I don’t claim to fully understand either of these text changes; however, my 2 cents… TC-1: I’m still very confused about this text change. It sounds like it will force the PC and Council to become more accountable for their decisions, since compliance with standards is supposed to be the basis for decisions. Very concerned about equitable representation for the average citizen. Needs to be some serious discussion about implementation and training. The GA reg that requires consistency with the Comp Plan sounded like a good thing; however, the PC quickly learned there is no watchdog around to enforce the reg. TC-2: List of prohibited conditions is my biggest concern. Not sure why we are tinkering with prohibited uses before rewrite of code. Submittal of requirements and timing of changes seem advantageous. Not sure I can make it tonight. What are others thinking? Ana, can you be a spokesperson for the RCAC tonight? Philip W Poe PWPoe(a)att.net 919.832.6777 voice 919.522.1078 mobile 919.832.6775 fax From: ddna-bounces(a)lineberry.org [mailto:ddna-bounces@lineberry.org] On Behalf Of southralcap(a)aol.com Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 12:25 PM To: ddna(a)lineberry.org Subject: [DDNA] Fwd: Check out http://www.raleighnc.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/PTARGS_0_2_1... I hope some of you will come to the public hearing tonight to speak about TC-2-10. If TC-2-10 passes as is, it may be the beginning of the end of CUD cases. I don't know how you feel about CUD cases, but if CAC's can't negotiate with rezoning petitioners before the rezoning is approved, I believe that we lose control of what happens in our communities. TC-2-10 also expands the list of prohibited zoning conditions to include: . the future sale or marketing of property . building materials . right-of-way reimbursement values . prohibitions of cross-wake access or public street connections or extensions . limitations on the hours of refuse collection . submittal of a traffic impact analysis Also, the way T-1-10 is written, we only can give our opinions at the Planning Commission meeting, not at the City Council public hearing. The writers of TC-1-10 had to choose between the City Council Public Hearing Meeting and the Planning Commission meeting as to which one would be the "quasi-judicial" meeting. They chose the Council meeting. That means if we want to state our opinions (that may or may not be factual), we cannot do so at the "quasi-judicial" City Council meeting, but will have to go to a 9:00 a.m. meeting of the Planning Commission. TC-1-10 was written because of a bill passed in the Legislature during their last session. If you have concerns about either or both text changes, I hope you will take time to attend the Council meeting this evening. It begins at 6:30 p.m. There is only one rezoning case and these two text changes on the agenda, so the meeting should be rather short. Hope to see you there. Mary Belle Pate Chair, SWCAC _______________________________________________ RCAC mailing list RCAC(a)eastraleigh.org http://www.eastraleigh.org/mailman/listinfo/rcac