STAFF REPORT
Proposed Schedule for LDO Amendments:
|
Planning and
Development Committee meeting: |
|
|
Dates of advertisements
in the Cary Connections section of The Cary News |
January 11, 2006
|
|
Date of public hearing: |
|
|
Date of Planning and
Zoning Board meeting: |
|
|
Date of final action by
Council: |
|
Land
Development Ordinance (LDO) Text Amendments (Round 7) (PL06-024a)
Consideration of a series of modifications and
revisions to the Land Development Ordinance
Speaker: Angela Reincke
From:
Jeffery G. Ulma, AICP, Planning Director
Prepared by: Angela
Reincke, ASLA, Senior Planner
Approved by: William
B. Coleman, Jr., Town Manager
Approved by: Benjamin T. Shivar,
Assistant Town Manager
BACKGROUND: Staff has identified amendments to various portions of the Land Development Ordinance text to be included in Round 7 of LDO amendments. Many of these amendments are made to address recent changes that were made to the North Carolina State Statutes which become effective January 1, 2006. In order to ensure that the LDO reflects the requirements of the statutes, we are processing these amendments to move through public hearing and public input processes. This round of amendments was presented to the Planning and Development Committee on December 15, 2005 and was forwarded to public hearing. The material was presented to the Developer Focus and Stakeholder Group on January 12, 2006, February 8, 2006, and March 1, 2006. Input and comments have been included. Major items of discussion included wall signs for multi-occupant buildings, stormwater management, off-premise open house residential real estate signs, real estate signs and bicycle parking requirements. Items have been added since the P&D Committee meeting and include, but are not limited to: Modifying Group Home distance requirements based on number of residents and lowering the maximum number of residents allowed to reflect state standards, amending the number of children allowed in large home daycares to reflect state regulations, changes to the Nitrogen Export Reduction Options to reflect State regulation changes, interpretation for the clarification of sign types not allowed within activity centers which are allowed in Town Center, optional amendments to the off premise real estate sign regulations and additional square footage and clarifications to sign location on multi-tenant wall sign regulations. The amendments also include substantive changes or additions and a number of minor clarifications to address concerns from the staff, council members, focus/stakeholder group and the public. As part of this amendment review process, the Development Review Committee (Town Staff comprised of representatives from key departments) has reviewed the proposed amendments.
Summary
of changes since the Town Council Public Hearing:
Changes to the Real Estate Sign
item are made to provide increased flexibility and to bring an enforceable
uniform standard to sign types of similar nature.
Although these sign types were originally intended to be temporary in
nature, the trend has been toward having these signs used in a more permanent
nature. Due to this staff has
looked into alternatives to provide professionals options which provide
sensitivity to cost, location and visibility issues.
All signs will now be permitted to be a maximum 42 inches in height and
5 square feet per side. The sign
type, style and colors will aid in determining the location of the signs.
Signs which match a uniform burgundy and white (similar to the off
premise open house residential real estate signs) will be allowed within
fifteen feet of the back of curb and out of the right-of-way.
Signs matching the color of the principal ground sign will also be
allowed fifteen feet from back of curb and out of the right-of-way.
If a real estate company wants to use a standard “corporate” sign
with their preference of color/style, then this sign would need to be placed
30 feet from the ultimate right-of-way. Adding
matching material/color information to the principal ground sign is still
allowed, and the option to use window or wall signs in combination with any of
the sign types previously listed is also permitted. The focus group has
indicated that although this is a move in the right direction, the proposed
regulations are in certain cases still too restrictive.
Staff has made additional modifications to allow flexibility when
topographic, and/ or other site specific conditions limit signage
opportunities. Staff does not
however, support the location of these signs with the Right-of-way.
In considering changes to the
Wall Sign regulations for multi-occupant buildings, staff made an effort to
provide the greatest flexibility with an equitable solution for all tenant
types and sizes. Staff has found
that the biggest issue for approving wall sings on these types of buildings is
that the first or largest tenant with a sign usually takes up more than their
“fair share” of the allowable sign area.
Due to this staff has worked with applicants for sign permits to
identify the allocation to tenants when the first permit is issued.
In some cases the property owner has indicated sign allocation in the
Uniform Sign Plan to further define and clarify the allocation.
In these instances the first to the last tenant end up with dedicated
sign area for their leased space. This
practice has been well managed and is now incorporated in to the draft of
proposed changes. Staff is also
proposing an increase of 25% of allowable sign area.
This would take into account the blank space incorporated to separate
signs for multiple tenants. Although
discussion has occurred for a greater increase in allowable sign area, staff
supports that a 25% increase covers the blank space needed in multi-occupant
sites. A greater increase would
only provide an inequitable distribution between multi-occupant buildings and
multi-tenant strip type developments. In
addition, due to new design requirements for building facades, additional
provisions have been created to allow an additional number of signs over the
two currently allowed. Please note
that the two permitted sign areas allowed could in fact be made up of multiple
tenant signs based on the layout proposed.
See graphic attached for examples of alternatives.
These additional provisions potentially allow signs on all four sides
of a structure when certain design characteristics such as those required by
the Community Appearance Manual are provided.
Since these design standards are required on certain elevations and
could possibly be required on all elevations credit is given to allow
additional signs on buildings. Lastly,
existing buildings could increase their allowable sign area by 25%, make façade
improvements to increase the number of allowable signs, and provide additional
signs on an elevation which meets the intent of the provisions created.
In the case studies performed by staff on existing structures of this
nature, staff could not find overwhelming evidence that an equitable amount of
signage alternatives would not be available.
In most cases, the lack of sign area was in fact a result of a
disproportionate sign allotment given to a particular tenant.
Off-premise real estate open
house sign regulations pilot program was completed in December of 2005.
This program has been successful for all parties.
The current amendments include deleting the trial period and allowing
additional sign location opportunities. The
focus group has indicated a concern that the 2 sign limit supported by staff
does not provide enough sign opportunities for new home development especially
on infill projects and those in western and southern Cary. The two
sign limit provides adequate exposure and directional information.
In addition, a new development could use two off-premise sign for each
unit available thus having many more signage opportunities than a resale.
The other major consideration is that these signs are required to be
placed on residential properties and/ or common pen space and do not direct
potential purchasers to the project as much a direct within the development.
A summary table of the proposed text amendments grouped
under two classifications, major and minor, follows.
Major amendments are substantive modifications or additions to the
text, while minor amendments are simple repairs to typographical errors or
minor clarifications. Major
amendments are numbered (1-39) in the table, while minor amendments are given
a letter designation (A-U). The
table includes the relevant LDO section being modified and the purpose for the
proposed amendment.
A
summary table of the proposed text amendments grouped under two
classifications, major and minor, follows.
Major amendments are substantive modifications or additions to the
text, while minor amendments are simple repairs to typographical errors or
minor clarifications. Major
amendments are numbered (1-39) in the table, while minor amendments are given
a letter designation (A-U). The
table includes the relevant LDO section being modified and the purpose for the
proposed amendment.
Fiscal
Impact: Although
much of the proposed round of amendments does not generate a fiscal impact,
the enforcement of Off-premise real estate signs increases the operational
costs for zoning enforcement officers weekend hours by $4,189 annually.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of these items including option one for open house residential real estate signs.
Proposed Round 7 Summary
|
Item
# |
Amendment
Description |
LDO Section |
Purpose
for Amendment |
MAJOR
AMENDMENTS
|
|||
|
1 |
Appeals
of Decisions by an Administrative Official |
Table 2.1-1 |
Associated with Changes to State Law |
|
2 |
Approval
Criteria for Text Amendments and Rezonings |
3.3.3 |
Associated with Changes to State Law |
|
3 |
Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation on Rezonings |
3.4.1 |
Associated
with Changes to State Law (written recommendation required) |
|
4 |
Rezoning
Protest Petitions |
3.4 .1(F) |
Associated with Changes to State Law |
|
5 |
Rezonings
to Conditional Use Districts |
3.4.2 |
Changed
to be consistent with Town’s Charter and to clarify process |
|
6 |
Conditions
Associated with Conditional Use Rezonings |
3.4.2(C) |
Associated
with Changes to State Law that addresses the limit on conditions |
|
7 |
Approval
Criteria for Development Plans |
3.9.2 (I) |
Associated with Changes to State Law |
|
8 |
Presale
Contracts Prior to Recording Subdivision Plats |
3.9.3(H) |
Associated
with Changes to State Law |
|
9 |
Minor
Modifications Allowed |
Table 3.19-1 |
Clarify the specifics on what can be modified |
|
10 |
Conditions
on Board of Adjustment Cases |
3.20.4 |
Associated with Changes to State Law |
|
11 |
Mixed
Use Overlay |
4.4.2 |
Clarification
from Activity
Center
Concept Plans
to Mixed Use Overlay |
|
12 |
Activity Center Protest Petitions |
4.4.2(G)(3)(d) |
Changed
to be more consistent with rezoning protest petition changes |
|
13 |
Variances
Forwarded to Environmental Management Commission |
4.4.6 |
Clarifying
that only certain Town variances to the Watershed Overlay District are
sent to the Commission. |
|
14 |
Table
of Permitted Uses- General Use Districts |
Table 5.1-1 |
Amend Activity Center Headings |
|
15 |
Residential
Uses |
5.2.1 |
Amending separation requirements depending on number of residents for group homes, limiting the number of residents to 6 maximum to match state regulations and clarification from Activity Centers to Mixed Use Overlay |
|
16 |
Public/Institutional
Uses |
5.2.2 |
Amending
number of children allowed in a large home Day care Center to match
State regulations |
|
17 |
Definition/Measurement |
6.3.1 |
Adding
front setback definition |
|
18 |
Requirements
for Perimeter Buffers and Landscape Areas |
7.2.3(J) |
Clarifications
to subdivision requirements related to HOA’s and stormwater devices |
|
19 |
Streetscape
and Streetfront Landscaping |
7.2.4(I) |
Ownership
requirements defined |
|
20 |
Fines
and Replacement of Existing, Original, or Installed Vegetation |
7.2.13(C) |
Addition
of the required buffer standard |
|
21 |
Stormwater
Management |
7.3 |
Revision
to Purpose statement to encompass wider range of stormwater management.
|
|
22 |
Variances
to Riparian Buffers |
7.3.7 |
Change
reductions in Riparian Buffers to be a Variance instead of a minor
modification. Also change
the evaluation criteria based on model regulations. |
|
23 |
Flood
Damage Prevention |
7.5 |
Clarification of the 1% chance flood vs. 100 year flood and changes to the flood boundary maps |
|
24 |
Off-Street
Parking Space Requirements |
7.8.2 |
Addition
of bicycle parking regulations, modifying mini storage parking
requirements |
|
25 |
Standards
for Bicycle Facilities |
7.10.5 |
Clarifying
bicycle parking standards |
|
26 |
Improvements |
8.1.5 |
Defining
maintenance requirements |
|
27 |
Timing
of New Street Connections |
8.1.6 |
Changed to specify when new streets connect to existing residential streets |
|
28 |
Construction
Traffic |
8.1.6(G) |
Changed
to require construction traffic from new development to use alternative
routes in lieu of existing residential streets |
|
29 |
Acceptance
of Improvements for Town Maintenance |
8.1.7 |
Changed
to clarify the warranty and maintenance requirements |
|
30 |
Alternative
Development Option: Cluster Housing |
8.3 |
Clarification
of development requirements |
|
31 |
General
Provisions |
9.1 |
Clarifications
of Interpretation for Signage within Activity Centers |
|
32 |
Signs
Exempt from Regulation |
9.2 |
Adding
governmental or quasi-governmental agency signs to the exempted sign
list |
|
33 |
Permitted
Signs: Location, Size, Number |
9.3 |
Addition
of verandah signs, clarifications to sign types and standards |
|
34 |
Real
Estate Sign |
9.3.2(Q) |
Clarification
of Requirements |
|
35 |
Off-Premise
Open House Residential Real Estate Signs |
9.3.2(R) |
Two
Options allowing either 2 or 3 off premise signs on residential lots or
residential common open space areas |
|
36 |
Wall
Signs, Non-Residential |
9.3.2(X) |
Increase
allowable sign area and allow alternative sign locations for multi
tenant buildings |
|
37 |
Remedies
and Penalties |
11.4 |
Addition
of language to reflect General Statutes and clarifications |
|
38 |
Formal
Enforcement and Remedies |
11.6.2 |
Modification
of civil penalties |
|
39 |
Other
Key Terms Defined |
12.4 |
Addition
of Mixed |
|
MINOR
AMENDMENTS |
|||
|
A |
New
Versus Old Zoning Districts |
Table
1.5-1 |
Clarification |
|
B |
Pre-Application
Conferences |
3.1.5 |
Clarification |
|
C |
Notice
Requirements |
Table
3.1-1 |
Clarification |
|
D |
Simultaneous
Processing of Development Applications |
3.1.9(B)(5) |
Clarification |
|
E |
Re-use/Redevelopment
Plan |
3.11 |
Clarification |
|
F |
Adequate
Public Facilities Planning and Development for Roads |
3.23 |
Reference
correction |
|
G |
General
Use and Development Standards for all PDD Districts |
4.2.3(D)(3) |
Clarification |
|
H |
General
Purpose; Relationship to General Use Zoning District |
4.4.1(A) |
Clarifications |
|
I |
Thoroughfare
Overlay |
4.4.4 |
Reference
correction |
|
J |
Auto
Sales/Rental |
5.2.3(Q) |
Clarification |
|
K | |||