Posted Nov 21, 2014, 3:26 PM
|
 |
I took a bus pic, CIRRUS
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Soon to be banned
Posts: 1,697
|
|
What do we think about this proposal to provide more neighborhood input for zoning?
Quote:
Registered Neighborhood Organizations would play a much bigger role in developments in Denver, under a platform recently adopted by a group that represents 100 of the 211 RNOs in the city.
...
The platform calls for the mayor and other city officials to appoint representatives of RNOS to all city board, commissions, advisory committee, collaborative working groups and task forces considering planning and zoning issues, to give RNOs more “representation at the table.”
...
The document also says that higher density zoning should not be approved unless it can be shown that it will not have an adverse impact on traffic or parking, unless they can be mitigate.
“Traffic and parking impacts can cause serious harm to the quality of life and economic vitality in neighborhoods,” according to the platform.
It also said that the impact of high-density projects, even in areas of change, must also consider the impact to nearby neighborhoods.
Larry Ambrose, president of INC, said that it is impossible to come up a citywide definition of high-density.
“In some areas of the city, a 10-story building may be perfectly appropriate,” Ambrose said. “In other areas of a city, a 3-story building may be totally inappropriate.”
Increasingly, neighborhood groups have opposed developments, even though the zoning allows them.
...
The platform would require much earlier notice to neighborhood groups, while with the Buckley Annex, there was only 15 days notice, which was not nearly enough time to consider the impact of proposed zoning changes, he said. The Lowry Redevelopment Authority, however, contends dozens of neighborhood meetings have been held on the Buckley Annex and the vast majority of people are pleased that the original plans for up to 12-story buildings have been scrapped. Kerwin disputes that, saying he thinks most people fear he added traffic the current plan would bring to an already congested area.
...
Another part of the platform calls for abolishing what is known as “courtesy zoning.”
Ambrose said for at least 40 years, there has been an unwritten tradition among City Council members to approve zoning supported by the council member where the zoning change is taking place.
While that council member’s position should be considered, “it should only be done so in light of the merits of the facts and testimony under consideration,” according to the platform.
Other highlights of the platform include:
Access to communications by RNOs;
More opportunities for citizens to speak on planning and zoning proposals;
More open and transparent meetings on zoning issues, with no discussions taking place “behind closed doors;”
Better access to records for citizens;
A balance between new developments and the revenue they will generate, with the recognition that “predictability of zoning needs to be maintained for all property owners and residents, not just for developer;
And adequate funding for the Community Planning and Development Department and the Landmark Preservation Commission.
|
__________________
The happy & obtuse bro.
"Of course you're right." Cirrus
|
Prev
Linear Mode
