SUMMARY OF A PUBLIC HEARING OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA, TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1997

 

Mayor Waldorf called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.  Council Members in attendance were Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Mark Chilton, Pat Evans, Richard Franck, Lee Pavão, and Edith Wiggins. Council Member Julie Andresen was absent.  Also in attendance were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos, Planning Director Roger Waldon, and Development Coordinator J. B. Culpepper.

 

Item 1 - Proposed Changes to the Development Ordinance Regarding the

Resource Conservation District Regulations

 

Planning Director Roger Waldon provided an overview of the seven proposed changes to the Resource Conservation District regulations.  He touched on each of these issues and briefly described how these changes would affect the ordinance.  Mr. Waldon noted the recommendation is for adoption of Ordinance A.

 

John Hawkins, representing the Planning Board, noted that the Board raised several concerns regarding the proposed changes.  He stated that several recommendations were made by the Board, and have been included in alternate Ordinance B.

 

Jim Carter, speaking as Chair of the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce, encouraged the Council to accept the Manager's recommendation, which is to make no changes to the current ordinance.

 

Henry Whitfield agreed with Mr. Carter, noting the current ordinance places a hardship on developers.  He endorsed the Manager's recommendation.

 

Madeline Jefferson stated her concern that Resource Conservation District areas be protected.  She remarked that she supported some of the proposed changes but disagreed with others, and encouraged the Council to look at this matter closely before making any changes.

 

Kevin Foy spoke in favor of the proposed changes to the ordinance. He stated his belief that these clarifying changes would make the ordinance stronger.

 

Council Member Franck stated that at the time this matter was first referred to staff he had made a recommendation that Chapter 18 of the Development Ordinance, regarding Special Use Permit regulations as it related to the Resource Conservation District ordinance, especially parts that allow the Council to waive some restrictions in the ordinance, be reviewed as to its effect on the Resource Conservation District.  He asked if the staff had any comment.  Mr. Horton replied he was not aware that Council Member Franck had made such a request, and he would direct staff to do so when this matter came back before the Council.

 

Council Member Capowski asked Mr. Waldon to supply information on the size, in acres, of an average golf course and driving range.

 

Council Member Evans said she is concerned about the impact of changes, or more specifically, the impact of not making changes.  She said the redesign of the golf course may improve some aspects including water quality, but if the proposed changes make it more difficult for redesign to take place then we are not achieving a positive purpose.  She noted another issue is that Resource Conservation Districts are more than just creeks.  Council Member Evans said there is also an equity issue, as to whether residential areas are treated in the same manner as commercial areas. She remarked that people living in a Resource Conservation District are affected more by the ordinance than commercial property.  Council Member Evans said it seemed logical that the Council allow properties that were approved before the Resource Conservation District was put in place to remain as is, so that their property value would remain high and not be adversely affected.

 

Council Member Capowski asked if a contemporary map of the Resource Conservation District areas in Town was available.  Mr. Waldon replied yes, but it is generalized.  He said some field work on the ground needed to be completed for specific borders, which means the current map lines may not be entirely accurate.  Mr. Waldon indicated a map would be included in the follow-up report to the Council.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS, TO REFER THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT ORDINANCE TO THE MANAGER FOR A FOLLOW-UP REPORT ON NOVEMBER 13th.

 

Council Member Evans asked if the issues raised by advisory boards would be addressed.  Mr. Karpinos answered yes.

 

THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Item 2 - Proposed Changes to the Town's Development Ordinance Review Process

 

Mr. Waldon described the current proposal made by Ms. Dianne Bachman, Appearance Commission Chairperson. Her proposal would create a new Community Design Commission and establish a mandatory Concept Plan review process for major development applications.

 

John Hawkins, speaking for the Planning Board, noted the Board had deferred discussion on this issue until their October 28th meeting. He stated the Board's belief that the proposal had some merit, but Board members expressed concern regarding the implication that this proposal may place an unusual work load on the traditional functions of the Appearance Commission.

 

Dianne Bachman, Chair of the Appearance Commission, and speaking for the Appearance Commission and Design Review Board, remarked that the combined Boards had unanimously approved the proposed changes. She noted that the combined Boards felt that developers should meet with them very early in the review process so that the developers understand exactly what is expected, and as a result give the Town the best possible product.

 

Mayor Waldorf asked if the proposed ordinance delegates the decisions regarding design and buffers to the staff.  Mr. Horton said no.  Mayor Waldorf replied she believes this issue should be studied.  She added she does not believe that an advisory board should necessarily have to make those kinds of decisions.

 

Council Member Evans stated the purpose of starting this process was to achieve a better product and at the same time achieve a faster approval process.  She commented that after five years of attempting to streamline the review process, she had little hope of achieving that goal.  Council Member Evans asked how long it takes for an average project to go through the entire process.  Mr. Waldon replied that from the time an application is received until approval is granted varies for each project.  He added it might take several months just to prepare an application before it is submitted to the Planning Department, and he had no way of knowing how long that process might be.  Mr. Waldon said staff currently advises applicants to expect nine to twelve months from the time an application is received by the Town until the process is completed.  He noted site plan reviews generally take about four months, from the time of application until the Planning Board process is completed.  Mr. Waldon said the next step is the process of presenting final construction drawings and details, which takes about three months.

 

Council Member Evans asked for some clarification on the time necessary to prepare an application for submittal to the Town.  Mr. Waldon commented it could take a month for a simple development, but several months or longer for more complex developments.

 

Council Member Franck said he believes this proposal will result in better projects because review would take place much earlier in the process.  He noted that on page 10 of the memorandum, in Section 15.5.5, broader language may be appropriate.  Council Member Franck added that the final paragraph on page 10 should be deleted, because approval or denial would not be recommended at that stage of the process.  He requested that on page 11, Section 25.5.1, citizens not already on an advisory board, but who have earned their experience and expertise through service on Town boards or through other means, be added to the membership list, as citizen participation should always be encouraged.  Council Member Franck added that if the Appearance Commission believes that the standards are such that the staff can enforce the landscaping and sign requirements, then he would like to have that proposal brought before the Council.

 

Agreeing with Council Member Franck’s remarks, Mayor Waldorf added that this subject had been discussed many times and should not have to go through advisory board review.

 

Council Member Wiggins added her agreement in general with Council Member Franck’s comments.  She asked Mr. Waldon for clarification of the illustration on page 4 of the memorandum.  Mr. Waldon said this version does not involve any staff evaluation, which means the application when submitted would go directly to the Concept Plan Review Committee without any staff review or involvement.  He added he sees this as a disadvantage, as there are some things the staff could add to the process in the way of review.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked if this issue had been raised with Ms. Bachman.  Mr. Horton responded the Council would have to resolve this issue because it could work either way, but staff felt an obligation to bring to the Council’s attention that problems could occur from time to time.  Mr. Horton said he believes there would be some benefit to early staff participation, because staff are most familiar with the ordinance.

 

Council Member Wiggins asked if advisory boards had staff assigned to them.  Mr. Horton answered yes, and said in this case that would be his recommendation.  He added that because of the work load, additional staff would be necessary to achieve this goal.

 

Mayor Waldorf noted that on page 8, Section 15.4 defines a major development proposal as one that requires or requests a Special Use Permit or a Special Use Permit Modification, a Master Land Use Plan or a Master Land Use Plan Modification, or a proposal for a major subdivision which creates four or more lots.  Mayor Waldorf stated the goal was significant design review and a more streamlined process.  She asked if a Special Use Permit Modification should be considered for this particular review process.  Mayor Waldorf remarked her understanding was that anything brought to the Council would go through this process.  Mr. Horton replied that was correct, but that he would not be comfortable recommending that the Council drop Special Use Permit Modifications from this definition because sometimes those modifications are significant.  He reminded the Council he had in the past recommended that the thresholds be raised for major subdivisions, but the Council had made a deliberate decision to keep it at its present level.

 

Mayor Waldorf said she believed the idea was to influence design, and noted all of these issues may need to go through this process.

 

Council Member Wiggins stated a strong design review process is good for the community, but it will have budget implications if the Manager recommends additional staff.  She stated the Council must consider the impact on the budget and give serious thought to rearranging their priorities to reduce this potential.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO REFER THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS TO THE MANAGER FOR A FOLLOW-UP REPORT ON NOVEMBER 13th.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

Item 3 - Special Use Permit Application for Performance Motors

 

Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper commented that this application would expand the boundaries of the Performance Motors Special Use Permit to include a new employee parking lot. She noted the applicant is asking the Council for a modification to the requirements of the Development Ordinance's Schedule of Use Regulations, which does not permit parking as a principle use of a lot in the Neighborhood Commercial zoning district.  Ms. Culpepper noted that Section 18.7.1 of the Development Ordinance permits the Council to make a finding that in a particular case that public purposes are satisfied to an equivalent or greater degree and allow specific modifications for the subject site.  She noted staff is concerned about drainage on the site, and believes the drainage pipe is not of adequate size. Ms. Culpepper added Resolution A would require replacement of the current pipe with a larger pipe, or some other drainage improvement.

 

Phil Post, speaking for the applicant, remarked that the Performance dealership is an asset to the community with a strong employee base, numbering over 200 employees.  He noted the applicant is aware of the drainage problem, and stated that agreement had been reached with the neighboring southern property owner to permit the applicant to install a 12-inch underground pipe from the parking lot through the southern neighboring property.  Mr. Post added they are continuing to consider ways to detain additional stormwater, and would increase the size of the existing 18-inch reinforced concrete pipe under Legion Road to a size appropriate to handle the 10-year storm event.

 

Mr. Post noted this proposed modification would add an additional 78 parking spaces, that would be reserved for employees only.  He stated that no other traffic or storage would be permitted on this lot.  Mr. Post commented that there are two shifts currently scheduled at Performance, with a two-hour overlap between shifts. He indicated the traffic congestion during this overlap, which is also the time when customers are arriving to retrieve repaired or serviced vehicles, places a burden on the existing lot.  He stated his agreement with the conditions noted in Resolution A, and asked for the Council's approval of the modification to the Special Use Permit as requested.

 

John Hawkins, Chair of the Planning Board, remarked the Board found the application to be legitimate and worthy of approval.  He noted the Board felt that the applicant was pursuing a positive course for his property and should not be forced to resolve the needs of the other nearby property owners at the applicant’s expense.  Mr. Hawkins added the Board recommended approval of Resolution A.

 

Dianne Bachman, speaking for the Appearance Commission/Design Review Board, stated the combined Boards had voted against approval of this modification request.  She said the consensus was that lots zoned Neighborhood Commercial were better suited for other uses, especially given the limited amount of remaining undeveloped land in the Town that exists in this zoning district.

 

Henry Whitfield commented he owns property that abuts the Performance property being discussed.  He remarked his plan was that all of the property owners along this shared property line would grant Performance an easement, adding that all of the owners had signed an agreement to donate this easement and dedicate it to the Town.  Mr. Whitfield asked that the drainage plan be approved and implemented as soon as possible.

 

John McPhaul expressed his agreement with Mr. Whitfield, adding that he plans to purchase some nearby property from Mr. Whitfield and believes this plan would solve the drainage problems.

 

Council Member Capowski remarked that this is a 12-acre site and believes there are more than the reported 148 parking spaces on that lot.  He asked Mr. Post to report to the Council the total number of parking spaces currently on the lot.  Regarding stormwater runoff, Council Member Capowski noted this is a major vehicle repair site and asked the staff if there are currently problems with contaminated water coming from the site.  Ms. Culpepper answered none had been reported, but she would research the issue further.  Council Member Capowski asked the staff to report on the total impervious surface of the site.

 

Council Member Evans asked Mr. Post to comment on the time of day the proposed new lot would be in use.  Mr. Post answered the highest usage would be between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. with some nighttime use, and no use on Saturday and Sunday.

 

Council Member Wiggins commented she would like to see something that clearly shows the landscape and buffer and how the property will look with the trees and buffers added.  Mr. Post said he would provide a drawing to the Council.

 

Council Member Wiggins said she often travels this area and had noticed two new developments in the area.  She asked if it would be possible that when looking at projects, other projects proposed nearby could be highlighted so that the Council would know what is happening in the area.  Mr. Horton said he would provide that information when this item comes back to the Council, as well as for future projects.

 

COUNCIL MEMBER EVANS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER PAVAO, TO REFER THE PERFORMANCE MOTORS APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION TO THE MANAGER FOR A FOLLOW-UP REPORT ON NOVEMBER 13th.  THE MOTION WAS ADOPTED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

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

 

The public hearing stood adjourned at 8:52 p.m.