Welcome everybody to the public comments.

Councilor Patton is likely excused for the whole evening, and I believe that Councillor Fort will be here as will Counselor Branch, but we have five, so we will start.

And we have Miss Rainey first on the agenda.

Good afternoon.

I'm here voicing a big concern that I have.

Can you hear me now?

Can you hear?

Yeah, I think now we can.

Yeah.

Nanny can hear me.

Okay, okay.

Um, I have been talking to staff, and I had a meeting with the Housing and Development Director a month ago.

And I asked her about the sign on the corner of Raleigh Boulevard and Newbert Avenue, and I asked her why College Park was not added to that sign.

And I'll tell you what she told me.

She said, Well, I tell you, there's been some problems about crime and crime in the neighborhood in the past.

Not no one who's been fighting since 1972.

So she was talking to the wrong, wrong person.

And I resent that statement, and I kept it to myself for about a month, but that ain't right.

That ain't right.

And I'm not playing with her.

Second, when Larry Job was supposed to plan and director, he had a list of things that he said he was going to do for College Park.

So far, that list has not been taken care of, Michelle.

It has not.

So when they moved it to the corner of Fisher Street, I asked Larry, I said, are you gonna put our sign up there saying this was built in 1969?

He said, I tell you, yes, I am.

What is wrong with that picture?

See, something is wrong here when staff tell you to your face, make comments to you that it's insulting and to be a director of a department, housing and neighborhood service, Janet, I got some serious issues about their bond, and we need to talk.

We need to talk.

Because if I got a director who can sit in my face and tell me some stuff like that, and you talking about a housing bond, oh no, no, no, no, no.

That ain't going down.

That ain't going down.

Another thing I want to talk about.

Corey, the issue in Riley North need to be dealt with because it's headed.

It is headed to be a racial.

Y'all need to thank you.

Eugene Myrick.

He's in here.

Okay.

Keisha Monk.

Good evening, everyone.

You know, when I first started participating in public comment, I was honestly impressed.

Residents showed up with bold signs and creative visuals and powerful presentations that help both you all and the public better understand community concerns.

And it really mattered because you know, visual presentations aren't just props, right?

Residents prepare them for you all, but they can also be incredibly helpful to the community as well, both inside this chamber and online.

So a few years back, I videotaped the concerns of an elderly homebound neighbor who physically couldn't come to the chamber himself.

And because of that video, his voice was still heard.

And then the rules changed.

Because as the media became more present in this room, the city decided that sign sizes needed to be reduced.

And around that time, I remember being stopped at security for wielding a dangerous weapon.

What was that?

A sign made of regular copy paper.

Yes, I was denied entry because the edges of the paper were too sharp.

And I would show you the encounter caught on video, but I can't because video presentations are banned now.

And uh image presentations are no longer allowed in the chamber as well.

And while I understand concerns about inappropriate content, presentations were already submitted in advance for review.

The city had the ability to approve or deny content individually, which, let's be honest, were super minimal.

Instead, the decision was made to restrict everyone, and then came the tiered speaking system during public comment.

And I get it if 150 people show up, you guys would be here for hours.

But if the maximum amount of people show up, but only 15, I'm sorry, if a hundred and fifty people sign up but only 15 show up, those 15 residents are still locked into the least amount of time to speak.

Outside of this chamber, engagement continues to shrink.

The community engagement board disappeared, CACs returned, yes, but with far less influence than they used to have.

Comments are disabled on the city's YouTube page, and when there's a public hearing, if you're lucky enough to run into one of those yard signs while driving down the street, the QR code sometimes will lead you to nowhere.

So here's where I'm concerned, and here's what I begin to ask myself are we truly being engaged, or are we just being tolerated?

Because while those roadblocks have weakened the public participation system, development continues to accelerate, rezoning cases move quickly, densities expanding rapidly, and communities are left trying to fight for visibility, and fewer and fewer tools are available.

So here's my call to action.

Reevaluate these restrictions, please.

Restore reasonable visual presentation tools, strengthen the CACs with real influence.

Because we're your part.

Good evening.

I'm John Sequera, Executive Director of Citizens for Safe and Secure Raleigh, uh citizens group advocating for public safety.

I'd like to thank Mayor Cowell, Mayor Pro Tem Harrison, Councilmember Sport, Silver Branch, and Melton, along with City Manager Marshall Adams David for supporting Chief Rico Boyce and the Raleigh Police Department and for improving police compensation in the 2026 budget.

In recent polling, 85% of Raleigh citizens across all demographic groups support increased funding of Raleigh police.

So as we enter the 2027 budget cycle, I'm here to encourage continued investment in public safety.

While Raleigh's crime statistics have improved in some areas, recent high-profile incidents of violent crime remind us that we cannot take our eye off of public safety.

A safe city depends on a fully staffed and supported police department, and RPD still faces significant staffing challenges with roughly 80 uh vacancies among its 798 approved officer positions.

Recruitment efforts are making progress, but recruitment alone is not enough if experienced officers continue leaving for surrounding departments.

At the same pace, we add new officers.

Without retention, we're simply trying to fill a leaky bucket.

The clearest way to improve retention is to ensure officer pay keeps pace with both the cost of living and the compensation offered by neighboring departments competing for the same talent pool.

Beyond the obvious, I encourage the council to consider additional retention tools as well, including expanded access to take-home vehicles for officers living outside Raleigh and Wake County.

Of the roughly 70 officer resignations over the past year, nearly half cited take-home vehicles at other departments as a key factor in their decision to leave.

Financially, this deserves consideration.

Recruiting, training, and ramping a new officer takes about two years, costing the city nearly $200,000 when salary benefits, training, and lost productivity are considered.

In comparison, a fleet vehicle that may avoid the need for that expense costs approximately $60,000.

There are operational efficiency benefits as well.

Officers with take-home vehicles can often respond more quickly and remain available for service during times otherwise spent commuting to and from a fleet facility.

Beyond RPD, I also encourage the council to consider a contribution to the Wake County District Attorney's Office as requested by incoming DA Wiley Nickel to help fill vacancies in the roles needed to efficiently prosecute criminals apprehended by RPD and strengthening the broader public safety continuum.

I recognize this is a difficult budget environment that requires tough decisions.

But even in the midst of those decisions, I urge you to keep public safety resources a priority.

Our officers and the citizens of Raleigh deserve it.

Thank you.

Okay, uh Yolanda Smith.

Good evening.

My name is Yolanda Smith, and I'm here to present 706 Tyler Road in Capitol Heights as a dangerous experimental model of what happens when blanket transit policy ignores neighborhood reality.

This seven-unit project on a.2-acre residential lot is a test case that proved that our current frequent transit rules are broken.

It towers over neighbors and occupies nearly every square foot of land by passing the very conservation standards the city promised to uphold.

The most alarming result of this experiment is the threat to public safety.

Tyler Road is a narrow residential street with no sidewalks.

We are a neighborhood of families pushing strollers and walking dogs in the middle of the road.

By allowing seven units with zero on-site parking, you are forcing 12 or more cars into a narrow street.

When car parks on both sides, you are creating a choke point that is hostile to pedestrians and potentially catastrophic for emergent emergency access.

We cannot prioritize developers' square footage over the ability of an emergency truck to reach a home.

The planning department claims the transit overlay unlocks this density, but the developer is exploiting a dangerous loophole because our NCOD specifically addresses the load size.

They're claiming the in-field compatibility setbacks that protect our streetscape no longer applying.

This is a bad face interpretation of the law.

The NCOD was meant to add protections, not to strip them away.

The city shouldn't be able to turn off our safety rules just to build more units.

Right now, there is a total lack of oversight that favors development.

Bottom lines.

Bottom lines over the safety of the people walking on Tyler Street.

I'm asking this council to direct stuff to reconsider how the TOD is applied.

We need a case by case evaluation process for TOD projects in established neighborhoods.

Density bonus should be only granted if one reliable high transit, high frequency transit is already operational on that specific corridor.

Two, the project is legally bound to provide actual warranty affordable housing.

And three, a safety audit confirms the street can accommodate emergency vehicles and safe walking.

Really needs a smart growth, but blanket policies that ignore.

Thank you.

Helen Tart.

She is here.

Good evening.

I am I'm here to support the people on Tyler Strait, but I realize that that building is built, but it's happening all over that neighborhood.

And I something needs to be done about the transit overlay and the missing middle.

What was it in the sketchy neighborhood?

And we got together and we did a lot of things to make it a better neighborhood when it turns out that ends up making it hard to afford to live there, and hard to um find yourself surrounded by castles, as opposed to houses, and find yourself competing for resources with people that make five times what you make.

And something you need to do, take another look at missing middle and because um we uh uh it's not working.

And um, and one last thing I wanted to say about the comprehensive plan is that we in '99, we had a high limitation of forty-two feet for our NCOD.

And somehow or another, after the comprehensive plan came into place, that went away.

We still have the minimum and a maximum lot sizes.

But so I would warn people to be very careful when this new comprehensive plan comes in and they start turning it into the um Azure code because things get missed and things get changed, and you have to watch very closely.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Tim Niles.

Mayor, members of council, I'm Tim Niles, and I'm speaking on behalf of Livable Raleigh.

We want our city to be affordable for people at all income levels.

As you know right now it isn't.

By your staff's count, 51,000 households in Raleigh are cost-burdened, meaning they spend more than one third of their income to find housing.

And that's just the folks who still live here.

It doesn't count those who've been pushed out to somewhere else already.

Twenty-seven thousand Raleigh households spend half or more of their income on housing.

You know this too, of course, and you know the problem is getting worse.

The city's efforts to bridge the affordability gap have been swamped by the rise in housing costs and the teardowns of older affordable homes.

Two months ago, Livable Raleigh presented a plan to do better.

The key elements are put an affordable housing bond issue on the ballot of at least 200 million dollars.

In other words, almost as much as the bond issue for parks two years ago.

Be more ambitious than the 80 million bond from six years ago.

Our proposal was the same as the one by one wake, 200 million or more.

Also, we ask that you not put the entire cost of doing better on Raleigh taxpayers.

We'll do our share.

It's only fair that the development industry be asked to step up too.

Developers reap large profits with each rezoning case you approve.

Maybe they build a project, maybe they just flip the land and reap the gain.

But either way, every rezoning approved is worth millions to them or tens of millions.

It's real money, and it could and should be shared with those in need.

In other words, developers would join with taxpayers to address a housing crisis that is, after all, a product of the fact that they build lots of luxury housing, but not much else.

This is this the industry refuses to do except in a very few cases, and in those few cases, their contribution to affordable housing is not commensurate with the increase in monetary value they are given by you and us.

Developers do not include affordable homes or rental units in most of their big rezoning cases.

They could, they don't.

Would doing so cut into their profits?

Yes, it would.

We understand that.

The question we ask is why are taxpayers expected to reach into their pockets for affordable housing regardless of their ability to pay.

But developers, why are they not expected to contribute a portion of the profits we gave to them?

Thus far, your response has been a 101 million dollar housing bond.

It's a disappointing effort.

As for developers, they aren't being asked for anything.

Please do better.

I send each of you a link to our full affordable housing agenda.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Donna Bailey.

Good evening, I'm Donna Bailey.

I'm also representing Livable Raleigh this evening.

I want to start by underscoring what Tim Niles just said.

The proposal for a hundred and one million dollar housing bond is very disappointing.

Adjusted for inflation, it's less than the $80 million bond from six years ago.

We need to have more affordable housing, not less.

We are long overdue when it comes to our development industry chipping in their fair share.

How many times do we have to hear our council members say we just can't make industry do that?

It's your job to remind developers that you can and should reject rezoning cases that don't have sufficient public benefit.

This is wholly your discretion.

This is where you hope your power.

Contributions to affordable housing are a crucial public benefit that we need and that developers can offer.

I have a suggestion, and it won't cost you anything.

What I suggest is that you, as a council, engage with the problem of housing affordability and start figuring out how to do more.

What do I mean by engage?

Start with a vote.

Vote to assign this issue to a council committee.

Tell the committee to study what the rest of the world is doing.

Meet with the public and the industry and staff and listen and learn.

And come back to us with new ideas and a new commitment to move forward as a city where we can all work and live together.

We keep being told we that can't be done.

Let's figure out what can be done.

What could we do with a bigger bond?

What can developers do in a rezoning case to add to our affordable housing stock?

Why is missing middle, which was supposed to help us, giving us more teardowns, more gentrification, but less affordability.

How is Portland, Oregon doing this right, but not us?

They're a perfect example.

Talk about gentrification and what happens to Raleigh if only the wealthy can afford to live here, which is what's happening right now.

You have four standing council committees, but they're not allowed to meet unless you're given you've given them an assignment.

That's a rule you've all set.

So we have four committees, but not one of them are authorized to discuss affordable housing.

My request is that you assign the topic to affordable housing to one of the standing committees or create a new committee.

In other words, do something.

Raleigh is becoming a city for the wealthy only.

Is that what we want?

It's what we'll get if we stay on the same slow course, falling farther and farther behind every year.

Um I do want to invite you, Liverpool Raleigh is having a community conversation on Thursday, June 3rd at 7 p.m.

at Tarborough Road.

Thank you.

Mayor, Council members, appearances are often fatal illusions.

They hide dark truth behind polished images.

As it is written, even Satan himself was an angel of light.

You see the ads, you see the clean trucks, you see the smiles, you see a system that looks strong, but behind the doors of solid waste services, there are years of heartache, years of lies, years of betrayal, manipulation, false accusations, suffering stacked on suffering.

Leadership says this is a curing workplace, but they say this job has your back.

As the workers, they will tell you walking into this job each day feels like walking into death.

That is the truth.

Now let's talk about ethics.

The city speaks on ethics, it promotes ethics, it teaches ethics, but inside this department, ethics are not practice.

Friends and family sit in leadership roles.

Power stays in the same hands.

Workers who do not fit the narrative are targeted, pushed aside, or retaliated against.

This is not ethical.

This is controlled access to power.

The city talks about diversity, it talks about equity, but workers are not getting a fair shake.

Opportunity is not equal.

Advancement is not equal.

Treatment is not equal, and people see it.

There are individuals sitting in interim roles for years, not stepping up, not stepping down.

Why?

Because staying in this space benefits them.

They get extra pay for doing nothing while the same workers who keep the city running are not even told these opportunities exist.

While these same workers who are pushed off the clock, hours cut, time taken, understand this.

This is not management.

This is mismanagement.

This is exploitation.

They take from the worker and give to themselves.

They drain the very people who hold the city together, and they expect us to smile while they do it.

This is not sustainable.

This is not just, and it will not last.

We have raised concerns for years and years, and the root of the problem is still standing untouched, unmoved, unchallenged.

But let me make something clear.

There will come a day when the disguise of the angel of light is removed, and what is hidden will be exposed.

On that day.

Our words would not stay in rooms like this.

They will reach the public, they will reach every corner of the city.

They will carry names, facts, and truth that cannot be ignored, solid or rewritten.

So hit this now.

This department has become something it should never have been.

A system that takes more from its workers than it gives, a system where truth is punished, a system where power protects itself.

That is corruption.

And corruption does not fix itself.

It must be exposed.

And while we have a promising new leader at the top, many bad apples remain beneath her, and something needs to be done about it.

You have a choice, uncover the truth now while you still control the outcome or face it later when the state gets involved and the truth controls you.

Thank you.

Next we have the Lorax.

Mayor Cow and City Council.

I am the Lorax.

Please heed my wood counsel.

I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongue.

And I bring you the voices of thousands among a forest of signatures will come your way to heal the scarred earth and bring a greener day.

This is not about what is, it's about what can become a vibrant tree canopy to grow 24,000 strong.

City of Oaks, grow them with care, give them clean water, and feed them fresh air.

Unless, unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is going to get better.

It's not, but today is the day you can set things right for trees, for the creatures, and all Raleigh ice.

Thank you.

Appreciate the extra effort there.

All right, Mamakai Sanders.

You get to follow that.

Take a deep breath.

Good evening, y'all.

It's another amazing day in paradise.

Thank you guys for your service and for being here for listening.

Um, I come with a very different message from the Lorax, but um, I mean, in line, 100%.

We need the trees, those are so important.

Um, 24,000 by 2032, right?

Um, but my message actually has to do, my thoughts actually have to do with the affordable housing bond.

And I speak about this as an unhoused mom living in our car.

Our car is actually sitting on the side of a road right now because it's it stopped working on Friday.

And I actually hate this idea.

Um, it comes from a lot of people with good hearts.

I realize that, but it doesn't meet the need.

And having just spent last week receiving text messages from a person who had to leave their apartment because they couldn't find how they couldn't find a job to continue the lifestyle they had lived.

What went through um 16 months of being unhoused, staying at the healing transitions for women facility just as a shelter, and now moving into affordable housing, um, where she feels unsafe.

Brand new Newburn crossings, but she's dealing with some mental illness, very serious mental illness that probably um was disguised before she became unhoused, but became very evident because of all the traumas she endured in the facility.

Because I heard about all that too.

And so affordable housing concentrates poverty.

And if we want to talk numbers, let's talk numbers for just a moment.

If these churches and these citizens are so concerned, let's talk numbers.

If you take and pay for a family to live in an apartment that costs $2,000 a month, which is high for Raleigh, it will cost $24,000 in one year.

For $2.4 million, you can house a hundred families.

2.4.

You would hit function functional zero is what it's called for families with children.

Now we're talking about Miss Octavia talked about the the challenges our youth had ECA CEC meeting, just talk.

You know, when we don't focus our efforts on our children, they look for things to make people pay attention to them.

All these children that are going through the services or are stuck at the shelter, some of them not even getting in at night at the family shelter because it's so inundated with need.

Those are traumas that will eventually come out in their behavior later.

And so when you're not actually addressing the problem, the problem isn't affordable housing.

The problem is we have plenty of housing.

And so just understand that the housing can be afforded.

It doesn't necessarily need to be afforded by the people who need it.

There are plenty of people in this city that could come together and make it possible.

Thank you.

Robert Scherer.

Good evening.

I'm here to uh talk about the proposed bicycle lane improvements.

Okay, air quotes to that, to Fairclaw Street.

And uh I'm uh Raleigh resident.

Family moved here in 77.

I've lived on Fairclaw Street for 15 years now, so I've had a good opportunity to observe the street and the way that changes in Raleigh have kind of made a lot of changes in Fairclaw Street.

Uh it's an extension of Corman Street, runs between Hillsborough Street and Wade Avenue.

It's a bordered entirely on the west side by Meredith College and entirely on the east side by my neighborhood.

Now we're being offered uh a double bike lane on the west side that is going to be separated by a media.

We currently have a single non-separated bike lane on the west side and one on my side.

As part of the plan, the bike lane on my side on the neighborhood side is going to be eliminated.

Uh I am concerned about a number of things about this project, and also about how uh the amount of uh communication and the way the communication was uh provided uh leading up to this project, but my main concerns are safety concerns.

Uh Raleigh specifies four to six feet of buffer between the sidewalk and the travel lanes uh we currently have less than three feet.

Um, and as a person who takes care of the grass trip up there, I'm often up uh very near the traffic, and I can tell you that even with the four foot buffer of the bike lane, uh I feel like I take my wife in my hands when I'm standing up there.

I cannot imagine what that's gonna be like when that buffer goes away.

Uh, there are lots of people that use that sidewalk uh from the neighborhood in both directions on bikes as well uh as pedestrians.

Uh the bike lane is used very much by our neighborhood.

Uh, it is not going to be adequately replaced by a separated bike lane across the road.

Um there's a lot more I could say about it, but there's also traffic issues that that have only increased as the traffic has increased in Raleigh.

Uh we have traffic jams in front of our house uh every evening at rush hour.

We're going to have uh a lot worse, I think if the uh if the bike lanes are put in place, it's gonna narrow everything.

I think it's good to have some uh traffic, some speed buffering that they're talking about with this project, but I think it's also gonna lead to uh increased traffic backups.

Um I'm gonna be sending an email to uh to each and every one of you with some of my uh concerns.

I've also spoken to a lot of my neighbors.

Uh the only ones of us who were notified about this project were the ones who were living right on the street.

None of my neighbors who do not live on Fairclaw Street were notified at all.

We were first notified about six years ago, but the project changed hands several times.

The recent, most recent uh leader has had it for two years, but uh did not contact us until the design was finalized.

I would ask that the design be unfinalized and that the construction be put off until we can take a little closer look about how to improve safety for pedestrians and residents.

Thank you.

TJ Lansbury.

Good evening, City Council members.

Thank you for your service and your work to improve safety and connectivity through initiatives like Raleigh's active mobility plan, neighborhood traffic management program, and safe routes to school.

Before moving to Raleigh in 2015, I bike from my house daily to downtown Boise, Idaho for my job for more than five years.

Since moving to Lichford Forest, however, I have not felt safe riding a bicycle beyond my own street because of the lack of bike lanes, sidewalks, crosswalks, and safe roadway connections.

Because of these conditions, I drive my teenage son the short distance to Millbrook High School rather than have him walk or bike along unsafe roads.

This is not the kind of connected active community many families envision when choosing to live in Raleigh.

We all feel the impact from rezoning decisions in the closest neighborhoods to the furthest city sidewalk.

I ask the council to carefully consider the environmental impacts of rezoning requests Z 4325 at 6309 Lichford Road.

I am a licensed wildlife rehabilitator with the state of North Carolina specializing in squirrel rehabilitation, and I see firsthand how habitat loss affects native wildlife.

The mature trees, wooded buffers, and natural areas surrounding this property provide important habitat and travel corridors for deer, foxes, squirrels, birds, raccoons, opossums, and pollinators that are part of the ecological fabric of our neighborhood.

These natural areas also support stormwater absorption, water quality, and tree canopy preservation, all priorities Raleigh has repeatedly emphasized through its sustainability and environmental goals.

Raleigh's planning commission voted 8-1 against this rezoning.

This reflects the serious concerns residents have regarding traffic, safety, infrastructure limitations, environmental impacts, and compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood.

Approving additional density in an area that already lacks basic pedestrian infrastructure, it undermines Raleigh's adopted goals for thoughtful, connected, and balanced growth.

Our community is not opposed to growth.

However, infrastructure, environmental protections, and safety improvements should come before, not after additional development intensifies existing problems.

I respectfully ask that you deny rezoning KZ 74325 until meaningful and safe infrastructure, mobility, and environmental improvements are in place.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Larissa Green.

Hello, Madam Mayor and Council members.

I am speaking today about the rezoning of 6309 Lichford Road Z 4325.

Overpopulating this parcel will have ripple effects through our neighborhood, which will place a burden on every Raleigh taxpayer.

This application is not compliant with the future land use map.

This area calls for low-intensity residential use into the future because Johnsdale Road still functions on rural standards today.

To bring Johnsdale Road to a city standard, it will cost the City of Raleigh multimillions of dollars.

Here's some land use changes around the property.

The Old Wake Forest Road Project announced in 2018 introduced an opportunity for this area to be more connected on foot and bike, less car-dependent, a lifestyle that we support.

In 2015, Lichford 315 apartments were rezoned, adding 296 units intended to be a step down in density from the Old Wake Forest corridor.

The rezoning before you now plans a more dense land use than the Lichford 315 apartments.

Lichford 315 has tree buffers, 50 foot setbacks, ample common space, and parking.

The adjacent new retail, like Dunkin' Donuts, has been built with walkable standards.

The walkable community is here.

The infrastructure is not.

The road plan that was inspired all of this change still sits with funding unsecured and will take additional years to provide crossings and sidewalks.

This means added people are living here, walking here, working here, without basic safety directly related to city planning.

I named my daughter Adelita, which means woman warrior.

She's here tonight in the audience with her BFF.

Last night we were reading Elsa's Frozen.

The story mentioned a council chamber.

She asked with curious eyes, what's a council chamber?

So here we are speaking to council, asking those who have the power to protect our successful parkside community to make the right choice.

The children of Raleigh deserve safe streets.

If our street becomes unavoidably unsafe, the city of Raleigh will be responsible to maintain our quality of life.

This proposal creates infrastructure demands.

We are looking at road widening requirements, sidewalk installation, curb and gutter, drainage improvements, creek erosion control, utility relocation, mailbox relocation, fiber lines relocated, right of way acquisitions, tree removal and retaining walls, driveway culverts brought to code, sewer capacity increases and tree disruption along the sewer line and more.

This is a cost burden to all taxpayers, not just individual landowners.

The impacts of development should be mitigated.

The disparity between UDO codes and existing conditions on Johnsdale and Lynchford Road is massive.

As we can as we think about city budget shortfalls, how many of Raleigh's other streets have been already pushed past the brink of sustainability?

We heard from Yolanda earlier tonight whose road is also too narrow for the safety of added residents.

Good planning should respect the limits of the land and surrounding context, not simply test how much can fit.

Thanks for coming to council chambers.

Alright, Eva Fairlinden.

Can you hear?

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council members.

My name is Eva Verlinden.

My husband Matt and I were born and raised in Raleigh and have lived at 6500 Johnsdale Road since 2009.

For the record, this is my least favorite thing in the world to do, speak in public.

I have nightmares.

But that being said, I feel that strongly about asking you to deny the rezoning case Z4325.

This isn't just about changing a map.

It's about safety.

On May 7th, last Thursday, traffic forced a school bus off of Johnsdale Road, and it took out our mailbox and the post.

Fortunately, it didn't hit a child or another car, and nobody was injured.

The accidents gonna go down as just another side swipe for Johnsdale.

This is the third time a vehicle has taken out our mailbox since we have lived there.

A school bus is nine and a half feet wide, including the mirrors.

That's more than half of our 17-foot-wide street.

There are no lines on the road to show inexperienced drivers or people unfamiliar with the road to show that they need to yield their space to a wide vehicle coming.

The city of Raleigh is already years behind in infrastructure updates on our adjacent roads.

Please deny this rezoning as the existing Johnsdale Road is clearly at its limits.

We aren't against growth.

We just want responsible planning and respects for safety and character.

What we need is a low density development, but right now that's out of our control.

I'm concerned also about yard flooding.

Additional houses on the road will mean additional runoff.

And that's going to be a burden to all the houses north of the property, including mine.

Fifty-four townhomes are going to destroy the majority of nature at 6309 Lichford Road, since they are only required to leave 10% green space.

I don't have a lot of faith in the parties that they're going to be responsible to resolve all the drainage issues before this project is done.

We as a neighborhood have stood against this rezoning from the start.

You have our calls, emails, and comments documented.

We love our community, and we strongly urge you to vote against rezoning case Z4325 on June 2nd.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Elizabeth Polizzo.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and uh council members.

Thank you for hearing all of us.

I think I'm number five tonight.

My name is Elizabeth Polizzo.

I live at 6408 Johnsdale Road, and I am here in opposition to zoning application Z4325.

You are meeting many of us this evening.

Please take note of how we have come together to speak against this application.

I am a mother of a young child, and I'm here tonight with serious concerns about what the proposed development means for the health and health and safety of our families, specifically regarding our water supply and the potential land disturbance impacts.

I am one of the closest property owners to this proposed development site in attendance tonight, and I have an active well.

We are already experiencing standing water on our property.

This is not a hypothetical, it's our current reality.

When I think about the scale of land disturbance and what this project would bring, I look at the water that already pools on our land.

I have genuine fear about what happens to the water my family drinks.

Standing water near wells and septic systems creates real contamination risks.

The potential impacts of significant land disturbance on an already wet site could push that risk to a level no family should have to accept.

The water coming out of our tap is not an abstraction to me.

It is what I give her every single day.

Clean water is a human right, and right now that feels very much at risk.

In addition, the loss of mature tree canopy compounds these concerns.

These trees are not just shade, they are natural filtration and absorption systems.

They slow runoff, reduce standing water, and protect groundwater we drink.

Removing them increases both the volume and speed of storm water reaching our wells and septics.

My daughter plays in our yard.

I should not have to worry about what's in our water, what's in the grass, and what's in the land she plays on, which is why we purchased the property with a well in the first place.

I want to preempt any suggestion that a city water or sewer connection resolves this issue.

It does not, not for us.

Johnsdale Road has unique conditions that make connection cost prohibitive.

Our homes have large setbacks from meters and sewer lines.

Every sewer connection on the east side of the road requires digging up the street.

Many homes sit below grade requiring a pump, and city water must be connected before city sewer.

We are realistically looking at 30 to 50,000 per household.

That is not a solution.

That is a burden placed on existing residents to absorb the impacts of a development we did not ask for.

We are asking this board to take seriously the potential impacts of this application and it the poses on groundwater safety and consider the cumulative effects of land disturbance on an already water prone site.

Please protect the health and safety of the families and the children who call Lichford Forest home, and please deny the application for Z4325.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Jason Compareto.

I live at Ravenville, I live on Ravenville Drive, near 6309 Lichford Road.

I'm here tonight to respectfully ask you to deny the proposed rezoning request for Z 4325.

I want to focus specifically on planning compatibility and infrastructure.

The current character of this area is still suburban in nature.

The roads, drainage systems, pedestrian infrastructure, and transit availability were not designed to support the level of density being requested here.

The 25L bus line only comes once an hour.

Nearby developments that were already approved years ago still lack completed sidewalks and safe pedestrian connections.

Infrastructure is already struggling to keep pace with growth in this area.

The planning commission recognized these concerns and voted 8-1 to recommend denial, stating that the requested zoning is too intensive for the assigned future land use category.

I also want to emphasize that this is not opposition to growth.

This property can already be developed under the existing R4 zoning.

That still allows meaningful growth while remaining more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood scale setbacks, open space, and infrastructure capacity.

Good planning is not simply about maximizing density wherever possible.

It's about matching development intensity to the realities of the land, transportation network, utilities, and surrounding community context.

Approving this rezoning would push this area toward a level of intensity that the existing infrastructure is not prepared to support today.

Throughout this process, residents have participated respectfully and consistently.

We've attended meetings, submitted comments, communicated with staff and council, and engaged in good faith because we care deeply about Raleigh's long-term planning decisions.

I respectfully ask that you vote no on this rezoning request and support growth that is balanced, compatible, and sustainable.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Robin Munsey.

Hi there.

Thank you for listening to everybody.

I am also from the same neighborhood.

I wanted to just thank you guys really for considering our request for denying the rezoning of Z4325.

And we've been engaged, showing up, leaving messages, not just because we think it's fun, but how important it really is to us.

But growth must be responsible and compatible with the existing neighborhood and supported by adequate infrastructure.

I've seen flooding in multiple homes.

And we do appreciate the careful review conducted by the planning commission and the city staff.

This is what builds public trust.

And we are putting our trust in you right now.

It matters because confidence in Raleigh's future depends on council decisions being made in the public interest, prioritizing long-term well-being over short-term profits.

Residents need to believe that respectful, respectful participation matters, and that adopted plans still carry weight, and the community voices are genuinely considered in decisions that shape our city.

Tonight we ask you respectfully to continue building that trust, honor the planning review, honor the consistent concerns of this community, and vote no on Z4325.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next we have Miss Nellie Taylor.

Good evening, Madam Mayor and Council members.

I'm Nellie Taylor, and I'm speaking today about also about the rezoning of 6309 Lichford Road, Z 4325, and why I feel that R4 zoning is significant for this project.

I have lived on John Dills Johnsdale Road for over 40 years, and I'm very concerned about the additional changes to our neighborhood.

The property at 6309 Lichford has always been referred to as the farm.

And I should, and I it feel it should be worthy of preservation as historical southern architecture built in 1904.

It has always been a reminder of what the area once was, a farming community dating back to the 1700s that protected and nourished the land.

Mr.

Lichford's grandfather was a tailor for President Andrew Johnson.

It is somewhat shocking that almost no buildings remain from this historical land, which goes south to Millbrook Train Crossing and north to 8020 Lichford Road.

As my neighbors have said, Johnsdale Road cannot handle any more traffic.

It is not safe now to try and walk or even drive, especially during opening and closing hours of Millbrook High School.

It is hard to imagine how it would be with 100 plus more cars using the roads on a daily basis.

It will make the nightmare we have now even worse.

Please preserve the land.

If not, respect it.

Developing at R4 is a compromise regarding the land.

R10 is abusive to the history.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Greetings to the mayor and council members.

I'm Vicky Reich.

My family and I have lived on Johnsdale Road for 23 years.

One of the main challenges we had in raising our five children was when they began driving.

And so as a retired teacher and parent, I have to talk about how rezoning of 6309 Lichford would affect the students at Millbrook High School.

Lichford Road is currently vacant, and no cars or pedestrians use Johnsdale to access the driveway.

The current building entitlements of 32 units on this site adds 288 trips.

We already have 936 trips a day.

So adding 54 allowed units would increase our traffic by 42%.

This excludes all the high school numbers.

In a single day, the traffic study data from 2023 reveals that 398 cars were documented speeding on Johnstale Road at up to 50 miles per hour with speed bumps.

The street data measurement tool shows Johnsdale Road measuring 16 and a half feet wide, and the roads edges are also crumbling.

Like most of our neighborhood, I'm not against increasing the density of our neighborhood.

We have a close neighborhood.

I'd love to see more people.

We had a Mother's Day picnic Sunday in the circle.

It was supposed to go from two to four.

It went from two to six.

Nobody wanted to leave.

So we're a rare community.

But I'm not against adding more people.

Our family lived in Barcelona, Spain, for seven wonderful years.

And I know about dense living, if you've been there.

But as we walked many blocks to school every day there, I felt safe because the infrastructure was safe.

I believe part of the reason you were elected in to our Raleigh City Council is that when you make decisions, you choose to walk in someone else's shoes.

Try walking in the shoes of an inexperienced and impulsive teenage driver who causes a tragedy on Johnsdale Road.

And then walk in the shoes of the child who has to go to the park in a wheelchair for the rest of his life.

I know you have much to consider, believe me, when faced with rezoning applications like this.

But please walk in the shoes of the residents, us who live on or near Johnstale Road and put the quality of life for existing neighborhoods first.

Vote to deny the rezoning on Lichford Road.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And we have a Mr.

Leon Reich.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

I'm so privileged again to be back here before you and speak on behalf of this my community of families that uh we dearly love.

We moved here in 2003 and have just seen in the last five years this community grow with about five, maybe six or seven young couples with children, and because it's an area that they can buy into.

And so we're really concerned about their safety and growing this community and families and children together.

You have been provided with all the detailed information on why we as a community pose this, so I'll not go over any of that.

The proposal pushes urban style intensity onto land and a long established community with an infrastructure fundamentally suburban in design, drainage, and transportation capacity.

And if you haven't ever driven Johnsdale, please do it.

You'll understand how dangerous it is.

And to see our families with children walking down with their children in carriages on the side of the road because there are no sidewalks, and if you get off the road, you fall into the ditch.

That's what it's like to live there, and then having cars speeding by.

So we're very concerned not only about the density, but about the difficulty uh and the danger that it provides.

Our persistent and passionate response to this rezoning change is to protect the quality of life and the safety of the families living here.

Our income levels in most cases do not allow us to transition to different locations if we don't like what's happening to our community.

We don't have that privilege.

This is where we now live and desire to remain.

We're not anti-growth, as each one has said, but believe that growth must be carefully monitored and controlled, well knowing that the pursuit of developers is first and foremost the biggest and best return on their investment, and not necessarily on the quality of life.

Once a project is completed, they no longer have any responsibility to the community and can disconnect from whatever the long-term outcome of that development is.

You as the council have the great responsibility and the power to set limits and provide guidelines that not don't that not just provide housing for more and more people, but to protect the sacred quality of life of our families in this long-established community.

You as the council have the responsibility and the power now to set limits and provide guidelines that not just provide housing to make this community a better.

Thank you again.

Thank you.

Last but not least, Lewis Wilkerson.

Thank you.

Can you hear me?

Good.

Um I don't make light of anything that we've heard or whatever, but I'm just thankful I didn't have to dress up to be the Lorax.

Uh, but I hear I am here to support trees and trees in Raleigh.

Uh I am again Lewis Wilkerson.

I'm a hometown Raleigh boy.

I've been there all my life and consider myself blessed to have been here and been able to you know raise a family and and to work here.

Professionally, I'm a real estate broker here, and as such, been asked to kind of comment on the value of the trees and what we do tree-wise and whatever and how that affects our real estate.

You know, I have a rare privilege that probably two or three times a month, people from from other places in the country will come in that are looking to move here.

As you all know, you see, you know, we are there's no better place in the country to be.

People that come here love it here, they want to stay here.

Maybe that's part of our quote unquote problems, but it's also part of the blessings that we get.

Um we have so many benefits there, and I'm so thankful for that.

But it is such it is so tangible for the people that do come here from other parts of the country when they see, especially when they fly in the tree canopy, and they see all the trees, and they are just amazed at what we have.

And maybe if we've been here too long, maybe we don't have that fresh set of eyes to see that and to appreciate that.

And you know, the last time I was here in these council chambers was to uh represent my aunt uh after she had donated to the city her farm that was out on Raven Ridge Road, 150 odd acres to be kept as a nature reserve park.

And the topic that day was stewardship.

She felt the land that she had been given was a gift from God, and it was just hers for a time, and then it was to be then passed on.

Um I think what you're doing here is also an aspect of stewardship to make those decisions as we look forward and to be intentional.

I can give you all kind of information about how trees impact and improve property values and all of that.

You don't need all of that from me.

I'm not a horticulturist, although I did go to NC State, go Wolfpack, thank you all very much.

And uh, but you've got Steve Bentley and you've got your parks and rec people, whatever, they know this, they do that.

They manage, I don't know, what is it, 200,000 trees for the city of Raleigh at this point.

But we need to be intentional about that, taking that next step.

We need to plan it forward, which is the also in alignment, I think, with your leaf out program that your parks and rec people have also trying to promote, or whatever.

That's the vision and the intentionality to plant 4,000 trees a year for the next six years.

That's taking that step out.

Some people that have sat at those desks and sat at those chairs, envisioned the outer loop of the belt line when there wasn't anything there.

They envisioned the research triangle park, all of these things in my lifetime, but that concludes our public comment.

Thank you.