Friday, January 13, 2012
Judge: Controversial rezoning for 751 South was legal
Editor's note: This story has been modified since its original post.
A judge in Durham dismissed a lawsuit Friday (PDF) that opponents of the controversial 751 South development near Jordan Lake filed in 2010. The ruling means the judge agreed with the defendants, that the actions Durham County Commissioners took to rezone the case in 2010 were legal. No word yet on whether the plaintiffs will appeal.
Residents near the land to be developed brought the civil lawsuit against Durham County after Durham County Commissioners voted to rezone the land to allow a large, dense development along N.C. 751, which is near the environmentally sensitive lake in southern Durham County.
Numerous property owners had signed a protest petition against the project. By local law, if enough adjacent property owners petition, at least four of five commissioners have to approve the rezoning. And while the petition met all the requirements, a last-minute technicality involving a land-transfer to the N.C. Department of Transportation botched their efforts. The commissioners approved the rezoning by a 3-2 vote, a simple majority. (See a timeline of events)
The Chancellor's Ridge Homeowners Association was one property owner that signed a petition. The HOA sued the county saying its petition shouldn't have been invalidated on the technicality, and thus that commissioners didn't lawfully approve the rezoning. Many residents in the Chancellor's Ridge neighborhood, which is across from the 167 acres to be developed, have said they don't want to live through the estimated 10-year construction of 751 South, which could include 1,300 homes and apartments, plus shopping and office space.
But in his order Friday afternoon, Superior Court Judge Henry Hight sided with Durham County and the project's proponents Southern Durham Development, which intervened in the case and helped defend the county in the lawsuit. Hight granted the parties' request for a dismissal, essentially agreeing that the protest petition was no longer valid when commissioners rezoned the land for 751 South. Hight is a judge from Henderson who has just begun a regularly scheduled rotation presiding in Durham.
"I’m very disappointed," said Steve Bocckino, one of the most vocal opponents to the project. Bocckino was not a plaintiff in the case, but supported their cause. "I do think that Southern Durham Development was guilty at least of trickery in giving land to N.C. DOT and I’m sorry that the judge didn’t recognize that." Plaintiffs in the case couldn't be immediately reached for comment. It is unknown whether the plaintiffs will appeal the judge's findings. However, representatives of the plaintiffs had indicated in recent months that they would appeal if the case was not decided in their favor.
Southern Durham Development President Alex Mitchell issued a statement through his attorney: “We are pleased with Judge Hight’s decision. His order shows Southern Durham Development has consistently acted above board and within the law. We hope this puts to rest any concerns that may have been generated during the course of this lawsuit. We look forward to being part of Durham’s future success.”
Comments (4)
Showing 1-4 of 4
While all the conspiracy theorists are foaming at the mouth, it seems they are missing an important point. This project has been vetted twice in court and the opponents have lost twice. Maybe the project is legal and proper and it is the opponents who are lying, making baseless accusations and engaging in character assassination without any consideration for the law or for decency in public discourse.
It is a shame when so-called progressive, liberal thinkers are so quick to jettison the rule of law and the legitimate rights of others when they are wrong and they lose. The opponents of this project need to take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror and consider the possibility that everything they believe about this matter simply is based upon inaccurate information and intentional distortions by those who think that the ends justify the means no matter how misguided those ends are, and no matter how despicable those means are.
like
dislike
Barry--we can't count on our elected BOCC officials. The 751 South developers bought Joe Bowser hook, line and sinker--$8000 to his electoral campaign. The way I see it,, that means they can give him $8K more to run again for BOCC. Pretty big war chest for his support on their little project.
It sounds to me as though the citizens of Durham County were expressing their interests very clearly, only to be shut down by special interests. Mr. Wardell- at least be honest as to whose behalf you are working because it is obviously not the people of that area.
Durham County issued a statement today including this:
"We are pleased that the litigation process has come to a conclusion. We were confident that County Attorney Lowell L. Siler had provided sound advice to the City County Planning Director", said assistant county attorney Bryan Wardell. He added, "We look forward to moving ahead with the development in the best interest of the citizens of Durham County."
Siler noted, "Attorney Bryan Wardell provided excellent legal representation in
defending the decision of the Durham Board of County Commissioners to support this project."
lonk - http://www.co.durham.nc.us/departments/pub…
==================
Call me stupid, but i thought that determining "the best interests of the citizens of Durham County" was the job of elected officials, not the County Attorney's office.
And i suspect that at least some citizens of Durham County will be working through the electoral process to make sure their elected officials have their best interests in mind, and not just a small group of investors.
Latest in Triangulator
-
Womble bill would compensate eugenics victims
Bill would establish $10 million fund to help compensate eugenics victims.
- May 16, 2012
-
State elections board clears Durham Partnership for Progress
Durham Partnership for Progress didn't coordinate with candidates, says state board
- May 7, 2012
-
Woodard: Election paperwork was sent, but not received
Mike Woodard says he learned Friday that the stack of forms he says he sent Feb. 22, within the required 10-day period, had not been received. "I'm going to take care of that today," he said.
- May 1, 2012
- More »
More by Author
-
Tracy Cline removed from Durham DA's office
Judge thanked Cline for her past service as "effective litigator," but says she crossed the line.
- Mar 2, 2012
-
Durham DA Tracey Cline's fate awaits Friday ruling
Cline testified: "Even though this has been difficult, I promised to do what was right. And after doing all that I could do, I had to protect the people of Durham County."
- Feb 29, 2012
- More »
