SCAD Task Force Inaugural Meeting - October 24, 2023

The Simplified Code for Affordable Development (SCAD) Task Force held its first meeting on Tuesday, October 24, 2023, from 1:00 PM to approximately 2:30 PM at Durham City Hall. Mayor Pro Tem Middleton opened the meeting on behalf of the Mayor, emphasizing that the meeting was informational and not decision-making. Councilmembers Freeman and Williams co-chaired the session, which included introductions, opening remarks, public comments, and preliminary discussion of SCAD's goals and concerns. The task force is charged with developing recommendations to the City Council regarding SCAD amendments.

Consent Calendar

• No consent calendar items were presented; the meeting focused on introductions and initial discussions.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Charlene DeBurse (East Durham resident, faith-based community advocate) expressed concerns about affordability and displacement, emphasizing that development is pricing out long-term residents. She called for more transparency and community engagement, particularly with faith-based organizations, and asked for practical assistance for homeownership.
• Mimi Kessler (public comment, alternate member) stated she is not against development but supports density only if the community defines it and neighbors are informed before construction. She questioned the purpose and goals of the task force meetings and the role of subject matter experts.
• James Chavis (public comment) expressed frustration, stating that new housing (e.g., 'road houses') is not affordable for existing residents, and that community voices are not being heard. He challenged the affordability claims and called for honest communication about intentions.
• Joseph Fleming (alternate member) opposed SCAD, citing concerns about changing neighborhood character, increasing taxes, and creating drainage/water runoff problems. He noted that SCAD would have a 'colossal negative impact' on Durham's future housing landscape.
• Donna Frederick (alternate member) questioned why the task force was formed, arguing that SCAD was brought to the public in an 'unauthorized way' and that the public did not fully understand its implications. She suggested that affordable housing could be achieved without SCAD, such as by refurbishing existing homes.

Discussion Items

• Opening Remarks and Process: Co-chairs Freeman and Williams outlined the task force's purpose: to share concerns, hear public input, and develop recommendations to the City Council. The mayor's directive emphasized creating space for public comment, with two-minute limits for public speakers. A procedural note was raised about the absence of task force member Ms. Green; alternate Amy Kessler took her place. Another alternate, Tiana Joyner, was absent; Donna Frederick and Joseph Fleming were present as alternates.
• Applicant Overview: Jim Anthony, the applicant, explained that SCAD emerged from years of frustration with the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and aims to address problematic regulations that create unnecessary burdens and inefficiencies. He noted that many elements are uncontroversial and that the task force would have three meetings to discuss the proposal.
• Task Force Member Positions:
  • Tom Miller expressed deep concerns about SCAD, arguing that it would reduce public oversight, enable demolition of existing housing, and commodify residential real estate. He opposed SCAD as an 'engine for gentrification and displacement.'
  • Bob Chapman defended SCAD, stating that it would enable fine-grained, incremental development and prevent the current trend of tearing down homes to build bigger ones. He highlighted the historical downzoning in 1968 and cited studies that more housing supply helps affordability.
  • Katie Ross expressed concern that SCAD's broad provisions could be abused, citing examples of conservation subdivisions that were misused. She recommended folding any good ideas into the comprehensive UDO review rather than passing a large package.
  • Topher Thomas shared his background as a low-income developer who has built eight homes for refugees, immigrants, and low-income individuals. He argued that removing regulatory barriers enables smaller, more equitable developers to participate, and gave an example of a church project with elderly housing that would benefit from SCAD.
  • Tiffany Elder (realtor/builder/landlord) said the average home price in Durham is about $460,000, and she built homes but faces regulatory barriers. She recounted a tenant who requested a rent increase to help others, and she expressed support for SCAD to allow more housing options.
  • Dan Jewell (landscape architect) compared Durham's regulatory process to Chapel Hill's, which became overly restrictive and led to high housing costs and displacement of African American residents. He noted that Chapel Hill has since streamlined approvals, while Durham has not, and he believes SCAD would help small developers, despite costing him business.
  • Jim Anthony (as task force member) emphasized that SCAD is intended to fix specific UDO problems and open up opportunities for small-scale, affordable housing projects.
• Subject Matter Expert: Dr. Jowers from Duke University, an environmental justice expert, offered to answer questions and noted she teaches about development dynamics. She expressed interest in reviewing the 15 articles cited by Chapman.
• Staff Analysis: Councilmember Williams noted that staff produced a detailed analysis by topic, indicating that some SCAD changes (e.g., buffers) were recommended but should be evaluated during the UDO rewrite.

Key Outcomes

• No votes or formal decisions were made; the meeting was informational.
• The task force will reconvene on Wednesday, October 25, from 5:00 PM to 7:00 PM in the same room.
• Public comment opportunity: The task force will continue to allow public comments at future meetings, with a two-minute limit per speaker.
• Next Steps: Members were encouraged to review the SCAD document (available by searching 'SCAD Durham' online) and come prepared to discuss specific sections or codes at the next meeting.
• Procedural Note: The date of the next meeting was clarified to be October 25, 2023, from 5:00 to 7:00 PM, not the 27th as one member mentioned.

Adjournment

• The meeting adjourned at approximately 2:30 PM.