Growth in Chapel Hill May Pause

The Town Council held a work session in response to three petitions that residents and local officials presented to the town during May and June 2001. All three petitions specifically requested that the council enact a moratorium on development in northeast Chapel Hill.

Council members expressed concerns about further expansion because the town's development ordinance is still incomplete and in the process of revision.

Action on the ordinance was postponed at the Jan. 14 Town Council meeting. The ordinance is now being revised and will be reviewed by the council in May. The ordinance will not be completed until summer or early fall.

Council member Bill Strom said drafting the development ordinance has been a two-year process involving the whole community.

Strom said he does not think the council should approve any further development in Chapel Hill before an ordinance is implemented.

"I have a problem proceeding on that basis," he said. "Rather than being put in a position that we are turning applications down, we will have reached a consensus and can approve development (if we wait for an ordinance)."

Town Manager Cal Horton said the purpose for the work session was to consider the council's wishes regarding consideration of development of the northeast section of Chapel Hill.

The pending applications for business development in the northeast area are for the Europa Office Building, the Marriott Residence Inn, and a mixed-use facility called Jefferson Commons.

There is also an expected application for the development of a residential neighborhood called Notting Hill II.

At the work session, council members learned that all necessary public departments, except for transportation, can accommodate additional development with the existing or planned capacity.

But without an ordinance officially in place to regulate development, some council members expressed concern about the numerous applications and upcoming proposals for development in northeast Chapel Hill.

Council member Jim Ward said a moratorium might be needed only until the development ordinance is completed.

"We are so close to what is perceived as a better tool," Ward said. "While it causes a momentary delay in some activities, in the long run, it is a short period of time."

Other council members expressed concern about a moratorium. Council member Pat Evans said implementing a moratorium might not be the best decision for Chapel Hill.

"We are on shaky ground if we delay developments because infrastructure isn't in place" Evans said. "There is a downside to holding up development."

The council will review the issue at its meeting next week. At that meeting the council plans to schedule a public hearing to allow for resident input.

The City Editor can be reached at citydesk@unc.edu.