Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Planning Reorg topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Durham planning department to more than double staff and budget as UDO rewrite, mailed-notice costs rise

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Durham City/County Planning proposes a consolidated City–County Planning and Development department that would grow from about 50 to roughly 110 full‑time employees and raise the department budget from roughly $6–7 million to about $14 million, driven by personnel and one‑time costs tied to the Unified Development Ordinance rewrite.

Durham City Manager Mike Ferguson and Planning Director Sarah Young outlined a major restructuring and budget increase for the newly consolidated City–County Planning and Development department, including plans to more than double staff and shoulder one‑time mailing costs tied to a rewrite of the Unified Development Ordinance.

The changes are part of the city manager’s proposed fiscal plan and are intended to centralize development review functions now spread across departments, Young said. "We're going from 50 current FTEs to 110," she told council, and the department’s proposed total budget is "just over $14,000,000 spread across four different funds," with about $13,000,000 for personnel and roughly $1,000,000 for operating costs.

Why it matters: The consolidation is pitched as an effort to speed permit review, improve coordination of infrastructure permitting and enforcement, and reduce the number of separate reviewers on single development cases. Council members pressed staff for detail about public notice costs, resident input and process changes that will follow the change.

What the plan includes - Reorganization: The planning department will absorb development review staff from other city departments. Young said the migration of staff is part of a long‑running plan to consolidate development review in a single department. - Personnel: New staffing requests include senior engineering specialists for right‑of‑way management, additional engineers for water/sewer permitting and principal engineers for development review. Young said fee increases are expected to yield roughly $1,200,000 to cover six proposed positions. - Budget drivers: Aside from personnel, staff cited one‑time costs linked to the UDO rewrite. Because the UDO remaps zoning citywide, the department must send direct‑mail notices to every property owner; Young said direct mailing for the full UDO outreach is currently estimated at about $365,382 and will require an expanded mailing budget.

Notices and state law: Young told the council that state law currently requires mailed notices to immediately adjacent property owners, a sign on the property and a newspaper ad for some actions. She said the planning team is seeking legislative authority to allow online posting in lieu of the newspaper ad — a change other jurisdictions have won from the state — but that mailed notice remains required and the UDO effort will be more extensive than typical cases. "State law only requires that we send mailed notice to properties immediately adjacent. We actually go a thousand feet out," Young said.

Timing and process: Young said the UDO draft is largely complete and staff hopes to have a full draft to planning commission later this year, with elected officials likely to see it after the new year; an effective date would be months after adoption to give property owners time to adjust. She told council the department will work with the city attorney’s office to update city code to reflect consolidated authorities and will meet with the development community and residents to define process improvements.

Council concerns and clarifications Council members asked whether residents are involved in developer meetings (Young said residents have participated through the comprehensive plan and frequent customer contacts), whether notices for condemnations or easements use certified mail (staff deferred to the city attorney and real estate services for condemnation notice rules), and whether the planning commission might need additional meeting capacity (Young said planning commission typically handles five or six cases a month and its current cadence is sufficient).

What staff will do next Staff said they will return to council with updates as the UDO draft is finalized, with code adjustments to follow the reorganization. They also committed to provide the detailed fee and staffing schedules that support the proposed positions, and to brief council on the legislative push to allow online posting as a substitute for newspaper ads.

Ending: The reorganization aims to reduce handoffs and speed case review by centralizing development review; council members said they will watch whether the changes translate into faster timelines and better customer service. "Better coordination is gonna result in better service for our customers," Young said.