INC NEWS - Durham residents seek to keep say in growth (News & Observer)

[Colin Crossman]

Pat,

NCGS 160A-364(a) discusses this (for cities, 153A-323 for counties):

Before adopting, amending, or repealing any ordinance authorized by this 
Article, the city council shall hold a public hearing on it. A notice of 
the public hearing shall be given once a week for two successive 
calendar weeks in a newspaper having general circulation in the area. 
The notice shall be published the first time not less than 10 days nor 
more than 25 days before the date fixed for the hearing. In computing 
such period, the day of publication is not to be included but the day of 
the hearing shall be included.


-Colin


Pat Carstensen wrote:
> Among the neighborhood folks discussing the UDO, one of our strongest 
> and most repeated requests was notification more than 2 weeks before 
> the hearing.  We kept being told that state law sets a limit of 25 
> days, but I never got a satisfactory answer about whether that was at 
> least 25 or no more than 25.
>
> I think more clarity on what department does what would be helpful to 
> neighborhoods as well as developers (you need to know who to complain to)
>
> My understanding is that re-zoning is not a right -- it is completely 
> a political question of what is best for the community.  The job of 
> the Planning Department is to make sure that the planned development 
> works technically -- they deal only with what the law says.  The law 
> can never be delicate enough to deal with reality -- which is why you 
> have the Planning Commission and elected officials.  
>
> Regards, pat
>
> > Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 06:06:29 -0700
> > From: bwatu at yahoo.com
> > To: inc-list at DurhamINC.org
> > Subject: INC NEWS - Durham residents seek to keep say in growth 
> (News & Observer)
> >
> > Durham residents seek to keep say in growth
> > By Matt Dees, News & Observer, 16 May 2008
> >
> > Some of Durham's many neighborhood activists are
> > worried that speeding up the development review
> > process means cutting them out of it.
> >
> > Outrage has radiated from neighborhood e-mail lists
> > since the city staff announced last week a plan to
> > examine over the next nine months every facet of how
> > development proposals are vetted, with an eye toward
> > streamlining.
> >
> > Developers say the process is deeply flawed, if not
> > broken.
> >
> > The myriad departments that review a project often
> > send mixed messages, and there's a general lack of
> > drive in City Hall to review projects in a timely
> > fashion, they contend. Developers have gotten some
> > support from Mayor Bill Bell, City Council member
> > Eugene Brown and others who have pushed the staff hard
> > in recent months to come up with a reform plan.
> >
> > But citizens groups contend that the process is
> > laborious for good reason: Land that can be developed
> > is becoming scarce in Durham, so a rigorous review to
> > prevent bad projects is essential.
> >
> > They're worried that developers now have the ear of
> > city leaders.
> >
> > "This is a very sneaky attempt to undermine the
> > neighborhoods by going around the neighborhoods and
> > getting everyone on council lined up before opening up
> > the plans, " said John Schelp, president of the Old
> > West Durham Neighborhood Association.
> >
> > City officials laid out a timetable for examining
> > different elements of the plan in each of the next
> > nine months -- rezonings in June, site-plan reviews in
> > September and so on.
> >
> > Members of the Greater Durham Chamber of Commerce and
> > other development leaders have been at the table with
> > city staff members as they've formulated the reform
> > plan. Schelp said residents have not been granted such
> > access.
> >
> > The process laid out last week would be the first
> > broad examination of development procedures since
> > 2005, when the city and county adopted a comprehensive
> > land-use plan and a related set of zoning laws known
> > as the Unified Development Ordinance.
> >
> > Developers must get permission to rezone their
> > property if a proposed project doesn't jibe with
> > existing law.
> >
> > Don Moffitt, a planning commission member, questions
> > whether that should even be an option.
> >
> > The comprehensive plan, produced after three years of
> > community discussion, lays out how Durham County
> > should and should not grow in certain areas. Moffitt
> > said he thinks it should be reviewed every three years
> > and changed if needed. Outside of that, he said,
> > developers should submit only plans that conform with
> > zoning laws.
> >
> > "I am deeply disturbed by the process today, never
> > mind the changes they want to make to it, because it
> > treats the comprehensive plan as nothing more than an
> > impediment to rezoning," Moffitt said.
> >
> > "We're down to the most valuable property in Durham
> > County, and we should be treating it that way."
> >
> > Developers argue that clogging a development proposal
> > at City Hall helps no one -- including those worried
> > about incompatible growth.
> >
> > "We're not asking for a reduction in requirements or
> > for city staff not to pay attention to things," said
> > George Stanziale, co-founder of a design and
> > engineering firm with an office in Durham.
> >
> > "The process needs predictability. [Developers] want
> > to know how much time and how much cost is going to be
> > involved, and they want to be able to count on that."
> >
> > Too often, Stanziale and others say, city staff
> > members don't follow the letter of the law when
> > reviewing projects. They'll ask for items, such as
> > construction of sidewalks on property the developer
> > doesn't own, that aren't required by ordinance. That
> > contributes to a bad reputation among developers,
> > which could scare away good development while not
> > necessarily preventing bad, Stanziale said.
> >
> > "If we submit a plan that meets each of the
> > requirements, then theoretically we should be able to
> > go through a single review," he said.
> >
> > Schelp said residents don't want unnecessary delays
> > either, and he points out that his neighborhood has
> > supported high-density developments in its midst.
> >
> > But citizen review and comment, he said, should not be
> > treated as an afterthought.
> >
> > Schelp and many others were irked by a proposal last
> > week to curb the ability of the City-County Planning
> > Commission, a citizen advisory board, to delay
> > decisions on proposed projects.
> >
> > Residents living near a proposed development often
> > first learn of it 10 days before it goes to the
> > planning commission, via a legally required notice.
> >
> > That leaves little time for neighborhood groups to
> > make thoughtful comments, Schelp said, which is why
> > the suggestion of limiting the commission's ability to
> > delay a decision is meeting resistance.
> >
> > "The planning commission is one of the few places
> > where a neighborhood can have a say," he said. "We
> > need more neighborhood involvement, not less."
> >
> > But Nick Tennyson, executive vice president of the
> > Home Builders Association of Durham, Orange and
> > Chatham Counties and a former Durham mayor, said
> > residents "get the first bite of the apple" in the
> > form of the comprehensive plan.
> >
> > "The burden of proof that it should be changed rests
> > with somebody coming in saying it should be changed,"
> > he said.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > INC-list mailing list
> > INC-list at rtpnet.org
> > http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Keep your kids safer online with Windows Live Family Safety. Help 
> protect your kids. 
> <http://www.windowslive.com/family_safety/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_family_safety_052008> 
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> INC-list mailing list
> INC-list at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>