INC NEWS - take developers' proposal off the table...

[Mike - Hotmail]

I do not hold any land other than the office I own at 1308 Broad Street.

But asking those on this listserve to discuss and debate issues should not 
label me, nor those who want to understand and work to improve the UDO 
process, as a developer (or blind supporters of their profession).

For those who missed last nights INC meeting (Tuesday May 27th) we had a 
very excellent presentation and open discussion with Steve Medlin, Director 
of Planning on several issues.  Those included rezonings, expediting of site 
plans, the UDO along with environmental resource sections (and proposals to 
improve it) during the majority of our evening meeting.

Dozens of neighborhoods were represented, including some from the new Golden 
Belt neighborhood!

It was a very interactive, participative process.

However,  suggesting that we take anything off the table while we're still 
trying to learn more is not the way to solve problems nor learn how to 
improve them.

STAYING at the table,  discussing our (neighborhood) needs and understanding 
the perspectives of others is a logical and thoughtful option that can 
enlighten us, rather than label and further divide us.

I, for one, heard many encouraging remarks coming from the Planning Director 
and several 'clarifications' that helped me understand that there as still 
several misconceptions that still need resolving.

I am not a developer,  but I feel it's still a responsibility for us to 
listen and fully understand their point of view,  if we ever expect them to 
understand OURS.

Mike Shiflett


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Schelp" <bwatu at yahoo.com>
To: <inc-list at DurhamINC.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 8:54 AM
Subject: INC NEWS - take developers' proposal off the table...


> folks,
>
> Thanks for all the off-line emails of support. They've
> been great (and some have been very funny). :)
>
> This proposal to remove the Planning Commission's
> ability to defer projects needs to be taken off the
> table. It's the big elephant in the room
>
> Until then, how well the City/County handles its site
> plan and technical review process is secondary.
>
> The developers' current push to limit deferrals will
> undermine community participation. It goes way beyond
> addressing developers' complaints about competency.
>
> The planning process in Durham needs to involve the
> community as much as possible. The Planning Commission
> is one of the few points where there's true open
> conversation with all the stakeholders.
>
> If they're going to take away that chance even more
> with this new proposal, then why have a Planning
> Commission?
>
> Recently, developers called to cancel a meeting with
> the neighborhood because their "plans aren't ready."
> We then found out the developers had been showing
> their plans to Council members to line up votes --
> before meeting with the neighborhood.
>
> This deliberate attempt to circumnavigate the
> community is frustrating. Neighbors deserve a chance
> to have their say.
>
> It also raises the question of trust. Developers'
> lawyers, lobbyists, past presidents of the
> pro-development Friends of Durham (who co-authored the
> column) and other allies were all at the table when
> these "technical adjustments" to streamline the
> development process were being hashed out.
>
> The different neighborhoods weren't at the table.
>
> So, there's nothing wrong with questioning what's
> being proposed. (The fictitious characters help keep
> the focus on the proposals, not the individuals
> involved.)
>
> For the record, other than my little house, I have no
> land holdings in the area. I would appreciate those
> who speak in favor of the developers' proposals to
> indicate whether or not they have land holdings in
> Durham city or county... It might help readers
> understand the author's perspective.
>
> best wishes,
> John
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INC-list mailing list
> INC-list at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>