CHAPEL HILL - Charterwood, the apartment, office, and retail complex proposed for northern Chapel Hill, will live to see another Town Hall meeting.

The Town Council voted 5-4 Tuesday night, after nearly three hours of discussion, to rezone 1641 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. for the project, which has been traveling through the town’s review process for five years.

But town rules require a second reading, or second vote, on a rezoning request if it does not get six of the council’s nine votes on the first reading.

The council will re-vote in September. If the votes fall the same way, the rezoning will pass and the council will then vote on a special use permit for the project.

Council members Matt Czajkowski, Laurin Easthom, Lee Storrow and Mayor Pro Tem Ed Harrison opposed the rezoning. Storrow and Easthom disagreed with how developer Bill Christian re-drew the lot lines on the site to bring Charterwood back after a different rezoning request failed in January. Czajkowski and Harrison both said that the project still had too many unanswered questions.

“I think we may have done better than put lipstick on a pig ... it’s a better project than that, unless you really like pigs,” Harrison said. "[But] it’s something that could have been a lot better.”

Charterwood changes

Charterwood would now have no more than 134 apartments, reduced from 154, and retail shops and office space in six buildings on Martin Luther King Boulevard south of Weaver Dairy Road.

The complex would include a renovated and preserved Altemueller farm house, now vacant on the property. Christian would make a $233,000 payment-in-lieu to the town for affordable housing elsewhere; his project would include none.

The council first voted Tuesday on a motion to deny the rezoning. It failed 4-5, with Czajkowski, Easthom, Storrow and Harrison in favor. The council then voted to approve the zoning, 5-4.

Before voting, the council asked Lacy Reaves, Christian’s attorney, about inconsistencies in the permit application, including building height, parking, storm water management, and assurances that Charterwood’s construction would not send dirt downhill.

Christian and his team agreed to make changes, but Harrison and Czajkowski were not satisfied.

“There may be time pressures on the applicant and they may be very severe and real, but that is not a reason for us to rush through this process with more loose ends than I’ve certainly seen since I’ve been on the council,” Czajkowski said.

‘Rigorous process’

Some council members lamented Charterwood’s recurring appearance at meetings and hearings since 2007. Others said the review process has been effective in making the project better.

Charterwood has been reduced by 30 percent of its original size and density, more trees have been protected, the tree buffer between the neighborhood was widened and parking was reduced.

“It has been [a] rigorous, rough process. I don’t know how it can change,” said council member Jim Ward.

Council member Easthom also defended the review process.

Most developments are approved; of the 30 development proposals, or Special Use Permits, the council has considered, it has rejected only two, she said.

“What are we giving up by not approving this SUP? Nothing,” she said. “We are getting the ability to come up with a better gateway project that benefits the whole town and respects the neighbors ... we don’t owe the developer the approval of a subpar project. The town deserves better.”

Setting a precedent

Neighbors from the adjacent Northwoods V say the town is violating its own rules by voting on Charterwood so soon after the last rezoning failed.

After his initial rezoning request was rejected last year, Christian submitted a new rezoning request and permit application to build Charterwood with the new lines. Redrawing the property lines, called a recombination, is legal and common, the town planning department has said.

Neighbors filed a successful protest petition against Christian’s first rezoning request, but failed to get enough signatures on another petition against his second request.

Northwoods V residents and council members Easthom and Storrow said approving Charterwood would allow developers to limit the power of neighborhoods by re-drawing projects’ lot lines.

“I’m very concerned about the future of the [neighbors] ability to utilize the protest petition,” Storrow said. “[Charterwood] is going to set a precedent about how the developers think about the neighbor petition protest and the ability to circumvent the process.”

Pease disagreed.

“All the parties in this game played by legal rules,” he said. “Whether you liked it or not is irrelevant.”