|
Planners finally table
request for office park
After a long and contentious debate
Thursday night, the Wake Forest Planning Board agreed to continue discussion of
a seven-building office park along the N.C. 98 bypass to February.
Board members questioned whether the
stream at the back (south) of the property is perennial or intermittent,
whether the stream buffers were correctly drawn and why the buffers had not
been certified by the state Division of Water Quality.. A perennial stream
would require wider buffers.
The park is planned for the southeast
corner of the bypass and the extension of Siena Drive, and planner Ann Ayers
said a Walgreen’s drug store is proposed just to the east of the site. There
would be seven buildings on eight acres with 12,000 square feet for medical
offices, 45,000 square feet for general offices. Siena Crossing, a Jim Adams
company, owns the land, and Southpointe Builders of Raleigh asked for approval
of the plan. The conditional use office and institution zoning was done in
1999.
The developers of this park and the
neighboring park also on Thursday’s agenda have agreed to work together to move
the required greenway trail along the bypass to the back of each property,
Ayers said.
Planning board member Ward Marotti
questioned the status of the stream that feeds a pond behind the adjacent
property, and Ayers said the stream is intermittent. Southpointe wants to use
the high-density option in the Richland Creek basin, which calls for more
buffering along streams. The buffers would increase if the stream is perennial.
Marotti wanted to know if the state
Division of Water Quality has inspected the stream and determined if it is
indeed intermittent, not perennial, and the answer was that that had not been
done. There was also discussion about the location of the spring that feeds the
stream.
Marotti said the buffers on the maps
provided are drawn from the centerline of the stream, not from the stream bank
as required and also asked about the construction setback
Mayor Vivian Jones asked whether the
plan meets the landscape ordinance, saying she did not see any trees or
plantings on the maps provided. “The landscape plan is provided as part of the
construction plan” which comes later in the process, Ayers said.
Marotti asked about the canopy trees
in the plan and, after several exchanges, Ayers said the canopy trees will be
planted in the 24 planting islands for the parking lots. “I know where each
tree is going to be.”
Commissioner Margaret Stinnett asked
about the Siena Drive connection to the bypass. Planning Director Chip Russell
said there would probably not ever be a traffic signal at the intersection,
which is now a T. The state Department of Transportation will allow for right
and left turns now but may make it a right-in, right-out intersection later.
Commissioner Peter Thibodeau asked
what the traffic impact analysis showed, and Ayers said, “Neither development triggered
a study.”
Thibodeau responded by asking if the
town does not have a responsibility to look ahead. “That’s fifty-seven thousand
square feet of office space plus residential. It really concerns me we’re just
throwing up our hands because it doesn’t meet the threshold.”
The town requires a traffic study to
determine what kinds of improvements are needed, Ayers said.
No, Thibodeau responded, “You do a TIA
to see if improvements are necessary.”
Ayers said the town may want to change
the standard for traffic studies.
Commissioner Frank Drake said he would
like to see a landscape plan with the master plan every time.
Planning board member Keith Robbins
had several questions about the greenway and why it was not shown at the rear
of the lot. The new placement has not been authorized, Ayers said, but the
request to move it there has been sent to the open space and greenway advisory
committee.
“It looks like the buffers have been
identified but not yet approved” by DWQ, Robbins said, and Russell told him the
buffer lines will have to be set before the construction plan is approved and
that the developers had professionals do the plan.
“We’re taking this on faith,” Robbins
said. “I’m uncomfortable with that.”
Marotti again said that the buffers
were drawn from the center of the stream, not the top of the bank.
Planning board chairman Bob Hill asked
Ayers what exactly the board was being asked to vote on.
She said the way in which towns and
cities handle plan approvals vary. “Some communities decide the rules and the
staff does the review. You are approving the general character of the
development plan. Any time we feel there is a significant change, we bring that
back to you.”
Ayers also said some developers submit
their full construction plan, including landscaping. That is more expensive,
she said, but “Quite frequently they will take the risk of fully engineering
plans before they have approval” because it can save them four to eight weeks
in the review process.
Ayers agreed the plans would have to
substantially change if DWQ finds the stream to be perennial. It would increase
the amount of stream buffer under the high density rules.
Russell said the decision to return
plans to the planning board when changes are made is on “a case by case basis.”
Marotti said that is “pretty much a qualitative evaluation,” and Russell said,
“It all depends on that change.”
Hill called the questions being raised
“very relevant,” and said, “If the governing body wants to change the direction
of the staff, that needs to come from the town board.”
The questions then rotated back to the
landscaping and the trees. Ayers said they are using the replacement standard
that was used for the Patterson Hall project on the seminary campus, a standard
that is also in the draft landscape ordinance.
Finally, Russell Gay with Southpointe
was asked to speak. “Had we known a landscape plan was required, we would have
provided it. We’re going to exceed your requirements.”
Thibodeau asked why they placed the
parking lots between the buildings and the bypass.
“Am I going to see a river of asphalt
as I drive down the bypass?” he asked.
Joel Moulin, the landscape architect
for the project, said no, maybe only a bit on the northeast corner. “The
ninety-eight bypass is lower than the parking lot. You won’t see very much of
the parking lot because of the cut slopes.”
Another wrangle ensued between Marotti
and Moulin about when the topographic survey was done, and Marotti said he
challenged “the accuracy of what’s being presented and its relevance.”
Jones asked, “Is this drawing
appropriate based on the policies this town has?” and Ayers answered, “This is
the level of information we typically have.”
Moulin tried to answer questions about
the width of the stream.
Marotti said the real question was
“the hydrological permanence of the stream,” whether it runs all the time or
just part of the time. And he pointed out: “It was evaluated on Oct. 17 in the
midst of the worst drought in this state.”
Russell suggested the planning board
wait until DWQ has made a determination. “It is a significant issue. If it ends
up being a perennial stream, then that makes a big difference and it comes back
to you.”
The board voted unanimously for Steve
Stoller’s motion to continue the review in February.
|
