Hello North Hills just passing through on my way to Greenvegas down east.
15 Likes
Driving along Lassiter Mill I don’t love seeing the back of these buildings with the loading docks and dumpster access, but as you note there’s nowhere else to put them. The other side is a plaza, which is pretty nice.
4 Likes
Genuinely wonder if Kane specifically wants the Lassiter Mill side to be ugly and pedestrian-unfriendly simply because of what a pain in the ass that neighborhood has been about any and everything North Hills development related. “You don’t want urban density to fill in the parking lots next to your neighborhood? Fine, you won’t get to enjoy any pedestrian/street-level activation on your side of the neighborhood, then.” LOL - I don’t like it but kind of get it. Play ball, or else the ball gonna play you.
6 Likes
There is also a logistical aspect to consider. Buildings have to have their infrastructure somewhere. Even if it is unsightly, placing that access along an actual street vs burying it on a lower level then having to get large vehicles in and out to service those buildings. It just makes logical sense to tie it into existing access to the road network. Sorry for the folks across the street, but they can cry their way to their realtors offices and cash in property for additional densification in the area. I guarantee for the 7 SFH properties directly across from North Hills, there would be several times that many new households built in townhouses/mid-rise condos directly across the street from NH.
9 Likes
When I walk the dog, its asshole has to point somewhere. I usually don’t mean anything by it, that’s just where it goes
10 Likes
I don’t know if it’s that cynical because Kane has essentially done the same thing at Smoky Hollow. Other than his big grand gesture of the Smoky Hollow entrance and sign on West @ Tucker, much of his West St. frontage is the “back” of his development. He also fronted the new section of Johnson St. with a huge parking garage and the back of Publix operations.
It would seem to me that he wants people inside of his development, and the city hasn’t demanded that he makes his developments better engage the neighborhoods around them.
10 Likes
I don’t think it’s malicious like that per se but certainly Kane cares exactly zero what the pedestrian experience or streetscape is facing away from North Hills. He wants all the energy focused inwards. North Hills has always been this way.
10 Likes
Nah see I’m with you on this, and my comment about him purposely making the sidewalk experience miserable was (mostly) in jest… but to that point - imagine if, instead of whining about anything being built there like the neighborhood focused so hard on, only settling on “well then don’t build anything TALL!!!” which was a moot point, given that even prior to rezoning, anything built there was still going to be taller than their damn houses - imagine, just imagine, if they focused their efforts on getting some guarantees of a better pedestrian experience. They could’ve leveraged “we will not hinder a 20-story rezoning if you can guarantee limited loading docks and instead at least one street-level retail space” or something. Would it have gone anywhere? Maybe, maybe not - if there truly was nowhere else for the loading docks to go, or couldn’t be reduced to one opening up space for a retail spot, then that could’ve been communicated. But imagine if instead of just trying to block the development, which was always going to be a no-win scenario for the neighborhood, they actually used their collective power to leverage for something that MIGHT actually benefit their neighborhood and proximity to this building??? idk, call me crazy…
8 Likes
I hear your comment, I really do, but for just a second think about this as a prospective retail tenant. You want to pay big bucks to rent a retail space in North Hills. Do you honestly think anyone will want to rent a single retail space located on the back of a building away from the interior where all the rest of the retail spots are located? You will have 7 SFHs directly across the street and maybe a handful of renters from NH who actually walked around the back side of their building as potential customers. Meanwhile if you had rented a spot on the “interior” facing side of the same building, your target customer base will be much larger. So yea… as a business model (both landlord and tenant) a single retail space separated from ALL the others in a quazi-urban area is going to sit vacant indefinitely (IE, ZERO revenue will be generated by the owner). So what’s the point of building a space that will sit empty??
7 Likes
Oh I hear you, nor do I think that proposal would’ve really resulted in that, my entire point was just that it would’ve been a more productive negotiation point (at very least, mitigating ugliness) for the neighborhood than “hurrr durrrr NO TALL BUILDING!!! ONLY HOUSE1!!!” know what I mean??? Which goes for so many of the SFH neighborhoods that START their fight that way, rather than accepting the reality that SOMETHING IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED and that they may have SOME leverage to at least negotiate a better street-level experience for them WHEN that something is built. These SFH neighborhoods time and time again believe they’ll have the power to completely block a new development, which never happens, and then they just end up with a scaled down/shittier version of what was initially proposed, when they may have been able to negotiate some retail, or some nice landscaping, public art - SOMETHING that might actually be nice for them to look at when they INEVITABLY have a new, big ass building next to their neighborhood lol
5 Likes
It’s certainly possible for a retailer to have multiple public facing facades. Department stores do it all the time in malls. There’s one or more facing a parking lot while there’s one on each floor of the mall itself. It’s not impossible for them to have one facing inward and one at the sidewalk on Lassiter Mill.
9 Likes
It turns out Kane is asking for some exceptions to design rules regarding setback and walls facing public streets. Will be interesting to see how the vote goes. Raleigh to vote on next steps for new 15-story North Hills tower :: WRAL.com
2 Likes
The city should not capitulate on walls facing public streets. Kane has been given nearly everything that he’s asked for, and the city should draw the line.
3 Likes
Not sure why he couldn’t at least do something like this along St. Albans. Not retail, but some residential entrances, and not a blank wall butt of a building.
3 Likes
I think the issue is that they will want retail / dining on the other side, facing inward, which would necessitate something like this, on the building next door:
2 Likes
While I am with you there, I will also point this right back at the residents of the neighborhood that were against the development from the jump - had they focused their efforts on negotiating for a better pedestrian experience on their side of the street in order to agree to Kane’s proposals, maybe they could’ve ended up with a better development overall. Instead, they wanted to block or at very least significantly scale-down the proposal from the start, which is a no-win scenario for them as by now they should know that something is going to be built there regardless of their anti-development stance.
5 Likes
1 Like
“Commissioners said they wanted more information from Kane Realty before making a decision, specifically citing the need for a shade study.”
“I chose my home because it had a nice view of North Hills. I could see the sky,” Ibrahim said during the meeting. “I didn’t sign up for this. I thought this was going to be my retirement home.”
Stop building buildings! Someone might experience shade sometimes!
14 Likes
Ibrahim, please list your house so I can buy it. Thanks!
11 Likes