INC NEWS - 900 Davidson Rezoning Case Number Z06-05

[Anne Guyton]

Dear Neighbors, 
  
 Colonial Village is asking for your help  inopposing this rezoning request by Roberts Construction.  The  site is just off Club Boulevard next to Time Warner Cable.  It  will be heard by the City Council this coming Monday, August 7, 2006 at  7:00Pm.  I have summarized our reasons below, and attached the  full background and position statement as both a pdf and word files so  ensure everyone will be able to open it.  It is also copied at the  end of this email.  
  
 1.   The environmental  impact of the project cannot be accuratley assessed because no  develpment plan was attached to the request.  
  
  2.   CVNA currently has a surplus of affordable housing and  is concerned that more homes will further decrease home ownersip rates  in this area.
  
  3.    To ensure future economic growth in Durham it should remain zoned Light Industrial per the Comprehensive Plan.
  
  If you would like to express your opinon please email the city council  using the subject line:  900 Davidson Rezoning Z06-05 Opposed.
  Cole-McFadden at durhamnc.gov, Eugene.Brown at durhamnc.gov,  Diane.Catotti at durhamnc.gov, Howard.Clement at durhamnc.gov,  mike.woodard at durhamnc.gov, tstith at nc.rr.com.
  
 The Mayor, Bill  Bell, prefers phone calls.  He can be reached at:   544.5597.  Howard Clement can be reached at:  home 688.5211  or office 682.7628.
  
 Thanks so very much for taking the time  to consider this.  If you have any questions please feel free to  email or call me at 220.7359.
  
  Anne Guyton,
  Colonial Village Zoning Chair.
  
  August 1, 2006
  POSITION STATEMENT
  Re: Rezoning Request at 900 Davidson Ave, Case Z06-05, By Roberts  Construction Co., to rezone  from Industrial Light to RU-5, Medium  Density Residential
  CVNA BOARD OFFICIALLY OPPOSES REZONING REQUEST Z06-05
  Background:
  This request to rezone from light industrial (IL) to medium density  single family residential  (RU-5) is from Roberts Construction  Company.  It does not include a development plan for the  site.  The site contains a pond, adjoins Ellerbee Creek, is within  the Falls/Jordan-B overlay district, and parts are in the flood plain  according to the Durham GIS.  It is adjacent to a future Ellerbee  Creek trail and a planned rail-to-trail.  
  
 The  Comprehensive Plan, which guides future land development in Durham, was  amended from light industrial to single family residential zoning so  this rezoning request could go forward.  The Durham City/County  Planning Department recommended the rezoning be granted, stating that: 
  
  “In general a residential use is considered a less intense use than  industrial and therefore, this development pattern could be less of an  impact than the current zoning in an environmentally sensitive  area.  Compliance with UDO requirements will be required at site  plan stage and can not be fully evaluated with this zoning map change  as there is no development plan associated with this request.”   (From the zoning map change report, page 2 of 5, staff analysis and  conclusion.)
  
 The future land use map also shows the rear  portion of the main property in the request as future recreation and  open space use which would benefit the neighborhood and the community  in general.  However, due to the size of the development in  question and the absence of a development plan, the public would likely  not have any further review of the planning, and oversight would take  place solely within the City/County Planning Department, if the  Rezoning Request is approved. 
  Based on the recommendation of our Zoning and Housing committee, CVNA opposes the request for the following reasons:
  1. The Environmental impact of the project cannot be accurately  assessed, due to the fact that no development plan was attached to the  rezoning request.  This is especially needed to properly evaluate  the effects of development in this case because of the current  environmental issues with the City, County and State detailed below.
  a. The site was cleared and filled before the rezoning request was  made, but because this occurred before the City of Durham’s UDO  (Unified Development Ordinance) was passed, the penalties imposed by  the UDO do not apply.
  b. The NC Department of Water Quality is currently investigating if wetlands were improperly filled.  
  c. The County Division of Water Quality issued a Notice of Violation  and ordered the owner to remove unauthorized fill and stabilize the  lower part of the site where older sewer lines had been excessively  covered, close to a stream buffer.
 d. The Planning Commission (a  citizens group) voted 13-0 on May 6, 2006 against the rezoning because:  “... the proposed project will have a detrimental impact on the  environment, [and] that the request could not be adequately evaluated  because of the lack of a development plan
”
 e. The Durham Open  Space and Trails Commission January 12, 2006 Memorandum on this site  expresses concerns with the request because there is no development  plan attached to evaluate, and there are large wetlands on the parcel  with a tributary to Ellerbee Creek that is part of their Master Plan,  stating:   “Should this request be approved, the committee  will vigorously study the site plan for conformance with our plans and  good environmental practices.”
 2. The area CVNA serves currently  has a surplus of affordable housing.  Our neighborhood association  is working diligently on a plan to increase home ownership rates and  improve the quality and appearance of the existing affordable housing  stock in our neighborhood.
 a. A site this size zoned medium density  residential could have as many as 70 homes (per Frank Duke, City  Planning Director), but given the environmental limitations of this  particular site CVNA is estimating 40-50 homes might be built if the  request is approved.
 b. Using the example of recent houses built by  Roberts Construction adjacent to this site, CVNA believes the houses to  be built will be in $115,000 - $120,000 range.  Because CVNA has  plenty of existing affordable housing currently for sale in this price  range, the Board is concerned that a surplus of homes at these prices  will decrease home ownership rates in our neighborhood.
 3. This  property should remain zoned for Light Industrial uses to help ensure  future economic growth in Durham, per the Comprehensive Plan.
 a.  The Planning Commission (a citizens group) voted 13-0 on May 6, 2006  against the rezoning because: “
approval would result in the loss of  needed industrially zoned property; and considering the information in  the staff report and comments received during the public hearing.”
  b. The CVNA Board feels that the diverse character of our neighborhood,  which currently includes Small Businesses and Housing, will be better  served by the use of this land according to the use categories for  Industrial Light property as described in the UDO.
  Respectfully submitted,
  Whitney Wilkerson, President    Anne Guyton, Zoning Chair

 			
---------------------------------
See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com.  Check it out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/private/inc-list/attachments/20060801/736e75a2/attachment.htm