Work Session Minutes of the Town of Cary, North Carolina
February 21, 2006
Subject: Retreat planning
Location: Conference Room 11130, 316 N. Academy St., Cary, NC
Present: Mayor Ernie McAlister, Mayor Pro Tem Jack Smith, Council Members Marla Dorrel, Mike Joyce and Nels Roseland
Absent: Council Members Jennifer Robinson and Julie Robison
Mayor McAlister began the meeting at 4:35 p.m.
Town Manager Bill Coleman reviewed logistics. He stated the retreat is scheduled for Mid Pines on March 17-19, 2006. The items for council decision at the retreat will include: the process for capital priorities and making capital decisions; stormwater capital budget; planning and zoning process (i.e., how we handle rezonings, site plans, the processes used, public input at various stages, etc.). Mr. Coleman suggested a facilitator, since this year’s retreat will require council decisions instead of in the past when only information was relayed. He stated he would more than likely utilize a facilitator from NCSU or UNC. The council concurred with the use of a facilitator. Mr. Coleman stated the staff will manage the facilitator cost and schedule with an emphasis on cost-consciousness.
Mr. Coleman outlined the following proposed retreat agenda:
1. Citizen Satisfaction Survey
2. Budget/Finance
3. Capital Budget
4. Planning and Development Decision Process (efficient, effective, equitable)
Mr. Coleman stated the citizen satisfaction discussion will be good information for the budget priority discussion, and it will give the council an indication of the state of the Town from the citizen perspective.
Mr. Coleman stated the budget/finance presentation will provide an update on revenue trends, debt and expenditure trends, debt and cash status, and an overview of the FY2007 budget (where we are in the process, major questions, etc.).
Mr. Coleman stated the capital budget presentation will include priorities and funding issues for roads, parks and possibly fire. It will include discussion about the master plans and how these plans translate into process. He stated the stormwater discussion will include the Town’s requirements, quality, quantity, history, current conditions and options for dealing with these issues.
Mr. Coleman stated the planning process discussion will focus on the new state law changes and how they relate to our processes, an overview of the process changes we’re making because of these state law changes, and whether we need to make additional changes based on these state law changes, etc. Discussion will include various aspects of what we do, when we do it, where decisions are made and why, and whether any of this needs to be changed.
Mr. Ulma distributed a draft outline for the planning process discussion to be held at the retreat:
Background/Context
Rezoning Process
Site Plan/Subdivision Plan Review Process
Summary/Conclusions/Decisions
Mr. Joyce stated at last year’s retreat he misunderstood that staff was seeking council decision and he thought the planning sessions were information only. He was surprised to hear after the retreat that the council made the decision at the retreat. Mr. Coleman stated staff will clearly identify all retreat items that need a decision.
Mr. Roseland wants to understand the big picture problem regarding the planning and development process. He stated this could feasibly take up the entire retreat, and he wants the retreat to be productive. Mr. Ulma replied that this presentation will look at how we operate and how we could improve/change. He stated the questions in the draft outline are questions that staff has actually heard over the past months and years.
Mr. Joyce asked if staff has heard enough complaint to justify this topic taking up so much time at retreat. Ms. Dorrel stated she has observed that by the time the council gets to the approval process, everyone involved seems to be “beaten and worn down.” She stated she interviewed some of the stakeholders to get a feel for how to better manage citizen involvement so neighborhoods don’t feel that way and to ensure they are heard.
Ms. Dorrel stated two things have happened in Cary’s development process: (1) growth and limited land has resulted in everything being infill development, which results in everything being a neighborhood issue; and (2) we are more accessible than ever via e-mail, which leads to an increased opportunity to make mistakes and disseminate inaccurate information. She stated these cases go for months and people stay engaged the entire time. She thinks it’s good to examine the current process and determine how to adapt to the current culture and environment. She stated the outline is now very rough.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated the council needs time to determine if the process is broken. He thinks that changes were made several years ago that were well intentioned to better involve citizens. He suggested that these actual results be examined. He stated it is important to actually determine if everyone does, in fact, feel abused and worn out. He’s heard from the P&Z Board that they don’t know what they should be doing. He stated development now seems to bring in projects that are less than desirable because of all the citizen comments and input throughout the process. He asked how to get the trust factor where people believe their voices are heard without hearing citizen comments for months and months, which results in constant changes to the plans. He believes that stakeholders would prefer not to go through months and months of these extra steps to get to the final product, and he believes that people want to get to the final product in a much shorter amount of time.
Mr. Joyce stated the human element must be considered, and everyone should recognize there are competing factors. He stated the council should help facilitate the process. He prefers to point to the law and determine if the plans comply with the law; if so, he stated citizens should understand that.
Mr. Coleman stated that Mr. Ulma has in the past characterized the planning and development decision-making process theoretically as the development regulations guide development, but realistically, citizens seem to think they are minimum standards, and developers think they are maximum standards, and it becomes negotiation process. He stated development decisions have become mostly negotiation, and if we make it more systematic, we move more away from the arbitrary negotiations.
Mr. Joyce is still unsure about this being a retreat topic. He believes the average citizen is overwhelmed by the process. He asked why staff can’t create a pamphlet to help people understand.
Ms. Dorrel sees this as a chance to recheck expectations for the process by starting with the legal requirements and then defining council’s expectations for the process. She stated sometimes this gets out of alignment. She stated the council needs to agree on how to relay this to the public to avoid the constant negotiations.
Mayor McAlister stated the exercise needs to have a point to it, and the council needs to understand why everyone is beaten up and how we can do a better job with the process. He stated everyone should look at where we are today so when we deal with infill we have better guidelines (i.e., LDO), and the council should stick to the guidelines. He stated the Town needs a fair process and not one that is arbitrary in which decisions are easily swayed. He does not want a pointless exercise at the retreat where nothing changes because the council is not willing to say no and stand behind the LDO. He believes it ultimately depends on the council and their willingness to fulfill the right guidelines.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated the council may need to look at decisions made years ago that had unintended consequences. He stated that negotiations often occur at the P&Z Board level that do not support the LDO, and then these recommendations come to council. He suggested that the process needs to be cleaned up. He stated it’s possible that LDO changes are needed.
Mr. Joyce asked if it’s reasonable for council to set buffer funding similar to sidewalk funding. He’s looking for a way to compensate the landowner to have satisfactory outcome regarding buffers where all parties win. Mayor McAlister stated part of this perpetuates the negotiation process that we want to get away from. He stated the council needs to determine the rules and stick to them to eliminate the negotiation process. Everyone needs to understand the expectations, which are based on reasonableness.
Mr. Roseland stated conditions are legal, and he believes that negotiations are a key part of the process.
Ms. Dorrel stated she is more concerned about neighborhoods who spend months on a plan because they don’t understand or trust the process. She stated there should be a clearer path for citizens to participate where they feel heard and responded to during the process. She stated the council should set more reasonable expectations to provide predictability. She’s heard from citizens who think the process is a game.
Mr. Joyce stated he’s heard that developers have a fear they will be denied by council unless they agree to the conditions the citizens want. He suggested that council refer citizens to the developers and then allow the developers to bring forth the plan and conditions.
Ms. Dorrel stated the state law will be a good starting point for the retreat discussion about the development issues.
Mayor McAlister stated in special use hearings the council must make decisions based on specific points, which are very objective and easy to understand. He stated council creates gray area by indulging unreasonable conditions. He stated the Town needs a cleaner process to avoid this. He thinks this is a good retreat topic.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated it’s not always as simple as following the rules, and it’s important to have balance. He stated there can be power in voting no without a lot of discussion.
Mr. Roseland stated people get emotional, and it’s impossible to remove all the subjectivity. He sees this as a continuous improvement effort.
Ms. Dorrel stated Mrs. Robinson couldn’t attend this work session, but she’s interested in reviewing the area plans. She elaborated that it may be good to review the plans to ensure they are meeting the council’s expectations.
Ms. Dorrel stated she recently asked individual council members about adding Campbell Road to the list, because the question has been raised by people in that area. She stated she got mixed comments from council members. She stated the retreat may not be the time or place to discuss this, but she stated it may provided an opportunity to canvass the council to determine interest.
Mayor McAlister stated it’s important to examine previously set guidelines. He does not know if the retreat is the right forum to review the various area plans; however, the council has had spirited discussions about varying from adopted plans. He believes the plans are worth revisiting if the council continues to make changes to these plans on a case-by-case basis. He stated the council should reaffirm the guiding principles or change the plans appropriately.
Mr. Joyce thinks that cluster development is problematic. He stated it is hard to justify saying a development is one lot per acre when there are actually multiple lots on the acre of land. He stated it’s possible that not all projects are suitable for cluster development.
Ms. Dorrel stated the discussion point may be the cases where decisions have been made that are inconsistent with the land use plan. She stated these cases may mean that the particular cases had extenuating circumstances and it was truly a case-by-case decision based on those circumstances, or it may mean the council no longer supports the concept of the plan. She stated it’s important for the staff to know what the council means in these situations.
Ms. Dorrel stated that Mrs. Robison suggested to her that the staff and council should look back at the recent retreat when citizen involvement was discussed, because part of this discussion included citizen education materials. Ms. Moran stated staff will research that earlier retreat discussion.
Ms. Dorrel asked about time allotments for the retreat agenda. Mr. Coleman stated the citizen survey discussion may take about an hour, and the remainder of the afternoon of the first day would be spent on budget and finance issues. He stated the capital budget discussion could be completed on Saturday morning, and the rest of the day Saturday and Sunday morning could be spent on the planning issues.
Ms. Dorrel commented that sometimes the council spends most of the retreat time receiving information and very little time getting feedback. She stated there’s often not time to process the information or discuss it.
Mr. Coleman stated staff will plan shorter presentations and will allow more time for discussions with good identification on goals for decision points. Mayor Pro Tem Smith stated the facilitator should ensure that dialog occurs conducive to problem solving. He stated everyone should understand up-front that it’s ok to disagree.
Mayor McAlister adjourned the meeting at 5:46 p.m.