[Durham INC] TC1200012

[Pat]

Given our holiday schedule, can we discuss this resolution over e-mail and vote on it at our December 10th meeting?  The Planning Commission is voting on the proposed change at about the same time as our meeting. 

A Resolution Regarding Proposed
Changes in Density of Multi-Family Developments, TC1200012

 

Whereas
Durham’s governing bodies are being asked to consider TC1200012, changing the
Unified Development Ordinance to generally increase the density allowed for
multi-family residential zones by

1.      Adjusting current density
allowances to remove fractions of dwelling units;

2.      Modifying the existing Residential
Suburban-Multifamily (RS-M) Major Roadway Density Bonus to include frontage
along service roads;

3.      Allowing higher densities, but only
with approval of the governing body through rezoning with a development plan;
and

4.     Allowing the use of density bonuses
for multifamily development in non-residential districts in the Suburban and
Compact Neighborhood Tiers, consistent with what is currently permitted within
the Urban Tier, and.

 

Whereas
removing fractions of dwelling units from the multiplier does not eliminate the
need to sometimes round the result (since the property could have, for example,
12.5 acres), and

 

Whereas
removing fractions results in as much as a 14.2% increase in the number of
dwelling units (for example, going from a multiplier of 3.5 to 4 for 10 acres
goes from 35 to 40 units), and

 

Whereas
rounding the result of multiplying a fractional number of units per acre and
the “allowed acreage” has seemed to work in the past, and 

 

Whereas
changing multiplies that have been decided on through a political process and
based on best national practices should not be done lightly, and

 

Whereas
there is no guarantee that a development along a service road will use that
service road as the primary access, or than the service road is not already
identified as having failing intersections, resulting in either more traffic
injected into residential streets behind the property or an even more dangerous
intersection with the main road (can anyone seriously propose that we put more
traffic on the service road on the south side of 15-501 east of Garrett Road?),
and 

 

Whereas
the higher densities around transit areas with development plans are necessary
to create the kind of density needed to make transit work, allowing any
suburban area is just diluting the incentive to build around transit, and 

 

Whereas
Durham has shown its support of transit through its planning processes and vote
to use a sales tax to support it, and

 

Whereas
the UDO requires two parking spaces per unit, which will create an immense
amount of impervious surface when there are 20 units per acre, and

 

Whereas
these changes are being made at the request of a developer trying to squeeze
more units onto a property too small for their profits, and

 

Whereas
developers have the right to ask for changes in the rules but the public good determines any change in the rules, and

 

Whereas
changes to the rules for the benefit of a single development usually have many
unforeseen pernicious consequences, and

 

Whereas
the Planning Department has done excellent work in identifying the issues with
the developer’s original proposal, therefore

 

NOW
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the InterNeighborhood Council (INC) of Durham by
its delegates duly assembled that the City and County of Durham should reject
TC1200012.  Also although the INC
does not agree with the current proposal from the Planning Department, the
department is to be commended for its efforts to improve the original proposal.


 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20131128/3febec77/attachment.html>