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.
When a developer asks for support from council, there were to be significant benefits to the community, but we the voters get only Astroturf, artwork, and a bench? Other cities have received ice skating rinks and, at a minimum, public bathrooms. The council needs to get developers to provide infrastructure and get significant benefits as it says in the plan. It seems easy for you to say no to voters, so try exercising some of that courage with the developers.
As elected officials, it is your prime responsibility to support all areas of the City with smart development and infrastructure spending to support it. Follow the guidance that you have been given in both the Midtown area plan and Comprehensive Plan.
There is a groundswell of opposition to Kane Realty’s request to rezone several of its properties at North Hills to allow taller buildings, up to 37 stories in some cases. Former Raleigh Mayor Nancy McFarlane has sent an email to Council in opposition to the request.
Nancy McFarlane served on Raleigh’s City Council from 2007 through 2019, as Mayor from 2011 through 2019. She sent an email to the current City Council expressing her views on the proposed rezoning of North Hills. “Now comes the difficult part for the city council. They have a staff report that claims the proposed rezoning is compliant with the comprehensive plan. One of the tenets of the plan is the transition from dense areas to the single-family homes around them. This request does not comply with that. It does not comply with the Small Area Plan.”
I am very concerned with losing the current firehouse at the corner of Rowan Street and Six Fork Road. I googled a map of all the Raleigh fire stations, and there really is no other fire station anywhere close to the North Hills area. The removal of this station will put lives and property in significant danger as the timing to attend to fire and life emergencies will be greatly lengthened.
The rezoning has three critical inconsistencies with the Midtown area plan and the Comprehensive plan that Raleigh is supposed to use for policy guidance that is intended to shape how the city grows and develops through the year 2030. However, recent approvals by Council indicate that they follow their own rules and create greater building heights without considering consequences.
On January 6 rezoning case Z-34-25, the rezoning of North Hills, was presented to Council for approval. Council chose to hold the hearing open for a vote at their January 20 meeting. This is not a new conversation for the city. A nearly identical rezoning request was submitted in 2021 but was ultimately withdrawn after City Council members and residents raised substantial concerns. Both elected officials and the public made it clear that the proposal did not adequately address inconsistencies with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, particularly around building heights, density transitions, and the absence of meaningful affordable housing commitments.