I agree that the very core of the city should not have had, seemingly, random variances in allowed height. That said, I think that it’s perfectly reasonable to taper the cap around the edges of the core (though we may debate where those lines are drawn) to transition to neighborhoods.
2 Likes
This isn’t a scientific poll, but all of my neighbors in The West that I have spoken to support the rezoning request and a few are going to support it tomorrow. We are most grateful for their approach to Phase 2.
2 Likes
On a similar note, Kane is going to be giving the west side residents of the Cotton Mill a very nice city view by the time he’s done.
2 Likes
Interesting to note that 14 of the the 15 tallest buildings in Houston were all built in the 1970’s and 80’s. I wonder if Kane’s 40 story doesn’t pan out if we’re stuck with the same skyline for decades.
1 Like
Nice pic. A triangle, on top of a rectangle, on top of a cube. Clearly, JDavis favors geometry
1 Like
So that looks like it’s topped out!
That’s it. Only the parapet is left.
2 Likes
What, beside the Reynolds “The Raleigh” tower was proposed at over 20 stories? Edison? Ha. That was a pure shot in the dark to see if there was any demand which as we all kind of should know, there was not. Everything is spec unless you have leases signed to bolster your prospectus. Orulz is right, it’s easier to build spec because there are fewer hoops to jump through but straw man developers still just prance their drawings around hoping for a bite while capitalized developers like Kane and Heritage build when *they see fit. Their buildings keep filling up so the system is obviously working. If anything, your 40 to 40 + odds go up as developable lots are eaten up. The reason central cities have tall buildings at all is exactly for this reason…enough people want to be there that the only way to accommodate them is go up. Right now all accommodations are met with the easy 20 story UDO rules. Raising that up in an expanded area wouldn’t do anything to encourage monument building. It’s not the guilded age or the roaring 20’s anymore and smart building outweighs ‘making a statement’ or whatever lame reason people on here use to justify their salivation over super tall buildings.
5 Likes
Mark,
301 Hillsborough is a good example of how the UDO isn’t working. The proposal is for 3 20-story buildings on the same block. A better system would see 25, 20 and 15 story mix of sizes with the same overall square footage, same demand.
2 Likes
Seems slightly offensive to call other’s comments lame but whatever. To each his own.
As for “all accommodations are met with the easy 20 story UDO rules”, that isn’t accurate. Downtown Raleigh has a shortage of office space that isn’t getting fixed with 20 story buildings. The Dillon is completely leased. You can’t get 5k sqf at One Glenwood and it hasn’t even opened. Fallon at 301 Hillsborough and the Nexus tower at the N&O site are being built on spec because of that so going higher would help. Doesnt mean rezoning will get approved. It seems we should encourage those that want to build higher and take advantage of their land so we can provide commercial space for those businesses that want to exist in DTR.
8 Likes
God if they could only been able to add 10 to 15 more floors, that would have been a much more significant impact.
2 Likes
What, beside the Reynolds “The Raleigh” tower was proposed at over 20 stories? Edison? Ha.
The Lafayette and the original One Glenwood are two concrete examples. I also recall 30 floor residential/hotel plans for either the 401 Hillsborough block or somewhere adjacent. There was also a 30 floor building planned for the block north of the PNC tower? Or somewhere adjacent to there.
Point to any block in Raleigh being developed now, there was likely something taller planned for it 12 years ago.
I’m willing to concede some of this is not due to the height limit but the fact that we will never really fully return to the housing market we had pre 2008, and Raleigh’s highrise market was never as strong as the boom cities it is often compared to. To say the UDO isn’t contributing though seems unlikely.
I definitely think that the financing options that were available pre-2008 contributed to the grander plans for housing in particular.
I also seem to remember that First Citizens planned a tower downtown. Perhaps that’s the one that you’re thinking of to the north of PNC?
2 Likes
Call me lame all one would want… I loved 7th grade. We complained for years for density over height and now thankfully, we have the density equation pretty much solved. Now, it’s only natural to expect height to enter the discussion as long as the city policies are not self limiting. It is quite obvious the UDO (DX height designations) are serving as a barrier restriction to developers. Its not that a developer cannot stand before the city and ask for height increase on designated land, its just that they do not want to take the time after dumping millions to purchase the land. The proof is in the pudding when every developer stops and 20 floors outside of the central Fayetteville spine. The city really needs to put its head together around simplifying the re-zoning process between 20 to 30/40. Not everyone has the patience and deep pockets of Kane.
3 Likes
I like the idea of inserting 30 floors in here. With the way that the UDO is written, it’s like the city is asking for just two heights of buildings. They could follow a format that is similar to their current math, or they could go with something that’s consistent, and allows for an average of 15’, floor to floor height.
20 floors: 250’ (300’)
30 floors: 400’ (450’)
40 floors: 500’ (600’)
As for density, I’m all in for it and it seems to have legs of its own to continue into the future. Thumbs up from me!
3 Likes
I believe everything should also tapper down towards Union Sq. We don’t want the Capitol in a bit surrounded by tall towers, not that its possible with the churches and state buildings, but I still like to be able to see the sky and a view from that square in particular.
1 Like
Layfaette was proposed as 21 stories so one story more is all. One Glenwood never had a serious proposal from the Paramount folks. Raleigh MSA still maintains a list of the projects discussed in any fashion from the time period in question.
Edit: apologies @Vatnos , at least from the formative stage, several proposals over 20 were being openly discussed including One Glenwood. I’m still chalking it up to the overzealous pre 2008 crash though.
There is no guarantee you’d get 25/20/15 if the whole block was set at 40. The UDO *is working the way it was designed to. What you’re saying is the UDO isn’t written the way you wanted it to be written. I don’t don’t know what the source of the 40/20/12 step-down is but it really down’t bother me one bit. There is just this broad assumption that Raleigh is being stifled by it which I contend is false.
1 Like