User:McThuggin2011/sandbox

Raleigh Downtown South Development Wiki

The Raleigh Downtown South Development is a 145.2 acre piece of land located northeast, northwest, and southeast of the South Saunders Street and I-40 interchange with frontage on Maywood Avenue, Gilbert Avenue, Green Street, Penmarc Drive, South Saunders Street, Walker Street, Bluff Street and South Wilmington Street, and comprises 39 individual parcels. The project is being developed by Kane Realty of the Raleigh North Hills project. The rezoning request Z-13-20 associated with the Downtown South project was a joint proposal between John Kane of Kane Realty and Steve Malik the owner of North Carolina Courage and North Carolina FC. The project is to include: a soccer stadium, buildings of up to 40 stories on parts of the property for office and retail space, buildings for housing, provide rent controlled residential units affordable to households earning 80% AMI for 5 years, two access points to the Walnut Creek Greenway, two public art installations, and an outdoor recreation area.

Background:

* The Applicants forZ-13-20

The Downtown South project is being developed by Kane Realty. John Kane the founder and CEO of Kane Realty is responsible for the North Hills development of Raleigh and in 2019 made $1.2 million in compensation from Kane Realty. Since 2015, John Kane has also been the president of Navient Corp, a loan management and asset recovery company. As president of Navient Corp, Kane earned $2.2 million in salary in 2021 alone (1). In 2015 John Kane served as the secretary for the RDUAA board 2 and in 2019 chaired a 4 minute 17 second meeting that approved a lease deal with Wake Stone of 105 acres of densely wooded land adjacent to Umstead Park; a deal that was opposed by community environmental activists due to its proximity to Umstead State Park and the threats to native species habitat (3). In 2007, John Kane requested $75 million in tax increment financing from the city of Raleigh in order to build a parking deck. Had the city approved, it reportedly would have paid out $140 million over the 20-year span of the deal. The Raleigh mayor at the time, Charles Meeker, was opposed to approving the tax increment financing citing it as bad public policy, Kane’s underestimation of Kane Realty’s capacity to build the parking deck without public funds, and North Carolina state law prohibited tax increment financing strategies4. Despite not receiving public funds for the parking deck, the North Hills Parking Garage was constructed.

Steve Malik is the owner of North Carolina Courage women’s soccer tean and North Carolina Football Club. In 2019 Malik sold his company Medfusion for $43 million which is expected to be used to build the planned soccer stadium in the Downtown South project. Malik, in partnership with John Kane, reportedly requested $330 million in funding from the city of Raleigh and Wake county to help build the stadium in the form of tourism taxes5. Kane and Malik are also expected to request a tax increment grant (TIG) from the city of Raleigh as well as Wake county for the Downtown South project as well.

* City Council Composition

Mary-Ann Baldwin is the mayor of Raleigh since 2019 and a member of city council from 2007 to 2017. Baldwin is the Director of Business Development for Barnhill Contracting company since 2020. Barnhill is a construction contracting company that provides commercial building, site infrastructure, transportation and asphalt services. During her stint as mayor, several rezoning cases were brought before Raleigh City Council for projects that were contracted by Barnhill, most notably the East End Market Z-22-206. Some residents of Raleigh claim Baldwin’s ties to Barnhill are an obvious conflict of interest and have called for Baldwin to recuse herself from rezoning cases with ties to Barnhill contracting; those calls were not acknowledged by Mayor Baldwin. Mary-Ann Baldwin is married to Jim Baldwin is a client account manager for Manpower engineering which provides workforce solutions for developers, likely including Kane realty. Notable campaign contributors for Baldwin’s mayoral campaign include developer John Kane, CEO of Capitol Broadcasting (WRAL-TV) James Goodmon, Tory Holt of Holt Brothers Construction company, and realtor Kimberlie Meeker7.

At-large city councilor Jonathan Melton is an attorney and partner at Gailor Hundt Davi Taylor & Gibbs. He spent time as a law clerk to North Carolina Court of Appeals Judge Richard A. Elmore. Melton was elected to city council in Fall 2019 and was the among the first two openly gay people to serve on Raleigh City Council. Melton’s campaign received contributions from notable donors such as developer John Kane, Brewery Bhavana co-owners Vansana and Vanvisa Nolintha, Eric Bruan, and Centro owner Angela Salamanca7.

At-large city councilor Nicole Stewart is the director of North Carolina Conservation Network and was elected to city council in Fall 2017. Notable campaign contributors include CEO of Capitol Broadcasting (WRAL-TV) James Goodmon, Congresswoman Deborah K Ross, Sig Hutchinson, Eric Braun, former mayor Nancy MacFarlane, and former mayor Charles Meeker7.

Patrick Buffkin is an associate lawyer at Bailey & Sons and was elected to city council in Fall 2019 to represent District A. Prior to involvement with Bailey & Sons and city council, Buffkin was a staff attorney for the North Carolina Utilities Commission. Notable campaign contributors include Eric Braun, Wake County Commissioner Matt Calabria, Charles Meeker, and David Meeker.

David Cox is the city councilor for District B since 2015 and a Senior Software Manager for Apex Life Sciences having received his PhD in computer science in 2010. Notable campaign contributors include Dean and Sesha Debnam of Debnam Property Management, a commercial real-estate firm.

Corey Branch is the city councilor for District C since 2015 and Director of Technology for AT&T. Notable campaign contributors include CEO of Capitol Broadcasting (WRAL-TV) James Goodmon, and Orage Quarles III the publisher for the News & Observer.

Stormie Forte was appointed to City Council to replace Saige Martin as the District D representative following Martin’s resignation over allegations of sexual assault and misconduct. Forte received 6 of the 7 votes from the current city council in an email vote held during a special meeting on July 14th 2020.

David Knight is the city councilor for District E since 2019 and the owner of Knight Consulting, a facilities management consulting firm. Notable campaign contributors include: developer John Kane, Eric Braun, Sig Hutchinson, Plexus Capital investment banker Molly Painter, and Trail Creek Investments investors Hamilton Sloan and Temple Sloan.

Request to Rezone Downtown South Z-13-20:

Rezoning case Z-13-20 for the Raleigh Downtown South project came before Raleigh City Council on December 15, 2020 for public hearing in a special meeting. The rezoning came before the Planning Commission on October 13, 2020. From October 13th to December 15th, the Planning Commission spent over 13 hours discussing the merits of the case and ultimately recommended denial of the rezoning request in an 8-0 vote. The Planning Commission justified their position by stating approval of the request would have unreasonable impacts on transportation infrastructure, housing, and equitable development in the community. Additionally, the commission stated that for a project of this scale to achieve consistency with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan that further development of outside agreements and technical revisions to zoning conditions would be necessary to mitigate impacts and improve public benefits.

When rezoning case Z-13-20 came before Raleigh City Council on December 15th 2020 for public hearing, it was deemed inconsistent with the 2030 Comprehensive plan, inconsistent with the Future Land Use Map, but consistent with the Urban Form Map.

Recommended action by city staff included: Conduct the public hearing. At the conclusion of the public hearing, City Council may choose to act on the case or defer for further review. Alternately, the City Council may choose to continue the public hearing to a future date.

Senior Planner Bynum Walter used a PowerPoint presentation to summarize the proposed rezoning and conditions offered.

Zoning Conditions

Several conditions were included in the rezoning case, the full list of which can be found in the meeting minutes8. Notable conditions include prohibition of cemetaries, adult establishments, detention centers, jails, prisons, vehicle repair facilities, and gasoline sales. Amenities to be provided include two access points to the Walnut Creek Greenway, two public art installations, an outdoor recreation area of at least 6 acres. Additionally, treatment of the first 1.34 inches of runoff stormwater from proposed impervious surfaces. Finally, the applicants are to provide rent controlled residential units affordable to households earning 80% AMI for 5 years.

Public Opposition to the Rezoning

A host of concerned citizens submitted public comments in the opposition during the public hearing portion of rezoning case Z-13-20, the minutes of which are included.

Bob Geary, indicated he wrote the story on Big Ideas Raleigh for the Independent Weekly in 2008 and argued Downtown South is not part of that program and that approving the rezoning would violate a number of city policies and regulations. He urged the Council to deny the request.

Hwa Huang, Wake County Housing Justice Coalition, expressed his opposition to the rezoning request.

Lynn Lyle, Interfaith Creation Care of the Triangle, read the following statement: Hello, Mayor, can you hear me? Good evening, good people, that’s everyone on the call. Lynn Lyle here (700 N. East St. in Mr. Branch’s District), from Interfaith Creation Care of the Triangle, with members from 44 faith communities all within city limits. Inspired to love justice and our neighbors as ourselves, we ask Council and all of us to let justice and love of our South Raleigh neighbors guide us. Please protect historically red-lined neighborhoods from gentrification and urban flooding displacement. Devil’s in the details. Our hearts ache for low-poverty displaced workers who can’t afford rent on a unit in Kane’s scant offer of only 10% of all units for just 5 years at 80% AMI and the displaced resort to commuting outside the county, eroding low incomes and enlarging our transportation carbon footprint. Or become homeless. Kane gets public assistance in taxpayer TIG money, possibly for decades, that pays for a privately-owned stadium while the community gets little affordable housing. We ask for denial in favor of a restart, a planned development, a master plan, and an enforceable community benefits agreement with opportunity for all, not just the privileged few, making Raleigh a shining light of justice and love. Thank you. Happy holidays. God bless.

Tatiana Height, Partners for Environmental Justice, expressed her opposition to the rezoning stating unless there is an enforceable Community Benefits Agreement signed by the developer the rezoning should not be approved.

Carmen Cauthen, read the following statement: The Downtown South Project plan doesn't go far enough and the developers haven't engaged all of the community. The project sits in an Opportunity Zone and is already eligible and getting tax dollars because of it. Federal tax credits from capital gains rollovers already give tax credit for any development in property that sits in the opportunity zones. The developers also want county tax money in the form of tax increment grants. This will occur (if approved by city council and county commission) by allowing a grant from the increase in property tax to be paid back to the developer for building certain items. In the case of Downtown South, this would include affordable housing (at 80% AMI - not low income housing at all), health facilities, incubation spaces for area businesses, education partnerships and workforce programming, support for MWBE, wellness assets and greenway trails and the ever popular entertainment and sports venue (better known as a STADIUM). Other than the 80% AMI housing, none of this is promised or agreed upon at this time. The rezoning process only includes recognizable pictures of the stadium and not recognizable pictures of any of these other entities. And, community benefits agreements have been spoken about as though they were illegal and unenforceable here in North Carolina. THAT IS NOT TRUE! Community benefits agreements are legally binding documents and are completely enforceable. Those are legal contracts between the developer and the community. Government entities can't create them. THAT would be illegal and unenforceable. CBAs are created regularly. I have checked this out with the former Senior Leader in Regional Community Development for the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and present Professor of the Practice at UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School, Jeanne Milliken Bonds. We need more details, more community engagement, and a Community Benefits Agreement before this massive project gets the green light, and it is still inconsistent with serious parts of the comprehensive plan. This project will be changing our lives for the 20 or more years that it takes to build it. We should at least know what is being built. Please vote no.

Evan Kane, read the following statement: My name is Evan Kane, no relation to the applicant. I am a water resource professional and a member of Raleigh’s Stormwater Management Advisory Commission. I agree south Raleigh needs investment, but I oppose this rezoning. The applicant said he wants to “let nature guide us.” So, let nature guide us. Sections A & B of this proposal consist of over 85 contiguous acres of undeveloped and forested land - all natural Green Stormwater Infrastructure, no redevelopment required. Natural green stormwater infrastructure already serving downstream communities. No engineered system can match it for longevity. Let nature guide us. The applicant also speaks of “restorative efforts.” Let nature guide us; development of sections A & B of this proposal is not restoration. The stormwater measures proposed in these sections are mitigation, not restoration. Let nature guide us. Please reject Z-13-20. Let nature continue to serve the public interest on sections A & B of the site, and re-develop section C in a way that respects and sustains the surrounding community.

Suzy Hooker, expressed her opposition to the rezoning request.

Rachael Wooten, read the following statement: Mayor Baldwin, your profile on Barnhill Construction Co. website says this: “Mary-Ann Baldwin joins Barnhill’s Building Group as Director of Business Development for our Triangle and Streamline Divisions. Mary-Ann will work closely with our leadership team to develop strategy, cultivate external relationships and lead marketing efforts to elevate our business and project acquisition performance.”  Mayor Baldwin, I wonder how you determined that you have no conflict of interest here? Your personal job is to help acquire construction projects, Barnhill has deep ties to Kane realty. Yet you have driven this city project, which will assuredly benefit your employer, with a markedly rushed timeline and an extremely poor process. You also stated in an ABC interview that the Planning Commissions’ unanimous NO vote on this project, and I quote: was actually a split on the decision but they voted it down to move the application forward and make sure it reached City Council for a vote.” I watched that meeting. I heard the comments of 6 extremely distressed people, both for themselves and the people they serve, who are the citizens of Raleigh, not Kane Realty. Their reasons for voting ‘no’ were explicit, and most of them will be stated by others here this evening. I’m also a participant in ONE Wake, whose 44 congregations, some of which directly serve SE Raleigh, and represent 50,000 people in Wake County. That is approximately the same number of people who elected this council. We are opposed to this rezoning as it now stands. In all our various traditions, the goal for everything we do is to be of benefit to all living beings. Neither this rushed process, nor the proposed rezoning, with its promises but no enforceable detailed agreements, meet that profound spiritual motivation. I urge you to vote no tonight, and come back with a clear proposal for a planned development with highly specific details, and engage our citizens, including the planning commission, in a respectful and honest process. Mayor Baldwin indicated she has stated in the past—and continues to maintain—that Barnhill will not be working on this project.

Rev. Jemonde Taylor, read the following statement: Good evening. I am the rector of St. Ambrose Episcopal Church, 813 Darby Street in the Rochester Heights Community. I am a ONE Wake steering committee member. I want the City Council to vote, “No,” on the rezoning request. I am not against this development in general; I am against this deal in particular. I implore the Council to remember the following:


 * Remember the hundreds of emails you received over the past three months.
 * Remember the stormwater commissioner’s concerned email regarding destroying 80 forested acres.
 * Remember that affordable housing needs to be just that, affordable. The current condition seems more affluent than affordable.
 * Remember that living wage jobs do change people’s realities.
 * Remember 8-0, the Planning Commissions unanimous “No” vote sending a clear message and a clarion call.
 * Remember hurricanes Fran and Floyd. Will a “Yes” vote be a falling barometric pressure forming superstorm Kane, increasing the water level on Walnut Creek and possibly flooding my church?
 * Remember that a “No” vote tonight is a soccer yellow card, not a soccer red card, signaling caution, not rejection.

The novelist Charles Dickens wrote in chapter 3 of his novel A Christmas Carol and I quote, “Remember that, and charge their doings on themselves, not us,” end quote. Remember Council, temporarily voting “No” now is saying “Yes” to possibility, imagination, and transformation in the future. Thank you.

Zainab Baloch, made a statement based on the following outline: 2020 has been a whirlwind for Raleigh Council.


 * We're a city of half a million people with NO formal community engagement process.
 * We're voting on the biggest development in Raleigh's history with no community engagement.
 * There are No commitments to anything. Including a stadium.
 * Stadiums are bad.  Only 2% of economists agree that stadium subsidies generate more economic benefits than costs for taxpayers.
 * Exploitation of community.
 * Black developers advancing the white supremacist narrative that the Black community should be happy with whatever from Kane’s table
 * and a reminder that Raleigh is made up with more than just Black and White - where was engagement of the thousands of Latin, Muslim, Indigenous, Refugee, Vietnamese, etc. residents in Downtown South?

Raleigh government has been twisted into an institution funded by the rich and power-hungry and legislated on their terms on the backs of the poor and working folks. When developers fund our government, candidates and elections, they end up getting their way and being allowed to shape our city into the model that suits them the best—which in many cases, isn’t what’s best for the greater good for the entire city. So, b/c I turn to those listening to the audience:


 * Raleigh is no longer a democracy.  Corruption is rampant.  And unless you’re a wealthy developer it doesn’t seem like you have a voice.


 * Kane’s colonization is the inevitable result of a political system focused more on the creation and expansion of business opportunity than on the well-being of its citizens.

Lisa Hughet, 712 Hinsdale Street, Raleigh, NC, summarized the following email sent to Council members prior to the hearing: I want to be clear that I oppose the timing and the lack of specificity of the rezoning application. There is much work the developer needs to do to gain the trust of the City and their coffers, and also the community which stands to either win or lose depending on your decision this week. Please hear the citizens of Raleigh tonight as they ask you to respect the historical black communities this project will impact, the environmental impact of such a large concrete development, the existing and vast inequities of the development as it's currently written in the application, and the great need the City of Raleigh has to protect its most vulnerable communities.

Stefanie Mendell, read the following statement: Mayor Baldwin said the Planning Commission rejected Z-13-20 with a unanimous “no” vote intentionally to move it along to Council for action because they were deadlocked. That’s not true. And it was news to Planning Commission members. The Planning Commission could have moved it along to Council with no recommendation or a split vote. But they rejected it 8 to 0. Commission members were quite outspoken about their strong opposition during their last meeting. In summary:


 * Community Engagement – insufficient
 * Affordable Housing commitment – insufficient
 * Traffic impacts –extreme degradations
 * Stormwater impacts – major concerns.
 * Equity – doesn’t live up to the City’s stated goals.

The applicant has thrown a few bones to the public at the last-minute, but the Planning Commission and the community found them insufficient. Several well-respected members of the community, like Central’s Coach LeVelle Moton, have gotten involved. Their involvement looks to benefit the community in terms of jobs. That’s great, but their involvement doesn’t address any of the other concerns and, according to Moton, isn’t designed to. Those who are speaking against this do not oppose development. We oppose bad development and are wise enough to not believe substantive conditions can be negotiated after approving the rezoning. I ask that the full Council support the Planning Commission’s recommendation and vote no.

Richard Johnson, read the following statement: I’m against this Downtown South rezoning boondoggle because community engagement has been inadequate. The offer for Affordable Housing for five years is really just market-rate housing and will not address the needs of the local community. As this is in a BRT zone, it is even more critical that truly affordable housing be made available. Where is the equity in adding value to already wealthy individuals through upzoning their property while burdening more marginalized residents with the impacts of that upzoning – including serious flooding issues and degraded transportation infrastructure. The question of tax incentives, especially for a stadium, needs more study. For one thing, Raleigh doesn’t have a Major League Soccer Team and isn’t likely to get one any time soon. Tax incentives for stadiums tend not to deliver on promised benefits, but instead become a sinkhole for continued public investment. Is that really the best use of our tax dollars during these challenging times of fewer resources and greater needs? John Kane needs to stop bullying the City of Raleigh with unreasonable demands and artificial deadlines and come back with a more detailed plan in 2021. If not, there will be plenty of other responsible developers lined up to take advantage of this opportunity zone. Please listen to your Planning Commission, reject this rezoning request, and ask the applicant to re-submit it after more thorough community engagement.

Nelda Holder, read the following statement: This is Nelda Holder, 2300 Timber Drive in Raleigh. I am a native of Wake County, and I have a master’s degree in Resource Management and Administration. My management molecules wholeheartedly agreed with the Planning Commission’s unanimous vote to deny this rezoning request. It only makes sense to entertain such a proposal carefully through a planned development model that could assure the full city’s interests and guarantee, in particular, equity to the current and historic residents of South Raleigh. This could also safeguard other issues such as transportation, loss of tree canopy, and floodplain infill. You are the people who have the responsibility for this, but if a safeguarded process is developed it is obvious there are many community members that would welcome a chance to help you. I would add that many city residents and businesses are in immediate need now as a result of the COVID pandemic. New proposals this expansive must be balanced against this backdrop. Please deny the current rezoning proposal and only pursue such a proposal as a planned development, so that the interests of all our citizens can be appropriately incorporated.

Helen Tart, urged the Council to postpone any decision on the rezoning asserting the project needs a detailed master plan.

Rosa Saavedra, indicated she lives in the Worthdale neighborhood and represents Bread for the World and the Wake County Housing Justice Coalition. She read a statement in opposition to rezoning request.

Lucy Lafitte, expressed her opposition to the rezoning and concern she heard a lot of lip service from the developer regarding the project but no commitment to hold the developer’s feet to the fire. She urged the Council to trust the Planning Commission’s unanimous vote and deny the rezoning.

Wanda Hunter, expressed her opposition to the rezoning request stating unless certain negotiations are made the Council should deny the rezoning. She stated the jobs associated with Downtown South once completed should be permanent jobs and not seasonable as associated with a soccer stadium.

Donna Bailey, expressed her opposition to the rezoning request.

Tim Niles, read the following statement: Those speaking against this rezoning application are not opposed to development. What we oppose is bad development and we are wise enough not to believe that substantive conditions can be negotiated after approval. There is a false choice being presented between luxury towers or dingy warehouses. Equitable development around transit calls for human-scale mixed use development with 3, 5 or 7 story multi-story residential apartment buildings with actual affordable housing, not 20 and 40 story luxury skyscrapers. Housing aimed at 80% AMI is not affordable. It is market rate housing aimed at middle class earners. Specifically a family of four earning over $74,000/year. Kane has said that there is no project without the stadium and not stadium without the TIG Let's take him at his word. The entire project hinges on the TIG. Tell him to go get the TIG first and then come back for a rezoning with a Planned Development. Because if he can't get the TIG he has no need for the rezoning. Don't put the cart before the horse.

Leon Cooke, read the following statement: I ask that you follow the unanimous recommendation of the Planning Commission and reject Kane Realty’s application for the “Downtown South” project. Mayor Baldwin stated that the vote was intentional in order to bump the decision to the City Council. That is their job to review and advise Council on zoning matters. They asked intelligent questions, many of which are still not answered by Kane. Thus, the 8-0 vote. As submitted, Z-13-20 falls far short of what is needed to lift up the communities of South Raleigh, despite late partnerships with black owned businesses. Community benefits are lacking. Developer John Kane would reap huge financial gains, while giving very little back. Meanwhile, the negative impacts of a project this large are obvious – among them, the possibility that the already notorious Walnut Creek flooding would get worse for the historically black neighborhoods downstream; displacement of current residents through gentrification and property tax increases and the estimated 100,000 additional car trips per day on already congested roads. Kane should start over, present a detailed master plan and this time engage in serious discussions with impacted neighbors and community leaders in South Raleigh. In other words: a Comprehensive Benefits Agreement! This is the ONLY way to achieve equity in the community. This development should be a win-win for everyone. With your help, it still can be BEFORE rezoning.

Skillet Gilmore, expressed his opposition to the rezoning and asserted the only community outreach he received of a community meeting was a post card he received after the date of the advertised community meeting.

Stephanie Lormand, expressed her opposition to the rezoning request.

Jeremy Gilchrist, expressed his opposition to the rezoning request. He talked about now homes along Virginia Avenue, an historically African-American neighborhood known as Tiny Town, were torn down and replaced with expensive homes and expressed concern regarding gentrification in Southeast Raleigh.

Joshua Bradley, expressed his opposition to the rezoning request asserting the Council should focus on the COVID pandemic and not making rich people richer.

Sam Hershey, expressed his opposition to the rezoning.

Russ Stephenson, read the following statement: Good evening Mayor and Council. I am here tonight to acknowledge the Raleigh Planning Commission’s professionalism, integrity and expertise, and their unanimous recommendation that the Downtown South project be denied in its current form, and brought back as a Planned Development, so that the inconsistent, incomplete and inequitable elements detailed in their evaluation can be resolved. For the Mayor to call the Planning Commission’s strong, unanimous vote a ‘deadlock’ is an unfortunate and perhaps unintended insult to their integrity and diligence under pressure. Having worked with John Kane over 14 years on and off Council, I am well aware he is a savvy player in the game of power politics, but I also know that if pressed to make the commitments recommended by the Planning Commission, he will not walk away from this gold mine of a project. He will do what he has to do - to close the deal and make a handsome profit. The only question is whether this Council will let clear thinking about their sworn duty to serve the public - be clouded by money politics, flowery marketing promises, false deadlines - or attempts to discredit the Planning Commission’s integrity. In order to produce a transformative project on this site, set aside Z-13-20 and tell John Kane to bring back a Planned Development, along with a willingness to negotiate with a Council committed to the equitable community benefits recommended by the Planning Commission. Thank you for your service.

Monica Lavery, expressed her opposition to the rezoning.

Michael Lindsay, read the following statement: Thank you for this opportunity to speak about Downtown South. To my knowledge, Raleigh has never approved an up-zoning request of this scale without it being a Planned Development. Wakefield Plantation and Briar Creek were very large up-zoning requests, but they were Planned Developments. Downtown South is not, but it should be. Just as the Planning Commission said when it voted unanimously against this current proposal. Now is the time when the City of Raleigh has the most leverage to ensure a great development for all concerned. Raleigh is doing very well economically, and we’re not desperate to approve an up-zoning request that lacks the details and conditions we seek. Plus, we don’t need a TIG to encourage development. This property will get developed without any taxpayer subsidies. I hope Mr. Kane will continue working with the community on improving his Downtown South up-zoning request, and then resubmit it as a Planned Development. Thank you for your public service and happy holidays.

Janice Cutler, read the following statement: I moved to Raleigh from NY in 1991. Since then, it has come so far—especially Downtown Raleigh. I have been a business owner since 1996 employed hundreds of residents over the years, and watched them struggle to pay their rent. Not much has changed for them since the 90’s. The bottom line is wages have NOT kept up with housing costs here. Prices have continued to rise, nice condos being built, improving aesthetics, growth, and attracting bigger business to the area. All this is great, except for one thing. The folks already here can’t keep up. Affordable Housing should NOT be intended for people making $50,000-$70,000/year. The majority struggling with housing make far less-less. I think we can all agree that we have been in a housing crisis for some time. A few of you have given interviews as recently as last year about what you care most about. The common theme over and over again was to improve the Housing crisis we were in. At that time, in 2019, there were 3400 kids in Wake County who didn’t have a stable or consistent place to sleep at night, and 1000 homeless people. Fast-forward to now—the pandemic. What do you suppose those numbers are now? This is a terrible time for our city. When will someone be brave enough to set the precedent that development projects should benefit ALL involved. The largest project we’ve ever seen needs the largest and most detailed plan that we’ve ever seen. I am asking that you demand more for the people you serve and said you had compassion for. I am asking you to delay this zoning application until there is an acceptable plan and agreement that matches the size of this enormous ask.

Mary Abrams, Wake Audubon Society, read the following statement: I represent the Wake Audubon Society at PO Box 12452, Raleigh. We serve Wake County and half of our members live in Raleigh. Wake Audubon is committed to creating a fair and just society where all birds and all people can thrive. We are not against development per se, but we remain concerned that there will be inequitable outcomes for S Raleigh from this specific project. We can’t quantify those impacts, but it’s reasonable to expect that wildlife and people will be displaced and disadvantaged if we don’t get this rezoning right and formalize the benefits promised to the community. We appreciate the work thus far to address some of the risks of intense development to the environment. The stormwater conditions will help protect the watershed and mitigate potential flooding in downstream neighborhoods. And the conditions to use native plants and down-shaded lighting for birds will also benefit people. These are good first steps, but more must be done to reduce other risks to nearby residents like gentrification, displacement, and housing insecurity. The applicant’s “affordable housing” condition does not meet the need of the nearby communities or the priorities set forth in Raleigh’s Consolidated Plan. Affordable housing in just one of many benefits that the community needs and that the applicant says they will deliver. But other than this rezoning request, there is no mechanism to hold the applicant accountable for delivering them. There is no way to ensure that the community will benefit equitably from this development and so we must oppose it in its current form. We ask that you will to. Thank you!

Wanda Gilbert-Coker, Wake County Housing Justice Coalition, express her opposition to the rezoning citing lack of citizen engagement and expressed concerns regarding affordable housing and potential conflicts of interest for some Council members due to financial contributions to their election campaigns made by the developer.

Bill Padgett, expressed his opposition to the rezoning indicating he has volunteered for several years as a soccer official and indicated he would have to issue the Council a red card on this rezoning and urged the Council to uphold the Planning Commission’s recommendation for denial.

Susan Maruyama, summarized the following email sent to Council members from her husband, Ken Maruyama: The Raleigh Planning Commission worked tirelessly to try to justify and approve the application for the "Downtown South" project (rezoning case Z-13-20) as proposed by applicant Kane Realty. Simply stated, the application for Z-13-20 had insufficient detail to deserve approval and as such was inconsistent with Raleigh’s commitment to “equitable and sustainable" development.  The Planning Commission did the right thing by unanimously voting to reject Z-13-20.  I support the decision of the Raleigh Planning Commission. Due to the developer’s imposed deadline of December 31, 2020 and the applicant's inability to provide sufficient detail, the Planning Commission voted in the public’s best interest to unanimously reject Z-13-20.  The Planning Commission studied the Z-13-20 application closely and more assiduously than any other decision making body in Raleigh City government.  The Planning Commission decision was based on 6-weeks of review by the Commission members and included the most robust public engagement through their Committee of the Whole meetings and subsequent Planning Commission meetings that has existed in Raleigh for the past 10 months. In addition, the Planning Commission requested the applicant address deficiencies in the application, which were never sufficiently met. All of this input was factored into the serious consideration afforded Z-13-20 by a Planning Commission. The Planning Commission in unanimously rejecting the rezoning request, recommended that this project be withdrawn as a rezoning request and resubmitted as Planned Development which, would require the site plan details that are necessary to consider for a project of this size. I support the Planning Commission’s decision and I strongly oppose any decision to move ahead with Z-13-20 until and unless more specific details are included in the development plans and an enforceable Community Benefits Agreement is in place.

Natalie Lew, read the following statement: Many of the previous speakers are voicing their approval of the Downtown South Project. Great. But that is not what this hearing is about. This hearing is about the re-zoning, which I am against at this time. Prior to rezoning, there needs to be definitive plans and agreements in place about many things. Affordable housing, traffic, environment, the lack of which others have addressed. What about funding and building materials? John Kane should not receive any tax breaks for this development. He has plenty of money and investors to do large developments with his own finances. John Kane is on the RDU Airport Authority and is involved with massive destruction of forested land adjacent to Umstead State Park for a rock quarry, land owned in part by the City of Raleigh. This quarry will harm our state park, our greenway system, a private home, and Crabtree Creek. John Kane continues to harm other Raleigh natural resources with the DTS project. I just read some information about the DTS area having some fortifications that were built around Raleigh in 1863, during the Civil War. This history needs to be explored prior to developing the land. Develop the area, but don’t rush to do it. Do not approve the re-zoning request at this time. Merry Christmas.

Statements by City Councilors

Councilor Corey Branch made the following remarks: I want to thank everyone that has called my phone, has sent us emails, has sent text messages, has sent messages via social media—on both sides of this rezoning case. As a  Raleigh native, as a District C native, I fully understand the impact of this project. But I also understand the impact of not having projects. Back in around 2008 there was a conversation of a stadium in Southeast Raleigh. It was a partnership between Wake County, Shaw University, and St. Augustine’s University. The community wanted that to happen because the community said “We need economic development within our district.”  The reason why that project did not happen is because one university pulled out—for whatever reason—and that killed the project. That was in 2008. We are now at 2020—12 years later—and we are having another conversation; but this one is a little more inclusive. This is not a Wakefield project where there was a PD done that helped with some forestation issues because we have past projects where we have had to deal with forestation because some of those homes are not up to code. PDs help us to decide how we do things that are not up to our UDO. This project I thought about long and hard. But what I thought about the most is my 2-year-old daughter, I thought about my 5-year-old niece, my 13-year-old nephew, and I said “What Raleigh are we leaving them, and their friends, and their peers?” Is this project perfect? I’ll go ahead and tell you, it’s not. If we wait for a perfect project, as some of the elders would say, “We’ll be waiting for the roosters to come home.” So I look at who’s involved in this project, and there are some people who are engaged in this project that I have known for years. Yes, Bonner and I went to the same middle school, but he was in a different building than I was. But there’re guys on this project that we literally saw each other—day and night. There’re women on this project that have helped build me and mold me. But I look deeper than that. I look at the diversity of those that spoke tonight, and I listened to those who weren’t here. How many young people were not here—on either side—and I say, “What about them? What are we leaving them?” So not to belabor the point, because I really could go on, because this is something that I don’t come to lightly; but I will—at the appropriate time—vote to support this project for the future. There’re parts of this project I may not see because tomorrow is not promised for anyone. But for the next generation—our vision, our hope—what are we leaving them? We have a project where there’s engagement—more engagement than any other project I’ve ever seen in my 42 years. So I say if this project has enough votes and passes, that’s what happens. We have to get together—and I’ve pushed, and I implore the developers—reach out to those who oppose the project. Work with them as well. Some of them have some good ideas. And let’s work together. Let’s be one Raleigh, or else we can look back 20 years from now, 40 years from now, and be like some our eastern towns and cities and say, “Dang, I wish we had that.” So with that, I’m done.

Councilor Cox read the following statement: I want to thank everyone who has participated in this rezoning process. This is the first formal discussion at City Council about this project. I want everyone to know that I have not had any in depth discussions with anyone on Council about this project. In my view we are at the beginning and not the end of Council’s due diligence. A few weeks ago I did email the Mayor objecting to rushing this rezoning request. I have been hoping that we can continue this process because there are outstanding issues. First, I agree with recommendations from Planning Commissioners that this rezoning should be resubmitted as a planned development to give the rezoning and the Downtown South project better definition. A project of this size should, as a matter of principle, never be submitted and approved as a general or conditional use rezoning case. There are simply too many variables to make reasonable predictions about the outcome. As the New & Observer editorial staﬀ noted, the rezoning case before us is simply too vague. The conditions do not address the environmental concerns raised by the community. Flooding is an important component. However, environmental concerns go beyond flooding. They include future automobile emissions from tens of thousands of automobiles that will be in the area daily. They include trash and garbage. They include air pollution, wind tunnel eﬀects and light pollution. This development will be at the door steps of the Walnut Creek wetlands. We do not have the details and plans to truly protect the wetlands and the downstream communities from such a high level of development. A development of this magnitude will, without a doubt, increase property values in southeast Raleigh and especially in the nearby communities. Those property values could easily double or triple. We all know well from the recent assessment that while the City remained tax neutral, the distribution of taxes shifted to those whose properties increased in value the fastest. This project will likely result in a further redistribution of the tax burden from the wealthy in Raleigh to those in this area who will experience rapid increases in their property values. A condition has been provided to provide what the developer refers to as aﬀordable housing. However, this condition only provides 99 out of the first 999 units of housing to those earning 80% of area median income. Significantly, the condition sunsets after five years. While Council cannot require a single unit of aﬀordable housing in these 145 acres, we should take the time for further discussions. Developing 145 acres with no room for those with low incomes is not in the best interest of the city. Next, this rezoning does not address that the properties are located in a federal Opportunity Zone. An Opportunity Zone allows investors to channel capital gains from the sale of assets into qualified funds that make long-term investments in the designated underserved community. According to a recent article in Barons, the regulatory framework created by the Treasury Department to guide this program has fallen short in meeting the goals of helping communities in need. Among the shortcomings is the absence of timely disclosure and transparency which are needed to ensure that the investment dollars are supporting the community and not just serving as a tax break for the wealthy. In lieu of government-mandated disclosure, a voluntary framework has been created called the Opportunity Zones Reporting Framework. This framework was created by the US Impact Investing Alliance in partnership with the Beeck Center for Social Impact and Innovation at Georgetown University and the Community Development Finance Initiative of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in February 2019. This framework creates a set of best practices designed to achieve “positive economic and social outcomes in distressed communities. These recommendations were signed by 70 organizations. Neither the Planning Commission nor the Council has received any information about this framework. This framework needs to be discussed before we move forward with any rezoning. Without it, there will be no timely disclosure or transparency for these tax deferred funds. Another late breaking issue was receipt of email today from writer and researcher A.R. Bredenberg who brought to Council’s attention of Civil War fortifications built around Raleigh in 1863. According to Mr. Bredenberg, a significant section of these fortifications ran across the area being proposed for development. I agree with Mr. Bredenberg, that we need to ensure that this historical resource is thoroughly studied and plans for preservation are made. Finally, let us remember what Ralph Ellison wrote in 1952, “I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me. You wonder whether you aren’t simply a phantom in other people’s minds. Say, a figure in a nightmare which the sleeper tries with all his strength to destroy. It’s when you feel like this that, out of resentment, you begin to bump people back.” The Downtown South project could be a great project for Raleigh and a great project for Southeast Raleigh in particular. But so many of Raleigh’s citizens have come forward with concerns. We as a Council need to take the time to openly and transparently consider these issues and work with citizens and the developer to resolve them. To move forward with this rezoning at this time will signal that Raleigh’s citizens, especially Southeast Raleigh’s citizens, are truly invisible to the wealthy of this city. If council votes for this rezoning now, we should not be surprised when the citizens of Raleigh bump people back.

Councilor Knight read the following statement: I just came from lighting the 5th candle of the Menorah DT with Zalmy Dubinsky, Bill King & a frontline Dr, Josh Dloomy, on behalf of the city & the council. I am honored & humbled by this experience, especially b/c I’m not Jewish, but rather Christian. It was very grounding during these tough time we’re in, & reminded me that we are truly in this together—all of us—no matter ones religion, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, & at a community level—We have to figure out these tough questions together, & we have to stay engaged together, even in uncertain imperfect times & circumstances like these. I want to thank everyone for all the hard work this community has put in—the individuals, orgs, places of worship, community leaders, biz leaders, it has been imperfect but impressive to see. I’ve talked to many of you, & read your comments, & again, thank you. District E, the NW part of the city in which I represent, is far from this proposed project, but I get that this project will have impacts & consequences that will affect the whole city & beyond. The conditions that the city has obtained are the most significant we’ve ever gotten, & they should be, b/c this project is of a magnitude we’ve never seen. These conditions should be reflective of the scale & impact of the project. Could we have gotten more—unclear? Should we have gotten more—hard to say? But what I do know is that the stakeholders & the experts have been at the table & there has been ample opportunity for those paying attention & engaged in this process to take part & have their voices heard. From the beginning, I have looked at this process in 2 distinct, separate steps or phases: I have been clear, & I think other councilors have been too, that if we approve this rezoning case, that doesn’t mean this project will receive any future local public financing. That will be a separate, public, transparent & arduous process. The fact that Raleigh doesn’t even have a policy on PF is a bit amazing. I do believe that while this project may be forcing us to have this conversation now, it is past time to have it—the difficult, complicated conversation around the policies concerning Public financing. For comparison, I understand Charlotte has used TIGs 16 times already. If a TIG is what these developers think it’ll take to complete this project, we should have that conversation. Is this the first project where public financing should be part of the deal, I don’t know, but let’s have that conversation. But that is not for today, & is separate & distinct. One thing being lost in all of this recently & I’m glad Ms. McDonald & others brought it up, & that is the opportunity to build a world-class soccer stadium for our Carolina Courage—which I believe has been consistently the best professional women’s soccer team in the world, not just the country. This team & these women deserve a world class soccer stadium to play in & it to be located in Raleigh! That is all about building community bonds. This project has a long way to go, this process will continue to be done with public scrutiny, these developers reputation are on the line with their follow up & follow through, & we will hold them to their promises & commitments. If public financing is involved, we will get much more in terms of commitments & requirements. I want to say a final word of thanks to councilor Forte for all the hard work she has done working with the community & helping to bring the community more together on this issue. I don’t think this project would have the support it has w/out her. If this project or similar project was being proposed in my district, I would want to lead & have the other district counselors—if I did the work, preparation, & engagement, I would appreciate them following my lead in that I know my district the best. Everything I’ve witnessed, seen & heard, Counselor Forte has done the hard work, the deep engagement to ensure all stakeholders are being heard & responded to. I appreciate her leadership in this effort. I rode around the proposed projects sites again today, good things are going on in that part of town, & you know what, it gave me hope for the future of Raleigh—that we will survive this pandemic & these tough times together. It is our responsibility to ensure that this proposed project works with the people, neighborhoods & small businesses already there to allow this area to thrive. Another thing the lighting of the menorah reminded me is that this rezoning case is not life & death, as some have portrayed it. We are dealing w/ L&D issues right now, & this isn’t one of them. So I ask that everyone take a step back, take a deep breath, & keep this all in perspective; & most of all tomorrow let us all go back to appreciating our families & friends & being grateful for how fortunate we are to be living in this imperfect community where we can come together, argue, disagree, & yet are able to move forward to make these decisions together. Happy & safe Holidays, everyone.

Mayor Pro Tem Stewart expressed her appreciation for statements made from a visionary prospective and pointed out this a rezoning of an industrial-zoned property with minimal stormwater retention.

Mayor Baldwin expressed her appreciation for Councilor Branch’s and Councilor Knight’s remarks and made the following comments: It’s about humanity, and who we are as a city. And Southeast Raleigh, there have been a lot of promises made, and not many promises kept. And this…when I was listening to everybody today…what it comes down to for me is this is an opportunity. It’s an opportunity for jobs, it’s an opportunity for investment in the community. I have heard from Southeast Raleigh and Southwest Raleigh residents for 10 years that they want so see investment in their community. I heard somebody tonight say this is an opportunity for unity. And you know what? It is. And it’s time we all start acting like adults and we come together for the betterment of our community. Yelling at people is not the way to build community. So my commitment is going to be…after we vote on this…we bring people together, and I am going to insist that the developers so the same. I see this as an opportunity to create the future. In today’s editorial in the N & O they told us to slow down, but they also said that I needed to be the mayor of the future; and that’s what I’m going to do, because this is going to build a future for Corey’s little girl, his nieces and nephews, for all of us, for our kids, for those who need our help the most. We have an opportunity here for workforce development, MWBE inclusion, improvements in stormwater, affordable housing, respect for nature. The team that has been assembled—LeVelle Moton, James Montague, C. J. Mann, Brenda—these are people who are really well-respected in our community, and people believe in them. They give me the trust that I need that they will care about our community and support our community, ensure public trust. So I am ready, like Corey, to move forward on this project.

Councilor Forte made the following comments: Thank you for everyone who has participated in this process. I, like every other member of Council, have gone through all the emails, gotten all the correspondence, and I probably had a little different experience because I have been in a ton of community meetings; a lot of zoom meetings, a lot of virtual meetings, having conversations with people who support the project and people who oppose the project. Certainly, it is not 100% percent perfect as a lot of folks have said, and I’ll echo those sentiments. But again, I, you know, would like to thank Councilor Branch for his comments, it’s a lot of what I’ve been thinking. Thank you, Councilor Knight and Councilor Stewart, for your comments as well. Thank you for the conversations, Councilor Buffkin, because there’s been a lot to explore. And certainly, I will say I appreciate the City Manager and the City Attorney clarifying what we’re voting on tonight, because one of the biggest challenges that I face is a lot of folks having miscommunication and misunderstanding about what we’re doing tonight. What we’re not doing tonight is approving public funding, tax incentives, or anything those lines, but a lot of people believe that’s what’s happening with this rezoning case, and that’s far from what’s happening, and many folks have said that’s a different conversation. And my personal opinion is that it’s going to be a very long conversation; there is a lot to work through before you can commit public money, and it’s not just the City, it’s also going to involve our partners with the County. So those are going to be some very protracted conversations, in my mind. Again, the word that’s been floated through some of the constituents and through the mayor tonight is “opportunity”, and that seems to be the word that’s sticking out for so many of us. In this particular project, which is in District D, there are a couple of things which I will say I find positive about this project. First and foremost, a lot of people have said that the developers are not engaging with the community. I certainly find that to be not necessarily an accurate statement. And the reason I say that is that I know constituents in my district that have direct conversations with the developer, and from those conversations we’ve gotten commitments to have more community meetings more frequently as the project moves forward. There has been conversations with Partners for Economic Justice…excuse me, Environmental Justice…which resulted in some additional stormwater conditions that were not on the table or not present during the original application. The developers have also gone through the process of inviting community partners in—and you’ve heard from all of them tonight: LeVelle Moton, Tyrell Midgett, Clarence Mann, James Montague, Wanda Montague—have all grown up in Southeast Raleigh. Folks in the community know them; they know the work that they’ve done through community work as well as their professional work with folks in Southeast Raleigh. Folks have said—to them, have said to me, have said to many of us on Council—their participation in the project gives them a level of trust that they did not have when this project was initially introduced to the general public. I think that’s a very positive, but very substantial and substantive step. Those folks have put their reputations on the line to join as a partnership with this particular project because they know how important it is to have a seat at the table and do be able to participate in the process of this project moving forward. Most importantly, I believe those folks will act in a way that is, first and foremost, transparent. But as you’ve heard, with a passion of Coach Moton, if there is a problem, you can definitely, to use an athletic reference, you can trust him to call a time out and blow the whistle. If there is something that needs to be corrected, he and the rest of the team will not allow things to move forward that’s not in the best interest of the community. Certainly you’ve got B. L. Wall Consulting, Bridgette Wall coming on board who’s got more than 20 years of service in terms of working with small, minority-owned businesses, and certainly she’s…I feel confident that she’s going to lay out a plan to make sure there is a lot of diversity and inclusion in this project. You also heard from Dennis Gaddy, who’s going to be a partner on a program. And talking about something that’s very important; we’ve heard a lot of elected officials talk about banding the box and helping folks who are coming out of prison have an opportunity to get reestablished and have employment opportunities. This team has brought in a person who’s got that skillset to work with some of our most marginalized folks who will be transitioning out of facilities or coming off of probation or whatever and need an opportunity to get themselves reestablished in the community. So, we hear a lot about what this project is not doing, we hear a lot about what the developers are not doing, but I do think it’s important to talk about some of the steps they have taken that are positive. There are some of the things that they are going to be doing. And that’s one of the things that I find favorable about the project. But to be quite honest, the biggest influence on me has been having conversations with folks who live close to the project in District D. And certainly I’ve got folks in the district who are not supportive of the project, I’ve heard from them, listened to them quite a bit, understand some of their concerns. But the flip side of that is I’ve heard a lot from folks who are in close proximity to the project who—as some of the Council members have stated and as some of the folks who called in tonight have indicated—they want to see something happen with this particular project. They are very concerned that if this project does not move forward, what comes in the interim. They want to see development. These folks are favorable to having increased density, they understand the importance of having more density for the city of Raleigh, particularly if we are going to attract larger companies to come in and relocate here. They know we need the density for employees to have a place to live. And for a lot of the folks in the area, they want walkable retail. They want more retail options. Some of these people drive to other municipalities, other sides of town to do shopping because they don’t find there’s a lot of retail opportunities available for them in their community. So they are very excited about having that as a prospect. And one of the youngest constituents is a 5-year-old who said I want to have more things in my community. More things that I can access and have more opportunities. And so for me, listening to the folks in the district who are going to be closely impacted by the project and getting their thumbs-up or their approval to move forward, is very, very important because those are going to be the people who are most closely impacted by the project. Again, for the folks who oppose it, I don’t feel like we haven’t heard your concerns. And I would echo the mayor’s sentiments to the developers and their team; please continue to engage the community, please continue to move forward with working out additional issues as it relates to…is there some flexibility for more affordable housing. I the folks that are participating on that team will be having those conversations with the developer. Certainly, everybody’s going to be keeping an eye on the stormwater and the environmental issues as it relates to the project. And so I do want folks to understand that we’ve heard those issues, we feel like the developers heard those issues. But at this particular time, the project seems to have more support in favor it than folks that are opposing it. And so, at this particular time, I’ll make a motion if there are no other comments to be addressed.

Motion to Approve and Vote

Councilor Forte moved to adopt the following Consistency Statement dated December 15, 2020 contained in the agenda materials and to approve the zoning amendment with the adopted and effective dates described in the Recommended Action. This approval is also deemed an amendment to the 2030 Comprehensive Plan and the Future Land Use Map, to the extent described in the adopted Consistency Statement.

After considering the policies, maps, and other materials included as a part of the comprehensive plan, the Council determines that the proposed zoning amendment is CONSISTENT with the Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans, INCONSISTENT with the Future Land Map, but the request should be APPROVED.

This approval is also deemed an amendment to:


 * 1) the relevant Comprehensive Plan Policies, as to the subject property only and, in addition, only if the property is developed in accordance with the approved ordinance: and
 * 2) the Future Land Use Map as to the subject property located in the southwest quadrant of I-40 and S. Saunders Street only, from Office/Research & Development to Regional Mixed Use.

The action taken is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is reasonable and in the public interest because the request will create an expansive urban environment proximate to planned BRT service, on mostly vacant land which will create opportunities for housing and employment; requires Green Stormwater Infrastructures and other measures to protect the Walnut Creek Corridor; and provides for much needed affordable housing.

Her motion was seconded by Councilor Branch and a roll call vote resulted in all Council members voting in the affirmative except Councilor Cox who voted in the negative. Mayor Baldwin ruled the motion adopted on a 7-1 vote.

Tax Increment Grant Policy

In the months following the approval of Z-13-20, rumors circulated that Kane Realty was requesting a TIG from both the city of Raleigh and Wake County as a means to avoid paying the full amount of property taxes, the costs of which would likely increase due to their development. In 2007, Kane sought tax increment financing from the city claiming it was needed for the development to occur. Kane’s request was ultimately denied and North Hills continued development contrary to Kane’s previous assertions4. On May 18, 2021, the Raleigh City Council approved a Tax Increment Grant which would allow the city to pay back up to 2% of the annual property tax valuation (about $5 million as of 2021) in property taxes to private developers that secured a TIG agreement from the city. Like rezoning cases, each TIG agreement would be assessed on a case-by-case basis, meaning the Council could award the full $5 million to a single developer, such as Kane Realty. Shortly after approving the TIG policy, which would reduce property tax costs of private developers by $5 million, the Council passes the FY 2021-22 budget with a 1.78 cent per $100 value property tax increase to raise $7.6 million they claimed was needed to fund affordable housing and Parks Maintenance. Opponents of the budget asked that the TIG policy be scrapped and property taxes only be raised 0.61 cents per $100 value. This increase would raise $2.6 million for affordable housing and parks maintenance, while the additional $5 million would come from the amount earmarked for TIG agreements.

The Role of CAC Disbandment

In February 2020 citizens’ advisory councils were disbanded by City Council citing lack of participation and a need for a new model of community engagement. Opponents to CAC disbandment argue that CAC leadership had reached out to City Council to work towards improving community participation, and to disband CACs without a suitable replacement prepared was irresponsible and deliberately negligent. City Council proceeded to hire an outside consultant, Mickey Fearn, who brought a recommendation to Council 15 months later to establish neighborhood enrichment units (NEUs). CACs claimed Fearn’s proposed NEUs are CACs by another name, CAC 2.0, and that City Council wasted more than $70,000 and 15 months to hire someone to essentially tell them to reinstate CACs and build upon the CAC model, something CACs had advocated for since 2019. Many residents in Raleigh speculate the true intent of disbanding CACs was to streamline the process of rezoning cases for private developers such as Z-13-20. Prior to CAC disbandment, rezoning cases were required to meet with CACs to discuss the impact of the project on nearby residents. After the discussions were completed, CACs would take a non-binding vote of their recommendation, whether to approve or deny the rezoning case. Some residents claim that Mayor Baldwin wanted to rubber stamp rezoning cases for developers that had contributed to her campaign and disbanding CACs was a part of that effort.

Critiques of Z-13-20

Many opponents of Z-13-20 have stated they are not opposed to development, but that this particular development needed improved conditions given its scope and location. One such demand is treatment of 100% of stormwater runoff instead of only requiring the first 1.34 inches of stormwater run-off to be treated. In Raleigh, the 10-year storm is reached if 1.25 inches of rain falls in 15 minutes. However, with the current frequency of Hurricanes and Tropical Storms, the historical data no longer accurately reflects the size of storm events going forward9. On June 9th, 2021, the Center for Biological Diversity announced the Carolina madtom is now on the federal Endangered Species list. The Carolina madtom occurs only in the Neuse and Tar River basins, according to the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission. It is the only madtom native to North Carolina. Runoff, sediment and other byproducts of urbanization and industrialized livestock farms have degraded the water quality in most of these streams10. Additionally, The Neuse River waterdog, an aquatic salamander found only in the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico river basins of North Carolina, is now listed as threatened. It has been eliminated from 35% of its range, according to the Center for Biological Diversity. The waterdog is very sensitive to pollution and changes in its habitat, which can occur from runoff attributed to logging, industrialized livestock farms, as well as development. An additional 25% of the Neuse River waterdog’s historical streams are in such poor condition that the waterdog is unlikely to survive there. The most significant declines have occurred in the Neuse River near Raleigh10.

Another criticism leveled against Z-13-20 is that the conditions for affordable housing are token measures that will do very little to address the growing homelessness crisis in Raleigh. Z-13-20 specifies that 10% of the up to 999 residential units to be built should be designated as affordable housing targeting 80% AMI for 5 years8. Opponents of Z-13-20 say that a more comprehensive mixed income housing model should be pursued in order to justifiably provide public benefit, and that affordable housing should be provided for the lifetime of the development, not a mere 5 years. One proposed model includes 20% of units targeting residents 30% and below AMI, 20% of units targeting 31-50% AMI, 15% of units targeting 51-70% AMI, 15% of units targeting 71-80% AMI, and the remaining 30% to be used for market rate housing. Proponents of such a mixed income housing model argue that increasing the number of units allocated for affordable housing and expanding the scope of target %AMI would be a more equitable housing solution and more accurately represent the demographics of Raleigh’s population. Other residents argue that such a mixed-income housing model cannot be entrusted to a private developer, and that the city should instead form a local housing authority that provides social housing to any resident, and the housing costs should be adjusted to their income, similar to the social housing model implemented in Vienna Austria11. Such a program would need to have elected representatives overseeing the administration of the housing program to ensure accountability to the community and maintenance of high-quality housing. Regardless of the housing model, many advocates for housing justice in Raleigh share concerns that current trends in Council rezoning decisions not only enable, but advance gentrification and displacement of Raleigh’s low-income residents. Additional concerns about gentrification and displacement of Raleigh residents include the prospect of police violence against tenants being evicted by private landlords.

Additional concerns regarding Z-13-20 include increases in maximum building height which would affect the quality of living conditions for nearby residents, and the need for improvements to city infrastructure to address the already congested traffic and rising number of vehicle accidents. It was revealed in a Parks, Recreation, and Greenway Advisory Board meeting that the Parks department was being asked to fund a city infrastructure project for the Dix conservancy because city infrastructure wasn’t being adequately funded12. Finally, many residents are skeptical that another sports complex for local soccer teams would provide justifiable public benefit given that the city is facing a homelessness crisis, a lack of funding for city infrastructure, and inadequate stormwater runoff treatment.

(1)     John Kane Net Worth (2021) – wallmine.com https://wallmine.com/people/16618/john-m-kane (accessed 2021 -05 -15).

(2)     Airport, R.-D. I. New Board Leadership Begins Tenure at Raleigh-Durham Airport Authority https://www.rdu.com/new-board-leadership-begins-tenure-at-raleigh-durham-airport-authority-2/ (accessed 2021 -05 -15).

(3)     Tauss, L. A Year After RDU Lease Land for a Controversial Quarry, Activists Are Still Fighting to Stop It https://indyweek.com/api/content/129095c6-5d7b-11ea-8790-1244d5f7c7c6/ (accessed 2021 -05 -15).

(4)     WRAL. Meeker: North Hills Doesn’t Deserve Public Funding : https://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1710475/ (accessed 2021 -05 -16).

(5)     Influential N.C. Sports Execs: Steve Malik. Business North Carolina, 2019.

(6)     East End Market. Barnhill Contracting Company.

(7)     Tauss, J. C. B., Leigh. Everything You Need to Know About the Money Race for Raleigh City Council https://indyweek.com/api/content/5514d7c2-b2ea-11e9-bd90-12f1225286c6/ (accessed 2021 -05 -30).

(8)     BoardDocs® Plus https://go.boarddocs.com/nc/raleigh/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=A4EMF95B00BF (accessed 2021 -06 -19).

(9)     NC DEQ: Flooding Guidance https://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/energy-mineral-land-resources/energy-mineral-land-rules/stormwater-program/flooding-guidance (accessed 2021 -06 -20).

(10)     North Carolina has a newly designated endangered species, which is nothing to be proud of http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2021/06/10/north-carolina-has-a-newly-designated-endangered-species-which-is-nothing-to-be-proud-of/ (accessed 2021 -06 -20).

(11)     Merrifield, W.; attorney. How European-Style Public Housing Could Help Solve The Affordability Crisis https://www.npr.org/local/305/2020/02/25/809315455/how-european-style-public-housing-could-help-solve-the-affordability-crisis (accessed 2021 -06 -20).

(12)     City of Raleigh. Raleigh Parks, Recreation and Greenway Advisory Board Meeting - March 18, 2021; 2021.