Present:  

Kelly Commiskey, Christopher Brooks, Carla Sadtler, William Lyke,
Lori Bush, Harry Baulch, Steven Goodridge, Christy Perrin,
Matthew Danielson, Wally Dawson  

Staff Present: 

JW Shearin, Travis Morehead, Beth Lewis, Bob Benfield,
Jeff Ulma, Brenda Culbertson, Chris Simpson, Shuyan Tian,
Dick Moore, Philip Smith, Scott Ramage, Doug McRainey,
Tammy Spivey, Glen Harrell, JoAnne Carlyle,
Ricky Barker, Doug McRainey  

A.  CALL TO ORDER (Chairman Dawson)  

B.  APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 18, 2005 MEETING
     (Chairman Dawson)
     Christy Perrin made a motion to recommend approval of the minutes,
     Steven Goodridge seconded and the Board approved unanimously 10-0.  

C.  TOWN COUNCIL REPORT (Council Member Robinson)  

      1.  Town Council Meeting April 28, 2005

      2.  Town Council Meeting May 12, 2005  

D.  REZONINGS, LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS, AND CONCEPT PLANS
     FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION:  

     Please adhere to the following guidelines:  

·         Proceed to the podium and state your name clearly.

·         Public testimony is limited to comments on new or substantially changed
    aspects of the request which have occurred following the public hearing
    held by the Town Council.

·         Be concise; avoid repetition; limit comments to five minutes or less, and
    designate a spokesperson for large groups.

·         Following your presentation, print your name on a form provided by the
    Board Secretary to ensure the official record reflects the correct information.

·         Provide the Board Secretary any documents or materials presented to
    the Board.  

      1.  Rezoning 04-REZ-31 Trinity Ridge (Bob Benfield) 

Carla Sadtler made a motion to recommend denial of staff’s
            recommendation, Lori Bush seconded, and the Board voted 5-4.
            The dissenting votes were Harry Baulch, Christopher Brooks,
            Steven Goodridge, and Kelly Commiskey. (Matthew Danielson was
            excused for personal reasons from involvement in this case.)  

Concerns Discussed:

·    New conditions proposed that were not previously reviewed by the
staff or Planning Board prior to the Planning Board meeting.

·     Added a clause stating that proposed dwellings shall be
located a minimum of 50 feet from the property line of Trinity Woods.

·    The developer shall provide an open space amenity of at least 5,000
square feet and within 600 feet from the current end of Brandywine
Drive.  This amenity shall consist of a seating area and may include
play equipment and shade structures.

·         The submittal of a Traffic Study.

·         Traffic calming measures along the existing section of Brandywine
     Drive.  (The applicant advised the Planning Board and staff that a
     private agreement would be entered into with the neighborhood,
     obligating the applicant to provide funding for the installation of
     traffic calming devices along the existing section of Brandywine
     Drive.)

·         The need for additional buffer width along the western boundary
    of the development.

·         Appropriateness of proposed zoning designation.  

     Reasons for majority vote:

·    The Planning Board felt that perhaps the Planned Development
District (PDD) designation, as opposed to the proposed Transitional
Residential Conditional Use (TR CU) designation, would have provided
additional information regarding access, buffers and the general
conceptual layout of development.

·     The submittal of additional zoning conditions for the Town Council’s
 consideration that were not previously reviewed by the staff or
 Planning Board.  

      Reasons for Dissenting Vote:

·     That the Transitional Residential Conditional Use designation
 (TR CU) as proposed satisfied the Comprehensive Land Use Plan
 requirement for low density development.

·     The proposed zoning conditions adequately met the needs of the
 neighborhood.           

            Public Hearing Comments    

      2.  Rezoning 05-REZ-01 Arboretum Planned Development District
           (PDD) Amendment (Bob Benfield)  

            Matthew Danielson made a motion to recommend approval of staff’s
            recommendation, Steven Goodridge seconded, and the Board voted 8-2.               
            The dissenting votes were Christy Perrin and Lori Bush.  

Concerns Discussed:

·     General parking needs of the development as compared to the
amount of parking provided.

·     The need for bicycle racks and the removal of signs prohibiting
 bicycles on the property.  (This issue will be addressed through the
 review and approval of the remaining sections of development within
 the Arboretum.)  

Reasons for Majority Vote:

·     The Planning Board felt that the change in use from hotel to
 condominium was in keeping with the mixed use designation for the
 property and the number of condominium units proposed was
 appropriate for residential development within a Regional Activity
Center.  

Reasons for Dissenting Vote:

·     Concerns regarding the amount of parking to be provided as
 compared to actual amount of parking needed to satisfy overall
 parking needs of the development. (This issue is being reviewed by
 the Planning and Development Committee separate from this
 request.)             

      3.  Rezoning 05-REZ-02 Forest Oaks Planned Development District
           (PDD) Amendment (Beth Lewis)          

            Carla Sadtler made a motion to recommend approval of staff’s
            recommendation, Kelly Commiskey seconded and the Board
            approved unanimously 10-0.   

Concerns Discussed:

·     Location of open space used for density bonus.  It was noted that
 the open space required by the Southwest Area Plan will, in Forest
 Oaks, be located in an area governed by the Northwest Area Plan.  

Reason for Majority Vote:

·     Request follows the plan for Forest Oaks/Amberly Town Park that
 was noted in the original Forest Oaks rezoning request.  

      4.  Rezoning 05-REZ-03 Summers Tract (Beth Lewis)  

Carla Sadtler made a motion to deny staff’s recommendation,
            Lori Bush seconded, and the Board voted 6-4 in favor of the motion. The
            dissenting votes were Steven Goodridge, Harry Baulch,
            Matthew Danielson, and Christopher Brooks.          

Concerns Discussed:

·     Inappropriate density and lot size for area.  The residents in the area
felt that the 20,000 square foot minimum lot size and 1.11 units per
acre were not appropriate in an area of one acre and larger lots.

·     Creating an area of smaller lots surrounded by larger lots.  It was felt
 by the neighbors that a “doughnut hole” of smaller lots is not
 appropriate at the edge of Cary’s ETJ surrounded by larger lots.

·     Municipal services.  The residents in the area do not want municipal
services such as water, sewer, sidewalks, curbs and gutters.  It is felt
 that the area is rural in nature and as such municipal services are not
 appropriate.

·     Visual impact of development.  The residents in the area felt that the
 visual impact of this proposed development on the existing property
 owners would be too great.

·     Concerns about stormwater run-off.  The residents in the area felt that
 an excessive amount of stormwater run-off generated by this
 development would negatively affect their properties.

·     Location of proposed pump station.  The residents in the area
 felt that the location of the pump station and the operation of the
 pump station would negatively affect their properties.  

Reasons for Majority Vote to forward with a recommendation
           of denial:

·      Density and minimum lot size are not appropriate in area of larger
 lots and lower density.

·     Visual impact of residences may not be buffered adequately by
 landscape strips.  

Reasons for Dissenting Vote to forward with a recommendation
           of denial:

·     Four members did not support the motion.  No specific reasons were
stated at the time the motion was made.  However, the earlier discussion
by the Board included the following points:

·     Compromises offered by the applicant and the failure of the
surrounding residents to offer compromises. 

·     The buffers and increased landscape strips would offer visual
 screening for the surrounding neighborhood.

·     Request meets the Southeast Area Plan.    

            Public Hearing Comments  

 E.  FOR INFORMATION  

      1.  Monthly Construction Activity Reports

      2.  Monthly Site/Subdivision Activity Reports    

 F.  ADJOURNMENT:  10:28 p.m.  

Please contact the Town of Cary Planning Department with any questions about
this agenda.  The e-mail address is brenda.culbertson@townofcary.org and the
phone number is (919) 469-4382.  Visit our Web site at www.townofcary.org for more
detailed information about each agenda item.  

“The Town of Cary is committed to providing all citizens with the opportunity to
participate fully in the public meeting process.  Any person with a disability who
needs an auxiliary aid or service in order to participate in any meeting may contact
the Town Clerk at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.  The e-mail address is
sue.rowland@townofcary.org; the phone number is (919) 469-4011; the TDD number
is (919) 469-4012.”  

Planning and Zoning Board meetings are broadcast live the night of the meeting
and are rebroadcast the same week on Tuesday at 7:30 a.m. and Wednesday
at 7:30 p.m.