Members of Elon’s municipal staff have proposed a few nips and tucks to a new land management ordinance that the town council adopted just over six months ago.
Lori Oakley, the town’s planning director, described these proposed changes as “minor modifications” when she formally presented them to Elon’s town council during a public hearing on Tuesday. Oakley added that the town’s engineer and attorney had recommended some the revisions while others suggested themselves to the town’s planning staff as they’ve applied the new ordinance to the development plans that have recently come across their desks.
Oakley went on to concede that her package of proposed amendments contained 28 separate items. She assured the council that some of these items were exceedingly minor while others were mere duplications of changes that would appear in the ordinance more than once. Oakley nevertheless called the council’s attention to a handful of potential amendments that she deemed worthy of emphasis.
The items that Oakley highlighted included the proposed elimination of a 10-foot side setback that the ordinance currently demands between townhomes, the removal of an upper limit on lot sizes in so-called neighborhood residential districts, and the restoration of a provision in the town’s previous development rules that had allowed developers to put up their own temporary construction signs.
Oakley also noted two other changes that would streamline the conditions that trigger certain kinds of studies during the development review process. One of these revisions would preclude the need for a tree survey for “passive” recreational uses like greenways and trails. The other change would eliminate a 1-percent population increase from the list of circumstances that would require a developer to conduct a formal traffic study.
The council, rather than Oakley, zeroed in on another recommendation that would jettison Crape Myrtles from the town’s approved list of medium-sized trees in a new subdivision. Oakley told the council that the motive for this proposed change was the very real problems that this particular tree poses as it grows and matures.
“There’s a saying in planning that Crape Myrtles are being crape murdered,” she explained. “They’ve been overused by developers, and people are cutting them down. So, you’re seeing them removed from more and more development ordinances, and we’re following suit.”
Meanwhile, the council found itself sucked into a long, ultimately inconclusive debate over the planning director’s proposal to nix the ceiling on lot sizes in neighborhood residential districts.
Monti Allison, the town’s mayor pro tem, favored the proposed change on the grounds that the town’s existing cap of 10,000 square feet is an overly onerous imposition on developers. Yet, other council members believed that some limit on lot sizes may be needed to encourage denser, more affordable housing.
Councilman Quinn Ray argued that, as things currently stand, developers can always apply for a variance to get around the existing 10,000-square-foot maximum. He went on to defend the additional cost this provision foists on developers as a reasonable tradeoff to ensure that the town has some control over lot sizes in neighborhood residential districts.
In the end, the council was unable to reach a consensus on whether neighborhood business districts actually need a ceiling on lot sizes – and if so, what that maximum limit should. Oakley ultimately agreed to come back to the council with some proposed recommendations for a new maximum lot size.
“I’m not asking for a vote this evening, because I know this is a lot of changes,” she went on to add. “So, this is something for you to mull over.”
The council took no action on any of the items that Oakley presented on Tuesday. Nor did its members hear any comments from residents during the public hearing on the proposed revisions.
