Possible New Development Locations and Projects - Rezonings

I also realized I never fully answered the question… the poll is solely for the rezoning case for the one site north of W. Hargett street.


Well, that’s why I asked a clarification question about the poll. Just so that I am clear about my position, I have nothing against preserving historic neighborhoods, but that’s where I draw the line. IMO, a privileged historic designation is not a trump card to then try to dictate what happens around you. I completely agree with the example of Ansley Park and how it abuts Midtown. There’s nothing about Midtown that “damages” Ansley Park or Sherwood Forest or Virginia-Highland.


2 posts were merged into an existing topic: “SoHi” and Developments Along South Wilmington (South DTR)

Saw this on LinkedIn this morning. I know there’s some doom and gloom talk with the Dix Edge Study being kicked back to committee, the potential council of slow, etc. It’s good to see Raleigh has 11 different cranes up currently for projects and I’m sure there’s some more on deck!


Now list them all! :grin:

1 Like

Not a chance lol I think I could name about 5-6 off the top of my head.


Alright. Finally dove into the weeds for the rezoning at St. Mary’s and Johnson. Wow, the influence the Forest Park Neighborhood has over this one.

Let me know what you think.



Yeah - people in downtown adjacent neighborhoods complaining about a 12 story building… Head-scratcher for sure. What did they think would eventually be built there as the city grows?

And about parking. Many people expect free on street parking in front of their house. I see it on Haridmont in my neighborhood when they added the bike lanes. People bitch and moaned about it, and now just flat out ignore the bike lane and park in it anyway. They say they need the on street parking, even though each house on the road has a driveway. And most of the times I see cars parked in the bike lane, the driveway is mostly empty.


The 20-story rezoning along the 700 block of West Hargett may get a shade study cause we can’t block the sun from the Joel Lane house’s garden.

Rather, Hubbard hopes the city would consider its concerns, one of the biggest of which is the shade a skyscraper would cast.


But the slaves’ plaque stands on a stone marker at the garden’s center, underneath a sundial. The house and museum wants Raleigh to conduct a “shade study” to find out how much and how often a 20-story building would block out the sun.

“We want to know our garden isn’t shaded into oblivion,” she said. “We don’t want a sundial that never sees the sun.”


This is ridiculous.


They have a point… how are they going to know the time without sun shining on their sundial?!?


Is this to the east of the Lane house? So any ‘shadows’ would be limited to a few hours in the morning…

No need for a study. Just look at a map and use common sense.

Or a quick google search.


Flat out anti-development. It’s the small tavern that started a big city, being surrounded by big buildings makes the historical point stronger!


The problem I have with these shade studies is that static images of the worst case scenario are often presented, even if those imagines only represent a small amount of time per day and only at particular times of the year. Any shade study presentation should be animated and representative of entire days across the entire year, and ESPECIALLY the growing season. The maximum shading is going to be during the Winter when the Sun is lower on the horizon and the garden isn’t in its growing season.


It’s these properties in yellow. The Joel Lane Museum, which is not in it’s original location by the way, is across the street at the northwest corner of St. Marys and Hargett.


Based on the direction of the shadows, the already existing Bloomsbury Estates should cast more shadows than a 20 story development here. The new shadows would cover the northern portion of the property, if only for a couple hours. This shade argument is NIMBYism thinly veiled by “conservationist” attitudes.


Not to mention the not so thinly veiled virtue signaling with regard to mentioning the slaves’ plaque, for which shadows have no effect whatsoever.


So, I just watched the hearing that you posted on the main blog page. Boy these NIMBY’s make my blood boil. This is especially true for the speaker who lives directly on St. Mary’s. Clearly the concession to not activate the sidewalk within 150 feet of St. Mary’s was in deference to him in particular. I mean, come on…
I LOVE how Melton basically put it out there that he is against eliminating sidewalk activation in this compromise zone. Good for him. I hope that this reopens the possibility that the sidewalk activation comes back into the equation for the entire property. If it doesn’t, can we make a motion that these residents are not allowed to go beyond that same 150 feet to enjoy an activated sidewalk experience? Can we put up an invisible electric fence and fit them each with a collar to keep them in their hermetically sealed neighborhood?


What would a non-activated sidewalk even look like? Blank wall? No doors allowed? No commercial space frontage? - if so, then wouldn’t that force the loading and trash collection area to this side?


When is the next city council session on this? I want to make sure I can sign up to speak. Many areas where the feedback from the Forest (acting like Cameron) Park feedback is moving things in the wrong direction.


That would be an amazing schedule to have auto-updated. This page says:

Rezoning Z-43-22 — 405 Clover Lane (District C) (Held open from March 7 meeting)

I take this to mean, “Keep an eye on future agendas.” :man_shrugging: