[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},"mediaId",6350487,"mediaKeyId","2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082","parentId",2232823,"title","Council sets March 4 public hearings for four Planning Commission cases, including large annexation request","audioSeconds",503,"startMs",805000,"endMs",1308000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082&start=805&end=1308","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082/thumbnail_805000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6350487/Raleigh/Wake-County/North-Carolina/Council-sets-March-4-public-hearings-for-four-Planning-Commission-cases-including-large-annexation-request","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6350487-02aaa8c0f2a190ae3764c6db7eaf0d40/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161495&Signature=XeB2AnpHgozuQm8nvVEuAYy-AOjF~2WifnVi3BNl22JPnaVY06ondbMgbyoq5H~Ec1hWFj8Q6QYQdNwsJL27CvIFQPZbHdFwIumRrRe~IFtbXrVSCuzMk0leG5d9lukGKSYiDLgZPJU~wHfTQ4UsbRw~4sRc6tvK2jJfW~ob31y8pluVTTV2gNhMwr6koYMaXdro6S7qqhlLDx-ojbbKwZW7dGuhKW0tXTXh-99v~h7AnXDkN8f96FU0SE5HP749WuapHW0E0fGmWy2s31oBWEAI4R12fN34hZYqsFwVDtC~KMHOd3tbjIb2pH5fRtZJFYAdL0s6cMErfRBwomVX5g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-02-05T08:43:24Z","article","Raleigh City Council voted to set public hearings for four planning items on March 4, including a large annexation and rezoning request at Old Cruz Road and Millburnie Road that staff said intersects previous council conversations about peripheral development and annexation policies.

\"What we are recommending today is 4 items, for a public hearing on March 4,\" said the city’s Planning and Development staff member, who asked council to consider a coordinated presentation and concurrent annexation action so the council would have additional context. She described the first request as a \"very large assemblage\" at Old Cruz Road and Millburnie Road that is outside the city’s extraterritorial jurisdiction but adjacent to Rivertown and eligible for annexation because of adjacency to a city‑owned property.

Planning staff said the Planning Commission recommended approval for the cases by split votes in some instances and asked council to consider an expanded presentation that ties the item to issues discussed at a recent retreat about annexation and peripheral development. Other cases set for hearing include: a Litchford Road request to change conditions for a property in the ‘‘Bridal Town’’ area (just under 3 acres, proposed change from Residential‑1 to R‑10 with conditions) and a Chapan Oak Road parcel proposed to change from industrial mixed use to commercial mixed use with transit‑oriented development (TOD) conditions and increased height. Planning staff noted the Chapan Oak Road parcel is planned for affordable housing with some public support from the county.

Council members asked procedural questions and requested that one item (the Summer Boulevard case) be brought back as a special item with revisions before setting a public hearing. The council approved the motion to set the March 4 hearing dates and to bring the annexation item to council concurrently with any rezoning action.

Planning Commission Chair Blaine Miller was in the audience with staff during the presentation. Staff said there are additional planning‑commission vacancies and turnover that may affect future hearings; the planning chair and staff urged council to consider candidate profiles when filling upcoming vacancies.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Raleigh City Council Afternoon Session - February 4, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The council set public‑hearing dates (March 4) for four planning cases recommended by the Planning Commission, including a large assemblage at Old Cruz Road/Millburnie Road that includes a concurrent annexation; the council asked for expanded context tying the request to recent annexation retreat discussions.","taxTitle","Raleigh, Wake County, North Carolina","taxId",4736,"location","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_47":80,"_49":81,"_51":82,"_53":83,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":84,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":85,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6350493,"Raleigh Arts Commission presents annual report; council approves work plan",470,1996000,2466000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082&start=1996&end=2466","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082/thumbnail_1996000.jpg","/articles/6350493/Raleigh/Wake-County/North-Carolina/Raleigh-Arts-Commission-presents-annual-report-council-approves-work-plan","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6350493-4e5f4fb259934ff2f9335dfd33810939/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161495&Signature=eV3GZDCeSwqlN9zn3S9AUj8sRFQXRPBOQrOPinhVYN91p4cVZXX6r-hfvbHVCQPWXi83nghAZh2D2Mv53n6zunDNwHELnGNumX~8gfwshiMWdC6rxpIk8k4MQpArH0tkhATKEt~LiZvWdBLYEHS0FwYja-RWYnXPzOF-s1iG~OFsyOdEnl53ch1PGhDHStpW090iBXLRQ8XXD1Jf3kRrSabHc9K5o3Nr3ZY2Xs9XycmekHrZAcZNsMrFWETYoyRB2Iv1DImcWqsTA93IXRfICVjgWYZLLO8fuihiNFz58S4mt~Id-b0NncUGOwA-fxA5XJjZDt7LHMck-LzFUF6DeA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Raleigh Arts Commission and the Public Art and Design Board presented their annual report to City Council Tuesday, outlining grant awards, recent public‑art installations and a multi‑year work plan; council voted to approve the commission’s work plan for the coming year.

\"I'm privileged to serve as the chair of the Raleigh Arts Commission,\" Mary Silver, chair of the Raleigh Arts Commission, told council as she summarized highlights. Silver said the commission supported professional opportunities for hundreds of artists and oversaw grant awards totaling roughly $2.94 million in annual grant awards and multi‑year lease agreements. \"Last year, we were able to provide opportunities for hundreds of artists, engage thousands of students in art classes, and provide creative experiences for the community through grants and programs,\" Silver said.

Angela Lombardi, chair of the Public Art and Design Board, briefed council on current capital‑project work, including 24 active percent‑for‑art projects at various stages and public‑art components of the city’s BRT station work along New Bern Avenue and other corridors. \"So right now, we are managing 24 active percent for art projects, in various stages of design, fabrication, and…\" Lombardi said, listing artist residencies, wayfinding collaborations and pedestrian‑safety murals among priorities.

Council members asked about the difference between temporary and permanent public art and about mapping and public access to the collection. Sarah Powers, staff liaison, described a collections management system and an interactive GIS map under development and said the commission has enriched public‑art pages to include multiple photos and project pages for major installations.

A councilor moved to approve the arts commission work plan and the motion was seconded. After brief discussion, the council voted to approve the commission’s work plan.

The commission emphasized five strategic priorities for the coming year—leadership, belonging, sustainability, expansion and connection—and identified goals such as implementing the public‑art strategic plan, expanding artist residencies and documenting community history through public art.","The Raleigh Arts Commission and Public Art and Design Board reviewed last year’s work—grant awards, new installations and artist‑in‑residence programs—and the council approved the commission’s work plan for the coming year.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6350498,"Raleigh council tightens public‑comment process for digital materials, declines immediate time change",1820,3804000,5624000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082&start=3804&end=5624","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082/thumbnail_3804000.jpg","/articles/6350498/Raleigh/Wake-County/North-Carolina/Raleigh-council-tightens-publiccomment-process-for-digital-materials-declines-immediate-time-change","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6350498-a17ac0929f506575be418fcdc20f3314/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161495&Signature=mvgO49nH~RLwZ1xb0WfSZoRZnXgTAHLrYhZY66LIhHxAF9LOA4VY9DHFbqjaw9FpVB7I-Wiw2WTmnrG5RPJ-6A86nOyIoyy9TTuEquf0-682B6uaABEb~UDSyIqw4w9WSp8nX5xUivaBjX6-CWl~zrkJp-ZQSiz-KffCPZE3WwtPgztKhNTULwPqsJTQanGH0JnFkNj8qgY2Om5wPd9n7agPZ4cIesLQAs74QAeXzD~CIab2EZ1vgK4AivwpNPcjqU~hk-Xe9ATmc58cVGsmN9SF1rrlXTai3gnJUEuC8-GXQ0KJwLHlQZxOtm0E6sL21MlE2jaGbCdk8E-al827JQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Raleigh City Council voted to clarify the purpose of public comment and to adopt a new, staff‑managed process for accepting visual materials from speakers, while rejecting a proposed immediate change to the public‑comment meeting time and duration.

City Attorney McDonald framed the options presented to council as three separate items: adding clearer language on the city website and a mayoral opening statement to restate the purpose of public comment; revising how digital media are handled during public comment; and changing the dedicated public‑comment session held on second Tuesdays of the month. \"This is really their time to come and speak to the council,\" City Attorney McDonald said, explaining the intent to prevent back‑and‑forth exchange during the public‑comment period.

On the digital media question, the council voted to allow static visual aids (PDFs and JPEGs) to be submitted in advance and attached to the meeting agenda as backup material instead of broadcasting material live during a speaker’s time. The motion required staff to establish a size limitation for submitted files and to run the materials through standard IT checks before posting. The council approved that change with a recorded short vote in the meeting.

Council members debated whether to reduce or move the second‑Tuesday public‑comment session. Several council members urged caution about shortening or moving the time without more public input. Councilor Lambert Melton said the body should act but also suggested staff provide implementation rules for the digital‑media handling. Mayor Pro Tem Ford recommended aligning the city’s approach with peer jurisdictions and restricting very large or problematic submissions. Community engagement staff reported prior survey results: in 2023, 73% of respondents preferred a 7 p.m. start time while 27% preferred 6 p.m.

A motion to move the start time to 6 p.m. and limit the session to two hours failed on a 4–4 tie. Councilors left the other parts of the city‑attorney proposal in place: clearer public‑comment purpose language and the new process for receiving static visual materials attached to the agenda. City staff will develop submission rules (file types and size limits) and a vetting procedure for materials that become part of the official public record.\"There is already a disclaimer on the box when you submit for public comment that you have read the rules of decorum,\" the city attorney noted during the discussion.

Councilors asked staff to return with concrete submission specifications and to solicit public feedback on whether to change the start time. The council did not adopt a new start time or duration at the meeting.","Council approved clearer public‑comment purpose language and a new process to accept static visual aids (PDF/JPEG) attached to the meeting agenda. A proposal to change the public‑comment start time and duration failed after split votes; council will continue to consider timing.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":56,"_73":56},6350503,"Raleigh Council accepts $80,000 Bloomberg grant to expand e-bike rebates, approves budget amendment",569,1313000,1882000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082&start=1313&end=1882","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2232823-e63120a610b1f4c28e53d5503affa082/thumbnail_1313000.jpg","/articles/6350503/Raleigh/Wake-County/North-Carolina/Raleigh-Council-accepts-80000-Bloomberg-grant-to-expand-e-bike-rebates-approves-budget-amendment","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6350503-7df5772343bfbd215f95b28ce526c4b9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771161495&Signature=J~ckDtuau0qo3F32pQJunVw6CEQKwbJaxW2mjndBDerFSNC2pMlgIVTCpC25opzshLjbaRqtAZ1BcBcdRUm5DZS2-AtVx2tZs4M8DtNwHZ3eTCsrQ79Gm182dacel2hsoLBvsAd0Y5jGFZnmFOSz~jD93MnP3uQW9hfHj3o46FHQ-fJPcxz6PqAcIVMPazmlZEZ-BP~qyuWkgN8YJCpufDofoYa5UJf1pJ9-i3wO2a-xCKDSgW~3f9KT3KUEbo~tKQzR-ofdPnuT6KijBf2ATPXFxqTblBZPK9JG1o4wlbV7UpDFlBeqNFK1mqgAL~WlQk-B27NYg~kr2p5cb8yrbw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Raleigh City Council on Tuesday authorized the city manager to execute grant documents and approved a budget amendment to add $80,000 in private funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies to the city’s existing e-bike rebate program.

The additional funding will be added to the voucher pool, which staff estimate will produce roughly 60–80 additional vouchers once the money is appropriated. \"This non federal funding... will be allocated towards additional vouchers in the applicant pool,\" said Mason Chamblee, Transportation Transit, who presented the program to the council.

The program began with $150,000 in initial funding from the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant administered by the U.S. Department of Energy. That seed funding underwrote 75 income-qualified vouchers (valued at $1,500 each) and 75 standard vouchers (valued at $500 each). Chamblee described the eligibility rules: income-qualified vouchers are for permanent Raleigh residents 18 or older with household income at or below 80% of area median income (about $68,000 for a one-person household); standard vouchers are available to any permanent Raleigh resident 18 or older.

Chamblee explained program mechanics and uptake to date: vouchers were released in three staggered batches of 50, on Dec. 4, Dec. 30 and Jan. 13, with recipients notified by email or text at award, 30 days and 10 days before expiration. \"As of February 3, we have a total of 65 vouchers that have been utilized, 52 in the income qualified grouping, and then 13 in the standard grouping,\" Chamblee said. He said the city extended redemption deadlines (from 60 days to 90 days) because redemption rates were slower than expected and third‑party technology will reassign forfeited vouchers to qualified applicants.

Council members asked about redemption behavior, demographic tracking and program evaluation. Councilor Pat asked whether staff had feedback from applicants who did not redeem vouchers; Chamblee said the city will survey both redeemers and nonredeemers after the final deadlines to learn why vouchers were not used. Councilor Jones asked whether the new Bloomberg funds would require a new application; Chamblee replied the city will draw additional winners from the existing qualified applicant pool (about 1,300 qualified applicants), not open a new application round.

Councilor Lambert Melton moved the motion to accept the grant and authorize the budget amendment; the motion was seconded and approved by the council. Councilors asked staff to report back with follow‑up evaluation data on usage and demographics in the coming months.

The council’s action lets staff add the Bloomberg funds to the program and continue redemption outreach; Chamblee said staff will provide 3– to 6‑month follow‑up evaluation data on how recipients use the e‑bikes and will share a more detailed breakdown of redeemed bike classes (class 1, 2, 3) with council upon request.

Background: Chamblee reviewed common e‑bike classifications for the council (class 1 = pedal assist to 20 mph, class 2 = throttle up to 20 mph, class 3 = pedal assist to 28 mph), approximate retail pricing for entry models ($1,200–$1,300 locally for class 1), and the program’s initial purchasing restrictions (voucher funds cannot be used to pay sales tax).","City Council authorized the city manager to accept an $80,000 private grant from Bloomberg Philanthropies for Raleigh's e-bike rebate program and approved a matching budget amendment; council discussed voucher redemption rates, eligibility and next steps for distribution and evaluation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council sets March 4 public hearings for four Planning Commission cases, including large annexation request

Raleigh Arts Commission presents annual report; council approves work plan

Raleigh council tightens public‑comment process for digital materials, declines immediate time change

Raleigh Council accepts $80,000 Bloomberg grant to expand e-bike rebates, approves budget amendment