There is broad community consensus that the new buildings in the Blue Hill District are unattractive, too tall and too big for Chapel Hill. This is the election issue that people cared about most. In making a decision about the form of these buildings, the Council’s job is to look at what our community wants, in addition to all aspects, not just the economic viability featured in the staff presentation.
When the Town Council met January 8th in the first meeting of 2020, new members Tai Hunyh and Amy Ryan joined the discussion of a draft proposal to recommend changes to the footprint buildings now allowed under the Form Based Code. This topic covered in this Herald article.
CHALT believes that in fact a reduction in the allowable heights and size of buildings in the current code will best support the Council’s goals of addressing climate change and stormwater management. Here is why:
- Diminished footprint. While many other aspects of the Code are imperfect, reducing the footprint is a good first step. We suggest you ask staff to provide 3-D images illustrating the differences among the options proposed, and compare them to existing buildings just built under the current code. A reduced footprint increases stormwater infiltration, green space and trees.
- Further limit height. The staff needs to provide height in the menu of options. Surely this is very much related to overall massing. Four story buildings with solar are carbon neutral if solar is required. Higher buildings can’t reach that standard.
- Response to Townhouse proposal. Undeniably a need for townhouses is a step in the right direction for more affordable housing but adding it does not begin to address major problems of Form Based Code. The Town must find a way to ensure small affordable homes is this proposal is enacted. We don’t support eliminating the hard fought 10% commercial requirement because there is a disproportionate number of residences in the FBC Blue Hill district which was intended to be largely commercial.
- Increase spacing. Spacing between buildings should be based on the footprint size of the buildings. For example, suppose two adjacent buildings are 300’x180’. If they are placed with long sides parallel, then their separation should be 180’. This will allow for plenty of green space at the site.
- Stormwater management. Reduced footprint will allow for improved stormwater management as well as reduced flooding.
- Require community benefits. These calculations are interesting but without hard requirements they are useless. 6% public space is inadequate. We want to see real community benefits in future text language that include public meeting spaces such as the one at Weaver Street Market in Carrboro. We don’t understand the consultant’s point that buy the value of suppling residential
- Reduced parking to incentivize transit. Advisable for the first story to provide parking for a 4 story building equaling a total of 5 stories. Consider 2 stories of parking to get a height bonus for 6 or 7 stories. Developers can allot a maximum of one parking space per unit but would be able to sell/rent a 2nd space to apartment residents for a cost/monthly fee.
- Design elements. Add upper story set backs to any building with more than 4/5 stories. Ask urban designer to weigh into design changes to code. Don’t you need his input now?
We recommend the Town Council approve the building footprint changes as step one in the continuing quest to approve the FBC.
The public hearing will stay open until the second public hearing when the Town Council plans to vote on the proposed changes. After that we would like to see the Council initiate another series of changes including environmental mitigation.
Read more about more things we will advocate to improve the Form Based Code.