From:	Karen Edwards
Sent:	Tuesday, November 21, 2017 8:05 AM
To:	Karen Edwards
Subject:	FW: Proposal for Mill Road Plaza Redevelopm



From: Diane Chen []  
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2017 8:50 PM 
To: Karen Edwards 
Subject: Proposal for Mill Road Plaza Redevelopm

Attention: Planning Board

I have lived on Oyster River Road in Durham for five years. Prior to my relocation, I worked for 
commercial real estate developers in Massachusetts. Thus, I am generally in favor of 
redevelopment, and have experience with the nuances of developing property while adhering to a 
community’s ordinances and what is in the public interest and doing so within the spirit of the 
law. 

It was with grave concern that I read the most recent Durham Friday Updates and reviewed the 
new proposal submitted by Colonial Durham Associates (CDA). Aside from the fact that the 
proposal flies in the face of the 2015 lawsuit settlement (which states that any student housing 
should be placed in the northern half of the Plaza, where Hannaford and RiteAid now sit), the 
proposal clearly violates the Conditional Use provisions for any housing in the Plaza. 

I live near several houses occupied by students. The increased noise and activity of just a few 
students (which already disrupts my peaceful enjoyment of my property) cannot be compared to 
the increased noise/lights/activity of several hundred new student residents on the border of our 
Neighborhood. I’m not speaking about parties but rather the normal coming/going of several 
hundred new student residents at the edge of the Faculty Neighborhood. Such a housing complex 
will of course, negatively impact our house values, our lifestyles and enjoyment of our 
properties. 

Without Hannaford, as an anchor store, being an active participant in the redevelopment process 
(which hasn’t visibly occurred to this point), there will continue to be a slipshod attempt by CDA 
to do the least possible effort and to not abide by the spirit of the Settlement and Conditional Use 
criteria. The developers I worked for would clearly understand that such a proposal would be 
rejected by a Planning Board upon violation of Conditional Use criteria and that such a rejection 
would be supported in Court in light of the clarity of the Conditional Use criteria in our 
ordinances. 

Again, I want to be clear that I am in favor of redeveloping this tired and inefficient property. I 
sincerely hope this current proposal is scrapped in favor of asking Hannaford to move to a 
different location on the site and building the student housing on the northern part of the property 
where Hannaford and RiteAid now sit.

Sincerely,
Diane Chen
12 Oyster River Road 
868-1198 
 
 
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone