|
Temporary Council
Chambers Present:
Mayor Ernie McAlister, Mayor Pro Tem Jack Smith, Council Members Marla
Dorrel, Mike Joyce, Jennifer Robinson, Julie Robison and Nels Roseland A.
COMMENCEMENT 1.
Call to Order (Mayor McAlister) Mayor
McAlister called the meeting to order at _________________________ 2.
Ceremonial Opening (Mrs.
Robinson) Mrs.
Robinson provided the ceremonial opening. _________________________ 3.
Adoption of agenda. (Town
Council) ACTION:
Mayor Pro Tem Smith made a motion to adopt the agenda as presented. Mr.
Roseland provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval. (The
format of the agenda is contained within these minutes.) _________________________ B.
CONSENT AGENDA The
council pulled item B.3.d, Neighborhood Improvement Grant Program, for
discussion. Mr.
Joyce noted he will vote for the consent agenda, but he opposes item
B.3.f., dog park. ACTION:
Mrs. Robison moved to approve the consent agenda (except for item B.3.d).
Ms. Dorrel provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval. 1.
Regular Consent Agenda (any regular consent agenda item pulled for discussion will be discussed
at the beginning of the old/new business portion of the agenda – item H
on this agenda) a.
Consideration of approval of the minutes of the regular town
council meeting held on Mr.
Joyce noted he will vote for the consent agenda, but he opposes item
B.3.f., dog park. ACTION:
Mrs. Robison moved to approve the consent agenda (except for item B.3.d).
Ms. Dorrel provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval. _________________________ 2.
Land Development Ordinance
Items for Consent Agenda There
are no Land Development Ordinance consent agenda items. _________________________ 3.
Planning and Development
Committee Consent Agenda, March 17, 2005 (any
committee consent agenda item pulled for discussion will be discussed at
the beginning of the committee discussion portion of the agenda – item G
on this agenda) (Mr.
Roseland) a.
Riparian Buffer Modification
Request (EN05-104) West
Regional Library, Project number 04-SP-165, located at the intersection of
(1)
The basic project purpose cannot be practically accomplished in a
manner that would better minimize disturbance and protect water quality. This
project is located on a lot that has significant flood plain, wetlands and
riparian buffers. The library
contacted the Town of (2)
The use cannot practically be reduced in size or density or
redesigned to minimize disturbance and protect water quality.
The
applicant attempted other layouts to avoid this encroachment but each
attempt reduced the parking to an unacceptable limit. (3)
BMP's will be used if necessary to minimize disturbance and protect
water quality.
A Best Management Practice is proposed to off set the water quality
impact of the proposed encroachment. (4)
Impact to Zone 1 must be minimized to the maximum extent practical.
There
are no impacts to zone 1 of the riparian buffer. (5)
Compensatory mitigation must
be done on a 1:1 ratio on a square foot basis for any impacts to Zone 1.
This mitigation may consist of planting of an un-buffered area or
additional planting of a partially buffered area located on-site or
nearby. Riparian
buffer is being land banked at a 3:1 ratio on site. (6)
The
applicant must receive written approval from the Town Manager
acknowledging that these conditions have been met before any impacts to
the riparian buffer shall occur. The
applicant is attempting to receive this permission at this time. Staff
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the modification request. Mr.
Joyce noted he will vote for the consent agenda, but he opposes item
B.3.f., dog park. ACTION:
Mrs. Robison moved to approve the consent agenda (except for item B.3.d).
Ms. Dorrel provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval. _________________________ b.
417 Kildaire Farm Road -
Request for Road Improvement Waiver (EN05-106) Staff
has received a request from Dr. Shelia Patterson requesting a waiver from
widening the road in front of The Town’s
Comprehensive Transportation Plan designates In order for Dr.
Patterson to comply with Transportation Plan requirements, existing curb
and gutter and sidewalk would need to be removed, approximately 6’ of
additional pavement added and sidewalk reinstalled.
It appears that approximately 9.5’ of land would need to be
dedicated to meet Transportation Plan requirements.
This would be confirmed with a survey. Dr. Patterson is
requesting a waiver from widening Staff
supports Dr. Patterson’s waiver request due to the following:
Staff
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the road widening waiver request which
would be associated with the development of 417 Kildaire Farm Road should
Dr. Patterson submit a development plan for the property.
Staff further recommends that the right-of-way required to meet
Transportation Plan requirements be dedicated now as part of site
development and, in the future, any necessary construction easements be
dedicated at no cost to the Town when the Town moves forward with widening
Mr.
Joyce noted he will vote for the consent agenda, but he opposes item
B.3.f., dog park. ACTION:
Mrs. Robison moved to approve the consent agenda (except for item B.3.d).
Ms. Dorrel provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval. _________________________ c.
Policy Statement –
Political Sign Findings (PL05-031) Town Council adopted
Ordinance No. 05-002 on POLICY
STATEMENT 144
Town
Council Intent & Findings Regarding Political Sign Regulations
Purpose:
To
present the rationale upon which Town Council based its decision to amend
the political sign regulations contained in Chapter 9 of the Land
Development Ordinance (LDO). Goals
of Policy: Chapter 9 of the Land
Development Ordinance (LDO) contains all sign regulations for the Town of The goal of this policy
statement is to set forth the following intent and findings associated
with these adopted political sign regulations. Statement of Intent
and Findings: During the 2004 election
campaign, it came to the attention of the Town Council of the Town of In adopting these
amendments, the Town Council makes the following specific findings: ·
Expressions of opinion on matters of public interest,
including but not limited to advocacy for or against particular candidates
or ballot issues, are the most important form of speech in our society.
For that reason, signs expressing views on public opinion should
receive the most favorable possible treatment under the sign ordinance; ·
As recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in Ladue v. Gilleo,
such signs are particularly valuable to allow individual residents to
express their views on matters of public interest; ·
The Town has intentionally adopted extremely restrictive
regulations on signs in both residential and nonresidential areas, but the
Town Council recognizes the need to make those regulations more liberal
for signs expressing views on public issues; ·
In particular, to protect the rights of our citizens, as
defined by the Supreme Court and as we understand them from our own
experience, we find that it is essential that we allow additional signs in
residential neighborhoods to be used specifically for the expression of
the views of residents on matters of public interest; ·
The residential neighborhoods of our Town, however, remain
the areas in which our residents continually tell us that it is most
important to reduce clutter and to maintain a pleasing aesthetic
environment. For that reason,
it is essential that regulations permitting signs that express opinions on
matters of public interest be subject to reasonable limits to prevent
unnecessary visual clutter in the neighborhoods; ·
Traffic safety is of particular concern in residential
neighborhoods, where young children often play in front yards and in other
areas abutting the streets. Although
traffic loads on residential streets are typically lower than on other
streets, the concerns with traffic safety on such streets are as great or
greater than such concerns on the Town’s arterial streets and roads; ·
In this context, we believe that a regulation that allows
only one sign per property or street frontage per candidate for office or
side of a particular issue achieves a reasonable balance in these
competing interests. It allows
for householders who disagree on a particular race or election
issue to express support for opposing candidates or opposing
viewpoints, but it precludes an overly enthusiastic individual from
posting multiple signs on the same property in support of the same
candidate or issue; ·
We recognize that former limits tying the use of political
signs to elections may have been too broad in their scope, and we have
consciously included in these amendments various provisions that allow and
ensure the expression of opinion on issues that are not now (or may not
ever be) the subject of an election or referendum; ·
Most signs of this type in our community, however, do relate
to an election. A rule
requiring that such signs be removed within a reasonable period after the
election – at which point they are no longer expressing an opinion on a
matter of public interest – furthers the Town’s interest in reducing
clutter and is consistent with other provisions of the sign ordinance
where we place time limits on other temporary signs and require the
removal of abandoned signs; and ·
Our review of this subject led us to note that, although
most real estate signs appear to be removed promptly after sale or lease
of the property takes place, the Town ordinance does not currently require
such removal; we have thus addressed this issue regarding the potential
clutter of signs serving no purpose in this set of amendments.
Staff
Recommendation:
Staff recommends adoption of this Policy Statement related to
political sign findings. Mr.
Joyce noted he will vote for the consent agenda, but he opposes item
B.3.f., dog park. ACTION:
Mrs. Robison moved to approve the consent agenda (except for item B.3.d).
Ms. Dorrel provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval. (Policy
Statement 144 is also on file in the town clerk’s office.) _________________________ d.
Neighborhood Improvement
Grant Program (PL05-032) This
item was pulled from consent for discussion. Refer to item G in these
minutes for the discussion and action. _________________________ e.
TCAP (Downtown) Strategic
Action Plan: Façade Treatment Program (PL05-033) On
Since
adoption of the TCAP Strategic Action Plan, staff has prepared suggested
operational guidelines for the program which are attached to this staff
report. On The
financial assistance will be provided to the business as a deferred loan
and requires a 100% match from the business owner.
Other requirements, including program limits, eligibility
requirements and the types of repairs allowed under the program are
contained in the attached guidelines.
Staff
proposes that the program be funded from the Town’s Community
Development Block Grant. For
FY 2005, $50,000 in CDBG funds reprogrammed from the Upon
approval of the program guidelines, staff would anticipate soliciting
applications for the program as of Staff
Recommendation:
Town Council approve the Façade Treatment Program and authorize
staff to implement the program as described in the attached program
guidelines. Attachment DRAFT
(July 2004) Revised
(February 2005) February 2005 What
is the Façade Improvement Program? The Façade Improvement
Program assists property and business owners located within the identified
Town Center Area boundary to undertake storefront or building front
improvements. These improvements can range from minor repairs and painting
to substantial façade renovations on buildings used for commercial or
office uses. The goal of the program
is to 1. Encourage
well-designed improvements; 2. Restore significant
architectural elements of the structure; and 3. Coordinate the
important features of a commercial or office storefront into a more
visually attractive package. These goals, in turn, are
designed to increase the attractiveness of the downtown, increase
patronage for the downtown businesses, and provide the impetus for further
private investment in the Town Center Area. The program will be
funded through the Town of How
does the Program Work? Approved property owners
or tenants with owner approval who undertake at least $2,000 of
improvements to the exteriors of their existing businesses will receive a
deferred loan equal to one-half (1/2) of the total cost of the work, up to
a maximum of $10,000 per storefront. Corner
lots with significant or double façade exposure may qualify for an
additional $5,000. For example, if an
applicant is approved for the program and undertakes $5,000 of
improvements, the amount of assistance made available would be for $2,500.
To receive the maximum assistance of $10,000 the building owner would need
to invest at least $20,000 in improvements. The deferred loan will be
provided in the form of a reimbursement of eligible costs incurred
and paid utilizing a construction draw process, once the improvements have
been completed, inspected, and approved. The deferred loan will be in
effect for a minimum of three years. The principal and interest on the
loan will be deferred each of the three years. Should the structure be
changed or rebuilt during that three year period, then the prorated
portion of the deferred loan will be paid back to the town. If no changes
are made at the end of the three year period, the loan will be forgiven. Access to the façade
assistance program will be on a first come, first served basis in answer
to an advertised notice. Applications will be selected by the Town staff
and must be based on meeting the objectives of the program. Selected
eligible applicants must complete the façade improvement project within a
six (6) month period following project approval. Additionally, the Town
will provide façade design assistance to owners of eligible properties
who retain the services of a professional architect or designer. This
assistance is limited to 10% of the total eligible façade improvement
costs. For example, if an applicant undertakes $10,000 in façade
improvements, they may also receive an additional $1,000 (10% of $10,000)
in design assistance. This assistance is provided by the Town to help
ensure that the façade improvements are functional and compatible with
surrounding structures. Should the façade improvements require structural
engineering design, those costs would be the sole responsibility of the
property owner. Architectural and design grants will also be made as a
reimbursement of the total cost package. All new façade designs will be
reviewed by the town to insure compatibility with the surrounding
structures and buildings. Who
can Apply for Funding? Any property/building
owner, or business owner/tenant with written authorization from the owner
can apply for funding assistance. The project site must be located within
the Town Center Area District boundary (see map).
Tenants must have a minimum of two years remaining on their lease
or have an option to renew. Façade assistance may be made available to
applicants based on phased boundaries of the downtown. That is, different
sections of the downtown will be offered the assistance at different times
according to the funding availability. What
Type of Improvements are Eligible for Funding? Improvements must be on
the façade of the building facing the primary street orientation or if on
a corner lot, the façades facing the two streets of primary orientation.
Examples of eligible improvements
include:
Examples of ineligible
activities include:
Are
There any Design Guidelines? Projects must conform to
the Town of How
does the Application Process Work? First, applicants must
meet with the Town Planning Staff. At
this preliminary stage, Town staff will explain the program requirements
as well as discuss the scope of the renovation project with the applicant.
Also at this stage the preliminary eligibility for the program will also
be determined. The preliminary stage
will be followed by the submission of a formal Application for Assistance
(see attached). Along with the
application, the applicant will provide an architectural or building
design plan of the improvements in sufficient detail to determine program
compliance; at least two contractor bids or quotes for the work to be
performed; demonstration of financial capability to meet the matching
requirements including a letter of commitment from the lender if
necessary; adequate insurance, and legal documents showing ownership of
the property or permission from the owner permitting the improvements.
The TCRC, upon
recommendation by the planning staff will review the application and
approve or deny the application within 30 days. If approved, the applicant
will receive a letter of commitment from the Town of Project cost overruns due
to miscalculations, undiscovered construction requirements, or other
justifiable reasons may be added to the overall cost of the façade
project and be eligible for one half matching funds with approval from the
Planning Staff. The overall project limit must still remain at $10,000.
Each project should contain a 10% contingency line item to insure against
valid cost over runs. What
Happens after a Project is Selected for Funding? Work selected for a
matching grant must be completed within 6 months of approval of the
application, unless extended by the Town of The owner of a selected
project will agree to allow the Town of Cary to promote an approved
project including, but not limited to, displaying a sign at the site
during and after construction and using photographs and descriptions of
the project in future Town marketing materials.
TOWN
OF DOWNTOWN
FAÇADE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Application
Form Date: Name(s)
of Owner: Owner(s)
Address: Owner(s)
Email Address: Owner(s)
Phone Number(s): Property
Address: Existing
Use of Property: Use
of Property After Improvements: Property
Legal Description: Contractor’s
Name: Contractor’s
Address: Contractor’s
Phone Number(s): Contractor’s
Email: General
Description of Improvements, include types of materials and colors
(attach photo or architectural drawing): Estimated
Cost of Façade Improvement (Total):
Design/Architect:
Construction:
Planning/Permit Fees:
Contingency (10%):
(Attach
final bid documents when available) Date
of Planning Department Approval (Plans and Costs): Building
Permit Date and Number: Estimated
Start Date:
Estimated Completion Date: Mr.
Joyce noted he will vote for the consent agenda, but he opposes item
B.3.f., dog park. ACTION:
Mrs. Robison moved to approve the consent agenda (except for item B.3.d).
Ms. Dorrel provided the second, and council granted unanimous approval. _________________________ f.
The
staff was revised on In
2002 Cary Dog Park Club (CDPC) approached Town staff and the Parks
Recreation and Cultural Resources Advisory Board requesting an off leash
facility for dogs. The mission
of CDPC is to establish the first, legal and safe dog park in Since
July of 2004, staff has conducted considerable research into site &
operational requirements for a dog park facility.
In December of 2004, PRCR held a public meeting to obtain input
about this proposed project. The
meeting was attended by over sixty residents.
The public input received from this meeting is in addition to
several “ Based
on this input and staff’s research on other successful dog park
facilities, this staff report has been submitted to provide an overview of
the proposed location for the dog park as well as recommendation for
development and an operations and management plan for the facility. Facility
Location The
facility was originally proposed for Staff
developed an alternative site plan for In
the meantime, the Buffaloe tract located between Due
to the neighborhood objections and the availability and advantages of the
Buffaloe tract, PRCR recommends that the dog park be developed on this
tract adjacent to Design Elements and Construction Costs The
basic design for a dog park includes a 5’ chain link fenced area with a
double gated entrance and designated areas for small and large dogs.
The extensive planting plan would screen the fence from the
roadway. The ground cover
would primarily be wood chips. Access
would be from the parking area adjacent to the SK8 Cary skate park
facility. An 8’ paved path
would be installed from the SK8 Cary drop-off area that would connect to
the proposed off-leash facility. Site
lighting for night use would be similar to the existing parking lot
lighting as leased through Progress Energy. Facility amenities include
benches, water access, information kiosk, pet cleanup stations and signs
regarding use of the facility. The
budget for the dog park is $50,000 and the cost estimate for construction
is $53,300. As the community
group advocating the dog park facility, the Cary Dog Park Club would
contribute $3,500 for the amenities as well as construct a kiosk for
information and signage. This
kiosk could be developed in conjunction with another volunteer effort,
such as an Eagle Scout project, and finalized after the park is
constructed. This estimate
includes the cost of developing an electronic entry system, which will
allow the development of a membership program and user fees to offset the
cost of operating the facility. The
cost estimate for development of the dog park is below:
Facility Operations Plan Four
goals were developed in working with Cary Dog Park Club to formulate an
operations plan. They are as
follows:
In
conducting research, staff found three models that have been developed for
dog park operations. The first
operational model is based on no fee.
|