I feel like these people may regret this. He has the zoning for 20 stories. If they won’t allow the set back modification he may just build to 20 set back a bit further.
14 Likes
Exactly what I’ve been saying this entire time about how they are approaching their negotiating tactics all wrong from the jump. They’re gonna end up with an even taller building and STILL get a shitty wall of nothing along Lassiter Mill - just a little further back from the street, instead. Gotta play ball or the ball gonna play you.
5 Likes
TBF, she did buy her house in April 1999, when North Hills Mall was a shithole. And it has appreciated nicely, even without much update (looking at Street View).
6 Likes
It is definitely weird how many of these people complaining about NH development have seen their home values probably triple at least in the last 15 years. I live in this general area and have heard it in person and I don’t get it. I think to some extent some people just don’t like change.
4 Likes
does the CX-20 CU for this site have a height limit? If not, then the building could be even taller by right, correct?
3 Likes
Yep, just probably with a further step-back. And honestly, at this point I hope he does lmao
2 Likes
Look at all those shadows from the trees!
7 Likes
If Kane needs a shade study then the city of Raleigh needs to mow down every tree in park land or right of ways as they create “shade” too. Of course I jest but I have never seen a city so concerned with shadows of buildings in my life. You buy a home from a dying mall then it is recreated and your property value skyrocketed and still complain. Obviously to me this is about traffic not shade or anything else. I was just in Greenville NC plenty of very affordable beautiful homes there and no high rises anywhere near homes.
3 Likes
The shade argument is just some BS that seems to give homeowners something to gripe about in this area. This will pass as Kane will have his ducks in a row per usual. Just a stall for a bit.
5 Likes
You are talking 3 homes that face Lassiter Mill Rd there and one on the corner but it faces Currituck. 3 homes across what has been a mall or commercially zoned buildings and complex for decades.
I will repeat this again: Shadows move with the sun and time of year. To say these homes will be a perpetual shadow is ridiculous. In terms of the service bay heavy and extra landscaping could diguise that easily. North Hills faces inward always has both sides. That is what is ideal for the retailers and businesses. These residents can walk across the street to all kinds of restaurants and shops in a safe walkable area which is what many people really desire.
10 Likes
Objectively, the study will show that those properties will be in shade in the early hours of the morning during the Winter months. Since those properties are west of the site, they will not be in shade long as mid morning through afternoons will cast their shade within North Hills itself.
Livable Raleigh is just playing its standard hits for this project resistance. It didn’t work when Glenwood-Brooklyn residents tried to prevent rezoning of downtown parcels on West St., and it’s doubtful that it will work here.
FWIW, these few houses are actually closer to this proposed building than the houses were to the West. St. parcels.
5 Likes
The rezoning already passed. They’re asking for variances because the building they’ve designed doesn’t comply with certain code provisions. This isn’t a unique occurrence it’s just getting a lot of attention because it’s North Hills and Kane. If the variance request is denied they can just redesign and submit something that complies. They can already build the height by right under the new zoning.
20 Likes
I said earlier (but recently) in the topic that it’s my hope that the city holds the line.
2 Likes
Kane is pushing too hard. Everybody knows what the UDO says. He got the rezoning. The least he could do in return is put up a UDO-compliant building. Otherwise, let’s just abolish the City Council and appoint Kane as Czar for life.
3 Likes
My point was, it’s a design review/board of adjustments hearing on the actual look and design of the building, not a rezoning.
9 Likes
I don’t know what the variances he’s proposing are, but often developers propose things that are non-compliant but would result in a better development. If the neighbors refuse to play ball he will just build a big middle finger pointed at the neighbors that meets the letter of the law. (Looking at you, Platform).
2 Likes
Yes, exactly the point. We can see how so many procedural steps creates nonsense drag on the process. People are there to complain about the height and shadows when that part is a done deal. Stuff like this should just be handled by the office. There should not be public input.
6 Likes
These aren’t City Council decisions so I haven’t followed it closely, but I skimmed the WRAL article and it looks like it’s about the ground floor transparency requirements and a step back requirement when reaching a certain building height.
2 Likes
For context when the Design Review Commission is considering a Design Alternate request it is acting as a quasi-judicial board.
This process is not the same as legislative actions like rezonings by City Council where non-expert opinions from the public can be discussed and the decision is not subject to judicial review.
Instead it is an evidentiary hearing with sworn testimony by expert witnesses and the record is reviewable by the courts to determine if sufficient evidence was provided to make the required findings of fact to grant relief from the UDO and design manual and approve the requested Design Alternate instead. There are strict guidelines for this procedure.
The process is led by legal counsel for both the City and the applicant with an emphasis on getting the language correct, the evidence clarified, and the determination process followed.
A continued hearing to a subsequent meeting to consider amended and additional evidence is not unusual at all.
10 Likes