LDO-Related Matters of Concern to GNC Issues & Bylaws Committee

(based on Input from Committee members’ neighbors and neighborhood organizations)

February 3, 2010

1. While we recognize the importance of infill development, there is good infill and
bad infill, and bad infill can destabilize existing neighborhoods and deteriorate property
values. To the extent that the LDO would allow for denser infill development in existing
neighborhoods, but does not provide safeguards to ensure that the increasingly dense
infill is not detrimental, that is a matter of concern. In particular:

A. The proposed LDO allows a greater maximum density for multifamily

(RM-40), which could have an impact on existing neighborhoods with
fringe areas susceptible to apartment complex development. This is of
particular concern to neighborhoods near educational institutions, where
the construction of increasingly dense student apartment housing is an
issue. In existing neighborhoods, such dense developments are likely to
cause potential traffic, noise, parking, sanitation, and architectural
compatibility issues. If such a new category of ultra-dense development
(50% more dense that the existing limit, RM-26) is to be allowed,
stringent development standards need to also be created to regulate it.

B. The proposed LDO allows for corner lots on thoroughfares to be

developed to contain two homes (“twin homes”) in single-family zoned
areas, but does not require that such denser new construction to be
compatible with surrounding detached single-family residences. We
expect homeowners in established single-family neighborhoods to be
dismayed when the corner lot near them suddenly becomes the site of not
one, but two new homes, particularly if their appearance and construction
is not at all incompatible with the adjacent existing homes.

2. The LDO does not require developers to meet with neighborhood groups before
proceeding with a rezoning, and GNC’s longstanding position is that such meetings
should be mandatory. GNC appreciates that the LDO encourages such meetings and
requires reporting concerning them, but this stops short of requiring that the meetings
occur. We request that the proposed procedures suggested by the Planning Department
concerning the information that a developer must report concerning such meetings (see
attached) be incorporated directly into the LDO to ensure that they are implemented.

3. Many neighbors are concerned about the LDO now that they have received letters
in the mail advising them about the proposed changes. Understanding of the implications
of the changes is limited, and we have anectdotal reports of inconsistent information
being given to neighbors when they inquire to City staff concerning the changes. We
believe that further communication should be encouraged before any changes are made to
ensure that citizens are as well educated as possible concerning the impact of the
changes.