The Committee of 100 | FYI Archives

At its July 24th meeting, New Castle County Council approved the 2007 New Castle County Comprehensive Development Plan Update. The final Comp Plan included 82 amendments from the Department of Planning, 25 from members of Council, and two oral amendments from the floor. (See the January 2007 FYI for highlights of the Draft Comp Plan.)

The 82 amendments drafted by the Department of Land Use were in response to over 300 written comments and public testimony (including The Committee of 100) at the Planning Board’s January 8 and January 11 Public Hearings. A number of the 82 amendments were in response to requirements from the Office of State Planning Coordination and State Agencies via their review through the PLUS (Preliminary Land Use Service) process. On January 30, 2007, the Livable Delaware Advisory Council recommended the plan for certification to Governor Minner conditioned upon the revisions from the PLUS process. The Planning Board, at its February 27th business meeting, approved the amended Draft Comp Plan.

One of the most important revisions, within the Department’s 82 amendments, was modification of the language surrounding Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs). Many of the Comp Plan goals–from preserving open space, protecting air quality, and providing infrastructure in a more cost-effective way, to facilitating affordable housing and creating a “sense of place”–depend upon higher densities. In the original Comp Plan draft, those higher densities depended upon devising, approving, and implementing a successful TDR program. Even though the Draft Comp Plan acknowledged that the existing TDR program is not working, it still relied heavily on a revised TDR program both for ensuring fairness to property owners with land designated for protection, and for providing the densities needed in growth areas to meet multiple Comp Plan goals. The Planning Department amendments acknowledged that, “In order for a transfer of development rights program to work effectively to achieve the Plan . . . the incentives needed to induce preservation will need to be developed more fully in code amendments.” In addition to TDRs, the amendments allowed “other code revisions” to achieve the goals.

This was one of the issues which The Committee of 100 addressed at the Planning Board Hearing. Among other points, Beverley Baxter, argued that the Comp Plan should:

Among the amendments offered by Council were several from Council President Paul Clark which softened the 60/40 North/South future-growth direction. In one amendment, the 60/40 language was changed to state, “this Plan proposes that we adopt policies and make investments so that more housing units are built in Northern New Castle County and growth in Southern New Castle County is more centralized and compact.” In another example, an objective to, “Guide 60% of new development to Northern New Castle County,” was modified to, “Guide new development to Northern New Castle County to achieve greater use of existing infrastructure and public resources.”

In addition, President Clark added important language about the State Resource Area map which caused so much angst because the State proceeded with its adoption without adequate public notice and input. Paul added, “Action on enacting or implementing strategies relating to the State Resource Areas will not be undertaken until pending litigation is resolved.”

Councilperson Bill Powers, a farmer who represents part of Southern New Castle County, amended all references to the “Possible Future Growth Zone” to read, “Southern New Castle County Low Density Residential Area.” Councilperson Powers has been actively involved in drafting and lobbying for passage of legislation that would modify the State Code impacting TDRs. Bill added TDR clarifications, including that Council “will evaluate and make changes, as necessary, to the size of the receiving area” for TDRs.

Councilperson John Cartier’s amendments focused on “strengthening distressed communities.” His amendments included, “To reverse decline in those communities that are experiencing some level of distress, efforts to promote and support community stabilization and redevelopment should be undertaken in partnership with both public and non-profit agencies including the creation of community development corporations and community non-profits, home-ownership assistance programs, redevelopment of under-utilized or poorly maintained non-residential and apartment properties, and improved connections for automobiles and pedestrians.”

Councilperson Bob Weiner’s amendments focused on Smart Growth. Reflecting the considerable problem that creative development has had with the Fire Marshal’s office, which has been unbending in its opposition to such things as neo-traditional development, Bob added to “Work with the Delaware State Fire Marshal’s Office, DelDOT, and the Office of State Planing to resolve differences among develop-ment, building and fire code requirements to ensure that structures are constructed in a safe manner” the amendment, “while promoting mixed use communities that incorporate smart growth design.”

It was Bob Weiner who introduced the two floor amendments, which were revisions of earlier-proposed amendments from both Bob and Councilperson Joe Reda that had been voted down by Council at it’s Land Use Committee meeting. The compromise amendments on density for redevelopment, in infill areas, along transit corridors, and in mixed-use development, removed specific numbers and became more amorphous. Amendment two states, “The densities found in mixed use development and along transit corridors should reflect those necessary to support transit service. All new development should respect the character and integrity of existing communities. Density increases, while appropriate in redevelopment areas and along transit corridors, should not be applied to existing neighborhoods.”

Now the work begins. State Code requires implementation within 18 months. Council is leading the implementation committees, rather than the Land Use Department, as in the past. How Council, with limited staff, will proceed, and how it will involve the public, in this untested new process, is unknown.