Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 04-29-2003-7e __. 1. Planning for Carolina North (UNC's Horace Williams Property) The purpose of this item is to provide information on the current status of planning for the University of North Carolina's Horace Williams Tract. For more than a decade, the University of North Carolina has been planning for the future use of the Horace Williams property. A Guide to Physical Development: Summary of the Campus Framework Plan, prepared by Johnson, Johnson and Roy (JJR) consulting firm was accepted by the UNC Board of Trustees on December 9, 1988. In 1994 the University began new land use framework plans for its outlying properties which included the Horace Williams Tract. The consulting firm JJR undertook this task which involved committees from both the University and the two towns as part of the planning process. -The consultants presented the Draft UNC Outlying Properties Land Use Plan on May 23, 1996. UNC land use planning advisory committees from both Chapel Hill and Carrboro submitted reports/recommendations to their respective town boards who in turn transmitted final comments to the UNC Board of Trustees in January of 1997. On January 24, 1997 the UNC Board of Trustees formally accepted JJR's plan for the Horace Williams and Mason Farm properties. The University published the Outlying Parcels Land Use Plans: Summary Report as well as a full technical report during September of 1998. Following the publication of the JJR plan, the University of North Carolina began a new central campus master plan process with the consulting firm of Ayers Saint Gross. In 2000 the work of Ayers Saint Gross was expanded to include a new look at the Horace Williams property. Representatives of the University presented a report in February of 2001 to both Chapel Hill and Carrboro that summarized the Horace Williams Committee's planning principles and the work completed by the consultant team (see Attachment D). The year 2003 has begun with the planning of the Horace Williams property under the name of "Carolina North". "Continuing to build on the foundation of the initial planning efforts, Carolina has created an Advisory Committee and associated Advisory Groups to provide .input and productive discussion regarding the planning of C;aro~lna Norm. uunng the course or tnis semes~er, uiC Executive Committee has asked the Advisory Groups to provide input in several specific areas that are critical to advance the planning of Carolina North. The input from the Groups will be incorporated into creating an updated development plan for Carolina North that will be ready for presentation and comment early this fall."source:carolina North Web Site http://carolinanorth.unc.edulvision.html Mission -Carolina North "Carolina North is a living and learning community, expanding Carolina's multiple missions, intensifying innovation and redefining our engagement with the region, the State and the world. Carolina North is an environment where diverse partnerships are created and new endeavors are born and nurtured. Carolina North is a place of exceptional energy, beauty and contemplation, connecting to and enhancing both the original campus and neighboring communities." Source: Carolina North Web Site http://carolinanorth. unc.edu/vision.html Also in 2003, the Town of Chapel Hill appointed members to the newly established Horace Williams Citizens Committee who began meeting on March 4, 2003. The Town of Carrboro established a Horace Williams Advisory Committee and appointed members in March. A summary of each advisory committee or group is attached. The following attachments provide information related to planning activities associated with the Horace Williams property.. Attachment A UNC at Chapel Hill CAROLINA NORTH Planning for Caro/ina North will be the responsibility of the Executive Committee, -the Advisory Committee, and .four Advisory Groups: Carolina North Eiccntire Committer ' C.arol'uu North "~tJ.iwrr Committee --~ ;Yew Burioe+. Enmul Rel.~ioe. ( Inf+actn•ccvc ~ ~ Uoi.cnuq tl~sr I)erclupm~nc C;ommu~« Caswam. ~ Co~emincr ~ Coiemums ~ i ~ Executive Committee The Executive Committee will work with all the normal University structures and with the Carolina North Advisory Committee to accomplish its objectives. The decision making body for major policy issues on Carolina North is an Executive Committee with the following members: * James Moeser, Chancellor * Tim Burnett, Trustee * Robert Shelton, Provost and Executive Vice * Paul Fulton, Trustee Chancellor * David Pardue, Trustee * Nancy Suttenfield, Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration * Tony Waldrop, Vice Chancellor for Research and Economic Develo ment Advisory Committee and Advisory Groups Accordingly, the following "charges" to the Carolina North Advisory Committee and its Advisory Groups are designed to provide an efficient and comprehensive means of gaining input and productive discussion. As a committee of the whole, the charge of the Carolina North Advisory Committee is to: * Facilitate the work of its Advisory Groups. * Plan and conduct plenary session meetings to hear and discuss advisory reports from the Advisory Groups * Convey advisory opinions to the Executive Committee via Vice Chancellor Waldrop * The Vice Chancellor for Research & Economic Development and Associate Vice Chancellor for Economic Development will be ex officio members of each Advisory Group. 3of10 Attachment A UNC at Chapel Hill CAROLINA NORTH Yn~'r~~fiiruC~ure ~4c~visvey Col~t~rni~~t~e Bruce Runberg ,Chair Associate Vice Chancellor Facilities Plannin~& Construction Charge• To study, discuss, and develop advice on physipl development issues (e.g. roads, utllfties, transportation, circulation, parking, airport, and other elements of the physlWl environment), environmental impact (including storm water management) and general aesthetics (including both built structures and landscape design as well as undisturbed vegetation) both within Carolina North and in terms of its ad)acencles with the community. Committee Members Garland Burton Steve Jarrell Peter Reinhardt HUB Director Interim Vice Chancellor Director Facilities Planning Information Technology Services Environment, Health & Safety Patriila Crawford Asad Khattak Doug Robertson Associate Vice Chancellor/ Associate Professor Director Associate University Counsel City & Regional Planning Highway Safety Research Center university Counsel Cynthia Shea Robert Marriott Sustainability Coordinator Doug Crawford-Brown Assistant Dean Facilities Service Division Department Chair School of Medicine Administration Environment Silences & Engineering David Pardue Philip Singer Carolyn Elfland Buildings & Grounds Committee professor Associate Vice Chancellor Chair Environment Sciences & Engineering Campus Services Board Of Trustees Michael Stegman Neil Pedersen David Godschalk Superintendent Chairman Professor Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Departrnent of Public Policy City & Regional Planning SCh0015 Jlm Ward Jonathan Howes Council Member Special Assistant to the Town of Chapel Hill Chancellor Universi Relations 4of10 Attachment A LTNC at Chapel Hill CAROLINA NORTH Un6~~rs6~~e U~~:~ ,d~a~v~sar~ ~om~roi~~ee Steve Allred ,Chair Associate Provost Charge• To discuss and develop advice on uses of the University that may be located in CQrOIInQ NOrth both near term and longer term. This Advisory Group is asked to focus on the ChQPQCf8rlStiCS Qnd Cr11er1Q that generally would make given activities suitable for location in Carolina NOrlI1. It also may recommend specific programs or activities, but is not required to do so. Committee Members Don Bailey, Director Tommy Griffin, President Frank Porter G2ham Child Development Institute ~ Employee Forum Facilities Service Division Flicks Bateman, Principal UNC Hospital School ]amen Hirschfield, Professor & Assistant Chair Studio Art Council Member, Town of Chapel Hill Department of Art Dean Bresciani, Interim Vice Chancellor Doug Kelly, Senior Associate Dean Student Affairs College of Arts & Scences Marjorie Crowell, AssoGate Vice Chancellor Terry Magnuson, Sarah Graham Kenan Professor & Chair Office of Development Department of Genetics Margaret Dardess, Associate Dean for Administration Cass Miller, Professor/Chairman School of Public Health Dept. of Environment Sciences & Engineering Jennifer Daum, Student Gene Orringer, Professor/Exec. Assoc. Dean Faculty Affairs Senior, Political Science School of Medicine Joe Desimone, Distinguished Professor William Snider, Professor/Director Department of Chemistry Neuroscience Center Joseph Jordan, Director Dhiren Thakker, Ferguson Prof./Associate Dean Black Cultural Center School of Pharmacy Sue Estroff, Professor Anna Wu, Director Department of Social Medicne Facilities Planning Jack Evans, Hettleman Professor Kenan-Flagler Business School Sof10 Attachment A UNC at Chapel Hill CAROLINA NORTH Neely F3tssi~~:~s ~?eve[~apmen~ ~dvisar~ ~~mn~~tt+~e Mark Crowell, Chair Office of Technology Development Char~e• To study, discuss, and develop advice on defining, by category or type, those private, public, or community uses that would both benefit from inclusion on Carolina North and contribute substantively to furthering the vision and mission statements established for Carolina North. rnls Advisory Group will identify and recommend specific infrastructure and resources needed on the CRYOIIna North campus in order to facilitate the formation, operation and growth of start-up companies based on university-generated intellectual property assets. All private or other uses (other than purely University uses) may be considered, but there should be priority consideration given to advanced knowledge-based activities that support and are supported by the vision and mission above. Committee Members Margaret Brown Richard Superfine, Associate Professor Orange County Board of Commissioners Department of Physics-Astronomy Nick England, President and CEO Mark Yusko 3rdTech, Inc ~ Chief Investment Officer Investment Office David M. Parker Associate University Counsel Ted Zoiler, Associate Dean Associate Vice Chancellor, Office of Technology Development Business & Finance School of Government Cam Hill, Citizen Steve Nelson, Partner Alston Gardner Wakefield Group Fulchrum Ventures Art Pappas, Chairman and CEO James Johnson, Professor A.M. Pappas & Associates Kenan-Flagler Business School Roger Perry Ryszard Kole, Professor East West Partners Department of Pharmacology John Russell, Citizen Bill Moore Franklin Str Nelson Schwab Carousel Capital Diana McDUffee, Alderman Town of Carrboro eet Partners Richard (Stick) Williams, Vice Chairman Duke Power Company 6of10 Attachment A UNC at Chapel Hill CAROLINA NORTH External Re[atiQns ~dvisary Comr~it~~e Kevin Fitz9eraltl, Chair Charee• To Study, discuss, and develop advice for (1) communications strategies and (2) partnership approaches by the University to the State of North Carolina and to local, regional, national and intemaGonal communities and business organizations in ways [hat will advance common interests for [he success of Carolina North. This Advisory Group also will recommend a stategy for capturing and tracking statistics and indicators of the economic and business development impact of Carolina North over a longitudinal basis, and for recommending strategic partnerships for'Carolina North which should be established with relevant local, regional, state, national and international groups interested in the impact of universities on economic development. Committee Members Lynn Blanchard, DireQOr June Steel, Director Carolina Center for Public Service Planned/Regional Gifts Office of Development Linda Convissor, Coordinator Local Relations University Relations Nancy Suttenfield, Vice Chancellor Finance and Administration Nanq Davis, Associate Vlce Chancellor University Relations Holden Thorp, Professor, Department of Chemistry Director, Morehead Center Doug Dibbert, Director, Alumni Affairs President, General Alumni Association Rollie Tillman, Professor/Dir Ctr Entrepreneur Kenan-Flagler Business School Ed Feser, Assistant Professor City & Regional Planning Barry Jacobs Orange County Board of Commissioners Michael Luger, Professor Department of Public Policy Howard Lee Director, Office of Economic Development Mike Nelson, Mayor Mark Meares, Director Town of Carrboro Corporate and Foundation Relations Dianne Reld, Ex-officio Office of Development Economic Development Commission Aaron Nelson, Coordinator of Local Relations Ruby Sinreich, Citizen University Relations Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber ofCommerce Allison Rosenberg, Associate Vice Chancellor, Federal Relations Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Studies 6ranson Page, Graduate Student School of Mediane Jim Ward Town of Chapel Hill 7of10 Attachment B ~ ;~s.~.:r. tii ,.ti Zr x _l~ r~ Jy `1. /` ::. ~t C`hltll .- HORACE WILLIAMS CITIZEN'S COMMITTEE A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A HORACE WILLIAMS CITIZENS COMMITTEE (2002-10-07/R-10) Adopted by the Chapel Hill Town Council on 10/07/02 Charae• Develop a set of Principles, including community interests and goals and objectives, to guide the Council's deliberations with the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill regarding the development of the Horace Williams property (Carolina North), including the following topic areas: • Water/sewer • Hazardous waste • Stormwater • Transportation modes, including transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and auto • Housing • Schools • Natural area protection • Fiscal equity • Neighborhood interface • Parks and Recreation space/facilities Keep the Council informed about work in progress on a regular basis, beginning with a preliminary report 90 days after the first Committee meeting Propose a process for Council consideration identifying points in the process where Public Hearings and Forums would be appropriate, to be able to bring information to the attention of the community and provide opportunity for citizen comment. Prepare recommendations for the Council's consideration regarding the University's plan for the Horace Williams property once a proposal is developed. Provide advice to the Council about ways to incorporate these Principles into the Council's ultimate zoning and ordinances for the Horace Williams property. Committee Members John Boyer Citizen's with Special Expertise Joyce Brown Citizen's with Special Expertise James Coley Citizen's with Special Expertise Cam Hill Citizen's with Special Expertise Julie McClintock Citizen's with Special Expertise Del Snow Citizen's with Special Expertise Henry W. Branson Citizen's with Special Expertise Joe Capowski Citizen's with Special Expertise Barbara Driscoll Citizen's with Special Expertise Randy Kabrick Citizen's with Special Expertise Ruby Sinreich Citizen's with Special 10 Attachment B Town of Chapel Hill Horace Williams Citizen's Committee Albert Burk Neighborhood Representatives Margaret L. Morse Neighborhood Representatives Diane VandenBroek Neighborhood Representatives Kathleen Kearns Neighborhood Representatives Blair Pollock Neighborhood Representatives Linda Convissor University Representative David Otto Carrboro Representative Margaret Brown Orange County Representative Pat Evans, Mayor Pro Tem Chapel Hill Town Council Mark Kleinschmidt Chapel Hill Town Council Bill Strom Chapel Hill Town Council 9of10 Attachment C HORACE WILLIAMS ADVISORY COMMITTEE A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A HORACE WILLIAMS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Resolution No. 101/2002-03 Adopted by the Carrboro Board of Aldermen on 2/11/03 har e• To define and advocate for Carrboro's interests and objectives with regard to any plans proposed for the development of the Horace Williams property (Carolina North) including the following topic areas: water and sewer, hazardous waste, stormwater, transportation modes (including transit, bicycle, pedestrian and auto), housing, schools, natural area protection, fiscal equity, and neighborhood interface. To keep the Mayor and Board of Aldermen informed about the work progress. To identify points in the process where a public hearing would be appropriate, to bring information to the attention of the community, and provide opportunity for citizen comment. To prepare recommendations for the Mayor and Board of Aldermen's consideration regarding the University's plan for the Horace Williams property once a proposal is developed. COfilllTll>tte@ Mf3r17b@fS (Appointed 3/1 Randee Haven-O'Donnell Planning Board Heidi Perry Transportation Advisory Board Mike Nelson Mayor Diana McDuffee Board of Aldermen Evie Odom Recreation & Park Commission Dave Otto Citizens At-Large Catherine Devine Dianne Reid Appearance Commission Citizens At-Large Keith Burwell Kathy Buck Environmental Advisory Board Citizens At-Large Jay Bryan Allen Spalt Carrboro Citizen Representative Northern Transition Area Advisory Committee on the UNC Carolina North Advisory Committee Brian Plaster Downtown Development Commission Rich Bell Carrboro Citizen Representative on the UNC Carolina North Advisory Committee 10 of 10 ATTACHMENT "D" ~~ TOWN O F CARRB O RO BOARD OF ALDERMEN PRESENTATION REPORT THE ENCLOSED IS AN EXCERPT OF TODAY'S PRESEN- TATION. IT SUMMARIZES THE HORACE WILLIAMS COMMITTEE'S PLANNING PRINCIPLES AND THE WORK COMPLETED TO-DATE BY THE CONSULTANT TEAM. 27 FEBRUARY 2001 AYERS/SAINT/GROSS Architects and Planners STONEBRIDGE ASSOCIATES, ING Market/Economic/Financial Analysis MARTIN/ALEXIOU/BRYSON, INC Transit Planners CARTEL ASSCK~ATES ~ • Environmental Consacltants 'I INTRODUCTION For over two centuries the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has pushed the frontier of educational excellence for the citizens of North Carolina, expanding the nature of the intellectual enterprise itself In 1952 Sociology Professor Howard Odum was among the first to develop organizational models for research cooperation that led to the development of the Research Triangle Park. Today faculty and students across disciplines are exploring new technologies and systems that have accelerated opportunities for innovation. From genomics to nano-technologies to digital graphics to new models for interna- tional education and collaboration, UNC is showing how part- nerships advance the pace of progress. The founders of UNC had no way of knowing that by the dawn of the 21st century such accomplishments would lead to a campus of more than 13 million gsf of buildings serving 24,000 students with 9,000 faculty and staff members on 575 acres. It is UNC's good fortune that Horace Williams, the Kenan Professor of Philosophy, left a final legary with a gift of more than 700 acres of land in Chapel Hill. It has since expanded to almost 1000 acres, thereby providing a place where University accomplishments can flourish in the new millennium. UNC-CH provides a Formidable foundation upon which to build new alliances and partnerships. The Horace Williams property gives UNC-CH an enviable competitive advantage by providing a location For significant long-term growth in close proximity to its central campus. Supporting this is the business climate and workforce of North Carolina and particularly .the Raleigh- Durham-Chapel Hill region. Under the direction of distinguished faculty the University has a number of departments and programs that already benefit from alliances and partnerships with the private sector and other institu- tions. Important ongoing research and development can be sup- ported in an attractive community environment within minutes of main campus facilities. And there are uncharted possibilities that will benefit From having a flexible, adaptable place in which to engage in important intellectual inquiry and collaborative work. While the new central campus master plan will accommodate significant growth on the central campus, the continued intel- lectual growth of UNC-CH will require the university to antic- ipate and provide the infrastructure for alliances within the insti- tution, with other institutions and within the private sector. Nationally and internationally, universities, cities, and regions are engaged in an extraordinarily competitive battle to develop or attract new economy industries. The last few years have defined not only a new economy but a new workplace as well. The businesses of tomorrow, their leaders and employees, will look and behave in dramatic contrast to the companies of the past. UNC is uniquely positioned in this new world economy where intellectual enterprise knows no bounds and pursuit of ways to improve the human condition requires the creativity and expertise enhanced through collaborative work. The intellectual capital of From the initial work of the Horace Williams Advisory Committee to the present day, UNC-CH has been dedicated to setting the table to enable the unknown possibilities of new University accomplish- ments. UNC-CH has the rare combination of the intellectual capi- tal, the physical land, and a vibrant entrepreneurial region necessary to compete in the new economy. With the proper planning and investment, the development of Horace Williams will one day be recognized for its vision and forethought. The Horace Williams legacy is a glass waiting to be filled with purpose, promise, and innovative thinking. Aerial view looking tart -Airport Road it seen in the foreground Aeru:! view looking north -Estes Road is seen in the foreground .~ ;x: t - `ems ~` +'' . f ~` r ads i._., ~".. ~}' .~~ tt ` '~- ~ ?w,~..,,,~ ~ ~ttn `~, ~ t t ~k '~ ~ tents ~lvgi~v+d 4 ~~ Sd~ "r L,. ~ ''~+... i~ vi 1M fp4t 'Mt~tX f'a~i' 'si^.C 3 ~ ~r " ~ 1 s s sr1~a gsx~t !"~ + s < sy. ; ~ ti.,. a k~, r ~ d ' i` ~e's kX+i a_t ~ ~th^i t ''O~yrJ~' 4 ~ w } s~~"3~ s ~ .^Y~ ~.~, q ~,~ ~ ~.'~a,~,s5 T ~_. ~1~fi,' 3* k 4yi~a y4 ~,~,~~ 1~»v ~~ ~ At 19t • ~~ _ ~~~ut'~li ~}~ a'~ -• _. ri. ~ Fiy~t~, r'p ~" ~`+4 xs l - ,~ t..~~ s, t ~ r~b . ~ °~ ~ „* ._ a ~.i _ ~, rli,~,? a ,~° Ala i y4~ t., Y 8T^ F ~f ~ tl t ~ ~„t ~_I ~ }} T .>,1 j^ ya_„R.~+'"~^ ~ ,f" ,f ^,*''~ m,0. ~} ~ ~ ?~. 1.y UNC Main Campus ~ ~ , ~ ~ Does the development.... 1. Help to better prepare students? 2. Elevate the quality of life of the people of the State? 3. Enable new knowledge? 4. Help to recruit and retain faculty? 5. Help to recruit and retain students? 1. Partnership Partnerships with the private sector, government, and other research institutions would bring complementary resources (fiscal and intellectual) and create opportunities for both faculty and students. 2. Program Innovation Horace Williams should be UNC's laboratory for new teaching and learning methods, driving creative transfor- mation and innovation throughout the academic disci- plines and professional schools. MISSION Strategic Vision "Create a village of mixed uses including Bio-Tech/Human Genome research and commercialization that Fosters relation- ships wich ongoing work at UNC-CH" Master Plan Mission "Using the JJR Report as a basis, develop a master plan for the highest and best use of the Horace Williams property to fulfill the Strategic Vision over the near term (10-20 years) and long term (100 years)." 3. Digitized Environment The emerging digital era will revolutionize almost all teach- ing, research, and public service aspects of the University. Horace Williams should reflect this transformation. 4. New Intellectual Level The development of Horace Williams should support the movement of UNC to a new intellectual level. 5. Compatible with the Community The program components and physical plan of Horace Williams should be compatible with the University's Campus Master Plan and the surrounding Communities of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. TTN(' nrnnerty~ Horace Williams, Main Campur and Masora Farm .........,_.. r......._ ---~---- - - ~ .. ~ ~ The diagram illustrates the relative size and scale of the Horace Williams property in comparison to UNC's main campus. The main campus of UNC is approximately 575 acres and contains 13 million square feet of occupiable building space. Comparatively, the 979 acres of the Horace Williams property will have a maximum of 8.4 million square feet. The grid shown on the diagram represents a distance of one-quarter mile, or a 5-minute walk. This study illustrates the immense size of the Horace Williams property, which is approximately two miles in length, and the need to develop the property as a: group of neighborhoods, each disciplined by the walking distance of five minutes from center to edge. Neighborhoods are quantified by area, not by density, and each includes a balanced set of activities: shop- ping, workplace, recreation, dwelling, etc. Each neighborhood has a center, such as a public space, which may be a plaza, a square, a green or an important intersection. Retail and work- places are usually associated with the center, as value is enhanced by adjacenry to `place'. The diagram shows concentric circles incrementally increasing by one mile. The center of the circle is located at the intetseaion of Franklin and Columbia Street, which is the northwest comer of the main campus. Minor and major thoroughfares surround the Horace Williams Property. To the east the property abuts Airport Road (NC 8~> the primary access route to the site. Recently widened, Airport Road is now five lanes from I-40 to Downtown Chapel Hill. The proximity of the property to I~0, and to the Main Campus is a key attribute of the site. `Enhanced access from the north will be provided by the extension of Weaver Dairy Road. Accessibility for eastbound traffic will also be improved by the planned widening of Weaver Dairy Road, with an improved connection to US 15-501 included in the region's currentTtansponation Improvement Program (TIP). Homestead Road wraps around the north and west sides of the site. Widening of this two-lane road to three lanes between Airport Road and High School Road is included in the region's TIP. In the longer term, Homestead Road west of High School Road will be widened to add a median. To the south, the site is bounded by Estes Drive, a major easy-westcon- nectionbetween Franklin Street, Airport Road, Carrboro, and areas fur- therwest. Currently a two-lane road, the TIP proposes the widening of Estes Drive to three lanes west ofAirport Road. The western portion of the site is traversed by SeawellSchool Road> atwo-lane no rth-south road with no plans for widening. Anew east-west connection from the lower portion of Seawell Road to Homestead Road (below the schools) is included in the Thoroughfare Plan, Durham/Chapel HiWCarrboro (DCHC) Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Overall, vehicular access to the Horace Williams property is relatively good, and planned improvements noted above will enhance that access. _~i ,~1- , S 7 ~ 1 a~ ~r~ - '~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~),ti ~~ ~ 'i ~ 'r L ~~i . t ~ ~~~~~ ~- "'~ P i ~ ~ iJ Y' ~-.~ ~ : I 4 c ~ ~~~ H' K ,~ I -~, C' , - \ Norfolk Southern Railroad corridor aassinv throuvh Horace Williams SITE OPPORTUNITIES The University/Norfolk Southern Railroad line runs through the western portion of the Horace Williams property. This is a spur line that extends from the North Carolina Railroad (NCRR) line near Hillsborough Road to the University's power plant in Carrboro, at the west end of Cameron Street. The line is used only for transporting coal to the power plant, twice a day, and carries very little freight traffic. The proposed plan uses this existing right-of--way for a dedicated busway connecting the site to the main campus. The Horace Williams site is well located to be served by tran- sit. Chapel Hill Transit (CHT) currently operates several bus routes along Airport Road in close vicinity to the site. These include the T and A routes, the north-south route serving the Eubanks Road Town park-and-ride lot, and the T' route which serves the University's P and PR park-and-ride lot on Estes Drive. During weekday peak hours a bus currently runs by the site every ten minutes. The University is a major participant in CHT, both in funding and using the system. The towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro have joined with the University and are committed to continu- ally improving transit service. To a large degree, the location of University Facilities and off-campus student housing defines the routes, service frequency, and hours. Intensive development of the Horace Williams property would warrant and support a high level of service, and the site can be readily and efficiently served. The Triangle Transit Authority (TTA) operates a regional bus service to Chapel Hill from the RTP and Durham. Riders can transfer between the regional and CHT buses, making Chapel Hill accessible by transit from other parts of the region. ~.;1]Sr ~ rte` °~", ~r ~ `" v 1 ;w yc - ~ ~ l 3A ~ t r { y ~ t. n t b4. `.w u~ i t ~ , ~r , { ~ ~ ~7 ~ , 1, 1'I .. I .1'"4 B' , :f - ~. ~~ i r~ r' 1 ~ ~ ~ { i ~. -.,~•4 8Y -~,. : A .,~. a t3k,S ( ~,•t - p ',f ~. f ... .~; ` `.. stream buffer, setbacks, airport; physical plant, and preservation area The Horace Williams site is located one and one-half miles northwest of the existing University of North Carolina cam- pus. Two streams run through the site, Bolin Creek on the western portion and Crow Branch on the eastern portion. The 979-acres site generally slopes down from north to south. The ground slopes towards the two streams and slopes vary considerably. Portions of the site have slopes in excess of 10%. Originally, the airport consisted of three runways. The munic- ipal facility along Airport Road is located on a flat portion of the site which was formerly one of the runways. Except for the land occupied by the existing University Physical Plant and Municipal Yard buildings, the airport, and landfill, the site is completely covered with vegetation and creel. OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION -The flood plain occupies 57 acres, and the stream buffer occupies 64 acres of land. Miscellaneous setbacks and open spaces occupy 22 acres, and land reserved for the runway approach zone occupies 116 acres. 259 acres (26%) of the total site area are reserved for open space preservation. PRIOR COMMITTED LAND -The existing airport occupies 110 acres, and the University Physical Plant occupies 60 acres. 170 acres (18%) of the total site area is prior committed land. DEVELOPABLE LAND -Total land available for develop- ment is 550 acres (56%) as per the 1998 JJR Study. WASTE SITES -Two waste sites exist on the property, a 35- acre landfill site and a 0.2 acre chemical site. ; , i. ,.. ' ;, ~~ . ~ #{ i~ F . l i' hp tt t~ 3~~~ ~ VM Nul} ~ ~ y ~ i`i ~t ~\ly s ~~ i \}q 4t t ;, +; ;; +~~' u ~ µ.,.. it z ,u , __~ ~, ~ tl ~' j t k ___ _ t 1j. A ~} h '~\. i HL S ~ y 1 ~`vr:i44y~ , , i 1 .. __ -__ i ..... ,,, _ i ---- _. ... ~ 1998JJR Study -Dark to light toner represents concentration ofdevrlcpment ~nnn ('oncenr Plan 1998 TTR STUDY 2000 CON CEPT PLAN TOTAL LAND ON HORACE WILLIAMS PROPERTY ............... 979 Acres 979 Acres PRIOR COMMITTED ................................................................... 170 Acres (18%) 170 Acres (18%) Airporr 110 Acres Physical Plant 60 Acres MANDATORY OPEN SPACE PRESERVATION .......................... 259 Acres (26%) 259 Acres (26%) Floodplain 57 Acres Setbacks 22 Acres Stream Buffers 64 Acres Runway Approach 116 Acres DEVELOPED LAND ...................................................................... 498 Acres (51%) 235 Acres (24%) ACTIVE AND PASSIVE RECREATION ....................................... 52 Acres (5%) 59 Acres (6%) ADDITIONAL LAND PRESERVATION ...................................... 0 Acres (0%) 256 Acres (26%) ridors from the interior of the neighborhood to the sur- rounding landscape; and 6) separate through traffic from the neighborhood traffic and discourage unsafe speeds on residential streets. The street network features multiple access point into the site and a hierarchy of streets. The internal street network is char- acterized by aline-grained grid of streets. The street system also serves as the pedestrian network, and therefore all-streets have sidewalks on both sides. 1998 JJR Study -Primary streets proposed ;y,i } a ~ ., s. ~ ` - .. ,. t : t ; ... .` ... _ ., 1 j - ,», 1 4 ~ k - 1 ~ t ,~ , 'r I.~, _ ._ ... , . ! i h, , t ~ ~ ' ` ~. ~ ~ fit . ,- l.. -s , / `' }~ J r a S l~ .... - ~~ , t ,, ~.'%.., r,,....~ .,,j . ,. ,_.... .~ i '` r __ ~ ~< . I 2000 Concept Plan -Network of streetr proposed TRANSPORTATION INTERNAL STREET NETWORK The street network of a traditional neighborhood develop- ment can help foster a sense of community if it is planned with this object in mind. The intent of streets at Horace Williams is to: 1) organize the public space of the neigh- borhoods and to make memorable and beautiful urban spaces; 2) provide identity and a sense of place for the ten- ants and residents; 3) link and integrate uses and provide a walking environment; 4) provide many routes for cars in order to avoid concentration of traffic; 5) provide view cor- A dedicated busway in the existing rail right-of--way could con- nect the Eubanks Road park-and-ride lot . to downtown Carrboro and campus, and pass though the Horace Williams property. ROADWAY CAPACITY If developed as a typical, auto-oriented suburban development, the preliminary land use program being considered for. the site (8.4 million GSF) could generate approximately 60,000 vehic- ular trips on a typical weekday. The location of the Horace Williams property within the urban setting of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, with good transit service, birycle paths, mixed land uses, appropriate site design, and moderate trip reduction strategies could reduce traffic by a minimum of 25% to 45,000 daily trips. An assessment of available capacity was undertaken, particular- ly to review the conclusion from the 1998 JJR Study that the future roadway network could accommodate approximately 45;000 daily vehicular trips. Based on a preliminary update of data from an early version of the 2025 travel forecasting model `.there will be sufficient roadway capacity, with some planned roadway improvements in 2025, to accommodate 45,000 trips generated from the site. TRIP REDUCTION MEASURES • Strong transit connection to Main Campus/Downtown • Internal transit services • Improved regional transit • Mixed uses (balanced to maximize internal trip possibilities) • Pedestrian/transit-oriented design • Bikeway connections • Ridesharing programs • Incentives for ridesharing/transit use The University of North Carolina is currently a major partici- pant in the Chapel Hill Transit System which can be expand- ed and enhanced to serve the Horace Williams property. In addition, the University is exploring trip reduction strategies to minimize the traffic impacts and parking needs for the expan- sion of the UNC Main Campus. Open Space Diagram Priority is given to public space and the appropriate location of these spaces within the master plan. The Plan organizes the streets and blocks to create a hierarchy of public spaces. Squares and streets have their size and geometry defused by the inrenrion to create special places. Buildings gain identity by occupying sites that overlook public spaces and help define these spaces within a neighborhood. If needed these manmade open spaces can be utilized as retention beds for stormwater runoff. The plan designates several major open spaces within each of the five precincts. In the east precinct a large quad defined by research buildings is the focal point for the research campus. This space is dimensionally based on McCorkle Place and its relationship to Franklin Street. In the north precinct a small linear space helps organize the research campus buildings, retail and parking decks. In the central precinct a crescent shaped space is the focal point of the town center It connects axially to a large recreational square, which connects to a linear park linking the precinct to the transit busway. In the hilltop precinct the buildings are organized around a linear park with a town square at the western end, that is defined by the transit stop, parking garage, and retail shops. In the wescem precinct several small scale pocket parks provide active and pas- sive areas for the residential inhabitants. Between the eastern and cen- ualprecincts the landfill area is also utilized as recreational playing fields. '~ .. _ F r,~ i ~ /' ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~r ~ ( . i t ~ ,i G :. l ., r „, ... f~ _ ~ : , ,~~, ~j ;, l~ 1 ~f ~ ~' ; { t ~ ~1 1~ `1 t ' ,~~ ~ { r i . y } . . ; 8 . . ~ ~ ' 4 ....... .... . ~"tl c , ;. .:.~ - i i ( ,. cF ' ~ y F. .. ,.. -. 1 ~ (^ ,' ~ rs _ __......._._.__..__ ... . C.. , ; -. ,: . . .. ,, ,. ,. ,,,. \ t ., i r.; ~ ~ ._ !H /~ i \ \ - . ,~ - ~:. ;, .. .~ ~ - .. .. i i, ;_ . ; .: '~ ".: ' ~ ~ ., t ~ f ~ ~ I ` .... ' .. . ...- ~ _ ~ .. , ' . ._ ` _ :. y .. 1 .~ t t 1 ~ i i .. .. .. ........ .. .... .. ..' "~ A. ~ .. a .. ... ..... ''.. .. .: A. .. .. ` r ~` 2000 Cancrpt Plan The purpose of the Physical Plan is to create an attractive and stimulating campus workplace for education and research. The proposed plan physically expresses, responds, and sup- ports the vision, program, and principles articulated by the Horace Williams Advisory Committee. Horace Williams is designed to become a collection of neigh- borhoods and districts serving approximately 25,000 workers, with research buildings, apartment dwellings, retail districts, civic and institutional buildings, and the potential for 3,000 residents. A series of public outdoor spaces are proposed that constitute a framework for development and will be the focal points for a variety of public activities. At the Horace Williams development, the Plan provides two essential features which are found in successful neighborhoods: an integrated mix of land uses and a well defined urban struc- ture. Both are vital components of place making. Ac Horace Williams, several uses that are essential to daily needs are to be conveniently located well within afive-minute walk zone. >. ;a. I[ ~. ~..~i E.~.4 r.*....i it 1.,~ ,. t..~ .. ,.. P ~aM ~ ~ Si ____ r ` 1 ~ ~ ~~~~"~~ , ~1~Y+a , u~ 55 5 ~, ~nekl~ f i4id,~~, .__, ~ Y 5, ~~ - ~ , za ; ~ Y iic+nt :e, t:: , ..... ... - - - `y ..._. .~.. t :;.~.~;. _..4 ..._ 5 ...._.... x ,'1 v 5 t V' . . f } ~ ql '. J`. ,v" V f ~ L .[-'~~~ ~an~~5 {3 . ,a~~ ;Si11t yt'}i`~5t2F55 F5' `~ ri ~ 5 65(5 5, t ~~ , 1 ~iy /l~:~ia~ L, ti ! p~ "!, ,: ~ 35` r el ,~ ,~, +~~, aja,;, ., 5 5 5 5 ~ r,~i _. „ : 1F 51 ~ F ~yti, ~ i"~~`; h ~'\~~: ` ~ e\~ ~' R }1 ~` to 5 F ~~ ~.. i ~ ` Y r'.: \~ S of ~ t 5.` ~~,.;~ ~ _~ r ,,6~t ~.. ~~y~„ I d l r `~~ ~, ~1 ~`~{~~ ~,~ *, ~ .i tip '~` a ,~ pp~}} s~ty~~ 1 ^Nq, ,„tom :: l 5 ~ ~'~ g ri t~ , ,f ~ N$: ~, ~ ~' gyp ,~ K n A6 ~" ' ~~ 5 ~ ~ ~ a+ l~ ~'. Ja~ p 4 t ~ 15 y {~~' ~ I`w~~i r c51~a~ q f 6Q~ ~. n~ ~ ~ ^. ~.'~~ ~ ~ ~i~ r`" ~ h ~~ ~ 55 a rr +, Streetscape Mang three-rtory InstitutionaUResearch Buildings h ~'S from Airport Road _~_=:~ ;.. u'S~ F~_ -_ _- a _-_ Aerial view of East Precinct -entry to Horace Williams EAST PRECINCT ' The Horace Williams property is most easily accessed from Airport Road, a major north-south route connecting I-40 to the university. An open space is proposed along Airport Road, which is similar in dimension to McCorkle Place on the main campus. The east precinct is designed as an integrated research cam- pus, consisting of seven large floor-plate buildings with approximately 635,000 gross square feet. Parking for 2,200 cars is provided in a structured deck, three surface parking lots, and on-street spaces. The proposed image portrays a group of distinguished institutional buildings around a campus green. The three-story research buildings are set back 250 feet, main- taining the tree lined corridor of Airport Road. At Horace Williams, the primary public identity of the place comes byway of the central green on Airport Road. This is the most con- spicuous feature of the layout and its most significant public gesture. The overall building pattern within the developement serves to define and support formed open spaces and the space of the street and hence acts as a kind of background texture. II ~'•~ l y 1 ~ ~_ ' . _. .. ..... , N u.IP.x. `111}, l%YJU I'f\c\Nhl%Il U.dLI ~ R ~a. _ -~ _~. -.. -. - __i .A ~.:...y >.._ .. 11 1, .~ ~- ., I q i I l ~ 4 ' r 1 .. @:. :6 ~::, ~`;:. [kt~:. ~~:u~. , ...,. R.. %'{fit t? ..' ~~{ 4 ~{~ i {~`tf Aid ~: ~j ,, P'1 ~~' 1'' f C 1 -~~ \~ `~ . "~ '1 ~ Y - -.,,., t~~ .i{~~it; ,~, ~ - ~ { ,~ ~ { t .w f'^ 1. ~~~ ~ 1f ~7~~ I z ~ . r 6 ~ ~l{~~ I ~ : { -. i _ ~ .~ :fin{ {. , rf a~~.~'1d~~ + ' e 1 . ~ , ~ _ `,~ '1':rPRe"_~@i~ >~.ea Kd~ ?fem. ~~ ,i11~C~-~~ t ~ ~r ~ s ~ ~, .,,..,r. ~ ~' ~~ ~ , , ~ ~- I ti~ ~,,; , , with retail at base and parking structure at rear The west precinct is designed to capitalize on the transit corri- dor that connects the Horace Williams property to the univer- sity, as well as the elementary, junior and high schools located to the immediate north of the precinct. The precinct is planned to be predominantly residential, given the proximity to the schools and transit corridor. ' As shown on the precinct plan, several small neighborhood pocket parks are proposed throughout the neighborhood. The parks maybe designed to serve different age groups of the residential population. .. .. T-^-^^~ _. .. k ark- ,,.~ ,w { ~~z y~ 4 ~ } ~I ~+ 4{SY ' ' - - ~ ~d '{{ ~. t wr ,a ` ~, ttf°, , Y 1~ r ~ {~ ~ ~~~( .1 ~~ 1t SS~ y ~ i~~M .~ f ~+J~ ~ r r rx! +~r~ 1 ~{ A ~ ~ 1' `~~` tt m ~ s~ ~ t ~ l~ ° ` , •1i ~+r`a; .;~ ~~ ~,.,, rite' ~r \r$ ~ ;^ I - .,.-F ' ~ ~ n I~. ~1x. i I ~ at { ~ 7~1+Ngw,y` ~ ~ ~-.,.us.-+-. ~" 'kihi v r .. Residential street with three-story buildings and vista to existing forest Seawell School Road is deflected away from the railroad tracks and dedicated busway to accommodate research buildings with retail along the base. The plan proposes chat the area west of the railroad track become a vibrant town center organized around a town green with services for residents, commuters, and the teacher and student population from the adjacent schools. The perspective sketches depict the low-scale buildings in the west precinct and in the entire Horace Williams development. Looking west to:... gals the but stop at the center of the transst comaor . .. .. .. ~ d i i~ ,. ,; axunanu uxt ~.i ~.. . .. ~ ,....~. I i !, i i {I 1 7~y ~~, l i I ~ ' .. .~. ~ t i ,_ , V __.___} :3 a ~P ~ ` ~ a. N'~ - G ~ Nd-~ Mme f u i~ . ry~~ ~ ^" ~~p~ ~. t ~ t Hilltop Pry , : Pict Pla n ,: >v = ----- ~`~~~~ ^+ .. Recreational open rpace withsn the (,entrat t-recsnct HILLTOP PRECINCT CENTRAL PRECINCT The hilltop precinct is organized around a linear open space that starts at a transit bus stop and extends out towards the open landscape. A 2,000 car parking deck is located adjacent to the transit stop, and sites for additional parking decks are provided between the corporate office buildings. A town square surrounded by retail buildings is planned at the transit stop. On the western edge of the. precinct provi- sion is made for multi-family residential buildings. Approximately three million gross square feet of building is proposed for this precinct supported by 7,700 parking spaces. The central precinct is envisioned as a traditional neighbor- hood development, with a grid network of streets and a town center at the heart of the property. The linear precinct is axially organized around three public spaces: a crescent shaped public space, a recreational park, and a linear park that begins at the transit bus stop along the dedicated bus lane. Research, retail, and residential buildings are organ- ized around these public spaces, and parking decks are buried within the blocks to minimize their impact on the pedestrian-friendly environment. Central Preciuc: i",r: The town center is centrally located and is positioned between the two east-west connector streets, and two north- south streets terminating in this precinct. Additionally, Seawell School Road, the train tracks, and the dedicated bus lane demarcate the western edge of the precinct. The crescent shaped space (shown in the drawing above) is the retail hub of the neighborhood, with a mix of activities occurring around the space. Two blocks to the west of this space is the seven acre recreational park, with softball fields and tennis courts surrounded by commercial and residential buildings. Commercial tenants and residents have easy access to these amenities. Students from the main campus could travel to the Horace Williams property by bus, and within a few minutes walk from the bus stop they can have access to the recreational park. The proposed plan allows for a mix of housing types to be provided within this precinct, all within comfortable walk- ing distance to recreation, workplace, shopping, and transit. TOWN CENTER EN~IRQNMENT ISSUES The environmental principles and goals embodied in the con- ceptplan For sustainable site design in terms of conserving land and water resources is as follows: MINIMUM DISTURBANCE Precinct Plan ` ~ ~~ ,, ~ ~ r ~ Y ti ~1. _' Nae"""~.y. } ~ . ~~~ . ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ a~ _ ~~ ~ ~- ~ ~i:.; F ! t ~~# ~~ d11 1 Ar„ r., ~ u t y 1 Y ~f j' ~ , ~._r.. ~~,,. ~. , ~~ ~ ~~rs~ : ~ w _ - ~ ~ ~ t` ;; View of the linear park within the North Precinct ~ . The north entrance to the Horace Williams property would be from the proposed extension of Weaver Dairy Road, which would bring southbound automobile traffic from I-40 into the research campus planned in the north precinct. The proposed plan organizes six large floor-plate research buildings and four parking structures around a contained lin- ear park space. The parking garages are masked with retail frontages on the ground level. The precinct includes 500,000 gross square Feet of research office space, 1,800 car spaces, and 12,000 square feet of retail. • Disturb as little of the proposed site as necessary. • Work with the natural contours; avoid excessive earthmoving. • Limit removal of existing natural vegetation. • Avoid placing structures in floodplains and sensitive areas. • Keep building and parking envelope as compact as possible. • Maintain riparian buffer along streams. MAINTAIN NATURAL HYDROLOGIC CYCLE • Maintain no net increase in Volume of Runoff. • Avoid unnecessary impervious surfaces -make pervious if possible. • Maintain recharge of rainfall to groundwater. • Provide retention beds to mitigate stormwater • Maintain infiltration for existing vegetation. • Use Best Management Practices such as Porous Pavement. • Collect rainwater for plant and garden watering. BENEFITS OF INFILTRATION • Maintain Hydrologic Balance • Remove Pollutants • Prevent increased downstream flows • Recharge Groundwater • Maintain Streamflows WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER • Use On-Site Water and Wastewater if feasible. • Use low-Flow fixtures. • Use alternatives to chemical disinfection (i.e., UV disinfection). • Reuse treated wastewater. • Use Low maintenance, low energy wastewater treatment systems. • Apply treated effluent to land surface to recharge groundwater. MAINTAIN WATER QUALITY • Use native species and limit future chemical site maintenance. • Limit artificial areas such as maintained lawns. • Avoid discharges of wastewater to streams and lakes. • Avoid earthwork which creates erosion and sediment problems. • Maintain native vegetation. • Use low maintenance, water quality Best Management Practices (BMP). . •. ; . ; ~. .. . ~, s 1 i i i . ~ 5 1 .. ~ tt 1 1 .~._. i 1 1 1 `.~ - \ ~' „ ~ . 1 1 L ~ ; l i ~ , ; t } 1 1 1 ' ~ t ,; i . 1 ~ i _ 1 1 _._._. _._._. 1 _ _.._ - _ __._ ._ _ ... ,'... ----- ~ ,{~,~! ~r y,, ,~, ,.. , . .. _ _._. _. ~ n LAIL ' .: !, ti ' rr I i ., , . re i. .... .,~ .. ..~ -. 1 , ; i i N , , .j ~ 1 ~ , ~ 1 ~ ~.. . a ~^r ~ " ~ - ~ ' . t $RC~OKES-I'O~TE r '• ` V'ILI.AGE ~ _ .. .~ .. .:. '1'I1~Q31=,R. , 1 e.l .. ~ i i . . - -: .r a . , ~., .. •:. .. ..~ s ~ ~ „~ -~ 1 ;; ,. - - ; 1 ~ ! , ~ 1 A ilJl ll~l~ 1 ` ~ i ! ~ 1 ~' ; school 1.. j '. ,. E©R.F.S'T 1 Dismct t '. -~ :, GL1/N ' I-TI:IGHTS 1 ~ ~ ;.. t ' .' _.... _ .._ n~~~~cn _ - ,,., 1 i. k~: t _ --__ ~ ~ ` 1-C'C OIL .:A::~..:~ i i ~ , . i i • i ~ i i i 7 ~ L1Z0`~,_. 1 l IOLLO\~ ` ~ _.. _. L.~astc .. - AiuiuCipal '; , £,. ;; Sites '..Yard ,, i ~' : , 1 1 1 1 , ,~ , t , ,. .: r ~ ` ~ y + , 1 1 .. .. ' 1 ~ _ >. , ' ,. .. A~ spent N r, : , - ~•- -s. , ~,. , . ...: ~- H ff .r . ;. .. r..~ , : 'P~7I(SiC3I ~ - 1~' ' . . . 1 ,. ~ ti .~ • [ ac~l~ties ~ ~ . ~ s HAVEN ~ . -_ ....... _._ _ _._._. -_. _...y_ -i .• ; - -. A 1 I _ _ -k Aw' _.... _.-. 1 .. .. r_ - -~z, f -r- may: ~ - i ~ -.- -• • ~1~: i + .1 1 ~ 1 :~1, y 1 . ~ ' - SI RI. O ,+ : r ~~'OOD - - ~cl~' BOI US ~GOl.orr~xlM . ' ,..:: BdIIN , Ei_I~I'~T ~~I~s ~ _:: HI:'IGII"fS ' ~ ., 1 :+: .. 1 FOREST -.:: ;; a 1 ~: ~ ~ ;;~. - .,~: .:. ~ ~ 1 ~' ~:. .''.. 1 r r _ i ly , SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS The conceptual plan embodies the principles of smart growth, a demographic shift, strong environmental ethics, increased fis- cal concerns, and more nuanced views of growth. New smart growth is more town-centered, is transit and pedes- trian oriented, and has a greater mix of housing, commercial and retail uses. It also preserves open space and many other environmental amenities. But there is no "one-size-fits-all" solution. Successful communities do tend to have one thing in common: a vision of where they want to go, what things they value in their community, and their plans for development reflect these values. The University and consultant team would like to engage the neighboring community in an open discussion focusing on the conceptual plan and its impact on Chapel Hill. It is important to the process that all concerned parries understand the intent and quality of this smart growth development. The inclusive process will positively inform the plan, add to the diversity and richness of region, and set a new standard for development in the State. 1518 h $n'cer N~~G' h1ezzaninc VPashing[on ))C. 2Q0(1$ PHi)NE: 202/G2S-U)l3 FAX: 2(12/623-1034 F-MAIL: inEOC"a,g-archicects.com L040 f-cull Srrczt Suirc k 100 Uahimore Maryland 21230 PHONE: 410!34;-3;00 FAX: 410/34?-351) WE3 SI1 E: tVWK'.aSg-3CC11l CeCCS.CO(77