Council holds off on 5009 Lewisburg Road rezoning and related development agreement pending affordability and maintenance details

The Raleigh City Council on Feb. 4 left open public hearings on a rezoning and a tied development agreement for 5009 Lewisburg Road, delaying votes until Feb. 18 to allow the applicant and staff to refine affordability language and provide more detail on long‑term maintenance costs for a new Greenway segment.

The rezoning request would change about 21 acres currently zoned R‑10 to an RX‑7 conditional district capped at 700 residential units, with conditions the developer and staff proposed to limit height to six stories and require a 25‑foot protective yard along Lewisburg Road. The related development agreement would require the developer to design, permit and build a Greenway trail across its property, including a signalized pedestrian crossing on Lewisburg Road, and reimburse the developer for 50% of the trail cost. Planning staff said the project would need the trail to be complete to the city’s satisfaction before the 50th certificate of occupancy was issued for the development.

Why it matters: The proposal bundles a large rezoning, an affordability commitment and a publicly accessible Greenway connection that the city and the developer say will improve neighborhood connectivity and extend the Greenway network toward a funded park project. Council members pressed staff and the developer for specifics about ongoing city maintenance costs and the length and enforceability of the developer’s affordability commitment.

Developer and staff presentations

Hannah Rekow, planning and development, summarized the rezoning and proposed conditions, saying the site is “a little over 20 acres in size” and that conditions include a cap at 700 residential units, height limitations and a requirement for “a portion of the units to be established as affordable.” Ken Bowers of Planning and Development explained the development agreement process and the Greenway alignment, noting the trail would bridge a stream, run along the developer’s property, and connect to Wallingford Drive and an eventual extension toward River Cane Wetland Park.

Developer representatives said the requested RX‑7 district was a vehicle to provide additional density while delivering public benefits. Matthew Carpenter of Parker Poe, representing the developer, said the plan is “a rezoning and development agreement for market rate and affordable apartment units, and the construction of Greenway infrastructure under the development agreement.” Carpenter said the developer had committed to include an affordability component and to participate in building the trail across its property.

Council questions and requested clarifications

Council members repeatedly asked for cost details and how the city would handle maintenance. When Councilor Silver asked who would maintain the trail, Ken Bowers said, “the city will take ownership and maintenance of the trail upon completion.” Several councilors asked staff to return with estimated annual maintenance costs for different trail materials and with clarity about when any maintenance costs would appear in the city’s budget; staff said such costs would be budgeted according to the schedule and triggers in the zoning case and could be years away.

Affordable units: the developer’s draft condition committed to 3.5% of units at 80% area median income (AMI). Matthew Carpenter and the developer said they had agreed in principle to extend the affordability term from an initially filed 10 years to 30 years, but staff and counsel noted that change required revised draft conditions to be filed before council action.

Public testimony and process

Two speakers from the development team spoke in support during the rezoning public hearing; no one signed up in opposition. The developer asked council to continue the hearings to Feb. 18 so the affordability condition could be revised in writing and submitted to staff.

Action taken

Council left both the rezoning and the development agreement hearings open. A motion to continue the public hearings to Feb. 18 passed by voice vote. No final zoning or agreement adoption occurred on Feb. 4.

What comes next

Staff and the applicant will submit revised affordability language and other technical edits ahead of the Feb. 18 hearing. Council requested staff analysis showing estimated ongoing maintenance costs for the trail under different construction types and clarification about how and when maintenance costs would be added to the city budget.

Ending note

Because the development agreement is a condition of the rezoning, staff advised the council that the rezoning vote should precede any vote on the agreement on a future agenda and that deferral of the rezoning would require deferral of the agreement vote as well.