Northwest CAC November 14, 2014 Meeting Minutes

Print More

Northwest CAC Suzette Harrington Greystone Community Center November 12, 2014 7:15 p.m.

Attendance: Residents:160; Presenters 2;Staff: 4 (Community Services -1, PR&C -1)


Chair, Jay Gudeman opened the meeting.

Raleigh Police Department No crime report

Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources

Director Alicia LaCombe of the Lake Lynn Community Center talked about upcoming Holiday events at the center and throughout the city. Most events are from 4:00pm to 9:0pm at a low cost to participants.

Housing & Neighborhood Preservation Dept. No report

Private Investment, Public Input:

Doug Hill, City Planner, explained the process of rezoning and the new UDO for the city of Raleigh. The UDO was approved back in September of 2013. Because of the city’s growth, our city leaders felt it was necessary to revise the old legacy zoning with a more comprehensive UDO. Doug spoke a little about the following:

  • Anything under review by the planning commission is listed on the website •Public input is really important to the process. Public input can be provided at:

*the neighborhood meeting before a rezoning application is filed,

*the presentation and vote at the CAC meeting

*at the planning commission meeting, and

*at the city council public hearing.

*Planning Commission and City Council hearings are

public so that residents have an opportunity to attend and

offer their opinion

Doug suggested to attendees that they visit the city’s website to know what is currently happening in the city and sign-up to receive emails about any zoning cases that are currently in review:

http: //www echWebServic


Q&A from residents.

Vote on Zoning Case Z-30-14-Alexander Place

Mike Birch of Morningstar Law and Brian Purdy returned to the NW CAC meeting and provided a brief overview of the Alexander Place rezoning case. Residents in attendance voted 15-yes to 1-no for the zoning case to move forward.

Presentation of Rezoning Case 7850 Brier Creek Parkway

The parcel covers about 8.76 acres, and the application will ask for a rezoning to allow a mixture of medical and residential use from a current retail use designation. Proposing about 20 residential units per acre. This case is in the early stages of planning, and Michael Birch expects submitting the paperwork for this project within the next few weeks.

Vote on Zoning Case Z-22-14 – Creedmoor Road

Isabelle Mattox together with 2SL Design Build summarized the special features of the development envisioned, including walkability, proximity to 540, high level finishes and small lots with no yard to take care of that may attract baby boomers or young professionals. Currently, the site is zoned O&I-1 CUD, and the request is for zoning of OX-3 with conditions, which permits office & residential uses. She offered to add a condition that the site will handle 25 year storm water runoff which is above the 2 and 10 year stormwater events required, to limit the number of units to 10 per acre and have a 50 ft. set back between homes. She also offered to add traffic calming measures, e.g. to curve the road into Corberrie Lane. The point was made that office use would create 4 to 5 times more traffic than residential use, and that road connectivity into existing neighborhoods is required by the city for all new developments.

John Sibert and Rex Osborne showed examples of what types of homes that could possibly be built and spoke about what type of products that’ll be used. Based on the growth Raleigh experiences they think certain individuals will want to live in this type of establishment, basically that this is what the market is demanding. Examples were shown. Residents were concerned about the increase in traffic on county roads that are already not in good shape, the creation of a possible fire hazard when building structures with high ceilings in close proximity, an underestimation of traffic impact by the traffic study, the safety of school children whose bus stop is in close proximity to the site, and questioned why there was no connectivity planned to the business area. The question of a possible buffer towards the existing neighborhood was raised as was the question if sidewalks could be added for the safety of the neighborhood children.

Ben Kuhn, attorney for the Stonehenge property owners abutting the zoning case property provided insight into the situation and shared their concerns and mistrust of what is being proposed by the developers.

Residents voted 150 no’s to 0-yes on the project, and there was also one proxy vote against the rezoning received. The result of this vote will be presented to the planning commission, and the city council. The case is scheduled to go to the planning commission on November 25th.

Adjournment: 8:40p.m.

Comments are closed.