Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
WELCOME TO THE DURHAM PLANNING
COMMISSION.
THE MEMBERS OF THE DURHAM
PLANNING COMMISSION HAVE BEEN
APPOINTED BY CITY COUNCIL AND
THE COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS AS AN ADVISORY
BOARD TO THE ELECTED OFFICIALS.
YOU SHOULD NOTE THAT ELECTED
OFFICIALS HAVE THE FINAL SAY-SO
ON ANY ISSUE BEFORE US TONIGHT.
IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THE
AGENDA ITEM, GO TO THE TABLE TO
THE LEFT AND SPEAK WITH THOSE
WISHING TO SPEAK.
STATE YOUR NAME AND TRAES
CLEARLY WHEN YOU COME TO THE
PODIUM.
SPEAK CLEARLY AND INTO THE
MICROPHONE.
EACH SIDE WISHES TO SPEAK IN
FAVOR OF THE ITEM AND THOSE
WISHING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION
TO AN ITEM HAVE 10 MINUTES TO
PRESENT EACH SIDE.
TIME IS DIVIDED AMONGST ALL
PERSONS WISHING TO SPEED.
IF YOU'RE HERE TONIGHT, YOU
SHOULD BE AWARE OF A PROTEST
PETITION.
IT CAN BE HELD FOR THOSE
RESIDENTS WHO LIVE IN THE
REZONING AREA.
PLEASE CONSULT THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT STAFF FOR DETAILS ON
A PROTEST PETITION, AND THEY'LL
BE HAPPY TO HELP YOU.
YOU SHOULD KEEP IN CONSTANT
TOUCH WITH THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT AS TO WHEN YOUR CASE
GOES BEFORE THE ELECTED
OFFICIALS FOR FINAL VOTE.
ALL MOTIONS ARE STATED IN THE
AFFIRMATIVE.
IF IT IS DENIED.
THERE'S A DENIAL.
THANK YOU, CAN WE HAVE A ROLL
CALL.
>> COMMISSIONER MITCHELL-ALLEN.
>> RIGHT HERE.
>> COMMISSIONER BEECHWOOD.
COMMISSIONER BOARD.
>> RIGHT HERE.
>> COMMISSIONER DAVIS.
COMMISSIONER GIBBS.
VICE CHAIR HARRIS.
>> PRESENT.
>> CHAIR JONES.
PRESENT.
>> COMMISSIONER KIMBALL.
>> HERE.
>> COMMISSIONER MARTIN.
>> PRESENT.
>> COMMISSIONER PADGETT.
HERE.
COMMISSIONER SMUDSKI, HERE.
>> COMMISSIONER WHITLEY.
HERE.
>> COMMISSIONER WINDERS.
>> HERE.
>> WE RECEIVED AN E-MAIL FROM
COMMISSIONER BEECHWOOD AND GIBBS
REQUESTING AN EXCUSED ABSENCE,
WHICH I DID GRANT.
WE DON'T NEED TO TAKE A MOTION
ON THAT.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO
THE AGENDA?
>> GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.
PAT YOUNG WITH THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT.
WE DO NOT HAVE ANY ADJUSTMENTS
TO TONIGHT'S AGENDA, BUT I WILL
CERTIFY FOR THE RECORD THAT ALL
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS HAVE BEEN
PROPERLY ADVERTISED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS
OF LAW AND WE HAVE AFTER
AFFIDAVITS ON FILE TO THAT
EFFECT.
>> CAN WE HAVE APPROVALFUL
MINUTES?
>> SO MOVE.
>> SECOND.
>> SO MOVED AND PROPERLY
SECONDED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR LET IT BE
KNOWN FOR RAISING YOUR RIGHT
HAND.
ANY OPPOSED?
ALL RIGHT.
MOTION CARRIES.
THANK YOU.
SO WE MOVE DOWN TO PUBLIC
HEARING.
WE OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING
FOR CASE A12000009 PLAN
AMENDMENT AND ZONING CASE A
INTERESTS 21200020.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M HANNAH JACOBSON WITH THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AND I'LL
PLAN CASE A120009 FOR THE DEL
WEBB ENTRY MON NMENT.
IT'S HOUR VAT AND THEY'RE USING
IT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
TO INSTITUTIONAL.
AL THEY WILL DESCRIBE IN GREATER
DETAIL, THIS WILL ALLOW THE
CONSTRUCTION OF ENTRYWAY
MONUMENTS INTO THE DEL WEBB
RESIDENTIAL PROJECT.
THIS WAS A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
PROJECT IN EASTERN DURHAM
COUNTY.
YOU CAN SEE THE OUTLINE OF IT
DASHED IN RED.
HOWEVER, THE DISCUSSION TONIGHT
WOULD IMPACT THREE LOCATIONS,
TWO ALONG THIS ROAD AND ONE
ALONG ANDREW CHAPPELL ROAD.
THESE SHOW THE BOUNDARIES OF THE
PROPOSED CHANGE.
I BELIEVE THEY'RE A BIT OUT OF
DATE BECAUSE CONSTRUCTION
STARTED ON A NUMBER OF AREAS ON
THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT.
IN THERE A JUSTIFICATION
STATEMENT.
THE APPLICANT POINTS OUT THAT
THEIR PROPOSED CONCEPT FOR THE
EMPTY MONUMENT DOES NOT FIT
CLEANLY INTO THE CATEGORIES OF
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS.
THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT THEY'RE
PROPOSING, O AND I IS PROBABLY
THE BEST FOR THE PROPOSAL.
IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS, THEY
NEED TO EITHER BE DESIGNATED AS
OFFICE OR AS INSTITUTIONAL.
THEY CHOSE INSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE
AS THEY POINT OUT THERE ARE
ALREADY A NUMBER OF
INSTITUTIONAL USES SCATTERED
AROUND DURHAM AND SPECIFICALLY
IN THIS AREA.
THERE IS A SCHOOL AND A NUMBER
OF PLACES OF WORSHIP.
THE STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE
PROPOSAL FOR THE PLAN AMENDME
AMENDMENTS.
STAFF AGREES WITH THE APPLICANT
THAT THIS IS A PRETTY UNUSUAL
REQUEST AND DOESN'T FIT VERY
CLEANLY INTO THE FRAMEWORK OF
OUR PLANS AND POLICIES.
HOWEVER, INSTITUTIONAL USES ARE
VERY BROADLY DEFINED, AND SO
ENTRY MONUMENT COULD POSSIBLY
FIT WITHIN THAT CATEGORY AND BE
APPROPRIATE IN THIS LOCATION
GIVEN KIND OF THE SIZE AND
MAGNITUDE OF THE DELL WEB
PROJECT. WEBB
PROJECT.
IT'S AN AREA TRANSITIONS FROM
RURAL TO MORE SUBURBAN.
AGAIN, WHILE THESE SITES ARE NOT
DESIGNATED AS INSTITUTIONAL ON
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS, THERE
ARE A NUMBER OF EXISTING USES IN
THAT AREA.
STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSAL IS
COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING FUTURE
LAND USE PATTERNS.
STAFF ALSO DETERMINED THAT THE
PROPOSAL DOES NOT CREATE ADVERSE
IMPACTS EITHER FOR TRAFFIC,
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OR
FUTURE DEMAND FOR LAND USES.
FINALLY, THAT THE SITE IS OF
ADEQUATE SHAPE AND SIZE TO
ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED LAND
USES.
SO IT MEETS ALL THE CRITERIA FOR
PLAN AMENDMENTS, AND STAFF IS
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
>> GOOD EVENING.
I'M AMY WILSON WITH THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT.
I WILL PRESENT THE ZONING MAP
CASE TO YOU, CASE Z-1200020 FOR
DEL WEBB ENTRY MONUMENTS.
THE APPLICANT IS HORVATH
ASSOCIATES.
THE REQUEST FROM PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL 3.700 TO
OFFICE INSTITUTIONAL WITH A
DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
THE TOTAL SITE AREA IS 2.67
ACRES.
THAT'S DIVIDED INTO THREE
INDIVIDUAL GEOGRAPHIES, AND THE
PROPOSED USES FOR ENTRY
MONUMENTS SIGNAGE.
THE SITE IS SHOWN HERE AS MISS
JACOBSON MENTIONED, IT'S ALONG
ANDREW CHAPPELL ROAD.
THAT'S SITE ENTRY NUMBER ONE.
SITE ENTRY NUMBER 2 IS THE
WESTERN LOEKDZ ON THE ROAD, AND
SITE ENTRY 3 IS THE REMAINING
SITE.
SITE ENTRANCE NUMBER 3 IS WITHIN
THE WATERSHED PROTECTION OVERLAY
AREA, WHICH IS REPRESENTED ON
THIS MAP BY THE BLUE LINE.
THIS REQUEST DOES MEET THE
STANDARDS FOR THE OFFICE AND
INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICTS SHOWN
HERE.
THIS CASE IS ALSO UNIQUE IN THAT
IT IS A COMBINED DEVELOPMENT
PLAN SITE PLAN.
WHAT YOU SEE IN YOUR PACKET IN
THE STAFF REPORT IN ITS ENTIRETY
IS A COMMITMENT WITH ALL THE
DETAILS SHOWN.
IT IS A COMBINATION -- WHAT YOU
SEE IS A COMBINATION OF A WALL
AND FREE-STANDING MONUMENT SIGN,
SO THOSE ARE THE UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCES AND
STANDARDS THAT ARE APPLIED NOD
TO THE OI STANDARD DISTRICTS.
THE FIRST SITE ENTRANCE NUMBER
ONE IS AT 704 ANDREW CHAPELS
ROAD SHOWN HERE.
IT'S THE SOUTHERN ENTRY TO THE
PROJECT.
CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED ON THIS
SITE SINCE THIS DEVELOPMENT PLAN
WAS PRODUCED, AND IT WILL BE
UPDATED.
YOU'LL SEE ON THE RIGHT-HAND
SIDE IS A SITE AREA, AND THE
LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THE SLIDE
SHOWS WHERE THE PROPOSED WALL
AND SIGN WILL BE.
SITE ENTRANCE 1 IS 1.58 ACRES.
SITE ENTRANCE 2 AT 5814 IS .70
ACRES.
IT REPRESENTS THE SAME
CONDITIONS.
YOU HAVE YOUR EXISTING
CONDITIONS ON THE RIGHT-HAND
SIDE, AND ON THE LEFT IT SHOWS
THE WALL WITH THE SIDEWALKS AND
ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT MAKE
OUR SITE PLANS STANDARD.
ENTRANCE NUMBER 3 IS THE
SMALLEST OF THE THREE SITES
AT .39 ACRES.
ALSO, IT SHOWS THE WALL AND THE
PROPOSED SIDEWALK.
ALL THESE ARE DETAILED IN THE
STAFF REPORT.
JUST A SUMMARY OF THE
COMMITMENTS, BECAUSE ALL OF THE
ELEMENTS -- THE THREE ENTRY
MONUMENT SIGNS AS SHOWN.
THERE'S NO BUILDING OR PARKING
PROPOSED AT THESE SITES.
THERE'S PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
PROVIDED THROUGH EACH ENTRANCE,
AND THERE'S RIGHT-OF-WAY
DEDICATION ALONG LEESVILLE ROAD
AND ANDREW CHAPELS ROAD.
THE SURFACE IS 1,705 SQUARE
FEET, AND THE TOTAL SITE WHICH
THIS PROJECT IS PART OF THE
LARGER DEL WEBB SIGHT, THE
IMPERVIOUS SURFACE IS ONE OF THE
COMPONENTS LOOKED AT THROUGH THE
ENTIRE PROJECT.
BUT IT DOES SATISFY THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE I AM
PERVIOUS SURFACE AND IS
RECOVERED AT 20%.
AGAIN, ALL THE GRAPHIC
COMMITMENTS OF THIS PLAN, WHICH
WAS REVIEWED AS A SITE PLAN WITH
ITS OWN CASE NUMBER AND REVIEW
PROCESS, ARE COMMITTED AS SHOWN.
THE SITE IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH
THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.
HOWEVER, YOU'VE JUST HEARD THE
PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST.
STAFF IS SUPPORTING IT.
IT DOES SATISFY AND MEET THE
POLICIES THAT ARE AMICABLE TO
THIS SITE FOR A MORE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THE
STAFF DETERMINES SHOULD THE PLAN
AMENDMENT BE APPROVED, THIS
REQUEST WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER
ADOPTED POLICIES.
I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT BECAUSE
IT IS A COMBINED DEVELOPMENT
PLAN SITE PLAN THAT THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DID
HEAR THIS AND REVIEW THIS
APPLICATION AND SITE PLAN ON
APRIL 19th.
THEY APPROVED IT BY A VOTE OF
9-0.
THAT RECOMMENDATION WILL ALSO
MOVE FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL.
THANK YOU.
>> THE STAFF DID AN EXCELLENT
JOB AND YOU HEARD IT SEVERAL
TIMES THROUGHOUT BOTH
PRESENTATIONS.
THIS IS A UNIQUE SITUATION.
THE UDO AND THE WAY IT IS SET UP
WITH PDRs AND RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT, IT MINIMIZES THE
SIZE OF SIGNAGE YOU'RE ALLOWED
WITHIN THOSE RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS OF 32 SQUARE FEET.
PLACING THE SIGN AS FAR BACK
FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AS WE'RE
PROPOSING, YOU WON'T SEE IT.
HENCE, WE NEEDED TO GET INTO A
MORE COMMERCIAL OR INSTITUTIONAL
DISTRICT THAT ALLOWED US TO DO
LARGER SIGNS AS WELL AS THE
WALLS.
WALLS INSIDE OF 50 FEET OF
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ARE LIMITED
TO A CERTAIN HEIGHT.
WE FEEL THIS ENTRY DESIGN THAT
BRINGS YOU INTO THE DEL WEBB
COMMUNITY MAKES A STATEMENT,
MAKES A VERY BROAD STATEMENT,
VERY POSITIVE ONE.
WATER FEATURES, LANDSCAPING,
MOUNDING, AND STONE WALLS.
IT'S NOT JUST A LITTLE ENTRY.
IT'S A MASSIVE, WELL-DEFINED
ENTRANCE INTO DURHAM.
THIS IS COMING -- THE MAIN ONE
IS COMING OFF ANDREW CHAPELS IS
UP FROM T.W. ALEXANDER OUT OF
BRIAR CREEK AND U.S. 70.
I ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS,
AND WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY
QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC
HEARING AND BRING IT BACK BEFORE
THE COMMISSION.
ALL RIGHT.
MR. SMUDSKI.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
THIS QUESTION IS FOR STAFF, I
GUESS, AMY.
ON THE REPORT IT SAYS THAT IT
MEETS THE MINIMUM SQUARE
FOOTAGE, BUT YET, ONE OF THE
LOCATIONS IS ONLY 16,000 SQUARE
FEET.
SO ARE WE TAKING ALL THREE AS
ONE, OR -- I THINK I'M
REFERRING TO ONE OF THE SLIDES
IN THE PRESENTATION.
>> OKAY.
>> THANKS FOR THE QUESTION.
THE DIRECTOR DID DETERMINE THAT
THIS IS ONE SITE FOR THE OI
DISTRICT.
IT IS PART OF THE LARGER DEL
WEBB COMMUNITY, SO UNDER THE
DIRECTOR'S DETERMINATION, IT
DOES SATISFY THE ORDINANCE.
>> IF I MAY ADD, THERE ARE
PROPERTY LINES THAT GO OUTSIDE
THE ZONING DISTRICT, AND THAT'S
STILL PART OF THE SAME LOT.
WE WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH IT
THAT WAY.
>> DON'T GET ME WRONG, OKAY?
I'M LOOKING OUT FOR THE ZONING
ORDINANCE.
>> YES, SIR.
>> THAT GOES ALONG WITH MY OTHER
QUESTION, I GUESS, FOR STAFF.
ITS MORE OF A GENERAL THING.
I GUESS THE DEVELOPER COULD HELP
ME WITH THIS.
IS THIS GOING TO BE THE START OF
A FLOOD REQUEST TO REZONE THINGS
AROUND DURHAM TO GET AROUND THE
SIGN ORDINANCE?
>> I CANNOT ANSWER THAT.
I KNOW THIS IS A UNIQUE
SITUATION WHERE THROUGH
DISCUSSIONS WITH THE DIRECTOR
AND INTERPRETATION OF THE
ORDINANCE THAT THIS WAS THE TOOL
USED FOR THIS PARTICULAR
PROJECT.
I CAN'T SPEAK TO ANY FUTURE
PROJECTS.
>> I'M NO BIG FAN OF SIGN
ORDINANCES, BUT AS LONG AS WE
HAVE ONE, I DON'T -- I DON'T
LIKE TO SEE END RUNS GOING
AROUND IT.
HOW IS THIS PROJECT SO UNIQUE
THAT WE DON'T START SEEING THIS
ALL OVER DURHAM?
>> THE TIME AND EXPENSE INVOLVED
IN DOING IT THIS WAY, IT'S NOT
GOING TO HAPPEN EVERY DAY.
THIS IS GOING TO BE -- IT'S A
UNIQUE SITUATION.
I DO NOT SEE THIS HAPPENING ON
VERY MANY PROJECTS.
IF ANYTHING, IT HAS BROUGHT TO
THE PLANNING STAFF'S ATTENTION
THAT THERE IS -- THERE NEEDS TO
BE SOMETHING IN THE SIGNED
ORDINANCE THAT FITS CERTAIN
CATEGORIES OF THE LARGER
DEVELOPMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL.
THAT MAY BE ADDRESSED LATER.
>> THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT YOU
HAD MENTIONED, RIGHT?
>> YEAH.
BUT, AGAIN, THAT HAS TO BE
BROUGHT BACK IN A TEXT AMENDMENT
IF THAT GOES THAT WAY.
RIGHT NOW I DON'T SEE VERY MANY
PROJECTS SPENDING THE TIME AND
MONEY DOING THIS REZONING EFFORT
LIKE WE HAVE.
>> THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS I
HAVE AT THIS TIME.
>> THANK YOU, SIR.
MR. KIMBALL.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
>> THERE WE GO.
LOOKING AT THE CONTOUR LINES,
ESPECIALLY ENTRY 3, IT LOOKS
LIKE WE HAVE A SADDLE THAT RUNS
BACK OFF THE ROAD THAT IS KIND
OF CHANNELING WATER FROM
ACTUALLY THE ROAD BACK PLUS TWO
ON THE SIDE.
YOU HAVE ALMOST LIKE A STREAM
GOING DOWN.
HOW ARE YOU GOING TO MITIGATE
THAT?
>> THAT'S A BERM.
>> OKAY, A BERM.
>> RATHER THAN A VALLEY
TRAINING, IT'S ACTUALLY A BERM
DIRECTING THE WATER BACK THE
OTHER DIRECTION.
>> OKAY.
SO ARE YOU HAVING A RETENTION
POND BACK THERE?
>> IT WILL TIE IN WITH THE
DRAINAGE ON THE REST OF THE
DEVELOPMENT.
>> OKAY.
>> ALL THIS GOES TO SOME CENTRAL
PONDS FOR TREATMENT.
WE JUST HAVEN'T SHOWN THAT
ADDITIONAL TREATMENT OFFSITE
YET, BUT IT IS WITHIN THE DEL
WEBB COMMUNITY.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU.
THAT WAS MY MAJOR QUESTION.
>> DR. WINDERS.
>> I JUST -- I HAVE LOOKED AT
THE PICTURES IN THE PACKET ON
THIS VERY ATTRACTIVE SIGN, BUT
IT'S HARD FOR ME TO TELL WHAT
THE SCALE OF IT IS JUST BECAUSE
THE PRINT IS SO SMALL AND
EVERYTHING.
COULD YOU JUST KIND OF DESCRIBE
HOW BIG THIS SIGN IS AND HOW FAR
IT IS BACK FROM THE ROAD?
ARE THERE SOME OTHER SIGNS
SIMILAR TO THIS IN OTHER PLACES
IN THE COMMUNITY?
>> THIS IS STILL FITTING WITHIN
THE SIGN ORDINANCE FOR
COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS THE 80
SQUARE FEET.
IF YOU NOTICE, WE DID PUT SOME
HUMAN FIGURES NEAR THE SIGN TO
GIVE YOU SOME SCALE.
NOT COUNTING THE SIGN'S FACE,
THE BACKGROUND -- WE'RE
FOLLOWING THE SIGN ORDINANCE
JUST UNDER A COMMERCIAL OR
OFFICE GUIDELINE.
SO IT'S 80 SQUARE FEET.
THE TOP OF THE SIGN IS ABOUT 6
FEET HIGH.
THANK YOU.
IT'S ABOUT 6 FEET HIGH.
THE LETTERS VARY FROM ABOUT 2
FOOT -- THERE ARE DMIMENSIONS A
THE BOTTOM.
THE AR BORE IS 27 FEET ACROSS.
THE HEIGHT OF THE LETTERS ARE
4'2" NO, NOT EVEN THAT.
I'M SORRY.
2'8".
SO THEY'RE 2'8" AND THEY'RE
SPACED OUT.
>> IS THE WALL ABOUT 6 FEET
TALL?
>> THE WALLS ACTUALLY VARY TO 6,
8, AND 10 FEET TALL.
THE WALL ITSELF IS LIMITED TO
THE 8, AND THEN YOU HAVE THE
COLUMNS THAT GO UP ABOVE THERE
AT 10 FEET.
>> HOW FAR BACK FROM THE ROAD IS
THIS?
USUALLY WE DON'T HAVE 8 FEET
WALLS AROUND RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
OF COURSE, I KNOW IT'S NOT ALL
AROUND.
>> IT'S NOT.
IT'S JUST THE ENTRYWAY.
THAT'S THE SECOND PART OF WHY
WE'RE BRINGING THIS COUNCIL IS.
WE NORMALLY HAVE TO GO THROUGH
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT THERE'S
A MECHANISM BY CARRYING THE SAME
PLAN THROUGH COUNCIL ON A ZONING
CASE, THEY CAN APPROVE THAT
VARIATION.
THEY'RE SET ANYWHERE FROM 25 TO
ABOUT 50 FEET BACK.
THEY VARY.
>> IT'S GOING TO BE LIGHTED AT
NIGHT?
>> THERE WILL BE UP LIGHTS ON
THEM, YES.
IN FACT, THE WALLS AND
LANDSCAPING AROUND THERE WILL
HAVE UP LIGHTS.
>> DO WE HAVE ANYONE ELSE?
CAN WE GET A MOTION?
>> SO MOVE TO APPROVE.
>> SECOND.
>> ALL RIGHT.
WE PROVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RAISE YOUR
RIGHT HAND.
ALL RIGHT.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES 11-0.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
WE'LL MOVE DOWN TO B.
>> EXCUSE ME.
>> YES, MA'AM.
>> WAS THAT FOR THE PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR THE ZONING?
>> CORRECT.
CAN WE GET A MOTION FOR THE
ZONE.
>> SO MOVED.
>> SECOND.
>> THE ZONING IS MOVED AND
PROPERLY SECONDS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SHOW BY YOUR
RIGHT HAND.
ANY OPPOSITION?
THANK YOU.
OKAY.
WE'LL MOVE DOWN TO ITEM B, AND
THAT'S PLAN AMENDMENT A1300003
AND ZONING CASE Z1300006.
>> WE NEED A BIT OF TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE.
>> I APOLOGIZE FOR THE DELAY,
AND I'M LAURA WOODS AND I'LL
PRESENT CASE A-1300003, RUSTICA
OAKS SUBDIVISION.
THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR
RUSTICA OAKS, LLC TO AMEND THE
LAND USE ON 1819 RUSTICA DRIVE
FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO
LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THE SITE IS SURROUNDED TO THE
WEST, NORTH AND EAST BY
DEVELOPING SUBDIVISIONS.
IT'S ALSO CALLED RUSTICA OAKS BY
THE SAME DEVELOPER.
AND TO THE SOUTH A SINGLE-FAMILY
HOME AND JUST TO THE SOUTH OF
THAT AT THE PARKS SUBDIVISION.
THIS IS IN THE SUBURBAN TIER,
AND IT COMPRISES
APPROXIMATELY .66 ACRES.
ACCORDING TO THE APPLICANT, THE
PROPOSED USE IS MORE COMPATIBLE
WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USE
PATTERNS THAN THE CURRENT LAND
USE DESIGNATION AND THE PROPOSED
USE WILL ALLOW FOR THE PROPERTY
TO BE DIVIDED INTO TWO OR MORE
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS
CONSISTENT WITH THE LOT SIZES IN
THE DEVELOPING RUSTICA OAKS
SUBDIVISION IN WIND MORE PARK AT
THE SUBDIVISION TO THE SOUTH.
HERE IS THE FLOOR PLAN CRITERIA
WE USE TO EVALUATE THESE
APPLICATIONS AS YOU SAW
PREVIOUSLY, AND STAFF AGREES
THAT THE FIRST OF THESE
CRITERIAS IS MET BY THE
APPLICATION AND THE PROPOSED
LAND USE IS CONSISTENT, OR AS
ADOPTED PLANS AND POLICIES,
SPECIFICALLY POLICY 2.3.1B.
STAFF ALSO AFWREES IT MEETS THE
CRITERIA THAT THE PROPOSED USE
IS COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING OR
FUTURE LAND USE PATTERNS, THE
LOT SIZES SUGGESTED BY THE
APPLICATION ARE CONSISTENT WITH
THE DEVELOPING SUBDIVISION THAT
GOES TO THE NORTH, EAST AND WEST
OF THE SITE.
IT ALSO MEETS THE THIRD CRITERIA
AND DOES NOT CREATE SUBSTANTIAL
ADVERSE IMPACTS.
AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE EXACTS
ARE QUITE MINIMAL GIVEN IT'S A
QUITE SMALL SITE.
IT MEETS THE FOURTH CRITERIA AS
WELL.
IT IS OF ADEQUATE SHAPE AND SIZE
TO ACCOMMODATE THE PROPOSED LAND
USE.
THEREFORE, STAFF AGREES IN ALL
CASES THAT IT MEETS THE CRITERIA
FOR PLAN AMENDMENTS AND STAFF
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> GOOD EVENING, AGAIN.
I'M PRESENT THE ZONING CASE FOR
THE PLAN AMENDMENT YOU JUST
HEARD.
CASE 01300006, RUSTICA OAKS
SUBDIVISION.
IT IS WITHIN THE CITY'S
JURISDICTION AND THE REQUEST IS
FROM THE PRESENT ZONING
DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL RURAL
TO RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN.
IT'S FOR SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL.
THE SITE IS AT 1819 RUSTICA
DRIVE, AS MISS WOODS JUST
MENTIONED.
IT'S EAST OF SOUTH AUSTIN AVENUE
AND WEST OF MAGNOLIA TREE LANE.
IT'S WITHIN THE SUBURBAN TIER.
THERE ARE NO OVERLAYS AMICABLE
TO THIS SITE.
THE REQUEST DOES MEET THE
STANDARD FOR THE ZONING DISTRICT
WITH A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF FIVE
UNITS AN ACRE.
I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IT'S
POSSIBLE THAT THIS SITE, WHICH
IS .659 ACRES, COULD BE DIVIDED
INTO THREE LOTS AT THE MOST.
THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSISTENT
WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP,
HOWEVER, THE PLAN AMENDMENT YOU
JUST HEARD REQUESTS A CONSISTENT
CATEGORY OF LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL.
THE REQUEST DOES MEET THE
POLICIES OF ALL THE OTHER
APPLICABLE POLICIES OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
STAFF DETERMINES IF THE PLAN
AMENDMENT IS APPROVED, THIS
REQUEST WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER
ADOPTED POLICIES AND ORDINANCES.
THAT CONCLUDES THE REQUEST.
>> WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP
TO SPEAK.
>> GOOD EVENING, I'M MICHAEL
BLUNT WITH KEYSTONE CORPORATION.
WE'RE THE DEVELOPER OF THE
RUSTICA OAKS SUBDIVISION
SURROUNDING THIS PIECE OF
PROPERTY.
I WANTED TO -- I'LL BE VERY
BRIEF.
THIS PARCEL -- THE PARCEL OWNER
AT THE TIME IN '06 WHEN WE
ORIGINALLY BEGAN THE PLANNING
FOR THE SUBDIVISION WASN'T
INTERESTED IN SELLING HIS
PROPERTY, AND YOU KNOW, LONG
AFTER THE PROCESS OF BEING
APPROVED AND BEGINNING
CONSTRUCTION, HE DECIDED HE DID
WANT TO SELL AND WANTED TO MOVE.
WE WORKED OUT A DEAL TO BUY HIS
PARCEL.
WE HAVE SINCE CLOSED ON THIS
PIECE OF PROPERTY.
HE'S BEEN ABLE TO MOVE TO
ANOTHER PLACE IN SOUTH DURHAM,
AND WE ARE ACTUALLY MOVING THIS
HOUSE TO AN OLD PIECE OF
PROPERTY IN NORTH DURHAM FOR A
CITY EMPLOYEE WITH THE WATER
MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT FOR THE
CITY OF DURHAM.
THE ONE CLARIFICATION ON THE
NAME OF THE SUBDIVISION, IT'S
NOT NECESSARILY RUSTICA OAKS.
THE INTENT WOULD BE TO SUBDIVIDE
THIS PARCEL INTO THREE LOTS THAT
WOULD BE VERY SIMILAR TO THOSE
LOTS THAT HAVE BEEN SUBDIVIDED
AROUND IT TO GENERALLY JUST
BLEND IN WHAT THE APPROVED SITE
PLAN THAT WE HAD TO GO THROUGH
IN 2007.
I THINK THAT'S ABOUT IT.
WE THINK IT WILL MAKE THINGS
LOOK MUCH MORE COHERENT WITH A
BETTER STREETSCAPE ACROSS
RUSTICA DRIVE GOING THROUGH THIS
NEIGHBORHOOD AND GIVE THE
SUBDIVISION MORE OPPORTUNITY TO
SUCCEED IN SALES AND MOVE
THROUGH AND BE DEVELOPED AS
PLANNED.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND I'M
HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU.
WE'RE CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING
TO BRING IT BACK BEFORE THE
COMMISSION.
DO WE HAVE ANYONE THAT WANTS TO
SPEAK?
MR. CAMPBELL.
>> QUESTION, MA'AM.
ON THE -- I SEE THAT WE'RE
MOVING ACROSS RUSTICA DRIVE ON
THIS.
NORMALLY WE LOOK AT ROADS BEING
THE BOUNDARIES OF ZONING.
ALL THE HOUSING CURRENTLY ON
RUSTIC DRIVE AND DOWN MAGNOLIA
TREE LANE, IS THAT ALL PART OF
THE RUSTIC DEVELOPMENT?
>> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
THE DEVELOPMENT, I THINK,
MR. BLUNT WAS REFERRING TO IS TO
THE NORTH OF RUSTICA DRIVE ON
THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET.
>> SIR, COME BACK TO THE MIC.
>> EXCUSE ME.
THE MAP THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT
NOW, ALL OF THE LOTS SUBDIVIDED
SURROUNDING THIS PARCEL ARE A
PART OF THE RUSTICA SUBDIVISION.
THE ENTIRE PARCEL THAT'S LABELED
AT PDR4.00 ENCOMPASSES THE
ENTIRE PROPERTY FOR THE RUSTICA
OAKS SUBDIVISION.
IT'S A TOTAL OF 276 LOTS AT
BUILD OUT.
THE ONES THAT ARE SHOWN NOW ARE
JUST THE LOTS THAT HAVE BEEN
PLATTED THUS FAR.
WE'LL CONTINUE TO THE NORTH AND
TO THE EAST SUBTWIDIVIDING LOTS
PHASES UNTIL ITS BILLED OUT PER
THAT SITE PLAN.
>> SO RIGHT NOW THEY'RE JUST LOT
MARKS?
>> THEY'RE BUILT, THE MAJORITY
OF THEM.
THEY'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION
CURRENTLY.
>> OKAY.
HAVE YOU -- WHY DID YOU CONSIDER
GOING TO THE HIGHER DENSITY JUST
FOR THIS PIECE WHEN EVERYTHING
SURROUNDING IT IS AT THE LOWER
DENSITY?
>> EVERYTHING SURROUNDING IT IS
ACTUALLY AT A HIGHER DENSITY, I
BELIEVE, AS PDR4.0.
THAT ALLOWS FOR MORE UNITS PER
ACRE, I BELIEVE.
>> FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, AND THIS
IS FOUR TO EIGHT, I BELIEVE.
>> I KNOW THAT THE ZONING ONLY
ALLOWS FOR THREE LOTS FOR THIS
PARCEL.
>> THAT'S CORRECT.
I'M NOT SURE IF THERE'S A
DISTINCTION HERE.
THE PLAN AMENDMENT IS ACTUALLY
FOR A HIGHER DENSITY.
WE HAVE A TABLE IN OUR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT
ALLOWS -- THAT MATCHES THE
ZONING DISTRICT TO THE LAND USE
CATEGORIES.
IN THIS CASE RS-8, WHICH THE
APPLICANT WAS LOOKING TO GET
THROUGH THE LOT, WHICH COULD BE
ACHIEVED UNDER THE RS-8
DESIGNATION, COULD NOT BE
ACCOMMODATED WITH THE EXISTING
PLAN AMENDMENT, AND THEREFORE
YOU SEE THE SHIFT OF THE PLAN
AMENDMENT, WHICH DOES -- WHICH
MATCHES THE FUTURE LAND USE
DESIGNATION TO THE SOUTH.
BUT IT'S JUST NUMBERS-WISE
MATCHING WHAT THE PROPOSED GOAL
IS VERSUS WHAT TOOLS WE HAVE TO
USE TO ACHIEVE THAT IS WHAT
YOU'RE SEEING.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU.
>> COMMISSIONER SMUDSKI.
>> JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, HOW
WOULD YOU DIVIDE THIS INTO THREE
PARCELS?
>> WELL, I'M WORKING ON THAT NOW
WITH THE BUILDERS THAT WOULD BE
BUILDING ON THOSE LOTS.
I BELIEVE THE ZONING REQUIRES
THAT I HAVE ONE SUBDIVIDED LOT,
HAVE 60 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON
RUSTICA DRIVE AND I'M LOOKING AT
AMY HOPING SHE CAN CONFIRM THIS
FOR ME.
BUT THAT ALL LOTS FROM THE
SUBDIVIDED PARCEL HAVE TO HAVE
SOME FRONTAGE, MEANING THAT I
COULD LIKELY GET TWO LOTS
BLENDING IN WITH THE TWO ON THE
CORNER THERE AND THEN HAVE ONE
FLAG LOT BEHIND IT.
THERE WOULD BE A LARGER LOT TO
THE REAR BACKING UP TO THE OTHER
LOTS.
IT'S AN ODD GEOMETRY, BUT IT
WORKS.
MEANING A DRIVEWAY FROM RUSTICA
DRIVE ACCESSING A LOT BEHIND
THOSE AT RUSTICA DRIVE.
>> THANK YOU.
ALL RIGHT.
WE HAVE NO ONE ELSE.
CAN WE GET A MOTION?
>> MOVE.
>> SECOND.
>> FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENT.
I'M SORRY.
IT'S MOVED AND PROPERLY
SECONDED.
>> EXCUSE ME?
>> CASE OF A INTERESTS 1300003.
>> OKAY.
SECOND?
CAN I GET A SECOND?
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR LET IT BE
KNOWN BY RAISING YOUR HAND.
ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
ANY OPPOSITION?
MOTION CARRIES 11-0.
>> CAN WE GET A MOTION ON THE
ZONING CASE?
>> MOTION FOR Z1300006.
>> SECOND.
>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR LET IT BE
KNOWN BY RAISING YOUR RIGHT
HAND.
ALL RIGHT.
>> MOTION CARRIES 11-0.
>> THANK YOU.
WE'LL MOVE DOWN TO THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM.
>>> GOOD AFTERNOON.
I'M KEITH LUCK WITH THE DURHAM
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLEASED TO PRESENT THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT'S FISCAL YEAR 2014
WORK PROGRAM TO YOU THIS
EVENING.
AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, THE
AGREEMENT THAT ESTABLISHES JOINT
PLANNING FUNCTIONS IN DURHAM
REQUIRES THAT THE PLANNING
TREKTOR CREATE AN ANNUAL WORK
PROGRAM AND PRESENT IT TO THE
CITY COUNCIL AND BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS, AND THAT'S WHAT'S
BEFORE YOU TONIGHT.
THE WORK PROGRAM IS BASED ON 35
FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES, WHICH IS
THE SAME FOR THE PROPOSED -- FOR
THIS COMING YEAR AS WE HAVE
PRESENTLY.
OUR BUDGET REQUEST TO THE CITY
AND COUNTY MANAGERS, WE
REQUESTED TWO ADDITIONAL
POSITIONS TO DEAL WITH INCREASED
WORKLOAD.
WE HAVE WE PROJECT A MODERATE
INCREASE IN OUR CASELOAD OVER
THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, BUT ALSO
WE HAVE SEVERAL NEW TASKS WE'VE
BEEN ASKED TO DO.
I'LL MENTION THOSE IN JUST A FEW
MINUTES.
THE MANAGERS HAVE NOT MADE THEIR
BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE
ELECTED OFFICIALS YET.
I BELIEVE THAT HAPPENS IN THE
NEXT TWO OR THREE WEEKS.
WE ARE KIND OF FULL UP IN TERMS
OF THE WORK WE'RE DOING.
WE HAVE NO CAPACITY TO TAKE ON
ANY ADDITIONAL PROJECTS AT THIS
POINT.
THE WORK PROGRAM ITEMS CAN BE --
THE WORK PROGRAM ITEMS ARE
CHARACTERIZED AS ONE OF THREE
WAYS.
THE FIRST IS ONGOING PROJECTS
AND PROCESSES THAT RESPOND TO
THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS.
THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOLKS IN
OUR DEPARTMENT REVIEW ANY NEW
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED FOR
CONSISTENCY WITH OUR PLANS,
POLICIES AND ORDINANCES.
AND YOU KNOW SOME OF THESE, THEY
COME BEFORE YOU.
ZONING MAP CHANGES, BUT YOU
DON'T SEE A LOT OF OTHER SITE
PLANS AND SUBDIVISION PLAS,
ALTHOUGH YOU KNOW THAT'S GOING
ON IN THE BACKGROUND.
THERE'S A SECOND TYPE OF WORK
PROGRAM ITEMS.
ONGOING PROJECTS AND PROCESSES
THAT RESPOND TO POLICIES THAT
OUR GOVERNING BOARDING HAVE SET
UP LIKE PUBLIC INFORMATION.
WE HAD SEVERAL STAFF IN OUR
DEPARTMENT WHO MAN OUR
CUSTOMER -- EXCUSE ME.
STAFF OUR CUSTOMER SERVICE
CENTER AND PROVIDE INFORMATION
TO THE PUBLIC.
SOMETIMES DEVELOPERS NEED IT FOR
ZONING AND THE PROPERTY IN
DURHAM.
WE PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE
COMMISSIONS, AND WE ALSO ENGAGE
IN DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT AND ALL
THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.
THOSE ARE ALL SET BY THE POLICY
OF THE GOVERNING BOARDS.
WE ALSO HAVE DISCRETIONARY
PROJECTS.
THESE ARE THE ONES WHERE WE
REALLY DECIDE WHAT PROJECTS TO
WORK ON IN THE COMING YEAR.
THEY'RE NOT MANDATED, BUT WE GET
TO PICK, WE MEANING THE ELECTED
OFFICIALS GET TO PICK WHERE THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILL SPEND
THE TIME.
A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF A NORTH
STATION, MAYBE A MEDICAL CENTER
AND DESIGN DISTRICT AROUND THE
TRANSIT STATION.
UDO TEXT AMENDMENTS YOU SEE ON A
REGULAR BASIS.
WE HAVE THESE DEPARTMENTAL
OBJECTIVES IS HOW WE ORGANIZE
OUR WORK PROGRAM, AND I'LL GO
INTO EACH ONE OF THESE IN A
LITTLE BIT.
I MENTIONED ALREADY THE
DEVELOPMENT PLANS THAT WE SEE,
AND THIS SORT OF GENERALLY --
WHATEVER COMES IN THE DOOR WE
RESPOND TO.
AGAIN, HERE'S A LIST OF THEM.
YOU MAY NOT SEE SPECIAL USE
PERMITS OR CERTIFICATES OF
APPROPRIATENESS VERY OFTEN.
THERE'S EVEN ANOTHER GROUP OF
THINGS THAT YOU PROBABLY DON'T
SEE VERY OFFENSE.
VARIANCES THAT GO TO THE BOARD
OF ADJUSTMENTS, STREET CLOSINGS
OUR STREET RENAMINGS AND LIMITED
AGRICULTURAL PERMITS AND THE
CHICKEN PERMIT, OUTDOOR SEATING
PERMITS, IF YOU'RE BRAND-NEW
WITH THINGS IN THE DOWNTOWN AND
DESIGN DISTRICTS.
FAMILY CARE HOME AND GROUP HOME
COMPLIANCE.
THAT'S ALSO A BRAND-NEW ITEM.
WE'RE LOOKING MORE AND MORE AT
BUILDING PERMITS TO ENSURE THAT
THE APPLICATIONS FOR BUILDING
PERMITS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE
ZONING RULES.
WE HAVE A GROUP OF STAFF ENGAGED
IN ZONING ADMINISTRATION.
THAT'S ENFORCEMENT.
WE HAVE SEVERAL ENFORCEMENT SNS
WHO RESPOND TO COMPLAINTS IN THE
COMMUNITY AND GO OUT AND
INVESTIGATE AND IF NECESSARY
ISSUE A NOTICE OF VIOLATION.
BUT THEY ALSO HAVE PROACTIVE
ENFORCEMENT WHERE YOU LOOK AT
SIGNS OR CARS IN THE FRONT YARD,
PATROL THE NEIGHBORHOODS TO TRY
TO SPOT THOSE ZONING ENFORCEMENT
ISSUES WE NEED TO FOLLOW-UP ON.
THE ZONING ADMINISTRATION FOLKS
ALSO DEAL WITH SITE COMPLIANCE
MAKING SURE THAT EACH AND EVERY
NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT IS
BUILT CONSISTENT WITH THE
APPROVED AND ADOPTED SITE PLAN.
WE HAVE FOUND IN THE PAST
SOMETIMES THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN,
SO OUR COMPLIANCE PEOPLE ARE OUT
THERE LOOKING AT BUILDING
PLACEMENT, SHRUBS, PARKING,
THINGS LIKE THAT.
I MENTIONED COMPREHENSIVE
PLANNING.
WE HAVE LONG-RANGE PLANS THAT
RELATE TO OUR -- WELL, THE PLANS
THAT YOU ARE AMENDING OR MAKING
RECOMMENDATIONS ON AMENDING.
WE HAVE REGIONAL TRANSIT PLANS
WE'RE INVOLVED IN.
WE GET INVOLVED IN TEXT
AMENDMENTS, AND YOU SEE THOSE
QUITE OFTEN.
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCES
AND TEXT AMENDMENTS.
WE DEAL WITH HISTORIC
PRESERVATION PLANS.
WE HAVE A COUPLE OF
NEIGHBORHOODS THAT REQUEST LOCAL
HISTORIC DISTRICTS, AND WE'RE
WORK ING ON THOSE.
WE GET INVOLVED IN TRAILS AND
GREENWAY PLANNING TO KEEP THE
TRAILS UP TO DATE.
WE PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE
COMMISSION, THE TWO GOVERNING
BOARDS THAT WE WORK WITH, THE
JOINT CITY/COUNTY PLANNING
COMMITTEE.
THAT'S THE LONG INITIALS THERE.
TWO QUASI-JUDICIAL BOARDS AND
THE BOARD OF ADJUST.
MENT .
WE HAVE FOUR ADVISORY BOARDS,
THE ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS BOARD,
THE APPEARANCE COMMISSION, THE
GENERAL CONCESSION AND TRAILS
COMMISSION AND I FORGET THE
FOURTH ONE.
PLANNING COMMISSION.
I'M SORRY.
THANK YOU.
AND THREE DIFFERENT REGIONAL
BOARDS THAT WE DEAL WITH.
THE TRIANGLE J CENTER OF THE
REGION GROUP, THE DURHAM CHAPEL
HILL ORANGE WORK GROUP, AND I
FORGET THE THIRD ONE, TOO.
WE PROVIDE STAFF SUPPORT FOR
EACH OF THESE MAINTAINING
MEMBERSHIP LISTS, SETTING UP
MINUTES AND ALL THOSE KIND OF
THINGS.
I MENTIONED EARLIER OR PUBLIC
INFORMATION FUNCTION.
WE HAVE A CUSTOMER SERVICE
CENTER IN THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT.
WE MAINTAIN THAT WEBSITE PEOPLE
LOVE SO MUCH BECAUSE THEY DON'T
HAVE TO TALK TO US.
THEY CAN FIND INFORMATION ON THE
WEBSITE.
WE DO A LOT OF ZONING
VERIFICATION, BUSINESSES AND
BANKS OFTENTIMES WANT OFFICIAL
WORD FROM THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT THAT, IN FACT, A
PARCEL IS ZONED FOR THE USE THAT
IS EITHER THERE OR PROPOSED.
WE SEND OUT A LOT OF ZONING
VERIFICATION LETTERS TO PEOPLE
ON A REGULAR BASIS.
SO BEFORE I GET TO THE STAFF
RECOMMENDATIONS, I WANT TO
REITERATE A COUPLE OF PIECES.
ONE IS THAT IN THE AGENDA
MATERIALS THAT YOU HAVE, AT THE
VERY END OF PART A, WHICH IS THE
LONG LIST OF WORK PROGRAM ITEMS,
THERE'S ANOTHER LIST OF THE
THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO
BE ABLE TO GET TO BECAUSE OF
STAFF AND RESOURCE ISSUES.
THAT'S NOT TO SAY WE DON'T THINK
THEY'RE IMPORTANT.
WE HAVE SOME VERY SPECIFIC IDEAS
ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT THOSE ARE.
WE JUST HAVE A LIMITED AMOUNT OF
STAFF TO WORK ON THOSE KINDS OF
ITEMS.
ESPECIALLY THE HOUSING
ASSESSMENT AND AFFORDABILITY
PLANNING.
WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION
OVERLAY FOR THE WEST DURHAM
DISTRICT THAT THEY'VE REQUESTED,
POTENTIALLY OTHER COMPACT
NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN DISTRICTS
ALONG THE REGIONAL TRANSIT LINE.
SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS
WE AREN'T GOING TO BE ABLE TO
GET TO.
TO REITERATE THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT IS WORKING AT FULL
TILT, AND WE DON'T HAVE CAPACITY
TO TAKE ON NEW ITEMS ON THIS
WORK PROGRAM WITHOUT ADDITIONAL
RESOURCES OR, B, REMOVING SOME
OF THE ITEMS ON THE PROPOSED
ITEM RIGHT NOW.
OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO RECEIVE
THIS REPORT AND MAKE A
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL
AND BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS WITH REVISIONS YOU
MAY SEE APPROPRIATE.
>> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?
MR. HARRIS.
>> I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION.
HOW MUCH OVERLAP WITH OTHER
AGENCIES WITHIN THE COUNTY AND
CITY DO YOU HAVE?
ARE THERE OVERLAPS?
>> WELL, I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU
MEAN BY "OVERLAP."
>> WHERE YOU INSPECT HOUSES, ARE
THE OTHER AGENCIES INSPECTING
HOUSES OR THE -- OR, YOU KNOW,
IN THE INSPECTIONS DIVISION, DO
YOU HAVE OVERLAP WITH OTHER
AGENCIES DOING THE SAME JOB?
>> I WOULD SAY PROBABLY NO.
THERE ARE OTHER -- OUR ZONING
ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE ENFORCE THE
ZONING ORDINANCES.
THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE THAT
ENFORCE THE HOUSING CODE AND THE
BUILDING CODE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS ANY
OVERLAP IN WHAT WE DO IN TERMS
OF OTHER CITY OR COUNTY
AGENCIES.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT.
COMMISSIONER SMUDSKI.
>> THANK YOU.
ON THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, WHO
DOES THAT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW?
YOUR TEAM?
>> PAT IS THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
FOR DEVELOPMENT.
HE SUPERVISES TWO PLANNING
SUPERVISORS WHO SUPERVISE A
GROUP OF STAFF.
SCOTT IS ONE OF THEM INVOLVED IN
ZONING AND LAND USE ISSUES.
ALYSIA TAYLOR IS OUR PLANNING
SUPERVISOR THAT MANAGES A GROUP
OF PEOPLE THAT DO SITE PLAN AND
SUBDIVISION REVIEW AND SCOTT
ALSO PROVIDES ASSISTANCE TO THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT THAT DEALS
WITH VARIANCES OR MAJOR AND
MINOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS.
>> DID THIS HAVE ANYTHING TO DO
WITH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
BOARD?
>> YES, VERY MUCH.
>> WHAT HAPPENED TO THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD?
>> THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD
IS -- WELL, PAT CAN HELP ME
EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD RELATED
TO THE DEDISCRETIONIZING EFFORT
GOING ON.
>> PAT YOUNG WITH THE PLANNING
DEMOCRATI
DEPARTMENT.
THE SHORT ANSWER TO YOUR
QUESTION IS THE CITY VOTED FOR A
SERIES OF TEXT AMENDMENTS TO THE
ORDINANCE THAT ELIMINATED THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD FOR
APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED AFTER
JUNE 1st OF THIS YEAR.
THE REASON FOR THAT WAS THIS.
THE DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEW BOARD
SERVED ONE FUNCTION, WHICH WAS
TO ALLOW ADMINISTRATIVE
VARIATIONS TO ORDINANCE
STANDARDS.
AN EXAMPLE THAT YOU'LL USE IS
THE LOCATION OF BICYCLE PARKING
THAT'S REQUIRED ON COMMERCIAL
SITES.
THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES IT BE
CLOSER TO THE FRONT DOOR OF A
NONRESIDENTIAL BUSINESS OR AN
INSTITUTION THAN EVEN VEHICULAR
SPACES.
THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD HAD
THE DISCRETION TO LOOK AT THE
FACTS, LOOK AT THE CIRCUMSTANCES
OF A DEVELOPMENT SITE AND AT THE
APPLICANT'S REQUEST GRANT THAT
TO THAT LOCATION.
THERE WAS A LAW PASSED IN 2009
THAT PROHIBITED ADMINISTRATORS,
UNELECTED OFFICIALS SUCH AS
OURSELVES, FROM MAKING THOSE
DECISIONS WITHOUT A
QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS.
THEY USED A FACT-FINDING PROCESS
BASED ON EVIDENCE AND CRITERIA.
SO THAT'S PROBABLY A LONGER
ANSWER THAN YOU WANTED, BUT
THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
>> WHEN I WAS PREPARING THIS
ITEM FOR YOUR AGENDA, I WAS
ANTICIPATING THAT BOTH CITY AND
COUNTY WOULD ACT ON THAT SET OF
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCES,
WHICH WILL REVIEW FROM OUR WORK
PROGRAM THE UNIFIED
DEVELOPMENT -- I'M SORRY, THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD.
IN THE INTERIM THE COUNTY WILL
NOT ADOPT THAT YET.
THEY'RE CONSIDERING OTHER
OPTIONS, AND SO IT'S NOT WHAT'S
IN FRONT OF YOU, ALTHOUGH WHAT
WE BRING TO THE CITY AND COUNTY
GOVERNING BOARDS WILL HAVE THE
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD FOR
COUNTY ONLY.
>> OKAY.
GREAT.
THANK YOU.
>> DOCTOR WINDERS.
>> DO YOU EXPECT THE FUTURE HIGH
PRIORITY PROJECTS TO BE ON THE
AGENDA FOR FY '15?
>> I WOULD CERTAINLY HOPE SO.
THAT WOULD REQUIRE US COMPLETING
SOME OTHER ITEMS THAT ARE ON
THIS WORK PROGRAM SO WE HAVE
STAFF TIME TO DO IT, AND I
ANTICIPATE THAT WILL HAPPEN,
YES.
THEY MAY BE MULTI-YEAR PROJECTS
TO BEGIN IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR
AND CONTINUE AFTER THAT.
I HOPE THOSE ITEMS GET INCLUDED
AS SOON AS WE FINISH UP MORE
PRESENT ITEMS.
>> OKAY.
THANK YOU.
>> COMMISSIONER KIMBALL.
>> THANK YOU.
IN LOOKING AT THIS, JUST LIKE
WITH ANY OTHER BUSINESS, THERE'S
CERTAIN PROJECTS THAT ARE TIERED
***
PROJECTS, IN OTHER WORDS, SILO
TYPE PROJECTS AND OTHER PROJECTS
ARE HORIZONTAL AND ROLL THROUGH
EVERYTHING SUCH AS THE U.D.O.
TEXT CHANGES, THAT'S A
HORIZONTAL LOOK.
YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ENTIRE
THING IN ORDER TO REALLY
EVALUATE WHERE YOU'RE GOING IN
THE FUTURE PLANNING MAP, SAME
THING.
THAT'S VERSUS SITE PLANS, WHICH
IS PRETTY SILOED IN WHAT THEY'RE
DOING.
I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, WHY
ISN'T HOUSING AFFORDABILITY AN
ASSESSME
ASSESSMENT, A HORIZONTAL-LOOKING
PROJECT RATHER THAN A SILOED
PROJECT, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT
COMES DOWN TO REGIONAL TRANSIT
PLANNING, NEW AREA STRATEGIC
STRUCTURE PLAN, YOUR COMPACT
NEIGHBORHOODS?
WHY ISN'T THAT PART OF THE
PROCESS RATHER THAN MAKING IT
SOMETHING SO SINGULARLY SILOED?
>> IN THE PAST OUR WORK PROGRAM
HAS INCLUDED, AS YOU SAY, ONE OF
THOSE SILOED ITEMS TO AMEND THE
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
RELATED TO THE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DENSITY BONUS.
AS THEY BEGAN TO LOOK AT THAT,
THE DENSITY BONUS ITSELF HASN'T
BEEN USED MUCH BECAUSE IT SDENL
REALLY PROVIDE A REAL INCENTIVE
FOR DEVELOPERS TO COME IN AND
BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
WHILE WE HAVE AN ITEM IN OUR
WORK PROGRAM, WE LOOK AT THAT
AND SEE IF WE CAN MAKE FAIRLY
SHORT-TERM QUICK CHANGES TO THE
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
THAT MIGHT STIMULATE AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PRODUCTION.
WE DO RECOGNIZE THAT ITEM IN THE
NEXT SET OF PRIORITIES, AND IT
SHOWS HOW AN ASSESSMENT AND
AFFORDABILITY PLAN -- WE
RECOGNIZE THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WORK FORCE
DEVELOPMENT NEEDS TO BE INVOLVED
IN A LARGER EFFORT TO IDENTIFY
AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY,
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, NEIGHBORHOOD
IMPROVEMENT SERVICES AND
PLANNING AND PROBABLY SEVERAL
OTHER DEPARTMENTS, TOO.
SO WE HAVE KIND OF RECOGNIZED
THAT THAT PROJECT IN PARTICULAR
WOULD SPAN ACROSS QUITE A FEW
DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS.
THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S ROLE
WHEN THAT PROJECT GETS STARTED,
I WOULD PROBABLY JUST KIND OF
COORDINATING A LOT OF OTHER
STAFF EFFORTS AMONG OTHER CITY
AND COUNTY DEPARTMENTS.
>> BUT COULDN'T WE START THE
BALL ROLLING THROUGH A UDI TEXT
CHANGE WHE
CHANGE?
WHERE I SEE THIS GOING THAT
AROUND WHERE OUR TAX MONEY IS
COLLECTED FOR TRANSPORTATION AND
LIGHT RAIL, TWOMENT --
DEVELOPMENT ALONG THOSE CORE
DOERS THAT LEAVE PETE THAT BEST
BENEFIT FROM LIGHT TRANSIT NOT
TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN IT.
UNLESS WE GET AHEAD OF THIS
CURVE OR AHEAD OF THIS ISSUE,
IT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT
TEN YEARS FROM NOW, 15 YEARS
FROM NOW WE'RE GOING TO BE AT
THE SAME PLACE WE ARE TODAY.
THAT IS NOT HELPING THE CITIZENS
OF DURHAM THAT NEED THE MOST OF
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION TO BE ABLE
TO WORK.
>> EVERYTHING WE'RE HEARING FROM
THE TRIANGLE TRANSIT AUTHORITY
AND OUR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD
IMPROVEMENT SERVICES HAS
SUGGESTED THAT WE NEED TO BE
STARTING ON THESE THINGS NOW TO
PRESERVE PRESENTLY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING OR PRESERVE
OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
IT CAN'T START TOO SOON
DEFINITELY.
>> THEN WHY IS IT IN A PROPOSED
INSTEAD OF ROLLING IT INTO SOME
EXISTING AND SPREADING IT OUT
INSTEAD OF WE'RE NOT GOING TO
WORK ON IT UNLESS WE GET
APPROVAL OF STAFFING POSITIONS?
>> WELL, SOMEBODY'S GOT TO SET
THE PRIORITIES TO SAY THAT SOME
ITEMS IN THIS WORK -- IF WE TAKE
ON THE LARGER ROLE, THE CITY
MANAGER NEEDS TO MAKE SOME
DECISIONS, CITY AND COUNTY
MANAGERS NEED TO MAKE DECISIONS
ABOUT THE WORK ITEMS THAT THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS PROPOSED
TO TAKE THINGS OFF OF HERE OR
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES.
>> ALL RIGHT.
I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT YOU'RE
SAYING.
I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE
THE RESOURCES TO JUMP IN AND
START THAT MORE COMPREHENSIVE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING STRATEGY.
>> OR JUST PUTTING IT ON THE POT
OF THE PLATE WHEN YOU DO YOUR
TEXT CHANGE, WELL, LET'S IN THIS
CASE GO TO THE JOINT CITY COUNTY
PLANNING COMMITTEE TO BE ABLE TO
START TO DIRECT SOME OF THIS
FROM OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS FOR
SURE.
BUT I KNOW AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS
SOMETHING THAT THIS COUNTY IS IN
DESPERATE NEED OF.
I'M OFF MY HIGH HORSE.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OUR
COMMENTS FOR THE WORK PROGRAM?
NO.
ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU, AND WE DEFINITELY
WANT TO THANK THE PLANNING STAFF
FOR THEIR HARD WORK AND FOR WHAT
THEY DID LAST YEAR AND THE
FUTURE PROJECTS.
I THINK CERTAINLY AS THE DURHAM
COUNTY AND CITY CONTINUE TO
GROW, WE WILL DEFINITELY NEED
MORE PEOPLE IN THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT TO HELP MOVE ALONG
SOME OF THESE PROJECTS AND MAKE
THE ENTIRE PROCESS MORE
EFFICIENT AND CERTAINLY TO AVOID
THE OVERLAP THAT WAS SPOKE OF
EARLIER.
I THINK CERTAINLY AFTER THE
PREVIOUS WORK SESSION WE HAD
LAST MONTH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING
IS A COMPLEX ISSUE.
I ACTUALLY DID INDEPENDENT
RESEARCH ON SOME THINGS WE
TALKED ABOUT AND LOOKED AT WHAT
OTHER CITIES ARE DOING.
THEY'RE CERTAINLY NOT A
ONE-DEPARTMENT SHOW.
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF DURHAM IS
GOING TO TAKE MORE THAN THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO FIGURE
OUT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
DILEMMA WE HAVE HERE IN THE CITY
OF DURHAM.
WE'LL MOVE ON.
WE WANT TO THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT.
>> POLICY INPUT AND ENGAGEMENT.
DID SOMEBODY HAVE A QUESTION?
I'M SORRY.
REVEREND WHITLEY, DO YOU HAVE A
QUESTION.
>> KEITH LUCK WITH THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT.
THIS IS ON YOUR AGENDA TO THE
FOLLOW-UP OF THE RETREAT HELD
LAST MONTH.
WE TALKED ABOUT SEVERAL
STRATEGIES TO EMPLOY TO GET YOU
FOLKS MORE INVOLVED IN
LONG-RANGE PLANNING EFFORTS.
I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE
RECOMMENDED WAS PERHAPS A
QUARTERLY REPORT ON LONG-RANGE
PLANNING PROJECTS TO GIVE YOU
SOME IDEA WHAT'S GOING ON AND
WHAT KIND OF PROGRESS WE'RE
MAKING.
I THINK YOU WEIGHED IN AND SAID
PERHAPS A REPORT AT THE
BEGINNING OF THE LONG-RANGE
PLANNING PROJECTS TO HELP YOU
UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE OF THE
PROJECT, THE TIMING, THE STAFF
INVOLVED AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I THINK WE LEFT IT TO ASK YOU TO
THINK ABOUT IT AND SEE IF YOU
HAD DIFFERENT OPINIONS OR
DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS TO PROCEED.
IF YOU DON'T AND IF YOU WISH US
TO FOLLOW-UP, THAT WOULD BE
RELATIVELY EASY TO DO TO GIVE
YOU AN INITIAL REPORT ABOUT
PROJECTS WE'RE STARTING AND A
QUARTERLY REPORT TO TOUCH BASE
ON ALL THE LONG-RANGE PLANNING
PROJECTS ON THE WORK PROGRAM.
>> CORRECT.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY
OBJECTION.
THAT'S PROBABLY THE WAY IT
PROBABLY SHOULD GO.
>> YEAH.
I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THE
VILLAGE, AND IT'S BEEN VERY
INTERESTING TO FOLLOW THAT AND
SEE THE REPORT AT THE BEGINNING
AND THEN THE DIVERSE MILESTONES
THROUGH IT IS VERY INTERESTING.
THAT WOULD BE ALL WE WOULD NEED
TO KEEP UP TO SPEED ABOUT WHAT'S
GOING ON.
THAT'S A VERY INTERESTING
PROJECT, AND I APPRECIATE BEING
PART OF IT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ALL RIGHT.
REVEREND WHITLEY HAD A QUESTION.
>> YES.
IT'S NOT SO MUCH AS WHAT'S IN
THERE AS WHAT'S NOT IN THERE.
DURHAM IS A GROWING CITY, AND WE
DO NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT
HOUSING.
WE ALSO NEED TO DO SOMETHING
ABOUT PARKING.
THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR
THAT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING
LOOPS DOWNTOWN, WE'RE TALKING
ABOUT THE DIFFERENT CHANGES.
I KNOW EAST END WILL HAVE AN
EAST END CONNECTOR, BUT IT WILL
BRING MORE PEOPLE INTO THE CITY.
YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE
AVAILABLE SPACE, AND I WAS
EXPECTING TO -- WELL, I WAS
READING THE WORK PLANNING TO
FIGURE OUT, ARE WE THINKING
ABOUT HOW WE'RE GOING TO USE
AVAILABLE SPACE FOR LIKE
PROJECTS LIKE PARK-AND-RIDE THAT
WOULD ENHANCE, YOU KNOW, BUT IT
WASN'T THERE.
ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, AND WHERE
COULD YOU FIND IT?
>> SEVERAL PLACES.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT
DURHAM APPROVED IN 2005 -- I'M
TELLING YOU SOMETHING YOU
ALREADY KNOW I'M SURE -- IS
ORGANIZED AROUND NEW
NEIGHBORHOODS SURROUNDS REGIONAL
TRANSIT STATIONS ALONG A TRANSIT
LINE THAT WOULD RUN -- ACTUALLY
IT'S EVOLVED BETWEEN TWO LINES.
ONE FROM RALEIGH TO DURHAM AND
ANOTHER LIGHT RAIL LINE TO
DURHAM TO CHAPEL HILL.
MUCH OF THAT GOES THROUGH THE
HEART OF THE CITY.
WE HAVE A COUPLE OF PROJECTS IN
HERE THAT SPEAK SPECIFICALLY TO
HOW PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE AT
THOSE TRANSIT STATIONS WOULD
OPERATE.
3.1.2 IS CALLED THE STATIONARY
STRATEGIC INTEREST STRUCTURE
PROJECT.
HANNAH, WHO WAS HERE A FEW
MINUTES AGO, IS THE PROJECT LEAD
ON THAT.
THAT'S LOOKING AT EACH OF THE
TRANSIT STATION AND TRYING TO
DETERMINE WHAT KIND OF
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS DO
WE NEED TO MAKE IT EASY FOR
PEOPLE TO GET TO AND FROM THE
TRANSIT STATION FROM THE
SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS.
ON THE DAY THAT THE TRAINS START
TO RUN.
THAT'S THE FIRST STEP.
THE SECOND STEP IS HOW ARE WE
GOING TO SUPPORT THE ADDITIONAL
INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS AROUND THE
TRANSIT STATIONS IN TERMS OF
SEWER AND WATER AND PARKING?
THAT'S SORT OF A LARGER SET OF
PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE ITEMS
AROUND THE TRANSIT STATION.
SO THOSE -- LIKE I SAID, THOSE
RUN THROUGH THE HEART OF DURHAM,
AND THE TRANSIT LINE DOES.
THOSE STATIONS ALONG THE TRANSIT
LINE BEGIN TO SERVE THOSE -- THE
NEEDS OF THOSE INNER CITY
NEIGHBORHOODS.
NOT ALL OF THEM, OF COURSE,
BECAUSE NOT EVERYTHING IS
ASSOCIATED WITH A TRANSIT
STATION, BUT THAT'S ONE EXAMPLE
OF HOW IT DOESN'T SAY EXACTLY
WHAT YOU DESCRIBED, BUT IT
BEGINS TO PROVIDE SOME BENEFITS
OF THOSE POPULATIONS.
>> RIGHT NOW WE HAVE TWO MAJOR
PROBLEMS.
CENTRAL AND DOWNTOWN.
WAIT A MINUTE.
THEN YOU HAVE THE WEST END.
BROAD STREET, NINTH STREET.
YOU KNOW, WE ALREADY KNOW WE
HAVE THOSE PROBLEMS.
WE'RE PLANNING -- I MEAN, THESE
ARE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
EXCEPT FOR DOWNTOWN, BUT
DOWNTOWN WE HAVE ALL THESE
WAREHOUSES, WHICH IS QUICKLY
RUNNING INTO THESE PLANS FOR
RESIDENTIAL HOUSING, WHICH I'M
NOT THAT EXCITED ABOUT.
I WANT TO SEE A COMMERCIAL.
IF WE'RE GOING TO EXPAND
COMMERCIALLY, IT MAKES SENSE TO
GO THAT WAY FROM DOWNTOWN.
BUT EVEN IF THAT HAPPENS, WHERE
WILL PARKING TAKE PLACE?
WHO IS THINKING ABOUT PLANNING
OUT WHEN IT SHOULD HAPPEN IN
DURHAM SO THAT WE WOULD KNOW
ABOUT IT?
>> IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA PARKING
IS VIEWED AS A PUBLIC AMENITY.
THE CITY AND COUNTY HAVE
INVESTED IN PARKING GARAGES TO
ESSENTIALLY LET US HAVE THE
STRATEGY WHERE NEW DEVELOPMENT
DOES NOT REQUIRE NEW PARKING.
OFTENTIMES THAT DEVELOPMENT
WANTS THE PARKING.
THE MARKET DEMANDS THAT THAT NEW
DEVELOPMENT IS ASSOCIATED WITH
PARKING.
IN A LOT OF OTHER PLACES OUTSIDE
OF THE DOWNTOWN AREA, IT'S NOT A
PUBLIC AMENITY SO THAT ANY NEW
DEVELOPER HAS TO PROVIDE THE
PARKING FOR THAT PARTICULAR
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
>> ALL RIGHT.
ANYTHING ELSE?
>> THANK YOU, SIR.
WE'LL MOVE DOWN TO ANY
ANNOUNCEMENTS.
OKAY.
>> GOOD EVENING.
PAT YOUNG WITH THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT.
HE MENTIONED BRIEFLY TO THE
CHAIR BEFORE THE MEETING, WE DO
NOT HAVE ANY ITEMS READY FOR YOU
IN JUNE, SO WE'RE GOING TO
CANCEL THE JUNE MEETING, WHICH
WOULD NORMALLY BE JUNE 11th.
SINCE WE HAVE NO BUSINESS, IT
DOESN'T REQUIRE A MOTION SINCE
THERE'S NO BUSINESS.
WE WILL HAVE AT LEAST TWO ITEMS
IN JULY, SO WE WILL HAVE THE
JULY MEETING.
WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT TONIGHT
IS COMMISSIONER ALLEN AND
COMMISSIONER MARTIN'S LAST
MEETING.
WE WOULD ASK AS WE HAD LAST
YEAR, WE COINCIDENTALLY CANCELED
THE JUNE MEETING LAST YEAR TO
HAVE YOU TWO IF YOU'RE WILLING
TO COME BACK AT THE BEGINNING OF
THE JULY MEETING AND WE CAN
HONOR YOU WITH A VERY
WELL-DESERVED RESOLUTION AND
RECOGNITION.
THAT'S IT.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
WE WANT TO THANK THE STAFF AGAIN
FOR PUTTING TOGETHER THAT
RETREAT LAST MONTH.
IT WAS GREAT AND VERY
INFORMATI
INFORMATIVE.
HOPEFULLY IT BROUGHT GREATER
CONTEXT TO WHAT IT IS WE DO UP
HERE FOR THE PUBLIC, FOR THE
CITY OF DURHAM AND DURHAM COUNTY
RESIDENTS.
EACH ONE OF US ARE STOPPED ON
THE STREETS AT VARIOUS TIMES AND
PEOPLE HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT
WHAT'S GOING ON HERE, THERE AND
EVERYWHERE AND EVEN STUFF THAT
DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH
PLANNING, WE GET ASKED.
I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL
INDIVIDUALLY AND CERTAINLY THANK
COMMISSIONER MARTIN AND
MITCHELL-ALLEN FOR YOUR
DEDICATED SERVICE.
IF WE CAN, WE CAN GIVE THEM A
ROUND OF APPLAUSE SINCE THIS IS
THEIR LAST SITTING MEETING.
THANK YOU.
IF OUR HEARTS AND MINDS ARE
CLEAR, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND
DISMISS AND ADJOURN.
THANK YOU.