Council Members Present: Mayor Glen Lang, Mayor Pro Tem Jack Smith, Council Members Marla Dorrel, Jennifer Robinson, Julie Robison, Nels Roseland and Harold Weinbrecht

Mayor Lang called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., and Mr. Weinbrecht provided the invocation.

_________________________

Mrs. Robinson presented the proclamation to Jeff Lee of the parks, recreation and cultural resources staff. The proclamation follows:

WHEREAS, the Town of Cary believes in its youth and wants them to succeed; and

WHEREAS, The Town of Cary is supportive of Creating Assets Reaching Youth (C.A.R.Y.) and the developmental assets including support, empowerment, boundaries and expectations, constructive use of time, commitment to learning, positive values, social competencies, and positive identity; and

WHEREAS, Cary has reduced juvenile crime and wants to continue this trend; and

WHEREAS, a Youth Matter to Cary Day would bring four spheres of our community together: school, home, church and business, to celebrate and encourage the creativity and achievements of our youth; and

WHEREAS, the Town of Cary will utilize two beautiful facilities for Youth Matter to Cary Day, with the Amphitheatre at Regency Park hosting Jamfest 2002 and the Sertoma Amphitheatre at Fred G. Bond Metro Park hosting the Applause! Cary Youth Theatre presentation of A MidSummer Night's Dream.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Glen Lang, Mayor of the Town of Cary, North Carolina, do hereby proclaim Saturday, May 11, 2002, as

and I urge the Cary community to come together to celebrate the achievements of our youth, and to make them aware of our pride in them..

PROCLAIMED this 24th day of April, 2002.

Ms. Hannah Litzenberger informed everyone of the Jamfest activities.

(Proclamation is also on file in the town clerk’s office.)

_________________________

Mrs. Robison read the following resolution:

WHEREAS, the Town of Cary, North Carolina, USA would like to foster international understanding, increase community relations, and enhance economic development with the Town of Markham, Ontario, Canada; and,

WHEREAS, we share a common desire to promote economic growth, to encourage business development, and to foster friendship between and among our communities; and

WHEREAS, we are both rapidly growing and dynamic communities, and leaders and citizens in both communities will greatly benefit from the exchange of ideas and the development of economic and personal relationships with one another; and

WHEREAS, we desire to enhance the economic health and betterment of our respective communities and enterprises, strive to keep each other informed on important economic and civic issues, provide support to prospective businesses interested in our respective market places, and undertake to promote public awareness of the coordination of economic community exchanges between our respective markets.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town of Cary, North Carolina, USA and the Town of Markham, Ontario, Canada are entering into a relationship to promote economic development and cultural exchanges for the benefit and betterment of their respective communities.

RESOLVED this 24th day of April, 2002.

(Resolution is also on file in the town clerk’s office.)

_________________________

Mr. Barker of the planning department stated that the draft was presented at the last council meeting, and Council is requested to adopt the final report at this meeting. He added that changes have been made based on clarification of specifics regarding fire, police, utilities and solid waste services. He stated these changes were minor, and were made to provide clarification. Mr. Buddy Blackburn stated the changes primarily dealt with the plan of services; specifically, which services will be extended upon annexation and what those services will be. He stated the changes were made at the request of the attorney’s request to clarify terminology.

Mr. Barker stated over 700 letters will be mailed to let the public know the dates of the informational meetings and the public hearing. He stated the informational meetings are scheduled for May 28 and May 29 and the Herb Young Community Center from 4-8 p.m.

The final plan is attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit A.

_________________________

Mr. Weinbrechted stated the committee was created in September 2000, and has met monthly since that time. He stated the task force expects to complete its mission by the end of this year. He stated they have already addressed water and sewer implementation issues and transportation issues along with implementation strategies. He stated the task force will soon address open space/parks, schools, community character and development standards and the cost of growth.

_________________________

Ms. Prince’s power point presentation is attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit B. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) document is attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit C.

Mrs. Robison asked the width of the connector road to the Magnolia Woods subdivision, and she asked if the road would carry routine traffic or provide emergency access. Mr. Bailey of the engineering staff stated this issue is not yet resolved. He stated the Town’s connectivity ordinance requires that the roadway be extended through the property and out, and the minimum width for the roadway would be 27 feet. He stated that the developer does not want to do this, and he added that people in the neighborhood have concerns about the connection. He stated the applicant may choose to request a waiver from the ordinance requirement through the PUD approval process.

Mr. Bailey stated if the road terminates as it does now, then it does not have a cul-de-sac that is required to meet Town standards. He stated if the applicant seeks a waiver to the Town’s connectivity ordinance, then another issue will be whether to require the cul-de-sac. He stated the applicant may also choose to seek a waiver for this requirement.

Mr. Henderson, Town Attorney, stated the master land use plan is included as part of the PUD application. He stated there are fixed requirements and also conceptual and illustrative plans. He stated the conceptual and illustrative plans only indicate what what may be built. He stated at the end of the rezoning process, staff will clearly define what is required and what is illustrative.

Mr. Garth Brandaw, representing the architect, stated Holiday has eight facilities in North Carolina, and they offer seniors a unique program. He stated they do not receive or seek exemptions, and they are a for-profit corporation. He stated the average age of their residents is 80, and the majority live alone. He stated they do not provide assisted living facilities. He stated that he feels the proposed site is ideal due to its close proximity to surrounding services. He stated the site is an in-fill site, one side is developed residential (Magnolia Woods), the other side is Penny Road Elementary School, and the park/open space area is on the northern portion of the site that needs to be preserved. He stated they have at least 100 foot sebacks next to residential properties, and they have low traffic generation. He added that the proposal is a quiet retirement use. He stated the residents of this facility will not negatively impact the schools, libraries, etc., and the use fulfills the need for senior housing.

Mr. Brandaw stated they have worked with the surrounding homeowners to present a proposal that is satisfactory to them. He stated there are a number of conditions and site plan elements that are very important to the homeowners association, including berming between the proposed property and Magnolia Woods, preservation of existing trees, shifting of parking so it is not next to the residential area, and stepped buildings to follow the natural grades of the site. He stated they have introduced a way to provide an easement to possibly provide for public benefit to share the open space on the northern portion of the property with the Magnolia Woods residents.

Mr. Brandaw stated the most sensitive issue is Rose Point Drive and the intent of the connectivity ordinance. He stated he believes that the existing road meets the intent of the connectivity ordinance. He stated a road extension is not practical and would not be a public benefit. He stated they have introduced a fire lane around the property, and he believes this complies with the fire department standards and is the most direct access to the property for emergency access purposes. He stated the Magnolia Woods entrance and the entrance to the proposed retirement residence do not currently have significant trees, but they do have the ability to provide appropriate emergency access. He stated he does not see a direct public benefit with extending vehicular access from Rose Point Drive – which is currently a 400-foot dead-end drive serving four driveways – and looping it through the retirement development parking lot next to the school and back out to Penny Road.

Mayor Lang stated if the road is not connected, then the senior citizens living in the retirement development will have to make a left turn to access shopping; however, if the road was connected, it would be easier for the drivers. Mr. Brandaw stated most of the residents will not drive. He stated he is opposed to introducing cut-through traffic in the retirement development. He urged the council to review the intent of the connectivity ordinance.

Mrs. Robison asked if there is a sidewalk in the plan that will connect from Magnolia Woods to Penny Road to allow children to walk to school through the retirement development property. Mr. Brandaw stated this is correct. He stated the walkway is not the most direct access to the school, but it is the scenic access that goes around the pond.

Mr. Buck Fisher, 104 Cedar Cliff Court, Cary (Magnolia Woods subdivision), stated he represents the Magnolia Woods homeowners association. He stated there are 31 homes is this subdivision. He stated the developer has created a win-win situation for all parties. He stated they support the development as presented by Mr. Brandaw. He stated the important issue to them is the connectivity of Rose Point Drive. He stated they believe that the proposed alternatives to the Rose Point Drive connection offer a more direct access to emergency vehicles. He stated Magnolia Wood Drive at the Penny Road intersection is already a dangerous intersection, considering the volume of traffic on Penny Road, the line of sight distance due to the curve in the road, and the congestion around Penny Road school possibly using the connection as a cut-through and an alternate drop-off for the school children. He stated they are also concerned with service and delivery vehicles that might cut-through the Magnolia Woods subdivision in order to serve the retirement development. He stated there is approximately ½ mile of street in the Magnolia Woods subdivision, and he questioned the practicality and the benefit to the community of extending a portion of this to allow the public to access ½ mile of street. He stated the Town’s ordinance allows waivers to the connectivity ordinance where practical, and he urged the council to consider this.

Jerry Stracke, 450 Rose Court Drive, stated he supports the retirement development. He urged the council to consider the request to not connect Rose Point Drive.

No one else came forward to speak, and Mayor Lang closed the public hearing.

Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked the typical length of a Cary cul-de-sac. Mr. Bailey stated 900 to 1,000 feet is the maximum length that is allowed. He stated the cul-de-sac in the Magnolia Woods subdivision exceeds Cary’s standard. He explained how cul-de-sacs are measured, and he stated it is not measured from the dead-end point to the most remote point in the subdivision. He stated Cary has made changes to its cul-de-sac standards since the Magnolia Woods subdivision was developed.

Mayor Lang asked why Magnolia Woods was not required to connect to Regency. Mr. Bailey responded that there is a stream and a buffer in this area.

_________________________

Ms. Prince’s power point presentation is attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit D.

Mr. Weinbrecht asked if there has been any discussion on the dedication of right-of-way on Trinity Road. Mr. Bailey stated Trinity Road is a two-way roadway on the transportation plan, and the applicant will be required to add a small amount of pavement, curb and gutter and sidewalk. He added that they will be required to dedicate 120 feet of right-of-way for the ultimate expansion of the road if and when it is needed. He stated they will dedicate 60 feet from the centerline of the roadway.

Mayor Lang stated churches in residential neighborhoods typically create parking problems. Mr. Bailey stated there are no conditions that address parking ratios, but staff can discuss this with the applicant.

Mayor Pro Tem Smith asked why a connection is not required to King Lawrence. Mr. Bailey responded that the Medfield neighborhood was always opposed to any connection. He stated staff would prefer connection or stubs for potential future connections.

Mrs. Robison noted that there is a small sliver of property between the proposal and Medfield Estates that abuts Carriage Woods. Mr. Bailey stated this parcel is part of the large tract in Carriage Woods and was not developed, and it is a stand-alone lot.

Mr. Dan Tyree, staff member of the Cary Church of God, stated the current facility is over-capacity, and this land will allow a new facility with adequate parking. He stated they are not purchasing the sliver of property adjacent to King Lawrence Road; therefore, they have no way of accessing King Lawrence Road.

Mayor Lang asked what can be done to encourage churches to locate in activity centers where there is adequate parking and adequate roads. Mr. Tyree responded that land cost is an important issue to churches.

Mr. Weinbrecht stated the Town could consider a reduced fee for non-profits to purchase land in activity centers. Mayor Lang suggested that the ordinance be amended so that churches are not allowed in residentially zoned areas. Ms. Dorrel suggested that this be discussed in the future by the council, because council members may have different views on this issue.

Ms. Vicky Gregory, 1321 Trinity Road, stated the Gregory family has lived on the land adjoining the Franklin-Maynard property for 55 years. She stated a conditional use with a prior rezoning called for a street stub onto her lower land with sewer access. She stated this was done to incorporate additional lots in the Franklin-Maynard subdivision. She stated this would have increased the value of the property, but now it has no other useful access. She stated she is being asked to give up the potential of her home being on a residential street and to forfeit the value of the lower lot. She stated she is not opposed to a church on this property, but she stated she feels she is being asked to give up monetary gain potential and options to protect her home.

Ms. Gregory requested that the following conditions be added to the request: Due to the natural lay of the land of this property, there should be 150 foot undisturbed buffer along the Franklin-Gregory property line for approximately 900 feet, and the site grading should be on a lower elevation that would naturally obscure obstacles (i.e., cars, parking lots, ballfields, etc.) from her front door. She stated the church’s site plan could take advantage of the natural lay of the land so that the church building would be the only structure she could see from her front door. She stated she would like to be included in the meetings that would impact the landscaping in the 150 foot buffer. She stated if the lowering of the site elevation is not possible, then she would like a row of leland cypress trees planted every six to seven feet running the length of the 900 feet of the Gregory property line.

Mr. George Whitt stated he has been trying to get Town sewer since 1996. He stated he is not opposed to the church; however, he stated the property was supposed to be developed several years ago, and he was to receive sewer from that development. He stated the health department is requiring him to repair his sewer system at a cost of $4,000. He urged the council to approve the development of this property so he can receive Town sewer.

Marianne Davis, 6417 King Lawrence Road, stated she is adjacent to the proposed church site. She stated she is in favor of the church building on this site. She stated she owns the only direct access from the church to King Lawrence Road, and she has no desire to sell the land for this connection. She stated she would like the church to provide buffers between their property and her property. She stated she is concerned about overflow parking and the increased traffic.

Town Attorney Henderson stated the area being rezoned does not abut King Lawrence Road, and zoning conditions are not typically placed off site. He stated one of the zoning conditions for this case is that no street connection will be made to King Lawrence Road. He stated staff may need to work on this condition, as this condition is less restrictive than the Code.

Mr. Randy Miller, representing the engineering firm (Thompson and Associates), stated they have no direct access to King Lawrence. He stated the condition mentioned by Mr. Henderson in the above paragraph is a carry-over of the previous rezoning. He stated the only condition the church is asking to change is to add church as an allowable use. He stated there is no access to any other street in the subdivision for overflow parking. He stated the church has plenty of room on their property to provide parking, and they do not foresee any overflow on King Lawrence due to lack of direct access. He added that it is not feasible to park along Trinity Road.

No one else came forward to speak, and Mayor Lang closed the public hearing.

_________________________

Ms. Vicky Buckholz, 121 Bonniewood Drive, stated she held a yard sale last year, and the morning of her yard sale, she learned that a Town employee had pulled up her signs and splintered her stakes. She stated two days later she received a letter in the mail threatening her with a $100 fine if she ever did it again. She encouraged the council to review this law and possible unintended negative impacts on good citizens.

Mr. Weinbrecht asked staff to send him to current policy and the reasons behind it, so that he can contact Ms. Buckholz.

_________________________

The guidelines are attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit E. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended unanimous approval.

_________________________

The council chose to take action on the annexation prior to the site plan (the annexation is under old/new business on this agenda.)

(Resolution is on file in the town clerk’s office and is incorporated in these minutes by reference.)

The site plan report prepared by staff follows:

The plan proposes 76 two-story townhomes located on 7.44 acres. The site would be accessed from SE Maynard Road by a proposed drive with a divided median. This roadway would extend northward through the development to a proposed collector roadway, and a second full service drive is also proposed at the collector roadway. The collector roadway would extend westward to SE Maynard Road and eastward to the easternmost property line. A 50' streetscape is required along SE Maynard Road, but the plan proposes to reduce this streetscape to a width of 30'.

Overlay District: N/A

Town Limits: Inside

Land Use Compliance: The Land Use Plan within the area calls for high-density residential development.

Excluding the following items, the plan complies with all zoning requirements:

1. The plan proposes to reduce the 50' streetscape along SE Maynard Road to a width of 30'. (The original plan submittal proposed a streetscape width of 22'.) The proposed 30' streetscape would include: plantings to an opaque standard, a 6' high wrought iron fence across the property frontage, and evergreen shrubs planted along the roadway side of the fence. The actual open area between townhomes and the right-of-way line of SE Maynard Road is 40'. The townhomes would adhere to a 50' setback from the right-of-way line. Staff feels the combination of a 50' building setback, 40' of open space, opaque landscaping, and wrought iron fencing meets the intent of the 50' streetscape requirement and, therefore, staff supports the reduction in streetscape width from 50' to 30'.
2. The plan designates an area central to the site as active recreation, but no physical improvements are proposed on the plan. Staff has recommended that the active recreation area be utilized as an asphalt multi-purpose court with an installed basketball goal.

Current Enrollment and Building Capacity is based on the 20^th day of the school year for 2001. School assignment will be determined at the time of development.

• Be advised that the Projected Number of Additional Students is only a rough approximation.

Staff has received for this development a Certificate of Adequate Facilities for Schools from the Wake County School System. The Certificate indicates that adequate seating would be available at designated schools at the time of occupancy. Actual school locations would be announced.

Along this project frontage, SE Maynard Road is designated to have an ultimate 76’ back-to-back (four-lane median divided) cross section centered within a 98’ right-of-way based on the Town’s Thoroughfare Plan. The 76’ wide street section consists of a 16’ landscaped median, 12’ inside lanes and 14’ outside lanes. Currently, SE Maynard Road along this project frontage has a 65’ back-to-back (two lanes in each direction with a continuous center turn lane) cross section centered within a 90’ right-of-way. In order to comply with Town Ordinances, the developer would be required to remove existing curb and gutter and sidewalk, widen Maynard Road pavement approximately 5.5’, and then install new curb and gutter and sidewalk. The developer would also be required to dedicate approximately 4’ of right-of-way and construct or bond for "one-half" of the 16’ wide median. The developer proposes to dedicate the additional right-of-way necessary to meet current Thoroughfare Plan requirements, but is requesting to make a payment-in-lieu of Maynard Road improvements. Due to the parcels limited frontage, the minimal amount of additional pavement that would be provided and the requirement for a center median, staff supports the developers request to make a payment-in-lieu of Maynard Road improvements. Staff feels that a widening of this nature would best be handled as a much larger project.

The Town’s Thoroughfare Plan calls for a new east-west collector street to be constructed from SE Maynard to the proposed Trinity Road Extension (from E. Chatham Street to Cary Towne Boulevard). This collector street is shown on the Town’s Thoroughfare Plan to align with Sloan Drive. The Maynard Office Center site plan (just north of proposed Maynard Summit) was approved by the Town in 1996 and the proposed collector street was not required as part of that plan approval. In researching the Maynard Office project file, no mention of the proposed collector could be found and it is staff’s opinion that this item was overlooked during the review and approval of the Maynard Office site plan.

The developer of proposed Maynard Summit, in response to emergency access concerns, as well as trying to work with staff to meet the intent of the Town’s Thoroughfare Plan, has proposed a reduced collector street cross section within the 60’ strip of land along the parcels northern boundary between Maynard Office Center and the Family Funds development, in order to provide a second point of access to the development. The reduced cross section is necessary due to grading constraints because of existing developments on either side. Staff supports the design as shown.

The sewer system would be located beneath private drives and parking areas where Cary has no authority or control over driveway and utility service repair, therefore, staff has recommended that the public sewer system be constructed of a more durable material, ductile iron pipe.

Mr. Yerha’s power point presentation on the Maynard Summit site plan is attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit F.

Mr. Roseland stated he is concerned with a trend in focusing all the lower income housing inside the Maynard loop. Mayor Lang stated this housing exceeds the value of some of the adjacent housing and will enhance the area.

Mr. Roseland stated he would prefer to table the item and talk to the applicant about reducing the density and increasing the open space. He stated black-top courts should not be "standard" open space, and he is opposed to this being a part of the open space calculation.

Mr. Weinbrecht stated he is concerned with the open space, and he understands that it meets the criteria, but he feels it violates the intention. He stated he thinks there will be more than 29 children generated by this development, and they will want to cross the street to get to the soccer fields. He stated Maynard Road is an unsafe environment for children. He stated this presents an unsafe condition, and he thinks there could be a better solution to address these concerns (i.e., a more vertical development, more open space, etc.).

_________________________

There were no consent agenda items on this agenda.

_________________________

_________________________

This item was approved with the related site plan as part of the Planning and Zoning Report portion of the agenda.

_________________________

2. Discussion of the Alternate Day Watering Ordinance (PW02-011)
The Operations Committee recommended amending the Alternate Day Watering program to allow hand watering on any day of the week and that staff investigate means of increasing water conservation in the commercial sector and that this item be discussed at the April 24, 2002 Council meeting.

At the April 2, 2002 Operations committee meeting, staff was directed to develop additional measures to improve water use efficiency in the commercial sector. Table 2 below provides an overview of the proposed additions to the Town’s current program; these additions would require minimal financial resources to implement. The first section describes measures staff will implement immediately upon approval. A brief description follows:

Develop Landscape Specific Water Allocations for all non-residential irrigation meters: To target high volume irrigation users, site specific water budgets were initially developed for the top 10% of customers. This option would provide site-specific budgets for all of the remaining non-residential irrigation meters.

Cooling Tower Audits: Use a contract HVAC professional to audit each of the 50-75 cooling towers and assist customers with modifications to increase operating efficiency. Site-specific budgets would be developed for all customers with separate irrigation meters (those without will have to install separate meters if Section II below is approved).

Focus enforcement on large non-residential irrigation customers: Field enforcement will focus on non-residential customers to increase compliance with existing Town ordinances.

Training and Education for commercial customers and their employees: Staff will provide workshops for commercial customers on water efficiency and increase the number of educational materials available for reducing use in the commercial sector.

Table 2. Commercial Water Conservation Options

Section II describes measures that can be implemented over the next 3-9 months to allow staff time to analyze and propose strategy and implementation requirements in a future staff report:

Require Irrigation Meters for All Non-Residential Outdoor Water Use: All new irrigation customers are required to purchase a separate meter. However, not all of the water used for irrigation, and other outdoor uses such as cooling towers and swimming pools is separately metered. This option would require those customers to modify their plumbing and install an irrigation meter to track that usage. Site-specific budgets would then be developed for those customers.

Review feasibility of implementing new penalty tiers, or increasing the penalty rate, and report back: Staff will analyze the first year of results from the new tiers added to the utility structure and recommend changes as needed to target inefficient commercial use.

Section III provides an overview of measures for implementation as the appropriate technology and/or legal authority becomes available:

Encourage rainwater collection: When feasible, encourage collection and use of rainwater to replace or supplement the use of potable water for irrigation.

Require/Promote real time weather irrigation controllers: The irrigation industry is developing controllers that operate irrigation systems based on real time weather conditions. Staff is currently meeting with representatives to evaluate available technology.

Require Waterless Urinals: The Town is currently using waterless urinals (a chemical barrier prevents odors) at the Bond Park Community Center. Waterless urinals are proposed for the Town Hall expansion. Currently waterless urinals are only allowed as an exception to the plumbing code and cannot be required across the Town. Once the NC State Building Code Council modifies the plumbing code the urinals can be required as a retrofit, in all new construction, or both.

As a first step in the Town’s water conservation program, in March, 1997, Council adopted a policy statement to establish the goals for the Town’s program:

"It is the policy of the Town of Cary to develop and implement a water conservation and demand management program that will decrease the average annual per capita usage of potable water. The program will include a mixture of educational, financial, and regulatory initiatives to encourage water conserving practices where consistent with the overall mission and values of the Town of Cary."

The established program goals are as follows:

• Support the high quality of life in Cary by providing safe, reliable water service while reducing wasteful uses of water;
• Reduce costs of infrastructure expansion; and
• Conserve a limited natural resource.

The Town’s Water Conservation Program has two focus areas: 1) reducing the per capita water consumption, and 2) managing the peak demands that occur during the hottest, driest times of the year. The milestones achieved since 1995 are shown in Table 1 below.

Because the Town’s water usage is 70% residential and 30% commercial, Council and staff designed a combination of programs to achieve the desired reductions. The 70/30 breakdown is consistent year round.

RESEARCH RESULTS

The Town’s water use and conservation model, which was developed as part of the Water Conservation Plan in 2000, allows staff to analyze water use by taking out the effect of weather – i.e. to examine whether habits are really changing from year to year. The model uses regression equations for water use in each user group as a function of weather variables, incorporates data such as rainfall and temperature factors. The regression equations can then be used to predict the expected water use under long-term average weather conditions. This allows staff to compare weather-adjusted water use from year to year, and to see how much variation there is due to factors other than weather. It is important to consider the weather-adjusted use to ensure that comparisons from year-to-year are equivalent. For example, a wet year and lower water usage would not appear as a positive conservation effect.

In 1996, the goal to reduce consumption 20% by 2015 was included as part of the Town’s interbasin transfer application. At that time, the 5-year average usage was 100 gallons per capita per day. Figure 1 below shows the 5-year trend of overall per capita water usage since the establishment of the Water Conservation Program. The light bars show the actual water use, compared with the dark bars, which show weather-adjusted water use. The graph shows the overall per-capita weather-adjusted water use declining steadily from 1997 to 2001, which indicates that overall water use per capita has been going down. Note that consumption decreased slightly in 1999 when restrictions were in place and continued to decrease in 2000, which is the year the Alternate Day Watering Ordinance was adopted and a ban was placed on commercial irrigation. Note that because the effects of weather are filtered out, changes in consumption are due to other factors. For example, in 2001, usage remained low despite the extreme weather fluctuations during the year.

While evaluating the accomplishments of the Water Conservation Program, staff has endeavored to determine the effects of Alternate Day Watering (ADW). Because the Town’s approach to water conservation uses a combination of education (such as Beat the Peak and Block Leaders), incentives (such as the tiered rate structure) and regulations (such as water waste and ADW), it is not feasible to solely determine the effects of the Alternate Day Watering Policy. The difficulty of arriving at a solid conclusion is increased by the fact that every year some variable in the Program has changed, as shown in the timeline in Table 1.

To further examine consumption trends, water use was broken down into two categories: residential (single family and multi-family units) and non-residential (commercial, industrial, and institutional) accounts.

Figure 2 shows the Town’s residential water use per capita, compared with the weather-adjusted water use. The graph shows the per-account weather-adjusted water use declining steadily from 1997 to 2001, which indicates that water use per account has been going down. Staff can't say exactly what the cause is, since the Town has used a combination of education, incentive, and regulatory programs. However, one possible conclusion is that the cumulative impact of the programs, including general customer education and awareness, has been to effectively reduce residential water use by almost 10 percent since 1997.

Figure 2. Residential Water Use 1995 – 2001

Gallons per Day per Capita

The diverse water uses of non-residential accounts further complicates the task of evaluating the effect of ADW. Furthermore, non-residential accounts use water in ways that mimic irrigation uses; a large difference between water usage in winter and in summer months often seems like irrigation, but can instead be the operation of devices like air conditioning cooling towers, commercial car washes, commercial laundries, swimming pools, etc. Staff feels that these non-irrigation uses of water along with the changing makeup of non-residential accounts, including the addition of large commercial users may be the cause for the relatively stable consumption for non-residential accounts.

The large fluctuation in water consumption among non-residential customers requires a combination of approaches to help these companies use water efficiently. The addition of a second higher tier for commercial irrigation users linking landscape size to weather data, along with ordinances like ADW have started to target the outdoor consumption of these properties. An increase in personalized consultation, including an effort to manage cooling tower uses, in non-residential properties will be needed to further affect non-residential efficiency.

PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES

In June 2001, the first phase of the expansion of the capacity of the Cary/Apex Water Treatment Facility became operational. Since then, meeting peak demand has been much easier. And now several options exist to modify the Alternate Day Watering Ordinance to increase flexibility for landscape watering by the Town’s utility customers.

As with any policy issue, both pros and cons exist for keeping the overall ADW program. The current ordinance allows landscape watering three days per week based on the customer’s address. Keeping the current ordinance would provide policy consistency. Customers have learned which days are their watering days and have generally adjusted their watering habits. The ADW ordinance has increased awareness that water is a valuable resource. This ordinance has become a key component of the Town’s Water Conservation Program’s three-pronged approach (voluntary/incentive/regulatory) to reducing water use and achieving the 20% reduction goal.

However, disadvantages of ADW also exist. The watering schedules are not always convenient. Citizens who like to spend a lot of time in their garden must work with the schedule in order to comply with the ordinance. Customers who need to water daily when seeding grass must apply for a watering exception. Programmatic costs are incurred through increased Town staff field monitoring. A summary of pros and cons of ADW is provided below.

• Customers have learned their days and have adjusted their watering habits
• ADW policy keeps issue of water conservation out in front of its citizens – shows commitment to conservation
• ADW spreads out peak demand
• Allows ample amount of water for landscapes
• ADW is efficiently enforced and managed
• ADW is straightforward
• Customers are looking for alternatives to using potable water – staff get calls on a weekly basis for options such as rainbarrels
• If water use is reduced, people may have less runoff of water into storm drains
• Run risk of negative PR (with both the State and the public) if policy is reversed

• Some customers have expressed concern about not being able to water at their convenience
• Small number of customers confuse with Odd/Even
• Ordinance requires exceptions for establishing grass, increasing administrative load

Analysis of the effectiveness of water conservation programs is a complex and difficult effort. Because of the relatively young age of the water conservation field, little literature on the effectiveness of specific programs exists, especially for medium-sized water systems in the eastern United States, such as Cary. In addition, each program is tailored to the needs of the utility’s customers, which vary widely. Based on the results achieved to date in Cary, staff recommends keeping the Alternate Day Watering program and increasing its flexibility to allow handwatering of gardens and landscaping on any day of the week.

Historically, peak water demand is driven by automatic irrigation systems and sprinkler use as the weather gets hotter and "drier". As proposed, handwatering would include any water use not associated with automatic irrigation systems or sprinklers connected to garden hoses. As analyzed in the Water Conservation Plan, the additional system impact from handwatering during the restrictions of 1999 was minimal. The option to allow handwatering on any day continues to spread out peak demand incurred from automatic irrigation systems and sprinklers. A modified ADW will keep the water conservation message consistent and visible on a regular basis yet increase flexibility to accommodate our customer’s needs.

(a) Definitions. As used in this section, the following terms are defined as follows:

Irrigate the landscape, irrigation of the landscape, and irrigation mean the act of applying water to the outdoor landscape by any means involving sprinklers or automatic watering devices, including but not limited to the use of watering cans, hoses, sprinklers attached to hoses, and installed underground sprinkler systems.

Landscape means the natural or modified ground outside the border of the foundation wall of the constructed area of the property.

Person means user of the town's potable water system.

Reclaimed or reused water means the treated plant effluent from a wastewater treatment facility that is further disinfected and piped or distributed in bulk form.

(b) Irrigation of landscape prohibited except in accordance with this section. No person shall use potable water supplied by the town water system to irrigate the landscape on any property except on alternate days assigned to that property for irrigating the landscape. The days of the week on which irrigation of the landscape can take place at a particular property shall be determined by that property's street address, which shall be further described in a separate town policy. The use of "reclaimed" or "reused" water, pond water, rainwater and well water or other non-potable water is not governed by this section, nor is the watering of plant material and lawns by use of watering cans, hand-held hoses, and other hand-held watering tools.

Effective 4/24/02

Mr. Weinbrecht stated he believes in strong conservation measures. He stated the Town is producing double the amount of the largest peak demand, and there is no data to support that alternate day watering decreases per capita useage. He stated he believes that the alternate day watering encourages overloading, but he believes that the price tier promotes conservation. He stated he feels that too many restrictions encroach on individual freedoms. He stated if done correctly, irrigation is a better conservation tool as compared to alternate day watering. He stated he would prefer to eliminate the alternate day watering restrictions for residential customers.

Mrs. Robinson stated she is in favor of keeping the alternate day watering, but she would like to eliminate alternate day watering during a two to three week period in the fall and spring to allow people to establish their lawns. She stated the permit process now in place is cumbersome for citizens, and it is also problematic for staff to regulate. Mayor Lang added that it may be best to completely eliminate enforcement for these time periods.

Mayor Lang stated he feels the current system works, and he suggested an on-line system so that citizens can request every day watering to establish their lawns. He stated the alternate day watering was a key component in getting the water plant expansion approval.

(Ordinance 02-012 is also on file in the town clerk’s office.)

_________________________

Mayor Lang announced the appointment of Arne Tune.

_________________________

_________________________