Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-11-1995 - Items 1 and 2 - Appendix 2 F� APPENDIX 2 AGENDA #1 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager SUBJECT: Work Session on the Northwest Small Area Plan DATE: August 30, 1995 On June 26, 1995, the Town Council scheduled this work session on the Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan. Overview We have attached a copy of the Council's June 26, 1995 memorandum that includes comments from the March 1 public hearing on the Northwest Area Plan as well as advisory board comments, letters from citizens, and letters from the Town of Carrboro and Orange County. We have also attached additional information received since June 26, 1995. The Town of Carrboro and Orange County have been invited to send representatives to this work session. In addition, we have invited the members of the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group to attend this work session. The next step in this process, following Council review of this plan, is to request that the plan be considered at a Joint Planning Area Public Hearing. Background On January 25, 1993, the Council initiated a small area planning process for the Northwest Area of Chapel Hill. The Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group met monthly from May 18, 1993 until December 20, 1994. During the Work Group's planning process, the Group held three neighborhood meetings to receive public comment on September 21, 1993, February 22, 1994, and on October 6, 1994. The Work Group also coordinated with the Town of Carrboro's Small Area Plan Work Group. The Carrboro Work Group continues to plan for Carrboro's northern planning jurisdiction, an area that is adjacent to the western border of Chapel Hill's Northwest Area. The two Small Area Plan Work Groups held joint meetings in January and October of 1994. On December 20, 1994, the Work Group unanimously recommended the attached Northwest Small Area Plan to the Council as a proposed addition to the Town's Comprehensive Plan. 2 On January 23, 1995, the Council adopted a resolution that expressed appreciation to the Work Group, called a public hearing, and referred the recommended plan to advisory boards for review. On March 1, 1995, the Council held a public hearing on the recommended plan. On June 26, 1995, the Council reviewed all of the comments that had been received on the recommended Northwest Small Area Plan, and scheduled this work session. List of Key Issues Regarding the Northwest Small Area Plan The attached June 26, 1995 Council Memorandum discusses all of the issues that have been raised in regards to the Northwest Small Area Plan. In particular, this memorandum includes comments from the March 1 public hearing on the Northwest Area Plan as well as advisory board comments, letters from citizens, and letters from the Town of Carrboro and Orange County. The issues discussed in this memorandum are listed as follows: 1) Carrboro Small Area Plan 2) Transportation Corridor 3) Eubanks Road Alternative 4) Remove Road "D" 5) Employment Campus 6) Land North of Eubanks Road Employment Campus 7) United Parcel Service (UPS) Concerns Regarding "Employment Campus" 8) Residential Density of Land Immediately North of Chapel Hill High School 9) Recommended Greenways and Roads 10) Use Greene Tract for a Park, Possibly Housing 11) Use Existing Landfill for a Future Park 12) Description of Rail Line 13) Location of Site 17 and Landfill Selection Process 14) Schedule a Work Session on the Northwest Small Area Plan 15) Dialogue with Carrboro We note that the Council has addressed Issue 14 by scheduling this work session. We also note that three governmental jurisdictions have ownership interest in the Greene Tract (Orange County, Carrboro and Chapel Hill). Based on the need for any discussion of this land to include intergovernmental discussion, the Council has invited both Carrboro and Orange County to send representatives to this work session. There is no new information on any of the 15 issues discussed in the June 26, 1995 memorandum, except for Issue 4, concerning the Plan's recommended Road "D." On June 26, the Council received a petition from the Homestead Group regarding this Issue (Attachment 2). We have also attached additional information on this issue that we have 3 received since June 26 (Attachment 3), and we also offer a staff report concerning Road "D" (Attachment 4). Next Stew Because the majority of the Northwest Small Area is in the Joint Planning Area, and therefore would require joint action in order to adopt a new land use plan, a key next step in the consideration of this draft Northwest Small Area Plan is for the Council to request that the draft Plan be scheduled for consideration at the next Joint Public Hearing (October 11, 1995). Based on the joint ownership of the Greene Tract by Orange County, Carrboro and Chapel Hill, we also believe that a key next step in the consideration of this draft Northwest Small Area Plan is for the Council to request a work session with Orange County and Carrboro to discuss the Greene Tract. Accordingly, we suggest that the Council schedule the Plan for discussion on September 11, 1995 in order to consider referring the Plan to Orange County and the Town of Carrboro for a work session on October 11, 1995, that could be followed by a Joint Planning Area Public Hearing to get public input on the draft Plan. Conclusion In 1989, the Council adopted a revised Comprehensive Plan for the Town of Chapel Hill. In September of 1990, the Council initiated the Small Area Planning process for undeveloped areas north and south of Chapel Hill. The Council established the Southern Small Area Plan Work Group and charged it with the development of a Small Area Plan for the Council's consideration. On June 23, 1992, the Council adopted a Southern Small Area Plan, amending the Town's Comprehensive Plan. As a next step, on January 25, 1993, the Council established the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group and charged it with developing a Small Area Plan for the Council's consideration. On December 20, 1994, the Work Group recommended a Small Area Plan for the Council's consideration. This Small Area Plan includes the Greene Tract, a 169 acre parcel of land that is centrally located in the Northwest Area and is jointly owned by Orange County, Carrboro and Chapel Hill. The Council has not endorsed the Work Group's recommendations for the Greene tract at this time. We believe that the Council's planning process for the Northwest Area would benefit from a joint work session on the Greene Tract followed by a Joint Planning Area Public Hearing,which would provide needed opportunities for dialogue with Orange County and the Town of Carrboro. 4 Manager's Recommendation: That the Council schedule the Plan for additional discussion on September 11, 1995 in order to consider referring the Plan to Orange County and the Town of Carrboro for a Joint Work Session followed by a Joint Planning Area Public Hearing on October 11, 1995. Attachments: 1. Council Memorandum - June 26, 1995 (begin new page 1) 2. Letter from Georgia Bizios (Homestead Group) with Memorandum from Keener Engineering Associates, Inc. - June 26, 1995 (p. 35) 3. Letter from Hoffman Design (Homestead Group) - July 30, 1995 (p. 42) 4. Planning Staff Report on Proposed Road "D" (p. 43) 5. Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan (begin new page 1) ATTACHMENT 1 AGENDA # 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager SUBJECT: Northwest Small Area Plan DATE: June 26, 1995 We have attached two resolutions for the Council's consideration: • Resolution A would receive comments from the Northwest Small Area Plan public hearing on March 1, 1995, including advisory board comments and letters, and call a Council work session on Wednesday, August 30, 1995, to discuss the Recommended Plan. The Resolution would also invite Carrboro and Orange County to send representatives to attend the work session. • Resolution B would refer the Northwest Small Area Plan back to the Small Area Plan Work Group to consider issues to be identified by the Council. We recommend that the Council adopt Resolution A. BACKGROUND On January 25, 1993, the Council initiated a small area planning process for the Northwest Area of Chapel Hill. The Council requested that the Planning Board undertake the plan, with the assistance of 11 additional members who were appointed by the Council in March and April of 1993. The Council charged the Work Group with the responsibility of developing a small area plan for the Northwest Area. The Work Group began meeting on May 18, 1993. The Work Group continued to deliberate monthly until December 20, 1994. In developing the recommended plan, the Work Group reviewed an environmental analysis of the area, examining features such as soil suitability, slopes, land elevations and drainage patterns, while also reviewing existing development and neighborhoods in the area. The Work Group used this information to help develop goals and objectives for the northwest area. During the Work Group's planning process, the Group held three neighborhood meetings to receive public comment on September 21, 1993, February 22, 1994, and on October 6, 1994. The recommended land use plan was developed based on the environmental analysis, existing neighborhoods, citizen input, and consideration of which potential land use patterns best met the goals and objectives of the plan. 2 The Work Group also coordinated with the Town of Carrboro's Small Area Plan Work Group. The Carrboro Work Group continues to plan for Carrboro's northern planning jurisdiction, an area that is adjacent to the western border of Chapel Hill's Northwest Area. The two Small Area Plan Work Groups held joint meetings in January and October of 1994. On December 20, 1994, the Work Group unanimously recommended the attached Northwest Small Area Plan to the Council. On January 23, 1995, the Council adopted a resolution that expressed appreciation to the Work Group, called a public hearing, and referred the recommended plan to advisory boards for review. On March 1, 1995, the Council held a public hearing on the recommended plan. SUMMARY OF THE PLAN The area is generally the land south of Interstate 40, including a portion of the land north of Weaver Dairy Road, the land west of Airport Road (N.C. 86), and the land north of the University of North Carolina's Horace Williams tract and Homestead Road. The western boundary of the area generally follows Rogers Road. A rail line runs through the center of the northwest area, and a large parcel of property in the center of the area (known as the Greene tract) is jointly owned by the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, and Orange County. The Recommended Plan incorporates the following "building blocks" as part of the long range vision for the Northwest Area: • Protection of Existing Neighborhoods • Affordable Housing • Open Space • Greenways • Village Pattern • Employment Campus • Transportation Corridor Future use of the publicly-owned Greene tract is a key consideration. Centrally located in the Northwest Area with characteristics suitable for development, this parcel of land played a prominent role in the Work Group's Recommended Plan. Since the Greene tract is jointly owned by the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, and Orange County, any future use of the tract would require the agreement of all three jurisdictions. The Plan proposes a Village Pattern of development along the rail line corridor, primarily located on the Greene tract. The plan assumes that the Greene tract would be developed and would not be used for landfill purposes. Generally decreasing residential densities are proposed as distance from the village center increases, in an effort to help preserve the character of existing neighborhoods. The Plan also proposes that the sale or lease of the 3 Greene tract be contingent upon at least a portion of the Greene tract being used for affordable housing. A new large Community Park is also proposed in the northwest corner of the Greene tract. This proposed park is intentionally located in the northwest corner of the tract in an effort to help buffer and protect the character of the Rogers Road neighborhood. The Plan also suggest several greenways. In particular, the plan recommends that a greenway be developed to connect the Town's Northern Community Park to the new "Greene Park." As previously noted, the use of the Greene tract for land uses such as a village pattern and a park would require the approval of all three governments that share ownership of the tract: Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Orange County. The Plan also supports the Town's Comprehensive Planning goals of encouraging the local economy by recommending an Employment Campus land use along Eubanks Road, near the Interstate 40 and N.C. 86 interchange. This Employment Campus would be intended to serve primarily as a place for employment rather than primarily for shopping. Since the Employment Campus would be a new land use category, the plan recommends creating a new Employment Campus zoning district. A Transportation Corridor is recommended in coordination with the rail line. This Transportation Corridor could focus on promoting the use of a variety of alternative modes of travel, ranging from pedestrian and bikeway facilities to light rail transit. The Plan recommends a feasibility study of the Transportation Corridor concept to investigate the short-term and long-term options for this idea. KEY ISSUES RAISED AT THE PUBLIC HEARING Below we summarize the comments of citizens and the Council as heard at the March 1, 1995 public hearing, and offer our staff responses. I. Carrboro Small Area Plan Robin Lackey, Chair of the Carrboro Small Area Plan Work Group at the time of the public hearing, expressed concern about joint transportation issues. In particular, she indicated that Carrboro desires to improve Eubanks Road for access to Interstate 40 and N.C. 86. She also indicated that Carrboro Small Area Plan Work Group wants to avoid widening Homestead Road, thereby preserving the existing character of the Road. Overall, she felt that the two small area plans mesh well. Staff Comment: The Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group coordinated with the Town of Carrboro's Small Area Plan Work Group while developing the recommended plan. In particular, the two Small Area Plan Work Groups held joint meetings in January and October of 1994. 4 The Northwest Small Area Plan presents a conceptual road network plan that is based on transportation modeling for the year 2010. The Plan's transportation modeling recognizes that Homestead Road is scheduled to be improved to a 3-lane facility, and assumes that the intersection of Eubanks Road and N.C. 86 will be signalized in its current alignment. The Plan's transportation modeling also assumes that Eubanks Road will be improved to a fully paved 2-lane facility, and will become a significant east-west corridor as growth occurs in Carrboro's northern planning jurisdiction. Although the Plan does not assume that additional improvements (widening to 3 or 4 lanes) will be made to Eubanks Road, it does not preclude that further improvements may be needed based on future development and demand. The Carrboro Work Group continues to plan for Carrboro's northern planning jurisdiction, an area that is adjacent to the western border of Chapel Hill's Northwest Area. The Carrboro Work Group tentatively plans to send a draft report to the Board of Aldermen in August 1995. The Northwest Area Plan assumes that growth will occur in Carrboro's northern planning jurisdiction and that Eubanks Road will become a significant east-west corridor. We agree that improvements need to be made to Eubanks Road; however, we feel that additional study is needed regarding the possible widening of Homestead Road and the issue of preserving the existing character of this road. 2. Transportation Corridor Robin Lackey also indicated that the Carrboro Small Area Plan Work Group supported the Transportation Corridor along the rail line. She requested that the Council consider potential implications since the rail line does run through downtown Carrboro. Members of the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group also have spoken in favor of the transportation corridor concept. One idea is the use of diesel-powered trolleys along the rail line, given that the old railroad right-of-way from the University's power plant to campus still exists. Staff Comment: The Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group recommended that a transportation corridor be developed in coordination with the existing rail line. The Recommended Plan discusses four potential options for the use of this transportation corridor: pedestrian/bikeway, busway, guided busway, or light rail transit. In concluding, the Work Group does not state specifically how the transportation corridor should be developed. The Plan recommends undertaking a feasibility study of the transportation corridor concept in order to investigate short-term and long-term feasibility of this idea. 5 We agree that a feasibility study of the proposed transportation corridor concept along the rail line, in accordance with the Northwest Small Area Plan's Recommended Strategies, would be helpful. 3. Eubanks Road Alternative A member of the Planning Board and the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group, requested that the plan preserve the right-of-way for constructing the "Eubanks Road Alternative" that is described in the Appendix of the Recommended Plan. Staff Comment: The Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group considered including a new road in the plan that would follow an alternative alignment to the existing Eubanks Road. Specifically, the new road that became known as the Eubanks Road Alternative would begin at the existing intersection of Eubanks Road and Rogers Road and proceed due east to the Weaver Dairy Road Extension and the intersection of Weaver Dairy Road and N.C. 86. The Work Group voted against including the "Eubanks Road Alternative" in the plan, based on transportation modeling data which indicated that such a road would attract eastbound traffic from the existing Eubanks Road to N.C. 86 to Interstate 40 route to a "Eubanks Road Alternative" to Weaver Dairy Road to Sage Road to U.S. 15-501 route. The Work Group concluded that it was better to keep traffic on the higher-capacity road (Interstate 40) rather than a local collector road (Weaver Diary Road). We support the Work Groups decision to not include the Eubanks Road Alternative" in the Recommended Plan based on the transportation modeling analysis. 4. Remove Road "D" The Homestead Group, which has submitted a conceptual proposal to the Design Review Board for a tract at the intersection of Merin Road and Homestead Road (north of the approved Homestead Village development), objects to the proposed Road "D." The Group wishes to proceed with development plans, and has asked that Road "D" be deleted from the Plan (please see Attachment I1). Staff Comment: We believe that the proposed road network for the Northwest Area was carefully considered by the Work Group. We recommend that north-south access from the recommended village pattern development to Seawell School Road remain part of the Plan. Merin Road is a potential alternative to Road"D;" however it is very close to the railroad crossing. We also do not believe that Road "A" is the obvious 6 connection from Homestead Road to the recommended village pattern development. Due to the unique location of the rail line through this area, we support the Work Group's general conclusion that two new roads (one on each side of the rail line) are needed to provide proper circulation and access to the proposed village pattern development. We suggest additional study of these issues. S. Employment Campus Several citizens expressed support for the Employment Campus land use recommended in the Northwest Small Area plan. Citizens noted that it is important to expand the Town's tax base while providing needed goods and services in this area. One citizen supported high densities for the Employment Campus area (possibly 6 or 7 story buildings) in exchange for larger landscaped areas. Two existing developments along Eubanks Road expressed their desire to be conforming uses under the Employment Campus zoning category. Staff Comment: The Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group recommended the Employment Campus land use along Eubanks Road and Millhouse Road, based on the fact that the northwest area contains some of the little land left in Chapel Hill that is suitable for office, commercial or retail use, and that the area has easy access to an interstate interchange. Since the Employment Campus land use is new category, if this plan is adopted, a new zoning district would need to be created for this land use. The types of uses and development regulations that would be permitted in a new Employment Campus zoning district would need to be recommended to the Planning Board, discussed at a Council Public Hearing, and then considered for adoption by the Town Council before they would be implemented. Existing uses in an area would be considered as part of this process. We support the Work Group's recommended Employment Campus concept. 6. Land North of Eubanks Road Employment Campus Two citizens requested that the Employment Campus Land Use area be extended north to include an area that the Plan presently recommends for low-density residential use. Staff Comment: The Work Group chose to recommend a low-density residential land use for the area north of the Employment Campus for two reason: (1) this area includes the Old Field Creek, and therefore encompasses a pond and several tributaries that include resource conservation district (RCD) land, and (2) a residential land use (1 unit per 7 acre) provides a natural transition from the Employment Campus land use to the Rural Buffer land north of this area (1 unit per 2 acres). Based on environmental reasons and a natural transition to the Rural Buffer, we support the Work Group's decision to recommend a residential Iand use for the area north of the Employment Campus . 7. United Parcel Service (UPS) Concerns Regarding "Employment Campus" The United Parcel Service (UPS) which operates a package distribution center on Eubanks Road, is concerned that the Employment Campus zoning designation may not include their center as a permitted conforming use. Staff Comment: The Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan does include a new "Employment Campus" land use designation that if the Plan is adopted, would be a new land use category for the Town. Consequently, if the Employment Campus land use is adopted, one of the implementation steps would be to create a new zoning district for this Employment Campus land use category. The creation of a new zoning district would include a public hearing on the characteristics of the proposed zoning district (such as types of uses permitted). Assuming that a new zoning district was approved, and additional public hearing would be needed before such a district could be applied to an area of Town. In conclusion, the types of uses permitted in an "Employment Campus" land use will be determined as part of a separate process, assuming that the Northwest Small Area Plan is adopted with this recommended new land use. 8. Residential Density of Land Immediately North of the Chapel Hill High School One citizen expressed concern that his land, which is presently zoned Residential-2 (R-2), has a recommended land use of 2 units per acre. The citizen was concerned that this recommended density would result in his property being rezoned to Residential-1 (R-1). Staff Comment: The Work Group recommended a residential land use of 2 units per acre for this area, in accordance with the Group's goal of preserving existing neighborhoods. In particular, based on the proximity of this area to the Billabong Lane and Rogers Road neighborhoods, the Work Group recommended a density of two units per acre for this area. The Work Group did not recommend zoning for this area, however. Therefore, if the Plan is adopted, and the Council were to pursue zoning of the northwest area in accordance with the recommended plan, then the Council would 8 have the opportunity pp mty to consider what zoning districts would be appropriate for this area. 9. Recommended Geeenways and Roads One citizen who owns property in the Northwest Area, noted that greenways and roads are shown on his property. He requested that the roads be flexible so that a developer can develop an appropriate site plan for the area. Staff Comment: The Northwest Small Area Plan recommends several greenways and a conceptual road network plan. The road network plan includes lines that represent potential future local and collector roads. There is no funding allocated for these roads, however. It is recommended that these roads would be constructed as new development takes place. Road lines included in the plan only represent approximate road locations. Adjustments will need to be made as development occurs and additional site information becomes available. We believe that the development review process will provide appropriate flexibility for a developer to site these conceptual roads in the area, while supporting the transportation network recommended in the Plan. 10. Use Greene Tract for a Park, Possibly Housing The Northwest Small Area Plan recommends that the Greene Tract, formerly purchased by Orange County, Carrboro, and Chapel Hill for possible landfill use, be set aside for parkland and affordable housing development. Staff Comment: We note that three governmental jurisdictions have ownership interest in the Greene Tract (Orange County, Carrboro, and Chapel Hill). Any such discussion of future use of this land needs intergovernmental discussion. Please note attached letter from County Commission Chairman Moses Carey (Attachment 7). 11. Use Existing Landfill for a Future Park A citizen requested that the existing landfill be used as a park once the landfill is closed. Staff Comment: The Work Group reviewed the possible re-use of the existing Eubanks Road Landfill, and concluded that any possible use of a closed landfill is a complex issue that requires detailed evaluations and engineering studies before a potential land use can 9 be considered. In particular, the capped landfill will have up to a maximum of 4:1 (25%) slopes. Also, the use of a closed landfill is limited as the landfill cap system may not be disturbed. Finally, very little unused area will remain once monitoring devices are installed. The Plan does recommend however, that the Town investigate the reuse of the landfill to determine what if any land uses might be recommended for future use on this site. We note that three governmental jurisdictions have ownership interest in the landfill (Orange County, Carrboro, and Chapel Hill). Any such discussion of future use of this land needs intergovernmental discussion. I 12. Description of Rail Line A Council member requested that the staff revise the description of the rail line to accurately describe the location of the rail line north of Chapel Hill's planning jurisdiction. Staff Comment: We have revised the rail line description to reflect that the line continues north of Chapel Hill across N.C. 86 to a point near the intersection of Old N.C. 10 and University Station Road, at which point it stubs into the North Carolina Railroad Company/Norfolk Southern Corporation rail line that runs from Durham to Greensboro. 13. Location of Site 17 and Landfill Selection Process A Council member inquired about the location of Landfill Site 17 with regard to the Northwest Small Area Plan and the selection process for determining the next Orange County landfill site. Staff Comment: Landfill Site 17 consists of 853 acres located adjacent to the north and west of the existing Eubanks Road Landfill. Site 17 encompasses part of the Blackwood Division of Duke Forest, and is generally bounded by Eubanks Road and Old N.C. 86. The Landfill Owner's Group appointed a Landfill Search Committee to recommend a site for Orange County's next landfill. The Landfill Search Committee narrowed their search to four sites and then proceeded to have an engineering firm conduct a detailed analysis of each site. In March 1995, the Landfill Search Committee recommended Site 17 to be the County's next landfill. The next step in the process is for the Landfill Owners Group to consider the recommendation and then either forward it or make a different recommendation to the governing bodies of Carrboro, Chapel Hill and Orange County. 10 14. Schedule a Work Session on the Northwest SmaU Area Plan Two Council members suggested that the Council should hold a work session on the Northwest Area Plan. In particular, one Council member requested that the Council discuss the preservation of greenways, affordable housing, and OWASA water supply under drought conditions. Staff Comment: We concur that it would be beneficial for the Council to conduct a work session to discuss these and other issues related to the Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan. We suggest that the Council call a work session on August 30, 1995. This schedule would provide the Council with the option of reviewing the Plan on September 11, in order to consider referring the Plan to Orange County and the Town of Carrboro for the Joint Planning Public Hearing on October 11, 1995. 15. Dialogue with Carrboro A Council member suggested that dialogue with the Town of Carrboro is needed prior to adopting the Northwest Small Area Plan as a component of the Town's Comprehensive Plan. Staff Comment: We concur that continued dialogue with Carrboro is needed. The Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group and the Carrboro Small Area Plan Work Group conducted joint meetings and maintained liaisons during the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group's planning process. We would recommend continuing this dialogue by inviting representatives from Carrboro and Orange County to attend the work session on August 30, 1995. In addition, if the Council chooses to refer the Plan to the fall Joint Planning Area Public Hearing, then additional opportunity for dialogue will occur when the Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Orange County elected officials sit together for the Joint Public Hearing. CARRBORO BOARD OF ALDERMEN REVIEW RECOMMENDED NORTHWEST SMALL AREA PLAN On April 25, 1995, the Carrboro Board of Aldermen requested that the Town Council delay action on the Northwest Area Plan until after the Board of Aldermen had an opportunity to review it and send some comments to the Town Council for its consideration. On May 8, the Town Council agreed to defer action on the plan until June, in order that the Board of Aldermen would have the opportunity to review the Recommended Plan. On May 23, the Board of Aldermen reviewed the Plan and forward comments to the Council (please attached comments). ' 11 In summary, the Board of Aldermen made the following requests/comments regarding the Northwest Area Plan: ► Recognize that Eubanks Road will be a significant east-west corridor, and take into account future improvements that will be needed to Eubanks Road. ► Coordinate all transportation efforts on a formal basis. ► Decisions concerning the future use of the Greene tract should be made jointly. ► The recommended use of-the Greene tract for affordable housing does not meet Carrboro's broad objective of integrating affordable housing into the community at large rather than isolating such housing in low-income developments. NEXT STEPS A key next step in the consideration of this draft Northwest Small Area Plan is to schedule the draft for consideration at the next Joint Public Hearing (October 11, 1995). Prior to that joint meeting, the Town Council may want to schedule a work session to be able to fully discuss the draft before the Hearing. We suggest that the Council schedule a meeting on Wednesday August 30, 1995 for purposes of conducting such a work session. Since the majority of the Northwest Small Area is in the Joint Planning Area, and therefore would require joint action in order to adopt a new land use plan, we suggest that the Council also schedule the Plan for discussion on September 11, 1995 in order to consider referring the Plan to Orange County and the Town of Carrboro for the Joint Planning Area Public Hearing on October 11, 1995. RECOMMENDATIONS Transportation Board's Recommendation: The Transportation Board met on March 21, 1995, and recommended that the Council adopt the Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan as proposed. (Vote: 7-0) Parks and Recreation Commission's Recommendation: The Parks and Recreation Commission met on March 29, 1995, and recommended that the Council adopt the Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan on the condition that the proposed road north of the Northern Community Park be constructed so as to have the least possible impact on the safety of park users and on the facilities of the Park. (Vote: 9-0) GreenwUs Commission's Recommendation: The Greenways Commission met on March 30, 1995, and recommended that the Council adopt the Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan on the condition that the proposed road north of the Northern Community Park be constructed so as to have the least possible impact on Park. The Commission also recommended that three additional greenway trails be included in the plan. Please see the attached summary. (Vote: 4-0) 12 Housing and Communijy Development Advisory Board's Recommendation: The Housing and Community Development Advisory Board met on April 25, 1995, and recommended that the Council adopt the Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan as proposed. The Board also reaffirmed the Plan's commitment to affordable housing as part of the development strategy. (Vote: 6-0) i Human Services Advisory Board's Recommendation: The Human Services Advisory Board met on June 1, 1995, and suggested several comments and recommendations. Please see attached summary of their consensus recommendation. Manager's Recommendation: That the Council schedule a meeting on August 30, 1995, in order to conduct a work session on the Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan. We also recommend that the Council schedule the Plan for discussion on September 11, 1995 in order to consider referring the Plan to Orange County and the Town of Carrboro for the Joint Planning Public Hearing on October 11, 1995. Adoption of the attached Resolution A would do so. Resolution B would refer the Northwest Small Area Plan back to the Small Area Plan Work Group to consider issues to be identified by the Council. Attachments: 1. Transportation Board Recommendation (p. 15) 2. Parks and Recreation Commission Recommendation (p. 16) 3. Greenways Commission Recommendations (p. 17) 4. Housing and Community Development Advisory Board Recommendation (p. 18) 5. Human Services Advisory Board Recommendation (p. 19) 6. Letter from Eleanor Kinnaird, Mayor, Town of Carrboro (May 24, 1995) (p. 20) 7. Letter from Moses Carey, Chair, Orange County Board of Commissioners (p. 23) 8. Letter from David Rudolf (p. 24) 9. Letter from United Parcel Service (February 22, 1995) (p. 26) 10. Letter from United Parcel Service (March 13, 1995) & Response (March 28, 1995) (p. 31) 11. Letter from The Homestead Group a 1995 . 33 P ( Y 29� ) (P ) i 13 RESOLUTION A A RESOLUTION SCHEDULING A WORK SESSION ON THE NORTHWEST SMALL AREA PLAN (95-6-26/R-12a) WHEREAS, the Town Council has received a Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan document from the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group and has held a public hearing on the proposed Plan on March 1, 1995; and WHEREAS, advisory boards, citizens, and other local governments have offered comments on the plan; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council receives these comments and sets a work session on reviewing the proposed Northwest Small Area Plan for Wednesday, August 30, 1995 in the Council Chamber,Town Hall, 306 N. Columbia Street, at 7:00 p.m.; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council invites the Town of Carrboro and Orange County to send representatives to attend the work session; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that following the work session, on September 11, 1995, the Council will consider referring the Northwest Small Area Plan to Orange County and the Town of Carrboro for the Joint Planning Public Hearing to be held on October 11, 1995. This the 26th day of June, 1995. 14 RESOLUTION B A RESOLUTION REFERRING THE NORTHWEST SMALL AREA PLAN TO THE NORTHWEST SMALL AREA PLAN WORK GROUP (95-6-26/R-12b) WHEREAS, the Town Council has received a draft Northwest Small Area Plan document from the Northwest Area Plan Work Group, and has held a public hearing on the proposed plan on March 1, 1995; and WHEREAS, advisory boards, citizens, and other local governments have offered comments on the plan; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council asks the Planning Board to reconvene the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group to consider issues identified in this memorandum as selected by the Town Council for further consideration and clarification. This the 26th day of June, 1995. ATTACHMENT 1 To: Mayor and Council From: Richard Franck, Chair Transportation Board Subject: Northwest Small Area Plan Date: March 21, 1995 The Transportation Board has reviewed the Northwest Small Area Plan and voted 7-0 to recommend adoption as proposed. ATTACHMENT 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Parks and Recreation Commission Martin Feinstein, Chair SUBJECT: Northwest Area Plan Recommendations DATE: March 29, 1995 On March 29, 1995 the Parks & Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed Northwest Area Plan. The Commission voted unanimously (9-0) to recommend that the Council adopt the plan with the following condition: That the proposed "Road F" have the least possible impact on the safety of park users and on the facilities of the proposed Northern Community Park. i -7 ATTACHMENT 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Greenways Commission Andrea Rohrbacher, Chair SUBJECT: Northwest Area Plan Recommendations DATE: March 30, 1995 The Greenways Commission reviewed the proposed Northwest Area Plan on March 30, 1995. The Commission voted unanimously (4-0) to recommend adoption of the plan with the following conditions: 1. The proposed "Road F" should have the least possible impact on the proposed Northern Community Park. 2. The plan should show a greenway trail within the 100 ft. buffer along the southern edge of Interstate 40. 3. The plan should show a greenway trail parallel to the . active rail line, from Estes Drive to the limits of the Town's planning jurisdiction. 4 . The plan should show a greenway trail along Old Field Creek, which would connect the rail line trail and the Interstate 40 trail. ATTACHMENT 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Town Council FROM: Arche McAdoo, Chair, Chapel Hill Housing and Community Development Advisory Board SUBJECT: Recommendation on the Northwest Small Area Plan DATE: April 25, 1995 We support the Northwest Small Area Plan as recommended. In particular, we reaffirm strategy. itment to affordable housing as part of the development . 9 ATTACHMENT 5 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council .I FROM: Sarah Kogut, Chair Human Services Advisory Board SUBJECT: Northwest Area Plan DATE: June 14, 1995 The Human Services Advisory Board appreciates the opportunity to review the Northwest Area Plan. The Board held a meeting on nand formulate rhea presentation from Rob Wilson of the 9 Department recommendations. After careful consideration of the Northwest Area Plan, the Board offers the following comments and recommendations: - The Board strongly supports the plan to include affordable housing in the development of this area; however, the Board recommends the issue be addressed more thoroughly. The Board views the formula which uses median income to be an l residents. The inadequate guide due to the high annual salaries of many ot the Chapel ommllunity and would Board views affordable housing as critical to the diversity like to see methods of funding explored. While builders should not be be feasible to fund affordable housing completely, joint public-private -The Board is concerned the implementation of development could deviate from this plan. While the Town Council may approve the plan conceptually, measures must be taken to assure the plan is followed. rior - The Board recommends the Greene tract t s valu valuable property aequirese car to sale or lease of the land. The development of consideration. - As part of the Northwest Area, the Board recommends the Council explore the possibility of providing a facility or facilities for nonprofit or for a e service wg n the as shared space. This plan could provide cost effective support 9 Town currently assists through the human service allocations. - The proposed recreation facilities should be more centrally located. The Board is concerned the proposed location may not promote inclusive use of the facilities but rather may serve a specific constituency. - The Board recommends the Northwest Area Plan include a multipurpose community center which could especia l y serve ao - ATTACHMENT 6 TOWN OF CARRBORO PC" NORTH CAROLINA May 24, 1995 Mayor Kenneth S. Broun Members, Chapel Hill Town Council Town of Chapel Hill 306 North Columbia Street Chapel Hill,North Carolina 27516 RE: Review of Proposed Plan for the Chapel Hill Northern Expansion Area Dear Mayor Broun and Council Members: Thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed plan for the Chapel Hill Northern Board reviewed the proposed plan to determine how it Expansion Area. The Carrboro Planning relates to the planning activities of the Carrboro Small Area Planning Work Group. From its review of the proposed plan, the Town of Carrboro offers the following comments: .♦ In the interest of sound transportation planning and inter-community access, the to efforts of Carrboro and Chapel Hill should be H lllplan fails to take into respect count the improvement of Eubanks Road. The C p el any improvements to Eubanks Road. It is in the best interest of Carrboro's long as a significant range planning process to consider Eubanks uld� sognize that Carrbo o will be corridor. As such the Town of Chapel Hill e recommending improvements to Eubanks at Road in which Ch pel will Hill's necessitate improvements to the portion of the road jurisdiction. rts on a formal ♦ Carrboro and Chapel Hill should coordinate transport atcioon ections between the basis to assure adequate and appropriate transportati two jurisdictions. to meet ♦ The use of the Green Tract for affordablghousingpnto th ecommunit<' Carrboro's broad objective of integrating a ffordable P O. BOX 829 - 301 WEST MAIN STREET. CARRBORO. NC 27510 (919) 942.8541 - FAX (919) 968.7797 . TDD (919) 968.7717 AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER �yor6MM d C0Una 4eMbga(coa't) stay 24,1995 eve*2 at large rather than isolating affordable housing in low income housing developments. ♦ The Green Tract, which lies within Chapel Hill's planning jurisdiction, is jointly owned by Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and Orange County. As such, any decisions concerning its future use should be made jointly. Additional comments regarding the proposed plan will be forthcoming from the Carrboro Transportation Advisory Board. Again, thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed plan. Sincerely, ` Eleanor G. Kinnaird Mayor /jes xc: Roy M. Williford, Planning& Economic Development Director TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION June 1, 1995 CHAPEL HILL'S NORTHWEST AREA PLAN • Mr.Zaffron suggested that the Town of Carrboro forward to the Town of Chapel Hilt the text for the Connector Roads Concept Plan along with the map showing the proposed routes. Also indicate to Chapel Hill that it is the intent of Carrboro to utilize Eubanks Road as the primary northern area east-west connector. Therefore,for that reason,the Town of Carrboro would like to see Eubanks Road improved In their jurisdiction going all the way to NC 86(Airport Roads Also lncludc in it packet a copy of Carrboro's TIP requests and encourage Chapel Hill to amend the TIP request to reflect the same. Finally,forward to Chapel Hill Carrbero's proposal for Homestead Road as well,which includes preserving the rural character of the road instead of creating a major urban throughfare. The TAB also recommended that staff forward to the Torn of Chapel Hill and the University Land Use Planning Committee the Lake Hogan Farm buildout proposal and all connectors to the east(Tallyho Trail-dotted line, Camden,Claymore,and Hogan Easement). The TAB also suggests to Chapel Hill that an opportunity exists to extend Weaver Dairy Road southward to connect with Estes Drive as a north-south connector. Finally,the TAB also recommends that communication be open between the Towns of Carrboro and Chapel Hill,along with open communication amongst governmental and advisory bodies within each jurisdiction. The TAB agreed with the suggestions by consensus; therefore, no formal vote was taken. a3 ORANGE COVN7Y COMMISSIONF.RS ATTACHMENT 7 P.O. Box 8181 200 S Cameron Street Hillsborough, N.C 27278 Moses Cxr+ ,Jr- February 22 , 19 9 5 919.732-8181 William L Cmwtber 919.9684301 Alice M.Gordon 919-688.7331 Stephen H.Hdkiotis 910-227.2031 Don Willboit (F44 919.644-3004 Mayor Kenneth Broun and Chapel Hill Town Council 306 N. Columbia Street Chapel Hill, NC 27514 Dear Mayor Broun and Council Members: On Tuesday, February 21, the Orange County Board of Commissioners received a summary of the report presented to the Chapel Hill Town Council by the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group. In discussing the report of the work group, the Board noted with concern the specific development pattern recommended for the "Greene Tract- " According to the plan, this tract would become the focus of a village pattern of development in the Northwest Area. The Board of Commissioners recognizes that the Greene Tract in its entirety may no longer be a viable landfill site. However, before a different land use plan for this area is adopted, we believe that the three jurisdictions owning the tract should discuss the potential public purposes that would be suitable for the Greene Tract. For instance, would a potential elementary school site be an appropriate use? Certainly, the two public purposes of recreation and affordable housing that are included in the plan are important to our community. Related to the decision on potential purposes for the Greene Tract would be the method by which to repay the landfill fund upon any disposition of the Greene Tract at fair market value. We understand that there is to be a public hearing on March 1 to receive comments on the recommended plan. We would like this letter to be included in the record of that hearing, along with any other comments we may provide to you by that date. In addition, we propose that in a spirit of cooperation, the Town of Chapel Hill, the Town of Carrboro and Orange County collaborate specifically on the future development pattern of the Greene Tract. Sincerely, Moses Carey, Jr. , C air Board of Commissioners cc: Cal Horton, Chapel Hill Town Manager Eleanor Kinnaird, Mayor Carrboro Carrboro Aldermen Bob Morgan, Carrboro Town Manager YOU CO UNT JN ORANGE COUNTY! ATTACHMENT 8 RUDOLF & MAHER, P.A. 312 WEST FRANKLIN STREET TELEPHONE(919)967-4W CHAPEL HILL,NORTH CAROLINA 27516 FACSIMILE (919)967-4953 February 27, 1995 I Mr. W. Calvin Horton Town Manager Town of Chapel Hill 306 North Columbia Street Chapel Hill, NC 27516 Re: Public Hearing on Proposed Small Area Plan for the Northwest Area Dear Mr. Horton: Unfortunately, because of a prior teaching commitment I cannot attend the March 1, 1995 public hearing before the Town Council regarding the proposed Small Area Plan for the Northwest Area. However, as one of the owners of property on the southeast comer of N.C. 86 and Weaver Dairy Road, I am very concerned about the effect of the plan on my property. As you may recall, several years ago the Town adopted the Mixed-Use zone, to promote increased coordination by landowners through density incentives for a mixed-use plan of 20 or more acres. More recently, at our request, the Mixed-Use regulations were amended to allow a second phase mixed-use plan for parcels of 10 or more acres that were adjacent to an already approved mixed-use plan. Pursuant to this, the four separate owners of parcels on the southeast corner of N.C. 86 and Weaver Dairy had a real incentive to coordinate any development plans. This incentive is now threatened in two ways. First, the State is about to take by eminent domain some of the property on this quadrant in order to expand N.C. 86, leaving less than 10 acres, the current threshold for a second phase mixed-use plan. Second, the proposed Small Area Plan deletes the mixed-use zoning for this parcel altogether, and allows only office/institutional. Under such zoning the property owners in this quadrant will not have sufficient incentive to coordinate their development plans. I would respectfully suggest that the current . oZ� Mr. W. Calvin Horton February 27, 1995 Page 2 Mixed-Use zone should be continued, with an additional amendmwelnll t be left after the second phase plans 7.5 acres, the approximately amount that taking. In the alternative, I would suggest that the Town and Council suster Road, as Commu°ty the east side of N.C. 86,between Weaver Daisy Road owners Commercial. Besides providing some real financial incentivestoo t e er albusinesses i ate their plans, such a zoning would provide space for the additional needed to support the additional residential development contemplated by the plan. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerel David S. Rudolf DSR/clh C140-OSRWDA cc: Mayor Ken Broun Joyce Brown Joe Capowski Mark Chilton Pat Evans Lee Pavao Barbara Booth-Powell James Protzman Rosemary Waldorf oATTACHMENT 9 United ?arcei Service ?3� :a„c°e tea- .ra;. Sete 500. NorC�OSS. �.�_ Mr. W. Calvin Horton February 22, 1995 Town Manager VIA NEXT DAY AIR 306 N. Columbia St. Chapel Hill, NC 27516 RE: Town of Chapel Hill Rezoning Dear Mr. Horton: I would like to take this opportunity to introduce myself and also pass along a concern of United Parcel Service ("UPS") as it relates to the rezoning issue which the Town has been considering for the past 2 years. My name is Bill Stott and I am the Regional Real Estate Manager for the Southeast Region of UPS. towhavebthetopportunity towmeetuyoulthenting on March 1 and hope UPS has some concerns as it relates to the proposed Employment Campus ("EC") zoning designation which appears will be recommended for adoption in the future. The existing UPS facility located on Eubanks Road would fall within the boundries of this new designation. our concern relates to the definition of the EC zone as outlined on pages 32 and 33 of the Small Area Plan - Northwest Area Recommended Plan dated December 20, 1994. As background, UPS built its existing facility in 1989 at a cost in excess of $1 Million for the land, building and equipment. At the time our plans were approved we made it known that the proposed facility was expandable and that it would be expanded when our business in Chapel Hill justified an expansion. When our facility was constructed our use was and has been permitted as a matter of right under current zoning. our concern with the EC definition is that it leaves our use and its legality open to interpretation. Although we believe strongly that UPS is a service related business under the definition, we certainly have no assurance that 8 or to years from now when we seek to expand that the Town will interpret the ordinance as we and perhaps even current local officials do presently. Therefore, UPS is requesting that the potential question of whether our use is permitted as a matter of right in the EC zone be resolved now before the ordinance is finalized to avoid potential problems in the future. We would request that the following be considered in the final wording of the ordinance. If the ordinance will be substantially as stated in the Recommended Plan, we request that following "service related businesses" in the EC definition be followed by " (for example, parcel distribution) " . If the ordinance will be drafted to include a list of uses which are permitted in the EC zone as a matter of right we would request that "parcel distribution" be included on that list. UPS feels very strongly that our use in the new EC zone should be classified a conforming use just as it was when the facility was constructed in 1989. We believe it would be unfair for our rights to be prejudiced as a result of a change which no one could have anticipated when our existing facility was constructed. If possible, I would appreciate receiving a written response from the appropriate agency which provides us with the level of comfort we seek. If you or any of your staff have any questions I would be happy to arrange to meet and discuss the matter more fully with you. I can be reached at (404) 417-2080 if necessary. Sincerely: William Stott Southeast Region Real Estate Manager cc Roger S. Waldon, Planning Director �8 UPS COMMENTS TO FINAL DRAFT OF REPORT • As you know, UPS has actively followed the work of the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group and has attended and/or participated in several of the Group' s meetings . UPS has reviewed all of the prior drafts of the Small Area Plan Report and has previously submitted a "Position Statement" to the Group (a copy of which is attached) . As noted in the "Position Statement" our primary goal is to ensure that our present facility located on Eubanks Road will be in conformance with whatever zoning classification is ultimately adopted for our sit . From a reading of December 20 , 1994 Report draft it appears this goal may not be realized. As you know, the Plan recommends that our site be zoned "Employment Campus" . While this is a new zoning classification and the Plan does not specifically define it, the Group' s apparent intent is that this classification permit only "small scale flex space" and "office space" . UPS has serious concerns that this would not accomodate its present facility (which is more specifically described on the attached) . UPS would ask the Group to do one of the following: 1 . if our concerns are misplaced, we would like to be assured of that . More specifically, we would request that an affirmative statement to the effect that it is the Group' s intent that the definition of "Employment Campus" would accommodate UPS' s current facility be added to the Report . 2 . If our concerns are not misplaced, we would request the Group to reconsider its position on this point . It does not seem to us to make sense to adopt a zoning classification when one knows, in advance, that the present uses will be non-conforming. Further, we believe that the nature of UPS' s current operations should in any event be permitted within the definition of "Employment Campus" . To do otherwise would make this zoning classification overly restrictive . In conclusion, UPS would like to reiterate its support of the Group' s efforts and to thank its members for their work . However, while we are generally receptive to our land being rezoned as "Employment Campus" , this is only if that classification permits our current use . We are opposed to any rezoning or rezoning recommendations which would keep us in a non-conforming position a� As you can see, the facility' s operational characteristics are similar to the typical business office; that is, there are peak traffic patterns during the early morning and early evening hours and minimal traffic otherwise. We believe that our land use fits into the general description of the uses to be permitted in the Employment Campus category. Our business is a service oriented business operated in a small-scale office/flex type facility with limited traffic patterns; very dissimilar to the busy retail/commercial business with relatively constant and high volume traffic patterns . In summary, UPS supports the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group' s efforts in developing a detailed land use plan for Chapel Hill' s northwest area. We are receptive to the Small Area Plan as currently proposed which provides that our land be categorized as Employment Campus, provided that this category permits the type of operations outlined above. Again, thank you for allowing us to present our thoughts on this matter. ao - STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY UNITED PARCEL SERVICE United Parcel Service (UPS) is appreciative of the opportunity to participate in the 'Town. of Chapel Hill' s Small Area Planning Process, and, in particular, the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group. We have attended some of the Group' s past meetings and have reviewed the July 19, 1994 draft of the Northwest Small Area Plan Report . At the outset, let us state that UPS supports the Group' s efforts and believe that we are in general agreement with the provisions of the Report . Our primary concern in this process is to assure that our present facility is in conformance with whatever zoning classification is ultimately adopted for our land. Our initial reading of the proposed Plan indicates that our land will be included in the "Employment Campus" zoning category. As you know, this is a new zoning category that will have to be defined. Our goal is to make sure that our present use will be permitted use within that category. Our present facility is what we call a Package Center and its characteristics are as follows : Approximately 75 employees An 18 , 000 sq. ft . office/warehouse facility located on approximately 8 3/4 acres . Packages are delivered each night from our regional distribution center (s) to the Package Center. Each weekday morning the delivered packages are sorted and loaded onto the package cars at the Package Center . (These are the brown vehicles you are use to seeing. ) The package cars leave the Package Center (normally before 9 : 00 A.M. ) to deliver and pick-up packages and return to the Package Center (beginning around 5 : 00 P .M. ) The picked-up packages are sorted and then delivered to the regional distribution center (s) and the process starts over again. There is a minimum amount of walk-in traffic during the day. On average, approximately 50 customers per day individually deliver packages to the Package Center . 3► ATTACHMENT 10 ::00. Ncrcress.n a rK1i?` JU United Parce! Service �/=• v� March 13 , 1995 Mr. Roger S. Waldon Planning Director Town of Chapel Hill 306 N. Columbia 2tre6t Chapel Hill, RE: Town of Chapel Hill Rezoning Dear Mr. Waldon: opportunity to attend the Public Hearing on I had the to March 1, 1995 regarding awn NouncilsregardingrUPS ' concernslas it speak briefly with the Town I outlined in my February 22 , 1995 relates to the rezoning letter to Mr. Horton. It was my sense after listening to the discussion, that will occur for several no specific action related ppearedntoghave many questions as it months, since the Council appeared lan itself . Since it is related to the basic elements of the p we this aspect ofthee plan which inis the asc u to whendiscussions would appreciate being regarding the rezoning becomes more specific so that our input can be fairly considered at that time. We look forward to hearing from you in the future on this matter. Sincerely: William Stott Southeast Region Real Estate Manager cc: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL ' 306 NORTH COUM"STREET APE,H81„NORTH CAROLINA 27516 March 28, 1995 Tekphww 19191 96827M Mr. William Stott, Southeast Region Real Estate Manager United Parcel Service 5335 Triangle Parkway, Suite 500 Norcross, GA 30092 Dear Mr. Stott: I am writing to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated March 13, 1995, regarding the Northwest Small Area Plan. to rezoning in the In particular, I am writing to affirm that no specific � basiclland use elements of the Northwest Area will occur until after the Council adopts the Recommended Plan. Your parcel distribution facility that if d Road adopted, fall i aonew recommended "Employment Center land use designation by the land use category for the Town. Consequently, if the be to createea new zoning district for Town Council, one of the implementation steps would the "Employment Center" land use category. ristics The creation of a new zoning district would include uses public hearing Assum ng that new of the proposed zoning district (such as the types of permitted). zoning district is approved, an additional public hearing would be needed before such a district could be applied to an area of Town. Presently, the Recommended Northwest Small Area Plan is being P an will return t the advisory boards. We tentatively project that the R 1994. If the Plan is adopted Council for further discussion and possible actions on May 8, in its current form, then the development of an "Empl Campus" a Council's summler ld recess. be pursued as an implementation step later this fall, after to send you We will keep you on our Northwest Small Area mailing list, furthertassistance on this notices and items tof�ontatctrRob Wilson at (919) 968-2728. matter, please feel free Sincerely, Roger S. Waldon, Planning Director cc: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager 33 ATTACHMENT 11 • May 29, 1995 Dear Mayor Broun: You have received letters from the individual members of the Homestead Group, LLC, concerning the proposed Road D on the Northwest Area Plan that will effectively destroy our property on Homestead and Merin Roads. We are following up with this letter to inform you of the positive response that our Development Proposal received at a joint meeting of the Design Review Board and the Appearance Commission on April 26. We are also responding to the suggestion in Dave Roesler's letter(see attached)that we offer alternative proposals to Road D. Alternative #1 Our basic proposal is to do nothing to the existing roads. If the Village Center is built, then let Merin Road, as it nresMIW—exisL.9, be extended to the North to allow a neighborhood connection to the Village Center for those needing to get to the schools. The obvious connection to Chapel Hill from the Village Center is proposed Road A. This alternative clearly reflects the wishes of the existing Billabong / Merin neighborhood. If Transportation Planners are adamant about having a connection to Seawell School Road, then there are several alternatives that would take into consideration the needs of more than just the Village Center development-- including the needs of already existing neighborhoods and properties. We would propose that the following be considered after existing and local conditions have been carefully studied --we don't want other property owners to suffer the same fate that we have thus far. Alternative #2 Road A, that has been on the Town thoroughfare plan all along, could be extended further south and connected to Seawell School Road along the UNC property line. Alternative #3 The existing Merin Road could extend south across Homestead along the railroad right- of-way and connect to Seawell School Road. In order for us to be able to continue with the town approval process, we respectfully request a resolution of the portion. of Road D tha crosses our property. At the Town Meeting on June 12, we ask that two CLEAR actions betaken: A) Eliminate the section of Road D that crosses our property B) Advise the appropriate review boards and planning staff that we may continue with the approval process for our development plan as already submitted in concept,which does not include Road D. Sincerely yours, The Homestead Group, LLC Georgia Bizios, AIA Weezie Oldenburg, AIA Werner Hausler, AIA Dr. DianeSchaaf Dr. Rosemary Hoffmann Holly Tesar Lyirr �vr�.vioy, �i� vi. DGUi Tgx:r r^iiA TOWN OF CHAPEL HILL - 306 NORTH COLtlMIMA MEET CHAPEL HLL. NORTH CAROLINA 27516 Ms. Weezie Oldenburg T.@O-(919)9U-27M The Homestead Group 403 Laurel Hill Road Chapel Hill, N.C. 27514 April 28, 1995 RE: Homestead Commons - Concept Plan Review (File No. 24-9) Dear Ms. Oldenburg: As you know, at their April 26,1995, meeting, the Design Review Board conducted a review of the proposed Homestead commons project. The following comments and recommendations were made by the Board for your consideration: j 1. The Board praised your innovative approach in utilizing a planned development housing scheme for a single family housing unit project. The Board suggested that you should be prepared to address the affordable housing concerns of the community and how your project may meet the concern of providing affordable housing, 2. The Board suggested that you carefully look at the placement of the garages. Some appear to be placed between the street and other houses, possibly blocking good views. 3. The proposed North West Small Area Plan road proposals need careful consideration as they relate to your property. The Board suggested that you look at the whole area traffic plan needs and possibly suggest an alternate to the proposed extension of Seawall School Road. S'Ould You have any questions, or need farther information, please feeler to call me at 968- 2728. Si rely, Dave Roesler, Planner CC: J. B. Culpepper, Development Coordinator ATTACHMENT 2 June 26, 1995 Members of the Town Council: My name is Georgia Bizios and I speak on behalf of the Homestead Group , eight friends, residents of Chapel Hill and Raleigh, owners of 9.3 acres of land at Homestead and Merin Roads in Chapel Hill. (diagram SIGNIFICANT PROPERTIES) The Northwest Area Study Plan dated December 20, 1994, indicates collector Road D transversing this parcel of land to connect Merin road to Seawell School Road. (diagram CONCEPTUAL LAND USE ANb ROAD NETWORK PLAN) We have previously written to you explaining many reasons why Road D should be deleted from the North Area Study Plan based on planning criteria as well as common sense. Tonight we want to add some technical information that makes clear that the proposed Road D is not only undesirable but also impossible to build as indicated in the plan for technical reasons. We asked Keener Engineering, Inc. Civil and Transportation Engineering, to do a preliminary study for the horizontal alignment of Road D through our property. The following diagrams summarize the information we have received from the engineer: Horizontal Alignment, Road D, at 35 miles /hour. This diagram illustrates the required configuration of the road in plan in order to connect to the existing roads at 35 miles/hour (according to AASHTO Guidelines, 1990) Horizontal Alignment, Road D, at 30 miles /hour. This diagram illustrates the required configuration of the road in plan in order to connect to the existing roads at 30 miles/hour (according to AASHTO Guidelines, 1990) Horizontal Alignment, Road D, at 30 miles /hour. This diagram illustrates the required length of the road standards at 30 miles/hour, (according to AASHTO Guidelines, 1990) and in this case it can not connect to Merin Road. These configurations assume that the land is flat. When the topography of the site is taken into consideration the problems are compounded. Road D can not be designed for lower speeds since it is a collector road. Therefore, it does not make sense to require a collector road through our property and have it be the only segment of the road with lower speed. This defeats the purpose of the collector road and creates dangerous driving conditions. We have presented this information to the planning staff who are working on this proposal and they have agreed with us that it would not be technically possible to build Road D as diagrammed in the North Area Study Plan, dated December 20,1994. We greatly appreciate their time, comments, and cooperation. Based on all the information we have presented regarding the proposed collector Road D, we request that Road D be eliminated from the Small Area Plan Northwest Area. We request that you approve this deletion tonight, if at all possible. We wish to proceed immediately with the required permit granting process of the town, but have been informed that our development proposal can not be considered until this study plan, eliminating collector Road D, is finalized. Delay on this decision for a few more months is putting us at a financial hardship. Thank you for considering this request. { PAA E ST>~an (�:)R o U P PEE ► 0 F 7 2 CoNSUlianr Place ' P.O. Box 51013 KEENER ENgiNEERINq ASSOCIATES, INC. DURHAM, NC 27717 Phone: (919) 419-0350 CIVIL ANd TRANSPORTATION ENgiNEERINq fax: 919 490-8953 MEMORANDUM To: Mr. Werner Hausler, AIA The Homestead Group From: Ms. Donna Keener, P.E. Keener Engineering Associates, Inc. A preliminary analysis of the horizontal alignment of Road "D°, which connects Seawell School Road and Merin Road, was conducted. No consideration was given to the vertical constraints at this stage. The design assumptions used are as follows: Posted Speed of Roadway: 35 mph Design Speed of Roadway: 40 mph Design Speed of Roadway @ Intersection: 30 mph Maximum Superelevation: 0.06 ft/ft Guidelines: AASHTO 1990 Standards According to AASHTO guidelines, the minimum radius of the proposed roadway at the intersection with Homestead Road is 230 feet. The corresponding length of superelevation runoff is 90 feet. The runoff length is the distance required to transition from full superelevation to adverse crown. Normal practice is to place 213 of the runoff length on the tangent approach and 1/3 on the curve. The length of tangent runout is required in addition to the superelevation runout. The tangent runout is the length of transition from adverse crown to normal crown. In this case; the length of tangent runout is 30 feet. Therefore, the total tangent length needed to transition to normal crown is 90 feet. The horizontal curve which ties into Merin Road should have a minimum radius of 450 feet, using a design speed of 35 mph. Accepted practice is to design the roadway at a speed 5 mph in excess of the posted speed. The length of superelevation runoff for this curve is 115 feet, and the tangent runout is 38.3 feet. The total tangent length needed to transition from normal crown to full superelevation is 115 feet. Placing these two horizontal curves in the area planned for this roadway extension results in a severe "S-curve" through the parcel. There is no room for the tangent runout or superelevation runoff between the curves, and the result is an undesirable reverse curve. To meet the criteria, a tangent section of 205 feet is required. This length is not available under this scenario. A direct result of this reverse curve will be the extreme difficulty in locating safe driveways to serve the remaining parcel. Severe sight distance problems will undoubtedly arise. Because accepted engineering standards are impossible to meet, the preliminary analysis of this horizontal alignment shows that the resulting roadway will be both dangerous and undesirable. {-�McSTFAf� (7'r2�UP a u w DUKE FOREST N )LIKE LANDFILL I )REST ?{••'•..�«-�{.r•.,}:..: �:; / I V -::.c?•.�. . EUBANKS R0. CHAPEL MILL t`L•x>.:'•.r' :%: NORTH I ( 1 LH i..... `WEAVER DAIRY R9 J IM iI ° : ..:. <Y:. 'ir'r:4k}�•?•i fi'F-;..:f'.jv�� � I �� I Ul..l `•?v}iv}�,,':Y:}ij:,:�.:6M��:l�v�JJ{.�ie�•x••i r'C IIII 1 `;r.'.:;;:',••};:{ t<•:•y.... C 0'- 1� 1-1 I � � I I L ti:k?i{:}-�::„`•,;....''..i"{:`w:..M:;r�!;c?.,.'1,,�'..• 1�v, L� I 1 I � Z CC• ilk 1 � - ..itrii��} J II I � m II 1 1 1 O Qf I � I I I 1� 9� I }:I::i;.it.l•:i;•r::.: -:. J�/� TOWN PARK& I I fl I SulJ "PUBLIC HOUSING ^ I I I �I 1 { I HOMES 1 AD R .. DUKE J II I - I I I I I ' 66 .POWER' — I I r✓x�j I Y'� I �( I C ORANGE CO. HUMAN SERVICES CENTER � �/•/'•'G- i I ( CHAPEL HILL 1 U I J HIGH SCHOOL UNC -1F / PROPERTY ^J rr WILLIAMS IA �1 � lL M TRACT ;�'`� >;..:. { HORACE i.-- �C. WIILIALAS AIRPORT QP' 1 I NORTHWEST AREA PLAN CHAPEL HILL,"' � / =C✓�,,--, �� L, N.C. SIGNIFICANT PROPERTIES PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL p,o-vc 3 o F� V r 1 r I f � •� •('1 N and ° r W)grr IC ! ILANOFlLL ,�„�•; T t / I EJSANKS RO - G LANOFILL `. B t r E \}X PAE STw. 1 l \\ f 7 VER Og1R L;r NO COD v / / r R N • r—•ti PARK C �'❑� , \ � III (•I I V NW PARK F:l�rr r oUKE t.. HOA4 rowEA ® �-„ ✓ I I �:_ I� < O c ILA.Gi Co. \ O j I .— Mu-A SEAVICES 'I C I� I e Q HIGH _ A�ZO I SCHCOL u IN \ I UNC O\ PROPEnn-TY L ^ HORACE O �lrr I WglI AiRPOR7 Rr ESTES OR. SMALL AREA PLAN NCIRTHWEST AREA CONCEPTUAL LAND USE AND ROAD NETWORK PLAN Note: These Lnes represent potential Iuture kcal and CDnoc:or roads. There is no funding allocated for these roads. As development occurs, roads would be Constructed through the development review process. Road lines reoresent approximate roan IOCahons. Minor adjustments will need to be made as development and redevelopment occur �ori�ST�.►� v��t° P�c-c 4 cD F 'l E W C/) CE: U) 0 O \ _I I w :E o O _ 2i 2 0 N 00 1- o ` = U a- 1 ° c cc I m I 0 \ I I c M � m I i o .o a1 I ° C' E I m O r . I 1 NL cr- � I I I I - is ca cab O I J N CC cc- I I i °—' w I Q. o o I o O °— N t a'� I cu I O O I I en to I cu cn ' ccu - -- I I a� P>1 loo4z)s Ilameas Z I I I f-bM LSTe--,D GRo>I P PA,t� 5 OF- 7 Y a 0 cu O Wcf) W :�i 00 O 2 U CL = co ' 11 I I C O \\ I ' Im ' o o U I -yLo � 11 (13 o a, ` I I I I ' I m c c O . o E I I s CD M i 3 R = � CU cu CO i NN 0 0 Q. I R co 1- PH I0043S IIJmEaS I � I ( 4-�+nE���o C�RovP 4- E C) W< CO IE CD C/) 0 w cc U) 0- 0 N C) 00 0 1.- CY) a-C) 0 4- zu ------------- to c 0 .0 i 0 ca (t cr- ca 0.2 .21 cc cc 0 Cl) ca d) 0 ou co C/) -C- C) 0 tu cc: CC -0 Cc:, -0 40 V) VW) i I I I I 0 0 CL CL o o 0 CL ca � CL) -0 to C: co tm L 440,AAE STEAC> [,QV VP F-AV,C- r7 0 F '7 ATTACHMENT 3 HoffmannDesign P.O.Box 17234 Rosemary Hoffmann Chapel Hill,NG 27516 Mr.Roger Waldon Head, Chapel Hill Planning Department Chapel Hill Town Hall 306 N. Columbia St. Chapel Hill, NC 27516 30 July, 1995 Dear Roger, On behalf of the Homestead Group, LLC, I would like to ask further procedural questions concerning the disposition of Road D as it joins Homestead Road on the Northwest area plan. We greatly appreciated the time that both you and Chris took to speak with us (Werner Hausler,Lyn McClay, Georgia Bizios and myself) before the Council meeting in May. We hope the engineering report that we presented to you as well as to the Council was sufficiently compelling to warrant some sort of staff action on the matter. As we mentioned in our meeting with you and as we have pointed out in our letters to the Council members, our reasons for opposing the portion of the road that runs across our property stem not only from our perspective as property owners but also from our professional concerns as designers and architects and from the personal concerns of those who presently live in the neighborhood. From an engineering standpoint, it would not be possible to build the necessary curves for 35-MPH speeds. Building curves that would only be safe at speeds less than 35-MPH would be creating a dangerous situation -- especially in such proximity to the High School. Given the combined weight of the issue of roadway safety and the planning issues we have discussed -- and which are in keeping with the development philosophy the Chapel Hill Planning Department has been so active in promoting -- we hope that the staff can see fit to make a recommendation that the direct connection from Road D to Seawell School Road be eliminated from the planning discussion. We look forward to participating in the process of the Northwest Area Plan. However, we would like to use our expertise and energy on broader and more fruitful subjects than on the elimination of a ill-advised intersection. Thank you again for your time and attention to this matter. I will check with you soon concerning the council workshop. Sincerely yours, Rosemary Hoffmann for the Homestead Gro p CC: Chris Berndt ATTACHMENT 4 PLANNING STAFF REPORT Subject: Northwest Small Area Plan - Proposed Road "D" Date: August 30, 1995 In response to citizens' requests regarding the Northwest Small Area Plan's proposed Road "D," we have conducted additional study of this proposed road segment. Our additional study determined that engineering standards would be difficult to meet for the proposed alignment of Road "D." This finding concurs with the Keener Engineering Associates, Inc. study that was presented by the Homestead Group. Based on this finding and property owner considerations, we propose an alternate alignment of Road "D" that would minimize property takings and would minimize the impact of the proposed road on the property that the Homestead Group desires to develop. The new proposed alignment of Road "D" is shown on the attached map. This alignment would provide additional access for residents in this area to the proposed village pattern development while minimizing the impact on the Billabong Lane residents and Homestead Group developers. In addition, this alignment would move the existing intersection to a point approximately 350 feet east of the rail line and approximately 700 feet west of Seawell School Road. We believe that this new alignment would meet the Northwest Small Area Plan Work Group's intent to provide access from Homestead Road to the proposed village pattern development, while also moving the Merin Road/Homestead Road intersection east of the Homestead Road railroad crossing, providing for a safer intersection. We offer this staff suggestion to the Council as it considers the draft Northwest Small Area Plan. PROPOSED REVISION OF ROAD D o 4 o 1 BILLABONG LN. m co HOMESTEAD HOMESTEAD COMMONS � CLOSE SOUT H E ND OF MERIN RD. INCLUDING PORTION OF R/W HOMESTEAD RD. c D HOMESTEAD m VILLAGE JL r r \ n 2 N y�C'ti SCN 8/28/95 • RD.