[Durham INC] [owdna] [Fwd: If you thought the BOCC were sleaze-balls, check this out] [1 Attachment]

Tue Jun 29 12:20:07 EDT 2010

The protest petition rule I understood said that you needed to get 20% of a side.  This works out to be about the same for a square property.  But it also means that property owners on a short side of a parcel need to get more than 20% of their side, and it's not uncommon for a lot of the negative impact to be on just one side.  And it is easier to organize your immediate neighbors than a scattering of people around your area.  Both of these may not matter much in a well-organized neighborhood, but is more of a problem when a lot of the parcel boundary is, say Corps of Engineering Land.
The new rule does make it simpler in some cases -- like you no longer need to figure out what one side of circular parcel will be.
I think it could open up other mischief -- like a developer dividing property into 2 pieces and creating a lot of boundary that he controls.
umm, maybe I over-reacted.
Regards, pat

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 11:41:18 -0400
From: d.moffitt at verizon.net
To: pats1717 at hotmail.com
Subject: Fwd: [owdna] [Fwd: [Durham INC] If you thought the BOCC were sleaze-balls, check this out] [1 Attachment]

Pat,

Can you help me understand the issue with the change? I have a dim
memory that this mirrors the language of municipal protest petitions,
and it seems to be identical to the UDO language for the City of
Durham. One issue that came up with this with 751 Assemblage is that
when the original enabling legislation passed, it mirrored
municipalities. Subsequently the legistation for municipal protest
petitions changes to simplify the process, but no one thought to also
change the legislation for that handful of NC counties that also have
protest petitions. I thought this change was to bring Durham protest
petitions up to date, and make the process identical for the city and
county.

Don

-------- Original Message --------

      Subject: 
      [owdna] [Fwd: [Durham INC] If you thought the BOCC were
sleaze-balls, check this out] [1 Attachment]

      Date: 
      Tue, 29 Jun 2010 07:35:08 -0400

      From: 
      Kelly Jarrett <kjj1 at duke.edu>

      To: 
      owdNA <owdna at yahoogroups.com>

 [Attachment(s)
from Kelly Jarrett included below]
If any of you are interested in or follow zoning issues, the message
below from the secretary of INC might be of interest to you. I'll let
you know if I hear them requesting any action.

Kelly

*********************************

I was looking at something else and found this special provision on
Durham protest petitions that the legislature is considering:

http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Sessions/2009/Bills/House/PDF/H2033v1.pdf

considered
"members
of the board" for calculation of the requisite supermajority.
10
To
qualify as a protest under this section, the petition must be signed
by the owners
11
of
either (i) twenty percent (20%) or more of the area included in the
proposed change or (ii)
12 five percent (5%)
of a 100-foot-wide buffer extending along the entire boundary
of each
13
discrete
or separate area proposed to be rezoned. A street right-of-way
shall not be considered
14
in
computing the 100-foot buffer area as long as that street
right-of-way is 100 feet wide or
15
less.
When less than an entire parcel of land is subject to the
proposed zoning map amendment,
16
the
100-foot buffer shall be measured from the property line of that
parcel. In the absence of
17
evidence
to the contrary, the county may rely on the county tax listing
to determine the
18
"owners"
of potentially qualifying areas.
19
The
foregoing provisions concerning

it is obviously
something the county commissioners has asked for since all the reps are
sponsoring it.  This would make it ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to get a protest
petition in the county.  I'm not sure how to stop it, but it must be
stopped.

Thanks,
pat

The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your
inbox. Get started.

__._,_.___

Attachment(s)
from Kelly Jarrett

 1 of 1 File(s) 

  Attached Message Part

  Reply to sender | 
Reply to group | Reply
via web post | Start a New Topic 
Messages
in this topic (1) 

Recent
Activity:

 Visit Your Group 

*** A neighborly note: if you intend to reply to an individual who has
posted (but don't intend it to go to the listserv), make sure that you
have the recipient's email address in your "TO:" line and not
"owdna at yahoogroups.com". Thanks! *** 

MARKETPLACE

Stay
on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get
the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

Get
great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers
Center.

Get
real-time World Cup coverage on the Yahoo! Toolbar. Download now to win
a signed team jersey!

Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use

.

__,_._,___

_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars with Hotmail. 
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5
-------------- next part --------------
HTML attachment scrubbed and removed