03/24/06  Comprehensive Plan for Dallas

Dear Honorable Mayor Miller and Counselmembers:

I wish to express 2 concerns regarding Dallas' Comprehensive plan -- input ending this Friday and the supplied url to comments being the city of Dallas Web page for Mayor and Counsels emails to you.

While not having resources to download and read the 500 pages (on line), others' recaps of the contents cause me concern regarding the ability of neighborhoods to control their zoning.  Indeed, the purpose of the recent overlay ordinance, an ordinance which was in The Dallas Morning News recently regarding the complexity of use and lack of success of it (only 2 neighborhoods are progressing through the process, a process which has the building/development community chortling like a cat eating a canary about being ineffectual), would be endanger as well as existing zoning regulations.

Similar concerns must be expressed upon the problem of blighted apartment complexes and the incentives granted toward redevelopment of these areas.  Showing my age, I can remember when many of these apartment communities were new and the rage to live in.  Over the years, they have been allowed to fall into disrepair and via changing demographics have become a liability to the city.  Indeed, I have read concerns on how the appraisal district values a rental property (some say unfairly depreciating the value as they age) vs a residential property (that if you look at it cross eyed it increases in value) as well as the lack of affordable housing for workers who wish to live within Dallas.  

I view many of the new retail/condo developments, that appear to be the present development rage, as being future source of blight 20-25 years from now.  How will this new development (that many in the city's population cannot afford) be prevented from following the course of the present blighted apartments?  Is this segment of the population to be forced out to other cities such as Garland, Mesquite et. el.?  Is the city to be like a reptile shedding it's skin (housing redevelopment) every decade despite a growing world trend toward limited natural resources?

Second concern again relies upon the comments of others that, in general, the document complex and difficult to read as well as having the appearances of being cut and pasted from another city's efforts.  Some say it is poorly written; while others claim it as gospel.  I urge caution on the rapid adoption of it.  While I do not watch local TV news, my recollections of discussion of it in the paper seem to be limited and only by others
concerned do I hear criticisms.  Perhaps more public town hall meetings?

Regards

David W. Tuthill