Folks,
Whoops! My mistake for posting some of my internal concerns (and
personal experiences) to everyone on the list … thought it was just going
to Mary Belle but I admit that I am seeking an interpretation on what this
means for our citizens. Hope I am wrong on what this could mean … but
please note that I did not intend this email for the entire list because I do
not know at this time the intent or extent of this legal change … and I
am seeking what this means for the future.
Bill
From: Bill Padgett
[mailto:bill@billpadgett.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 10:39 PM
To: 'RCAC'
Subject: RE: [RCAC] Check out
http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2009/Bills/Senate/PDF/S44v7.pdf
Mary
Belle,
I
sent this out last evening and will get some information back on Sunday. We are
truly about to become a city of lawyers and “just us” is about to
become very expensive. The disconnect between the people and their elected
leaders is immense and seems to be growing faster than the deficit. ;-)
Bill
------------------
Dan
& Carrie … Could you take a look at this and let me know if I am in
the right Universe. If this does what I think it does, from a ‘Raleigh
perspective’ the brain trust of our community has been rendered impotent.
But before I send this out, I would like someone to explain what these folks
were trying to accomplish. This bill passed unanimously! Perhaps that is why I
am skeptical.
====================
After
Mitch Silver’s (Director of Planning) announcement to the RCAC this
evening who touched on this, I got the email below. The legislative bill was
instigated by Ellie Kinnaird – generally a trusted source. But the bottom
line here is that citizens will not have access to professional engineers.
Speaking from the Coker Towers experience, we defeated Coker Towers by the
traffic study that we as citizens were allowed to present to council. I was in
the center of that exercise – the initial data presented to City Council
was publically declared ‘a lie’ in a Council meeting by Ed Johnson,
the City of Raleigh’s head of traffic. Pretty humbling when the work of
citizens was classified not just as garbage but as fabricated lies. I like Ed and
understand his humanity, respect his knowledge and believe his condemnation of
our data/analysis was based on his honest ‘belief’ system. But
after further analysis of our traffic data – the city ‘by
active observation’ verified the data and in time an apology was issued.
The entire Coker Tower issue hinged on traffic – and I will not go into
the longer lasting results … Meeker, Cowell … Reeves … Cowell
… Stein, Janet – Treasurer of the State. Not a bad record for the
plebeians.
Our
experience on Traffic engineering was novice and when we tried to approach
legit traffic engineering companies, we were quickly rejected. They had a
company to run and employees that depended on the success of their business. As
a onetime customer, neighborhood groups trying to get legit traffic analysis
had little financial longevity when compared to the development community that
paid their way day after day. We were up against Kimberly Horne and there was
not any ‘professionals’ for hire to present the community. We even went
to NCSU for assistance, but the reality check was that their graduates would be
seeking employment from KH and the bottom line was that assisting a
neighborhood organization in traffic studies was not in the interest of the
University or their students. We all should understand the practicality of
economics.
So
we actually started from scratch and learned … a trip was a one way
destination … like from home to shop, and from home to shop to home would
be 2 trips. Can’t get any more basic than that. But in several week we
were analyzing complex DOT traffic analysis, running the logarithmic
calculations and able to present traffic analysis in real time as the
developers changed their building densities before Committees – an
analysis that took several weeks in the commercial world. Some of our analysis
practices became part of the teaching curricula in Civic Engineering.
Kiss
those days good-bye. From my analysis … the new Kinnaird model is that
neighborhoods will need to come up with $thousands of dollars to preserve
status quo (read -$K for no profit and assuming that there is a professional
like a traffic engineering company that would be available to the development
community) verse the developers that have $100K if not millions in potential
profit at stake. Investing several thousand for a good chance of turning
millions, is a no-brainer; investing thousands for ‘status quo’ is
a hard sell.
Can
someone explain what the legislature was thinking? Surely I am missing
something since this passed unanimously … but the consequence is that in
quasi legal system – money wins and common folks will lose and lose big.
I
could use some ‘expert’ enlightenment. ;-)
Thanks,
Bill
Sent: Wednesday, November
18, 2009 10:42 AM
Subject: Senate Bill 44 Appeals of Quasi-Judicial Decisions of Decision
making Boards
Of
interest to the land development community is Senate Bill 44. (See the link
below.)
This
was brought to our attention by Mitchell Silver, AICP, Planning Director for
the City of Raleigh at our NCSS Triangle Chapter meeting.
The
interpretation which he provided was that if citizens have concerns about
traffic and proposed land use, they may only use a professional engineer to
submit the evidence to a planning commission. Mitchell reported that proposed
legislation is under review by local officials and authorities.
http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2009&BillID=SB+44
Richard
J. Homovec, PLS
Survey
Section
919-996-4119
(W)
919-278-6485
(Cell)
Richard.Homovec@ci.raleigh.nc.us
From:
rcac-bounces@eastraleigh.org [mailto:rcac-bounces@eastraleigh.org] On Behalf
Of Southralcap@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 6:06 PM
To: rcac@eastraleigh.org
Subject: [RCAC] Check out
http://www.ncleg.net/Sessions/2009/Bills/Senate/PDF/S44v7.pdf
Here is Senate Bill 44 (in its final form) that Mitchell and Ken were
talking about last night - thanks to Richard J. Homovec sending it out to the
DDNA today.
Mary Belle