Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19850910ooo~~o MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS JOINT PLANNING AREA HEARING SEPTEMBER 10. 1985 The Orange County Board of Commissioners met for a Joint Planning Area Hearing with the Town Council of Chapel Hill and the Orange County Planning Board on September 10. 1985 at 7:30 p.m. in the Cultural Arts Raom at Chapel Hill High School. Chair Don Willhoit, and Commissioners Shirley Marshall, Moses Carey and Ben Lloyd. MM S I Commissioner Norman Walker. ApF.T. HiT_L TOWN CO CIL_ P ~N~i_ Mayor Joe Nassif. and Council members William Thorpe, David Godschalk, David Pasquini, and Beverly Kawalec. nueur_F nniiNTV PtANNZNG MEMBERS yRESEt~LT: Chair Alice Gordon and members Barry Jacobs, Betty Margisan, Margaret Miller, Sharlene Pilkey, Carl Walters and Steve Yuhasz. Alice Ingram. 4TAFF PRESEHT:_ County Manager Kenneth R. Thompson, Director of Planning Marvin Collins, Planners Susan Smith and Gene Bell, Administrative Secretary Joanna Bradshaw and Clerk to the Board Beverly A. Blythe. (!HAPF.L AILL STAFF PRESENZ: Planning Director Roget Walden. Town Manager David Taylor and Assistant Town Manager 5onna Loewenthal. C None. None. C C 1. PD-2-85 CHANDLERS GREEN (Rezoning from Residental-1 to Planned Development Residential-2 with Class A Special IIse Permit) (A copy of the descriptive narrative with the list of recommendations is in the permanent agenda file). The Presentation was given by County Planning Director Marvin Collins. This agenda item is to continue the Joist Public Hearing on the Planned Development/Rezoning/Special Use Permit application for Chandlers Green. The applicant, Allenton Realtys has requested a Planned Development Housing (PD-H) and Residential-2 (R-2) rezoning designation far 80.2 acres out of a 99.44 acre tract located contiguous to the Town of Chapel Hill's northeast corporate boundaries and situated between Sunrise Road (SR-1732), I ~+0 and Weaver Dairy Road (SR 1733). The purpose of the request is to allow development of a planned single-family residential community composed of 82 lute. The 19.2 acres located in the Town of Chapel Hill's jurisdiction is zoned R-2 and the applicant is presently pursuing subdivision approval far this parcel for an additional 26 lots. The property is known as Lot 17 of Tax Map 17 and Lots 7 and ll on Tax Map 25 in Chapel Hill Township. The location of the property is within an area designated Ten Year Transition on the Orange County Land Use Plan. That designation allows for the consideration of an application for rezonings to any of the residential zoning districts (R-1 through R-13). The present zoning classification of the property is Residetial-1. The development standards must aoo~~i be met and a Special Use Permit must be obtained in order for the development to proceed. The request was submitted to a Joint Public Hearing with the Town of Chapel Hill on July 11, 1985. Concerns were expressed at that time regarding (1) open space and buffer requirements, partitularly the 100' perimeter open space/yard setback requirement for PD-H districts, (2) impact of power lines and facilities, and (3) the collector road system serving the area. These items. along with other items, prompted the Board of Commissioners to continue the public hearing to allow staff the opportunity to address these concerns. Approval of the request would allow development of the property for single family residences on lots containing a minimum of 20,000 square feet. Collins listed the issues raised at the June 11, 1985 public hearing as follows: Traffic impacts; Location of road stub-outs; Location of Weaver Dairy Road Expansion; Open space acreage and location; Pump stations vs. gravity sewer; Condition of a dam upstream from portions of this proposed subdivision; Impact of power lines on residential units; and Compliance with Orange County floor area ratios. Collins noted that the applicant has not submitted a revised site plan that addressed any of these concerns. Tn reference to the concern regarding stub-outs within the subdivision itself, Collins stated that the Town Manager and the County Manager suggested the possibility that a Collector Roads Plan could be developed for this area. Collins explained the Collector Roads Plan as developed jointly by the Orange County Planning Staff. the Chapel Hill Planning Staff and Engineering Department. Collins noted that condition D6. which originally recommended a 60' rightrof-way, was now increased to a 70' right-of-way since Sweeten Creek Road clearly falls under the Orange County designation for collector street. Another concern noted was the 100' setback provision which is applicable only in Orange County's jurisdiction. Collins cited the colored subdivision maps prepared by staffs and illustrated the range o£ lot sizes and adjacent zoning. The concern about off-street parking within the recreation area was addressed by recommending ten (10) parking spaces rather than the 2 proposed by the developer. In regard to the open space requirement, the developer could either enlarge the existing recreation area to 3.21 acres or he could make a payment in lieu of open space to the Town of Chapel Hill in accordance with Chapel Hi11's Development Ordinance to address the requirements for the portion of the property being subdivided in Chapel Hill's jurisdiction. Both planning staffs considered the impacts of the power line easements and could find no suitable alternative except to increase the lot sizes where the power lines cross. The applicant does not wish to revise the site plan so enlargement of the lots is not an option. Both staffs agreed that given the location of the power lines and the manner in which they cross the property, the arrangement that the developer came up with was about the best that could be done given the circumstances. Another concern had to do with the Orange County floor area ratios. The r~l+nvnf ovwOA~C the Intel e.nnnnt nf'flnnr ATPA ~ymYrP~ hV thP. CUnntv's Land aoo~~~ Collins then cited the findings and noted that where noncompliance was found. conditions of approval were included which seek to address that element of noncompliance with a specific standard. Chair Willhoit inquired about the stub-out of Bradleq Drive to the right- of-way in condition ^14. Collins responded this right-of -way exists. There was a desire on the part of the Tawn of Chapel Hill to initially limit access far this project to this egiating 60 foot right-of--way. The two staffs working together felt that. given the arrangement of the properties to the north of Chandler's Green subdivision and if Sweeten Creek Road were developed as a principal access, over a period of time this 60-foot right .of way needed to be eliminated. The reason for the stub-out was to allow future access to the properties to the north and at that time the existing 60 fast right-af-way could be closed. Collins continued that this was a stipulation of the Town of Chapel Hill's staff. Roger Walden. Chapel Hill Planning Director. stated that the reason for the closing of the right-of -way was to prevent access onto two roads. thus preventing double-frontage lots. Commissioner Marshall asked if the dam should break how much water and how many houses would be involved. She noted that all safety standards should be met. Collins responded that he was not sure how much water would be released but that 4 or 5 lots would be affected. Marshall continued that public safety is a matter. the Planning Board should consider. She also pointed out that there is a Bradleq Road in Chapel Hill and perhaps the name of this road should be changed. Commissioner Carey asked again for explanation of the options for compliance with the floor area ratio. Collins responded that the applicant had proposed a total floor area of 287,OOD square feet. One option would be to decrease the size of some dwellings and perhaps increase the size of others within this maximum area. Another option would be to establish a floor area ratio of 2,660 sq. ft. for each dwelling. He noted this would be monitored by the County through the issuance of building permits. Commissioner Marshall noted this could create problems with the last few houses built. Collins agreed, but responded that the progress of the subdivision as a whole could be tracked and the developer informed how fast he was using up the maximum floor area allotted. the developer could be provided with projections as to what the usage might be if the development was continued along the same lines. Chair Willhoit inquired what would occur if at some later time a resident wanted to add to his/her home. Collins responded the only waq this could be done would be to apply to the Board of Adjustment for a variance or the developer could return to the Board of Commissioners and Town Council to request for a reconsideration of a condition of approval. David Godschalk inquired about the practical affect of condition ^23 on the plan which requires the 100' perimeter open space. Collins responded that one part of the buffer is related to the Major Transportation Corridor (MTC) and another part to local requirements. Staff recommendation was previously for a waiver of the buffer requirement. but after looking at the lot sizes and comparing them to adjacent property densities, this recommendation was changed to require the 100' buffer in accordance with the ordinance which was very specific on this point. He noted this did affect the number of buildable lots and that at least 2 lots would be lost. Gordon noted that the 100' buffer requirement was one that had been consistently applied in Orange County for other planned developments. ooo~~~ Beverly Kawalec expressed concern with the power line through the development. She felt it was an obtrusive eyesore and that Chapel Hi11 staff should include (1) stipulations which require that the recreation axes be moved outside of the power line easement, (2) a stipulation for a 50' buffer between buildable area and the easement observing all setbacks, aad (3) a dedication to the Town of Chapel Hill of pedestrian easement within all pourer line easements. Commissioner Lloyd inquired how many acres of water was behind the dam. Collins responded 1-1/2 acres. Mayor Nassif stated that the power line easement should not be platted in the lots at all, just be a space marked easement. He noted that this would be part of his motion when the project comes to the Town Council for a vote. He noted there were computations which could be done for the reservoir in case of a dam blowout. He felt the applicant should furnish this computation. Commissioner Carey inquired. if the power line easement was included in the floor area ratio and Collins responded qes. He continued asking if the ordinance allowed this and the response was yes. David Pasquini inquired if staff would confirm the potential presence of a stream subject to the Resource Conservation District requirements and .would inform the Town Council and Walden responded yes. He cited the potential effects on lots 12. 13. 40, 41. 42, and 43. Mayor Nassif expressed concern with the contours of the lots located across Weaver Dairy Road from the proposed Bradley Road extension in regards tv a proposed collector road. Collins responded that topographical maps were used to plot out the alignment of the collector street. Nassif asked if there was to be an overpass on Sunrise Road and Collins responded yes. Settp Margison inquired about the timing for the road construction. The developer responded approximately 3 years. Allen Aldridge, applicant. was sworn in for his statement. Barry Jacobs inquired about traffic projections in regard to I-40. Collins referred this question to the applicant and noted that Chapel Hill staff had done a Weaver Dairy Road impact study. Walden responded that Chapel Hill staff had prepared a corridor study of Weaver Dairy Road from NC S6 to U5 15-501. The three intersections studied were NC $6/Weaver Dairy Raad. Erwin Road/15-5D1s and Erwin 8oad/Weaver Dairy Road. The conclusions were as follows: (1) Considering the existing conditions and. developments approved, but not qet constructed, there is a problem of overcapacity at the l5 501/Erwin Road intersection. This will be partially mitigated by the improvements proposed for Sage Road Extension (2) The Erwin Rd/Weaver Dairy Road intersection is not yet at capacity (3) The Weaver Dairy/NC 86 intersection is well below capacity Walden noted that this study did not address the impacts of I-40. Jacobs asked for NCDOT projections of Z-40 impacts on the area. Willhoit reviewed the procedures to adjourn the public hearing. Allen Aldridge. applicant, requested permission to speak. Willhoit noted that the hearing had been continued to receive staff reparta. He stated that Mr. Aldridge could speak to those concerns. Mr. Aldridge began by apologizing to the Boards for bringing this project forward in the manner in which it was presented. He noted there was great difficulty in trying to deal with 4 bodies ( 2 Administrative staffs and 2 governmental agencies) as well as OWASA. ooo"ti~ He stated that the project was begun 12 months ago and extensive preliminary engineering studies have been done. The amount of $16.500 has been spent, as well as considerable time. effort and energy. He noted that his firm had tried tv comply with all the recommendations. He continued that he had received a six page report on September 9. 1985 with many of the previous recommendations changed. ke noted it was the first written report his firm had received since the June 11. 1985 public hearing. His intent was to develop a nice residential subdivision with curb and gutter and Sidewalks. He felt it was a very unfortunate circumstance that he could not comply with the 100' buffer now being required by the County and develop the development as planned. He felt the considerable road requirements were unfair and unfortunate. He also noted the recreation area was for the neighborhood and it did not seem to him to be necessary to have 10 parking spaces, particularly since there were to be sidewalks on both sides of the street going to the recreation area. He felt if these items could not be overcome. the hearings might as well be stopped as his firm could not develop the project under these conditions. Mayor Massif asked if Mr. Aldridge was withdrawing the petition. Aldridge responded no. He continued that he would like for the Board and Council to make the decision as to whether the conflicting items could not possibly be overcome and, if so, then he felt the petition should be withdrawn. Massif continued that as long as the petition was before the Boards it would require action and that the developer would be the one to withdraw the petition. Aldridge stated he was not willing to withdraw the application at this point, but could not meet the requirements now being set forth. Chair Willhoit adjourned the public hearing and referred the application tv the Chapel Hi11 Towa Manager and the County Planning Board for recommendation. He noted the earliest the Commissioners could receive the recommendation would be September 3D, 1985. He asked if the recommendation could be received from the Board and Council by that date. Town Manager David Taylor stated that the Town Council's next meeting date was October 14, 1985. County Attorney Gledhill stated that several requests for additional information had been made and could only be considered if brought before the Boards at public hearing. Walden reviewed the list of information requested including dam safety, application of the Resource Conservation District, NCDOT comment on I-40 impacts, stub-out gradients, and stipulations regarding setbacks from power line easements. elimination of power line easements within recreation areas, the elimination of lot areas from power line easements and the dedication of pedestrian easements within the power line easements. &e noted a typographical error in one of the conditions and added a stipulation that elimination of a condition does not invalidate any other condition of approval. Chair Willhoit noted that he felt a new public hearing could be avoided regarding the consideration of these items by the Boards. Gledhill noted that if factual information is presented to the Board as part of the recommendation it is acceptable. Massif commented that since this property abuts the Town limits, the developer could ask for annexation. Willhoit stated that the public hearing is adjourned by consensus to November 4, 1985 to receive recommendations from the Chapel Hill Town Council and the Orange County Planning Board. aoo~ti5 a. Natural environment, infrastructure and public services, sociological characteristics. b. Goals and objectives/operating principles Chair Willhoit adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. The nest regular meeting of the Orange Countq Bvard of Commissioners will be held on September 17. 1985 at 7:30 in the Courtroom of the old Past Office in Chapel Hill. North Carolina. Don Willhoit, Chair Joanna Bradshaw, Administrative 5ecretarq Beverlq A. Blgthe. Clerk