Correct. By right, they can submit plans for a building up to 12-story. No commission/council needed.
They were also working on a development agreement that could have brought Smoky Hollow Park to us faster and at a lower cost but that’s probably out the window now.
I love walking my dog around Glenwood-Brooklyn, it’s a beautiful neighborhood. One thing that actually would be nice for them - taller development will block off a lot of the noise from Capital and the train tracks.
Oh for sure. You know I wonder if at the core, it’s just the same old Raleigh car-bias showing up here. No problem with a six-lane highway but more people bringing all their cars? Not gonna happen.
How much longer will we have this city council denying these requests before we can vote on a group that knows what it’s doing again?
That’s at least another 18 months away unfortunately.
Maybe this will incentivize others to build down Peace Street like on Smoky Hollow phase 3 or that Zimmer lot. To me, and I think a lot on this forum, if you believe that building height in one location causes market effects then I think denying development in one location will make another more likely.
But who knows. 
I hope they build a 12 story building with 15 foot high floors ASAP. This argument about displacing businesses is valid, but has nothing to do with the rezoning. Is the hope that without the rezoning they’ll just walk away?
The hope from members of council is that with this denial vote they will secure favor in the eyes of the wealthy ITB voters, and that the developer will build 12 stories of affordable housing above non-profit retail spaces while funding the park build out completely and offsetting their carbon footprint with off-site wind power 
Hey y’all, I typically refrain from posting here as I don’t want to intrude upon your space. But thought I’d jump on to provide some transparency to what happened with this vote.
I voted against the motion to deny (Mayor Baldwin did too).
I met with the neighbors on this case at least twice. I also respect Councilmember Harrison and agreed with many of her statements. However, this rezoning request was consistent with the comprehensive plan, the future land use map, the urban form map, and the planning commission recommended approval unanimously (8-0). Staff recommended we the hold the case until June to allow them time to work with the applicant on a development agreement for the park and revised conditions. I supported giving them the extra month to see if we could get to “yes” on this case with the needed 5 votes.
The neighbors’ primary concern was height. It’s a narrow, long parcel already zoned for 12 stories, and the farther down the street you go, the closer you are to residential single-family homes on the other side of the train tracks. Closest to Peace Street, it’s mostly businesses and some multi family residential up the hill. Also, right along Peace Street there are already several taller buildings, including a planned 40-story building that was approved by the 2017 City Council as part of the Smoky Hollow development project. I had hoped that the applicant would maybe agree to put most of the height on Peace St., near those other taller buildings, and maybe agree to step down the rest of the parcel. That way, the tallest building would be near the other tall buildings, and the rest of the site would transition in scale. I shared those ideas with the applicant.
I don’t know if we would’ve gotten there, but I would’ve given them the extra month to try. As it stands now, they can still build on this site, 12 stories, the entirety of it, we’re not going to get any affordable units (which I know several council members wanted to see) money for the park or an agreement to build the park faster.
Now it’s time to regroup to figure out how we can still accomplish at least our goals with the park.
Regarding the small businesses, the site can already be developed 12 stories. I do agree that finding ways to incentivize smaller retail spaces that are more affordable to small businesses or perhaps the city providing some incubator space would be an important goal. We’re already doing something similar on Fayetteville Street with the teaching kitchen and food hall.
Always happy to connect via email: jonathan.melton@raleighnc.gov
As always, you’re a voice of reason, and I wish your attempt to reach a compromise, where most of everyone’s goals were met, was given a chance. Aside from my frustration that it was not, I think the bigger thing for this area is definitely the park. I had hoped it would get funded fully from the bond, as I think it would’ve easily passed, and would not be an issue now. I’m sure you will (or do) have some good ideas how to move that forward.
Side note, there’s at least 2 properties right here zoned for 40 stories (Zimmer and Kane’s Smoky Hollow phase 3) that I would really like to see move forward way more than this 12-to-30 rezoning, given their prominent locations. I’m going to continue to focus my hopes on those for the time being.
This is probably the biggest bummer to me. Can’t imagine the developer will have much interest/incentive to work with the city on the park now. Instead we’ll just continue to have ugly parking lots instead of a nice park that would’ve benefited the neighbors fighting against this.
I appreciate you being civil and remaining professional, but I’ll go ahead and say it for you: Jane Harrison is an idiot with zero qualifications to be on the council.
Come on man. Trying to be civil here also. Would you like to try and use a big kid word instead?
Not my style to be argumentative (especially on a forum, ha!) so I hope you don’t take this wrong, but just wanted to add that CM Harrison won with overwhelming support of her district; in my experience with her so far, she’s been thoughtful and collaborative with her approach at and away from the Council table. I happen to disagree with her on the outcome of this case, but there’s no one I agree with 100%.
And to be fair, she led the motion to approve the Baker Roofing assemblage rezoning (also in her district) earlier in the afternoon meeting, and that redevelopment will be transformative for our city.
My big kid words would get me banned 
I was mostly being crass for the sake of being crass. She’s certainly more qualified than a few of the other newbies on the CC, and to your credit she hasn’t always said silly things to justify her actions - but to use the scapegoat of displacement of local businesses that will inevitably be displaced regardless of how this request was voted on is just … dumb.
To add: Your response to this is exactly why I hope to be voting for you for Mayor in the next election!
The developer can also wait two years and try to rezone again. Maybe 20 stories.
Don’t think other developers aren’t paying attention to this crap and will eventually become gun shy to try their hand with this council.
How foolish of an opportunity to forgo affordable units, money for the park and an agreement to build the park faster, all because a few people voiced concerns about the height of the project or the hypothetical potential Endless Grind wouldn’t find a new location? I honestly can’t make sense of how stupid that truly is, I wouldn’t be surprised if they sell they lot and walk away.
So how does this work exactly because the current situation is unsustainable, they keep using the “neighbors” as the scapegoat for handcuffing the development. But what neighbors? All of them? Did you take of a vote from every single resident that can see this development and they voted against it? Or just the loud handful that showed up to the meetings? I’m genuinely curious.
Tough to argue against them when the only one showing up is support is the developer.
Let’s say 50 homes are in the affected area, of which 5 show up and voice concerns over the height. So the whole project gets sent back to the drawing board? Like I was saying this isn’t sustainable, and dumb.
Can me and 5 of my friends show up to the local school board and demand them to teach Arabic? The answer is no, but somehow this power is flexed onto developers by the smallest of the population.
