The City is approving rezonings that directly contradict its own Comprehensive Plan and Small Area Plans, the documents meant to protect neighborhoods, historic areas, and responsible growth. When the government fails to follow its own rules, residents are left with no choice but to stand up and defend themselves.
It turns out that at that January hearing when North Hills traffic was lightly discussed, the referral to the Transportation Committee – which had been previously promised to opponents – was not for any review of North Hills traffic at all but rather for the Six Forks Corridor Project – a dead project that would have provided little if any relief for traffic congestion in North Hills.
Raleigh’s current plans provide ample opportunity to reach Raleigh’s housing and density goals without threatening the character that makes Raleigh such a desirable address.
Let’s move on from self-serving and counterproductive supply-side theories used to justify massive developments that are violating our neighborhoods and our adopted growth plans. Instead, let’s work with Wake County’s Affordable Housing Director toward solutions described in Livable Raleigh’s Affordability Agenda, to produce much more affordable housing and more growth according to our adopted plans.
The city is FAILING at providing even a fraction of what is needed for Affordable Housing. According to the last breakdown of NET LOSS of Affordable Housing, the city is losing 4,000-5,000 units a year. The Comp Plan and Missing Middle rules are NOT promoting affordability. Instead, the city continues to destroy our existing NOAH to build “luxury” housing.
Does anyone think Kane kicks in extra cash for more height out of the goodness of his heart? The simple business logic is that taller buildings add enormous profits to Kane’s bottom line. It’s just the cost of doing business to offer a small cut of his added profits to get his rezoning approved over the objections of impacted neighbors and conflicts with the community’s Midtown growth plan adopted by Council only a few years ago.
You often point to offered conditions as public benefits. The question is whether those benefits are proportionate to what is being granted. In the recent cases they were not. Doubling or tripling height should come with significantly elevated public benefits. You have leverage. Developers want to build here. Council can either insist on meaningful benefits or adhere to the plans we collectively agreed to follow.
The objective analysis and evaluation of information to form a reasoned judgement, involving questioning assumptions, identifying biases, recognizing logical connections, and considering multiple perspectives to reach well-supported conclusions, rather than accepting information at face value. When filing a rezoning case, the applicant is asking the city to increase the value of their property. They need to earn that increase in value through community benefits.
Critical listening is the process of carefully analyzing and evaluating the information presented during a communication event. It involves understanding the speaker’s intent, assessing the quality of arguments, and distinguishing between valid points and misinformation. If the majority of the City Council had taken the time to clearly explain why they disagreed with the folks that opposed the West/Peace St and North Hills rezoning requests, that would have been an example of critical listening.
The City is approving rezonings that directly contradict its own Comprehensive Plan, the document meant to protect neighborhoods, historic areas, and responsible growth. When the government fails to follow its own rules, residents are left with no choice but to stand up and defend themselves. That is why neighbors are raising money to support the community’s efforts to defend responsible planning and neighborhood protections. Donations can be made anonymously.