Update Part II/II: Hayes Barton Strikes Back! Files 'Petition of Writ'. Challenges BOA's Rubber Stamping of Developer's Updated Plans for 908 Williamson Townhouses.
The Hayes Barton legal team files a 'Petition of Writ'. Challenges BOA's Rubber Stamping of Developer's Updated Plans for 908 Williamson Townhouses.
In Part I (here) , I updated you on the developer moves and provided a rough visualization of what the crowded, no-parking monstrosity they want to build on 908 will look like.
Latest Legal Volley in the 908 Williamson Saga
On October 8, 2025, adjacent property owners (the Bennetts at 1517 Iredell Drive and the Solics at 912 Williamson Drive) filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in Wake County Superior Court. This is their appeal of the Raleigh Board of Adjustment’s (BOA) September 2025 decision upholding the City’s April 2025 approval of a revised plan. If you’re new to this, it’s all about pushing back on dense infill that petitioners say violates the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and threatens our historic neighborhood’s character. Here’s the breakdown.
Quick History Recap
Original Plan (Dec 2022 Approval): City staff greenlit a compact subdivision with 17 townhomes on 2.43 acres in R-4 zoning. Petitioners appealed to BOA, focusing on missing Transitional Protective Yard (TPY—a vegetative buffer) and street setback issues. BOA affirmed, but Superior Court Judge Bryan Collins reversed in Sept 2024, citing no TPY, and gave developers 6 months to revise.
Revised Plan (April 2025 Approval): Developers (908 Williamson LLC, RDU Consulting, Concept 8 LLC) submitted changes adding a TPY but shrinking central open space and shifting it to the perimeter. City approved it quickly.
BOA Appeal (July 2025): Petitioners challenged the revisions. City moved to dismiss on res judicata (claim preclusion) and collateral estoppel (issue preclusion), arguing issues were already litigated. BOA agreed, affirming the approval in a Sept 2025 order (attached as Exhibit 1 in the petition).
No one appealed Judge Collins’ ruling last year, but petitioners argue the revised plan introduces new violations, so the old ruling doesn’t apply.
Key Arguments in the Petition
Petitioners claim the BOA’s decision was riddled with legal errors and was arbitrary/capricious. They’re seeking reversal and voiding of the April 2025 approval. Main counts:
Count One: Errors of Law
Open Space Issues: Revised plan fails UDO’s minimum 1-acre open space (20% of site) and 60% contiguity requirements. Open space must be at least 50 feet wide, but developers count narrow perimeter strips (e.g., 20-foot TPY) as qualifying—petitioners say this is illogical and defeats the purpose of breaking up density. They argue this wasn’t litigated before because the original plan appeared compliant.
TPY Violations: Internal road is too close (<10 feet) to TPY, and non-screening walls are inside it, breaching UDO §7.2.4.D. “Structure” (undefined in UDO) should include roads per common dictionary meaning.
Res Judicata/Collateral Estoppel Rejection: Not applicable because revised plan is “substantially different,” creating new facts/claims. Prior rulings were reversed or limited to old issues; BOA lacked jurisdiction to apply these doctrines here.
Other points: Fairness weighs against preclusion; burden on City/developers not met.
Count Two: Arbitrary/Capricious Decision
BOA’s findings (e.g., Nos. 10, 13, 16) are mislabeled conclusions without evidence support.
Three BOA members’ deliberations showed misapprehension of law, undue deference to City staff, violating de novo review under NCGS §160D-406(j).
How you can help!
Once you read the petition, you will see this isn’t a simple cease and desist letter, this is very involved zoning law that requires intimate knowledge of the state/county/city level rules - our counsel is great and doing awesome work, but we need YOUR help covering the legal fees.
We kicked off this round of fundraising in late July here. I’m happy to now report we have just crossed $45k of our $100k target, but we need to keep the momentum up. If you haven’t donated, everything helps.
Donate HERE.
The Petition
If you want to read the > 20 page Petition for Writ, it’s attached here→
Next Steps
The court will issue a writ commanding the City to submit the full record within 30 days. We’ll watch for hearings—stay tuned for updates. There’s no ‘set time’ that these things are acted on and it could take quite a while to work through the courts for the next step.