Staff Report to Town Council
07-CPA-09
Davis Drive Towns
Request
The applicant is requesting
an amendment to the Land Use Plan Map of the
Comprehensive
Plan for the Town of
The purpose of a comprehensive plan amendment is
to evaluate the appropriateness of a proposed land use and/or other issue, need,
or opportunity for the subject parcel(s) of land.
Specific development requirements related to the technical aspects of
land development, such as access, stormwater management, road improvements,
utility line placement, road connectivity and landscape plantings, are not
considered during the comprehensive plan amendment process.
However, all of these development issues must be addressed for compliance
with existing requirements specified in the Land Development Ordinance (LDO)
when the site or subdivision plan is submitted.
All such requirements can be found at
http:vic.townofcary.org.
Background
Information
|
Applicant |
Pablo Reiter
PS Partners, LLC
6736 Falls of
919-422-1166 |
||
|
Agent |
J. Adam Ashbaugh
Withers & Ravenel
919-469-3340 |
||
|
Acreage |
16.13+/- |
||
|
General
Location |
|
||
|
Hearings /
Meetings |
Public Hearing |
Planning & Zoning |
Town Council February 14, 2008 |
|
Existing Land
Use Plan Designation |
Low Density Residential (LDR) |
||
|
Requested Land
Use Plan Designation |
Medium Density Residential (MDR) |
||
|
Town Council Action |
Town Council voted to Approve | ||
|
Town of |
Meredith
Chandler, RLA, AICP
Urban Designer/Senior Planner
meredith.chandler@townofcary.org (919) 460-4983
|
||
Subject
Parcels
|
PARCEL & OWNER
INFORMATION |
|||
|
Property Owner(s) |
Numbers
(10 digit) |
Real Estate ID(s) |
|
|
Lin, Juinn Jer & Fang Chih Chen |
0744407159 |
0013110 |
16.13 |
|
Total Acres |
16.13 |
||
Applicable
Comprehensive or Area Plan Requirements:
A.
Land Use Plan:
This case proposes to modify the
existing land use designation from Low Density Residential (
B.
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
The Town’s
Transportation Plan identifies two thoroughfare or collector roadways in the
vicinity of the subject parcels:
Existing Section: 4 lanes median divided,
100’ ROW
Future Section:
4 lanes median divided, 100’ ROW
Road Improvements:
complete
Sidewalks Requirements:
required on both sides
Bicycle Requirements:
14’ wide outside lane
Leonard
Christian:
Existing Section: 2 lanes, approx. 60’ ROW
Future Section:
3 lanes, approx. 67’ ROW
Road Improvements:
N/A
Sidewalks Requirements:
required on both sides
Bicycle Requirements:
14’ wide lanes
C.
Parks &
Greenways Facilities Master Plan:
Greenways Map
According to the approved Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Facilities
Master Plan, there is an existing multi-use trail along the western side of
D.
Open Space and Historic Resources Plan: Based
on the Open Space and Historic Resources Plan (OSHRP),
this site was not designated as priority open space proposed for conservation or
as a historic resources site.
However, the Plan’s open space resources inventory did identify lower-priority
bottomland forest/hardwood swamp on this site in approximately the same location
as the stream buffers on the western portion of the site.
According to the Wake County Historic Inventory, there are no identified
historic resources within the boundary of the subject site, though the Wake
County Real Estate Database indicates a 1,600 square foot home dating from 1925
on this property. However the
applicant confirmed that there is no house on the subject parcel.
E.
Affordable Housing Plan:
The
Affordable Housing Plan includes the following four goals which are relevant
to this case:
F.
Growth Management Plan:
The
Growth Management Plan includes the following three Guiding Principles which
are relevant to this case:
Analysis:
Water and sewer infrastructure is available, and the Adequate Public
Facilities Ordinance for Transportation will ensure concurrency for roadway
capacity.
Analysis:
The subject parcel is located within an area where urban services are
readily available, is located nearly adjacent to the
Analysis:
The subject parcel is located nearly adjacent to the
Comparison of Existing
and Requested Land Use Plan Designations
|
|
Low Density Residential (LDR) |
Medium Density Residential (MDR) |
|
Definition |
1 – 3 units per acre |
3 – 8 units per acre |
|
Number of Units |
16 - 48 |
48 – 129 |
Town Council Public
Hearing ON
A.
Public Hearing Comments
No citizens came forward to
speak at the Town Council Public Hearing on
B.
Town Council Questions and Comments
Mr. Roseland asked about
the Comprehensive Plan land use and zoning conflict that exists today.
The table below includes a timeline of events between 1996 and 2007 that
explain the changes to the land use and zoning for the site at
|
|
1996 – 2007 Timeline |
|||
|
|
Nov. 1996 |
|
Oct. 2007 |
|
|
Event |
Adoption of
Comprehensive Plan |
00-REZ-22
(Approved) |
Sufficiency check
for 07-CPA-09 and 07-REZ-24 application |
07-CPA-09 and
07-REZ-24 Town Council public hearings |
|
Land Use Plan’s property designation |
Low Density
Residential (LDR) |
Error – Changed to
Office/ Institutional (OFC/INS) |
Corrected back to
Low Density Residential (LDR) |
Medium Density
Residential (MDR) requested |
|
Zoning |
Planned |
Office and
Institutional Conditional Use (O&I-CU) |
Office and
Institutional Conditional Use (O&I-CU) |
Residential
Multi-Family Conditional Use (RMF-CU) requested |
C.
Changes Since the Town Council Public Hearing
There were no changes to
this case between the Town Council Public Hearing on November 8, 2007 and the
Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing on January 28, 2008.
Planning and Zoning
Board Meeting ON
A.
Public Hearing Comments
No citizens came forward
to speak at the Planning and Zoning Board Public Hearing on
B.
Planning and Zoning Board Actions and Analysis
The Board made a
unanimous recommendation to approve this request.
The Board asked whether
affordable housing on this site is a requirement, citing the Affordable Housing
Plan section of this report. Staff
responded that the Affordable Housing Plan is an adopted volume of the
Comprehensive Plan, and that a brief analysis of the applicable sections of that
Plan were therefore added to case staff reports last year, so that all volumes
of the Comprehensive Plan are covered in such staff reports.
The Affordable Housing Plan expresses the Town’s official affordable
housing goals, however at the level of a comprehensive plan amendment no
requirements are or can be imposed.
The Board also voiced concern about the public’s understanding of the error in
the Land Use Plan Map that was discovered and corrected in October 2007 (see
table above).
C.
Changes Since the Planning and Zoning Baord Meeting
There have been no
changes to this case since the Planning and Zoning Board Meeting on
Staff Analysis and
Recommendation
The current land use
designation for the subject parcel is Low Density Residential (LDR) which
typically describes single family housing at 1 to 3 units per acre.
This triangular shaped
parcel at
The applicant proposes to
change the land use designation for the subject parcel from Low Density
Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) which typically describes
single family attached or detached housing at anywhere from 3 to 8 units per
acre.
A land use designation of
Medium Density Residential (MDR) would allow a greater number of residents to
take advantage of a 10’ wide multi use trail that creates an easy walk or bike
ride north to shopping and services at the corner of
Staff believes that the
requested Medium Density Residential (MDR) would serve as an effective density
transition to adjacent uses while also providing housing near services.
Accordingly, staff recommends approval of this request.
Criteria for
Consideration in Reviewing Comprehensive Plan Amendments:
Section 3.2.2(B) of the
Land Development Ordinance states that “Proposals to amend the Comprehensive
Plan shall be evaluated based upon whether the amendment is necessary in order
to address conditions including, but not limited to, the following:”
Staff Comment:
No changes have been identified.
Staff Comment: The new multi-use path on
Staff Comment:
None have been identified.
Staff Comment:
None have been identified.
Town Council Motion
Options
Approval Motion:
I move that we amend the
Land Use Plan Map as proposed.
Approval Motion with Modifications:
I move that we amend the
Land Use Plan Map with the modifications suggested by Council as follows:
_______________.
Denial Motion:
I move that we deny the
proposed amendment because it is not necessary in order to address conditions.