Work Session Minutes of the Town of Cary, NC
Present:
Mayor Ernie McAlister, Mayor Pro Tem Jack Smith, Council Members Erv
Portman and Nels Roseland
Mayor McAlister called the
meeting to order at
Absent:
Council Members Marla Dorrel and Jennifer Robinson
Council member Julie Robison
arrived late and her arrival is noted in the minutes.
Ricky Barker of the Planning
Department stated that the ordinance amendments for the Conservation Residential
Overlay District and Cluster Development Option were removed from the Round 8
LDO because they needed to be further studied.
Staff has been working with the development community, received feedback
from the Planning and Development Committee, and then met with council members
to receive more solid direction. (Staff’s
PowerPoint Presentation is attached to and incorporated in these minutes as Exhibit
A.)
Mrs. Robison arrived at this
point in the meeting at
Mr. Barker stated that open
space subdivisions are not new to
Mr. Portman said that he likes
the concept that the greater percentage of buildable land set aside by a
developer the greater incentive they receive.
He said that would align the public and private interests and the
developer can get a higher density for conserving more.
He asked about having a conservation incentive that can be applied
throughout the Town and provide a density bonus based upon the higher percentage
of conserved land. Mr. Barker said
that for each one percent more open space they would get three percent more
lots.
Mayor McAlister said
integrating the open space into a development makes more sense and they need to
determine how to promote that alternative. Mr.
Barker said the alternative takes some of the lots out to provide more of an
open feel.
Mrs. Robison said they need to
either make the modification towards the alternative in terms of the amendment
to the ordinance or, if there is a legal problem, then create other incentives
to go back to building in keeping with
Mr. Portman said that the
incentives are almost a multiplier of 10x, in keeping with the current
ordinance. He said that the concept
is clear; they just have the wrong multiplier.
He said council wants to provide an incentive for some larger lots that
would be more valuable with more open space and more profitable to develop.
He likes the idea of agreeing on a ratio and then letting the developer
ask for the incentive.
Mayor McAlister asked if there
were any particular ratio breaking points that the developers thought would make
it worthwhile for them to consider. Mr.
Barker said the proposal will be presented to the developer focus group after
staff receives direction from council. Mayor
McAlister said that they need to hear from the developer focus group to
determine if it’s worth pursuing.
Mayor McAlister asked what can
be done for the connectivity and integration of the open space. Mr. Barker said
they would need to set criteria for open space.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said that
he would like to get away from the concept of ranges.
Mrs. Robison agreed. She
said the market will consume as much house on as little available land as is
allowed unless council enforces an alternative based in actual requirement.
Mr. Portman said council is
trying to create an incentive ordinance to save open space.
He said the current 1 to 9 percent ratio is counter to what they are
trying to achieve. He said that the 1 to 5 percent and 1 to 3 percent ratios are
more favorable.
Mayor McAlister asked council
if they agreed to take the 1 to 9 percent ratio off and move forward to the
developer focus group with the other two alternatives.
All of the council members concurred.
Mr. Roseland said they need to
be more flexible on the sidewalk issues as long as they meet or exceed the
standards. Mrs. Robison said they
need to start dealing on a systematic basis with stormwater management.
Mr. Barker said that is covered later in the presentation.
Streetscape Alternatives
Mr. Portman said he would lean
toward the developer’s option to increase width as long as it’s opaque, and
techniques are used to reduce views from the road.
It keeps connectivity of open space.
He said that kind of an approach would be broad brushed and portrays the
classic views of
Jeff Ulma of the Planning
Department stated that the objectives they are trying to accomplish add to the
complexity on all of this—low density, rural, protect open space, minimum lot
sizes, maximum density; all of the parameters are getting at that complexity and
at the view from the public realm.
Mr. Roseland liked the option
to increase width with opaque and other techniques as well as requiring deeper
streetscapes at entrances to subdivision. Mr.
Portman said the big issue is to get developers to conserve open space. He
said they can’t go below the minimums and the Town would still state the
requirements. He said that council
shouldn’t be overly restrictive because he believes that developers will try
to create good, high end, attractive communities.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said the minimum standard is not the product Council
wants.
Mrs. Robison said they
shouldn’t base the alternatives conceptually on one single development
product. She said the projects that
have come before council have not protected enough of the streetscape entrances
and leaving it at the developers’ option guarantees that they may or may not
look at it.
Mayor McAlister suggested
moving forward with the top two options to the developer focus group for
feedback—require 1.5 times the width, then provide other open space, and
required deeper streetscapes at entrances to subdivisions.
Mr. Portman didn’t agree. He
asked if using the overlay automatically comes to council.
Mr. Barker replied that it does until they get the ordinance fixed; once
the ordinance is fixed it goes back to administrative approval.
Mr. Roseland said he would like
to provide the flexibility of the developer’s option.
Mr. Portman agreed. Mr.
Barker said there would be criteria set.
Mayor McAlister said he is
hearing that council would like to keep all of the options available to receive
feedback from the developer focus group. Mayor
Pro Tem Smith, Mr. Roseland and Mr. Portman agreed; Mrs. Robison disagreed.
Open Space Criteria
Mr. Portman said it was stated
upfront that the concept only applies to buildable land, and that credit isn’t
given for the stream buffers or the required street frontage.
Mr. Barker said it gets back to requiring that open space be at least 50
feet wide for integration or that the majority of lots are adjacent to open
space.
Mayor McAlister said that is
achieved from criteria for integrating open space gives.
He said once they do that it will determine whether to move forward.
Mr. Portman and Mr. Roseland agreed.
Mrs. Robison asked about open
space that is not developable or not accessible to residents.
Mr. Barker said there wouldn’t be any credits or incentives.
Mrs. Robison asked if the developer can still have undevelopable open
space that’s not accessible to residents.
Mayor McAlister said yes. They
just wouldn’t get any benefit of credits or incentives.
Mrs. Robison asked if anything
is being done to make the undevelopable land accessible.
Mr. Ulma said it would be difficult to get even a greenway trail if
the terrain is steep. Mr. Barker
said with the travels and sidewalks there may be a criteria that all of the open
space needs to be accessible through a system of greenways and trails, which
would get at that point as long as there weren’t any topography issues.
Mr. Portman said an unintended
consequence is that there is a lot of land not buildable in certain areas, which
under the ordinance becomes an incentive to buy the land because the area
that’s not buildable gives you credit toward higher density.
Mr. Barker said staff will look into that.
Secondary System of
Greenways
Mrs. Robison asked for clarity.
Mr. Barker said that the secondary system of greenways is the private
circulation of trails that eventually lead to public primary greenways.
Mrs. Robison asked if there
would be optional greenways connecting to the public greenways.
Mr. Barker said that is the purpose.
He said it’s also to put in trails that access the extra green open
space and provide opportunities for residents to feel like they are in a
conservation overlay.
Mrs. Robison asked if the
greenways would serve as pedestrian access to move around.
Mr. Barker responded yes. Mrs.
Robison said that according to our own regulations the greenways are not usable
after dusk and there are obvious safety issues related to that.
Mr. Roseland said it’s about
pedestrian accessibility and mobility and he recommends flexibility.
The plans have to have a good pedestrian circulation element.
Mr. Ulma said that the intent was that in creating and maintaining rural
character you don’t’ see sidewalks in the country.
Mayor McAlister said that the
system should allow a combination of sidewalks and secondary greenways ensuring
that open space is accessible through trails. Council
members concurred.
Curb and Gutter
Mr. Barker said that staff is
okay with using curb and gutter as long as it meets the low impact design
requirements.
Mr. Portman asked how that
would be done and whether a key feature of low impact design was a swale.
Tom Horstman of the Engineering Department said that you can have low
impact designs for curb and gutter. Instead
of having storm drains you would have turnouts on the curb and gutter which
would then go to a swale system. He
said that you can have the groundwater recharge that you get from the swales
system and also have curb and gutter.
Mr. Portman asked about curb
and gutter running to a storm sewer. Mr.
Horstman said you want to try to eliminate the storm sewer because there’s no
infiltration when there’s a concrete pipe.
Council members liked the
options provided.
Low Impact Design Options
Mr. Roseland said that he
doesn’t like the massive sweep of everything inside of a site.
Bonus density units should only be given if minimizing the grading.
Mr. Barker asked if staff
should still pursue the low impact deign. Mrs.
Robison said yes. Mr. Roseland
said he is open to flexibility as long as the Town’s minimum standards are
exceeded. Mayor Pro Tem Smith
doesn’t want to incentivise mass grading. Mr.
Barker said it seems like they have agreement on requiring lot clearing limits
and roads on ridges to the extent practical.
Mr. Roseland asked which option
equals less nitrogen in
Mr. Roseland asked if the same
amount of impervious surface was being required on the engineering street
standards. Mr. Barker said the Town
meets the rural road standards for the main roads.
Mr. Ulma added that internal subdivision streets are the same as the
current standard; it hasn’t been changed or altered.
Mayor McAlister said the top
two options seem acceptable. Council
members agreed.
Cluster Ordinance
Mr. Barker stated that the
current cluster regulations have been in effect for well over 15 years.
He doesn’t remember anyone using them.
Mr. Portman suggested using the
same percentage approach as in conservation overlay.
Mr. Barker said the cluster is an option within districts so staff
would have to craft it to blend.
Mrs. Robison suggested adopting
the percentages as an overall approach. Mr.
Barker said Town wide they are talking about a lot of infill.
He said it would open the door for allowing it by right and it would only
go down 15 percent.
Mayor Pro Tem Smith said he is
okay with adding additional restrictions to creates checks and balances.
Mr. Portman asked about not
exceeding 3.6 units per acre. Mr.
Barker said it is an example for R-12 and it couldn’t be exceeded from a gross
density standpoint. Mr. Portman
asked about the incentive. Mr.
Barker said most properties on a conventional R-12 subdivision won’t achieve
3.6 because of roads, stream buffers, etc. Mayor
McAlister said setting the bar higher makes sense, even if it’s not as strong
an incentive to go this way.
Mr. Roseland said if there is
additional open space which has a feature that can bring them together with
incentives then that should be done. Mr.
Barker said within open space they can have some type of feature instead of just
a trail. Mr. Roseland said he would
like it to have something that gives a sense of community.
Mrs. Robison said that
developers who have experience with
Mr. Portman is concerned about
putting in hard numbers which precludes the concept council is trying to
achieve. He asked about the
incentive for the cluster ordinance. Mr.
Barker said you may be able to get 3 units per acre in an R‑12
subdivision; the ordinance gives up to 3.6 acres.
He said staff will still use percentages but it will be capped.
Next Steps
Mayor McAlister asked that
council be notified once the developer focus group meeting is scheduled in the
event council members want to attend.
Mayor McAlister adjourned the
meeting at 6:03 p.m.