May 12, 2015

Page 1

COUNCIL MINUTES

The City Council of the City of Raleigh met in a special session at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 12, 2015 in the City Council Chamber, Room 201 of the RaleighMunicipalBuilding, Avery C. Upchurch Government Complex, 222 W. Hargett Street, Raleigh, North Carolina, with the following present.

Mayor Nancy McFarlane, Presiding

Mayor Pro Tem John Odom

Councilor Mary-Ann Baldwin

Councilor Kay C. Crowder

Councilor Bonner Gaylord

Councilor Wayne K. Maiorano

Councilor Russ Stephenson

Councilor Eugene Weeks

REZONING Z-1-14 – FALLS OF NEUSE ROAD – HEARING – DENIED

Mayor McFarlane pointed out she understands the applicant plans to withdraw or ask that the Z-1-14 be denied. She stated there is no staff presentation. She opened the hearing and asked the applicant to describe his request.

Attorney Mack Paul, Morningstar Law Group, pointed out they filed a notice that they plan to withdraw the case; however, due to the fact that the public hearing had been advertised they could not withdraw the case as the Council has to have a hearing. He stated based on their intent to withdraw, he would not make any presentations and/or comments.

Mayor McFarlane explained the procedure for a zoning hearing indicating each side is allowed 8 minutes. She stated however some of the neighborhood groups had asked that the Council allow 12 minutes per side. She stated without objection the Council would follow that course.

Proponents

No one asked to be heard.

Opposition

David Cox, 1902 Stoney Trace Court, utilizing a PowerPoint, presented the following prepared statement.

Mayor McFarlane and Councilors, thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight about this rezoning.

I will discuss three topics. First, the history of Dunn and Falls of Neuse.

Second, the vision and expectations for the Falls of Neuse Corridor.

Lastly, I will convey our position regarding this rezoning.

The first time a shopping center was considered for Dunn and Falls of Neuse was in 1994. In April 1994 homeowners and developers together spoke at a Comprehensive Planning Committee meeting against the proposed shopping center Including Mr. Bill Mullins who is one of the applicants for today's rezoning request. The minutes show that Mr. Mullins was developing the Wood Spring subdivision at that time and had concerns about the shopping center.

Mr. Steve Kenney, son-in-law of Bill Mullins' partner Dan Austin, was also developing River Oaks at that time. The minutes show that Mr. Kenney also shared Mr. Mullins' concerns about the shopping center.

Then as now, Wood Spring would be adjacent to the proposed shopping center and the minutes show that Mr. Mullins "would ask the (Comprehensive Planning) Committee to deny the project."

Ultimately there were two outcomes in 1994. Mr. Mullins' property on Dunn Road was rezoned to Buffer Commercial that allows offices and small retail development to 3000 square feet per building, and prohibits fuel sales, drive-ins, and drive thrus. Concurrently, a plan was developed for the adjacent parcel to become a small village office park rather than retail. Thus, by 1995 clear expectations had been established for the development of Dunn and Falls of Neuse Roads that did not include a shopping center.

Fast forward to 2008. By 2008 virtually all of Wood Spring had been developed and sold. Whatever concerns Mr. Mullins had about retail next to his development were now absent. As a result Mr. Mullins filed to rezone his approximately 4 remaining acres to allow construction of 20,000 square feet of retail.

Area homeowners expressed their concerns to City Council and opposed the rezoning. Retail was not what Mr. Mullins had agreed to in 1994. The case eventually went to the Comprehensive Planning Committee that recommended denial for the following reasons:

  1. The retail was too large and out of scale with the neighborhoods.
  2. The retail would generate objectionable traffic, lighting, noise, hours of operation, odors, litter and garbage.
  3. The proposed retail failed to eliminate the opposition of the neighbors.

In short, 20,000 square feet of retail did not fit with the surrounding neighborhoods. It was then and is today an inappropriate location for retail and City Council denied the request.

So, let's talk about today. Since 2008 the Richland Creek watershed has been established to protect the Neuse River's water supply. The Annie Wilkerson Nature Preserve next to Falls Lake Park was created across the street. The North Carolina Mountain to Sea trail connects Annie Wilkerson to the brand new Neuse River Greenway. And at Falls Dam, Raleigh's largest park, the 586 acre Forest Ridge Park, is currently being developed to become one of Raleigh's premier destinations.

This brings us to our second topic- vision and expectations. With all of this residential and Park land, this site is the wrong place to maximize growth and development. This site is the wrong place for a strip mall or shopping center.

And we are not alone in this thinking. The Comprehensive Plan protects the Falls of Neuse corridor north of Durant Road in a special area plan where we find that the proposal violates 9 policies and actions.

Even the staff report for this rezoning case states, "In recent years, significant public investment has occurred in the area. Capitalizing on the area's unique natural environment, new parkland and outdoor recreation resources have been established, with more yet to follow such asForest Ridge and a whitewater rafting park. Such efforts reflect and manifest the aims of theFalls of Neuse Area Plan."

We couldn't agree more. A 58,000 square foot strip mall drawing up to 7000 vehicles a day does not belong in this place.

Finally, I would like to convey our position regarding the Falls of Neuse Corridor and this rezoning request. A year ago 522 of us attended the CAC meeting to vote in favor of current zoning and against the proposed zoning. To that end many of us have signed a petition that I now present.

We petition the City NOT TO REZONE OR REMAP these properties and to allow development under the current zoning. This petition contains 3733 signatures. Will those of you in the audience who agree with this petition please stand?

Thank you.

Bob Fry presented the following prepared statement:

Iam Bob Fry, Iresideat1409 CoolmoreDr.inRiverOaksIIandwasthefirstownertooccupyahomeinthisphase in 1994. ImovedmyfamilytoRaleightoleave the congestion of Los Angeles and wanted to raise our children in a safe and uncongested community. I have 30 years of real estate experience. I have owned my own real estatecompany in LA and Raleigh and have developed land forofficesand residential use since 1996.

We have contracted with Mr. Frank Price of Wetherill Engineering and Mr. Gary Faulkner formally with NC DOT. Together they have 80 years of professional experience and have reviewed for us the TIA provided by the Applicants' engineer.

The TIA clearly shows that the proposed shopping plaza will dramatically change the character of our neighborhoods by generating up to 5900 additional trips each weekday, 7200 additional trips each Saturday, and 5800 additional trips each Sunday. The TIA assumes a maximum allowance of 25% for internal capture. Even with -this maximum rate-of Internal capture, the shopping plaza will add twice the number of trips than possible under current zoning for weekdays, 12 times the number of trips on Saturdays, and 21times the number of trips on Sundays. THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE.

What we know for certain regarding access to the site is that there will be access on Dunn Road where the increase in traffic will degrade our morning commute to a level of Service "F". Mr. Price and Mr. Faulkner concur with City engineers that access on Falls of Neuse would violate standards and should not be allowed. Access on Whittington is at best uncertain. Regardless of the exact access, placing thousands of additional trips on our neighborhood streets seven days a week and transforming them into shopping plaza entrances IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE!

Ihaveheardfromsomethat"growthiscomingandwecan'tstop it" andthat"thepreviouseffortsonthissitespanover20-yearsandaren'trelevanttoday".

However, good planning doesn't grow old. The area is not a growth area or designated as a Mixed Use Community Center on Raleigh's Growth Framework Map. Dunn Road is one of two Neighborhood Mixed Use areas on the Future Land Use Map with the other located in Bedford. The Shoppes of Bedford withsmall retail, a day care center, and clock tower is the classic town center serving the immediate neighborhood and is the embodiment of Neighborhood Mixed Use.

Previous planners and City leaders understood that this site should be developed in character with our homes. The Comprehensive Plan sets policies that development should complement the character of the area. This proposed shopping plaza stands in stark contrast to the character of our neighborhoods. THIS PROPOSED SHOPPING PLAZA IS NOT GOOD PLANNING.

Zoning exists to protect adjacent property owners. Rezoning should-not harm adjacent owners. Yet, I have been told by three different MAI appraisers that we could expect our home values to easily drop 10% if this type of large retail is built. Families with children will not move to a community with traffic congestion and unsafe streets.

We want this site developed under the existing zoning for uses that enhance our community and create a good neighbor for all. The proposed zoning turns away from sound planning and will harm our neighborhoods.

Please continue to use wise and sound land planning decisions to keep our community safe and limit the amount of traffic and safety issues this rezoning will bring! VOTE NO ON THIS REZONING!

Michael O’Sullivan, 1704 Wescott Drive, presented the following prepared statement:

Wood Spring has 296 homes and families, and our community is located between the Falls River and Bedford subdivisions. Smaller neighborhoods like Autumn Hill, Kings Crest, Ravens Ridge and River Oaks east of Falls are also in the area bordered by Dunn Road and Raven Ridge Road.

You've heard from us in recent meetings and through emails that our neighborhoods already face cut through traffic, and the traffic study Indicates it will get far worse if rezoning is approved. We are very concerned that this will endanger residents, and the hundreds of children who live in Wood Spring and surrounding neighborhoods, including my 7-year-old granddaughter, who is in the audience tonight.

Most importantly from the Wood Spring perspective, there has been discussion of access points to this proposed shopping center, including possible site access via Whittington Drive. One of the parcels of land for this rezoning is residential property that extends from the Falls of Neuse and Whittington Dr. intersection east down Whittington.

You should know that this strip of land is part of a lot that is subject to restrictive covenants for Wood Spring. The presence of an access point across that strip of land would violate the restrictive covenants for Wood Spring. The covenants specifically state that lots shall be used for residential purposes only, and that no business activities of any kind shall be conducted on the property. In short, the access is not permitted under the Wood Spring restrictive covenants, and the Association will enforce the covenants that protect Wood Spring residents.

You've heard from our entire community for more than a year. We have been clear from the outset. We support appropriate development under current zoning. We call on you to do the right thing: Protect neighborhoods, as the city commits.

We want to work with the landowners, city staff and all appropriate stakeholders to identify appropriate development opportunities that respect Raleigh's promises to neighborhoods. Let's reach a positive outcome here. That starts with your vote tonight to deny this rezoning. We need and expect your support, tonight and in the future.

Thank you.

Vicki Crenshaw, 1604 Elegance Drive, Bedford Homeowner but not on behalf of the Bedford HOA Board presented the following prepared statement:

My husband and I, along with a large contingent of families here this evening, are impacted by this proposed rezoning far more seriously than other homeowners in the Bedford community because of our close proximity to this site. We have no way to leave or return to our homes except via DUNN ROAD. Even today, it can take minutes to exit Elegance Drive onto Dunn Road. Adding 7,000 vehicles a day to our neighborhood streets will make an already challenging situation that much worse for the whole community, and particularly dangerous for those of us whose residential streets border Dunn Road. But I am not just concerned for us. I can only speak for my immediate area of Bedford, but I am concerned for every homeowner in every community represented here this evening. Z-1-14 threatens our quality of life, the investment in our homes and our safety --- not what several thousand citizens expected when they invested in these communities.

As concerning and frustrating as this case has been for so long now, you have worked patiently with the citizens. I thank you for listening to us. But let's remember that what you've heard citizens say through the petition, our CAC vote and here tonight is "WE SUPORT DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING." Development that includes small retail, shops, restaurants, and light office -development that neighborhoods can embrace because it SERVES, not HARMS the surrounding neighborhoods. The kind of development that is a winning combination for neighborhoods and developers.

We also believe you have worked patiently with the applicant. You've asked for a neighborhood-appropriate development and you've seen several plans. But what you have before you in Z-1-14 is still not neighborhood-appropriate development. A destination shopping center like this is out of scale, harmful and inappropriate for aneighborhood.

Unfortunately, despite your best and honest efforts, this case has turned into the most contested battle between a single developer and citizens that Raleigh has ever witnessed. This plan is for a destination shopping center. Tonight I stand here with my neighbors, and we are trying to protect our community. Please stand with us and say NO to rezoning this property.

Thank you.

No one else asked to be heard thus the hearing was closed.

Mr. Stephenson moved that the Council find that A-1-14 is not reasonable and in the public interest for a number of reasons. It is incompatible with the comprehensive plan in a number of policies principally the FLUM which shows this as a neighborhood mixed use designation which calls for a much smaller scale development, incompatible with the capacity of the street system in the area, incompatible with the long range plan for land in the urban overlay protection district which is to be used in the future for one of our water supplies. For those reasons, Mr. Stephenson stated he would move to deny the case. The motion was seconded by Mr. Maiorano and put to a vote which passed unanimously. The Mayor ruled moved the motion passed on an 8-0 vote.

Adjournment. There being no further business, Mayor McFarlane moved the meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.

Gail G. Smith

City Clerk

Jt/SCC05-12-15