[Durham INC] PA involvement for Notice for TC1200012 and TC130002 for February 3, 2014, Durham City Council

Fri Jan 17 10:42:11 EST 2014

Pat:

Dick Ford has pointed out that INC meets on Jan 28th, not next week as I
said in my last post.  We will take the resolution up then. Sorry if I
mislead you.  Hope you can come.  We will be at the Neighborhood Services
conference room at Golden Belt at 7 p.m.

Tom

From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org] On
Behalf Of Tom Miller
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 9:54 AM
To: 'Pat'
Cc: inc-list at rtpnet.org
Subject: Re: [Durham INC] PA involvement for Notice for TC1200012 and
TC130002 for February 3, 2014, Durham City Council

Pat:

INC will vote on a resolution next week.

Tom

From: Pat [mailto:pats1717 at hotmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 7:31 AM
To: Tom Miller
Subject: PA involvement for Notice for TC1200012 and TC130002 for February
3, 2014, Durham City Council

Any chance to get PA involved in this?  THere is this general pattern of
pulling out threads in the UDO to help individual developers that is very
troubling.  

On the trees one, I think there should be a limit in how much tree coverage
can be cut.

On the intensity standards, the PA concern would be the creation of dense
apartment complexes that would be forever car-dependent, cutting our ability
to direct density to multi-use and transit-rich areas.  I think there is
also an affordable housing argument -- a few bad examples will make it
harder to do density where we do want it.

Regards, pat

  _____  

From: pats1717 at hotmail.com
To: inc-list at durhaminc.org
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 06:50:25 -0500
Subject: [Durham INC] FW: Notice for TC1200012 and TC130002 for February 3,
2014, Durham City Council

These go to City Council on Feb 3 and Board of Commissioners on Feb 10.  The
draft resolution on TC1200012 is at the bottom of this e-mail. 

Following up on John's question, it's not just the property on 15-501 that
should concern us.  If this amendment passes, every neighborhood would need
to be very, very worried when they see a proposed zoning change to RS-M(D)
or RU-M(D) because it could have twice as many units as what you have seen
around here.  And no matter how worried a neighborhood is, we have recent
experience with a governing body that simply whistles the JOBS-SONG when we
express our concerns.

Regards, pat

  _____  

From: Wade.Griffin at durhamnc.gov
Subject: Notice for TC1200012 and TC130002 for February 3, 2014, Durham City
Council 
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 18:31:40 +0000

Please be advised of the upcoming proposed changes to the text of the Durham
Unified Development Ordinance (UDO):  

Text amendment TC1200012 proposes changes to Article 6, District Intensity
Standards, to revise certain density requirements, including:

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 within the RS-M and RU-M Districts, but
only with approval by 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.

Text amendment TC1300002 proposes changes to Article 8, Environmental
Protection, to modify the method of calculating tree coverage requirements
by exempting the area of certain large, existing utility easements.

The Durham City Council will hold public hearings on TC1200012 and TC1300002
on Monday, February 3, 2014, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at
101 City Hall Plaza, 1st Floor.  

The text of the proposed changes may be viewed at
http://durhamnc.gov/ich/cb/ccpd/Pages/Text%20Amendments/Pending-Text-Amendme
nts.aspx. Interested parties may appear and speak at the public hearing.
Substantial changes to the proposed actions may be made following the public
hearings. For more information please contact Michael Stock, 560-4137
x28227; Michael.Stock at DurhamNC.gov.

Notice Under the Americans with Disabilities Act - A person with a
disability may receive an auxiliary aid or service to effectively
participate in city government activities by contacting the ADA Coordinator,
voice 919-560-4197, fax 560-4196, TTY 919-560-1200, or ADA at durhamnc.gov, as
soon as possible but no later than 48 hours before the event or deadline
date.

Wade Griffin

Planner

Durham City/County Planning Department

101 City Hall Plaza

Durham NC 27701

Phone: 919-560-4137 x28229

Fax    : 919-560-4641

www.durhamnc.gov/departments/planning

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 no developer has the right to rules that optimize their profits, and

Whereas changes to the rules for the benefit of a single development usually
have many unforeseen bad 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.

_______________________________________________ Durham INC Mailing List
list at durham-inc.org http://www.durham-inc.org/list.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20140117/dab4a914/attachment.html>