10-REZ-05 Weston PDD Amendment

Town of Cary , North Carolina
Rezoning Staff Report for the Town Council
10-REZ-05 Weston PDD Amendment
February 24, 2010

REQUEST

To amend the Town of Cary Official Zoning Map by amending a 13.79-acre portion of the existing Weston Planned Development District (PDD) to allow up to 248 multi-family residential dwelling units on a site currently designated for Office use.

PDD Document
Land Use Plan
Circulation Plan
Open Space Plan

The Comprehensive Plan Amendment request, 10-CPA-06, associated with this case was approved on September 16, 2010.

NOTE: The purpose of the rezoning is to determine whether or not the land uses and densities allowed in the proposed zoning district are appropriate for the site. Technical design standards of the Land Development Ordinance (LDO) are addressed during review of the site or subdivision plan and can be found at http://www.amlegal.com/library/nc/cary.shtml.

SUBJECT PARCELS

Property Owner(s)	County Parcel Number(s) (10-digit)	Real Estate ID(s)	Deeded Acreage
Highwoods Realty Ltd Partnership	0765487268	0178569	13.79±
Total Area			13.79±

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Applicant	Thomas Hill, Highwoods Realty 3100 Smoketree Court, #600 Raleigh, NC 27604 919-875-6670
Agent	Chuck Smith Withers & Ravenel, Inc. 111 MacKenan Drive Cary, NC 27511 919-469-3340
General Location	North of Weston Parkway; West of Old Reedy Creek Road and Winstead Drive
Schedule	Town Council Public Hearing July 15, 2010	Planning and Zoning Board December 20, 2010	Town Council February 24, 2011
Land Use Plan Designation	High Density Residential (HDR)
Existing Zoning District(s)	Planned Development District (PDD) Major, with Office and Institutional uses
Proposed Zoning District(s)	Planned Development District (PDD) Major, amended to allow up to 248 residential multi-family dwelling units as an alternate use to General Commercial.
Town Limits	Yes
Valid Protest Petition	None
Staff Contact	Debra Grannan, Senior Planner Debra.grannan@townofcary.org (919) 460-4980

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

Streams: Based on Cary’s GIS files, the subject property is impacted by stream buffers along the northern and western edges. This has been indicated on the Open Space Plan included in the PDD document submitted by the applicant. Exact field determination of buffers will be required at the time of site plan review.

Topography: Based on Cary’s GIS files, the subject property is impacted by significant topography changes. There is a drop of between 30 and 100 feet between the center of the property and the area along Old Reedy Creek Road. There is also an elevation decrease of between 70 to 100 feet between the center of the property and the western edge of the subject property. (The drop in grade increases on the northern part of the subject property in both cases.)

Existing Land Use: Vacant

Surrounding Land Uses:

North and West: Open Space
South: Weston Lakeside Apartments (Part of Weston PDD)
East: North Cary Water Reclamation Plant (Opposite side of Old Reedy Creek Road)

CONSISTENCY WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE

Density and Dimensional Standards

	Existing PDD Land Use Office Use	Land Use Proposed By Applicant PDD Amendment	Typical LDO Standard for Residential Multi-Family (RMF)
Max. Gross Density (Dwelling Units/Acre)	N/A	18	12 (If within a PDD, density limits are set by the approved PDD.)
Minimum Lot Width (Feet)	20	Not Specified	20
Min. Front Yard Setback	The existing PDD provided a 50-foot landscape buffer on the subject property along Old Reedy Creek Road. Non-residential buildings generally must be setback from roadways a minimum of 30 feet. If parking is located between the building and the street, the setback must be a minimum of 50 feet. (LDO 6.3.2)	The proposed PDD Amendment proposes a 30-foot minimum, 50-foot average streetscape along Old Reedy Creek Road. Regarding internal streets: The PDD document indicates no minimum front setback to sidewalk along internal travelways.	20 feet combined between front and rear. A 10-foot building setback is required from landscape buffers.
Min. Side Yard Setback	Not specified	Minimum 16 feet between building groupings (Side to side) Minimum building separation rear to rear and side to rear: 40 feet	Minimum 16 feet between building groupings
Min. Rear Yard Setback	Not Specified	Minimum rear setback off buffer 10 feet. The document also states: No building or parking setbacks shall be required against buffers, portions of buffers, streetscapes and any type of open space unless existing vegetation remains. There shall be no interior buffers or setbacks between separate buildings even if under separate ownership.	The width of the roadway or front and rear setbacks combined shall equal at least 20 feet and any individual rear setback shall be at least three feet.
Maximum Building Height (Feet)	35	No reductions to LDO standards are proposed.	35

Open Space
According to Chapter 4 of the LDO, Planned Development Districts that contain 201 acres or more are required to provide a minimum of 15% open space. The Ordinance further states that portions of planned developments that are between 10 and 49 acres in area are required to provide a minimum of 5% of the land area for Open Space. The proposed PDD Amendment proposes no changes to the existing open space allocation of 238.63 acres within the 929-acre Weston PDD. This represents approximately 25% of the land area within the entire Weston PDD. The percentage of open space for this individual parcel exceeds 22% of its total land area.

Landscape Buffer
Chapter 7 of the LDO requires the developer to provide half of a 20-foot Type B (semi-opaque) buffer between multi-family residential use and separately owned multi-family residential use. The applicant has met the width requirements, and has proposed to increase the performance standards of the buffer by requiring Type-A (opaque) buffer along the southern edge of the subject property.

Streetscape
According to Chapter 7 of the LDO, a 50-foot streetscape is required along thoroughfares and a 30-foot streetscape is required along collector roads. Cary’s comprehensive Transportation Plan classifies Old Reedy Creek Road as a collector road. The applicant is proposing an opaque (Type A) streetscape with a minimum width of 30 feet and an average width of 50 feet. The applicant also proposes a 30-foot streetscape adjacent to Winstead Drive. This street is identified as a local road and a streetscape is not required per the LDO.

Parking
LDO Table 7.8-1 (Off-Street Parking Schedule “A”) requires two parking spaces per dwelling unit plus 0.5 spaces for each bedroom over two. The applicant is proposing the following parking standards:

Dwelling Type	Parking Spaces Proposed	LDO Standard*
One-bedroom unit (Minimum of 50% of the units)	1 space per unit	2 spaces
Two-bedroom unit (Minimum of 40% of the units)	2 spaces per unit	2 spaces
Three bedroom unit (Maximum of 10% of the units)	3 spaces per unit	2.5 spaces

*In addition, 0.25 spaces are required per unit for designated visitor parking. No provision for visitor parking is proposed with the PDD amendment.

Traffic
The applicant has indicated that the proposed multi-family development will closely resemble the Weston Lakeside Apartment development, catering to urban professionals and a perceived lower trip generation potential than a traditional suburban apartment development. Therefore, the applicant asked the Town to conduct a localized trip generation study to establish trip generation rates for the proposed PDD Amendment. Instead of using the national average rates published in the ITE Trip Generation manual, a localized trip generation study was conducted by the Town’s traffic consultant Martin Alexiou Bryson (MAB) by counting the existing apartment complex (Weston Lakeside) and developing a trip generation rate that could be used for the PDD Amendment project site. Results of the study concluded that using the local data was about 10% to 30% lower than the trip generation using the ITE average rates. Therefore, the localized data will be used in future traffic study. Summarized below is the predicted trip generation for the proposed PDD Amendment:

USE	UNITS	A.M. TRIPS	P.M. TRIPS
Apartments	240 d.u.	109	117

The current PDD zoning on the property allows office & institutional type uses. The estimated trip generation potential for a 155,000 sq.ft. office building that possibly could be built on this site is 266 A.M. trips and 253 P.M. trips. This assumes applying a planning guideline building area basis of 14,500 sq.ft. per useable acre of land. The total useable acreage of the subject parcel is estimated to be approximately 10.7 acres. The PDD Amendment proposes to allow residential multi-family uses capped at a maximum of 248 dwelling units. For traffic comparison purposes, the requested changes would be considered a “down-zoning” or reduction in traffic generation potential because it would not exceed the LDO threshold of 50 peak hour trips; therefore, a traffic impact study would not be required during the PDD Amendment process, but a traffic impact study may be required during the site plan approval process.

The applicant is requesting a waiver from the LDO requirements to improve the site’s public street frontage along Old Reedy Creek Road. The applicant justifies the waiver by stating Old Reedy Creek Road currently dead-ends into Umstead State Park and carries very little traffic. In lieu of making the required roadway improvements, the applicant is offering the following roadway improvements (or an accepted equivalent) with the development of this site:

Winstead Drive will be re-aligned and merged with the northern portion of Old Reedy Creek Road to form one continuous roadway segment.
On the southern end of the subject property, the southern portion of Old Reedy Creek Road will connect with the realigned segment of Winstead Drive.
The newly realigned portion of Winstead Drive will be constructed to 65’ back-to-back, median divided street section from Weston Parkway to the southernmost private drive serving the subject property and the existing Weston Lakeside Apartments.
A second driveway connecting the subject property to the newly realigned Winstead Drive will be provided. In addition, the applicant proposes to stub an internal private street to the Weston Lakeside development that will be interconnected whenever development changes or requests are made by the Weston Lakeside development.
A traffic signal and the associated improvements will be provided at the intersection of Weston Parkway and Winstead Drive. (Note: installation of signal will be subject to satisfying signal warrants as outlined in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices).
An additional 30’ of right-of-way will be dedicated along the site’s frontage on Old Reedy Creek Road in accordance with the Town’s CTP.
A sidewalk connection will be constructed along Winstead Drive from the subject property’s southernmost driveway connection to Weston Parkway.
4’ bike lanes will be striped along Winstead Drive from the subject property’s southernmost driveway connection to Weston Parkway.
A private sidewalk connection will be made internally to the subject property’s southernmost private driveway connection to realigned Winstead Drive.

SUMMARY OF PROCESS AND ACTIONS TO DATE

Changes Since the December 20, 2010 Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing

The applicant modified the proposed circulation plan and associated language in the PDD document to reflect a more detailed depiction of proposed off-site road improvements. The circulation plan is supported by the Development Review Committee (DRC). The plan includes a proposed realignment of Old Reedy Creek Road and Winstead Drive, indicates that the applicant would be responsible for off-site road improvements between the subject property and Weston Parkway and indicates that the applicant would provide a traffic signal at the intersection of Winstead Drive and Weston Parkway.

The applicant removed references from the PDD Document regarding proposed zoning conditions pertaining to amenities and design features located inside buildings.

Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing (December 20, 2010)

Staff presented the case and reported that the applicant had proposed several modifications to the plan to increase building separation, better define buffers and to indicate where off-site road improvements would occur.

During the public hearing, a resident of Silverton, and member of the Environmental Advisory Board and the Black Creek Watershed Association spoke. She asked that connections to the Black Creek Greenway be provided and recommended additional bus stops. Ms. Adams stated the Town needed to avoid degradation of streams and nature areas. She expressed concern regarding airport noise and encouraged the Board to require high development standards.

Chuck Smith of Withers and Ravenel, representing the applicant, explained that the request for residential use would produce less traffic impacts than the currently approved office use. He described the proposed road improvements and explained how the proposed parking reduction would be monitored.

The board asked staff if the proposed parking reduction was reasonable. Staff responded that, based on the number of one-bedroom units proposed, and conditions introduced by the applicant that would help limit parking demands, a reduction could certainly be considered.

Several board members questioned the appropriateness of the $50,000 gift proposed by the applicant to benefit the Town of Cary Public Greenway system.

The Planning and Zoning Board recommended the case for approval 7-2 with the condition that the gift proposed by the applicant be removed.

Town Council Public Hearing (July 15, 2010)
Staff presented the case and noted that there were no protest petitions. Staff further noted that the applicant needed to address specific parts of the proposed PDD document to ensure items such as setbacks and dimensional standards either met LDO requirements or that the applicant provided justification for any reductions to LDO standards.

The applicant spoke in support of the request. A representative of the owner of the adjacent apartment complex expressed concern about traffic impacts, vehicular connectivity and the appropriateness of the site for residential use. A representative from RDU Airport Authority spoke against the request, stating that, in his opinion, the site was not appropriate for residential use. The Town Council asked for clarification on some of the proposed reductions to LDO standards. Staff indicated that comments would be provided to the applicant and modifications or justifications would be requested from the applicant as the case moves through the review process.

Changes Since the Town Council Public Hearing
Cary’s Land Use Plan designation was changed at the request of the applicant from Office and Institutional to Multi-Family Residential on September 16, 2010. (Case 10-CPA-06)

The applicant increased the proposed minimum, side to side separation between buildings from 10 to 16 feet to be consistent with LDO standards. The applicant also provided clarification to the size and type of perimeter buffers being proposed.

The applicant introduced conditions to the PDD document that would restrict parking of recreational vehicles on the subject property and establish other parking limits.

The circulation plan was revised to show the required connection to adjacent property. The plan also indicates that the applicant will assume responsibility for making off-site road improvements along Old Reedy Creek Road between the subject property and Weston Parkway, rather than making road improvements along the street frontage of the subject property.

The applicant has offered to make a $50,000 donation to the Town of Cary for the purpose of enhancing the public greenway system.

Notification
On June 30, 2010, the Planning Department mailed notification of a public hearing on the request to property owners within 400 feet of the subject property. Notification consistent with General Statutes was published in the Cary News on June 30 and July 7, 2010. Notice of the public hearing was posted on the property on June 30, 2010.

Neighborhood Meeting – May 11, 2010
Based on information provided by the applicant, a neighborhood meeting to present the applicant’s proposed rezoning was conducted by the applicant on Monday, May 11, 2010 at 7 p.m.

The applicant reported that the only people present at the meeting were there on behalf of the applicant and property owner.

CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERATION IN REVIEWING REZONINGS

Section 3.4.1(E) of the Land Development Ordinance sets forth the following criteria that should be considered in reviewing rezonings:

1. The proposed rezoning corrects an error or meets the challenge of some changing condition, trend or fact;

2. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan set forth in Section 1.3 (LDO);

3. The Town and other service providers will be able to provide sufficient public safety, educational, recreational, transportation and utility facilities and services to the subject property while maintaining sufficient levels of service to existing development;

4. The proposed rezoning is unlikely to have significant adverse impacts on the natural environment, including air, water, noise, stormwater management, wildlife and vegetation;

5. The proposed rezoning will not have significant adverse impacts on property in the vicinity of the subject tract;

6. The proposed zoning classification is suitable for the subject property.

APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE OR AREA PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Comprehensive Plan Element	Consistent	Not Consistent	Not Applicable
Land Use Plan	P
Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Resources Facility Master Plan	P
Growth Management Plan	P
Affordable Housing Plan	P
Comprehensive Transportation Plan	P
Open Space and Historic Resources Plan	P

A. Land Use Plan
Long-range land use recommendations for the subject parcel are given by the townwide Land Use Plan. A request by the owner to change the land use designation of the subject parcel from Office and Institutional (OFC/INS) to High Density Residential (HDR) (case # 10-CPA-06) was approved by Town Council on September 16, 2010.

Growth Management Plan
The Growth Management Plan includes the following Guiding Principles that are relevant to this case:

1. R1 Guiding Principle: Ensure that adequate infrastructure and services are available concurrently with new development.
2. L1 Guiding Principle: Concentrate growth near existing and planned employment centers and available and planned infrastructure to minimize costly service-area extensions.

Analysis: The subject property is located in an existing planned employment district, and public utilities are readily available to the property. There are two shopping centers located approximately one mile to the east of the property. The property is within walking/biking distance of a public greenway, a county park, and a state park. There is a C-Tran bus stop located on Weston Parkway approximately 1000 feet south of the property. Development of this property is in keeping with the above principles of the Growth Management Plan.

Affordable Housing Plan
The proposed project is applicable to the following Affordable Housing goals:

1. Provide for a full range of housing choices for all income groups, families of various sizes, seniors, and persons with special challenges.
2. Facilitate the creation of a reasonable proportion of the Town of Cary’s housing as affordable apartment units for individuals and families earning up to 60% of the area median income.
3. Encourage the location of high density housing within walking and convenient commuting distance of employment, shopping, and other activities, or within a short walk of a bus or transit stop, through "mixed use" developments, residences created on the upper floors of nonresidential downtown buildings, and other creative strategies.
4. Assure a quality living environment and access to public amenities for all residents, present and future, of the Town of Cary, regardless of income.

Analysis: The subject property is located within convenient commuting distance of employment and shopping, walking distance from a greenway and two parks, and is located approximately 1000 feet from a transit stop. Therefore, a high-density land use designation for this property has the potential to support the above goals of the Affordable Housing Plan.

Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Old Reedy Creek Road is designated as a Collector Road.
Existing Section: 2 lanes, 60-foot ROW
Future Section: 3-lane section 49-foot b/b, 120-foot ROW (required for future expansion)
Sidewalks: Required on both sides
Bicycle Lanes: 4-foot bike lanes required
Transit: No transit requirements; a CTran bus stop is located on Weston Parkway approximately 1,000 feet from the subject property.
Status of Planned Improvements: None funded by Town or NCDOT

Parks & Greenways Master Plan

According to the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Facilities Master Plan, there are no issues related to this site. A recreation payment-in-lieu may be required for residential development in accordance with the LDO.

While there are no specific requirements related to the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Master Plan, the applicant has proposed a $50,000 donation in order to enhance access to, and use of, the Town of Cary greenway system, to be used for public trailhead parking development and/or public trail improvements in the general vicinity of the Black Creek Greenway / Old Reedy Creek Road / Umstead State Park entrance, or within the general vicinity of the larger Weston Planned Development District.

Analysis: This development is in close proximity to the Black Creek Greenway, Lake Crabtree County Park and Umstead State Park. The proximity of these facilities to each other along with their interconnected trail systems, has created access and subsequent parking issues along Old Reedy Creek Road, where it intersects with Interstate 40. Because of this, both the Greenway Committee and the PRCR Advisory Board at their October and November 2010 meetings, recommended that the applicant’s proposed donation of $50,000 be used to help fund a future trailhead to be located somewhere in proximity to the intersection of Black Creek Greenway, Old Reedy Creek Road and the Umstead State Park entrance.

Open Space Plan
According to the Open Space and Historic Resources Plan there are bottomland hardwood forests and swamps in the very northeast portion of this site. This site was not identified as a priority site for open space conservation.

Historic Preservation Master Plan
There are no known historic resources on the site.

STAFF OBSERVATION

The purpose of a PDD zoning district is to allow projects of innovative design and layout that would otherwise not be permitted because of the strict application of zoning district or general development standards. In evaluating the proposed zoning, staff identified the following:

Proposed Weston PDD amendment streetscape and landscape buffers either meet or exceed LDO Standards.
The existing and proposed open space, both within the overall Weston PDD and this individual tract, exceeds LDO standards.
The building separation requirements proposed by the applicant meet or exceed LDO standards.
Residential Multi-family provides a more diverse mix of uses within an area where the predominant use is currently office park. The LDO states that increases in base densities can be justified by superior design or the providing of additional amenities such as public or private open space. As noted in the staff report, the applicant has exceeded open space requirements for the subject property.
A reduction to LDO parking standards is proposed by the applicant based on the number of one-bedroom dwelling units proposed, and other conditions proposed by the applicant to regulate parking. Staff also observed that there is public transit located approximately 1,000 feet from the subject property. LDO parking standards were designed with a broad approach that included traditional garden-style apartments. Staff has observed that many municipalities are reducing parking requirements for more urban-style multi-family residential units. Reductions to these standards may be approved as part of this proposed PDD amendment.
The gift that is proposed by the applicant for improvements to the Town’s greenway system in the general vicinity of the site is not a requirement, and would exceed LDO requirements. Staff acknowledges the concern expressed by several members of the Planning and Zoning Board who suggested such a gift appears precedent-setting, and notes that the proposed zoning would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and other applicable adopted plans, policies and documents even if the gift was no longer offered.

OTHER REFERENCE INFORMATION

Schools Note: The Wake County Board of Education controls capital projects for school capacities.	Assigned Schools	20^th Day Enrollment¹	Permanent Seating Capacity	Average Percent Occupied	Projected Range of Additional Students²
	Reedy Creek Elementary	653	770	85%	5-86
	Reedy Creek Middle	819	902	91%	0-56
	Cary High School	2030	2243	91%	0-49
					5-191
Total Projected range of additional students²
¹ Current Enrollment and Building Capacity is based on the 20^th day of the school year for 2009-2010 as supplied by the Wake County Public School System. School assignment will be determined at the time of development.
²The Projected Number of Additional Students is a rough approximation. The actual number of students will vary depending on variables, such as the number of bedrooms, dwelling size, and other factors. For example: a site with 248 one-bedroom units may only yield five additional students, while 248 three-bedroom dwelling units could yield up to 191 students. The basis for making this calculation is based on multipliers provided from Wake County Schools Office of Student Assignment. At rezoning, student yield cannot be accurately determined due to unknown variables.

APPLICANT’S JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT

The following statements are provided by the applicant (shown below in italics) in response to the criteria established in the application (shown below in bold) and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of the Town of Cary. Any statements as to the type, the quality, or the physical features are at the direction of the applicant and may be formulated into a condition:

1. Any issues with the size of the tract?
Response: Physical characteristics do impact the proposed use and zoning for the site. Both existing areas of steep slopes and an unusual site shape make development of office uses traditionally found in Weston more difficult without the use of parking decks, this additional expense would, as a result leave the office use unable to compete with other areas sites because of higher lease rates.

2. How is the request compatible with the comprehensive plan (i.e. Land Use, Transportation, Open Space and Historic Resources)?
Response: The proposed request of a higher density residential use is consistent with the use of the adjacent site to the west that is the home of the Weston Lakeside apartments.

3. What are the benefits and detriments to the owner, neighbors and the community?
Response: There are a number of benefits to the owners, neighbors and community in general that include the following

A continued transition of Weston into more of mixed use development from a more traditional office park
Faster absorption of undeveloped office land in both Weston and the surrounding area because of the close proximity of additional residences
A resulting increase in tax base for the Town.
A better balance in are traffic patterns because of a better balance of the residential/non-residential ratio

A perceived detriment is the reduction in the supply of residential land for the future expansion of the Town’s non-residential tax base. This is offset by the fact that there is still a 15-20 year supply in Weston alone (over 1.2 million square feet) and, as mentioned above, this supply will develop at a more rapid rate because of an increase in close-proximity young professional housing.

4. How are the allowable uses with the proposed rezoning compatible with, or how do they relate to, the uses currently present on adjacent tracts?
Response: The allowed residential use in this rezoning proposal is the same as already developed in the adjacent site to the west

5. What reductions/amendments and/or modifications to the development standards of the LDO are being requested and how are they justified? (PDD, new or amended) Applicants must list these items and/or clearly highlight them within the Planned Development document.
Response: One reduction from required standards in the LDO is requested with this proposal as specified in the accompanying document. In our opinion this request is necessary because of changing trends in higher density residential development that are not considered in the LDO instead of a need that would be called a “reduction.” The rezoning proposal includes the request for one parking space per bedroom in each residential unit – a request that is consistent with both current industry standards for more urban high density residential units and the parking standard originally requested and approved for the adjacent Weston Lakeside apartments. By comparison, the parking standard that is laid out in the Town’s LDO is more consistent with traditional suburban apartment development. We have less of a desire than the Town to under park our project, but because of the history of the Weston Lakeside apartments over the past four to five years where there has been consistently been an occupancy rate of 90- 95%, we don’t believe this to be a reduction request but more of a statement of the actual parking need. Finally, in this day and age of more “green” development, a request with less impervious surface is more environmentally friendly with less impact on water Quality in the area

ORDINANCE FOR CONSIDERATION

10-REZ-05 WESTON PDD AMENDMENT

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE TOWN OF CARY BY AMENDING AN APPROXIMATELY 13.79 ACRE PORTION OF THE EXISTING WESTON PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (PDD) BY REPLACING THE EXISTING OFFICE USE DESIGNATION WITH A RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY DESIGNATON AND ALLOWING UP TO 248 RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS.

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CARY:

Section 1: The Official Zoning Map is hereby amended by rezoning the area described as follows:

PARCEL & OWNER INFORMATION

Property Owner(s)	Wake County Parcel Number(s) 10 digit)	Real Estate ID(s)	Area ± (Acres)
Highwoods Realty Ltd. Partnership 3100 Smoketree Court, #600 Raleigh, NC 27604	0765487268	0178569	13.79 ±

Total Acres			13.79 ±

Section 2: That the Planned Development District (PDD) for this Property is amended to replace the existing office use designation with a residential multi-family designation and allowing up to 248 residential multi-family dwelling units subject to the individualized development conditions set forth herein, within the PDD document and all the requirements of the Cary Land Development Ordinance (LDO) and other applicable laws, standards, policies and guidelines.

Section 3: The conditions mutually approved by the Town and the applicant for promoting public health, safety and the general welfare are as set forth in the amended PDD document.

These conditions address conformance of the development and use of the Property to ordinances and officially adopted plans and address impacts reasonably expected to be generated by the development and use of the Property.

Section 4: This ordinance shall be effective on the date of adoption.

Adopted and effective: February 24, 2011

________________________________________
Harold Weinbrecht, Jr.
Mayor

______________________________
Date

ORDINANCE FOR CONSIDERATION

(Alternate)

10-REZ-05 WESTON PDD AMENDMENT

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE TOWN OF CARY BY AMENDING AN APPROXIMATELY 13.79 ACRE PORTION OF THE EXISTING WESTON PDD BY REPLACING THE EXISTING OFFICE USE DESIGNATION WITH A RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY DESIGNATON AND ALLOWING UP TO 248 RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS.

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF CARY:

Section 1: The Official Zoning Map is hereby amended by rezoning the area described as follows:

PARCEL & OWNER INFORMATION

Property Owner(s)	Wake County Parcel Number(s) 10 digit)	Real Estate ID(s)	Area ± (Acres)
Highwoods Realty Ltd. Partnership 3100 Smoketree Court, #600 Raleigh, NC 27604	0765487268	0178569	13.79 ±

Total Acres			13.79 ±

Section 2: That this Planned Development District for this Property is amended by replacing the existing office use designation and allowing up to 248 residential multi-family residential dwelling units subject to the individualized development conditions set forth herein, and all the requirements of the Cary Land Development Ordinance (LDO) and other applicable laws, standards, policies and guidelines, with the exception of the proposed gift of $50,000 proposed by the applicant.

Section 3: The conditions mutually approved by the Town and the applicant for promoting public health, safety and the general welfare are as set forth in the amended PDD document but do not include the $50,000 gift proposed by the applicant.

Section 4: This ordinance shall be effective on the date of adoption.

Adopted and effective: February 24, 2011.

________________________________________
Harold Weinbrecht, Jr.
Mayor

______________________________
Date