[Durham INC] Reminder and Call for Agenda Items

[pazar at nc.rr.com]

Our August INC Delegates Meeting is scheduled for Tuesday night, August 25th at 7:00 in Golden Belt (807 E. Main St.) Building 2, 3rd Floor in the Neighborhood Improvement Services conference room.

We have two transit related resolutions slated for vote.  Pat distributed separately and they appear below.

Expected Committee Reports

	• Candidate Forum
	• Pocket Neighborhoods 
	• WCF update 
	• Nominations  (Unless I am mistaken, these are slated for vote in September and we should have a slate presented by the committee Tuesday night.)

Given recent shorter meetings, and the appreciation for brevity displayed by delegates, there are no speakers currently scheduled.  Additional time may be requested for the Pocket Neighborhood item.

Please let me know of other items for the agenda, preferably by Monday morning.

Thank you, Philip

__________________________________

Resolutions That Are Not Yet Passed
 
Although both the transit resolution (first one) and the compact design one address communications at public meetings, the subjects of the meetings differ (routes versus development near routes), the organizations hosting the meeting differ (TTA versus Planning), and the remedies sought are not quite the same. 
 
_______________________________
Overarching Resolution Regarding Rail Siting Process 
 
Whereas local and regional authorities including GoTriangle (formerly Triangle Transit Authority), the City of Durham, the Town of Chapel Hill, the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan Planning Organization (DCHMPO), and the North Carolina Department of Transportation are all presently engaged in forming plans for a proposed Durham-Orange Light Rail line; 
 
Whereas neighborhoods and other groups continue to have concerns with the proposed routes – safety of at-grade crossings, impact on businesses, difficulties of pedestrian crossing, and reach into the eastern part of the city – and would like to see these concerns treated seriously;
 
Whereas there have been concerns about sharing of working maps and other materials;
 
Whereas although it is clear GoTriangle staff has worked hard to schedule public meetings and put a large amount of expertise and effort into the presentations made at these meetings, citizens feel they have not been listened to when they ask about anything other than the results of staff studies;
 
Whereas meetings with neighborhoods and other groups should be part of a dialogue where GoTriangle uses its expertise to meet groups and individuals “where they are” and not opportunities to reiterate reasons for supporting positions already taken;
 
Whereas INC has passed resolutions about a stop east of Alston Avenue and the alignment near Little Creek;
 
Whereas INC has passed resolutions in support of light rail;
 
Be it resolved that:
 
1.  INC continues to endorse such improvements in our transportation system.

2.  GoTriange is encouraged to have more meaningful direct discussions with neighborhoods to address their concerns, using real world light rail examples and offering Youtube examples and specific examples from other transit systems, especially Charlotte.

3.  GoTriangle is encouraged to explore new ways to promote citizen involvement.

4.  Durham should proceed with plans to link the new Amtrak and bus stations with a pedestrian crosswalk as a downpayment against promises that transit expenditures will also benefit low-income residents that do not live in or immediately adjacent to downtown, and who rely on bus service linkage to rail.  Failing that, other plans to serve low-income residents in meaningful manners should be accelerated so that the benefits of transit are shared more equitably.
 
 
 _________________________________
 
Resolution for a more inclusive, in-depth process for public involvement in planning “Compact Neighborhoods” and “Compact Design Districts” with higher density development zoning around proposed light rail stations in Durham (AKA Resolution on Density around Rail Stations)
 
Whereas, in Spring and Summer 2015, Durham City and County staff put significant effort into the community meetings as part of the process of planning “Compact Neighborhoods" with higher density development around proposed light rail stations;
 
Whereas, residents, businesses and institutions in and near proposed “Compact Neighborhoods” may be displaced with the largest impact on lower income residents who would have the greatest difficulty finding homes they can afford;
 
Whereas, many residents who live in “Compact Neighborhoods” did not get mailed notices of these meetings;
 
Whereas public input was limited to drawing lines for “Compact Neighborhoods,” with no discussion of the impact of high density development on residents or how the public and residents would be involved in planning for their neighborhoods in the future;
 
Whereas, the public has not seen an analysis of the impact of higher density development already happening Downtown, 9th Street, and Duke/VA Hospital;
 
Whereas, the plan for development around 9th Street was aided immensely by participation and expertise from the community;
 
Whereas, new methods of public engagement are being used across the country to create dialog within communities and increase public knowledge, leaving them less dependent on outside experts (see Denver Example);
 
Whereas, planning principles should support neighborhood values, including neighborhood stability, character, and smooth transitions among uses, and planning’s rule of drawing lines between back yards does not support this value;
Whereas, Durham City-County Planning did not include adequate neighborhood involvement in creating “Compact Neighborhoods” and has not specified how the community would be involved in planning for “Compact Design Districts;”
 
Whereas, once “Compact Design Districts” are in place, the public will have no say in what is built;
 
Therefore, the InterNeighborhood Council (INC) of Durham resolves that:
 
Before adopting plans for "Compact Neighborhoods” with higher density development near future light rail stations, we ask the City and County to:
 
1.     Investigate and implement best practices around the country for building a dialog among members of the community as well as with experts;
2.     Inform the public about the potential impact of higher density development, including the effects of higher zoning, taxes, rents, and home prices on the stability of local neighborhoods, small businesses, institutions, and residents;
3.     Involve the public in a more inclusive, in-depth planning process with:
         a.     Neighborhood Planning Committees for each transit station with members of local neighborhoods, businesses, institutions, and residents who would be most affected by higher density development, and
         b.     Training and involvement of community members in leadership of Neighborhood Planning Committees. 
4.     Provide equitable solutions to ensure that:
        a.     Neighborhoods stay stable and livable,
        b.     Homeowners, home buyers, and renters can stay in safe, sustainably affordable homes and have opportunities for new homes they can afford long-term,
        c.     Small businesses and local institutions can continue and have options for comparable locations, and
        d.     Residents can access light rail transit with safe sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, and bus stations.
_______________________________________________