SUMMARY MINUTES OF A WORK SESSION
WITH THE COMMUNITY DESIGN COMMISSION
MONDAY, MAY 17, 1999 AT 5:30 P.M.
Mayor Rosemary Waldorf called the meeting to order at 5:40 p.m.
Council Members present were Flicka Bateman, Joyce Brown, Joe Capowski, Pat Evans, Julie McClintock, Lee Pavão, and Edith Wiggins. Council Member Kevin Foy arrived at 5:45 p.m.
Staff members present were Town Manager Cal Horton, Assistant Town Managers Sonna Loewenthal and Florentine Miller, Assistant to the Manager Ruffin Hall, Planning Director Roger Waldon, Development Coordinator J.B. Culpepper, Current Development Planner and Community Design Commission Staff Liaison Rob Wilson, and Town Clerk Joyce Smith.
Community Design Commission members present were Steve Manton, Bruce Guild, Sarah Haskett, Polly Van de Velde, Diane Bachman, Slayton Evans, Terry Eason, Weezie Oldenburg, and Nancy Gabriel, Planning Board liaison.
Mayor Waldorf welcomed the Community Design Commission.
Dianne Bachman, Chair of the Community Design Commission (CDC), said that the CDC had completed its first full year and was here to review its progress with the Council. She said that it had established a baseline of cohesiveness and communication. Ms. Bachman said that the Commission had asked her to tell the Council that in establishing the CDC the Council had provided value to Chapel Hill’s review process by having one group, with consistent membership and a common sense of focus, to review projects with applicants and citizens from conception to the Commission’s recommendations to the Council for final review. She said that the CDC had been able to contribute to an improved quality of design for the projects that it reviewed. Ms. Bachman said that by reviewing projects with applicants and citizens in the concept phase, the CDC was able to discuss alternate approaches with the applicant at a point in the project that did not require costs to the applicant for work already completed, and by applying consistency in the project plans that did not exist previously. She said that this year the CDC had reviewed 21 concept plans, had made 16 recommendations to Council, and had reviewed 21 final plans. Ms. Bachman said that the group had established the first and third Wednesdays of each month as its regular meeting dates and when the agenda did not warrant a second meeting it was cancelled. She said that the members had established work sessions throughout the year, and had distributed concept plan reviews to all of its applicants in the concept phase during the year. Ms. Bachman said that the Commission’s diversity spoke to its strength, and on all projects the group had been able to reach consensus, noting that the CDC recognized the importance of dissenting opinions.
Ms. Bachman said that the CDC would like to receive feedback from the Council regarding:
1. To what degree the Council found the input from the CDC of value in reviewing projects that the CDC had also reviewed.
2. How the Council foresaw the CDC responding to projects for which the Council and other elected boards had already issued mandates. She cited as examples the Scarlette Drive project and the Smith Middle School project.
Council Member McClintock said that the School Board had the final say on the Smith Middle School project, but that making use of daylight with the windows might cause considerable savings for the school system. She wondered if the CDC felt that they had adequate time to give these projects the fair amount of time needed for each one.
Mayor Waldorf asked that this question be held until the Council responded to the issues brought up by the CDC.
Council Member Brown asked the CDC how much they had looked to the Town’s Comprehensive Plan when they discussed the various projects that came before them. She said that one of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan was the use of renewable energy, and that an ordinance had been passed requiring all buildings built by the Town to incorporate renewable energy, and this was also important to the school system. Ms. Bachman said that the Comprehensive Plan was definitely one of the parameters that the CDC used in looking at projects. She said that renewable energy was never in question regarding the Smith Middle School. Ms. Bachman said that what they were asking for feedback on, from the concept phase, was if there were other ways to do daylighting design, that perhaps some elements of the school might be two-story and still use renewable energy sources. Ms. Bachman said that the response that they received from the applicant was that the School Board said this had to be a total, one-story, daylighting approach, and the CDC felt that their hands were tied in seeking any other kind of design opportunity that would still maximize renewable energy, but also balance out with responsible use of the land.
Steve Manton said that the topography of the site was not necessarily conducive to a single-story building the way it was designed, but they were told that that was the way the Council and the School Board wanted it.
Terry Eason said that the Council wanted to know when the CDC struggled with a project they were assigned, but were unable to agree on. He said they wondered if the Council wanted them to comment on the givens which they were uncomfortable with and over which they had no control, or whether Council wanted them just to accept the givens, and give comments only on the part that they could affect.
Council Member Bateman said that she would always welcome divergent opinions, and if the CDC had concerns, the Council would weigh those concerns.
Council Member Evans said that those members on the CDC were the most knowledgeable on the design issues, and she did not think that the Council was ever asked by the School Board about the design. She said that when the CDC had problems and concerns, the Council would want to hear them.
Council Member Foy asked whether the CDC’s question specifically regarded the School Board or if it was a broader question about mandates from the Council. He asked what other times they had found themselves in that particular situation. Ms. Bachman said that the other example was Scarlette Drive, where they had felt that the Council had said that they would like a particular density, and they had many citizens come before them to speak about it.
Steve Manton said that there was an opportunity for affordable housing when it came before the CDC at the Meadowmont location, but there was a roadway that was dedicated by the developer, and the CDC was told very clearly that that road could not be moved, even though it would have been beneficial for that particular development if the road could be situated in a different configuration. He said that the CDC was told that was the way the Special Use Permit (SUP) was written, and that the CDC was not permitted to make any adjustments to it.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked who gave them that information. Polly Van de Velde said that, as the CDC understood it, they
could not request the road be moved because it was next to another SUP, and
that dictated where the road had to go in the affordable housing section,
because the road was going to be used by tractor-trailers delivering groceries.
Council
Member Foy asked if the CDC had expressed concerns about the road. Mr. Manton
said they had, and they had talked to Robert Dowling about other options, but
that Mr. Dowling felt stymied, because of the adjacent SUP which had already
been approved, and since that initial concept conversation it had not come back
to the CDC again.
Council
Member Brown said that she would like to know the status on that road, and she
thought that some review of it was taking place. Mr. Horton said that he believed that it was coming back through
the process fairly soon. He said that
Mr. Dowling was trying to take into consideration some of the concerns that the
CDC had expressed to him. Mr. Horton
said that there had been some redesign, but the roadway still went
through. He said that when East Chapel
Hill High School was being discussed, the Council had expressed concern to the
School Board about the use of daylighting and that the designer had probably
taken that mandate into consideration with the Smith Middle School.
Council
Member McClintock said that she encouraged the CDC to look at the ideal, and
that the Council would want to hear their concerns, since they were looking at
the specific designs and talking with citizens.
Council
Member Wiggins said that she would like to hear the CDC’s recommendations
regardless of any other mandate or message from any other group, because the
CDC was the group of citizens looking at the design, and she would like their
opinion and would like to feel that this opinion would carry a lot of weight. She said they should be vigorous in their
opinion, since it was considered early in the process, when there was room for
flexibility.
Mayor
pro tem Capowski said he agreed with Council Member Wiggins that the Council
needed the CDC’s opinions, because they were the only people seeing the
projects upfront, and if they felt that they were being pressured to approve
something which they had reservations about, then they should cite their
reservations. He mentioned the Human
Services building as an example.
Council
Member Brown said that she would welcome any input from the CDC, but that there
were certain things that might have already been established before they came
to the CDC for discussion. She said
that the Council would welcome comments from the CDC, but in some cases it
would be difficult to change. She said
not everything came to the CDC as a clean slate, such as the Human Services
building and the Smith Middle School.
Council
Member Wiggins wondered if there would be any way of flagging those projects
that already had other requirements applied to them so that when the CDC
reviewed them, it could minimize the time spent because they would not think
that they were starting from scratch.
Mayor
Waldorf said that if applicants would use the concept phase the way it was
intended—something that was schematic and not something that was completed—then
the CDC could communicate with the Council and the Council could communicate
back to the CDC more efficiently. Sarah Haskett said that she felt that this
issue would come up again, specifically with Meadowmont and the Master Plan,
and she felt that there should be a tie-in with the Design Group for Meadowmont
and the CDC.
Council
Member Wiggins said that she felt the Meadowmont development would be difficult
for the CDC, since many decisions regarding the project had been made before
the formation of the CDC.
Council
Member Evans said the CDC should certainly emphasize all the strong points that
it saw, and those that were questionable and those that were weak, because the
Council did have some discretion.
Steve
Manton said that the CDC had established some guidelines by which applicants
would be required to fulfill certain requirements when they came before the
CDC, keeping it simple. He said that
most of the applicants had been doing that.
Mayor
Waldorf said that it was the sense of the Council that they were interested in
having designs that minimized land disturbances as much as possible, and
minimized impervious surfaces, and traffic, and considered solar orientation. She said it would be helpful to the Council
for the CDC to look at those things closely.
Council Member McClintock asked if the CDC was able to handle all the projects that were coming through and if there was a better way to do it. She asked if there was some way they could evaluate some of the things that they had accomplished. Bruce Guild said that there was an obvious learning curve, they were making much better use of their time than they did at first, the addition of the second meeting was very helpful to finish, and that they dealt with issues step by step rather than getting into the specifics.
Mr. Eason responded to the question reflection on decisions after a project was built, and said he felt that the answer was yes. He felt that was one of the things that would emerge with the continuity of the group, that they were beginning to learn from decisions that had been made and would be more knowledgeable and discerning in the decisions made in their recommendations, because they had seen things built.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked Mr. Eason what he meant by having second thoughts. Mr. Eason responded that sometimes they did not respond to what they thought the builder was going to do, or sometimes they did not have a full understanding of the topography, a misunderstanding of the renderings. He said that was all part of the learning curve, and that they needed to absorb where they had not quite predicted what was going to happen.
Ms. Haskett said that she would like to emphasis the importance of the continuity of the reviewing board, seeing it through the process.
Ms. Bachman said that it also brought strength to the group to have the liaisons from the other boards and commissions, which gave them input.
Council Member Brown asked if, when they saw the completed building, it conformed to the drawings they had seen or if there were some differences, or if the placement made it a different concept. Mr. Eason said that they asked for the drawings to be brought back to their board so they could see how the building conformed to the drawings they had seen and interpreted, but in some cases he felt that the misunderstanding was because of a lack of information, and some of the developments were very complex. Ms. Bachman said that the CDC had not yet had any projects come to fruition so that they could see the progress. Nancy Gabriel said that the CDC had not yet seen a project all the way from concept to final review, but there had been projects that had gone from concept to recommendations to the Council, and she felt that the applicants were very responsive to what the CDC said. She said that the two projects that they had cited, Scarlette Drive and the Smith Middle School, had come to the CDC with the project already further along in its design than concept plans. She also said that not all of the group had those particular concerns about the two projects.
Council Member Pavão asked if the CDC was cataloguing the projects that turned out differently than they had perceived, so that they could make reference to it on future projects they would be looking at. Ms. Bachman said that there were reviews of each project in which the Chair reviewed the comments before signing off. She said that when the projects from concepts came back to the board as recommendations to the Council or for final review, then that information went along with the particular project, so all the information was there in black and white for any member of the board to review to see if the applicant had made recommended changes for the project.
Council Member Pavão asked how the CDC would proceed with something like Chapel Hill North, with the question of the elevation. He asked how they would deal with that in the future. Ms. Haskett said that the next time they got a project they would think about the things that had previously not turned out as expected.
Council Member Wiggins asked what kinds of backgrounds and expertise were represented on the CDC. Ms. Bachman said that there were citizens with backgrounds in land-planning with landscape planning and architecture, noting that several citizens brought experience from other boards and commissions and committees in the Town.
Council Member Wiggins asked if the technical expertise was balanced—of the ten appointed members what members were architects, landscapers, engineers. Ms. Bachman said that there was one landscape architect, an engineer, several land planners, and three architects.
Council Member Evans said that it might be helpful if, when the CDC sent the projects to the Planning Board, they flagged the warnings that they might see for that Board.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if the CDC saw University projects. Ms. Bachman said only Special Use Permits.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked if that meant no one in the Town got involved in University projects early on. Mr. Horton said that was correct.
Mayor pro tem Capowski asked who regulated things like colors and textures, and architectural styles with adjacent buildings. Ms. Bachman said that the CDC did, in the schematic phase, which was the second step. She cited the case of the Aurora Restaurant, where the CDC worked with the owner to get a design that the CDC could approve.
Council Member Brown said that she appreciated the comments of Nancy Gabriel about the diversity on the CDC and asked if the majority of the members had approved the Smith Middle School. Ms. Bachman said that was accurate.
Council Member Foy asked if the CDC was going to be part of the Meadowmont process, where SUPs were already approved. Ms. Bachman said that they had reviewed Hilltop Condominiums, and the Meadowmont affordable housing project, and, even though there was a Master Plan approved, the Commission did not feel that the design was appropriate in the Hilltop Condominiums. She said that they would review these just as though they were any other project.
Council Member Wiggins asked if any of the CDC members were on the Appearance Commission when the redevelopment of the little shopping center where Fosters is located was discussed, and if that had to go before any of the groups. Mr. Horton said that there might have been some elements, but that he did not recall—it was principally staff.
Ms. Bachman said that the staff was helping the CDC a great deal and that they appreciated their response. She added that the group had worked extremely hard during the past year, and they were working well together.
The meeting adjourned at 6:37 p.m.
The minutes of May 17, 1999 were adopted on the 28th day of
June, 1999.
__________________________________________
Joyce A. Smith, CMC