________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Land Development Ordinance Amendments Round 27 Planning And Zoning Board Work Session November 25,

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Amendment Items A) Downtown Housing Options B) Density Limits For Life Care C) Public Hearing Notification D) Telecommunication Towers & Antennas E) Removal & Replacement Of Champion Trees F) Building Setbacks In R-8 District G) Review Procedures – Technical Corrections 2

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM A Downtown Housing Options Existing LDO Requirements: New Detached Residential Dwellings Are Not Permitted In The High Density Mixed Use (HMXD) Sub-district Of The Town Center ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 3

ITEM A Downtown Housing Options Proposed LDO Requirements: New Detached Residential Uses Would Be Allowed In HMXD As Follows: Only In Downtown Historic District Approval Of Special Use Permit Required Certificate Of Appropriateness From Wake County Historic Preservation Commission Required For Properties Or Buildings Designated As Landmark ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 4

ITEM A Downtown Housing Options Proposed LDO Requirements: Adds “Detached Multi-Family” As New Use In Permitted Use Table, That Would Allow Three Or More Dwellings On A Single Lot, With Dwelling Units In Common Ownership Or A Condominium Form Of Ownership Flag Lots Could Be Created In Downtown Historic District To Enable Subdivision Of Lots Containing Contributing Structures. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 5

Downtown Historic District Boundary ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 6

ITEM B Density Limits For Life Care Facilities Existing Provisions: Life Care Facility Units (e.g. Independent, Assistant Living, And Nursing Home Units) Are Counted The Same As Detached Dwellings When Calculating Density Proposed Amendment: In Non-residential Zoning Districts, Buildings Containing 3 Or More Units Would Be Equivalent To ½ Dwelling Unit For The Purpose Of Calculating Density ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 7

ITEM B Density Limits For Life Care TABLE 5.2-1: DENSITY FOR LIFE CARE COMMUNITIES Zoning DistrictDensity (units per acre) Transitional Residential (TR)7 Residential Multi-family (RMF)8 Office & Institutional (OI) 12 * Office/Research & Development (ORD) 12 * Town Center (TC)No Limit Mixed Use Overlay District (MUOD)No Limit * Dwelling Or Rooming Units In A Building Containing At Least 3 Such Units Are Equivalent To ½ Dwelling Unit ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 8

ITEM B Density Limits For Life Care Examples Of Life Care Density Requirements In Other Jurisdictions Raleigh R-1, R-2, R-4Same Density As Otherwise Allowed R-6, R-102 x Density Otherwise Allowed Mixed Use DistrictsNo Limit Durham R-SM (Suburban Multi-Family) RU (Urban) RC (Compact) 1.5 x Density Otherwise Allowed If Includes Independent Multi-family Units; 2 x Density Otherwise Allowed If Independent Multi-family Units Are Not Provided Non-Residential Districts-No Limit ______________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN of CARY 9

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM C Public Hearing Notification Implements Town’s Authority To Publish Notices For Public Hearings On Its Website Instead Of In The Newspaper Includes Amendments To Various Sections Of The LDO, As Well As The Town Code And Town Charter Existing Requirements Related To Posting Property And Notifying Nearby Residents Would Remain Unchanged ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 10

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM D Telecommunication Towers & Antennas Session Law (Approved June 26, 2013) Requires Local Governments To Approve Any “Eligible Facilities Request” To Co-locate On An Existing Structure Proposed Amendment Brings LDO Into Compliance With New Statute ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 11

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM D Telecommunication Towers & Antennas “Eligible Facilities” Are Those Which: Increase Tower Height By No More Than 10% Add An Appurtenance That Protrudes Less Than 20’ Horizontally From The Structure; And Do Not Increase The Area Of An Existing Equipment Compound By 2500 Sq. Ft. Or More. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 12

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM F Building Setbacks In R-8 Current Minimum Side Yard Setback In R-8 Is 10’ Request By Developer To Reduce Minimum Setback to 7’ While Maintaining 20’ Combined Setback For Both Sides Purpose Of Request Was To Accommodate Side-Loaded Garages ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 13

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM F Building Setbacks In R-8 Based On Further Consideration Since Staff Report Was Prepared, Staff No Longer Has Concern With Enforcement Staff Recommends A Minimum Setback Of 5’ And Aggregate Setback Of 20’, The Same Requirements That Apply To Lots In Conservation Subdivisions Would Provide Greater Flexibility In Building Location And Design Without Increasing Intensity Or Density Of Development ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 14

R-8 Setbacks - Existing ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 15

R-8 Setbacks - Proposed ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 16

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM G Review Procedures – Technical Corrections An LDO Amendment Recently Approved In Round 26 Included Changes Related To Quasi-judicial Hearings, Required By Session Law , “An Act to Clarify and Modernize Statutes Regarding Zoning Boards of Adjustment.” Amendments Proposed At This Time Are Corrections Inadvertently Left Out Of Round 26 That Are Necessary To Comply With The New Law ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 17

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Round 27 LDO Amendments Discussion Item A - Downtown Housing Options Item B - Density Limits For Life Care Item C - Public Hearing Notification Item D - Telecommunication Towers & Antennas Item F - Building Setbacks In R-8 District Item G - Review Procedures (Technical Corrections) 18

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM E Removal & Replacement Of Champion Trees History of Recent Amendments: June 13, 2013 – Approval Authority - Regulations Amended to Only Allow The Planning Director To Permit The Removal of Champion Trees if They Are Diseased and/or Dying September 26, 2013 – Regulations Amended To Clarify the Replacement Requirements – Inch- for-Inch Replacement (Minimum Size 2 and ½ Inch) October 24, Proposed Amendment To Set Forth When Champion Trees Can Be Permitted For Removal By The Planning Director ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 19

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Proposed Amendment Planning Director Could Approve If 1.Tree Is Dead, Damaged, Or Not Typical Of Species, (As Determined By A Certified Arborist); Or 2.More Than 25% Of The Critical Root Zone Is Impacted By: - Required Road Connections - Utility Lines - Stormwater Treatment Devices & Associated Grading In Topographically Appropriate Areas - Placement Of Buildings In Locations Necessary To Meet Required Site Design Standards 3.Other Requests Would Be Approved By Town Council Through The Quasi-Judicial Hearing ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 20

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM E Removal & Replacement Of Champion Trees Stakeholders Meeting on November 14th Recommended By Council To Obtain Additional Feedback Designed To Be Balanced – Both Development-Related Representatives, Residents, and Other Professionals ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 21

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Summary of Feedback From Stakeholders Meeting Overall Comments/Suggestions and Goals Possible Solutions: –Better Definition of A Champion Tree –Create An Inventory of Champion Trees –Provide a Tree Canopy Requirement –Place a Limit On The Amount Of Land Preserved On Site –Provide More Incentives/Flexibility With Design Sites ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 22

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY ITEM E Removal & Replacement Of Champion Trees Possible Solutions (Continued): –Saving A Group Of Trees Rather Than One Large One –Focus Only On The Outer 50 Feet Of The Site to Save Champion Trees –Focus On Location Of The Champion Tree (More Visible To The Public Should Be Saved) –Have Second Opinion From A Certified Arborist –Higher Standards To Save Champion Trees For Developing Sites Verses Redeveloping Sites (Limitation on Replanting – more urban) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 23

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Feedback Needed From P&Z Review Preliminary Concepts For Changing Proposed Regulations Staff Will Develop More Detailed Regulations From P&Z Board’s Feedback ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 24

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Definition of Champion Trees A Certain Percentage of the Size of State Champion Tree By Type (75%, 50%, etc.) Aesthetics Measurement - Whether it is especially perfect and symmetrical or notably craggy and idiosyncratic Location – High Visible Area Historic Significance? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 25

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Inventory of Champion Trees Could Be Part Of A Long Term Solution Unsure of Costs Involved Need To Understand How It Will Be Used ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 26

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY More Flexibility In Design? To Save Champion Trees – Reduce Streetscapes or Other Buffers and Landscape Areas; Reduce Parking Areas; Allow Stormwater Devices Within Buffer Areas Current Ordinance Already Allows For Reducing Buffers and Streetscapes When Saving Existing Trees/Tree Stands (1.5 X Credit) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 27

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Tree Canopy Requirement Or Cap on Amount of Land Set Aside? Should The Ordinance Take Into Account Current Regulatory Requirements (Stream Buffers, Floodplain, Streetscapes, Buffers, Amount of Forest Land Already Being Preserved)? Should The Town Evaluate A Tree Canopy Requirement (Project Canopy Coverage From All Existing and Proposed Landscape On-Site)? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 28

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Treat Redevelopment Sites Differently Stronger Standards for New Sites vs. Redevelopment Limit Revegetation Requirements to The Amount of Land On The Site Given Required New Tree Spacing (Especially On Redevelopment Sites) ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 29

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Focus On Protecting Trees On The Exterior of Sites Indentify Champion Trees Only Within the Outer 50 Feet (Or Another Distance)? And/Or Have A Higher Standards (Larger Tree Caliper Size) For Considering Interior Champion Trees? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY 30

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ TOWN o f CARY Round 27 LDO Amendments Discussion Item E – Removal And Replacement Of Champion Trees 31