The Greensboro City Council will hold its one business meeting of the month on Tuesday, Feb. 21 in the Katie Dorsett Council Chamber at city hall.
The meeting officially begins at 4:30 p.m., but the purpose of the early start is to hold a closed session. The public portion of the meeting should begin at 5:30 p.m. or later. If the closed session runs long, the public portion of the meeting is delayed. However, the City Council does not call the public portion to order until 5:30 p.m. even if the business in closed session is completed early.
At the second regular meeting of the month there is no public forum. The public is allowed to speak on any agenda item, but people are not allowed to speak on non-agenda items – that is reserved for the first meeting of the month.
The agenda includes three annexations and original zoning cases and one rezoning case. On Alamance Church Road, the requested annexation is for 0.32 acres owned by the City of Greensboro.
The other annexation and zoning requests are for 24 acres at 3510 Liberty Road and 17.4 acres at 3923, 3927 and 3929 Presbyterian Road.
The rezoning request is to rezone the property at 4200 and 4206 United Street from Conditional District – Commercial-Medium (CD-C-M) to Conditional District – Commercial-Medium (CD-C-M) and that’s not a typo. If the City Council approves the rezoning request, the property will remain CD-C-M but the conditions for the conditional district zone will be altered.
The purpose of the rezoning request is to allow car sales on the 0.97-acre lot. The current conditions of the CD-C-M zoning prohibit car sales. The applicant also added conditions requiring vegetative screening and the paint color of the buildings be “earth-toned colors,” limiting exterior lighting and signage, setting the hours of operation from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and prohibiting chain-linked, barbed wire and woven wire fencing.
There was neighborhood opposition to this rezoning request at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, but the commission voted 8-0 to approve the rezoning request.
I am curious, John, just how much say the public would have in this. Unless people were watching “Life, Liberty, and Levin” Sunday night or paying attention to the passing of the Infrastructure bill, I would most still believe the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing act passed by Obama and repealed by Trump still no longer exists. However, the Senate Democates and RINOs slipped it through on the Infrastructure bill and Biden signed it into law. This will give the Federal Government control over state, town, and municipal governments over zoning, police, transportation, housing, bus districts, and school districts. nThere is already a case in NY state going through the courts where public housing is being built next to single family homes. This is the future under Marxist Socialism, soI ask again. Just how much say would the public actually have is something no longer in our control?
Should be “Would guess” and Democrats
The annexation process as it is right now heavily favors the city and the property owner requesting the annexation. You cannot get access to city water and sewer unless you have been annexed into the city. If you are a developer or homeowner with a failed septic system the rules are the same. So, the city adds to its tax base so they are happy, the property owner wants/needs the access so they are happy, and the surrounding property owners really have no say in it because they are not part of the city and have zero representation at the city zoning board or the city council. All the city has to do is run lines out into the county as close as they can to large swaths of undeveloped land, then sit back and wait. Large, undeveloped land with city services access draws developers like pollen draws honeybees. All they have to do is get control of the property because getting annexed is a cakewalk from that point.
The Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing act has been in and around since the 60s. It is designed to avoid the mess created by segregating all low-income housing into isolated areas of a community as happened with public housing in major cities where infrastructure was poorly supported by the cities for things such as education, access to job, etc… To call this Marxist Socialism is highly disingenuous and clearly ignorant of the history of the act as the success it has brought to many communities for improving access to affordable housing. Affordable housing, as acknowledged by the Rhino Times, is a significant issue lately.
You voted your city council represents to represent you. Did they?
Unfortunately for those opposed you have to deal with it. Remember this next election.