manager's recommendation is that it continue to be a 37-foot road until it connects with another road in the western tract, at which point it will become a 27-foot roadway as it connects with the Cobbleridge development.  Mr. Waldon noted that after the previous public hearings, the Transportation Board looked closely at this issue and the proposed bus routes.  He said their conclusion was that the entire roadway in this area should be a 27-foot cross-section.  Mr. Waldon said staff believes either width would work, but if the 27-foot cross-section was approved, parking restrictions would be necessary to assure room would be available for buses to maneuver.

 

Mayor Waldorf noted the rezoning application before the Council this evening changing the R-5 zoning to R-5-C would have no practical effect until the accompanying Special Use Permits are approved.  Mr. Waldon said this is correct.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown noted that on page 25, condition 10a, Mr. Waldon's memorandum asked that the word "may" be changed to "shall".  She indicated this occurs throughout many of the conditions, and asked if it was Mr. Waldon's intention that this word be changed only in this condition, or in all cases where it appears.  Mr. Waldon answered that in this case, the intention was to make it clear that the homeowners' association would have maintenance responsibilities for development elements.  He noted that if there are other areas where the word "may" should be replaced with the word "shall" to eliminate ambiguities, he asked that the Council call them to his attention.

 

Council Member Andresen asked what the density of this project would be if the non-buildable areas were included.  Mr. Waldon responded that there are about 60 acres of Resource Conservation District areas which are non-buildable, so if these acres are taken out of the equation the density per acre rises from 4.4 per acre to about 5.5 per acre.

 

Mr. D. R. Bryan, speaking as the applicant, noted that Mr. Waldon had thoroughly covered the issues before the Council this evening.  Mr. Bryan said there are two items they would like to see changed in the stipulations.  He said one is the width of the roads in the West Tract, which they would like to build at a 27-foot width.  Mr. Bryan said they believe the residential streets give quality to the neighborhoods, and 27-foot widths are more appropriate for residential neighborhoods.  He said the second item pertains to a request by the school that the roadway fronting their southern property line, known as Kildaire Road, be dedicated to the school so that it can be used for traffic stacking purposes, in effect making it a private road.  Mr. Bryan said this area would then be covered under the school's Special Use Permit.  He stated that if the road remains a public road, they would pay for half and the school for half.  Mr. Bryan said their request was to delete Kildaire Road from the application, and that the streets be 27 feet wide in the West Tract.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked if Kildaire Road would then serve only the school site and potentially the few condominiums located on the southern edge of the property.  Mr. Bryan said that was correct.  Mayor Waldorf asked if the road widths in the West Tract remain at 27 feet, would that call for parking restrictions on those roads?  Mr. Bryan said yes, that with 35-foot-wide streets parking could be allowed on both sides, but with 27-foot-wide streets parking could be allowed on one side only.

 

Don McCullough, of 103 Braswell Place, stated his property backs Culbreth Road.  He noted that the Council had received a petition from three neighborhoods protesting the stubouts onto Culbreth Road.  Mr. McCullough asked the Council to delay decision on the rezoning until an area-wide study was conducted on traffic impacts on neighboring roads.  He said the traffic study conducted by the applicant does not take into account the development planned at Kent Woodlands or other nearby development, and it appears to understate the traffic projected in 2002.

 

William Coleman, a resident of Smith Level Road and speaking as a member of the Smith Level Road Alliance, stated that if the Council agrees to all the suggested changes, residents in and around Southern Village will benefit.  He stated eight concerns: (1) the plans for the retention ponds should be approved by OWASA, the Army Corps of Engineers, and our Town engineers who are qualified to review these types of plans; (2) the stubouts proposed on page 22 of the materials should be discontinued; (3) the number of roads that cross Fan Branch should be reduced to two; (4) the Council and Town Manager should be held legally responsible if the stormwater management plan fails; (5) the density transfer plan will allow an unlawful amount of buildings on this land and also violates the spirit of the Comprehensive Plan; (6) no administrative exemptions should be allowed in the Resource Conservation District; (7) the Type E landscape buffers are legally sound, but the Alliance's proposal for a 100-foot buffer would make for a better environment for pedestrians and pets walking between Southern Village and Dogwood Acres; and (8) the Council needs more information on potential traffic impacts before a decision is made.

 

Charles Fuller, of 100 Channing in Glenmere, said that for many nearby neighborhoods including his own Culbreth Road is their only exit. Mr. Fuller said he believes the stubout onto Culbreth Road will add to an already dangerous situation.

 

Robin Dorff, a resident of Southbridge, stated that small area plans work only if the Council keeps their focus on the big picture of how proposed development effects neighborhoods, traffic and quality of life in the surrounding areas.  He asked the Council to please consider the effects of this development on the surrounding neighborhoods during their deliberations.  Mr. Dorff also asked that the rezoning of the western tract be delayed until a comprehensive study of traffic and pedestrian issues has been conducted for the entire area.

 

Kevin Foy suggested that the Council consider the items before them tonight comprehensively rather than separately before the rezoning is acted on.  He said the four roads planned to cross Fan Branch violate the Resource Conservation District ordinance.  Mr. Foy asked the Council to keep in mind the intent of the ordinance, and to attempt to minimize the impact that land disturbing activities have.  He asked to Council to research exactly how the four roads will cross the Resource Conservation District, and exactly what steps will be taken to minimize the impact on the area.

 

Julie Coleman urged the Council to reverse their decision on the street stubout on the western border of Southern Village which will cross Ms. Eva Snipes' property to Smith Level Road.  She stated this road would have a major impact on traffic already coming in from Chatham County and other neighborhoods, making this area even more dangerous for bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists.  Ms. Coleman urged the Council to honor their commitment to the adjacent neighborhoods and not allow this stubout.  She said in lieu of this, don't make a decision now, but wait until development actually takes place before a decision is made.

 

Alan Rimer stated he was a member of the Council when Southern Village was first proposed.  He commented he agreed that the roads in the West Tract should be 27 feet wide to maintain the village atmosphere.  Mr. Rimer said that he also agreed that smaller detention ponds where more suitable, but their locations do pose a problem because of their proximity or location in the Resource Conservation District.  He stated that although the Town Manager approves them, they also have to be approved by the N.C. Department of Environmental Management.  Mr. Rimer said he believes these two checks and balances should resolve any concerns.  He said another concern expressed was the possibility that OWASA lines might run through some of these detention ponds, but the developer had indicated this would not be a problem.  Mr. Rimer urged the Council to follow up on this to make sure no problems exist.  He said he believed the new pond system was appropriate and should be accepted by the Council.

 

Livy Ludington stated she was optimistic that the Council would vote tonight to protect the environment.  She asked that the Council remember that the proposed stubout is on the boundary of the Universality Lake Watershed, and that there is a school nearby with children crossing daily.  Ms. Ludington stated that the concept of Southern Village was not to use cars but to promote mass transit, the use of bikeways and pedestrian paths, but now it seems cars are more important than neighborhoods, the watershed, and public safety.  Ms. Ludington asked that the Council make sure the detention ponds function adequately, and that a 100-foot buffer be approved.

 

Dave Cook expressed his concern about the Resource Conservation District ordinance and how it is being interpreted.  He stated he believes it may be weakened by its current interpretation, and the language of the ordinance is being eroded.  Mr. Cook asked that the Council look at this development in terms of how the ordinance will effect this development in ten years because of its current interpretation.

 

Jo Teachman read a letter from Scott Glasser, a resident of Southern Village, which asked the Council to address the issues of the management of steep slopes and erosion, the addition of green space, and safe pathways for bikes and pedestrians along Culbreth Road.  Mr. Glasser's letter stated that the Southern Village Apartments had created a steep slope in his backyard.  His letter commented that he believes a retaining wall may be necessary to prevent erosion, and asked that the Council make clear before approving the applications for Southern Village who will be responsible for maintenance of the steep slopes, erosion control, and stormwater management.  Mr. Glasser's letter went on to say he was concerned that there was not safe passage for bicyclists and pedestrians along Culbreth Road, and recommended that the payment-in-lieu funds be used for greenspace along Culbreth Road.

 

David Latowsky stated the detention ponds violate basic design criteria developed to achieve the effective operation of stormwater management facilities.  He commented that the ponds should have berms or embankments completely around them.  Mr. Latowsky remarked that none of these ponds should be located in the 100-year floodplain because they are permanent facilities and will be subject to flooding during severe storms.  Mr. Latowsky used overheads to point out the difficulties which might be experienced during a severe storm with water being retained by the ponds and later released.  He indicated some discharge could be experienced onto the wetlands on the property.  Mr. Latowsky concluded by saying at the very least the developer should be required to redesign the ponds and those plans reviewed by the Engineering Department and an independent consultant.

 

H. Coleman Day stated that Dogwood Acres residents are seeking protection from the Southern Village development by requesting a 100-foot buffer.  He indicated a petition had been presented to the Council by Dogwood Acres residents asking for this buffer.

 

Lloyd Kramer, a resident of Dogwood Acres, read a letter from Carrboro Mayor Michael Nelson to Mayor Waldorf, which had been distributed to the Council.  The letter stated Carrboro's position regarding development adjacent to Smith Level Road, and Carrboro's concern that the stubout towards Smith Level Road from Southern Village would lead to more traffic on the road and therefore lead to its widening.  Mayor Nelson's letter went on to say the Carrboro Board of Aldermen had passed a resolution regarding the need to keep Smith Level Road two lanes, and that any traffic increase due to high density development and stubouts allowed into the road will have the effect of increased traffic pollution in the watershed and will compromise the June 20, 1995 boundary agreement between the two towns.  Mayor Nelson's letter emphasized that agreement's intent was to keep Smith Level Road a low traffic, two lane scenic entranceway.

 

Joanna Haymore stated she believed the detention basin plans should be approved by OWASA, the Army Corps of Engineers and Town Engineers who are qualified to review these plans before construction begins.  She said the water quality and environmental impact of this development is in the Council's hands, and urged them to please take the time to ask in-depth and comprehensive questions regarding these issues as well as the issues brought forward tonight by other speakers.  Ms. Haymore asked that Mr. Latowsky's remarks regarding the wetlands be considered carefully, and that the Town honor its commitment to Carrboro to preserve the rural character of Smith Level Road neighborhoods.  She asked that only two crossings be approved over Fan Branch, that the Resource Conservation District be protected when considering the Special Use Permits, and that the Town Manager and Council be held legally responsible if stormwater management does not work.  Ms. Haymore stated no administrative exemptions should be allowed in the Resource Conservation District and a committee be put in place to review the correct interpretation of the Resource Conservation District ordinance.  She commented that a 100-foot buffer is a preferable environment for people, pets and other animals.  Ms. Haymore urged the Council to focus on the bigger picture and collect all the data necessary before making decisions on what the traffic impact will be on the environment, on safety, and quality of life.

 

Council Member Richard Franck asked Mr. Russell Briggs to state his qualifications regarding stormwater management.  Mr. Briggs stated he is with W. K. Dixon and Company and is a registered professional engineer, has practiced in the Triangle area since 1980, served on the Technical Advisory Committee of the Sediment Control Commission for six years, has a Bachelors of Engineering and a Masters of Science Engineering degree with emphasis on hydrology and hydraulics.

 

Council Member Franck stated he wanted Mr. Briggs to comment on three issues regarding the location of the ponds: in the watercourse or the stream bed itself; within areas designated as wetlands; and areas that are within the 100 year floodplain.  Mr. Briggs said that in several instances these ponds do exist in these locations.  He stated that these ponds must be placed in low-lying areas because that's where the water ends up.  Mr. Briggs said some wetlands would be disturbed, but emphasized that part of the reason for choosing small ponds over larger lakes was because roughly one half the amount of wetlands would be disturbed using the smaller pond options.  He said that in respect to the 100 year flood event, we are within the 100 flood limits, not the 100 year floodway.

 

Council Member Franck asked if they would be required to create wetlands in other locations to compensate for the wetlands that are being disturbed by the ponds.  Mr. Briggs said this would be through a permit process with the Corps of Engineers and through a 401 permit process with the State, and they would be required to follow the recommendations.

 

Council Member Franck asked in regard to locating a pond in the watercourse itself, how would the water be retained during a flood event?  Mr. Briggs said the smaller you can make the drainage area for these ponds, the more effective they are.  He said this is why they are designed the way they are.  He stated they have minimized the upstream area to maximize the capability of the ponds.

 

Council Member Capowski commented on the problems experienced over the last twenty years by the homeowners adjacent to Eastwood Lake, including maintenance and beavers.  He asked Mr. Briggs what guarantees do we have that when this project is completed and the homeowners association has taken over maintenance, that we won't have another Eastwood Lake situation on our hands, where the capacity of the distributed ponds have been reduced and they are experiencing problems both from quality and quality perspectives?  Council Member Capowski said he wanted to be sure that the Southern Village homeowners would not be before the Council in ten years asking for help.

 

Council Member Andresen stated she did not believe it was appropriate to address these questions to Mr. Briggs.  She said it was the Council's responsibility to assure that protective measures were in place.

 

Mr. Briggs stated that any time we can minimize the drainage area going to these ponds, the more likelihood of success of these ponds.  He commented he believes these ponds will work and will work well, and is pleased that the Council choose the small pond option.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked why the ponds function better if the drainage area is small?  Mr. Briggs answered because the sediment load is decreased.  Mayor Waldorf asked if the drainage area is small, how do you keep an adequate level of water in the pond?  Mr. Briggs said even though the drainage area is small, the ponds are located in a low-lying area.

 

Council Member Andresen stated one of the purposes of the ponds is to keep the pollutants in the pond to protect water quality.  She asked if any of the ponds are located in the buffer area affected by the high density options?  Mr. Briggs stated the ponds are in compliance with the current regulations regarding buffer area density.  Council Member Andresen asked if these preliminary drawings had been reviewed by the State Stormwater Management Division or the Army Corps of Engineers?  Mr. Briggs answered no.  Council Member Andresen said she is concerned about the location of the ponds in the stream, because during a storm event the pollutants will be washed out.  Mr. Briggs replied the elevation of the ponds themselves and the dike that forms the pond are very important, and that in all cases where the ponds are in low-lying areas the dike which forms the pond is above the 100 year elevation.  Council Member Andresen asked if figures had been provided to the staff on the size of the ponds in relation to the impervious surface?  Mr. Briggs stated yes.

 

Town Engineer George Small commented that he had previously discussed this with Mr. Briggs, but did not have the figures with him tonight.  Council Member Andresen asked if actual figures had been provided that would allow calculation of the impervious surface?  She said the size of the ponds obviously had to have been calculated using some type of data.  Mr. Small indicated he was not able to answer at this time.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown asked if the developer would need to get approval from the State Stormwater Management Division and the Army Corps of Engineers?  Mr. Briggs said that is correct.  Mayor Pro Tem Brown said if either of these entities mandates changes, then conceivably if could change the development somewhat.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked Mr. Karpinos if the two entities find the stormwater management plan inadequate in some way, what does that do to an approved development?  Mr. Karpinos answered that assuming there is an approved Special Use Permit that shows a plan for ponds, then the Corps of Engineers determines that some modifications are necessary, one of two things may happen.  He stated one would be a minor change which the ordinance allows, and the second would be substantial changes to the plan which would require a modification of the Special Use Permit.

 

Council Member Capowski stated there was a provision in the Special Use Permit which says public storm drainage systems or other utilities shall not be located within a pond or dam structure.  He asked if there was a sewer line located in a pond.  Mr. Briggs answered no.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked does that mean there are no sewer lines located beneath the ponds?  Mr. Briggs said that is correct.

 

Council Member Andresen asked if OWASA had reviewed these plans?  Mr. Briggs stated no.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Brown said it might be possible that when more detailed plans are developed by OWASA then this situation may change.  Mr. Briggs replied in his opinion that is not likely.

 

Council Member Capowski said the language in the proposed ordinance says the homeowners' association will maintain the storm drainage system including these ponds, yet we probably had this stipulation with Eastwood Lake.  He asked if this language was enough, or do we need to give it more teeth?  Mr. Horton directed the Council's attention to page 20, stipulation 5.D, which says "The property owner shall post a performance bond or other surety instrument satisfactory to the Town Manager, in an amount approved by the Town Manager to assure maintenance, repair, or reconstruction necessary for adequate performance of the engineered stormwater controls."  Mr. Horton said in essence that is a guarantee of the costs that we would estimate to be necessary to maintain or replace the ponds.

 

Council Member Andresen asked if we called a bond, would we do it if one pond failed or if all nine failed?  Mr. Horton replied the Town could do it if any portion of the system failed.  Council Member Andresen said that the bond may pay for only the reconstruction of one pond and maybe a year of maintenance.  Mr. Horton stated the bond would have to be restored to an acceptable surety level if we had to call it, or the development would be out of compliance and therefore in violation.  Council Member Andresen asked wouldn't it work better to have a bond for each pond?  Mr. Horton replied that he believes it would work better to have one bond for all nine ponds based on the estimates of individual amounts for each pond.  Mr. Horton said it is important that they estimated the bonds accurately.  Council Member Andresen asked if the bond is called, then the Town gets involved with the maintenance.  Hr. Horton said the process would be that the surety agent got involved and made sure that the problem was corrected.  He stated that the person who provides the surety instrument is the one who would be responsible for seeing that repairs are made.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked Mr. Briggs to clarify the distinction between the 100 year flood limit and the 100 floodway as they apply to this property and proposed ponds.  Mr. Briggs stated that the 100 year flood limit is from point of water to point of water from bank to bank when the 100 year flood occurs.  The floodway is that portion of the flood limits that is necessary for the conveyance of water as defined in the Town's floodplain mapping.  Mayor Waldorf asked for his reaction to the comments made earlier regarding moving the location of ponds and the combining of some of the ponds.  Mr. Briggs replied that it is their intention during construction to use these ponds as sediment control devices, but at no time were these plans represented or were they envisioned to represent full detailed drawings for sediment control devices.  Mr. Briggs said when the detailed drawings are completed they will have the appropriate length to width ratio for sediment control.  He stated that regarding the comments concerning moving the ponds, there are specific reasons why some of them have been located where they are.  Mr. Briggs said for instance pond C has been located to treat water coming from the Village Core on the other side of Fan Branch.  He commented that water is being brought across Fan Branch in a pipe system as it goes across Brookgreen and into that pond, so that pond by necessity is at a lower elevation.  Mr. Briggs said the other ponds in low lying areas are placed there because that is where they are needed to handle storm drainage.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Brown asked Mr. Briggs to comment on the suggestion to use the wetlands rather than disturbing them.  Mr. Briggs said it is always preferable to use wetlands for treatment if possible.  He commented that using the small pond option rather than the large lake option disturbs fewer wetlands.  Mayor Pro Tem Brown said she was specifically asking about using the wetlands as part of the system itself rather than disturbing them in the distributed pond system, using them as filtration devices.  Mr. Briggs stated the ponds were in low lying areas to treat the water coming from the development into that low area.  Mayor Pro Tem Brown asked if once this project is approved and the ponds are built, who will actually determine if the pond system is working and if the pollutants are being taken out as required by law, and what testing is done, who is responsible for that testing, and how often?  Mr. Briggs answered to his knowledge no formal testing is done of any of these water quality ponds in any of the water quality watersheds.  He said random testing could be done by the Department of Environmental Management to ascertain the effectiveness of the ponds, but there is no formal testing to his knowledge.

 

Council Member Evans asked if the Town has a formal testing of our creeks?  Mr. Horton said we do perform regular testing of creeks at limited locations.  He stated he believes the way this program works is the State would have to approve the design of the ponds and their approval takes into account the theoretical way the ponds are suppose to work.  Mr. Horton said the State approves a design that they believe will meet the intended needs, and then the pond has to be built according to that design and maintained to meet that design.  He said in essence they are applying the theory of how the ponds are intended to work to accomplish the purposes they are intended to accomplish, and then using those designs but not doing field testing in order to determine if they actually work the way they were designed.

 

Council Member Franck called the Manager's attention to Section 5.8 of the Resource Conservation District Ordinance, which says that every application which proposes development within the Resource Conservation District must include certain plans.  He asked does this mean these plans are required at the Special Use Permit stage or in order to obtain a Zoning Compliance Permit?  Mr. Waldon stated that some plans are required at the Special Use Permit stage and some at later stages.  Council Member Franck stated Section 5.8 goes on to say "unless affirmatively exempted by the Town Manager."  He asked if Mr. Horton had granted any exemptions to this point?  Mr. Horton asked if Council Member Franck referring to exemptions to required plans?  Council Member Franck answered yes.  Mr. Horton answered no.  Council Member Franck asked if under ordinary circumstances would such an exemption be granted?  Mr. Horton said under ordinary circumstances, no, but the normal course of events is not to require all plans until the Zoning Compliance Permit stage is reached.

 

Council Member Franck said on page 31, stipulation 23, there is language which speaks to requirements of Section 5.6 and 5.8 of the Development Ordinance, which is the Resource Conservation section.  He said that 5.8 grants the Town Manager the power of administrative exemption, but 5.6 does not.  Council Member Franck said 5.6 is the section which speaks to design standards, and asked if there was intent that such exemptions might be granted?  Mr. Horton said there is no intent, but asked Mr. Waldon is comment if such an intent is proposed.  Mr. Waldon commented that in regard to Section 5.6, their intent is to achieve all standards included in that section.  Council Member Franck said he would like language added that would specifically state that no administrative exemptions could be granted under Section 5.6 but could be under Section 5.8, so that no ambiguity would exist.

 

Council Member Franck stated he was bringing this up now because he wants to be convinced that the stipulations in Section 5.6.d which speaks to streets and roads would be met.  Mr. Waldon replied that in that section it mentions water courses crossing roads, and it is the staff's opinion it is necessary that the roads cross Fan Branch.  He said they are compelled also to try to meet the rest of that stipulation, including providing access for wildlife and to safely convey flood waters.

 

Council Member Franck asked Mr. Waldon to describe what a road that meets these standards might look like, for instance how high would the bridge be, and would a change be made to the water course?  Mr. Waldon responded that he could not answer at this time.  Mr. Small indicated that the bridge located on Umstead Drive would be a good example of what a bridge located on this property might look like and how it might operate.

 

Council Member Evans asked if there would be pedestrian sidewalks over the bridge.  Mr. Small said yes.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Brown asked Mr. Horton has he granted any immediate exemptions for utility plans for this project?  Mr. Horton said no exemptions had been granted.

 

Council Member Capowski stated that on page 31, item 23, is the language regarding exemptions by the Manager standard language?  Mr. Horton responded that language was used frequently in Special Use Permits.

 

Council Member Andresen stated the language on page 31, item 23, grants the Manager the authority to grant exemption.

 

Council Member Franck stated the ordinance only allows the Manager to grant exemptions to Section 5.8 which deals with plans that must be submitted, rather than Section 5.6 which deals with standards for development.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Brown stated that the Council could limit the Manager's authority to make exemptions anywhere in the ordinance. Mr. Horton stated that was correct.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked the Manager to explain the annexation boundary agreement made in 1985 with Carrboro.  Mr. Horton responded that the Council appointed a committee of Council Members to work with a committee of Carrboro Aldermen to determine a line of annexation limits for the two towns to agree upon.  He indicated that the annexation limit Chapel Hill agreed to follows Smith Level Road up to a few hundred feet below Culbreth Road, then swinging in to a creek then north up past Culbreth Road.  Mr. Horton said another line is to the north which follows Seawell School Road.  He stated that when Chapel Hill and Carrboro agreed on the limits, it meant neither could annex beyond that line without going through a specific legal process.  Council Member Wiggins asked how that agreement relates to what has been discussed tonight concerning Culbreth Road.  Mr. Horton said that at the time the Council agreed to the annexation agreement, it also passed a resolution stating it would do what it could to preserve the rural character of the area along Smith Level Road.  Council Member Wiggins asked would the project as it is proposed now be in keeping with that resolution?  Mr. Horton said he would argue that this project does not reach Smith Level Road, that stubouts are provided which point in that direction.

 

Mayor Pro Tem Brown read Section 18.8.1.1 of the Development Ordinance which speaks to planned developments and the stipulations regarding mass transit within or connected to the development, saying this section applied to the stubouts in question.  Mr. Horton stated he did not see how you could have a development of this size without having traffic affect surrounding areas.  He said the Council had the option of eliminating stubouts if they are judged to present undesirable effects.

 

Council Member Capowski asked if there was flexibility in relocating the stubout which the Council approved earlier in the Master Land Use Plan.  Mr. Waldon said yes, that the location of the stubout could be shifted without a significant departure from the Master Plan.

 

Council Member Andresen asked what if the Council decided that didn't want the stubout at all?  Mr. Horton said that if after reviewing the evidence, the Council could make that determination.

 

Council Member Evans commented that you have to look at the larger picture, and that a stubout is necessary somewhere in that general area.

 

Council Member Andresen said the reason why the stubout should be eliminated is because the original concept was to have a concentrated village located on 15-501 surrounded by 5-acre zoning.  She said by putting in a road which connects to Smith Level Road it encourages traffic to more towards this area, and even more important is more paved surfaces in the watershed is not a good idea.

 

Council Member Capowski stated they were dealing with two different watersheds, the Jordan Lake watershed and the University Lake watershed, and asked where are the boundaries of the two watersheds?  Mr. Waldon said basically Smith Level Road, with everything the right of this road being in the Jordan Lake watershed, and everything to the west draining into the University Lake watershed.  Council Member Capowski asked were there serious limitations to the development which could eventually be done in the Jordan Lake watershed side of Smith Level Road.  Mr. Waldon said any development over two units per acre would have to have ponds.  Council Member Capowski stated there was language in the Special Use Permit proposal which talks about the applicant being able to increase the development within Southern Village by contracting for development rights of nearby property.  Mr. Waldon said that the maximum density in Southern Village is set at a maximum of 4.4 units per acre.  He said the language referred to offers an option to prevent other land from being developed, thus possibly precluding the need for one of the ponds.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown asked Mr. Waldon to indicate at what point the proposed four-laning on Smith Level Road would reach?  Mr. Waldon said he believes it will continue to Rock Haven Road.  Mayor Pro tem Brown asked if the stubout could be moved to relocate with that proposed four-laning?  Mr. Horton said the stubout as indicated on the Master Plan could be connected in any number of ways to Smith Level Road.

 

Council Member Evans asked when the greenways would be deeded to the Town.  Mr. Horton said that upon final approval by the Council, the Town would take title to the greenways.  Council Member Evans asked if the developer is responsible for maintenance until that time?  Mr. Horton responded yes.

 

Council Member Evans asked the Manager to explain the meaning of the language on page 29, section C, which says "(if developer field locates the trail, the corridor width may be reduced to 15 feet)."  Mr. Waldon responded that because we don't know what the best greenway location might be at this time, a 50-foot greenway trail is required.  He stated that if they could go out and locate the exact trail in the field, then only 15 feet would be required.

 

Council Member Evans asked who would replace buffer material if it dies?  Mr. Horton said the buffer would have to be maintained using the Town's standard process.  Council Member Evans stated that during construction it would be the developer's responsibility, but after that it would revert to the homeowners' association, unless it had been deeded to the Town making it the Town's responsibility.  Mr. Horton replied that is correct.  Council Member Evans said on page 34, section 37.C, it states that for single and two-family lots, refuse collection would be provided by curbside service.  She asked why was collection service not provided in the alleys?.  Mr. Horton said the alleys were not wide enough to allow the Town's equipment to pass through in most cases.  Council Member Evans asked that if the community feels that one basketball court is not enough, what process would they have to go through to create another one?  Mr. Horton said it would depend on where they wanted to locate it and if it was a substantial change.  Council Member Evans asked what if it was located in the same general area?  Mr. Horton responded that would probably be considered only a minor change.

 

Council Member Capowski stated there was a northern stubout to Cobbleridge Phases III and IV, with only pedestrian and bicycle access to the existing development.  He asked what the current plans are for upgrading Culbreth Road and Smith Level Road, if any?  Mr. Waldon said no plans have been made for Smith Level Road, but for Culbreth Road plans call for a three-lane road with curb, gutter and sidewalks and enough room to provide for striping for a bike lane.  Council Member Capowski asked when Culbreth Road could be completed to its fullest potential?  Mr. Waldon indicated he had no way of knowing, but believed that the State Department of Transportation would eventually have to take part in the funding process.  He stated that as development occurs improvements to the road were being required.  Mr. Horton stated that the Council could move improvements to Culbreth Road to a higher position on the priority list.  Council Member Capowski asked was it safe to assume that for the next ten years or so traffic from Southern Village would use Culbreth Road in its current state?  Mr. Waldon said it is his opinion that improvements to Culbreth Road are important so that the school can be accessed without traveling on 15-501.  He stated that some traffic may access Smith Level Road.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown asked what traffic impact studies had been done for Smith Level and Culbreth Roads?  Mr. Waldon said impact statements were provided by the developer, and because of that the staff recommendation includes the requirements for a stoplight and turning lane into the development.  He said the impact statements did look into traffic volume on 15-501 and Culbreth Road and specifically at the intersections.  Mr. Bryan stated those impact statements also looked at volumes on Smith Level Road.  Mayor Pro Tem Brown asked if the Town has conducted its own impact analysis?  Mr. Horton stated it was not the practice of Town staffto conduct such analyses, but they do review the impact statements submitted by developers.

 

Council Member Andresen stated she had taken one of the conceptual drawings to OWASA for their review, and OWASA underscored their desire that sewer lines not be located where infiltration can occur.  She stated OWASA does not want their lines in the ponds or under the ponds, so that they may more easily access them if necessary.  Council Member Andresen said they also indicated sediment would clog the lines if not properly maintained.  She stated she talked with someone from the State who said a certificate of water quality would be needed and permits from the Corps of Engineers as well.  Council Member Andresen said a member of the Department of Water Quality had indicated that to satisfy State watershed regulations ponds should not be located in the buffer areas, because it violates the high density option for the State watershed regulations, and that it was not advisable for ponds to be located in stream courses.  Council Member Andresen said they were very anxious to review this project.  She also indicated that the Department of Water Quality had requested full disclosure of all plans from the developer so that would not be receiving information piecemeal, but they had not seen any of the plans since the lake was a consideration.  Council Member Andresen said that the regulations she mentioned earlier were minimum regulations, which she hoped Chapel Hill would at least meet, one of which is a 100-foot setback from the stream, and she indicated some of the ponds are much closer than that.

 

Council Member Franck stated Mr. Briggs had convinced him regarding the location of ponds in wetlands and in the 100 year floodplain but not with locating the ponds within the stream course.  He asked Mr. Bryan what would be his reaction if the Council were to impose a condition that there be no water retention ponds located within an existing watercourse?  Mr. Briggs said several of the ponds are located within a watercourse, and in his opinion they are ideally located.  He said key factors were the off-site drainage area, especially pond G located below the elementary school site with a drainage area of 19.1 acre drainage area.  Mr. Briggs said this area is a very small stream, and asked at what point do you stop calling a stream a stream and call it something else?  Council Member Franck asked where other such ponds are located and what are their drainage areas?  Mr. Briggs said one is located just below the existing Culbreth School with a 20 to 30 acre drainage area, another is pond D with 28.6 drainage acres, and pond A with 43.5 drainage acres.

 

Mr. Bryan said the ponds and their locations are very complex issues, and feels it is best left to the experts, being the State, the Army Corps of Engineers, and Town engineers to decide where they will ultimately be placed.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE O-1.

 

Council Member Andresen stated she would like the Council to consider delaying action on the two Special Use Permit requests for the West Tract Neighborhoods and the West Tract Multi-Family Housing.  She stated that since O-1, the West Tract rezoning request, has already been introduced, would we want to act on the rezoning tonight if we were to delay the other West Tract issues?

 

Mayor Waldorf stated she believes the Council should move ahead, because the rezoning is conditional and if it passes it doesn't affect anything until the Special Use Permits are approved.

 

Council Member Andresen asked if the Council finds issues that need to be addressed in the Special Use Permits yet to come, what does it do if we approve the rezoning now?  Mr. Karpinos answered that in approving the rezoning the Council is acting in its legislative capacity which gives you more flexibility that is present in the Special Use Permit stage.  He said if you do not have rezoning in place then it is not appropriate to consider the Special Use Permits for approval.  Mr. Karpinos said once the rezoning is in place, and since the Master Plan has already been approved, then you no longer have legislative flexibility when looking at the conditions of the Special Use Permit.  He stated the Council would then have to look at the application and determine if it complies with the terms of the Special Use application and the Master Plan, and if it does then it is entitled to approval.

 

Council Member Andresen stated that based on the Attorney's answer, she would like to have the whole process continued rather than putting the rezoning in place and loosing some of the flexibility when dealing with the Special Use Permits for the West Tract.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked for a consensus by the Council to discuss Council Member Andresen's concerns regarding the West Tract even though it is procedurally out of order.  The Council agreed by consensus.

 

Council Member Andresen proposed that the proposals for the West Tract, designated as Reports 6 and 8 in the materials, be sent back for additional work.  She said her reasons are: some evidence has been presented that OWASA would not find the plans acceptable as they are now; the State departments have not seen these plans and there is evidence they would not find them acceptable; the Army Corps of Engineers needs a permit now.  She stated if the Council acts now she believes it would put the permitting agencies in a bind, meaning we have an approved plan, and yet what if the stormwater management plan doesn't work as its been laid out in the conceptual plan, with no detailed numbers?  Council Member Andresen commented she believes this is a very high density development that shows promise of being very good, but its been modified a number of times with no modification to the stormwater management changes since the lake was removed.  She commented there are a number of permits that must be received, and the Council has the responsibility of approving a plan that provides a workable stormwater management plan and protects water quality.  Council Member Andresen stated that if we have a complete review by OWASA and the State agencies it will assist the Council in deciding how much design is needed.  She said there are problems with the pond locations and the size configuration design, and that figures such as the impervious surface area, the surface area of the ponds and the area to be drained should all be finalized in advance.  Council Member Andresen said she believes the Council should not move forward until a plan is in place that works, stating that there are some very attractive areas in Southern Village, but the most unattractive areas include the stormwater drainage areas and the temporary pond next to the apartments.  She said the Council should wait until a complete review is received from all involved agencies and then add the stipulations needed before approval is granted.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown said she agrees completely, stating that based on the comments made tonight by other Council members and members of the public, she is uncomfortable with moving forward at this time.  She said she agrees it is important to hear from the permitting agencies before approval.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked if approvals were granted as proposed, wouldn't the applicant then have to go before the Corps of Engineers and the Water Quality Division to get his stormwater management plan approved, and that only after those approvals were obtained could this phase of Southern Village proceed?  She stated she believed Council Member Andresen may be suggesting that we not use the normal procedure in this case.

 

Council Member Andresen responded that the normal procedure would have been for the permitting agencies to have had more information about this development from the beginning.  She stated the State had not seen any plans except an early conceptual drawing that had the lake on it.  Council Member Andresen said the Council is being asked to take a leap of faith that all the information provided is accurate and that the developer will be able to obtain his permits.  She stated that once the rezoning and the Special Use Permits are approved, it will be more difficult for the permitting agencies to conduct their reviews.

 

Mr. Bryan stated that was not true.  He said the process begins by having the Special Use Permits approved, which includes the maximum number of lots, the street network and the general location of the ponds.  Mr. Bryan said once the Special Use Permits are approved, they then present detailed plans to the State agencies as part of the Zoning Compliance process.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown said it is important to note that the ponds are now located and the development is built around them, and if somehow this is changed during the permitting process it may place the Council in a bind if significant changes must occur.  She said the Council should know before hand if the permitting agencies will concur with the plans before the Council approves them.

 

Council Member Andresen said she is not proposing that the development be held up or voted down, but that it be done right.  She commented she believes watershed regulations are being violated with the location of the ponds, adding she did not see how the sewer lines could be placed as proposed by the developer.  Council Member Andresen said there is a possibility the sewer lines could be placed in the road rather than the Resource Conservation District and save a tremendous amount of demolition in the RCD.  She commented this may not be the normal process, but this is an unusual development in a sensitive area, and believes the Council needs to be very careful when considering the requests.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown said we would have to live with this development for a very long time, and it is inherent in our process that the Council make sure that we have a very clear understanding of what we are doing, and she does not believe we have that yet.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked if the Council approves the project in some form and the stormwater plan is rejected by either of the permitting agencies, would the developer then have to come back to the Council with a modified proposal?  Mr. Horton answered it would depend on how extensive the modifications were.  He said the plan could be rejected for a minor reason which could be corrected if the Council agreed to a minor change, or it could be rejected in a way that would create a substantial change in which case it would come back before the Council.  Mr. Horton said for example, if half the ponds were judged to be the wrong size or in the wrong location and were rejected, and this caused changes in the stormwater system, this is a substantial change and it would come back before the Council.  He said if one pond were slightly enlarged or shifted but stayed in the same place, he would not judge this to be a significant change.  Mr. Horton said where to draw the line is always difficult and depends on how any individual views it.  He said he tends to be very conservative and reminded the Council that in the past he has alerted the Council to these types of situations to gain feedback as to when changes needed to come back before them.  Mr. Horton said the only way to be absolutely certain the project is exactly the way the Council wants it is to wait for final design drawings, and whether or not that is practical is a matter for the Council to decide, but that has not been the Council's practice in the past.

 

Council Member Chilton stated we don't normally have more detail at this stage for developments than we do now for this one, and he believes the permitting agencies will require changes if necessary to make the plans work.  He stated Council Member Andresen had made a good argument as to why the process should not work the way it does now, but does not believe this developer should be held to a different standard, even though this development is larger than most the Council reviews.

 

Council Member Andresen said she had spent a great deal of time on this and had investigated instances where, in her opinion, the staff is violating the Town's Resource Conservation District ordinance.  She stated the State sets the standards but it is up to the Council to carry them out.  Council Member Andresen said if this stormwater management plan does not work, the State will come back to the Town to solve it.  She said she feels strongly about this issue, that the Council has allowed the developer a tremendous amount of development in this area, and with that comes the responsibility to see that it is done right.  Council Member Andresen said there is evidence that this just might not work.

 

Council Member Chilton said he did not feel qualified to make that type of judgment, adding it might be better if the ponds were not built in the watercourse; but on the other hand, whether or not that will work technically is not for him to say.

 

Council Member Andresen said that was her point, that the Council needed to know if it would work.

 

Council Member Chilton replied that was the responsibility of the Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of Water Quality who would both be reviewing the plans.

 

Mayor Waldorf stated if no other comments were forthcoming, she believed the majority of the Council was ready to act on the motion on the floor, action on O-1.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown stated she would be voting against this because she did not believe they were ready.

 

Council Member Andresen indicated she agreed.

 

THE MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE O-1 WAS ADOPTED 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND BROWN VOTING NAY.

 

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CHAPEL HILL ZONING ATLAS AT THE SOUTHERN VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT (96-11-4/O-1)

 

WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill has considered the application of Bryan Properties, Inc. to amend the Zoning Atlas to rezone property described below from Residential-2 to Residential-5-Conditional Use Zoning, and finds that the amendment achieves the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan; and

 

WHEREAS, the Council finds that any approved special use under the Residential-5-Conditional Use district would be suitable for the property proposed for rezoning under the conditions of the approved Master Land Use Plan and conditions attached to an approved Special Use Permit;

 

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Chapel Hill Zoning Atlas be amended as follows:

 

Section I

 

That the portion of the property identified as now or formerly Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 126, Block A, part of Lot 4K and part of Lot 20, located on the west side of Fan Branch, south of Culbreth Road, within the Residential-2 zoning district, be rezoned from Residential-2 to Residential-5-Conditional. The legal description of the property is as follows (please refer to the attached map):

 

COMMENCING at a point located at the northernmost corner of Tract 4 as recorded in Plat Book 71, Page 9, Orange County Registry, and running thence along the western lines of said Tract 4 the following six (6) courses and distances: (1) South 48-44-04 West 526.79 feet; (2) South 78-41-51 West 59.37 feet; (3) South 32-29-19 West 50.58 feet; (4) South 19-59-44 East 90.80 feet; (5) South 31-37-29 West 59.21 feet; and, (6) South 82-52-47 West 125.16 feet to a point, THE POINT AND PLACE OF BEGINNING; thence from said BEGINNING North 69-30-05 West 855.68 feet to a point, thence South 55-42-50 West 156.85 feet to a point; thence North 65-21-36 West 54.54 feet to a point, thence North 59-37-47 West 57.33 feet to a point; thence North 52-02-26 West 472.87 feet to a point; thence South 40-20-15 West 201.98 feet to a point; thence South 52-19-34 West 80.00 feet to a point; thence South 74-17-34 West 65.21 feet to a point; thence South 76-57-25 West 90.13 feet to a point; thence South 65-42-40 West 124.33 feet to a point; thence South 34-17-50 West 130.83 feet to a point; thence South 04-17-15 East169.43 feet to a point; thence South 72-49-32 West 210.35 feet to a point; thence South 19-57-30 East 621.11 feet to a point; thence South 05-02-26 East 103.96 feet to a point; thence South 58-21-33 East 212.76 feet to a point; thence South 58-44-10 East 189.25 feet to a point; thence South 23-28-13 West 91.52 feet to a point; thence South 39-52-42 East 116.29 feet to a point; thence South 68-20-33 East 385.68 feet to a point; thence North 74-54-47 East 323.75 feet to a point; thence North 57-16-56 East 516.64 feet to a point; thence North 32-42-16 East 553.08 feet to a point; thence North 23-02-22 East 168.58 feet to a point; thence North 37-17-06 East 224.23 feet to a point; thence North 59-52-31 East 139.10 feet to a point; THE POINT AND PLACE OF BEGINNING, containing 56.86 acres, more or less.

 

Section II

 

That all ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

 

This the 4th day of November, 1996.

 

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-4a.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown requested an amendment to page 20, number 5.C, adding after the Division of Environmental Management the phrases ", the NC Division of Water Quality, the Army Corps of Engineers,".

 

Council Member Andresen suggested that another phrase be added which would say that changes would be made in the development proposal as needed.  Mr. Karpinos suggested adding after the phrase "and shall be" the words "designed so as to be".  Council Member Andresen accepted that language.

 

The Mover and Seconder accepted both of these amendments.

 

Council Member Brown offered another amendment, on page 22, number 7.2, that the word "four" be deleted and the word "two" be inserted, that "and its tributary" be replaced with "or its tributary", and that a), b), and c) be deleted.

 

Council Member Evans said this amendment would limit access to other parts of the site, and as the Mover does not accept this amendment.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION AS STATED.  COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN SECONDED.

 

THE MOTION FOR THIS AMENDMENT WAS DEFEATED 4-5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, CHILTON AND WALDORF VOTING AYE.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown proposed an amendment to page 25, number 8.C.1, that the phrase which begins with,” until such time as" be deleted to the end of the sentence.

 

The Mover and Seconder accepted this amendment.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown proposed an amendment to page 27, number 12.J., that the phrase "where possible" be deleted.

 

The Mover refused to accept this amendment.

 

MAYOR PRO TEM BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO AMEND RESOLUTION R-4a AS NOTED.  THE MOTION FAILED 3-6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS BROWN, CHILTON, AND FRANCK VOTING AYE.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown proposed an amendment to page 30, number 19, that the phrase "to the Town of Chapel Hill for Parks and Recreation purposes only, or" be deleted, so that the recreation area would be deeded to a homeowners' association rather than the Town.

 

The Mover did not accept this amendment.

 

Council Member Brown proposed an amendment to page 31, number 23, that a period be placed after the phrase "must be adhered to" and the remainder of the sentence deleted.

 

The Mover did not accept this amendment.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO AMEND RESOLUTION R-4a AS NOTED.  THE MOTION FAILED 4-5, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, CAPOWSKI, AND CHILTON VOTING AYE.

 

Council Member Franck proposed an amendment to page 31, number 23, that the phrase "under subsection 5.8" be added after the phrase "administrative exemptions."

 

The Mover agreed to this amendment.

 

Council Member Franck proposed that the amendments suggested in the memo from the Southern Village Limited Partnership be included as amendments to the resolution.  He stated they are: on page 22, number 7.c(a), change "...a 35 foot cross section..." to "a 27 foot cross section..."; on page 23, number 7.C(2), change "a 35 foot cross section..." to "...a 27 foot cross section..."; and on page 23, number 7.C(3), delete the entire section and replace with "Construction of Kildaire Road west of Copperline Drive is not part of this Special Use Permit."

 

The Mover accepted these amendments.

 

Mr. Horton reminded the Council that with the reduction in the road width, some limits to parking will need to be imposed.

 

Mayor Waldorf proposed an amendment on page 33, number 34, making it mandatory that sewer lines be placed under the roadways and out of the greenway system.  Mr. Horton commented he would urge the Council not to make it mandatory as it has not been engineered to a point that he could assure the Council it would be practical for the lines to follow the roadway.  He stated it may be practical in key areas but not in every area.

 

Mayor Waldorf then suggested that the phrase "where possible" be struck and the phrase "if approved by OWASA" be added.

 

Council Member Andresen suggested clarifying that language saying that "sewer lines would avoid the Resource Conservation District, the wetlands, and the detention ponds wherever possible, and be placed under nearby streets."

 

Mayor Waldorf suggested the entire number 34 be worded as follows: "That sewer lines avoid the Resource Conservation District, the wetlands, and the detention ponds wherever possible, and be placed under nearby streets if approved by OWASA."

 

Mr. Bryan asked what would happen if OWASA did not approve it?  Mayor Waldorf said her intention was to place the sewer lines under the streets.

 

The Mover and Seconded stated they would accept the amendment if the phrase "where possible" remained in the sentence.

 

Council Member Andresen suggested using "to the greatest extent possible".

 

Mr. Horton commented this language would certainly show the Council's intent.

 

The Mover and Seconded accepted this language.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown proposed an amendment to page 22, number 7.1, that item b) be deleted.

 

The Mover and Seconder refused this deletion.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI, TO DELETE ITEM 7.1(b) ON PAGE 22 OF RESOLUTION R-4a.  THE MOTION FAILED 3-6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, AND CAPOWSKI VOTING AYE.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown proposed an amendment to page 22, number 7.1, that item a) be deleted.

 

The Mover and Seconder refused this deletion.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO DELETE ITEM 7.1(a) FROM PAGE 22 OF RESOLUTION 4a.  THE MOTION FAILED 3 TO 6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, AND CAPOWSKI VOTING AYE.

 

Council Member Franck proposed an amendment to page 34, number 38, that the word "may" in the fourth line be changed to "shall."

 

The Mover and Seconder accepted this amendment.

 

Council Member Capowski asked if it was possible for garbage collection to take place in the alleys rather than at curbside?  Mr. Horton answered the alleys were not wide enough for collection trucks to maneuver.

 

Council Member Andresen stated that on page 20, number 5.G regarding maintenance of the ponds, she proposes that covenants be adopted and registered with the Orange County Register of Deeds to be attached to each lot, so that each lot owner would know what their responsibilities are regarding maintenance of the ponds.

 

Mr. Karpinos said the standard procedure is that restrictive covenants were recorded and are in the chain of title to the property, and the Town would review to make sure a homeowners association was established and has the legal responsibility and authority to carry out those covenants.  Mr. Karpinos suggested adding a sentence to 5.G which reads "The homeowners association covenants shall spell out responsibilities for pond maintenance as provided in the Special Use Permit."

 

Council Member Andresen asked the Manager if it is his idea that all responsibility would be placed on the homeowners association or on each individual property owner?  Mr. Horton responded that the homeowners association would be the legally responsible entity and would be the one the Town would sue, if necessary.  He stated that each property owner would be required to join the homeowners association and to bear the expense as established by the Special Use Permit.

 

Council Member Andresen suggested adding a section to G which reads "That the stormwater pond system be annually reviewed at the cost of the homeowners association by a certified engineer licensed in North Carolina to assure that these ponds systems meet State guidelines, and if not, the homeowners association will undertake correction action within three months."

 

Mr. Karpinos asked if it was Council Member Andresen's intent to add some specificity to the maintenance plan?  She responded yes, adding this would put more of a burden on the homeowners association in case something goes wrong.

 

Mr. Horton said the key issue is the Town would want to make sure the ponds were being maintained so that they function as they were originally designed and intended, and would rather use language along these lines rather than refer to "guidelines" as suggested by Council Member Andresen.  Mr. Horton stated staff would draft some language and respond later.

 

Council Member Capowski stated that one of the main issues is to get the ponds to work, but the other issue is for the Town not to be liable for those ponds.  Mr. Karpinos stated that by providing these requirements of the homeowners association made them legally liable for those requirements.

 

Council Member Andresen proposed an amendment to page 32, number 29.A, that the buffer listed in the second indented section, Type B, be 50 feet rather than 20 feet.

 

Council Member Chilton suggested the following language be inserted as a new paragraph to read "Type C buffer (minimum 30 feet) along the southwest property line shared with lots fronting on Dogwood Acres Drive;".

 

Council Member Evans asked if the development in that area is the same as that which already exists, why buffer it?

 

Council Member Chilton said he did not believe the developments were the same, and that what he is proposing would in effect widen the buffer by 10 feet in that area, making the lots 10 feet shallower.

 

The Mover and Seconded refused to accept the amendment.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO ADD THE LANGUAGE AS NOTED ABOVE.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 5 TO 4, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, CAPOWSKI, CHILTON, AND WALDORF VOTING AYE.

 

Mr. Horton said that regarding the maintenance of ponds discussed by Council Member Andresen earlier, he now has some language to offer which would be in addition to the stipulations already proposed.  He stated the proposed language is "The Homeowners association shall be responsible for arranging for annual inspections of all ponds by an appropriately certified engineer, to determine whether the ponds and associated structures are operating acceptably according to design requirements, and to report findings of said inspections to the Town Manager, with such recommendations for maintenance or repair as may be warranted.  Any needed repairs shall be completed within 120 days unless otherwise approved by the Town Manager."  Mr. Horton said he believes this language contains all of the elements desired by Council Member Andresen.

 

Mr. Karpinos said that regarding the covenants tied to the deeds, he suggests the following language: "Restrictive covenants shall be recorded which shall spell out these responsibilities of the homeowners association for pond maintenance as provided for in the Special Use Permit."  Mr. Karpinos said this language as well as the language offered by the Manager would become a part of 5.G on page 20 of the resolution.

 

The Mover and Seconder accepted both of the suggested additions.

 

Council Member Andresen said she had one other issue concerning management of sediment and erosion on these tracts.  She asked what the Council can do about these issues after approval has been given.  Mr. Horton said the Council could lobby the County Commissioners to add personnel to their staff or we could take over the function and add personnel to do it on our payroll.  He stated he does not know how many additional resources it would take to maximize control efforts. 

 

Council Member Andresen asked whether the Town has the authority to levy fines if soil erosion requirements are not being met?  Mr. Karpinos said the County is the enforcing agency.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown asked if the Town's Engineering Department could be brought into this process to assist with enforcement?

 

Mayor Waldorf said she did not believe the enforcement issue pertained to the Special Use Permit, so should not be discussed at this time.

 

Council Member Chilton proposed an amendment to page 22, number 7.A, to add a number 4) to read "4) That streets that stub out to adjacent properties incorporate traffic calming features such as those outlined in the Town's report on traffic calming.

 

The Mover and Seconder agreed to this amendment.

 

Mayor Waldorf said regarding the stubout to the adjacent properties to the west, if she wanted to suggest moving that stubout, is now the appropriate time to do so?  The Manager answered yes.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown stated she wanted to make sure this stubout had the least impact possible, meaning that it not be in the watershed if at all possible, that it has the least possible impact on existing neighbors as well as any future neighbors, and that it has the least possible impact on Smith Level Road.

 

Council Member Chilton said that moving the stubout more to the north would lower the impact.

 

Mr. Horton said he would put language together and offer it to the Council.

 

Mr. Bryan stated the stubout was placed as far north as possible without entering the Resource Conservation District.

 

The Manager offered the following language as an addition to section 7.A.1)b): "at the most northern point that would meet Town standards."

 

The Mover and Seconder accepted this language.

 

Council Member Andresen questioned the reason for stipulation number 7.A.3), which provides for a driveway from one lot onto Carlton Drive.  Mr. Waldon said this is a very large lot, and there is an excellent possibility to site a house off of Carlton, but it would be difficult to access from anywhere else within the development because of the topography.

 

RESOLUTION R-4a WAS ADOPTED, AS AMENDED, BY A VOTE OF 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND BROWN VOTING NAY.

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE WEST TRACT OF THE SOUTHERN VILLAGE (126-A-4) (96-11-4/R-4a)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit - Planned Development Mixed Use proposed by Bryan Properties, Inc., on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 126, Block A, part of Lot 4, part of lot 4K and Lot 20; if developed according to the Site Plan, dated July 31, 1996, the general principles outlined in the “Traditional Neighborhood Design Guidelines” (submitted by the applicant and subject to the revisions listed in conditions below), and the conditions listed below:

 

1.                 Would be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or propmote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

2.                 Would comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Article 12, 13, 14, and 18, and with all other applicable regulations;

3.                 Would be located, designed and operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and

4.                 Would conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

 

These findings are conditioned on the following:

 

Stipulations Specific to the Development

 

1.                 Construction Deadline:  That construction begin by November 4, 1998 with a valid Master Plan to be completed by November 4, 2008.

 

2.                 Land Uses:

 

A.                Land Use Intensity Ratios:  That this Special Use Permit shall be required to comply with the Land Use Intensity requirements of the underlying zoning district, except as may otherwise be approved by the Town Council, but individual site-by-site applications for development within the boundary of this Special Use Permit shall not be required to demonstrate compliance with the Land Use Intensity requirements.

 

B.                Uses:    Land uses within the Neighborhood Districts and the Village Green Districts must be limited to those described in the uses sown on the Master Plan Uses of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance. In cases where the Master Plan and Neighborhood Guidelines list a use not included in a particular zoning district according to subsection 12.3, the use shall not be permitted. Uses shall be in accordance with those defined in Article 2 of the Development Ordinance.

 

C.                Residential Uses:  That with the West Tract Special Use Permit there will be no more than 534 residential lots and no more than 634 dwelling units.

 

D.                Commercial Uses:  That the West Tract Special use Permit shall, along with all other Southern Village Special Use Permits or Special Use Permit Modifications other than the Village Core, not exceed 17,50 square feet of floor area of commercial land uses.

 

E.                 That the boundary of this West Tract Special use Permit does not include the proposed private recreation center or the multi-family development on Copperline Drive.

 

F.                 That the proposed building lot to be accessed from Carlton Drive may be used only for a single-family or two-family dwelling, and that the only clearing and grading shall be that necessary for constructing the house and driveway. Clearing and grading on this lot shall be kept to the minimum necessary.

 

3.                 Future Sewer Location:  That the developer negotiate with OWASA to determine if the proposed sewer lines in the public street can be designed in such a manner that they may be utilized for future off-site sewer extensions thereby reducing the impact of future sewer line construction on the large trees in and adjacent to the Resource Conservation District between Street “A” and Street “L.”

 

4.                 Clearing and Grading:

 

A.                That with final plans, the developer submit drawings which indicate the following:

 

Ø                  the final shape and size of the water quality ponds;

 

Ø                  all clearing and grading associated with the construction, maintenance, and operation of the ponds, including the excavation, side slopes, utility pipes and easements, erosion control devices, dams and spillways, pumps, access roads, and equipment/materials staging areas;

 

Ø                  grading plans and clearing limit lines;

 

Ø                  all utility lines and easements

 

Ø                  tree protection fencing locations; and

 

Ø                  any other information deemed appropriate by the Town Manager.

 

B.                That all cut and fill slopes along public rights-of-way shall be a maximum of 3:1 slope unless the Town Manager approves a specific exception.

 

5.         Permanent Retention Basin Installation:

 

A.        Compliance with the Town Watershed Protection District regulations, if applicable, shall be demonstrated with the provision of multiple permanent ponds.  For those portions of the development complying with the Low Density Option identified in the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall not be required.  For those portions of the development complying with the High Density Option identified in the Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall be required in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance.

 

B.         The size, accessibility, location, and design of each pond shall be approved by the Town Manager.

 

C.        These wet retention ponds shall meet or exceed the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management requirements and shall be designed so as to be approved by the Division of Environmental Management, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Town Manager.

 

D.        The property owner shall post a performance bond or other surety instrument satisfactory to the Town Manager, in an amount approved by the Town Manager to assure maintenance, repair, or reconstruction necessary for adequate performance of the engineered stormwater controls.

 

E.         For purposes of calculating impervious surface area for compliance with the water quality regulations, the proposed public park/ride lot shall not be counted as part of this development; it shall be counted as part of the public facilities on adjacent Town-owned property.

 

F.         For ponds proposed to be located  within the Resource Conservation District, the ponds must be designed so as not to be inundated by the flood waters from the base flood discharge.

 

G.        The homeowners association shall be responsible for arranging for annual inspections of all ponds  by an appropriately certified engineer, to determine whether the ponds and associated structures are operating acceptably according to design requirements, and to report findings of said inspections to the Town Manager, with such recommendations for maintenance or repair as may be warranted.  Any needed repairs shall be completed within 120 days unless otherwise approved by the Town Manager.  Restrictive covenants shall be recorded which shall spell out these responsibilities of the homeowners association for pond maintenance as provided for in the Special Use Permit.

 

H.        Maintenance of the ponds shall be the responsibility of the developer or a property/homeowner’s association.  A maintenance plan shall be provided for each of the retention ponds, to be approved by the Town Manager.  The plans shall address inspection, maintenance intervals, type of equipment required, access to each pond and related matters.

 

I.          Escrow account funds required as part of the 1993 Master Land Use Plan approval shall be returned to the developer upon provision of a performance bond or other surety instrument identified in item (d) above for the first pond(s).

 

J.          As part of every application for Final Plan Approval, Zoning Compliance Permit, and residential Building Permit, the developer shall provide an up-to-date cumulative total for impervious surfaces in the particular sub-basin.

 

K.        The minimum permanent pool depth shall be at least three (3) feet in addition to enough volume to store the accumulated sediment between clean out periods.

 

L.         All sediment deposited in the ponds during construction activity on contributing sites must be removed before “normal” pond operation begins.

 

M.        Emergency drains shall be installed in all ponds to allow access for repairs and sediment removal as necessary.

 

N.        Anti-seepage collars shall be used on any structures penetrating dams or water retaining embankments.

 

O.        Public storm drainage systems or other utilities shall not be located within a pond or dam structure.

 

P.         That access to Pond “D” located near Street “I” shall be provided from Street “I” unless the pond is located further up the Resource Conservation District at a location acceptable to the Town Manager.

 

Q.        That no ponds be created within the perimeter landscaped buffer required for the Southern Village Development.

 

R.         That the ponds be located and designed such that damage to existing large trees can be minimized.

 

6.         Other Water Resources Protection Regulations:

 

A.        That the applicant submit final plans which show the location of State or federally regulated wetlands on the site.

 

B.         That any proposed disturbance of wetlands shall demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal regulations.

 

7.         Required Transportation Related Improvements:

 

A.        Street Connections

 

            1) That street stubouts be provided in the following locations:

 

a)  one to the northern property line to connect to a street in Cobble Ridge Subdivision, Phase 3 and 4, (aka Culbreth Ridge Subdivision); and

 

b)  one to the western boundary to allow for future access to the currently undeveloped property to the west, at the most northern point that would meet Town standard.

 

            2) That four street crossings of Fan Branch and its tributary be provided

                 for vehicular access to the other tracts of Southern village:

 

a) an extension of Parkview Crescent crossing Fan Branch as a link to the Northeast Tract (Arlen Park);

 

b) an extension of Brookgreen Drive crossing Fan Branch as a link to the Market Street loop in the northern portion of the Village Core Storefront District; and

 

c) two crossings of a Fan Branch tributary in the portion of the West Tract which is south of Fan Branch, as a link to the northeastern portion of the Village Core Storefront District.

 

            3) A driveway for a single-family or two-family dwelling may be constructed with

                 direct access onto Carlton Drive.

 

            4) That streets that stubout to adjacent properties incorporate traffic calming

     features such as those outline in the Town’s report on traffic calming.

 

B.         Off-site Streets:

 

            That the developer construct Brookgreen Drive between Street “A” and Copperline Drive; and construct Copperline Drive between Brookgreen Drive and Kildaire Road in the village Core Storefront District prior to obtaining Certificates of Occupancy for the West Tract west of Fan Branch.

 

C.        Internal Streets:

 

The Roadway Hierarchy identifed on the Site plan, Sheet W-3, dated July 31, 1996 shall be modified to include:

 

1)  That Street “A” be constructed to a 27 foot cross-section from back-of-curb to back-of-curb with a 5 foot sidewalk on both sides, with seven foot tree lawns and a 60-foot right-of-way.

 

                        2)  That Street “C” be constructed to a 27 foot cross-section from back-of-curb to back-of-curb with a 5-foot sidewalk on both sides, with seven foot tree lawns and a 60-foot right-of-way.

 

                        3)  Construction of Kildaire Road west of Copperline Drive is not part of this Special Use Permit.

 

                        4)  A revised road hierarchy shall be submitted for approval by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of the first Zoning Compliance Permit for development in the West Tract.

 

            D.        Other Internal Street Improvements:

 

                        1) That the pavement design for all streets, bus routes, and alleys meet Town standards.

 

                        2) The public streets and alleys shall be constructed to Town standards.  The Town Manager may require certain proposed private alleys to be built to Town standards to withstand Town service vehicles.

 

3) That each road stubout to a subsequent phase be extended (cleared and  graded) at least 100 feet into the adjacent future phase(s).  Signage shall be located at each roadway stubout that indicates the roadway will be extended for future development.

 

                        4) That traffic control signage and pavement markings conform to the standards in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).  The Developer shall be responsible for maintaining the signs until the development is annexed by the Town.

 

                        5) That a vehicular crossing of Fan Branch shall be required to link the portion of the development identified as Arlen Park, the Northeast Tract, to the West Tract.

 

            E.         Pedestrian Paths:

 

                        1)  That sidewalk be installed on at least one side of each public street (except alleys). Sidewalk shall be installed on both sides of streets which are local through streets and neighborhood through streets (labelled “Type A” and “Type B” streets on the site plan).

 

                        2) That a pedestrian path be provided from the southern edge of the West Tract, around the proposed stormwater retention facility, and to the proposed elementary school site.

 

                        3) That a pedestian path be provided from the northeastern portion of the West Tract to the Culbreth Middle School site.

 

            F.         Transit:

 

                        1) That adequate transit stops, with benches, and possibly shelters, be provided as appropriate.  The Town Manager shall determine the number and location of transit stops to be located within the site as more is learned about the use of future buildings and potential transit needs.

 

            G.        Other Off-Site Improvements:

                        1) That the developer shall install a traffic signal or make a payment-in-lieu to the Town for the design and installation of a traffic signal at the Arlen Park/U.S. Highway 15-501 intersection (the northern intersection of the development on Hwy. 15-501) prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

                        2) That the developer construct a left turn lane on Culbreth Road at the proposed Cobble Ridge Subdivision, Phases 3 and 4, (aka Culbreth Ridge Subdivision) street intersection.

 

8.         Required Utility Related and Other Improvements:

 

            A.        Stormwater Runoff:

 

                        1)  All alleys without curb and gutter shall have side ditches and catch basins to handle stormwater drainage; or a revised design for inverted crown construction and drainage must be submitted for Town approval.

 

2)  Additional catch basins for the alleys must be provided as deeded necessary in the review of final plans.

 

                        3)  Stormwater from all streets and alleys shall be piped past the adjacent building sites and shall be contained in a minimum 30 foot wide storm drainage easements, unless the width is modified by the Town Manager; and, if necessary, the number or configuration of lots shall be adjusted accordingly.

 

                        4)  A stormwater management plan based on a 10-yeaar storm shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  The post-development stormwater run-off rate shall not exceed the pre-development rate for all non-residential use.  Stormwater calculations should be determined using the Town’s HYDROS model.

 

                        5)  Underground storm drainage shall be provided for the “closes” and “greens” if they are to become landscaped islands.

 

                        6)  Design and construction of any stormwater management facility shall be approved  by the Town Manager. All plans and final plats shall include dedication of permanent easements and construction of a paved or gravel drive for ingress/egress as necessary for construction, maintenance operations and equipment.  The drive shall be in a location to be approved by the Town Manager.

 

            B.         Other Utilities:

 

                        1)  That the final plans demonstrate there is no conflict between utility lines, easements, and other site elements.

 

                        2)  That where possible, sewer lines be located out of the greenway system and placed under nearby streets.

 

                        3)  Detailed phase-specific utility extension plans shall be reviewed for approval by OWASA and the Town Manager.  These plans shall include water and sewer line construction both off-site and on-site.

 

            C.        Other:

 

                        1)  That community yard waste/compost site(s) be provided, with the number and location to be approved by the Town Manager.  Property owners’ associations shall be responsible for the management and maintenance of the yard waste/compost site(s).

 

2)  That play equipment, benches, and/or picnic shelters be provided in the neighborhood parks, with type, number, and location to be approved by the Town Manager.

 

9.                 Accessory Dwelling Units:  That an accessory dwelling unit may be constructed only on a residential lot at least 50 feet wide, with provision for at least 2 parking spaces on the lot, behind the primary dwelling unit.  This restriction shall also be included in the restrictive covenants for the development.

 

10.       Ownership and Responsibilities of Common Areas:

 

A.        That an owners’ association be created for the maintenance and regulation of the private (residential, office, park, landscape, and commercial) areas.  All property owners owning land within the area of the Master Land Use Plan Modification approval, excluding governmental bodies, must be represented in the owners’ association.  This owners’ association shall have maintenance responsibilities for development elements for which the owners’ association retains ownership including the stormwater management facilities.

 

B.         Separate neighborhood association(s) and owners’ association(s) shall be created for the maintenance and regulation of the residential, office, and commercial areas.  The documents creating these entities shall be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager, and shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

C.        The responsibilities of these entities shall include the ownership and maintenance of the neighborhood compost sites, private alleys, private green spaces, private parks and recreation space, permanent retention basins, and the landscape buffers.

 

D.        These entities shall also be responsible for any “add-on fees” charged by Duke Power for special street lighting.

 

11.       Density Options:  A density transfer option shall be available to the developer.  Under the density transfer option, the developer may acquire developable land or obtain restrictions on development of that land and use that land, if it is located within the same drainage basin as the Southern village, to help meet density thresholds for purposes associated with the Watershed Protection District regulations.  Restrictions on development of such land shall be structured in a manner that will allow the Town to assure that the restrictions are permanent, and shall be in a form approved by the Town Manager and Town Attorney.

 

12.       Design-Related Stipulations:  The following revisions and additions shall be incorporated into the applicant’s Neighborhood Guidelines.  A revised copy of the Guidelines shall be submitted to the Town’s Planning Department, and shall supersede the original set of guidelines.  The revised guidelines must be received and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the first phase of development.  Subsequent revisions may be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager.

 

A.        All sidewalks within public rights-of-way shall be at least 5 feet in width.  Alternatively, the Town Manager may approve a narrower width in situations where there are topographical or other constraints.

 

B.         Landscape protection measures shall be to Town standards.  The Town Manager may review and approve other methods on a case by case basis.  Because uses other than single-family and two-family lots are allowed in the Neighborhood District and Village Green District, tree protection fencing shall be required during construction of public utilities and roadways and in other areas as determined to be necessary by the Town Manager.

 

C.        Include specific street construction standards and materials; maximum slopes and vertical curve data; curb type; drainage methods; and typical cross-sections.

 

D.        Address landscaping of street side slopes and traffic islands.

 

E.         Address lighting of streets and alleys.

 

F.         All alley/street intersections must be at least 100 feet apart.  The Town Manager may approve narrower separations on a case by case basis.

 

G.        No alleys shall intersect a street at a point where the street slopes over 15%.

 

H.        Widths of the right-of-way for public alleys shall be:

                        -with no curb and gutter - 30 feet

                        -with curb and gutter -  24 feet.

            The Town Manager may approve narrower widths on a case by case basis.

 

I.          That all driveway locations, for residential and non-residential uses, be reviewed for approved by the Town Manager.

 

J.          Parking areas shall be located behind the multi-family and non-residential buildings, where possible.

 

K.        Provide more specifics on the provisions for refuse storage and recycling containers, pads, and access and other refuse management issues.

 

L.         That all signage shall be reviewed for approval by the Town’s Appearance Commission.

 

M.        That the building setbacks for the perimeter of the 312-acre site be in accordance with Subsection 18.8.9.4 of the Development Ordinance.  Setbacks within the development shall be as specified in the applicant’s Neighborhood Design Guidelines.

 

N.        That speed limits and on-street parking shall be regulated by the Council.

 

O.        Front yard driveways and parking areas shall be prohibited for the lots fronting on Street R-R (the continuation of the northern highway entrance into the site).

 

13.       Review Process:  For subphases and blocks and buildings within this Special Use Permit, the following review processes apply:

 

            Residential:

            Single-family and two-family development to be approved by the Town Manager.

 

            Townhouses to be approved by the Planning Board as Site Plan Reviews.

 

            Non-residential:

            Non-residential development to be approved by the Planning Board as Site Plan Reviews.

 

            Signage:

            All signage to be approved by the Appearance Commission.

 

14.       Stormwater Management Plan:  That a detailed stormwater management plan, based on the Town’s HYDROS program, shall be submitted with applications for Zoning Compliance Permit for approval by the Town Manager.

 

15.       Steep Slopes:  That each submittal for final plan approval shall include a map showing lots and street segments on slopes of 10% or more and indicating how the development and construction will comply with the steep slopes regulations in the Development Ordinance:

 

-                    for slopes of 10-15%, site preparation techniques shall be used which minimize grading and site disturbance;

 

-                    for slopes of 15-25%, demonstrate specialized site design techniques and approaches for building and site preparation; and

 

-                    for slopes of 25% or greater, provide a detailed site analysis of soil conditions, hydrology, bedrock conditions, and other engineering or environmental aspects of the site.

 

Each final plan application shall demonstrate compliance with the steep slopes regulations in the Development Ordinance.  The Town Manager shall decide if the proposed building and site engineering techniques are appropriate.

 

16.       Encroachment Agreements:  That any required State or local encroachment agreements (for landscaping and other required improvements) be approved prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

Stipulations Related to Recreation Area

 

17.       Greenway:

 

A.        That the applicant provide an asphalt pedestrian/bicycle path, sections of which would be within the greenways and recreation areas along Wilson Creek and Fan Branch, and across Morgan Creek.  The Greenway shall be deeded to the Town and shall contain a pedestrian, non-motorized vehicle easement.

 

            Asphalt paths shall be provided from the southern property line of the overall development, extend through the village site, extend beyond the northern property line of the overall development, across Culbreth Road, to Morgan Creek and over Morgan Creek.

 

            A bikelane and a sidewalk shall be provided along the south side of Culbreth Road, from the current termination of the greenway/bicycle path at Culbreth Road to the intersection of Culbreth Road and Highway 15-501.  Install pedestrian signs and crosswalk striping across Highway 15-501, across Culbreth Road and across Mount Carmel Church Road.

 

            For cyclists, construct a bikelane on both sides of Highway 15-501 from the Culbreth road intersection north to Purefoy Road with a safety railing on each side of the bridges.

 

            For pedestrians, construct a sidewalk on the west side of Highway 15-501 to the point of the nothern-most entrance ramp (ramp onto westbound Fordham Boulevard).  Install pedestrian signs and crosswalk striping across Highway 15-501 and across the exit ramp intersection.  Provide a sidewalk from this interesection north to Purefoy road on the east side of Highway 15-501.

 

            The location, width, and design/construction standards for the bikelanes, sidewalks, and paths are to be approved by the Town Manager.

 

            Within the development, a several block long portion of the improved greenway path may be shifted away from the creek and up to the public roadway subject to Town Manager approval.  For this several block section, a six (6) foot wide tree lawn shall be provided between the back of curb and the improved ten (10) foot wide path and a three (3) foot wide shoulder shall be provided between the path and the beginning of the slope down to Fan Branch.  For this several block section, a natural surface trail shall be provided near the creek.

 

B.         A payment-in-lieu of constructing the connection to the north side of Morgan Creek from Culbreth Road, the amount to be approved by the Town Manager, may be provided to the Town.  In the event that a future decision is made by the Town Council not to construct this link, the funds may be used for other greenway purposes in the immediate area that connect to the existing Southern Village greenway.

 

C.        That a 50 foot greenway trail corridor be deeded to the Homeowners’ Association along the west fork of Fan Branch (if developer field locates the trail, the corridor width may be reduced to 15 feet).  A greenway easement overlaying the greenway corridor shall have wording “public pedestrian, non-motorized vehicle, motorized wheelchair, trail construction and trail maintenance easement, dedicated to the Town of Chapel Hill.

 

D.        That the trail not be paved and that all trail work will be accomplished with hand tools.

 

E.         That slopes associated with the recreation areas and greenway corridor be no greater than 3:1, unless the Town Manager approves a specific exception.

 

F.         That the greenways shown on the plans, public parks, public recreation areas, and community recycling center(s) shall be dedicated and deeded to the Town.

 

18.       Other Recreation Facilities:

 

A.        That the private greens and closes, greenway trail corridor, multi-purpose field, basketball court, and volleyball court be owned and maintained by the Homeowners’ Association.

 

B.         That play equipment and/or picnic shelters be provided in the neighborhood parks and private green, with type, number, and location to be approved by the Town Manager.

 

19.       Recreation Space Requirements for Residential Component:  That recreation space of sufficient area and type, according to Article 13 of the Development Ordinance, be provided for the residential components within this phase of development, including amenities such as playground equipment, benches, and/or picnic shelters.  The plans for the recreation area shall be reviewed and approval by the Town Manager.  The recreation space may be dedicated and deeded to the Town of Chapel Hill for Parks and Recreation purposes only, or to an owners’ association (to be determined by the Town Manager).  The developer remains responsible for the recreation space unless the Town or a homeowners’ association accepts the property.  No private recreation facility on this site may be used to fulfill the Town’s recreation space requirements for this development.

 

Stipulations Related to the Resource Conservation District

 

20.       Boundaries:  That the boundaries of the Resource Conservation District for the entire West Tract be indicated on final plans submitted for the first phase of development.  A note shall be added to all final plats and plans, indicating that “Development shall be restricted within the Resource Conservation District in accordance with the Development Ordinance” on this plan and on all plans and plats for subsequent Special Use Permit applications.

 

21.       Buildable Lots:  That no lot be created that would require a Resource Conservation District Variance in order to be built upon.

 

            In addition, for each lot it must be demonstrated that there is sufficient buildable area outside the Resource Conservation District, slopes of 25% or greater, water quality vegetated buffers, other required landscape buffers, easements, and any applicable building setback limits.

 

22.       Variances:  That all variances necessary for development within the Resource Conservation District be obtained before application for final plat or final plan approval for the subject phase(s) of development.

 

23.       Construction Standards:  That for encroachment(s) into the Resource Conservation District, the requirements and standards of subsections 5.6 and 5.8 of the Development Ordinance must be adhered to, unless the application is granted administrative exemptions from sub-section 5.8.  Encroachments include, but are not limited to:

 

                        - street crossings;

                        - pedestrian/bicycle paths along and over the streams;

                        - wet detention basin/stormwater management facilities; and

                        - utility lines.

 

Stipulations Related to State and Federal Approvals

 

24.       State or Federal Approvals:  That any required State or federal permits or encroachment agreements (including but not limited to those needed for improvements to Highway 15-501, for stormwater management and erosion control, for water and sewer extension, and for development in the wetlands and Watershed Protection District) be approved and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town of Chapel Hill prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.

 

25.       NCDOT Approvals:  That plans for improvements to State-maintained roads be approved by NCDOT prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.

 

Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements

 

26.       Landscape Protection Plan:  That a detailed landscape protection plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  This plan shall include areas of vegetation to be preserved; the anticipated clearing limit lines; proposed grading; proposed utility lines; a detail of protective fencing; and construction parking and materials staging/storage areas.  The plan shall show the use of tree protection fencing between infrastructure construction and existing vegetation in:

 

                        - all required buffers;

                        - all common areas (public or private);

                        - all areas designed to be used for residential,

  non-residential, or mixed use development; and

- other areas, to be determined by the Town Manager.

 

27.       Street Tree Plantings:  That the developer shall provide street tree plantings in the following locations:

 

                        - along selected streets; and

                        - in the parks and greens.

 

            Final plans for the West Tract shall include a street tree plan developed in conjunction with local utility companies as well as by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  Letters from utility companies specifically approving the street tree plans shall be required, and if necessary, utilities shall be relocated to permit planting of trees as proposed in the applicant’s conceptual street tree planting plan.  These trees shall be installed to Town standards as detailed in the Town’s Design Manual.

 

28.       Landscape Plan Approval:  That detailed landscape plans (including buffers and street tree plantings), landscape maintenance plans, and lighting plans be reviewed by the Town Manager for approval prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

29.       Landscaping Buffers:

 

A.        The following buffers shall be provided; and if any existing vegetation is to be used to satisfy the buffer requirements, the vegetation will be protected by fencing from adjacent construction;

 

-           Type C buffer (minimum width 30 feet) along the northern property line shared with Culbreth Middle School property; and

 

-           Type C buffer (minimum width 30 feet) along the southwest property line shared with lots fronting on Dogwood Acres Drive; and

 

-           Type B buffer (minimum width 20 feet) along other property lines which coincide with the perimeter of the 312-acre Southern Village site.

 

B.         No ponds and no construction, other than perpendicular utility lines and road crossings, shall occur in the landscape buffers.

 

C.        Supplemental plantings may be necessary to fulfill the requirements for buffers, screening, and entranceway plantings.

 

D.        The landscape buffers shall not be located on private individual lots, but shall be on land owned and maintained by the Homeowners’ Association.

 

E.         That the existing Carlton Drive water line shall be abandoned prior to platting of any of the adjacent lots and, when the line is abandoned, the easement shall be replanted with a mix of trees and evergreens to provide a screen between the West Tract and the adjacent Dogwood Acres neighborhood.

 

30.       Greens and “Closes”:  All open space (except for the greenway), greens and closes shall be maintained by a Homeowners’ Association.  Closes located in the public rights-of-way may be owned by the Town; with appropriate encroachment agreements, the Homeowners’ Association may landscape and maintain these areas.

 

31.       Landscaping Around Permanent Detention Ponds:  That landscaping approved by the Town Manager shall be provided around the permanent detention ponds, and that such landscaping shall be in accordance with local and State watershed protection regulations.

 

Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer and Other Utilities

 

32.       Fireflow:

 

A.        That a detailed hydrant plan and fireflow report, certified by an engineer registered in North Carolina, shall be required prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  The following flow and pressure shall be provided:

 

Ø                  For non-residential: 2,500 - 12,000 gallons per minute, at 20 pound per square inch residual pressure;

 

Ø                  For multi-family: 1,500 - 2,500 gallons per minute, at 20 pounds per square inch residual pressure; and

 

Ø                  For single-family: 750 gallons per minute, at 20 pounds per square inch residual pressure.

 

B.         Abandonment of the recently constructed “temporary” Carlton Drive water line shall not occur until a new connection from the Carlton Drive water line is operational.

 

33.       Utility/Lighting Plan Approval:  That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Duke Power, Time Warner Cable, Public Service Company, BellSouth, and the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. The property owner shall be responsible for assuring that these utilities, including cable television, are extended to serve the development.

 

34.       Sewer Line Locations Relative to Greenways:  That, to the greatest intent possible, sewer lines avoid the Resource Conservation District, the wetlands, and the detention ponds and placed under nearby streets.

 

35.       Utility Service Laterals:  That prior to paving streets, utility service laterals (including cable and telephone) shall be stubbed out to the front property lines of each lot.  Sanitary sewer laterals shall be capped off above ground.

 

36.       OWASA Easements:  That easement documents as required by OWASA and the Town Manager be recorded before final plat approval.

 

Miscellaneous Stipulations

 

37.       Solid Waste Management Plan:

 

A.        That a detailed solid waste management plan, including a recycling plan and a plan for managing and minimizing construction debris, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

B.         A detailed Refuse Collection Plan must be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  This plan shall indicate how refuse is proposed to be collected in different parts of the site.  This plan shall be consistent with the alley design plan and indicate that Town service vehicles will only utilize alleys if they are public alleys.

 

C.        For single- and two-family lots, refuse/recyclable collection will be provided by curbside service, subject to exceptions approved by the Town Manager.  A note to this effect shall be placed on final plat(s).

 

38.       Transportation Management Plan:  That prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance permit for any portion of the proposed non-residential uses, the applicant prepare, for approval by the Town Manager, a Transportation Management Plan.  The required components of each Transportation Management Plan shall include:

 

Ø                  Provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;

 

Ø                  Provisions for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;

 

Ø                  Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;

 

Ø                  Ridesharing incentives; and

 

Ø                  Public Transit incentives.

 

39.       Detailed Plans:

 

A.        That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), landscape plans, and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable regulations and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.

 

B.         The Town Manager may require adjustments to the street design to enhance safety and maintenance operations.

 

C.        The developer shall be responsible for assuring that all utilities, including cable television, be extended to serve the development.

 

D.        All utility easements and easement documents for utility companies and the Town shall be recorded before final plat approval.

 

40.       Certificates of Occupancy:  That no Certificates of Occupancy be issued until all required public improvements are complete; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plats.

 

            If the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; and no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plats.

 

41.       Sight Triangle Easements:  That sight triangle easements be provided on the final plat.

 

42.       New Streets - Traffic Signs:  That the property owners shall be responsible for placement and maintenance of temporary regulatory traffic signs, including street name signs, before issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy until such time that the street system is accepted for maintenance by the Town.

 

43.       New Street Names and Numbers:  That the name of the development and its streets and house/building numbers, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

44.       Erosion Control:  That a general soil erosion and sedimentation control plan for the West Tract be reviewed by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer with the review of the final plans for the first phase of development.

 

            A phase-specific detailed erosion control plan shall be submitted with each final plan application for review and approval by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer.

 

45.       Silt Control:  That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

 

46.       Construction Sign Required:  That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number, the contractor’s representative, with a phone number, and a telephone number for regulatory information prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

47.       Continued Validity:  That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

 

48.       Non-Severability:  That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the Special Use Permit for the West Tract of the Southern Village in accordance with plans and conditions listed above.

 

This the 4th day of November, 1996.

 

Council Member Andresen reminded the Council that it was already one hour past their normal quitting time.

 

Council Member Chilton asked if there was a request for a closed session this evening.  Mr. Horton answered no.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-5a.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown proposed an amendment on page 44, number 4, that the word "may" in the last sentence be replaced with the word "shall."

 

The Mover and Seconder accepted this amendment.

 

Mr. Waldon stated that at the beginning of the discussion Council Member Brown had asked if there were other places where this word needed to be changed, and the staff will do so in all cases where necessary.

 

Mayor Pro tem Brown proposed an amendment on page 45, number 7, to add the phrase"...and the Town Council will review, and if approved,..." after the phrase "the Town's Planning Department."

 

The Seconder refused the amendment.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK, TO APPROVE THE LANGUAGE AS NOTED ABOVE.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 5-4, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, CAPOWSKI, CHILTON AND WIGGINS VOTING AYE.

 

Council Member Franck proposed that the amendment offered by memorandum by the Southern Village Limited Partnership be included.  He stated that amendment is on page 43, number 3.K, changing "35 foot cross section" to "27 foot cross section."  Council Member Franck also suggested the same language as was included in the previous resolution to the top of page 48, to read "...under subsection 5.8."

 

The Mover and Seconder accepted this amendment.

 

THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-5a WAS ADOPTED 8-1, WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN VOTING NAY.

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A RECREATION CENTER - SOUTHERN VILLAGE (126-A-4) (96-11-4/R-5a)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit, Recreation Center proposed by Bryan Properties, Inc., on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 126, Block A, part of Lot 4K and part of Lot 20; if developed according to the  Plans dated  August 1, 1996, and the conditions listed below, would:

 

1.         Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;

 

2.         Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Article 12, 13, 14, and 18, and with all other applicable regulations;

 

3.         Be located, designed and operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and

 

4.         Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

 

These findings are conditioned on the following:

 

                                                Stipulations Specific to the Development

 

1.         Construction Deadline:  That construction begin by November 4, 1998 and be completed by November 4, 2008.

 

2.         Land Use Intensity:  That the total square footage permitted for non-residential use shall be no more than 6,000 square feet.

 

3.         Required Improvements:

 

a.         That one-half of a 120-foot right-of-way along the Highway 15-501 frontage be dedicated, with additional right-of-way dedicated at the project entrance off Highway 15-501 if determined to be necessary by the Town Manager.  The entire dedication shall occur prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the first phase of development.

 

b.         That the developer add a left turn lane and a right hand deceleration/turn lane on Highway 15-501 at the entrance into the neighborhood district, subject to NCDOT approval.

 

.         That this northern entrance off Highway 15-501 be constructed at a width which accommodates three lanes:  one lane into the development, one lane for right turns onto Highway 15-501, and one left turn lane onto Highway 15-501.  The right-of-way width should be such that it accommodates the addition of a fourth lane should it be necessary in the future.

 

d.         That the developer shall install traffic signals or shall provide signal payment-in-lieu to the Town for the intersections of Highway 15-501 and the proposed northern and southern entrance to the village.  The signals must be installed or payment-in-lieu made by the developer prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for any phase of development using these intersections for primary access. 

 

e.         That sidewalk be installed on at least one side of each public street (except alleys).

 

f.          That adequate transit stops, with benches, and possibly shelters, be provided as appropriate.  The Town Manager shall determine the number and location of transit stops to be located within the site as more is learned about the use of future buildings and potential transit needs.  The streets shall be built to Town standards, and shall be dedicated as public streets.

 

g.         That each road stubout to a subsequent phase be extended (cleared and graded) at least 100 feet into the adjacent future phase(s).  Signage shall be located at each roadway stubout that indicates the roadway will be extended for future development.

 

h.         That traffic control signage and pavement markings conform to the standards in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).  The Developer shall be responsible for maintaining the signs until the development is annexed by the Town.

 

i.          Detailed phase-specific utility extension plans shall be reviewed for approval by OWASA and the Town Manager.  These plans shall include water and sewer line construction both off-site and on-site.

 

j.          That detention basin(s) and/or other stormwater management facilities be provided in accordance with conditions and with all applicable Town regulations, including the Town's Water Shed Protection District regulations, State regulations, and federal (FEMA) regulations.  Design and construction of any stormwater management facility shall be approved by the Town Manager.  All plans and final plats shall include dedication of permanent easements and construction of an improved drive for ingress/egress as necessary for construction, maintenance operations and equipment.

 

k.         Construct "Street A" to a 27-foot cross-section from back-of-curb to back-of-curb, with a 5-foot sidewalk and a 60-foot right-of-way, across the property frontage.

 

l.          Construct Brookgreen Drive to a 35-foot cross-section from back-of-curb to back-of-curb, with a 5-foot sidewalk, a 7-foot tree lawn and a 60-foot right-of-way, from Copperline Drive to the proposed T-intersection in parcel "A" of the West Tract.

 

m.        Construct Copperline Drive to a 37-foot cross-section from back-of-curb to back-of-curb, with 62-foot right-of-way between Brookgreen Drive and Kildaire Road.

 

n.         Construct Kildaire Road to a 41-foot cross section, with a 67-foot right-of-way from the Market Street Loop to Copperline Drive.

 

o.         Prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, provide a street sign, on street parking, and pavement marking plan for approval by the Town Manager.  The signs and pavement markings shall be installed by the applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

 

p.         Sight distance triangles shall be shown on all final plans for all street, alley, and major driveway intersections.  Sight distance easements shall be shown on the final plat.  Sight distance triangles will be based on a minimum vehicular speed of 20 m.p.h. as shown in the Town of Chapel Hill Design Manual and the Standard Engineering Specifications and Standard Details.  The Town Manager may require sight distance triangles based on higher vehicular speeds when warranted by roadway conditions.

 

q.         Construct the parking lot to Town standard for dimensions and pavement design.

 

r.          That all driveway locations for residential and non-residential uses are subject to the approval of the Town Manager.

 

s.                  All cut and fill slopes along the public rights-of-way shall have a maximum 3:1 slope unless the Town Manager approves a specific modification.

 

            t.          That a curb cut shall be provided along Brookgreen Drive to allow handicap access from the curbside handicapped parking to the improved sidewalk that leads to the basketball court.

 

4.         Ownership and Responsibilities of Common Areas:  That an owners' association be created for the maintenance and regulation of the private (residential, office, park, landscape, and commercial) areas.  All property owners owning land within the area of the Master Land Use Plan approval, excluding governmental bodies, must be represented in the owners' association.  This owners' association shall have maintenance responsibilities for development elements which affect the entire development, including the stormwater management facility.

 

In addition, separate neighborhood association(s) and owners' association(s) shall be created for the maintenance and regulation of the residential, office, and commercial areas. The documents creating these entities shall be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager, and shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

The responsibilities of these entities shall include the ownership and maintenance of the neighborhood compost sites, private alleys, private green spaces, private parks and recreation space, existing cemeteries and grave sites, and the perimeter buffers.  These entities shall also be responsible for any "add-on fees" charged by Duke Power for special street lighting.

 

5.         Permanent Retention Basin Installation:

 

a.         Compliance with the Town Watershed Protection District regulations, if applicable, shall be demonstrated with the provision of multiple permanent ponds.  For those portions of the development complying with the Low Density Option identified in the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall not be required.  For those portions of the development complying with the High Density Option identified in the Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall be required in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance.

 

b.         The size, accessibility, location, and design of each pond shall be approved by the Town Manager.

 

c.         These wet retention ponds shall be designed and constructed in accordance with standards and specifications established by the Town Manager, and designed to control the first one inch of stormwater.

 

d.         The property owner shall post a performance bond or other surety instrument satisfactory to the Town Manager, in an amount approved by the Town Manager to assure maintenance, repair, or reconstruction necessary for adequate performance of the engineered stormwater controls.

 

e.         For purposes of calculating impervious surface area for compliance with the water quality regulations, the proposed public park/ride lot shall not be counted as part of this development;  it shall be counted as part of the public facilities on adjacent Town-owned property.

 

f.          For ponds proposed to be located within the Resource Conservation District, the ponds must be designed so as not to be inundated by the flood waters from the base flood discharge.

 

g.         A maintenance plan shall be provided for each of the retention ponds.

 

h.         As part of every application for Final Plan Approval, Zoning Compliance Permit, and residential Building Permit, the developer shall provide an up-to-date cumulative total for impervious surfaces in the particular sub-basin.

 

6.         Density Options:  A density transfer option shall be available to the developer.  Under the density transfer option, the developer may acquire developable land or obtain restrictions on development of that land and use that land, if it is located within the same drainage basin as the Southern Village, to help meet density thresholds for purposes associated with the Watershed Protection District regulations.  Restrictions on development of such land shall be structed in a manner that will allow the Town to assure that the restrictions are permanent, and shall be in a form approved by the Town Manager and Town Attorney.

 

7.         Design-Related Stipulations:  The following revisions and additions shall be incorporated into the applicant's Neighborhood Guidelines.  A revised copy of the Guidelines shall be submitted to the Town's Planning Department, and the Town Council will review, and give final approval, and then shall supersede the original set of guidelines.  The revised guidelines must be received and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the first phase of development.  Subsequent revisions may be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager.

 

a.         All sidewalks within public rights-of-way shall be at least 5 feet in width. Alternatively, the Town Manager may approve a narrower width in situations where there are topographical or other constraints.

 

b.         Landscape protection measures shall be to Town standards.  The Town Manager may review and approve other methods on a case by case basis.  Because uses other than single-family and two-family lots are allowed in the Neighborhood District and Village Green District, tree protection fencing shall be required during construction of public utilities and roadways and in other areas as determined to be necessary by the Town Manager.

 

c.         Include specific street construction standards and materials; maximum slopes and vertical curve data; curb type; drainage methods; and typical cross-sections.

 

d.         Address landscaping of street side slopes and traffic islands.

 

e.         Address lighting of streets and alleys.

 

f.          All alley/street intersections must be at least 100 feet apart.  The Town Manager may approve narrower separations on a case by case basis.

 

g.         No alleys shall intersect a street at a point where the street slopes over 15%.

 

h.         Widths of the right-of-way for public alleys shall be:

- with no curb and gutter - 30 feet

- with curb and gutter - 24 feet.

 

                        The Town Manager may approve narrower widths on a case by case basis.

 

i.          All driveway locations, for residential and non-residential uses, be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager.

 

j.          Parking areas shall be located behind the multifamily and non-residential buildings where possible.

 

k.         Provide more specifics on the provisions for refuse storage and recycling containers, pads, and access and other refuse management issues.

 

l.          That all signage shall be reviewed for approval by the Town's Appearance Commission.

 

m.        That the building setbacks for the perimeter of the 312-acre site be in accordance with Subsection 18.8.9.4 of the Development Ordinance.  Setbacks within the development shall be as specified in the applicant's Neighborhood Design Guidelines.

 

n.         That speed limits and on-street parking shall be regulated by the Council.

 

o.         Front yard driveways and parking areas shall be prohibited for the lots fronting on Street R-R (the continuation of the northern highway entrance into the site).

 

8.         Land-Use Related Stipulation: That land uses shall be limited to those described in the uses shown on the approved Master Plan (and included in the Neighborhood Guidelines) and Subsection 12.3 (schedule of uses) of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance.

 

In cases where the Master Plan and Neighborhood Guidelines list a use not included in Subsection 12.3 of the Development Ordinance, the use shall not be permitted.  Uses shall be in accordance with those defined in Article 2 of the Development Ordinance.

 

9.         Building Elevations, Signage and Lighting Approval: That detailed elevation drawings for the buildings, lighting and all signage be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

10.       Stormwater Management Plan:  That a general stormwater management plan for this Special Use Permit be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of the first Zoning Compliance Permit.  A detailed stormwater management plan, based on the Town's Hydros program, shall be submitted with applications for plat approval and Zoning Compliance Permits for approval by the Town Manager.

 

                                                   Stipulations Related to Steep Slopes

 

11.       Steep Slopes:  That each application for Final Plan Approval include a map showing lots and street segments on slopes of 10% or more and indicating how the development and construction will comply with the steep slopes regulations in the Development Ordinance:

 

-           for slopes of 10-15%, site preparation techniques shall be used which minimize grading and site disturbance;

 

-           for slopes of 15-25%, demonstrate specialized site design techniques and approaches for building and site preparation; and

 

-           for slopes of 25% or greater, provide a detailed site analysis of soil conditions, hydrology, bedrock conditions, and other engineer/environmental aspects of the site.

 

Each final plan application shall demonstrate compliance with the steep slopes regulations in the Development Ordinance.  The Town Manager shall decide if the proposed building and site engineering techniques are appropriate.

 

12.             Encroachment Agreements:  That any required State or local encroachment agreements (for landscaping and other required improvements) be approved prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

                                   Stipulations Related to the Resource Conservation District

 

13.       Boundaries:  That the boundaries of the Resource Conservation District be indicated on  all final plan applications.  A note shall be added to all final plats and plans, indicating that "Development shall be restricted with the Resource Conservation District in accordance with the Development Ordinance."

 

14.       Variances:  That all variances necessary for development within the Resource Conservation District be obtained before application for final plat or final plan approval for the subject phase(s) of development.

 

15.       Construction Standards:  That for encroachment(s) into the Resource Conservation District, the requirements and standards of subsections 5.6 and 5.8 of the Development Ordinance must be adhered to, unless the application is granted administrative exemptions from Section 5.8. Encroachments include, but are not limited to:

 

- street crossings

- pedestrian/bicycle paths along and over the streams

- wet detention basin/stormwater management facility

- utility lines.

 

16.       State or Federal Approvals:  That any required State or Federal permits or encroachment agreements (including but not limited to those needed for improvements to Highway 15-501, for stormwater management and erosion control, for water and sewer extension, and for development in the Water Supply Protection Area) be approved and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town of Chapel Hill prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.

 

17.       NCDOT Approvals:  That plans for improvements to State-maintained roads be approved by NCDOT prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.

 

                                             Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements

 

18.       Landscape Protection Plan:  That a detailed landscape protection plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

This plan shall include areas of vegetation to be preserved; the anticipated clearing limit lines; proposed grading; proposed utility lines; a detail of protective fencing; and construction parking and materials staging/storage areas.

 

The plan shall show the use of tree protection fencing between infrastructure construction and existing vegetation in:

-           all required buffers

-           all common areas (public or private)

-           all areas designed to be used for multifamily (including townhouses) and nonresidential, or mixed use development

-           other areas, to be determined by the Town Manager

 

19.       Landscape Plan Approval:  That the applicant's planting plan be revised to include a dense evergreen hedge and associated ornamental trees between the sidewalk and parking lot unless alternative screening is authorized by the Appearance Commission.  The revised plan shall comply with sight distance requirements.

 

That detailed landscape plans (including buffers and street tree plantings), landscape maintenance plans, and lighting plans be reviewed by the Town Manager and the Appearance Commission for approval prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

20.       Landscaping around permanent detention:  That landscaping approved by the Town Manager shall be provided around the permanent detention ponds, and that such landscaping shall be in accordance with local and State watershed protection regulations.

 

                                    Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer and Other Utilities

 

21.       Fireflow:  A detailed hydrant plan and fireflow report shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

22.       OWASA Easements:  That easement documents as required by OWASA and the Town Manager be recorded before final plat approval.

 

23.       Pool Water Discharge:  That the pool water drainage line shall not be directly connected into the OWASA sanitary sewer line or the Town's stormwater drainage lines.

 

24.       Utility/Lighting Plan Approval:  That a detailed utility/lighting plan be approved by OWASA, Duke Power, Time Warner Cable, Public Service Company, Southern Bell, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  The property owner shall be responsible for assuring that these utilities, including cable television are extended to serve the development.  

 

 

                                                          Miscellaneous Stipulations

 

25.       Wetlands:  That the applicant submit final plans which show the location of State or federally regulated wetlands on the site.  Any proposed disturbance of wetlands shall demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal regulations.

 

26.       Solid Waste Management Plan:  That a detailed solid waste management plan, including a recycling plan and plan for managing and minimizing construction debris, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

27.       Detailed Plans:  That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), landscape plans, and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable regulations and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.

 

The Town Manager may require adjustments to the street design to enhance safety and maintenance operations.

 

28.       Certificates of Occupancy:  That no Certificates of Occupancy be issued until all required public improvements are complete; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plats.

 

If the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plats.

 

29.       Sight Triangle Easements:  That sight triangle easements be provided on the final plat.

 

30.       New Streets - Traffic Signs:  That the property owners shall be responsible for placement and maintenance of temporary regulatory traffic signs including street name signs before issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy until such time that the street system is accepted for maintenance by the Town.

 

31.       New Street Names and Numbers:  That the name of the development and its streets and house/building numbers, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

32.       Erosion Control:  That a phase-specific detailed erosion control plan shall be submitted with each final plan application for review and approval by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer.

 

33.       Silt Control:  That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

 

34.       Construction Sign Required:  That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number, the contractor’s representative, with a phone number, and a telephone number for regulatory information prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

35.       Continued Validity:  That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

 

36.       Non-Severability:  That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approves the Special Use Permit for the Recreation Center of the Southern Village in accordance with plans and conditions listed above.

 

This the 4th day of November, 1996.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN.  THE MOTION FAILED 3-6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, AND CHILTON VOTING AYE.

 

Mr. Horton said in the interest of time, the Council could make it clear that their intent was that all the amendments made to the previous resolution are to be carried forward to all applicable parts of the remaining resolutions.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-6a, TO INCORPORATE THE SAME AMENDMENTS MADE TO THE PREVIOUS SPECIAL USE PERMIT RESOLUTIONS INCLUDING THOSE MADE BY THE APPLICANT AND BY THE COUNCIL.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED 7 TO 2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND BROWN VOTING NO.

 

A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - HOUSING OF THE SOUTHERN VILLAGE (126-A-4)

(96-11-4/R-6a)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that it finds that the Special Use Permit, Planned Development - housing proposed by Bryan Properties, Inc., on property identified as Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 126, Block A, part of Lot 4 and part of Lot 4K; if developed according to the Plans dated March 28, 1996, and the conditions listed below, would:

 

1.     Be located, designed, and proposed to be operated so as to maintain or promote the public health, safety and general welfare;

 

2.     Comply with all required regulations and standards of the Development Ordinance, including all applicable provisions of Article 12, 13, 14, and 18, and with all other applicable regulations;

 

3.     Be located, designed and operated so as to maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property; and

 

4.     Conform with the general plans for the physical development of the Town as embodied in the Development Ordinance and in the Comprehensive Plan.

 

These findings are conditioned on the following:

 

Stipulations Specific to the Development

 

1.     Construction Deadline:  That construction begin by November 4, 1998 and be completed by November 4, 2008.

 

2.     Land Uses:  That this Special Use Permit or Special Use Permit Modification shall be required to comply with the Land Use Intensity requirements of the underlying zoning district, except as may otherwise be approved by the Council.

 

That because the land area of this Special Use Permit does not provide sufficient land to demonstrate compliance with the Residential-5-Conditional Land Use Intensity requirements, prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant shall encumber land within the bounds of the Master Land Use Plan to enable this development to demonstrate compliance with the Land Use Intensity requirements.  With any application for Final Plan Approval, the applicant shall provide document(s), to be recorded at the Orange County Register of Deeds Office, that encumbers allowable floor area and other Land Use Intensity requirements of land located within the bounds of the Master Plan but outside the boundary of this Special Use Permit to this Planning Development - Housing project.

 

The floor area of this project may not exceed 136,000 square feet with no more than 116 dwelling units.

 

3.                 Required Improvements:

 

a.                  That one-half of a 120-foot right-of-way along the Highway 15-501 frontage be dedicated, with additional right-of-way dedicated at the project entrance off Highway 15-501 if determined to be necessary by the Town Manager.  The entire dedication shall occur prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the first phase of development.

 

b.                 That the developer add a left turn lane and a right hand deceleration/turn lane on Highway 15-501 at the entrance into the neighborhood district, subject to NCDOT approval.

 

c.                  That this northern entrance off Highway 15-501 be constructed at a width which accommodates three lanes: one lane into the development, one lane for right turns onto Highway 15-501, and one left turn lane onto Highway 15-501.  The right-of-way width should be such that it accommodates the addition of a fourth lane should it be necessary in the future.

 

d.                 That the developer shall install traffic signals or shall provide signal payment-in-lieu to the Town for the intersections of Highway 15-501 and the proposed northern and southern entrance to the village.  The signals must be installed or payment-in-lieu made by the developer prior to issuance of a Zoning compliance Permit for any phase of development using this intersection for primary access.

 

e.                  That sidewalk be installed on at least one side of each public street (except alleys).

 

f.                   That adequate transit stops, with benches, and possibly shelters, be provided as appropriate.  The Town Manager shall determine the number and location of transit stops to be located within the site as more is learned about the use of future buildings and potential transit needs.  The streets shall be built to Town standards, and shall be dedicated as public streets.

 

g.                  That each road stubout to a subsequent phase be extended (cleared and graded) at least 100 feet into the adjacent future phase(s).  Signage shall be located at each roadway stubout that indicates the roadway will be extended for future development.

 

h.                  That traffic control signage and pavement markings conform to the standards in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).  The Developer shall be responsible for maintaining the signs until the development is annexed by the Town.

 

i.                    Detailed phase-specific utility extension plans shall be reviewed for approval by OWASA and the Town Manager.  These plans shall include water and sewer line construction both off-site and on-site.

 

j.                   That detention basin(s) and/or other stormwater management facilities be provided in accordance with conditions and with all applicable Town regulations, including the Town’s Water Supply Protection regulations, State regulations, and federal (FEMA) regulations.  Design and construction of any stormwater management facility shall be approved by the Town Manager.  All plans and final plats shall include dedication of permanent easements and construction of an improved drive for ingress/egress as necessary for construction, maintenance operations and equipment.

 

k.                 That the applicant provide an asphalt pedestrian/bicycle path, sections of which would be within the greenways and recreation areas along Wilson Creek and Fan Branch, extending from the southern boundary of the Southern village development northward to the existing termination of the constructed greenway path.  The Greenway shall be deeded to the Town and shall contain a pedestrian, non-motorized vehicle easement.

 

            The location, width, and design/construction standards for the path shall be approved by the Town Manager.

 

l.                    Construct Copperline Drive to a 37 foot cross-section from back-of-curb to back-of-curb, with a 67 foot right-of-way, between Edgewater Circle and Kildaire Road.

 

m.                Construct Aberdeen Street to a 27 foot cross-section from back-of-curb to back-of-curb, with a 67 foot right-of-way, from the Market Street loop to Edgewater  Drive across the property frontage.

 

n.                  Construction of Kildaire Road west of Copperline Drive is not part of this Special Use Permit.

 

o.         The site plan will be adjusted to eliminate or relocate the driveway connection to Kildaire Road.

 

p.         Construct Edgewater Circle to a 27 foot cross-section from back-of-curb to back-of-curb with a five foot sidewalk, a seven foot tree lawn, and a 52 foot right-of-way along the property frontage.

 

q.         Prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, provide a street sign, on street parking, and pavement marking plan for approval by the Town Manager.  The signs and pavement markings shall be installed by the applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

 

r.          Sight distance triangles shall be shown on all final plans for all street, alley, and major driveway intersections.  Sight distance easements shall be shown on the final plat.  Sight distance triangles will be based on a minimum vehicular speed of 20 m.p.h. as shown in the Town of Chapel Hill Design Manual and the Standard Engineering Specifications and Standard Details.  The Town Manager may require sight distance triangles based on lower or higher vehicular speeds when warranted by roadway conditions.

 

s.          Construct the parking lot to Town standards including dimensions and pavement design.

 

t.          That all driveway locations for residential and non-residential uses are subject to the approval of the Town Manager.

 

u.         All cut and fill slopes along the public rights-of-way shall have a maximum 3:1 slope unless the Town Manager approves a specific modification.

 

4.         Ownership and Responsibilities of Common Areas:  That an owners’ association be created for the maintenance and regulation of the private (residential, office, park, landscape, and commercial) areas.  All property owners owning land within the area of the Master Land Use Plan approval, excluding governmental bodies, must be represented in the owners’ association.  This owners’ association shall have maintenance responsibilities for development elements for which the owners’ association retains ownership, including the stormwater management facility.

 

            In addition, separate neighborhood association(s) and owners’ association(s) shall be created for the maintenance and regulation of the residential, office, and commercial areas.  The documents creating these entities shall be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager, and shall be recorded in the Orange County Register of Deeds Office prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

            The responsibilities of these entities shall include the ownership and maintenance of the neighborhood compost sites, private alleys, private green spaces, private parks and recreation space, existing cemeteries and grave sites, and the perimeter buffers.  These entities shall also be responsible for any “add-on fees” charged by Duke Power for special street lighting.

 

5.         Permanent Retention Basin Installation:

 

a.         Compliance with the Town Watershed Protection District regulations, if applicable, shall be demonstrated with the provision of multiple permanent ponds.  For those portions of the development complying with the Low Density Option identified in the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall not be required.  For those portions of the development complying with the High Density Option identified in the Development Ordinance, permanent stormwater retention shall be required in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance.

 

b.         The size, accessibility, location, and design of each pond shall be approved by the Town Manager.

 

c.         These wet retention ponds shall meet or exceed the North Carolina Division of Environmental Management requirements and shall be designed so as to be approved by the Division of Environmental Management, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the Town Manager.

 

d.         The property owner shall post a performance bond or other surety instrument satisfactory to the Town Manager, in an amount approved by the Town Manager to assure maintenance, repair, or reconstruction necessary for adequate performance of the engineered stormwater controls.

 

e.         For purposes of calculating impervious surface area for compliance with the water quality regulations, the proposed public park/ride lot shall not be counted as part of this development; it shall be counted as part of the public facilities on adjacent Town-owned property.

 

f.          For ponds proposed to be located  within the Resource Conservation District, the ponds must be designed so as not to be inundated by the flood waters from the base flood discharge.

 

g.         The homeowners association shall be responsible for arranging for annual inspections of all ponds  by an appropriately certified engineer, to determine whether the ponds and associated structures are operating acceptably according to design requirements, and to report findings of said inspections to the Town Manager, with such recommendations for maintenance or repair as may be warranted.  Any needed repairs shall be completed within 120 days unless otherwise approved by the Town Manager.  Restrictive covenants shall be recorded which shall spell out these responsibilities of the homeowners association for pond maintenance as provided for in the Special Use Permit.

 

h.         Maintenance of the ponds shall be the responsibility of the developer or a property/homeowner’s association.  A maintenance plan shall be provided for each of the retention ponds, to be approved by the Town Manager.  The plans shall address inspection, maintenance intervals, type of equipment required, access to each pond and related matters.

 

i.          Escrow account funds required as part of the 1993 Master Land Use Plan approval shall be returned to the developer upon provision of a performance bond or other surety instrument identified in item (d) above for the first pond(s).

 

j.          As part of every application for Final Plan Approval, Zoning Compliance Permit, and residential Building Permit, the developer shall provide an up-to-date cumulative total for impervious surfaces in the particular sub-basin.

 

k.         The minimum permanent pool depth shall be at least three (3) feet in addition to enough volume to store the accumulated sediment between clean out periods.

 

l.          All sediment deposited in the ponds during construction activity on contributing sites must be removed before “normal” pond operation begins.

 

m.        Emergency drains shall be installed in all ponds to allow access for repairs and sediment removal as necessary.

 

n.         Anti-seepage collars shall be used on any structures penetrating dams or water retaining embankments.

 

o.         Public storm drainage systems or other utilities shall not be located within a pond or dam structure.

 

6.         Density Options:  A density transfer option shall be available to the developer.  Under the density transfer option, the developer may acquire developable land or obtain restrictions on development of that land and use that land, if it is located within the same drainage basin as the Southern village, to help meet density thresholds for purposes associated with the Watershed Protection District regulations.  Restrictions on development of such land shall be structured in a manner that will allow the Town to assure that the restrictions are permanent, and shall be in a form approved by the Town Manager and Town Attorney.

 

7.         Design-Related Stipulations:  The following revisions and additions shall be incorporated into the applicant’s Neighborhood Guidelines.  A revised copy of the Guidelines shall be submitted to the Town’s Planning Department, and the town Council will review, and give final approval, and then  shall supersede the original set of guidelines.  The revised guidelines must be received and approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the first phase of development.  Subsequent revisions may be reviewed for approval by the Town Manager.

 

a.         All sidewalks within public rights-of-way shall be at least 5 feet in width.  Alternatively, the Town Manager may approve a narrower width in situations where there are topographical or other constraints.

 

b.         Landscape protection measures shall be to Town standards.  The Town Manager may review and approve other methods on a case by case basis.  Because uses other than single-family and two-family lots are allowed in the Neighborhood District and Village Green District, tree protection fencing shall be required during construction of public utilities and roadways and in other areas as determined to be necessary by the Town Manager.

 

c.         Include specific street construction standards and materials; maximum slopes and vertical curve data; curb type; drainage methods; and typical cross-sections.

 

d.         Address landscaping of street side slopes and traffic islands.

 

e.         Address lighting of streets and alleys.

 

f.          All alley/street intersections must be at least 100 feet apart.  The Town Manager may approve narrower separations on a case by case basis.

 

g.         No alleys shall intersect a street at a point where the street slopes over 15%.

 

h.         Widths of the right-of-way for public alleys shall be:

                        -with no curb and gutter - 30 feet

                        -with curb and gutter -  24 feet.

            The Town Manager may approve narrower widths on a case by case basis.

 

i.          All driveway locations, for residential and non-residential uses, be reviewed for approved by the Town Manager.

 

j.          Parking areas shall be located behind the multi-family and non-residential buildings where possible.

 

k.         Provide more specifics on the provisions for refuse storage and recycling containers, pads, and access and other refuse management issues.

 

l.          That all signage shall be reviewed for approval by the Town’s Appearance Commission.

 

m.        That the building setbacks for the perimeter of the 312-acre site be in accordance with Subsection 18.8.9.4 of the Development Ordinance.  Setbacks within the development shall be as specified in the applicant’s Neighborhood Design Guidelines.

 

n.         That speed limits and on-street parking shall be regulated by the Council.

 

o.         Front yard driveways and parking areas shall be prohibited for the lots fronting on Street R-R (the continuation of the northern highway entrance into the site).

 

8.         Land-Use Related Stipulation:  a) That land uses within this Village Green District shall be limited to those described in the uses shown on the approved Master Plan (and included in the Neighborhood Guidelines) and Subsection 12.3 (schedule of uses) of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance.

 

            In cases where the Master Plan and Neighborhood Guidelines list a use not included in Subsection 12.3 of the Development Ordinance, the use shall not be permitted.  Uses shall be in accordance with those defined in Article 2 of the Development Ordinance.

 

            b)  That the primary use of this property shall be multi-family.

 

9.         Building Elevations, Signage and Lighting Approval:  That detailed elevation drawings for the buildings, lighting and all signage be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

10.       Stormwater Management Plan:  That a general stormwater management plan for this Special Use Permit be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of the first  Zoning Compliance Permit.  A detailed stormwater management plan, based on the Town’s Hydros program, shall be submitted with applications for plat approval and Zoning Compliance Permits for approval by the Town Manager.

 

Stipulations Related to Steep Slopes

 

11.       Steep Slopes:  That each application  for Final Plan approval include a map showing lots and street segments on slopes of 10% or more and indicating how the development and construction will comply with the steep slopes regulations in the Development Ordinance:

 

·          for slopes of 10-15%, site preparation techniques shall be used which minimize grading and site disturbance;

 

·                    for slopes of 15-25%, demonstrate specialized site design techniques and approaches for building and site preparation; and

 

·                    for slopes of 25% or greater, provide a detailed site analysis of soil conditions, hydrology, bedrock conditions, and other engineer/environmental aspects of the site.

 

Each final plan application shall  demonstrate compliance with the steep slopes regulations in the Development Ordinance.  The Town Manager shall decide if the proposed building and site engineering techniques are appropriate.

 

12.       Encroachment Agreements:  That any required State or local encroachment agreements (for landscaping and other required improvements) be approved prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

Stipulations Related to Recreation Area

 

13.       Recreation Space Requirements for Residential Component:  That recreation space of sufficient area and type, according to Article 13 of the Development Ordinance, be provided, including amenities such as playground equipment, benches, and/or picnic shelters.  The plans for the recreation space shall be reviewed and approved by the Town Manager.  The recreation space may be dedicated and deeded to the Town of Chapel Hill for Parks and Recreation purposes only, or to an owners’ association (to be determined by the Town Manager).  The developer remains responsible for the recreation space unless the Town or a homeowners’ association accepts the property.

 

            The open play field shall be further developed for a specific recreation activity such as basketball or a children’s play area.  The type of improvement shall be left to the discretion of the developer, based upon the anticipated needs of future residents, to be approved by the Town Manager.

 

Stipulations Related to the Resource Conservation District

 

14.       Boundaries:  That the boundaries of the Resource Conservation District be indicated on all final plan applications.  A note shall be added to all final plats and plans, indicating that “Development shall be restricted with the Resource Conservation District in accordance with the Development Ordinance.”

 

15.       Variances:  That all variances necessary for development within the Resource Conservation District be obtained before application for final plat or final plan approval for the subject phase(s) of development.

 

16.       Construction Standards:  That for encroachment(s) into the Resource Conservation District, the requirements and standards of subsections 5.6 and 5.8 of the Development Ordinance must be adhered to, unless the application is granted administrative exemptions from sub-section 5.8.  Encroachments include, but are not limited to:

                        - street crossings

                        - pedestrian/bicycle paths along and over the streams

                        - wet detention basin/stormwater management facility

                        - utility lines.

 

17.       State or Federal Approvals:  That any required State or federal permits or encroachment agreements (including but not limited to those needed for improvements to Highway 15-501, for stormwater management and erosion control, for water and sewer extension, and for development in the Water Supply Protection Area) be approved and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town of Chapel Hill prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.

 

18.       NCDOT Approvals:  That plans for improvements to State-maintained roads be approved by NCDOT prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for the subject phase of development.

 

Stipulations Related to Landscape Elements

 

19.       Landscape Protection Plan:  That a detailed landscape protection plan be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

            This plan shall include areas of vegetation to be preserved; the anticipated clearing limit lines; proposed grading; proposed utility lines; a detail of protective fencing; and construction parking and materials staging/storage areas.

 

            The plan shall show the use of tree protection fencing between infrastructure construction and existing vegetation in:

 

                        - all required buffers

                        - all common areas (public or private)

                        - all areas designed to be used for multi-family (including townhouses) and

  non-residential, or mixed use development

- other areas, to be determined by the Town Manager.

 

20.       Landscape Plan Approval:  That detailed landscape plans (including buffers and street tree plantings), landscape maintenance plans, and lighting plans be reviewed by the Town Manager and the Appearance Commission for approval prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  All parking lot medians shall include a minimum width of 10 feet of permeable area if they are to include the installation of canopy trees.

 

21.       Landscaping Around Permanent Detention:  That landscaping approved by the Town Manager shall be provided around the permanent detention ponds, and that such landscaping shall be in accordance with local and State watershed protection regulations.

 

Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer and Other Utilities

 

22.       Fireflow:  A detailed hydrant plan and fireflow report shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  The following flow and pressure shall be provided:

 

-           For multifamily: 1,500 - 2,500 gallons per minute, at 20 pounds per square inch residual pressure.

 

23.       OWASA Easements:  That easement documents as required by OWASA and the Town Manager be recorded before final plat approval.

 

24.       Duct Bank for Future Utilities:  That the Town Manager may require installation of empty duct banks for future street lights and signal cables along internal streets.

 

25.       Utility/Lighting Plan Approval:  That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Duke Power, the local cable television company, BellSouth, and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  The property owner shall be responsible for assuring that these utilities, including cable television, are extended to serve the development.

 

Miscellaneous Stipulations

 

26.       Wetlands:  That the applicant submit final plans which show the location of state or federally regulated wetlands on the site.  Any proposed disturbance of wetlands shall demonstrate compliance with applicable State and federal regulations.

 

27.       Solid Waste Management Plan:  That a detailed solid waste management plan, including a recycling plan and a plan for managing and minimizing construction debris, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.  Dumpster pads shall be enlarged to accommodate recyclables.  The details of the dumpster pad, including the size, angle and grade of the dumpster pads, shall be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

28.       Detailed Plans:  That final detailed site plans, grading plans, utility/lighting plans, stormwater management plans (with hydrologic calculations), landscape plans, and landscape maintenance plans be approved by the Town Manager before issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that such plans conform to plans approved by this application and demonstrate compliance with all applicable regulations and the design standards of the Development Ordinance and the Design Manual.

 

            The Town manager may require adjustments to the street design to enhance safety and maintenance operations.

 

            The developer shall be responsible for assuring that all utilities, including cable television, be extended to serve the development.

 

29.       Certificates of Occupancy:  That no Certificates of Occupancy be issued until all required public improvements are complete; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plats.

 

            If the Town Manager approves a phasing plan, no Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for a phase until all required public improvements for that phase are complete; no Building Permits for any phase shall be issued until all public improvements required in previous phases are completed to a point adjacent to the new phase; and that a note to this effect shall be placed on the final plats.

 

30.       Sight Triangle Easements:  That sight triangle easements be provided on the final plat.

 

31.       New Streets - Traffic Signs:  That the property owners shall be responsible for placement and maintenance of temporary regulatory traffic signs including street name signs before issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy until such time that the street system is accepted for maintenance by the Town.

 

32.       New Street Names and Numbers:  That the name of the development and its streets and house/building numbers, be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

33.       Erosion Control:  That a phase-specific detailed erosion control plan shall be submitted with each final plan application for a review and approval by the Orange County Erosion Control Officer.

 

34.       Silt Control:  That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.

 

35.       Construction Sign Required:  That the applicant post a construction sign that lists the property owner’s representative, with a telephone number, the contractor’s representative, with a phone number, and a telephone number for regulatory information prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.

 

36.       Continued Validity:  That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.

 

37.       Non-Severability:  That if any of the above conditions is held to be invalid, approval in its entirety shall be void.

 

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council hereby approved the Special Use Permit for the Planned Development - Housing of the Southern Village in accordance with plans and conditions listed above.

 

This the 4th day of November, 1996.

 

                                  Item 3 - Scheduling an Assembly of Governments Meeting

 

COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION R-7.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

A RESOLUTION CONCURRING WITH A PROPOSED MEETING DATE FOR THE ORANGE COUNTY ASSEMBLY OF GOVERNMENTS (96-11-4/R-7)

 

BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council:

 

·        concurs with the proposal for an Assembly of Governments meeting at 6:30 p.m. on November 11, 1996, at the Orange County facility on Homestead Road.

 

·        authorizes the Mayor to represent the Council in setting the agenda in consultation with representatives of other local governments.

 

This the 4th day of November, 1996.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 11:38 p.m.