STS Rezoning Petition 2009-039 Public Meeting
Belmont Regional Center
December 15, 2009
Question: Is the public deck going to be on a first-come, first-serve basis-especially during
the morning?
Answer (CATS): It is not a public deck. This is employee and visitor parking for this site and it
is controlled. The agreement we are looking at with Parks and Recreation would be for the afterhours use. Our facility will be most active during the day. In the evening hours when it is
underutilized, we want to be able to open it up to allow citizens going to the Park and Recreation
site to be able to use it. We are looking at time restrictions on that and we are open to your
comments and/or concerns regarding that issue.
Question: Is it (the parking) open to the McGill Rose Garden all during the day?
Answer (CATS): We currently work with the McGill Rose Garden to help them with their
parking needs on weekends and special events such as Mother’s Day.
Question: Is there a master plan to look at? Are there more detailed renderings? Do you
have a rendering showing elevation?
Answer (CATS): The master plan calls for the renovation of the existing facility and the
construction of a new STS facility on the Alexander Street Parcel. The master plan layout, the
revised rezoning drawings and elevations are posted on the web.
Question: Is Art-in-Transit applied to the renovation?
Answer (CATS): Yes it is.
Question: Does the building come into the existing greenway?
Answer (CATS): It does not. The existing greenway comes only to the very edge of the City
property and then backs off.
Question: Are you doing anything about the edge treatment on the parking area on
Caldwell Street. The chain-link fence looks horrible.
Answer (CATS): We heard your concerns about the chain link fence in our previous meetings
and have committed to replacing them with a “wrought iron look” aluminum fence. A shop
drawing and photo of a similar fence is posted on the website.
Question: Is the square footage of the building able to build up on the current lot? Seems
like the footprint of the proposed structure looks like it would fit inside the current parking
lot.
Answer (CATS): We cannot build upon the existing lot while maintaining our operation.
Additionally, we would not be able to provide the office space and maintenance functions
needed for STS as proposed in the rezoning that utilizes the Alexander Street parcel.
Question: Why can’t you build on your current site on Spratt Street?
Answer (CATS): This is no room for further expansion at this location. STS is one tenant in a
building that is also occupied by CDOT, Building Services and others. We have expanded
beyond the capability of that facility and cannot expand further at this location.
Question: There are a lot of industrial sites in the Belmont area. At what point will the
City say we should preserve this area like South End? We don’t even have sidewalks. I
don’t see the City as a whole creating sustainability in the Belmont area.
Answer (Planning): We actually are reducing the usage at the City yards. We have relocated the
CDOT maintenance and we relocated Fire Logistics. There was a very detailed look at if we
relocated these uses we would spend more taxpayer dollars. Unfortunately this is an urban
environment. We spent a tremendous amount of money in this community on infrastructure
improvements. What we heard from a lot of people when we were talking about public
improvements is that they actually wanted some of those retaining walls because they wanted
more privacy because these parcels are so small.
There is perception that we always can go vertical and we can solve the problem; or we can
create sidewalks that never have to have a retaining wall. But there are some real engineering
reasons why we have to sometimes build retaining walls such as protecting land values,
protecting the erosion of that land onto the sidewalk and onto the street.
Question: How did you get the figure of 15 acres if you built elsewhere if it is hypothetical?
Answer (CATS): The estimate is based upon meeting the same Design Criteria that are
achieved at the Alexander Street site and by use of the adjacent shared resources. These are
listed as project elements in the Cost Comparison handout. It’s not an evaluation of any
particular site; but, it is our attempt to be able to look at and quantify the difference in capital and
operating costs for comparison purposes.
Question: Did you do any math if the rezoning quells future development in the area? I
think a larger business facility does not bring in growth.
Answer (CATS): No we didn’t. But the existing facility is remaining here. We felt that the
design of this facility helps transition the screening from the larger existing bus maintenance
facility down to the park and then to the residential across the street.
Question: Who makes the decisions on how much recreation space there should be? I am
referencing the Belmont Plan and the desire to have recreational space.
Answer (Planning, Debra Campbell): Ultimately it is City-owned land. City Council makes all
the decisions on how land is used, how much is used, for what particular usage and by which
department. There was not a detailed analysis in the Belmont Plan that specifically allocated a
certain amount of acreage and a certain amount of square footage to open space and recreation.
What we did in the Belmont Plan is try to capitalize on what we thought were opportunities to
expand green space, to expand recreation opportunities in the Belmont area. This particular
proposal we thought because there was a huge connection with the greenway that was proposed
by Park and Recreation and we had the Alexander Street Center at the time that was providing
social services, that a reuse of that for recreation opportunities would be a good concept.
We also have a need to expand Special Transportation Services to have additional parking,
operating and maintenance services. As you know I also participated in a lot of those
discussions and I think we all tried extremely hard to come up with a win-win. We talked about
ball fields on the roof of the parking deck. We went through lots of analysis. But there is a
reality and a cost. Our elected officials, including the County, have a responsibility to try to
manage our resources as best they can. And when we costed out several of these analyses, I
remember when we were trying to come up with parking opportunities, and I was working hard
on the regulatory side on some revision of parking standards. So we really, really did try.
What this is about is trying to find a balance between the need for two public facilities-parks and
open space and transit. And in my mind both of those are sustainable initiatives. We need the
opportunity to transport people with special needs. We need the opportunity to maintain the
budget. And we are looking at an existing site that meets their operational objectives.
The decision of how and who can use the land has been made by Council through what we call a
Mandatory Referral Process. The process started when the community made requests and we all
had competing requests for who’s going to use this land. We went through a review and tried as
best we could, again to come up with two public uses being able to locate within this area. We
will be coexisting. We will have open space. There will be some fields in that space.
Question: What other sites were considered besides the Belmont site? What about the
airport or others?
Answer (CATS): This started as a redevelopment and renovation of the existing facilities. We
knew we needed to have an STS facility and we began looking at relocating STS onto the
existing site. That led us to the realization we could not accommodate our needs within the
existing footprint. Then we looked at this adjacent piece of property because we have the benefit
of all the joint uses. We share a lot of the existing facility which means we have a small
footprint versus going somewhere else and buying additional land. Plus it fit our operational
needs due to its central location.
Question: What are the changes in the redesign? Was there a cost difference from the
original to the revised plan?
Answer (CATS): This is basically just flipping the building and parking layout. We took the
lessons learned from our South Tryon Bus Facility and what we heard at our previous meetings
and we flipped the design to face the office portion of the building toward the park for a more
pleasing look and to screen the remainder of the facility.
There might be some slight cost changes in the cost of the façade. However, we believe that the
estimate provides us with an accurate order of magnitude cost for comparison purposes.
Question: Regarding the ARRA funding, can you give us an update on the deadline for
this funding?
Answer (CATS): This project does not contain any ARRA funding. The ARRA funding is for
the Davidson Bus Facility renovation which is not part of this rezoning.
Question: What types of air quality or environmental impact studies have been done?
How will it impact air quality for residents nearby?
Answer (CATS): There are no air quality impacts for nearby residents. We have posted the
environmental document for the adjacent renovation for your information.
Question: Are you adding more buses?
Answer (CATS): Yes and no. At its peak before the construction of a second bus facility the
Davidson Bus Facility operated and maintained between 250-300 buses. The renovation project
that is underway will restore the original design capacity to maintain and operate 200 fixed route
buses. The rezoning will accommodate a permanent home to STS and will provide capacity for
up to 185 of the smaller STS buses and vans.
Question: How many STS buses will be there?
Answer (CATS): The current STS fleet has 85 buses. The design will accommodate up to 185
STS buses and vans.
Question: When will screening and landscaping plans be available?
Answer (CATS): We will do that in Final Design. We will come back and engage the
neighborhood as we develop the final design.
Question: When is the rezoning decision?
Answer (CATS): This zoning petition will go before the Zoning Committee on January 27, 2010
and it will then go before City Council on February 15, 2010.
Question: When would construction end?
Answer (CATS): Construction is anticipated to take 18-24 months. The construction start is not
yet determined and would depend upon: rezoning approval, securing federal/local funding, final
design and fleet growth. We believe we are probably 3-5 years away from the start of
construction.
Question: Who is on the zoning committee?
Answer (Planning): The Zoning Committee members are listed on www.charmeck.org under
Planning.
Question: The rendering looks like speculative office space. What about making the
building look more like it fits into the community?
Answer (CATS): This is a typical office building design. Once the rezoning is approved and
funding is identified CATS will engage the public on the final design of the facility.
Question: Will the building be LEED certified?
Answer (CATS): We will follow the City’s adopted Sustainable Facilities Policy. The City’s
sustainability policies are focused on the entire green aspect versus going after LEED
certification specifically. They are tied into sustainable items that fit within existing City
priorities. Any decision to seek LEED Certification will be made in coordination with the City’s
Sustainable Facilities Oversight Team during the final design.
Question: The original design proposed was due to the layout of the parking deck with an
entrance on the side. The layout was proposed was "the only viable solution" when looking
at expense. With the current change, the parking lot has been flipped to the higher side of
the hill. What changes were made when the other was the only viable solution?
Answer (CATS): CATS has continued to state that the use of the Alexander Street Parcel is
necessary to meet our STS needs for the long term. The change of the layout on the site can be
accommodated by a slight change in the elevation of the building.
Question: On the current design, the open area below the CATS facility states "Possible
Location of Water Quality Measures". What water quality are you preparing to have
running from our CATS facility towards Sugar Creek and our Park?
Answer (CATS): This area is needed to provide meet the post construction control ordinance.
Its purpose is to detain storm water (rain) runoff and to treat it before it flows into Little Sugar
Creek. This is a required standard and is a normal requirement of new construction in the City of
Charlotte.
Question: Since CATS business offices and parking will be a new "Community Facility",
what access will the community have to access the parking deck and use the business
facilities?
Answer (CATS): The STS Facility will not serve as a Community Facility and we have not
indicated that it would. The STS Facility will accommodate the staff and vehicles needed to
operate the provide paratransit service to the public within the city and county.
Question: How many spaces will be available for the public parking in the proposed deck
during work days, nights and weekends?
Answer (CATS): We are working with Mecklenburg County Park and Recreation on an
agreement to use up to 25 spaces on nights and weekends. These spaces will be in the visitor
parking in the new deck that will be constructed under the existing N. Davidson project across
the street from the Alexander Street parcel.
Question: How do you reward CATS employees for taking public transportation instead of
parking their cars at the CATS facility?
Answer (CATS): CATS encourages our employees to use public transportation. Since our
drivers must come to the facility before bus service begins and leave after service ceases for the
day; parking is necessary at this facility. We have examined the work flow and shift demand at
the facility to minimize the number of spaces constructed.
Question: Can you describe the thought process of how the current plans of the CATS
increased size of their facilities is incorporating the history of the Alexander Street School
into its design and use of the land? Should we not have the history incorporated into the
plans before we build?
Answer (CATS): The appropriate time to incorporate this into the facility is during final design.
A decision on the rezoning is necessary before final design can be started.