Ana, could you send out an outline of the issues submitted to you. Is there anything included for affordable housing and transit? Philip W Poe PWPoe(a)att.net 919.832.6777 voice 919.522.1078 mobile 919.832.6775 fax From: rcac-bounces(a)eastraleigh.org [mailto:rcac-bounces@eastraleigh.org] On Behalf Of Ana Duncan Pardo Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 12:08 PM To: RCAC Subject: [RCAC] last call for comments on the comp plan Hi everyone, Per our discussion at the July meeting, we've asked for and collected chairs comments on the Comprehensive Plan. All the comments have been sent out to the group, but just in case you haven't seen them yet, they're also copied below. If anyone has any additional comments, please send them ASAP. I'd like to summarize all our comments in a memo to the Council before the public meeting this afternoon. Thanks! Ana Duncan Pardo Chair, Hillsborough CAC/RCAC --------------------------------------------------------------------- TRANSITIONS BETWEEN LAND USE CATEGORIES The Future Land Use Map shows many areas across the city where the designated land uses for neighboring areas differ significantly. The most extreme example of this is the edge of the Central Business District, especially where it borders single-family residential neighborhoods. Other, lesser examples of swift changes in character and intensity between adjacent areas can be found throughout the city. Several changes have been made to the Comp Plan policy document, and a new map has been created to address the most significant transition areas. These revisions are laudable, however, more concrete language is needed regarding how the transition policies will actually be implemented. Will it be done parcel by parcel through the regular rezoning process, as part of the updated zoning code (the most comprehensive option), or through some other means? PARCEL-TO-PARCEL TRANSITIONS: INSTITUTIONAL IMPACTS As Raleigh has grown, churches, schools and civic centers are morphing from relatively low impact neighborhood facilities to relatively high impact destination facilities. As a consequence, the quality of life in neighborhoods is either threatened or eroding as residents experience the adverse effects from more noise, intrusive lighting and additional traffic and parking congestion. Because most of these institutions were considered neighborhood facilities in the past, they are typically zoned residential. However, the increases in scale and activity make the residential zoning classification obsolete. A change of use or more robust regulations are now needed for these properties to mitigate the adverse impacts on adjacent properties. Additional comments from Paul Brant (these will be summarized to highlight the broader themes): 1. There does not seem to be a serious effort to control excessive development along the Neuse River. The greenway is touted as a significant environmental initiative, and it is, but there is very little in the 2030 Comp Plan to ensure development adjacent to the river greenway is transitioned from no density in the greenway to low-density along the greenway within a 1/4 mile and moderate density within 1/2 mile of the greenway. It is currently permissible to pack high density development along the greenway including retail. The original Neuse River East Plan has been removed from the new 2030 Comp Plan and nothing really takes its place. 2. The 401 Corridor Plan has been removed from the 2030 Comp Plan. This plan designated specific land use segments along the corridor designed to prevent the stripping out of Louisburg Hwy in a similar fashion to Capital Blvd. There was specific language which encouraged retaining the open look and feel of a rural environment interspersed with denser developments at specific intervals along the corridor. The concept is not retained in the new plan. 3. The Interchange development proposed for I-540 and Buffaloe Road is unsupported by a timely Transportation Plan for the extension of Spring Forest from Louisburg Road to Buffaloe Road; the addition of a bridge crossing at the Neuse River to accommodate an additional two to three lane increase in Buffaloe Road; the expansion of the I-540 bridge from three lanes to six lanes; the widening of Buffaloe Road from Perry Creek to Old Crews Road from two lanes to four lanes plus turning lanes. Development along this corridor should be limited to the available funding and completion of the required roadways to match the increase in traffic generated by the significant increase in density suggested since the draft plan was made available. 4. Overlay district zoning such as the NCOD process is a significant method to ensure preserve and control excessive out of character development and direct development to areas better suited for growth and in line with Council's objectives but is barely mentioned in the new plan. 5. Almost all of the requested changes to the Draft Plan are designed to increase density of development without addressing appropriate transitions to adjacent neighborhoods; especially where the Mixed Use categories are proposed. There needs to be a clear definition of appropriate levels of mixed use within each of the categories. There has not been enough detail provided to ensure that a true mix of development will be achieved. It is our fear that each category will have a token amount of a different use but will be mostly one type of development; either heavily favoring retail or alternatively very dense residential apartments. Some specific guidelines should be included so that Staff and Planning Commission decisions on rezoning cases, site plans and redevelopment plans will not be left to the subjective views of those involved but rather to fulfill the specific intent of City Council to manage appropriate growt h and development away from suburban sprawl to existing urban serviced areas. 6. The spreading of Triangle Towne Center commercial massing further to the East and North is of considerable concern. It has the potential to create the same congestion and grid-lock that is currently the shortcoming of the Glenwood, Crabtree Valley Mall area. Keeping the major retail and density of development to the south of I-540 will ensure traffic will flow more freely North on Capital Blvd where major DOT efforts are underway to create a thruway corridor above I-540 to Wake Forest. 7. Impacts of Institutions in residential zoning needs attention. Other cities require large institutions to be in O&I zoned areas. As organizations grow there should be strict limits to ensure parking is accommodated on site and not in neighborhood streets blocking access for residents and emergency vehicles. 8. Group homes should be restricted from residential neighborhoods when the nature of the operation is to serve those considered a danger to themselves and others. Type III and Type IV residents. This will require a legislative initiative but a policy statement in the Comp Plan as to action required would be a good first start. 9. Day Care Centers should not be located in residential neighborhoods when they service more than what might be considered the largest family environment that makes sense. Larger centers should be confined to areas where street design and traffic patterns can accommodate peak morning and evening access to the centers.

Ana, Please include the following Resolution below (also attached) from the Wade & Glenwood CACs: Thanks, Bill =============== The following Resolution to 'Keep 3400 Block of Wade Ave Low Density' was passed unanimously by residents of the Wade CAC 11-0 and the Glenwood CAC 10-0 Resolution: Keep 3400 Block of Wade Ave Low Density To the Raleigh City Council 07-28-2009 Whereas the City of Raleigh Planning Department initially designated on the 2030 Future Land Map the properties in the 3400 block of Wade Ave. as Low Density Residential (1-6 units per acre) which reflected the current R-4 zoning and Whereas the density was subsequently changed from Low Density Residential (1-6 units per acre) to Low-Medium Density Residential (6-14 units per acre) and Whereas residents in the 3400 block of Wade Ave. and adjacent neighbors were not notified of the changes in the land use densities proposed for these properties and Whereas the aforementioned corridor lies within the Wade CAC and the Glenwood CAC and leadership in the City's CACs were not notified of the land use changes in the draft 2030 Future Land Map and Whereas the Comprehensive Land Use Plan has been reviewed by citizens of Ridgewood Subdivision in meetings with Councilors Crowder, Isley, and Stephenson and representatives of the City of Raleigh Planning Department, and attending citizens requested a revision/change to said plan. These revisions shall include removal of the proposed Low-Medium Density Residential along the Wade Avenue corridor from Dogwood Lane to Faircloth Street and the 2030 Future Land Map should reflect Low Density Residential (1-6 units per acre) for the 3400 block of Wade Ave (north and south sides of the street). Whereas the Wade CAC met with residents of the Wade CAC and neighbors in the Wade Ave. 3400 block corridor to discuss this issue on July 28th to discuss this issue. Therefore Let It Be Resolved that the residents of the Wade CAC and neighbors request that the 2030 Future Land Map reflect (as initially presented) Low Density Residential designation for the 3400 block of Wade Ave. Thank you for your consideration, Wade CAC Motion made by John Cargill and seconded by John Riddle. From: rcac-bounces(a)eastraleigh.org [mailto:rcac-bounces@eastraleigh.org] On Behalf Of Ana Duncan Pardo Sent: Monday, August 10, 2009 12:08 PM To: RCAC Subject: [RCAC] last call for comments on the comp plan Hi everyone, Per our discussion at the July meeting, we've asked for and collected chairs comments on the Comprehensive Plan. All the comments have been sent out to the group, but just in case you haven't seen them yet, they're also copied below. If anyone has any additional comments, please send them ASAP. I'd like to summarize all our comments in a memo to the Council before the public meeting this afternoon. Thanks! Ana Duncan Pardo Chair, Hillsborough CAC/RCAC --------------------------------------------------------------------- TRANSITIONS BETWEEN LAND USE CATEGORIES The Future Land Use Map shows many areas across the city where the designated land uses for neighboring areas differ significantly. The most extreme example of this is the edge of the Central Business District, especially where it borders single-family residential neighborhoods. Other, lesser examples of swift changes in character and intensity between adjacent areas can be found throughout the city. Several changes have been made to the Comp Plan policy document, and a new map has been created to address the most significant transition areas. These revisions are laudable, however, more concrete language is needed regarding how the transition policies will actually be implemented. Will it be done parcel by parcel through the regular rezoning process, as part of the updated zoning code (the most comprehensive option), or through some other means? PARCEL-TO-PARCEL TRANSITIONS: INSTITUTIONAL IMPACTS As Raleigh has grown, churches, schools and civic centers are morphing from relatively low impact neighborhood facilities to relatively high impact destination facilities. As a consequence, the quality of life in neighborhoods is either threatened or eroding as residents experience the adverse effects from more noise, intrusive lighting and additional traffic and parking congestion. Because most of these institutions were considered neighborhood facilities in the past, they are typically zoned residential. However, the increases in scale and activity make the residential zoning classification obsolete. A change of use or more robust regulations are now needed for these properties to mitigate the adverse impacts on adjacent properties. Additional comments from Paul Brant (these will be summarized to highlight the broader themes): 1. There does not seem to be a serious effort to control excessive development along the Neuse River. The greenway is touted as a significant environmental initiative, and it is, but there is very little in the 2030 Comp Plan to ensure development adjacent to the river greenway is transitioned from no density in the greenway to low-density along the greenway within a 1/4 mile and moderate density within 1/2 mile of the greenway. It is currently permissible to pack high density development along the greenway including retail. The original Neuse River East Plan has been removed from the new 2030 Comp Plan and nothing really takes its place. 2. The 401 Corridor Plan has been removed from the 2030 Comp Plan. This plan designated specific land use segments along the corridor designed to prevent the stripping out of Louisburg Hwy in a similar fashion to Capital Blvd. There was specific language which encouraged retaining the open look and feel of a rural environment interspersed with denser developments at specific intervals along the corridor. The concept is not retained in the new plan. 3. The Interchange development proposed for I-540 and Buffaloe Road is unsupported by a timely Transportation Plan for the extension of Spring Forest from Louisburg Road to Buffaloe Road; the addition of a bridge crossing at the Neuse River to accommodate an additional two to three lane increase in Buffaloe Road; the expansion of the I-540 bridge from three lanes to six lanes; the widening of Buffaloe Road from Perry Creek to Old Crews Road from two lanes to four lanes plus turning lanes. Development along this corridor should be limited to the available funding and completion of the required roadways to match the increase in traffic generated by the significant increase in density suggested since the draft plan was made available. 4. Overlay district zoning such as the NCOD process is a significant method to ensure preserve and control excessive out of character development and direct development to areas better suited for growth and in line with Council's objectives but is barely mentioned in the new plan. 5. Almost all of the requested changes to the Draft Plan are designed to increase density of development without addressing appropriate transitions to adjacent neighborhoods; especially where the Mixed Use categories are proposed. There needs to be a clear definition of appropriate levels of mixed use within each of the categories. There has not been enough detail provided to ensure that a true mix of development will be achieved. It is our fear that each category will have a token amount of a different use but will be mostly one type of development; either heavily favoring retail or alternatively very dense residential apartments. Some specific guidelines should be included so that Staff and Planning Commission decisions on rezoning cases, site plans and redevelopment plans will not be left to the subjective views of those involved but rather to fulfill the specific intent of City Council to manage appropriate growt h and development away from suburban sprawl to existing urban serviced areas. 6. The spreading of Triangle Towne Center commercial massing further to the East and North is of considerable concern. It has the potential to create the same congestion and grid-lock that is currently the shortcoming of the Glenwood, Crabtree Valley Mall area. Keeping the major retail and density of development to the south of I-540 will ensure traffic will flow more freely North on Capital Blvd where major DOT efforts are underway to create a thruway corridor above I-540 to Wake Forest. 7. Impacts of Institutions in residential zoning needs attention. Other cities require large institutions to be in O&I zoned areas. As organizations grow there should be strict limits to ensure parking is accommodated on site and not in neighborhood streets blocking access for residents and emergency vehicles. 8. Group homes should be restricted from residential neighborhoods when the nature of the operation is to serve those considered a danger to themselves and others. Type III and Type IV residents. This will require a legislative initiative but a policy statement in the Comp Plan as to action required would be a good first start. 9. Day Care Centers should not be located in residential neighborhoods when they service more than what might be considered the largest family environment that makes sense. Larger centers should be confined to areas where street design and traffic patterns can accommodate peak morning and evening access to the centers.