It has just come to our attention that Wake Forest has mailed violation letters to many members citing prohibited signs per the Town's Ordinance.  We are in the process of investigating this issue, but cursory information leads us to believe that the Town had been lenient in their allowances of signs and now are suddenly taking a "letter of the law" approach to enforcement of the rules on the books.  

Our greatest frustration is the method by which this has taken place.  We try very hard to build relationships with municipalities and encourage them to reach out to us when problems arise.  It could have been better handled had we been informed that the ordinance enforcement was going to change and given a 30 day grace period to communicate such information to our membership and comply.  This would have prevented the adversarial approach of sending out violation letters with date certain compliance or else fines of $500/day.

Please be aware that the Town is now strictly enforcing their sign ordinance which can be found here.  See below for an example of the violation letters being sent.

All General Contractors are now required to include their NC General Contractor License Number on everything. The new regulation, 21 NCAC 12.0501, states: “license numbers shall be included on all contracts, advertisements and licensee websites.”

Our state association (NCHBA) is currently working to get clarification on the term "advertisements", but in the meantime, all general contractors are advised to put their GC License Number on:

• Contracts
• Subcontracts
• Business cards
• Project signs
• Signs on Vehicles
• Websites
• Advertisements
• E-mail signature blocks
• Letterhead & stationery

​The new regulation is part of a larger re-write of the NC GC Licensing Board Regulations in Title 21, Chapter 12 of the NC Administrative Code.

The massive down zoning (to 1 unit/2 acres) being considered by Knightdale for nearly 44% of the land it has planning jurisdiction over is well on its way to approval.  After holding the public hearing open for 3 weeks, Council sent the item to the Land Use Review Board (LURB).  The LURB met on 11/13 and with hardly more than a blink unanimously approved the proposed zoning map amendments that would effectuate the massive down zoning.

Even after many meetings with elected official, staff and stakeholders, speaking at all three public hearings and communicating with the LURB, the opinion on this item among the elected officials is seemingly not to be swayed.  The item is scheduled to come back to the Council at their 11/19/18 meeting at 7pm where it is expected to pass.

At their 11/6/18 evening meeting, Raleigh City Council voted to approve a notification requirement for residential infill development (TC-3-18).  Keep in mind that "infill development" in Raleigh is currently defined by the UDO as any building in an R-4, R-6 or R-10 district where all of the following are present:

1. The total site are is 5 acres or less;
2. At least 50% of the side and rear property lines abut existing detached or attached building types; and
3. The lot must have been recorded for at least 20 years.  This time period includes subsequent recombinations or subdivisions of the original lot configuration or recordation.

Mailed notice to a 100 foot radius and site posting will be required when a plot plan (excluding improvements described in Section 1.5.4 D. Setback Encroachments of the UDO) meets both of the following criteria. 

1. It involves the construction of or addition to a principal building or and accessory structure that is 7 or more feet in height.
2. The property meets the applicability standards for Residential Infill Compatibility in Section 2.2.7 of the UDO.

To comply, unsealed, stamped and addressed envelopes shall be submitted with the plot plan application.  A sign shall be posted by the property owner on the property for 30 consecutive days.  This text change was approved due to concerns of many City Council members that adequate notice and transparency is not currently available to neighboring properties of pending projects.  This text change takes effect February 4, 2019.

The debate continues as to whether accessory dwelling units (ADU's) will ever be allowed in the City of Raleigh.  On 10/30/18, the proposed text change for ADU's (TC-3-17) was discussed in the Text Change Committee (a subcommittee of the Planning Commission).  It was sent there from the Growth & Natural Resources Committee (a council committee) where it had spent months upon months getting twisted and turned into a proposal that if passed, would make ADU's exclusive at best and more than likely unbuildable.  After much discussion, the TC Committee did not agree with the idea of an overlay district and voted to recommend denial of the text change.  The items was then sent back to the Planning Commission and discussed at their 11/13/18 meeting.  They agreed that they couldn't agree on the proposed text for an ADU overlay district so they are planning to reconvene in a Committee of the Whole meeting at a date TBD to try and formulate some language to which they can mostly agree. 

The Town of Knightdale closed its public hearing after holding it open for 3 meetings to receive public input.  At the meeting on Monday, 11/5/18 at 7pm, there were only 5 who spoke against the proposed map amendments and 1 who spoke in favor.  These numbers are significantly lower than the past two meetings, but to be expected with the fatigue that comes with tracking issues like these.

The Town made some changes to the zoning map, removing 95 parcels from the new Rural Transition (RT) zoning classification.  However, this removal only brought the amount of land being rezoned from 47.5% of land controlled by Knightdale to 43.6%.  This RT zoning is set at 1 unit/2 acres and is clearly being set to create large areas of Knightdale that will require a rezoning request through a legislative process instead of going through the current set up of a Special Use Permit via a quasi-judicial process.  

While the Town contends that the motivation is for increased transparency and greater flexibility, those who own large parcels of land or plan to develop in Knightdale believe it to be a downzoning of their property, creating greater ambiguity and lowering confidence in the process.

As the HBA, we spoke at all three public hearings, held meetings with staff and elected officials and have tried to convince the Town and Council that the proposed massive rezoning is not the right path to take to gain greater transparency and flexibility.  Unfortunately, there seems to be much buy-in for this change among both staff and Council.  

At the final public hearing, the Town Council voted unanimously to close the public hearing and move the item to the Land Use Review Board which will begin discussion on the item at the 11/14 meeting, 6pm, Knightdale Town Hall.  If they act quickly, it could be back to the Council as early as 11/20/18.  Please click here for more information on the proposed changes.  Contact Suzanne Harris with questions or concerns.