TOWN OF CARY STAFF REPORT
Modification to minimum lot size and setbacks (PL02-049c) Consideration of an amendment to the Unified Development Ordinance to modify dimensional standards and increase open space requirements for certain residential dwellings types in the RM,R-MF-8 and R-MF-12 districts.	Speaker Chad Meadows
COMMITTEE MEETING	DATE
Operations Committee
Planning & Development Committee	4/18/02
TOWN COUNCIL MEETING	5/23/02
Planning and Zoning Board	8/19/02

FROM:	Jeff Ulma, AICP, Director, Planning Department
Prepared by:	Chad Meadows, AICP, Senior Planner
Approved by:	William B. Coleman, Jr., Town Manager Benjamin T. Shivar, Assistant Town Manager

MODIFICATIONS SINCE PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON MAY 23, 2002:

During the public hearing and subsequent internal staff discussions on these amendments, several items of concern have been expressed. A summary of these issues is listed below:

The possibility that the proposed amendments may have the negative consequence of increasing densities for certain types of residential uses in the RM and DR districts by removing minimum lot sizes and changing setbacks.

The potential for loss of common open space through the removal of minimum lot sizes and the resultant utilization of marginal land for more dwelling units (as opposed to retention of this land for open space).

The necessity of making changes to the text governing lot sizes and setbacks in downtown residential districts like the DR (Downtown Residential) district in light of upcoming Town Center Area Plan implementation efforts.

The need for a greater understanding of how these proposed amendments will benefit all citizens in Cary.

Based upon these concerns, the Staff has made substantial modifications to the staff report and adjustments to the proposed amendment language since the public hearing on 5/23/02. The modifications have been proposed as a method to focus on concerns while also assuring that the original purposes for the amendments continues to be addressed. Each of the modifications is listed below.

Removal of proposed changes to the Downtown Residential (DR) district.

This district has been removed from this ordinance amendment since the forthcoming Land Development Ordinance (new UDO) will replace this district and all associated standards with a new Town Center District. These new standards will address residential lot sizes and other dimensional requirements.

Removal of minimum lot sizes for certain uses in the Residential Mixed (RM) district.

The current UDO provisions regarding lot sizes and density are somewhat confusing, and have resulted in administrative difficulty. To simplify the development review process, the staff has removed the language related to minimum lot sizes for certain residential unit types in favor of a maximum residential density provision. The maximum density figures have not been increased beyond that currently available in the UDO. To address concerns about increased densities (due to removal of minimum lot sizes), the Staff is also proposing increased requirements for common open space.

Removal of the maximum building footprint requirements in the Residential Mixed (RM), Residential Multi-Family (RMF-8 & RMF-12) districts.

The requirements are in direct conflict with other lot size and maximum residential density provisions found in the UDO. As a result of this conflict, the Staff made an administrative interpretation in the 1990’s that the maximum building footprint requirements would not be implemented. As a result, this amendment proposes to remove this wording within the RM and RMF districts.

Reduction of the front and rear yard requirements from local and private streets.

The current UDO requires that all residential structures in the RM and RMF districts maintain aggregate front and rear yards of 40 feet when the structure fronts a local or private street (the actual front yard setback distance varies based upon the presence or absence of parking between the residential structure and the edge of the street). The Staff believes that these provisions are appropriate for traditional single family homes and patio home developments, but that these requirements are not practical for duplex, townhouse, or other attached dwelling unit developments since the yard requirements create a "de facto" minimum lot size which is not flexible, and is incapable of responding to different site or market conditions. The Staff has proposed reducing the aggregate front and rear yard requirements (from local and private streets) from 40 feet to 20 feet for duplex, townhome, and attached dwelling units in the RM and RMF districts. Note that the existing setbacks from collectors and thoroughfares remain unchanged.

Addition of new common open space requirements for certain residential unit types in the Residential Mixed (RM), Residential Multi-Family (RMF-8 and RMF-12) districts.

Several concerns have been expressed during and after the public hearing that reducing the minimum lot sizes and reducing setbacks for certain types of residential units would lead to an increase in the total number of units which could be constructed as part of a development project. In recognition of these concerns, the Staff has added a requirement that twenty percent (20%) of a development parcel’s area be recorded as common open space (excluding dedicated right-of-way). This requirement would apply to projects constructing patio homes, duplexes, townhouses, or multi-family structures.

It is important to note that these types of projects are already required to reserve 500 square feet of common open space per dwelling unit as described in UDO Section 15.2.2. This 500 square feet per dwelling unit could be credited towards the 20% requirement, but a project would be required to reserve whichever yielded more open space. In addition, the 20% requirement could be reduced to 10% of the parcel’s area if existing significant and healthy trees located outside of all required landscaping areas (perimeter & riparian buffers and streetscapes) are maintained. However, the ability to reduce the amount of recorded open space based upon tree retention does not negate the requirement to reserve 500 square feet of open space per unit.

After researching recently-approved projects, the Staff has determined that the proposed 20% open space provision will yield more common open space than that provided based upon the 500 square feet per unit provision in Chapter 15 of the UDO except in apartment developments. In addition, the 20% requirement should adequately address the concern that the removal of minimum lot sizes will lead to increased densities in the RM and RMF districts.

Following the public hearing, several questions have arisen as to how these proposed amendments benefit the citizens of Cary. There are four intended benefits to existing and potential Cary residents:

Increased diversity of housing stock
Increased opportunities for home ownership
Increased lifestyle choices
Increased provision of common open space

Over the past few years, the Town has adopted several new sets of regulations which have placed additional demands on developers and development in the Town, like: expanded stream buffers, an open space plan, the inability to plat into required buffers, design guidelines which control the arrangement of structures on a lot, and many other demands. At the same time, the Town has not added any flexibility to the other provisions in the UDO related to lot sizes or required yards.

The current regulatory climate can limit home ownership opportunities as well. The requirement to have a minimum lot size in the RM district has made it necessary for developers to offer a condominium-style residential product when the residential market may have preferred a townhouse or attached single family-style product. Removal of the minimum lot sizes within the RM district will allow developers more flexibility in offering their units as condominiums or townhomes, or attached single family units. The increased flexibility offered to developers may make the possibility of home ownership more attractive to different market segments who wish to own the land beneath their dwelling unit.

Recent construction trends have shown that more and more of today’s homebuyers are looking for smaller individual lots to maintain. This amendment responds to these market choices by allowing developers to devote less space to private lots in favor of greater provision of common open space. As a result, prospective homebuyers in Cary have more choices about the size of yard they would like to maintain.

Finally, the proposed requirement to preserve more open space will lead to greater retention of common open space in the higher density residential developments occurring in the RM and RMF districts.

This concludes the substantive changes to the staff report and amendment language which occurred as a result of concerns expressed during the public hearing and internal meetings with the staff.

The proposed UDO amendments are attached for review, and changes to the text are presented in the strike-through/underline format where new text is underlined and removed text is stricken.

Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Board forward the attached amendments for Council’s approval at its September 12, 2002 meeting.

ORDINANCE 02-

Ordinance Amendment
Town of Cary, NC
This ordinance amends Chapter 8, Parts 8, 9, 10, and 11 of the Cary Unified Development Ordinance.

CHAPTER 8. GENERAL USE DISTRICTS.
PART 8. Residential Mixed District.

8.8.5. Development Standards of General Applicability.

(d) Detached Single family dwellings:

(1) Minimum Lot Area: 6,000 square feet;

(2) Minimum lot width: 60 feet for each dwelling.

(3) Minimum front setback ~~yard~~: The width of the required front setback ~~yard~~ varies as follows, depending on the type of street on which the lot fronts, and shall be measured from the edge of the street right-of-way:

(i) From thoroughfares, 50 ~~feet~~ foot setback.

(ii) From collector streets, 30 ~~feet~~ foot setback.

(iii) From all other streets, the front yard ~~and rear yard combined shall amount to a width of at least 40 feet, provided that the front yard~~ shall be no less than 18 feet where parking is provided in the front or 10 feet where parking is not provided in the front. (See Figure 8.8.5. below.)

These requirements also shall apply to all side ~~yards~~ and rear ~~yards~~ setbacks/yards ~~which~~ when a property abuts a street., except where the side yard requirement or rear yard requirement stated below is greater than the front yard requirement stated above, the greater setback distance shall apply.

[FIGURE 8.8.5]

(4) Minimum side yards: only one side yard shall be required; however, the side yards combined shall amount to a width of at least 16 feet;

(5) Minimum front and rear yards: Properties which are part of a proposed subdivision and abut a street must adhere to the minimum front setback provisions as well as the following yard requirements:

(i) The front yard and rear yard combined shall amount to a width of at least 40 feet, provided that the front yard shall be no less than 18 feet where parking is provided in the front or 10 feet where parking is not provided in the front.

(ii) ~~Residential uses on a thoroughfare or collector street: 10 feet.~~ No rear yard shall be required on a thoroughfare or collector street; however, the front yard and rear yard combined shall amount to a width of at least 40 feet.

~~(6) Maximum building footprint shall be one of the following:~~

~~(i) 40 percent, with a 6,000 square foot minimum lot; or~~

(ii) No maximum building footprint provided that 60% of the total parcel proposed for development is restricted by appropriate covenants and restrictions which ensure that such area remains undeveloped open space.

(e) Patio dwellings.

(1) ~~Minimum Lot Area: One of either of the two following calculations, whichever provides the least density, provided that no property smaller than (i) below can be developed:~~

~~(i) 8,000 square feet including common area and the fee simple lots; or~~

~~(ii) A gross density of 6.0 dwelling units per acre~~. Maximum Gross Density: 6.0 dwelling units per acre.

(2) Minimum lot width per dwelling unit: 20 feet.

(3) ~~Maximum building footprint: same as sub-section 8.8.5(d)(s) above.~~ Minimum front setback: same as sub-section 8.8.5(d)(3) above.

(4) Minimum front and rear yards: same as sub-section 8.8.5(d)~~(3)~~(5) above.

(5) Minimum side yard between building groupings: 16 feet combined.

(6) Minimum interior side yards between buildings: 0 feet.

(f) Duplexes., Subdivided Attached, Semi-Attached and Townhouse Developments.

(1) ~~Minimum Lot Area: One of either of the two following calculations, whichever provides the least density, provided that no property smaller than (i) below can be developed:~~ Maximum Gross Density: 6.0 dwelling units per acre.

~~(i) 8,000 square feet; or~~

(~~ii) A gross density of 6.0 dwelling units per acre.~~

(2) Minimum lot width: 5020 feet per dwelling unit, except that duplexes shall maintain a minimum lot width of 50 feet.

(3) Minimum front~~, side~~ and rear ~~yards~~ setbacks: ~~same as Section 8.8.5(d)(3).~~

(i) From thoroughfares, 50 feet setback.

(ii) From collector streets, 30 feet setback.

(iii) From all other streets, the front yard shall be no less than 18 feet where parking is provided in the front.

These requirements also shall apply to all side setbacks when a property abuts a street.

~~Maximum building footprint: equals 40%.~~Minimum side setbacks between building groupings: 16 feet.

5. Minimum front/rear yards. 20 feet combined, split in any way between front and rear yards.

Permanent common open space: One of the following shall be provided, whichever is greater:

(i) 500 square feet per unit as required in Section 15.2.2; or

(ii) 20% of the total parcel proposed for development, excluding dedicated right-of-way. 10% where existing significant and healthy trees outside of required buffers are preserved.

(g) Subdivided attached, semi-attached and townhouse developments.

(~~1) Minimum Lot Area: One of either of the two following calculations, whichever provides the least density, provided that no property smaller than (i) below can be developed:~~

~~(i) 8,000 square feet for the first two dwelling units plus an additional 2,500 square feet for each additional dwelling unit; or~~

~~(ii) A gross density of 6.0 dwelling units per acre.~~

~~(2) Minimum lot width: 20 feet per dwelling unit.~~

~~(3) Maximum building footprint: same as Section 8.8.5(d)(6).~~

~~(4) Minimum front and rear yards: same as Section 8.8.5.(d)(3).~~

● ● ●

CHAPTER 8. GENERAL USE DISTRICTS.

PART 10. R-MF-8 Multi-Family Residential District.

8.10.5. Development Standards of General Applicability.

All uses and structures in the R-MF-8 District shall meet the following development standards, except as otherwise provided by this Ordinance:

(a) Minimum lot area/density.

(1) Residential uses: the total density of each development shall not exceed 8.0 units per acre. (Except for major special uses under Section 8.10.4.)

(2) All other uses: 10,000 square feet.

(b) Minimum lot width.

(1) Subdivided attached, semi-detached, patio dwelling, and townhouse developments: 20 feet.

(2) All other uses: 60 feet (70 feet for corner lots).

(c) Minimum front ~~yard~~ setback. The width of the required front ~~yard~~ setback varies as follows, depending on the type of street on which the lot fronts, and shall be measured from the edge of the street right-of-way:

(1) From thoroughfares, 50 ~~feet~~ foot setback.

(2) From collector streets, 30 feet foot setback.

(3) From all other streets, the front setback shall be no less than 18 feet where parking is provided in the front for residential uses. 20 feet for nonresidential uses~~; 40 feet, split in any way between front and rear yards for residential uses~~.

(4) ~~This applies to~~ For patio dwellings. from all other streets, the front ~~yard~~ and rear ~~yard~~ setbacks combined shall amount to a width of at least 40 feet, provided that the front ~~yard~~ setback shall be no less than 18 feet where parking is provided in the front ~~or 10 feet where parking is not~~.

These requirements also shall apply to all side ~~yards~~ and rear ~~yards~~ setbacks ~~which~~ when a property abuts a street.~~, except where the side yard requirement or rear yard requirement stated below is greater than the requirement stated above.~~

(d) Minimum side yards

(1) Non-residential: 10 feet, plus an additional four feet for each full story of building height over two stories.

(2) Residential:

(i) Between building groupings 16 feet, divided between both side yards.

(ii) Between buildings in the same development: 0

(e) Minimum front/rear yards. 20 feet for non-residential uses; 4020 feet combined, ~~split in any way~~ between front and rear yards for residential uses, except that patio dwellings shall maintain 40 feet combined.

(f) Yard requirements contiguous to other residential districts. With respect to any yard which is contiguous to property located in another residential zoning district, unless the buffer required by Table 14.1.5 is provided adjacent to that residential zoning district, that yard shall be no less than the corresponding front, side, or rear yard requirement of the adjacent district and one-half of the buffer required in Table 14.1.5.

(g) ~~Maximum building footprint~~. Permanent common open space: One of the following shall be provided, whichever is greater:

(1) ~~Residential uses:~~ 500 square feet per unit as required in Section 15.2.2; or

~~(i) 40 percent with a minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet, or~~

(ii) No maximum building footprint provided that 60% of the total parcel proposed for development is restricted by appropriate covenants and restrictions which ensure that such area remains undeveloped open space.

(2) ~~All other uses: 30 percent.~~ 20% of the total parcel proposed for development, excluding dedicated right-of-way. 10% where existing significant and healthy trees outside of required buffers are preserved.

● ● ●

CHAPTER 8. GENERAL USE DISTRICTS.

PART 11. R-MF-12 Multi-Family Residential District.

8.11.5. Development Standards of General Applicability.

All uses and structures in the R-MF-12 District shall meet the following development standards, except as otherwise provided by this Ordinance: