The Raleigh City Council kept a Sept. 16 rezoning hearing open for two weeks after developers and neighbors reached a tentative agreement to shrink the proposed apartment component and to consider removing an adjacent parcel from the rezoning that is not part of the developer’s contract.

The case concerns a multi‑parcel rezoning along Tryon Road (referenced as Z‑52 in meeting materials) in an area near Renaissance Park. Dominion, the affordable‑housing developer that plans to build the rental portion, lowered the maximum number of units in the project’s eastern portion from 175 to 125 units after neighborhood concerns over density and impacts on local streets and services.

“Reducing the number of units brings density for that area down to 5.7 units per acre,” attorney Toby Coleman said on behalf of the applicant and the property owner, Raleigh Golf Association. Coleman said the change was made in response to residents’ concerns and to improve compatibility with adjacent residential blocks.

Council members and nearby residents raised several recurring concerns: public‑safety issues in surrounding commercial corridors, the suitability of local streets for added traffic, and the project’s proximity to existing multifamily developments. Chief of Police Rico Boyce told the council that while the Southeast District has experienced growth, overall crime statistics did not show the area as a hotspot; he said the department planned targeted quality‑of‑life enforcement and outreach.

Neighborhood representatives asked the council to require stronger on‑site buffers. In response the applicant added a new condition requiring a minimum 10‑foot landscaped buffer and specified plantings along the property line adjacent to a fraternity house. The council also asked whether the rezoning can exclude the so‑called “hook” — a narrow, irregular piece of land that the owner controls but Dominion will not develop. Councilors said removing that hook would create an additional buffer for nearby homeowners; the applicant’s team said the owner was willing to consider removing it and that they could report back within two weeks.

The council left the hearing open to allow the parties to finalize the removal of the non‑developed hook and to return the case at the next meeting. No final rezoning vote was taken on Sept. 16.

Details: The applicant is a national affordable‑housing developer proposing rental units targeted at lower incomes; the applicant and owner negotiated a reduced unit cap during the meeting. Police and planning staff said they would continue working with the applicant on access, buffers and mitigation measures before the council again considers the rezoning.