![[e-mail]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/presentation/v2/images/header/email-15x10.gif){kind=small}
Subscribe
![[e-mail]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/presentation/v1/images/icon_email-story.gif){kind=icon}
Get News Alerts to your Email & Cell Phone
![[search]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/presentation/v1/images/icons/16x12/search-form-icon.gif){kind=icon}
Site SearchCary, N.C. — Neighbors once again are fighting plans to develop an area at the intersection of Piney Plains and Stephens roads in northeast Cary.
Wimberly Associates wants to develop a 450,000-square-foot office park on the 16-acre site near Cary Crossroads. Residents of the nearby Wellington Park subdivision said increased stormwater runoff could flood their property and worry about traffic congestion in the area.
"We're not against development, and we're probably not against an office park. But the scope of the office park that they are proposing we are against," said Ruth Merkle, a board member for the Wellington Park Homeowners Association.
Attorneys for Wimberly Associates have met with residents three times in recent months to discuss their concerns, and they said they have added numerous details to the site plan to accommodate them, including retention ponds, tree buffers and additional landscaping.
Some neighbors contend the accommodations aren't enough.
"I do appreciate the developer's efforts to listen to our concerns, but just because they're listening doesn't mean that (an office park is) the responsible thing to do," Wellington Park resident Kenneth Mastro said.
Attorney Gray Styers said an office park would be a good fit between Crossroads and nearby subdivisions.
"We need good transition of land use, and an office park serves that very very well," Styers said. "An office park will increase the tax base for Cary."
Two years ago, Wimberly Associates proposed a 350-unit condominium development for the site. The Cary Town Council rejected the plans after neighbors protested.
The developer filed suit against Cary over the failed project, alleging the plan met all town requirements. Styers said the lawsuit would be withdrawn if the town allows the office park to move forward.
Some residents said they fear town leaders will approve the plan to avoid the lawsuit. Styers said his clients want to avoid another protest.
A public hearing on Wimberly Associates' request to rezone the property for an office park proposal is scheduled for Thursday evening during the Town Council meeting. The plans are expected to go before the planning board in September and return to the Town Council in October.
Because residents have filed valid protest petitions against the office park plans, six of seven Town Council members would have to approve the plans.
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/share/2012/02/08/10701014/4f3258681a195-44x75.jpg){kind=small}
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/news/local/2012/02/10/10712172/thumbnail-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/entertainment/out_and_about/2012/02/04/10712136/pics_agunn53833-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/lifestyles/travel/2012/02/09/10710709/10710709-1328829176-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wralsportsfan.com/asset/basketball/2012/02/09/10705803/10705803-1328766083-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/lifestyles/travel/2012/02/08/10704761/10704761-1328743348-100x75.jpg)
WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.
This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.
AS far as offering to drop the lawsuit if this is approved, they may even have to drop it because once the land is built as an office park, they can't exactly build condos there and lawsuits like this are not asking for damages or potential profits, just that the land be zoned they way they want it to be.
July 25, 2008 11:11 a.m.
July 24, 2008 1:49 p.m.
Well, yes, of course. :) My point was to put a different face on the concept. The concept is that a threat will be removed in exchange for getting something that you want.
The question is whether or not the developer's actions would be called coercion. I'm not sure I would go that far, but again, something doesn't seem right with using the promise of removal of a lawsuit as a means of motivation for getting something outside the lawsuit itself.
Regardless - I don't think Wellington Park is particularly concerned about the lawsuit issue - extortion or not. I can't speak for everybody, though.
Personally, I just want to prevent our property from being further damaged by nearby development. If existing problems are solved and they can develop reasonably responsibly, then there would be little to no reason for any objections from my point of view.
July 24, 2008 1:24 p.m.
July 24, 2008 12:14 p.m.
For an analogy, say you're walking down the street and bump into some guy. An argument ensues and he pulls a gun - let's assume he's perfectly allowed to pull the gun to defend himself. He then tells you that for an apology and a donation of 10 dollars to his favorite charity, he'll holster the gun and walk away.
The similarities to that scenario are why some people think this feels like extortion. I'm not a lawyer, but like I said - something doesn't seem right here.
---
As for buying land in a low-lying area - it's not particularly low-lying - it's just downstream. It's also been there for years with no problems.
With a normally very quiet creek in my back yard, I'm perfectly willing to accept that it might flood on rare occasions.
What I have a hard time accepting is the fact that recent unchecked development has forced the community to deal with everybody else's flooding problems.
July 24, 2008 11:56 a.m.