Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rezoning Edenburg Model Home topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors push back as council continues Edenburg Road rezoning that would allow a limited temporary model‑home office
Summary
Council continued a split‑vote rezoning on Edenburg Road after residents raised concerns about removing housing potential and permitting a temporary office/model home; applicant offered to shorten the temporary office allowance to eight years.
The Raleigh City Council on May 20 continued the public hearing on a rezoning request at 105–109 Edenburg Road after residents and the developer discussed conditions that would allow a limited model‑home “design center” within a new single‑family building.
Planning staff explained the request would rezone three small parcels from R‑6 to OX‑3 (office, mixed use) conditional use, with multiple conditions restricting the permitted uses, limiting the size and hours of an office use inside 105 Edenburg Road and prohibiting outdoor signs. Hannah Rekau of Planning and Development said the package of conditions reduces the potential number of dwelling units compared with by‑right development in R‑6 but adds a narrowly constrained office use tied to a model home.
Charles Walker, representing the applicant, said the model home would function as a design center where buyers select finishes and noted the developer’s intent to limit off‑site impacts. “If this case is to move forward, [the applicant] would offer to change the time frame from 10 years to 8 years,” Walker told council during public comment.
Neighbors expressed several concerns at the hearing: the loss of potential housing because the conditional zoning would prohibit townhomes and other higher‑density options the UDO and future land‑use maps encourage for Glenwood Avenue corridors; stormwater impacts; on‑street parking and traffic on the narrow block of Edenburg Road; and the precedent of allowing a commercial‑style use in an established single‑family neighborhood.
One nearby resident, Shepherd Fountain, said the neighborhood had an established residential character and urged protections including a green buffer and restrictions on conversions that would change the street’s character.
Planning Commission recommended approval on a split vote (reported as 4–3). Several council members asked staff about tightening the conditions to explicitly limit any office activity to design‑center functions by appointment only and to shorten the temporary office term; staff confirmed that more restrictive conditions could be accepted and would require updated, signed conditions ahead of the next council consideration.
Council voted to keep the hearing open and continue the item to the June 3 evening meeting to give staff, the applicant and neighbors time to refine conditions and to allow residents to sign up for the continued hearing.
