751 Assemblage: Hello, old friend
The Durham Planning Commission will hold a public hearing tomorrow at 5:30 p.m. in City Hall to determine whether Durham should amend its Comprehensive Plan Unified Development Ordinance to accommodate a privately funded survey that significantly re-draws the boundaries of Jordan Lake. This is the first step in a public hearing process the Durham County Commissioners approved by a 3-2 vote last April, despite protests from developers who stand to benefit from a new location for the lake, a drinking-water source, albeit a polluted one, for the region.
Meanwhile, the Haw River Assembly has requested a deferral on the item (PDF, 2.4 MB), citing preliminary results from a survey, funded by 50 citizens, that indicates the lake ends “approximately 1/2 mile further upstream than the original determination location based on surface elevation measurements.” The developer-funded survey, by contrast, moved the lake’s boundary in the opposite direction, accommodating development upstream from the Upper New Hope Creek branch of Jordan Lake.
The proposed changes to the Comprehensive Plan Unified Development Ordinance (see June 9 agenda)– recommended by the Durham City-County Planning Department–would effectively move 273 acres outside Jordan Lake’s critical watershed boundary, a protected area that limits development within one mile of drinking-water sources. Simultaneously, it would add these 273 acres to the “urban growth area” and suburban tier, allowing denser development. Of these 273 acres, local real-estate developer Neal Hunter–who commissioned the private survey that moved Jordan Lake–owns, or has a stake in, roughly 240 of them (totalling $20.5 million in tax-assessed value):
-165.59 acres comprise the proposed site for the so-called 751 Assemblage project, which in 2008 Hunter sold to Southern Durham Development. (He is a minority partner in the company.)
-74.23 additional acres are held by Seven Five One Investments, LLC, which Hunter formed in 2007.
In 2005, Hunter commissioned the private survey that removed these 273 acres from Jordan Lake’s critical watershed boundary, and submitted the resulting maps to former Planning Director Frank Duke, who approved the changes without public review. Since then, Hunter and Southern Durham Development have fought to maintain Duke’s decision, which violated state code, without a public hearing process.
A letter, dated June 1, 2009 (PDF, 272 KB), from Southern Durham Development attorney Bill Brian argues that Durham Planning Commission Chair George Brine should “recuse” himself from Tuesday’s hearing due to his “personal opposition” to the project. Brine was one of several applicants who asked the N.C. Environmental Management Commission to reconsider its approval of Hunter’s private survey:
In light of his personal opinion on these matters, any involvement by Chairman Brine in the public hearings and deliberations regarding Durham County’s application will further taint this already deeply flawed process and will be substantially prejudicial to Southern Durham’s property rights.
Brian adds that Southern Durham is “not involved” in the public hearing process, because it “considers the entire process to be illegitimate.”
Durham County Manager Mike Ruffin, to whom the letter was addressed, was not immediately available for comment.
Note: Updated with strikethroughs. Both UDO and Comprehensive Plan changes are on tomorrow’s agenda, though only the Comp Plan will be discussed, because the UDO item does not include a change to Jordan Lake’s 5-mile protected watershed, which will affect more than 300 properties in South Durham, according to Durham Planning Director Steve Medlin.
5 Comments
The majority of planning commission meetings I’ve attended have resulted in deferrals, at the request of a developer — usually because they say they want to meet with neighbors for further discussion (and often-times these meetings still don’t take place before the next cycle).
It should be a no-brainer for the PC to grant this deferral to the HRA, and indeed to the CITIZENS of Durham. They routinely grant such deferrals to developers when far less is on the line.
It would certainly be nice if they could grant the deferral before all us South Durham citizens truck up to City Hall (a 20 minute drive for me). It’s very frustrating to drive all that way, and to get others motivated to do so, just to hear ‘the case will be deferred.’ But if that’s what’s necessary, we’ll do it.
— Melissa Rooney 8 June 2009
Re: Bill Brian of Southern Development
“Me thinks he doth protest too much.”
(with thanks to Wm. Shakespeare for the quote)
— Liz Pullman 9 June 2009
So let me get this straight: The chair of the Planning Commission, whose job it is to provide critical oversight of zoning and planning policy changes, should recuse himself for being critical of a proposed planning policy change?
But a developer-funded land survey that just happens to redefine a lake boundary in the developer’s favor? Oh, no: no conflict of interest there…
— David N 9 June 2009
[...] representing Southern Durham Development, which would financially benefit from the map change, accused Brine of holding a “personal opinion” on the matter, and said his participation in the hearing would “further taint this already deeply flawed [...]
— Update: Planning Commissioner Chair plans to sit out Jordan Lake hearing - Triangulator - Indy Week Blogs 9 June 2009
[...] for future re-zoning requests to permit dense development. Lawyers for Southern Durham Development recently accused Brine of holding a “personal opinion” on the matter, and said his participation in the hearing would “further taint this already deeply [...]
— Planning Commission protests would-be Jordan Lake developers’ ‘chilling effect’ on Durham - Triangulator - Indy Week Blogs 9 June 2009