Rezoning Staff Report for Town Council
07-REZ-34 Evans Estate Phase II
Request
The applicant is requesting
Town Council approve an Ordinance to amend the official zoning map of the Town
of
The purpose of a rezoning is to evaluate the
appropriateness of a proposed land use 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 rezoning 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 |
David Ward
Pro Engineering |
||
|
Agent |
David Ward |
||
|
Acreage |
14.90 +/- |
||
|
General
Location |
|
||
|
Hearings /
Meetings |
Public Hearing |
Planning & Zoning |
Town Council |
|
Land Use
Designation |
Low Density Residential |
||
|
Town Limits |
Located inside |
||
|
Annexation |
Required at time of site plan |
||
|
Valid Protest |
None |
||
|
P&Z
Recommendation |
Unanimously Recommended for
Approval |
||
|
Existing Use |
Vacant |
||
|
Proposed Use |
Single- family residential
|
||
|
Final Council
Action |
Approved on consent |
||
|
Staff Contact |
Debra Grannan, Senior Planner
Mailing Address: |
||
Notification:
On
Feedback at the Public Hearing:
Staff presented the case
and noted the differences between this request the proposed rezoning case that
had been rejected for the property in an earlier request.
The earlier request did not have zoning conditions and involved a larger
land area. Staff reported that there
were no protest petitions.
The applicant has submitted the following
proposed zoning conditions:
1. Development
shall be limited to 40 single family lots.
2.
Lots bordering the southern property line shall be a minimum of 14,000
square feet.
3. A
minimum 20' Type "B" undisturbed buffer, with disturbances only as provided for
in the Land Development Ordinance, shall be maintained along the southern
property line.
Changes since the Town Council Public Hearing:
None
Feedback from the Planning and Zoning Board
The Board verified with staff that road
connectivity would be addressed during site plan review.
Planning and Zoning Board Recommendation
Unanimously recommended for approval
summary
Staff has reviewed the application and
information provided prior to this meeting, and the analysis of Staff is
that the application is consistent with the Goals and Objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan, the Land Development Ordinance and is reasonable and in the
public interest.
Consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan
A. Land Use Plan:
The land use designation for
the subject parcel is Low Density Residential (LDR).
The definition of LDR is 1 to 3 single family dwelling units per acre.
This rezoning request conforms to the adopted Land Use Plan as long as
the residential unit density does not exceed 3 units per acre.
B.
Growth Management Plan:
The Growth Management Plan includes
the following two Guiding Principles which are relevant to this case:
C. Affordable Housing Plan:
The Goals of the
Affordable Housing Plan are not applicable to this case.
D. Comprehensive
Transportation Plan:
Existing Section:
Future Section:
n/a
Road Improvements:
n/a
Sidewalks Requirements:
Sidewalks on at least one side
Bicycle Requirements:
n/a
Transit Requirements:
None
Traffic
Analysis:
The existing zoning of R-40 on 14.9 acres would generate approximately 15
peak PM trips. Assuming
that the R12 is single family homes, the 40 homes
(based on the conditional use) would generate 40.4 peak hour trips.
So, that would be a net gain of approximately 25 trips.
Under an
ordinance change passed by the Town Council on
E.
Open Space and Historic Resources Plan:
As per the Open Space and
Historic Resources Plan, significant hardwood and conifer plant communities are
identified at along
F.
Parks & Greenways Master Plan:
Greenways Map
According to the approved Parks,
Recreation and Cultural Resources Facilities Master Plan, the Black Creek
Greenway exists adjacent to the property’s eastern boundary line.
Private, 6’ wide paved trail connections providing access to the Black
Creek Greenway will be required.
Locations of these trails will be determined during site plan review.
A payment in lieu of park land dedication will be required for
residential development in accordance with the Land Development Ordinance.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT
ORDINANCE
G.
Environmental:
According to the Town of
H.
Buffers:
According to Chapter 7 of the Land
Development Ordinance, the applicant shall be required to provide a 20’ wide
landscaping area planted to Type “B” Buffer standards between this proposed use
and the adjacent uses to the south and east of the subject property. Per the
Ordinance, this area may be located within the platted portion of a lot.
A zoning condition, proposed by the applicant, specifies a minimum 20'
Type "B" undisturbed buffer outside the platted lots, with disturbances only as
provided for in the Land Development Ordinance, and which shall be maintained
along the southern property line adjacent to the existing Evans Estates
subdivision. This proposed condition exceeds the Ordinance requirement for a
landscaping area mentioned above. In
accordance with the LDO, a 40’ Type “A” Buffer is required between the subject
property and adjacent multi-family residential uses.
No buffer is required for uses adjacent to permanent open space unless
needed to meet buffer requirements between uses.
I.
Streetscape:
According to Chapter 7 of the Land
Development Ordinance, a streetscape is not required along
The proposed project is in
the rezoning stage and therefore preliminary engineering of the site has not
been provided to Staff for review done.
Prior to Site Plan or Subdivision Plan approval, the application will be
required to demonstrate consistency with the Land Development Ordinance with
respect to specific development requirements, such as access, stormwater
management, road improvements, utility line placement, road connectivity and
landscape plantings.
Existing and Requested Zoning District
Comparison:
|
District Regulations |
Existing Zoning
(R40) |
Requested Zoning
(R12 CU) |
|
Maximum Gross Density (du/ac) |
19 |
40* |
|
Minimum Lot Size (square feet) |
40,000 |
12,000
14,000 for lots along southern property line * |
|
Minimum |
150’with septic tank/well
(160’ for corner lot)
125’ with public sewer
(135’ for corner lot) |
80’
(90’ for corner lot) |
|
Side
Yard Setback |
20’ with well/septic tank
15’ with public sewer |
10’ |
|
Street
Setback |
From Thoroughfare: 50’
From collector: 30’
Other streets: 20’ |
From Thoroughfare: 50’
From collector: 30’
Other streets: 20’ |
|
Rear
Yard Setback |
30’ |
25’ |
|
|
35’ |
35’ |
*Per zoning condition proposed by applicant.
Town Council
Criteria for Consideration in Reviewing Rezonings
Section 3.4.1(E) of the
Land Development Ordinance sets forth the following criteria that the Town
Council should consider in reviewing rezonings:
1.
The proposed
rezoning corrects an error or meets the challenge of some changing condition,
trend or fact;
2.
The proposed
rezoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan set forth in Section 1.3
(LDO);
3.
The Town and
other service providers will be able to provide sufficient public safety,
educational, recreational, transportation and utility facilities and services to
the subject property while maintaining sufficient levels of service to existing
development;
4.
The proposed
rezoning is unlikely to have significant adverse impacts on the natural
environment, including air, water, noise, stormwater management, wildlife and
vegetation;
5.
The proposed
rezoning will not have significant adverse impacts on property in the vicinity
of the subject tract;
6.
The proposed
zoning classification is suitable for the subject property;
Other Reference
Information
Schools
The school
information is being provided for your review; however, the Wake County
Board of Education controls capital projects for school capacities.
|
School Information |
||||
|
Assigned Schools |
20th Day Enrollment* |
Permanent
Seat |
Average |
Projected Range of Additional |
|
Northwoods Elementary |
607 |
591 |
103% |
11 to 17 |
|
|
1362 |
1380 |
99% |
2 to 6 |
|
|
1496 |
1663 |
90% |
2 to 7 |
|
|
1890 |
2217 |
85% |
|
|
Total Projected range of additional students |
15 to 30 |
|||
* Current Enrollment and Building Capacity is based on the 20th day of the school year for 2007-2008 as
supplied by the Wake County Public School System.
School assignment will be determined at the time of development.
** The
Projected Number of Additional Students is only a rough
approximation. The actual number of
students will vary depending on several variables, such as dwelling unit type,
number of bedrooms, dwelling size, and other factors. For example: A site with
40 two-bedroom units could yield 11 additional students, while 40 three bedroom
units could yield 17. The basis for
making this calculation is based on multipliers provide from Wake County Schools
Office of Student Assignment. At
rezoning, student yield can not be accurately determined due to unknown
variables.
Applicant’s Justification Statement Submitted (
The following statements
(shown below in italics) are provided by the applicant in response to the
criteria established in the application (shown below in bold) and do not
necessarily represent the views or opinions of the Town of
1. Any issues with the size of the tract?
No.
2. How is the request compatible with the
comprehensive plan (i.e. Land Use, Transportations, Open Space and Historic
Resources)?
Zoning request is for R12 which is consistent
with the existing comprehensive plan.
3. What are the benefits and detriments to the
owner, neighbors and the community?
Larger lots with larger houses rather than the
R8 of Evans Estates would benefit Evans Estates’ owners with greater re-sale
value.
4. How are all the allowable uses with the
proposed rezoning compatible with, or how do they relate to, the uses currently
present on adjacent tracts?
The
allowable uses of a Residential subdivision are consistent with R12 zoning.
All adjacent land is residential or R40 Zoning.
The rezoning will have increased value of all property adjacent to this
land.
5. PDD/new or amended: What
reductions/amendments and/or modifications to the development standards of the
LDO are being requested and how are they justified?
Applicants must list these items and/or clearly highlight them within the
Planned Development document.
Does not apply to Re-zoning request.
Ordinance
for Consideration
07-REZ-34 Evans Estates Phase II
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE
OFFICIAL ZONING
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN
COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
Section 1:
The Official Zoning Map is hereby amended by rezoning the area described
as follows:
|
PARCEL & OWNER INFORMATION |
|||
|
Property Owner(s) |
|
Real Estate ID(s) |
Acres |
|
CCR
Development, INC 201 Evans
|
0764293252 |
0297358 |
14.90 ± |
|
Total Acres |
14.90 ± |
||
Section 2:
That this Property is rezoned from Residential 40 (R40) to
Residential 12 Conditional Use (R12CU)
subject to the individualized development conditions set forth herein, and all
the requirements of the Cary Land Development Ordinance (LDO) and other
applicable laws, standards, polices and guidelines.
Section 3: The conditions mutually
approved by the Town and the applicant for promoting public health, safety and
the general welfare are:
1. Development shall be limited to
40 Single Family Lots
2.
Lots bordering the southern property line shall be a minimum of
14,000square feet.
3. A minimum 20' Type "B"
undisturbed buffer, with exceptions to disturbance only as provided for in the
Land Development Ordinance, will be
maintained along the southern property line.
These conditions address conformance of the development and use of the Property
to ordinances and officially adopted plans and address impacts reasonably
expected to be generated by the development and use of the Property.
Section 4: This ordinance shall be
effective on the date of adoption.
Adopted and effective:
|
|
|
|
|
Harold Weinbrecht, Jr. |
|
Date |