Whew! My view to the North is preserved!
The phase 3 rezoning hits the Growth and Natural Resources Committee again on June 12.
http://go.boarddocs.com/nc/raleigh/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=BCVSBR59BC45
6 Likes
Thank you Leo!
IYO why āagainā?
It first went to this committee on May 29 so the issue is āstuckā (as I like to call it) here still.
based on the kind of incoherent ramble by Russ Stephenson, looks like he wants to put all development on hold until there are some sort of rules requiring affordable housing by developers.
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article231262578.html
At least Dickie Thompson called him out on it.
3 Likes
I feel the council has heard, loud and clear, that Raleigh wants more affordable housing options. Fine.
The problem is that council is trying to force it into current projects, which delays things, and creates a toxic development business culture, makes us unfriendly to developers. That can hurt too. (and hurts housing prices as they keep going up cause we donāt get the supply we need)
The council needs to take a step back and work on an affordable housing plan as well as be mature enough to review current projects with the current standards and policies in place. Once a strategy to get more affordable housing built in the city is in place, then they have something to review against rather than these āfeelingsā that things are too tall or too expensive.
Beating that horse again but letās get out the vote everyone!
16 Likes
Isnāt it technically illegal to require developers to include affordable housing options in their projects? I mean Iām sure there are ways to try to skirt it by making it hard for developers to get necessary approvals without it, but I think Chapel Hill tried something like that in the last few years and it hasnāt worked very well.
There are a myriad of options to address affordable housing solutions (Mary-Ann Baldwin posted some ideas to her campaign website recently), but holding up new development while they āfigure it outā is short-sighted and about as un-progressive as it comes.
ETA: Hereās an article about Chapel Hillās efforts to get developers to include affordable housing into new developments: Eight Years Ago, Chapel Hill Enacted the Most Progressive Affordable Housing Policy in the Triangle. Hereās How It Failed. - INDY Week
5 Likes
She also tweeted that itās illegal and is expecting a lawsuit. Not sure how serious she was about expecting a lawsuit but point received. There will be plenty of options for affordable housing after these current developments IF we properly construct a program FOR affordable housing. Youāre not benefiting any agenda (except NIMBY) by putting these requests on hold.
1 Like
I donāt know exactly what the nuances are between what is legal and illegal (would love to hear from someone else that knows more about it) but from what I am observing is that the council wants to use a rezoning as a reward for developers to āvolunteerā affordable housing. This tactic is legal.
It also sounds like extortion to me.
9 Likes
This type of extortion is common in the triangle from what Iāve seen. You can make it legal as long as you require them to sign a zoning application stating that itās a voluntarily accepted condition.
Donāt they use that kind of extortion to get developers to add lanes to roads, esp in NRal? I think its a common practice in places where there is a lot of development pressure. In contrast, my little town will pretty much wave anything, including your taxes for years to come, if youāll build here.
2 Likes
This affordable housing issue is infuriating to me. Because the council hasnāt done THEIR job with OUR money they are trying to force developers to do it. If I were rich I would run a full page ad in the N&O or lease a few billboards to let citizens know what some of our council members are up to. Even folks in non-downtown areas should careā¦increase the tax base and not the tax rate. I understand forcing developers to add lanes to roads to handle the traffic into the specific development. Thatās fine. But forcing (or even dangling it out there) a developer to have affordable housing has nothing to do with the impact to the city. I read where Kane said that he canāt add this as he wouldnāt be able to get his investors to buy into it.
4 Likes
Maybe Kane and some other wealthy developers should start funding pro development campaigns. I feel like most of the voters I see for city elections are old people who never even go downtown, and probably vote because they know a name of an incumbent and read something about them standing up to developers and fighting all those big city things.
Iād like to some actual campaigning that engages the general public and points out how restricting downtown development drives down housing supply and encourages sprawl and traffic.
6 Likes
Maybe a non-profit that can head up efforts like this. Iām sure youād find very interested donors in no time.
Feels too much like lobbying of which I am no fan. I want to take out a billboard! Lol.
1 Like
If they just would have found a way to get some decent impact fees that would have worked too. Graduated impact fees might be something to consider too though admittedly I havenāt thought it through soā¦
1 Like
