Residents press Cary council for stormwater, traffic and lot‑size answers at Pittard Sears rezoning hearing

At a public hearing on the proposed annexation and rezoning of roughly 12.6 acres along Pittard Sears Road (25A03 / 25REZ05), residents repeatedly pressed the Cary Town Council for more engineering on stormwater, for traffic studies, and for assurances about lot sizes and neighborhood transitions.

Principal Planner Aaron Puckett summarized the application and conditions: the applicant proposes initial Cary zoning of TRCU with a cap of up to 24 detached dwellings (about 1.9 units per acre gross), at least 75% of lots 8,000 square feet or larger, EV‑ready garage wiring, added frontage improvements including a 5‑foot bike lane and a mid‑block pedestrian crossing with a rapid‑flashing beacon. Puckett noted field determination of stream buffers would be required during development plan review and that the site sits in the low‑density subdistrict of the Chatham–Cary planning area.

Multiple residents said on the record that drainage from the higher elevation parcel already floods backyards and that past heavy rains have entered basements and first floors. "This is a serious flooding problem and needs a solution," Bridgette Bossier told the council, saying her family had to hire contractors to remove carpeting and furniture after a storm. Other speakers from nearby Dunhill and Sequoia Creek HOAs stressed that the proposed lot sizes (some as small as 6,500 sq ft) would be out of character with adjacent neighborhoods averaging 10,000–20,000 sq ft and that the effective density on the developable area could be materially higher than the gross units‑per‑acre number.

Several residents also criticized existing traffic and sight‑line issues on Pittard Sears Road and urged that any new connections or removal of temporary turnarounds be considered carefully. One longtime resident said a proposed bike lane would sit on a steep blind hill and could create safety problems unless addressed in design.

Council members and staff responded with technical clarifications: Puckett and others said the town compares gross density as an "apples‑to‑apples" metric for plan consistency and that lot sizes in the application exclude stream buffers under state provisions. Council members encouraged continued neighborhood meetings; one council member noted the applicant had indicated willingness to drop a unit during recent discussions. Staff advised that the Planning & Zoning Board would review the case and make a recommendation before council action, and that detailed engineering (stormwater, site plan) would occur at the time of development plan review.

No final decision was made; the rezoning and annexation will return to the council after advisory review and additional technical materials. Residents were directed to the planner, Erin Puckett, as their primary contact for updates and follow‑up.