SUMMARY OF A PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, WEDNESDAY, JULY 2, 1997
Mayor Waldorf called the meeting to order. Council Members in attendance were Julie Andresen, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Richard Franck, Lee Pavao and Edith Wiggins. Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Planning Director Roger Waldon and Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos.
RESOLUTIONS REGARDING TRAFFIC IMPACTS
Persons wishing to testify this evening were sworn. Mayor Waldorf noted that two resolutions proposed by Council Members had been inadvertently omitted from this evening’s agenda.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 1.
Mayor Pro-tem Brown suggested that some of the comments about to be made might have some bearing on this resolution, so the proposed resolution should be considered following the hearing.
Council Member Pavao reviewed the proposed resolution, noting that the resolution requested Town staff to prepare a follow-up report on traffic calming and traffic management for the vicinity surrounding Meadowmont by September 22nd. Council Member Andresen suggested that the resolution be revised to show the Council’s commitment to traffic calming and traffic management in the area. Council Member Evans suggested adding the words “if necessary” to the proposed resolution.
RESOLUTION 1 WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
A RESOLUTION REGARDING TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT AND CALMING PLANS FOR AREAS IMPACTED BY MEADOWMONT (97-7-2/R-1)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill is reviewing plans for the Meadowmont Development which includes a mix of residential, office and commercial development which include a mix of residential, office and commercial development located on both the north and south sides of Highway 54 between Barbee Chapel Road and Burning Tree Drive; and
WHEREAS, the Council is concerned about the impact of traffic generated by the new development on surrounding neighborhoods;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council will pursue development of traffic management and calming plans for areas in the vicinity of the Meadowmont development;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Council that this endeavor shall include direction to the Town Manager to provide options for traffic management and calming in the area bounded as follows: Highway 54 to the south, Fordham Boulevard to the west, Ephesus Church Road to the north, and George King Road to the east.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Manager shall bring an initial report to the Council at the Council’s September 22, 1997 meeting.
This the 2nd day of July, 1997.
Council Member Andresen presented the petition offered by herself and Council Members Brown Capowski. She said that the resolution called for a traffic study to be done of the neighborhood streets surrounding Meadowmont and the intersections which would be impacted. She also said that the resolution also asked to recess the public hearing until the study was completed as there would be no way of knowing what improvements were needed until the results of the traffic study were available.
Mayor Pro-tem Brown said she believed that there had not been an adequate response by Department of Transportation or Town staff to questions about traffic impacts. Council Member Andresen said she thought that it would take about two weeks to complete the proposed studies. Council Member Evans said she thought it would take much longer to complete the studies because of the need to encompass areas such as Governor’s Club, Carolina Meadows and Southern Village. Stating that the Town had a tradition of planning ahead, Council Member Andresen said that the proposed resolution would continue this tradition.
Mayor Waldorf stated that she would not support this resolution due to the fact that the findings would not be able to be applied to Meadowmont, that there was a large study in progress of U.S. 15-501 that was taking years to complete and that the integrity of the process might not be maintained if it were to be delayed over the summer. Council Member Franck said that he supported this sentiment and added that the Council was making clear its intent to do the study. Council Member Franck also questioned the legality of the proposed delay.
THE MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2 FAILED BY A VOTE OF 4-5, WITH THE AYES BEING COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN, CAPOWSKI AND CHILTON AND THE NOS BEING MAYOR WALDORF AND COUNCIL MEMBERS EVANS, FRANCK, PAVAO AND WIGGINS.
Beth Kell, a resident of Rogerson Drive for more than twenty years, expressed concern about the increasing amount of traffic and vehicle speeds on Rogerson Drive. Ms. Kell told the Council that recently traffic had been re-routed through Rogerson Drive because of construction on Burning Tree Drive and the result had been a “nightmare”. She stated that during this period two pet animals had been struck by vehicles and that many elderly residents who normally walked along Rogerson Drive chose not to do so due to concerns about the increased volume of speeding cars. Ms. Kell requested that the Council do its part to maintain the quality of life on Rogerson Drive.
Diane Bloom reminded the Council that when the applicant had first submitted their proposal to the Town, they had included language which matched the Town’s goals for the NC East Entranceway. She stated that in the proposed Village Center, the applicant had proposed a Village Green and numerous other “gathering places” in a “pedestrian-oriented” area. Ms. Bloom pointed out that the Village Center, as it has been recently presented, did not include a “Green” or many gathering spaces. She said that the proposed Village Center had lots of parking and very few and small gathering places. Ms. Bloom urged the Council to add stipulations for more open space.
Martin Feinstein, Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission, reiterated the need for recreation space in the Town. Mr. Feinstein emphasized the need for playing fields like those in the proposed Meadowmont development. Acknowledging the environmental concerns of some residents, Mr. Feinstein stated that the Army Corp of Engineers had given their approval for the proposed soccer/recreation field site.
Anne Recesso, a resident of Downing Creek, urged the Council to reconsider the proposed traffic study. She stated that there was a growing concern among residents of Downing Creek and neighboring developments that traffic impacts from Meadowmont and other planned developments would devalue existing homes and quality of life. Ms. Recesso asked that the Council proceed with the proposed traffic study before possibly approving the proposed Meadowmont development.
There is a growing concern among those residents of Downing Creek and neighboring developments, that the traffic impact will not only devalue their homes, but their quality of life as well. Ms. Recesso asked the Council to do the traffic study before allowing Meadowmont to happen.
Kani Hurow expressed concern over items twelve and thirteen in Resolution 5a, which stated that a strip of land would be deeded to the Oaks Community Association. Ms. Hurow stated that the Oaks had four, rather than one, community association. She stated that the association closest to the parcel in question, was the Oaks Villas. Ms. Hurow said she believed that this association was not equipped to own any land. Noting that she had not been able to contact the President of her association about this matter, Ms. Hurow requested that the Association’s formal position on this matter be brought before the Council on July 7th.
Dr. Philip Goodman said he would present evidence that he believed would allow the Council to deny approval of the Meadowmont applications. Dr. Goodman said in the Goals for the NC 54 East Entranceway, it was stated that the meadows and vistas were to be preserved and restored, with no language permitting buildings to be seen along the meadows. In fact, Dr. Goodman stated, the language which allowed buildings in the vistas had been eliminated.
Dr. Goodman also said that in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan there was language which encouraged developers to allow for 15% of the housing to be affordable to low and moderate income families. He said that the applicant was proposing that 32 units, or 2.5% of all housing units, be set aside for low-income housing. Dr. Goodman said that the Development Ordinance’s standards for office to retail and impervious surfaces to land area should be for individual applications, rather than the development as a whole.
Dr. Goodman also expressed concern that contrary to provisions of the Development Ordinance, the first Council public hearing on the proposed Meadowmont development had been held prior to the Planning Board making a recommendation on the applications. Referencing these several items of non-compliance, Dr. Goodman asked the Council not to approve the applications.
Madeline Jefferson asked the Council to compare the statements made by the applicant, Roger Perry, and the expectations to fulfill needs expressed by the community and the Dubose family. Ms. Jefferson pointed to the expectation that there would be no traffic impact on neighboring streets and inquired whether this complied with everything the Council had learned about the anticipated traffic impacts of Meadowmont. Ms. Jefferson also questioned the Council about the pedestrian orientation of the Village Center, which promised public gathering spaces to enhance the pedestrian experience.
Richard “Stick” Williams urged the Council to vote with integrity on the basis of whether or not the special use permits conformed with the Master Land Use Plan. Mr. Williams stated that both the citizen’s group and the Planning staff found that the proposed Meadowmont development did so and hoped that the Council would follow their lead in recommending approval of the applications.
Susan Franklin-Fulton submitted an alternate stipulation which requested that Pinehurst Drive be an emergency-only access and defer any further opening until traffic management and calming was implemented in the area. Ms. Franklin-Fulton quoted Randall Arendt, an expert in the field of planning, as saying that connections were good, except when they are the only ones and create funnels. Ms. Franklin-Fulton said that Mr. Arendt had once stated that “Neighborhood streets should never be funnels”.
Holding up a diagram of the proposed Village Center, Kevin Foy said the plan showed a lot of parking, but did not appear to include a Village Green. Mr. Foy also alluded to a connection between the amount of parking and the small percentage of low-income housing. He expressed concern that what was being proposed was an elitist community where many people would be brought in to work for the community’s residents. Stating that the entire community would ultimately be involved with building the proposed development, Mr. Foy said it was important to know what the final product would resemble.
Ed Harrison expressed his support for the trail to Lancaster Drive and requested that it be posted “no parking” since the most frequent users would probably be middle school students and stalwart nature lovers. Mr. Harrison requested that the trail be the most basic of maintainable foot trails possible. Mr. Harrison also said that although he supported the previously mentioned traffic studies, but mentioned Pope Road as an area in need of traffic calming. He suggested that the North Carolina Department of Transportation be approached on this matter.
Kani Hurow was asked to return to the podium for a follow-up on her earlier concern about the parcel of land to be deeded to the Oaks Villas Association. Ms. Hurow asked whether anyone had found out why this stipulation had been included in the proposed stipulations. Mr. Waldon responded that although there was a desire to preclude any sort of street going through to Lancaster Drive, he didn’t see any need or value of a street here, so it was perfectly reasonable to strike items 12 and 13 if the Council desired. Ms. Hurow said she still hoped to find out the origins of the request. Mr. Karpinos said that it would be possible to draft language which would make it very easy for the homeowners association to refuse the land and give the parcel back when the association president’s stand was known. Council Member Franck inquired whether it was possible to ask the applicant to build a footpath along this parcel. Mr. Horton said that this was possible.
Joseph Carsanaro expressed concern that the locations of the traffic study in the area were places at which people naturally slowed down. Mr. Carsanaro also expressed concern that although the traffic study claimed that there had been no accidents in the area during the course of the study,
he had contacted Department of Transportation who indicated that there had been some accidents in the area. Mr. Carsanaro also said that although the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board favored the proposed Pinehurst Drive connection, the Board had not looked into the safety issues tied to the possible connector.
Planning Director Roger Waldon presented a brief overview of the materials before the Council this evening, including responses to previous Council questions regarding playing fields on the school and park site, minimum parking requirements and tree ordinance requirements.
Mayor Waldorf informed the Council that she had been in touch with Paul Norby of the Durham Planning Department because of concerns about a planned hotel in a location which was also planned for traffic connection into the proposed Meadowmont development. Mayor Waldorf asked for the Council’s support in taking these concerns to the Durham City Council. Mayor Waldorf said the hope was that NCDOT would buy the area to set aside for this future connection. Reminding the Council that the City of Durham moved a lot faster than the Town in terms of development, Council Member Evans said that it might be wise to let Durham know the plans for this area as soon as possible.
Council Member Franck requested additional information regarding the developer’s calculations regarding parking space ratios. Settle Dockery, representing the applicant, said that parking space ratios per 1,000 square feet ranged between 4.0 and 6.9, with the national average being 5.24 and the proposed ratio for the Meadowmont development being about 4.2. Mr. Dockery stated that only 850 of the proposed 1,093 parking spaces were actually in parking lots, with the balance of spaces being located on public and private streets. Mr. Dockery showed a number of renderings of parking lots with focal points on center tree-lined promenades. Council Member Wiggins inquired how these renderings could be implemented. Mr. Dockery replied that it would be in the developer’s best financial interest to make the development as attractive, and therefore as successful, as possible. Council Member Wiggins requested additional information about the landscape plans and stipulations which would require the type of setting presented by the applicant in their graphics presentation.
Council Member Andresen said that she supported many of the citizen comments regarding the lack of public gathering spaces in the application, as well as creating private streets. Mr. Dockery replied that the streets were more appropriate being private due to the proposed width of the buildings. He said if the streets were public, the buildings would have to be wider. Referencing the lack of a Village Green, Mr. Dockery said that a Village Green meant different things to different people. Smedes York said that he was hoping to create a pedestrian-friendly atmosphere. Mr. York said he envisioned a bustling urban area with sidewalk cafes and wide sidewalks for people to stop and talk. Mr. York said that the concept was not to have a park in the middle of the town. Mr. York also said it would be better if streets were kept private so that they could be blocked off occasionally for street fairs and other events.
Council Member Capowski inquired about the possibility of decreasing the number of parking spaces and was told that this figure was really the minimum necessary to be commercially successful.
Council Member Franck offered responses to Dr. Goodman’s list of reasons to deny these applications. He stated that the meadow on the south side of NC54 was not part of the applications currently under review. Council Member Franck also said that language in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan did not prohibit buildings along the meadow’s edge along NC 54. He added that the Comprehensive Plan was an advisory, rather than regulatory, document. Referencing the provision of affordable housing, Council Member Franck said that it was quite possible that moderate-income residents would chose to purchase townhomes or to rent properties. He added that because of the way the Master Land Use Plan was written, the ratios of office to retail uses and impervious surfaces were actually in compliance. Council Member Franck also explained that “final plans” referred to those plans to be submitted after special use permit applications and at the time of zoning compliance permit. Finally, regarding proper notice,
Council Member Franck said that the Council scheduled the public hearings before the Planning Board’s recommendations so as to allow additional time for public comment. Mr. Horton interjected that the staff did not agree with this last observation.
Council Member Andresen requested additional information regarding protection elements of the Town’s tree ordinance. Curtis Brooks said that many people involved with the construction process would be required to participate in a landscape protection seminar. Mr. Brooks said that a tree survey of the proposed Village Center had identified a total of forty significant trees, all but one of which would be cut down. He stated that the Town’s Tree Ordinance required a developer to locate significant trees and not remove them unless necessary to reasonably develop an area. Mr. Brooks said that Town staff had determined that the developer’s plans complied with terms of the ordinance.
Council Member Andresen requested clarification about proposed playing fields in the resource conservation district and flowage easement. Mr. Horton said that the applicant’s proposal called for three fields for Town use which would be constructed by the developer and one for school use to developed by the school district.
Mayor Waldorf mentioned that at this point there was a disagreement about the proposed treatment of an existing pond. She stated that the Orange County Commissioners wanted the pond preserved, while the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board was suggesting that the pond be removed. She also noted that there was some confusion about the specific boundaries of the proposed school site.
Mr. Waldon noted that two of the proposed playing fields were located entirely in the resource conservation district, while two other fields were partially located in the resource conservation district. He added that once the fields were constructed, they would be located above the flood plain and should therefore remain fairly dry.
Council Member Andresen suggested that if the Orange County Commissioners decided that the proposed site was not suitable for a school, the Town ought to develop these portions of the site for additional playing fields. Council Member Andresen also responded to Council Member Franck’s responses to Dr. Goodman’s concerns about the office to retail and impervious surface ratios. Council Member Andresen stated that after reading the Town’s Development Ordinance carefully, she disagreed with both the staff and Council Member Franck’s interpretation of Article 10, which stated that all provisions of each special use permit shall be met and satisfied and should serve the community in a beneficial manner. Council Member Andresen said she believed that the staff’s reading did not benefit the community, nor did the application meet Town standards. Council Member Andresen submitted a memorandum for the record outlining these specific concerns. Council Member Franck noted that there would be no more than fifty percent impervious surface in any of the individual site developments.
Council Member Chilton inquired about the nature of the trails which would be crossing over Little Creek. Mr. Perry stated that the existing crossings would be used in order to minimize disturbance.
Council Member Brown referenced an April 16, 1997 memorandum from East/West Partners alluding to landscape design criteria and an energy efficiency plan. Council Member Brown said that she hoped to see documentation regarding these plans. Mr. Perry explained that the documentation was in the process of evolution and development, but would not be done in time for these special use permits. Council Member Brown said it would be very desirable to have documentation and specifics as soon as possible. Mr. Perry gave his assurance that these plans and specifics would be developed as soon as possible.
Council Member Brown inquired about the number of proposed driveway cuts along Meadowmont Lane. Mr. Horton said the proposal was to allow only one driveway cut for each two lots, for a total of twenty driveway cuts. Council Member Brown asked whether this was in keeping with the vision of the proposed Laurel Hill Parkway. Mr. Horton replied that the vision
for this roadway had been a two-lane road with bicycle lanes and sidewalks which was consistent with the applicant’s current plans.
Council Member Brown inquired whether or not utilities would be located underground. Mr. Horton said all utilities, excepting electric distribution lines, would be located underground. Noting the prohibition of buildings in the resource conservation district, Council Member Brown inquired about the proposed restrooms for playing fields. Mr. Waldon said that the proposed restroom facilities would be built on an acre of land which was not located in the resource conservation district.
Council Member Brown inquired whether or not the over 700,000 square feet of open space included any parking areas. Stating that open space was broadly defined as anything not having a building on it, Mr. Waldon said that parking areas were included in the square footage for open space.
Council Member Capowski inquired about Section 18.8.1.1 which stated that any planned development would not create additional traffic in any nearby residential neighborhoods. Mr. Waldon stated that the language required that a planned development have access on to a major thoroughfare/transit facility and that this needed to be done without creating traffic in adjacent neighborhoods, not that the development could not create traffic in residential neighborhoods.
Council Member Evans inquired who was doing traffic counts in the area. Council Member Evans also inquired whether the necessary pipes were being put in to take advantage of reclaimed water that would be available in the future. Mr. Perry stated that OWASA had required the installation of these pipes. Council Member Evans commented that there had been plans for an amphitheater to be built on a hillside and wondered whether or not this project was still in the works. Mr. Perry replied that there had been a consistent statement on the part of East/West Partners that the use of the meadows was up to the will of the Town Council. Mr. Perry said that his bias would be that people should be allowed to enjoy them more than just as a visual enhancement from NC 54.
Council Member Andresen revisited the impervious surface compliance issue. She expressed her concern that if a special use did not meet provisions of the ordinance and other special uses were adopted, then the Town might be left with a non-compliant development. Mr. Horton assured Council Member Andresen that a very good and accessible tracking method would be in place throughout the whole project to monitor the amount of impervious surface, and that at no time would it be allowed to exceed the fifty percent requirement.
Council Member Franck briefly read from the master land use plan in relation to the Village Center, which offered public spaces, a village green, and would have no large parking lots.
Mayor Pro-tem Brown requested a reclarification regarding traffic impacts on neighboring streets. Mr. Waldon reiterated his previous statement that planned developments were required to have access to major transportation facilities without creating traffic on neighboring streets. Council Member Brown stated that this was a case of different interpretations that did not agree.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AND RECONVENE THE NEXT EVENING (JULY 3RD). COUNCIL MEMBER BROWN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION FAILED BY A VOTE OF 3-6, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN AND CAPOWSKI VOTING YES.
THE MOTION TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING PASSED BY A VOTE OF 7 TO 2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN AND BROWN VOTING NO.
COUNCIL MEMBER CAPOWSKI MOVED THE ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 2A. COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRESEN SECONDED THE MOTION.
Council Member Capowski explained that he wanted to deal with this special use permit first because it was the most difficult, unique and controversial, and that once the Council completed work on this matter, the balance of items would fall into place.
Council Member Franck proposed an amendment which would limit the number of parking spaces to 987, and would require the addition of green space which is easily accessible from the village center equivalent to the size of a 106 space parking lot. Council Member Franck stated that the 987 parking spaces represented 4.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet of commercial space, which was the amount that the applicant stated was necessary to ensure the success of the project.
Council Member Capowski made a presentation from the podium, including the use of overheads showing a comparison of the plans submitted for the Village Center in 1995, which called for 2.6 spaces per 1000 square feet of commercial space. Council Member Capowski also quoted the applicant as having said that the success of the businesses in the Village Center depended on access and visibility from NC 54, which meant that the Village Center was clearly intended to serve much more than just the residents of Meadowmont and that it was dependent on automobile traffic, not the pedestrian-oriented space which was envisioned in the master land use plan. Council Member Capowski urged the Council to vote their philosophy and to not approve eight lanes of traffic, 1,093 parking spaces and automobile-oriented area.
COUNCIL MEMBER FRANCK MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER CHILTON, TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FROM 1093 TO 987 AND TO MAKE THE FUTURE GREENSPACE AREA EASILY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE VILLAGE CENTER.
Council Member Brown expressed her desire to see a transit-friendly site and language which would reduce the amount of traffic generated by this development. Council Member Brown also acknowledged the numbers cited by Council Member Franck, but stated that the master land use plan was based on more than numbers. Council Member Brown said that the land use plan was based on a philosophy which needed to be heeded.
Noting the importance of adherence to a philosophy, Council Member Franck said that in order for the transit hub to be viable and created, the project had to be economically feasible. Council Member Franck stated that the Council needed to strike a balance between having a project which was pedestrian-friendly and a project which was economically feasible. Council Member Pavao echoed this sentiment, stating that the Council either needed to decide to proceed with mixed use and make the project attractive to business or move ahead with a project which would be entirely residential.
Council Member Andresen suggested reducing the number of parking spaces to 887. Council Member Chilton suggested the possibility of reducing the amount of commercial space, since there appeared to be some concern that the commercial area might serve customers from outside of the Meadowmont area. Mr. York responded that 987 parking spaces would be the minimum number acceptable to the applicant.
Council Member Brown requested that the figure for parking spaces be lowered. Council Member Franck suggested the possibility of reducing the number to 900. Mr. York said he could not accept a figure of less than 987 parking spaces.
Council Member Evans expressed disappointment and concern that reducing the number of parking spaces any further would doom the proposal by making the project unmarketable.
Council Member Wiggins suggested that the proposed parking lots could include trees, landscaped medians, benches and small gathering places.
Reflecting Mr. York’s concern that 987 parking spaces would be the minimum number of spaces needed to make the project viable, Roger Perry reminded the Council that the number of parking spaces would be reduced by over eighty spaces when mass transit was put in place. Mr. Perry also said he believed that the Village Center had always been portrayed as an area which would serve more than residents of the Meadowmont community.
Council Member Franck acknowledged Mr. Perry’s comment about the number of parking spaces being reduced with the introduction of high-density mass transit and suggested that the number of parking spaces be reduced from 987 to 900 six months after construction of the mass transit stop in the Village Center was completed. The seconder concurred with this proposal as a friendly amendment.
Council Member Pavao stated that 73% of the business done in the Fearrington Village Shops was generated by non-Fearrington residents. Council Member Pavao said it was important that new developments not pour a lot of traffic out on to the streets to do shopping somewhere else.
Council Member Andresen said that she was concerned because it seemed that even though mixed-use development did capture some trips, the total number of trips still increased dramatically.
THE AMENDMENT TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES TO 987, WITH A FURTHER LIMIT OF 900 WITHIN SIX MONTHS FOLLOWING THE OPENING OF A HIGH-DENSITY TRANSIT STOP AT MEADOWMONT, AND TO REQUIRE THE ADDITION OF GREEN SPACE EASILY ACCESSIBLE FROM THE VILLAGE CENTER EQUIVALENT IN SIZE TO A 106 SPACE PARKING LOT, PASSED BY A VOTE OF 7-2, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CAPOWSKI AND PAVAO VOTING NO.
Mayor Pro-tem Brown suggested amending the main motion to prohibit all drive-through businesses. Council Member Brown also asked for a technical amendment of stating the school site as 22 acres, rather than 16 acres. Mayor Waldorf added that the school district would have six years from the time of approval of special use permits to build the school before it would revert back to the developer for home sites.
Mayor Pro-tem Brown suggested amending language on pages 8, 9 and 12 to add “the Appearance Commission and the Manager” to those who would approve different treatments of different areas.
Council Member Andresen suggested adding “bricks or other textured surfaces” to language on page 8 dealing with median treatments.
Council Member Franck, referencing stipulation 11.1, suggested amending the location of building M to become a street front area.
Council Member Andresen suggested that language in the design guidelines be changed from “encouraged” to “required”. Mr. Horton pointed out that this language was used so that more things could be encouraged. He also noted that the Appearance Commission and Town staff would be reviewing these projects.
Council Member Capowski asked whether or not the developer would be required to adhere to the drawings being presented. Mr. Horton said that all materials presented would be considered as references and it would be expected that the outcome would be reasonably consistent with these materials. Council Member Franck added that the Development Ordinance, which contained design guidelines, was the Town’s regulatory arm and could be used as such.
Council Member Capowski expressed concern that the development might not be built out and he did not want the area to end up with a grocery store and a set of apartment buildings. Council Member Capowski suggested requiring that the project be built in an order which would keep this from taking place. Mr. York said it was necessary to build portions of the project, like the grocery store, first in order for the project to be economically viable.
Council Member Franck suggested another friendly amendment which stipulated a path design at intersections which would make cyclists and pedestrians visible to motorists.
Council Member Evans suggested amending the taxation requirements of office areas in the commercial space to allow for non-profits.
Council Member Franck suggested an amendment that an energy management program be prepared and submitted by the developer.
Council Member Andresen stated that she was glad to see the increase in green spaces, but could not support the main motion because of the traffic impacts.
Council Member Brown noted that she was looking at a plan which clear-cut and bulldozed too much to comply with the design guidelines and was not sufficiently clustered to comply with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan. Council Member Brown said that when she was developing language for the Comprehensive Plan, she was not being idealistic, but realistic.
Mayor Waldorf said that it was important to look at the whole project and that this was one that was more self-contained than any other being built at the time. Mayor Waldorf also said she believed that people within Meadowmont would walk to the shops and that the Village Center was important to the entire community.
Council Member Pavao expressed his support for the proposed resolution and some concerns about the effect of some of the additional restrictions proposed this evening.
Council Member Chilton said he would support the proposed motion, although not enthusiastically because of concerns about traffic generation.
RESOLUTION 2A, AS AMENDED, WAS ADOPTED BY A VOTE OF 6-3, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS ANDRESEN, BROWN AND CAPOWSKI VOTING NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE MEADOWMONT VILLAGE CENTER; PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-MIXED USE (97-7-2/R-2a)
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 York Properties Inc., on property identified as Orange County, Chapel Hill Township Tax Map 52, Lot 6; if developed according to the Site Plan, dated April 14, 1997, the general principles outlined in the Meadowmont Design Guidelines, Design Guidelines, Plans and Details and Entranceway Corridor 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 promote 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 July 2, 2002 (five years from the date of Council approval) and be completed by July 2, 2007 (ten years from the date of Council approval).
2. Land Use Intensity: This Special Use Permit approves:
¨ Net Land Area: 942,638 square feet
¨ Number of Dwelling Units: 32
¨ Maximum Floor Area: 267,400 square feet
¨ Office type business use or clinic: 102,400 square feet
¨ Convenience type and general type business use: 125,000 square feet
¨ Residential use: 40,000 square feet
¨ Minimum Open Space: 716,405 square feet
¨ Minimum Livability Space: 254,512 square feet
¨ Number of Buildings: 13
¨ Number of Parking Spaces: 987
(Six months after the fixed guideway system is in place with a transit stop, the parking shall be reduced to 900 parking spaces).
2a. Public Green Space: Land area equivalent to a 106 parking space parking lot shall be provided as a public green space which shall be easily accessible from the Village Center center.
3. Land Uses:
A. Permitted land uses must be limited to those described in the uses shown on the Master Plan submitted by the applicant and identified in Section 12.3 (schedule of uses) of the Chapel Hill Development Ordinance and any other applicable provisions of the Development Ordinance, or applicable approved Special Use Permit or Zoning Compliance Permit.
B. In a case where the Master Plan or Applicant’s Report lists a use not included in a particular zoning district according to Subsection 12.3 or other applicable sections, the use shall not be permitted. Uses shall be in accordance with those identified in Article 2 of the Development Ordinance.
C. That facilities with drive through windows be prohibited.
D. That 22 acres of land be deeded to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools for use as a future school site. The location of the 22 acres shall be as shown on the applicant’s Master Land Use Plan, dated June 23, 1997. The 22 acre parcel shall be deeded as a condition for the first phase of development that includes residential units. The deed shall provide that if the School Board does not commit within six years of the date of the approval of the Special Use Plan, to build a school and within eight years receive a Special Use Permit for construction of a school on this site, title to the property shall revert to the current owner and may be used for up to 50 residential lots in this area with the approval of a Special Use Permit (Maximum number of dwelling units for entire site remain at 1,298). However, if the applicant has not constructed Meadowmont Lane from Highway 54 to the school entrance and provided utilities to the site, the time period to receive a Special Use Permit shall be extended until two years after such time as said road and utilities have been constructed.
E. That an additional two acres (lots 331 through 335) at the southern end of the school site shall be reserved for eight years from the date of the approval of the Master Land Use Plan, for optional purchase by the local School Board, at a price determined to be fair market value for developed lots (i.e., with utilities and roadway frontage). If the School Board does not commit to purchase within six years and act within eight years to purchase this 2-acre parcel, the reservation requirement shall expire and the property owner may use this two-acre parcel for development of residential lots. However, if the applicant has not constructed Meadowmont Lane from Highway 54 to the school entrance and provided utilities to the site, the right to purchase shall be extended until two years from such time as said road and utilities have been constructed.
F. That the approximately 70 acre-park shall be developed with the first phase of development which contains residential units, or a surety guarantee shall be provided in an amount to cover costs of building the park and access roads to the park.
G. That prior to the first Zoning Compliance Permit, the applicant must provide a method and format approved by the Town Manager for a continual tally of the impervious surface on the site to ensure that the project is always in compliance with the Watershed Protection Ordinance.
H. That the Community Recycling Center shall be deeded to the Town of Chapel Hill with access determined to be adequate by the Town Manager.
I. That the boundary of this Special Use Permit include the area identified as the Recycling Area, being lot #419 of Sheet 3 of the Infrastructure Site Plan dated February 28, 1997.
4. Clearing and Grading: That all cut and fill slopes along public right-of-way shall be a maximum of 3:1, or as approved by the Town Manager.
5. Permanent Retention Basin Installation:
A. That the applicant be required to construct retention pond 1B and retention pond 5 prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Village Center.
B. 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.
C. The size, accessibility, location, and design of each pond shall be approved by the Town Manager.
D. 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.
E. The property owner shall post a performance bond or other surety instrument satisfactory to the Town, in an amount approved by the Town Manager, to assure maintenance, repair, or reconstruction necessary for adequate performance of the engineered stormwater controls.
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 Owners’ or 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 identify these responsibilities of the Owners’ Homeowners’ Association, including pond maintenance.
H. Maintenance of the ponds shall be the responsibility of the applicant or a property/homeowners 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. As part of every application for Final Plan Approval, Zoning Compliance Permit, and residential Building Permit, the applicant shall provide an up-to-date cumulative total for impervious surfaces in the particular sub-basin.
J. 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.
K. All sediment deposited in the ponds during construction activity on contributing sites must be removed before “normal” pond operation begins.
L. Emergency drains shall be installed in all ponds to allow access for repairs and sediment removal as necessary.
M. Anti-seepage collars shall be used on any structures penetrating dams or water retaining embankments.
N. Public storm drainage systems, or other utilities, shall not be located within a pond or dam structure.
O. That no ponds be created within the perimeter landscaped buffer required for the Meadowmont development.
P. 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: That the applicant be required to construct the following improvements:
A. State-Maintained Roads: That all designs for State-maintained roads be approved by the North Carolina Department of Transportation prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
B. Internal and Off-site Streets:
Meadowmont Lane: That Meadowmont Lane between Highway 54 and Residential Collector Road be constructed within a 110 foot wide right-of-way and include four 12 foot travel lanes, two four foot wide on-street bicycle lanes, two five foot wide sidewalks, two eight foot wide tree/lawn planters separating the sidewalks and on-street bicycle lanes and a landscaped center median.
Meadowmont Lane Alignment: That Meadowmont Lane be re-aligned according to the transit corridor alignment revision plan dated June 17, 1997.
Meadowmont Lane Turning Lanes: That all Meadowmont Lane turning lanes be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Meadowmont Lane Median: That the width of the median along Meadowmont Lane be constructed with a minimum width of 10 feet, excluding narrower widths for turn lanes and associated tapers to be approved by the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
That bricks (or other textured surface) be included in select locations within the Meadowmont Lane median, as determined by the Town Manager and the Appearance Commission. All other paved areas shall be a hard permanent surface.
Hilltop Collector Road: That Hilltop Collector Road be constructed within a 73 foot right-of-way from Meadowmont Lane to the west edge of this proposal. The construction shall include two 11 foot travel lanes, a 10 foot wide center turn lane, two four foot wide on-street bicycle lanes, two bus pull-offs, two five foot wide sidewalks, two eight foot wide tree/lawn planters separating the sidewalks and on-street bicycle lanes.
B. Highway 54 Improvements:
Highway 54 Improvements: That Highway 54 be improved to a six-lane cross-section, with a landscaped center median, from the Meadowmont Lane/Friday Lane intersection to the proposed intersection of Hilltop Collector Road.
Westbound Turn Lanes: That one westbound right-turn lane be provided to access Hilltop Collector Road. That one westbound left-turn lane be provided south of Hilltop Collector Road, to access future development south of Highway 54.
Eastbound Turn Lanes: That two eastbound left-turn lanes be provided to access Meadowmont Lane. That one eastbound right-turn lane be provided to access Friday Lane.
Landscaped Center Median: That the center median along Highway 54 shall include landscaping as approved by the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Town Manager and the Appearance Commission. Curb and gutter shall be provided along the Highway 54 median at the intersections with Meadowmont Lane, Barbee Chapel Road and Hilltop Collector Road, unless NCDOT determines that curb and gutter is required along the entire length of the median to accommodate plantings.
Traffic Signal Upgrades: That traffic signal upgrades be installed, or a payment-in-lieu be provided, for the Highway 54 intersection with Meadowmont Lane. All new and upgraded traffic signals must have hard wire connection to the Town’s computerized traffic signal system.
C. Pedestrian Paths/Bicycle Paths/Greenways:
Highway 54 Bicycle/Pedestrian Path: That an off-street pedestrian/bicycle path, at least 6-8 feet from the outside travel lane, be provided along the north side of Highway 54 along the property’s frontage and west to the Burning Tree Drive intersection; and that the path be 10 feet wide unless otherwise determined by the Town Manager.
Path Design at Intersections: That the off-street bicycle/pedestrian path along Highway 54 be designed so that the path is drawn closer to the Highway when approaching the intersections with Meadowmont Lane, Barbee Chapel Road and Hilltop Collector Road to facilitate turning movements by bicycles and pedestrians.
Highway 54 Pedestrian Tunnel: That the North Carolina Department of Transportation review and approve the specifications for the below-grade pedestrian tunnel crossing Highway 54 prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit; and that utility wiring be installed in this tunnel to allow future installation of a video monitoring system.
Highway 54 Pedestrian Waiting Areas: That pedestrian waiting areas be provided within the Highway 54 median at locations to be approved by the Town Manager, subject to approval by the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
Meadowmont Lane Pedestrian Crossing: That a specially designed pedestrian crossing be provided on Meadowmont Lane at the intersection with Hilltop Collector Road, and that the design be approved by the North Carolina Department of Transportation and the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Meadowmont Lane Pedestrian Signal: That the installation of or a payment-in-lieu be provided for a pedestrian activated signal, with hard wire connections to the Chapel Hill computerized traffic signal system, at the intersection of Meadowmont Lane and Hilltop Collector Road. This signal shall be approved by the North Carolina Department of Transportation prior to installation.
Future Transit Station Access: That the applicant provide a safe and convenient pedestrian access connections between the future transit station, the bus transfer areas and the retail/grocery store (Building K).
Greenway/Bikepath access: That the proposed pedestrian connection to the west between the Village Center and the greenway and bikepath be a minimum of 10 feet wide in order to accommodate both pedestrians and bicycles.
D. Transit:
Transit Corridor: That the 50-foot wide right-of-way for a future transit corridor be provided within a transit easement, and that this land be available for use by the Town of Chapel Hill and the Triangle Transit Authority as needed.
Transit Corridor Alignment: That the transit corridor be re-aligned according to the transit corridor alignment revision plan dated June 17, 1997.
Future Transit Stop: That the final plan locates a transit stop. We recommend that the details of the transit stop be provided prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Bus Stops: That the applicant provide two additional bus stop locations. A bus pull off, and stop, including a bench, shelter and 5 foot by 10 foot pad shall be provided along the west side of Meadowmont Lane, just south of the vehicle entrance to the Village Center. A second bus stop, including a bench and a 5 foot by 10 foot pad shall be located along the south side of Hilltop Collector Road at a location to be approved by the Town Manager.
E. Parking:
Parking in Transit Corridor: That parking shall be prohibited within the proposed transit corridor north of Hilltop Collector Road in order to preserve existing vegetation, subject to Town Manager approval.
Angled Parking: That the parking spaces between Buildings E and H be angled.
8. Required Utility Related and Other Improvements:
A. Stormwater Runoff:
1. 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.
2. A stormwater management plan, based on a 10-year 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. All storm drainage facilities in the State right-of-way shall be designed for a 25 year storm.
3. 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. 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.
3. That underground conduits be installed for future utilities and/or lighting in designated locations approved by the Town Manager.
9. 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 including privately maintained streets and alleys. All property owners owning land within the area of the Master Land Use Plan approval, excluding governmental bodies, shall be represented in the owners’ association. This owners’ association shall have maintenance responsibilities for commonly owned development elements which affect the entire development including the stormwater management facilities.
B. In addition, a separate neighborhood association(s) and/or 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 the issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
C. The responsibilities of these entities shall include the ownership and maintenance of the private alleys, private green spaces, private parks and recreation space, private retention and detention 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.
E. These entities shall have the ability to place a lien on property for nonpayment of dues or fees.
10. Design-Related Stipulations: The following revisions and additions shall be incorporated into the applicant’s Entranceway Corridor Design Guidelines document: That the text under “North side of Highway 54” on page 2 be revised to include a note indicating that the Town Manager and the Appearance Commission will assist the applicant in determining and defining where and how breaks in the existing tree buffer can occur.
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.
11. 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.
11.1 That Building M front on the road called Hilltop Collector or on the private street which runs in front of Building K.
Stipulations Related to Recreation Space
12. Town Park: That the approximately 70 acre Town Park shall be developed by the applicant with the first phase of development which contains residential units or a surety guarantee provided in an amount to cover costs of building the park and access roads to the park.
Stipulations Related to the Resource Conservation District
13. Boundaries: That the boundaries of the Resource Conservation District be indicated on final plans. 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 Chapel Hill 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 sub-section 5.8. Permitted encroachments include, but are not limited to:
¨ Street crossings;
¨ Pedestrian/bicycle paths along and over the streams;
¨ Wet detention basin/stormwater management facilities;
¨ Utility lines; and
¨ Surface Parking.
Stipulations Related to State and Federal Approvals
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 Meadowmont Lane, Highway 54, for pond and dam construction, for stormwater management and erosion control, for crossings over/under Highway 54, for disturbance related to the listed archaeological site, for water and sewer extension, and for development in the wetlands and Watershed Protection District) be approved by the appropriate agencies and copies of the approved permits and agreements be submitted to the Town Manager 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, including landscaping and utility plans, 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, including the area within the transit easement, 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, unless alternate protection measures are approved by the Town Manager, between construction and existing vegetation.
19. Street Tree Plantings:
A. That the applicant shall provide street tree plantings for public streets, with canopy trees to be planted 40-60 feet apart. Locations shall include:
¨ at Entranceways on Highway 54;
¨ along entrance roads;
¨ in the parks, greens, and recreation areas;
¨ both sides of streets in the non-residential areas;
¨ both sides of Meadowmont Lane;
¨ both sides of Barbee Chapel Road Extension;
¨ both sides of streets abutting townhouse development; and
¨ at least one side of all other streets.
Final plans for the development shall include a street tree plan developed in conjunction with local utility companies, and approved 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.
B. That all street tree planting be linked to construction of the infrastructure associated with each phase of development, and are therefore the responsibility of the applicant.
C. That all street trees along public streets, adjacent to selected multi-family and commercial areas be 3 ½ to 4 inch caliper when planted, or as approved 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 approved by the Town Manager and the Appearance Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
21. Plantings along Highway 54 Frontage: That planting be provided, meadows be restored and existing vegetation preserved along the Highway frontage in general compliance with the Town’s Master Landscape Plan for Entranceway Corridors along Highway 54. A streetscape plan, demonstrating compliance with the Master Landscape Plan for Entranceway Corridors, shall be submitted for Town Manager and Appearance Commission review and approval. A phasing plan for plant installation shall be included with this plan. Planting plans for trees along Highway 54 shall also be subject to approval by the North Carolina Department of Transportation.
22. Highway 54 Entranceway Corridor: That the applicant provide additional information as part of the final plan review process including detailed elevations and direct views from Highway 54 for consideration by the Appearance Commission. That Appearance Commission and Town Manager review final planting plans and approve the size and location of the proposed “windows” in the Highway 54 buffer.
22. 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:
¨ Buffer Area G (minimum width 200 feet) along north side of Highway 54 in front of western portion of the Village Center development; and
¨ Buffer Area H (minimum width 200 feet) along north side of Highway 54 in front of eastern portion of the Village Center development.
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. That a plan for the thinning of the hedgerows along Highway 54 be approved by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
23. 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.
24. Parking Lot Medians: That parking lot medians where canopy trees are proposed to be installed to a minimum of 10 foot width (rather than the 8 foot proposed) or as approved by the Town Manager.
Stipulation Related to Building Elevations
24. Building Elevations: That detailed building elevations be approved by the Appearance Commission prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
Stipulations Related to Water, Sewer, and Other Utilities
25. Fireflow: 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:
¨ For non-residential: 2,500 - 12,000 gallons per minute, at 20 pound per square inch residual pressure;
¨ For multi-family: 1,500 - 2,500 gallons per minute, at 20 pounds per square inch residual pressure; and
¨ For single-family: A minimum of 750 gallons per minute, at 20 pounds per square inch residual pressure.
26. Utility/Lighting Plan Approval: That the final utility/lighting plan be approved by Orange Water and Sewer Authority, Duke Power Company, TimeWarner Cable, Public Service Company, BellSouth or GTE, 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.
27. 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.
Miscellaneous Stipulations
28. Mix of Uses: That the initial phase proposing buildings on the Meadowmont site include a mix of residential and commercial uses.
29. 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.
That a note be added to the final plans and plat indicating that the refuse compactor shall be privately maintained.
That a note be included on the final plans and plat indicating that the scheduling of public refuse collection services will be determined by the Town Manager and may conflict with the proposed residential uses.
30. 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:
¨ Provision for designation of a Transportation Coordinator;
¨ Provisions for an annual Transportation Survey and Annual Report to the Town Manager;
¨ Quantifiable traffic reduction goals and objectives;
¨ Ridesharing incentives; and
¨ Public transit incentives.
31. 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.
The Town Manager may require adjustments to the street design to enhance safety and maintenance operations.
B. That a Streetlighting Plan be developed in cooperation with Duke Power Company and submitted to the Town for approval prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit, and that this plan reflect the hierarchy of streets within the development.
C. That a street sign, on-street parking, and pavement marking plan be provided for approval by the Town Manager prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit. All pavement markings shall be thermoplastic. The signs and pavement markings shall be installed by the applicant prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
D. The applicant shall be responsible for assuring that all utilities, including cable television, be extended to serve the development.
E. That all parking lots be designed and constructed to meet Town standard unless an alternate design or phasing is approved by the Council or Town Manager.
32. Soil Exploration: That the applicant conduct soils exploration to determine special pavement and sub-surface drainage design for some sections of roadway. The pavement and drainage designs must be approved by the Town Manager and shall include supporting technical data. A note shall be included on the plans indicating that during the review of final plans, the Town may require these special measures, including replacement of base materials, subsurface drainage systems and heavy duty pavement sections.
33. 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.
34. Sight Triangle Easements: That sight triangle easements be provided on the final plat.
35. New Streets - Traffic Signs: That the property owners shall be responsible for placement and maintenance of temporary regulatory signs, including street name signs, before issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy until such time that the street system is accepted for maintenance by the Town.
36. 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.
37. Erosion Control: That a general soil erosion and sedimentation control plan for the development 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.
38. Silt Control: That the applicant take appropriate measures to prevent and remove the deposit of wet or dry silt on adjacent paved roadways.
39. 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 telephone number; and a telephone number for regulatory information prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
40. Taxation of Office and Commercial Property: That arrangements be made by the developer such that office and commercial buildings in Meadowmont; if built as proposed on the Master Plan, be subject to local and State property and sales taxes, or that provisions be made for payment in lieu of such taxes in the event that such properties become tax exempt.
41. Energy Management: That an Energy Management program generally consistent with guidelines submitted by the applicant, designed to minimize energy consumption, be prepared and submitted to the Town Manager as part of final plans, prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit.
42. Continued Validity: That continued validity and effectiveness of this approval is expressly conditioned on the continued compliance with the plans and conditions listed above.
43. 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 application for Special Use Permit for the Meadowmont Village Center.
This the 2nd day of July, 1997.
COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO MOVED TO RECESS THE MEETING UNTIL JULY 3RD. COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY (9-0).
The hearings concluded at 11:17 p.m.