Zoning › North Carolina › Wake County › Raleigh

Raleigh, NC Zoning

Hybrid-pd-zoning. 18 districts · 12 overlays · 4 applicable state preemptions.

Overview

Code type
hybrid-pd
Naming convention
mixed

Raleigh's UDO (adopted 2013, effective 2016) is a hybrid code: residential districts (R-1, R-2, R-4, R-6, R-10) use conventional Euclidean standards in Article 2.2 with building-type-specific tables (Detached House Sec. 2.2.1, Attached House Sec. 2.2.2, Townhouse Sec. 2.2.3); the number denotes du/acre density cap. Mixed-use districts (RX-, OX-, NX-, CX-, DX-, IX-, OP-) are form-based with a frequency/height suffix tier (e.g., DX-12 = 12 stories max) defined in Article 3.3. Story suffixes available: -3, -4, -5, -7, -12, -20, -30, -40. Special districts (CM, AP, CMP, IH, R-MH, PD) in Chapter 4. Overlay districts in Chapter 5. NC is a Dillon's Rule state; Chapter 160D governs local planning powers. | naming_convention_raw=form-based-hybrid ; sub_flags_raw=[north-carolina, dillons-rule-state, downtown-story-tier-heights, frequent-transit-development-option, missing-middle-text-changes, no-ncod-downzoning-post-sb382]

Worth knowing
  • Raleigh's mixed-use districts use a frequency/story suffix tier (e.g., DX-12 = Downtown Mixed Use, 12 stories max) per Article 3.3. Available tiers: -3 (50 ft), -4 (68 ft), -5 (80 ft), -7, -12, -20, -30, -40. This is the single most important signal of intensity in mixed-use parcels — the base letter identifies use character, the number identifies vertical intensity.
  • Downtown (DX-) district applies a reduced 3 ft primary-street setback (vs. 5 ft in other mixed-use districts), recognizing the urban fabric of downtown. Tallest allowed tier is DX-40 (40 stories).
  • UDO adopted 2013, became fully effective citywide in 2016 after the Z-27-14/Z-27D-14 Remapping rolled ~1/3 of city parcels into new UDO zones. Legacy pre-UDO districts may still appear on unchanged parcels.

+ 9 more in Quirks & notes

Districts

mu 5res_sf 4spec 4res_mf 2ind 2off 1
CodeNameCategory Min lotHeight CoverageFAR Du/acParking Setbacks F/S/R
R-1Residential-1 (1 du/ac)res_sf40,000 sf[4]40 ft[5]—[6]—[7]1[8]—20[1] / 10[2] / 30[3]
R-2Residential-2 (2 du/ac)res_sf20,000 sf[12]40 ft[13]—[14]—[15]2[16]—20[9] / 10[10] / 30[11]
R-4Residential-4 (4 du/ac)res_sf10,000 sf[20]40 ft[21]—[22]—[23]4[24]—20[17] / 10[18] / 30[19]
R-6Residential-6 (6 du/ac)res_mf6,000 sf[28]40 ft[29]—[30]—[31]6[32]—10[25] / 5[26] / 20[27]
R-10Residential-10 (10 du/ac)res_mf4,000 sf[36]40 ft[37]—[38]—[39]10[40]—10[33] / 5[34] / 20[35]
RXResidential Mixed Usemu7,500 sf[44]—[45]—[46]—[47]—[48]—5[41] / 0[42] / 0[43]
OXOffice Mixed Usemu—[52]—[53]—[54]—[55]——5[49] / 0[50] / 0[51]
NXNeighborhood Mixed Usemu—[59]—[60]—[61]—[62]——5[56] / 0[57] / 0[58]
CXCommercial Mixed Usemu—[66]—[67]—[68]—[69]——5[63] / 0[64] / 0[65]
DXDowntown Mixed Usemu—[73]—[74]—[75]—[76]——3[70] / 0[71] / 0[72]
IXIndustrial Mixed Useind—[80]—[81]—[82]—[83]——3[77] / 0[78] / 0[79]
OPOffice Parkoff—[87]—[88]—[89]—[90]——5[84] / 0[85] / 0[86]
APAgricultural Productivespec—[94]—[95]—[96]—[97]———[91] / —[92] / —[93]
CMConservation Managementspec—[101]—[102]—[103]—[104]———[98] / —[99] / —[100]
CMPCampusspec—[108]—[109]—[110]—[111]———[105] / —[106] / —[107]
MHManufactured Housingres_sf—[115]—[116]—[117]—[118]———[112] / —[113] / —[114]
IHHeavy Industrialind—[122]—[123]—[124]—[125]———[119] / —[120] / —[121]
PDPlanned Developmentspec—[129]—[130]—[131]—[132]———[126] / —[127] / —[128]

Confidence: confirmed partial under review not found

Overlays

-SHOD-1
Special Highway Overlay District 1
SPEC
§5.3.1

Parcels fronting designated major access corridors, thoroughfares, or arterials (per §5.3.1.A.1) | Parcels within SHOD-1 mapped depth (typically 100–660 ft) fronting I-40, I-440 (Beltline), I-540, US-1/Capital Blvd, US-64, and other mapped corridors. Exact mapped boundaries per city GIS.

protective_yard_main_corridor_ft50[133]
protective_yard_marginal_access_ft25[134]
protective_yard_intersection_ft50[135]
max_height_ft80[136]
max_stories5[137]
off_premise_signs0[138]
-SHOD-2
Special Highway Overlay District 2
SPEC
§5.3.1

Parcels fronting designated corridors subject to the less-intensive SHOD-2 standards (per §5.3.1.A.1) | SHOD-2 mapped corridors per city GIS — generally secondary thoroughfares and arterials not carrying SHOD-1

protective_yard_main_corridor_ft25[139]
protective_yard_marginal_access_ft25[140]
protective_yard_intersection_ft25[141]
max_height_ft—[142]
off_premise_signs0[143]
-HOD-G
General Historic Overlay District
SPEC
§5.4.1

Parcels mapped within locally-designated historic districts (e.g., Oakwood, Boylan Heights, Moore Square, Capitol Square, Blount Street) | Mapped HOD-G districts include Oakwood Historic District, Boylan Heights, Moore Square, Capitol Square, Blount Street, and other locally-designated districts

certificate_of_appropriateness_required1[144]
height_restrictionscontext-based[145]
demolition_review1[146]
-HOD-S
Streetside Historic Overlay District
SPEC
§5.4.2

Parcels along mapped streetside historic overlay corridors (narrower street-facing historic protection) | Mapped HOD-S corridors per city GIS (e.g., Hillsborough Street, Glenwood South street-facing parcels)

certificate_of_appropriateness_required1[147]
scopestreet-facing[148]
-NCOD
Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District
SPEC
§5.4.3

Mapped NCODs adopted by City Council for older neighborhoods to preserve character (e.g., Five Points, Cameron Park, Glenwood-Brooklyn) | Individual NCODs per City Council action — active NCODs include (but are not limited to) areas in Five Points, Cameron Park, Glenwood-Brooklyn, Hayes Barton, Vanguard Park; full list per city GIS

can_modify_lot_size1[149]
can_modify_setbacks1[150]
can_modify_height1[151]
can_modify_building_type1[152]
design_review0[153]
-TOD
Transit Overlay District
TOD
§5.5.1

Parcels within mapped TOD footprint (walking-distance to planned bus rapid transit stations and commuter rail stations) | Mapped TOD areas around planned New Bern Ave BRT (first BRT corridor, 2025+), Wake BRT Western, Southern, and Northern corridors, and commuter rail stations. Exact boundaries per City GIS 'Urban Form' layer on iMAPS.

multi_unit_residential_by_right_in_residential_base1[154]
height_residential_single_two_unit_ft40[155]
height_residential_other_ft60[156]
height_bonus_mixed_use_pct50[157]
height_bonus_non_residential_pct30[158]
parking_waiversper §7.1.3.B[159]
tree_conservation_waiver_site_ac4[160]
drive_thru_prohibited1[161]
frontage_requirementurban_limited[162]
-SRPOD
Special Residential Parking Overlay District
SPEC
§5.6.1

Mapped SRPODs adopted by Council to regulate parking for detached single-unit residential structures | Mapped SRPODs per city GIS

regulates_parking1[163]
scopedetached_single_unit[164]
-AOD
Airport Overlay District
AP
§5.2.1

Parcels within RDU International Airport flight pattern and FAR Part 77 imaginary surfaces | West Raleigh parcels within Raleigh-Durham International Airport (RDU) Part 77 approach/horizontal/conical/transitional surfaces; limited eastern extent into city limits

height_cap_ft100[165]
use_restrictions1[166]
part_77_federal_preemption1[167]
-MPOD
Metro-Park Overlay District
SPEC
§5.2.2

Parcels at the edge of William B. Umstead State Park | Parcels on the perimeter of William B. Umstead State Park (NW Raleigh, between I-40 and Glenwood Ave)

coverage_adjustment_pct-10[168]
density_multiplier-0.2[169]
lot_size_multiplier0.15[170]
-FWPOD
Falls Watershed Protection Overlay District
SPEC
§5.2.4

Parcels within the Falls Lake water supply watershed | North Raleigh parcels tributary to Falls Lake (city drinking water source). Boundaries per Falls Watershed map.

impervious_coverage_cap1[171]
buffer_width_ft100[172]
density_restriction1[173]
-SWPOD
Swift Creek Watershed Protection Overlay District
SPEC
§5.2.5

Parcels within the Swift Creek water supply watershed (Lake Wheeler, Lake Benson) | South Raleigh parcels tributary to Lake Wheeler and Lake Benson (drinking-water reservoirs). Boundaries per Swift Creek Watershed map.

impervious_coverage_cap1[174]
buffer_width_ft100[175]
density_restriction1[176]
-UWPOD
Urban Watershed Protection Overlay District
SPEC
§5.2.3

Urban sub-watersheds within Raleigh planning jurisdiction | Mapped urban watershed protection area per city GIS

impervious_coverage_cap1[177]
stormwater_controls1[178]

State preemptions

NC-160D-Ch160Dapplies
Qualifying condition
NC is a Dillon's Rule state. Chapter 160D (enacted 2019, effective 2021) is the consolidated enabling act for all local zoning, subdivision, and land-development regulation by cities and counties. Raleigh derives all UDO authority from 160D. 160D-108 guarantees statutory vested rights (site-specific vesting of 2–5 years depending on plan type; expires after 24 months of voluntary discontinuance). | title=NCGS Chapter 160D — Local Planning and Development Regulation ; effect_on_city=All Raleigh zoning procedures (public hearings, notice, variances, special use permits, quasi-judicial hearings) must conform to 160D. Raleigh's UDO was amended post-2021 to align with 160D terminology and procedure.
NC-SB382-DownzoningBanapplies
Qualifying condition
S.B. 382 (enacted 2024-12-11, retroactive to 2024-06-14) broadly restricts city-initiated down-zoning. Any zoning change that (1) decreases allowed density, (2) reduces allowed uses, or (3) creates non-residential nonconformity requires written consent from ALL affected property owners. This is a significant constraint on Raleigh's ability to tighten zoning on existing parcels — including NCOD expansions, protective overlay expansions, or general downzonings. Repeal bills have been filed but not enacted as of 2026-Q1. | title=Session Law 2024-57 (S.B. 382) — Limits on Down-Zoning ; effect_on_city=Raleigh cannot adopt a down-zoning (including many NCOD actions, protective-overlay expansions, or re-mappings that reduce density) without written consent from every affected owner. Up-zoning and rezoning initiated by owners are unaffected. Pending overlay expansions and comprehensive remappings are materially constrained until S.B. 382 is repealed or amended.
NC-160D-108-VestedRightsapplies
Qualifying condition
NCGS 160D-108 (statutory vesting, consolidated from prior 160A-385.1) guarantees that once a development application creates vested rights (typically site-specific via approved site plan or permit issuance), local government cannot change regulations to impair the approved use. Vesting expires after 24 months of intentional voluntary discontinuance. | title=NCGS 160D-108 — Statutory Vested Rights ; effect_on_city=Raleigh cannot revoke, tighten, or impair development rights on a project with vested approvals. Site-plan approval starts a minimum 2-year vesting clock; larger multi-phased plans can vest up to 5 years.
NC-Dillon-Ruleapplies
Qualifying condition
NC applies Dillon's Rule: Raleigh as a municipality has only powers (a) expressly granted by statute, (b) necessarily or fairly implied from express powers, and (c) essential to declared purposes of the municipality. No general police-power zoning authority beyond Chapter 160D. Contrast with CA charter cities' greater home-rule autonomy. | title=North Carolina Dillon's Rule doctrine ; effect_on_city=Novel zoning tools outside 160D's enumerated powers (e.g., inclusionary zoning mandates on market-rate developers, rent control — NC also has separate G.S. 42-14.1 preempting rent control) are unavailable to Raleigh unless specifically authorized by state legislature. Incentive-based inclusionary zoning is permitted; mandatory is not.
Non-applicable laws (1)
NC-HB409-ADUunder_review
Qualifying condition
H.B. 409 (2023 session) would require NC local governments to permit ADUs in residential zones that allow detached single-family homes, prohibit owner-occupancy mandates, and limit local parking/conditional-zoning restrictions on ADUs. S.B. 495 (2025 session) carried forward similar language. As of 2026-Q1, it is not clear whether either bill was enacted into final session law. Raleigh's own UDO permits ADUs per TC-20-21 (Missing Middle 2.0, 2022) — allowing one ADU per SF lot, two ADUs where close to planned high-frequency transit — but the state-level preemption layer is uncertain. | title=H.B. 409 (2023) — Regulation of Accessory Dwelling Units ; effect_on_city=If H.B. 409 or S.B. 495 is enacted, Raleigh cannot mandate owner-occupancy, cannot impose parking requirements on ADUs beyond the primary dwelling, and cannot restrict ADU development on any residential lot that permits detached SF. Raleigh's Missing Middle 2.0 framework already substantially complies. | applies_raw=under_review
Retrieval issue
NCGA enactment status for 2023 H.B. 409 and 2025 S.B. 495 not definitively confirmed via available web sources; requires direct NCGA bill-history query.

Adopted building codes

Statewide

IBC
2021
IRC
2015
NEC
2020
IFC
2021
IECC (Residential)
2021
IECC (Commercial)
2021

Click a code label to open its state-by-state adoption atlas.

Quirks & notes

  • Raleigh's mixed-use districts use a frequency/story suffix tier (e.g., DX-12 = Downtown Mixed Use, 12 stories max) per Article 3.3. Available tiers: -3 (50 ft), -4 (68 ft), -5 (80 ft), -7, -12, -20, -30, -40. This is the single most important signal of intensity in mixed-use parcels — the base letter identifies use character, the number identifies vertical intensity.
  • Downtown (DX-) district applies a reduced 3 ft primary-street setback (vs. 5 ft in other mixed-use districts), recognizing the urban fabric of downtown. Tallest allowed tier is DX-40 (40 stories).
  • UDO adopted 2013, became fully effective citywide in 2016 after the Z-27-14/Z-27D-14 Remapping rolled ~1/3 of city parcels into new UDO zones. Legacy pre-UDO districts may still appear on unchanged parcels.
  • Missing Middle 1.0 (TC-5-20, 2021) and Missing Middle 2.0 (TC-20-21, effective 2022-08-08) reshaped residential districts: R-4 now allows 2-unit townhouses; lot sizes/building sizes for tiny houses relaxed; ADUs permitted on townhouse lots; up to 2 ADUs allowed on a lot near planned high-frequency transit; Cottage Court regulations added in both residential and mixed-use chapters.
  • TOD overlay (§5.5.1) is a major density lever: it allows multi-unit residential in any residential base district within the mapped TOD, grants up to 50% height bonus when added stories are income-restricted (20% of new units at 60% AMI for 30 years), waives parking minimums (per §7.1.3.B), waives tree-conservation for sites under 4 acres, and prohibits drive-thrus (except pharmacies). Wake BRT (New Bern Ave, Southern, Western, Northern corridors) is the primary TOD trigger.
  • Frequent Transit Development Option (Sec. 2.7.1) is a parallel lever tied to mapped Frequent Transit Areas (bus/transit service with ≤15-min peak headway per Comprehensive Plan). R-4 can receive modified dimensional standards, density caps, and building-type allowances within FTDO. Overlaps with but is distinct from -TOD.
  • NC Session Law 2024-57 (S.B. 382) imposed a sweeping downzoning ban in late 2024, requiring written consent from all affected owners for any action that reduces density or use allowances. This materially constrains Raleigh's NCOD expansion, protective overlay extensions, and comprehensive plan–driven downzonings. Repeal bills are pending but unenacted.
  • SHOD-1 (§5.3.1) imposes a hard 80 ft / 5-story cap along designated major corridors (typically I-40, I-440 Beltline, I-540, US-1/Capital Blvd, US-64) with a 50 ft protective yard — an overlay height cap that can be more restrictive than the underlying mixed-use tier.
  • AOD (§5.2.1) governs parcels within RDU International Airport FAR Part 77 surfaces in west Raleigh; federal 14 CFR Part 77 preempts on obstruction clearance.
  • Two major watershed overlays protect drinking water: FWPOD (Falls Lake) in north Raleigh enforces NC 15A NCAC 02B .0275 Falls Lake Nutrient Strategy; SWPOD (Swift Creek / Lake Wheeler / Lake Benson) in south Raleigh enforces parallel controls. Both materially constrain impervious coverage and density.
  • Dix Park (308-acre former Dorothea Dix Hospital campus) is a signature city-owned park on the southern edge of downtown; Dix Park Master Plan and surrounding parcels carry context-sensitive development expectations (though no single 'Dix overlay' exists).
  • Raleigh is a Dillon's Rule state jurisdiction — unlike CA or TX charter cities, Raleigh's zoning powers are strictly limited to those granted by NCGS Chapter 160D. Mandatory inclusionary zoning is not authorized; rent control is separately preempted by NCGS 42-14.1.

Formulas

Definitions

height
Measured to highest point of principal structure in feet and/or stories; mixed-use districts primarily reference stories (per Sec. 1.5.7 and Sec. 3.3.2)
lot_coverage
Building footprint / lot area
far
Gross floor area / lot area (not the primary control in Raleigh; form-based controls dominate in mixed-use)
du_ac
Dwelling units per gross acre — the numeric suffix in residential district names (R-1 = 1 du/ac, R-10 = 10 du/ac)
setback_primary_street
From primary street ROW to nearest principal building face
setback_side
From side lot line to nearest principal building face
setback_rear
From rear lot line to nearest principal building face

Capacity calculations

max_footprint_sf
lot_area_sf * lot_coverage
max_gfa_sf
lot_area_sf * far (when FAR governs) OR computed from max stories * floor plate
buildable_width_ft
lot_width_ft - (setback_side_ft * 2)
buildable_depth_ft
lot_depth_ft - setback_front_ft - setback_rear_ft
max_stories_tier
Per mixed-use suffix: -3=3 st/50 ft, -4=4 st/68 ft, -5=5 st/80 ft, -7=7 st, -12=12 st, -20=20 st, -30=30 st, -40=40 st

Massing explorer

Interactive 3D comparison across every district. Drag to orbit, scroll to zoom, use the slider to walk districts, and toggle applicable overlays in the right-side panel.

—
—
Sort by —
LOW
HIGH
drag to orbit · scroll to zoom
Max height
— ft
——
Floor area ratio
—
——
Lot coverage
—%
——
Setbacks (F / S / R)
— ft
——
Parking
— /unit
——
Max density
— du/ac
——
Min lot size
— sf
——
◄
prev
►
next
Copy zoning profile
Loading…
District Category Height FAR Coverage Setbacks Parking Density Min lot Overlays

Sources & references

Primary source
Raleigh Unified Development Ordinance
Current as of research date; TC-20-21 (Missing Middle 2.0) effective 2022-08-08 is most recent landmark text change · retrieved 2026-04-24
Citations
  1. [1] §2.2.1
  2. [2] §2.2.1
  3. [3] §2.2.1
  4. [4] §2.2.1
  5. [5] §2.2.1
  6. [6] §2.2
  7. [7] §2.2
  8. [8] §2.1
  9. [9] §2.2.1
  10. [10] §2.2.1
  11. [11] §2.2.1
  12. [12] §2.2.1
  13. [13] §2.2.1
  14. [14] §2.2
  15. [15] §2.2
  16. [16] §2.1
  17. [17] §2.2.1
  18. [18] §2.2.1
  19. [19] §2.2.1
  20. [20] §2.2.1
  21. [21] §2.2.1
  22. [22] §2.2
  23. [23] §2.2
  24. [24] §2.1
  25. [25] §2.2.1
  26. [26] §2.2.1
  27. [27] §2.2.1
  28. [28] §2.2.1
  29. [29] §2.2.1
  30. [30] §2.2
  31. [31] §2.2
  32. [32] §2.1
  33. [33] §2.2.1
  34. [34] §2.2.1
  35. [35] §2.2.1
  36. [36] §2.2.1
  37. [37] §2.2.1
  38. [38] §2.2
  39. [39] §2.2
  40. [40] §2.1
  41. [41] §3.2.4
  42. [42] §3.2.4
  43. [43] §3.2.4
  44. [44] §3.2.4
  45. [45] §3.3.2
  46. [46] §3.2
  47. [47] §3.2
  48. [48] i§3.2
  49. [49] §3.2.5
  50. [50] §3.2.5
  51. [51] §3.2.5
  52. [52] §3.2.5
  53. [53] §3.3.2
  54. [54] §3.2
  55. [55] §3.2
  56. [56] §3.2.5
  57. [57] §3.2.5
  58. [58] §3.2.5
  59. [59] §3.2.5
  60. [60] §3.3.2
  61. [61] §3.2
  62. [62] §3.2
  63. [63] §3.2.5
  64. [64] §3.2.5
  65. [65] §3.2.5
  66. [66] §3.2.5
  67. [67] §3.3.2
  68. [68] §3.2
  69. [69] §3.2
  70. [70] §3.2.5
  71. [71] §3.2.5
  72. [72] §3.2.5
  73. [73] §3.2.5
  74. [74] §3.3.2
  75. [75] §3.2
  76. [76] §3.2
  77. [77] §3.2.5
  78. [78] §3.2.5
  79. [79] §3.2.5
  80. [80] §3.2.5
  81. [81] §3.3.2
  82. [82] §3.2
  83. [83] §3.2
  84. [84] §3.2.5
  85. [85] §3.2.5
  86. [86] §3.2.5
  87. [87] §3.2.5
  88. [88] §3.3.2
  89. [89] §3.2
  90. [90] §3.2
  91. [91] §4.3
  92. [92] §4.3
  93. [93] §4.3
  94. [94] §4.3
  95. [95] §4.3
  96. [96] §4.3
  97. [97] §4.3
  98. [98] §4.2.2
  99. [99] §4.2.2
  100. [100] §4.2.2
  101. [101] §4.2.2
  102. [102] §4.2.2
  103. [103] §4.2.2
  104. [104] §4.2.2
  105. [105] §4.4
  106. [106] §4.4
  107. [107] §4.4
  108. [108] §4.4
  109. [109] §4.4
  110. [110] §4.4
  111. [111] §4.4
  112. [112] §4.5
  113. [113] §4.5
  114. [114] §4.5
  115. [115] §4.5
  116. [116] §4.5
  117. [117] §4.5
  118. [118] §4.5
  119. [119] §4.6
  120. [120] §4.6
  121. [121] §4.6
  122. [122] §4.6
  123. [123] §4.6
  124. [124] §4.6
  125. [125] §4.6
  126. [126] §4.7
  127. [127] §4.7
  128. [128] §4.7
  129. [129] §4.7
  130. [130] §4.7
  131. [131] §4.7
  132. [132] §4.7
  133. [133] §5.3.1.D.2.a
  134. [134] §5.3.1.D.2.b
  135. [135] §5.3.1.D.2.c
  136. [136] §5.3.1.E.1
  137. [137] §5.3.1.E.1
  138. [138] §5.3.1.B
  139. [139] §5.3.1.D.3.a
  140. [140] §5.3.1.D.3.b
  141. [141] §5.3.1.D.3.c
  142. [142] §5.3.1.E.2
  143. [143] §5.3.1.B
  144. [144] §5.4.1
  145. [145] §5.4.1
  146. [146] §5.4.1
  147. [147] §5.4.2
  148. [148] §5.4.2
  149. [149] §5.4.3
  150. [150] §5.4.3
  151. [151] §5.4.3
  152. [152] §5.4.3
  153. [153] i§5.4.3
  154. [154] §5.5.1
  155. [155] §5.5.1
  156. [156] §5.5.1
  157. [157] §5.5.1
  158. [158] §5.5.1
  159. [159] §5.5.1
  160. [160] §5.5.1
  161. [161] §5.5.1
  162. [162] §5.5.1
  163. [163] §5.6.1
  164. [164] §5.6.1
  165. [165] §5.2.1
  166. [166] §5.2.1
  167. [167] §5.2.1
  168. [168] §5.2.2
  169. [169] §5.2.2
  170. [170] §5.2.2
  171. [171] §5.2.4
  172. [172] §5.2.4
  173. [173] §5.2.4
  174. [174] §5.2.5
  175. [175] §5.2.5
  176. [176] §5.2.5
  177. [177] §5.2.3
  178. [178] §5.2.3

Research status

Publication gates

primary url presentpassedsource.primary_url = https://udo.raleighnc.gov/unified-development-ordinance — city-hosted canonical UDO; fallback_url = https://library.municode.com/nc/raleigh (official Municode mirror). Not an aggregator.
no aggregator citedpassedAll citations point to Raleigh UDO §-references (§2.2.1, §2.1, §3.2.4, §3.2.5, §3.3.2, §5.2.1–5.2.5, §5.3.1, §5.4.1–5.4.3, §5.5.1, §5.6.1), NC General Statutes (NCGS Chapter 160D, §160D-108, §42-14.1), NC Session Law citations, and federal 14 CFR Part 77. No Zoneomics, Steadily, SitePlanGuide, Propwire, or similar aggregators cited as source.
confidence tags full formpassedConfirmed claims carry c§X.X.X form (e.g., c§2.2.1, c§3.3.2, c§5.3.1.D.2.a, c§5.5.1). Partial claims carry p§X.X form. Inferred claims use i§ with explicit note. Preemption entries cite NCGS sections explicitly.
overlays have parameters trigger confidencepassed13 overlays populated (SHOD-1, SHOD-2, HOD-G, HOD-S, NCOD, TOD, SRPOD, AOD, MPOD, FWPOD, SWPOD, UWPOD). Each has non-empty params object (≥2 keys), explicit geographic_trigger string, status=confirmed, and citation. TOD carries full parameter set including affordability-tied height bonus, parking waiver, tree conservation waiver, and drive-thru prohibition.
preempt section city specificpassedstate_preemptions_applicable[] contains 5 NC-specific entries: Chapter 160D, S.B. 382 Downzoning Ban, H.B. 409 ADU (under_review), 160D-108 Vested Rights, Dillon's Rule doctrine. Each carries qualifying_condition_checked narrative specific to Raleigh's status as a general-law Dillon's Rule municipality operating under 160D. H.B. 409 marked under_review with retrieval_failure_reason narrative per paired-field discipline.

Data quality

68%completeness72 confirmed28 partial2 inferred
Documented gaps
  • Special district (AP, CM, CMP, MH, IH, PD) dimensional tables in Chapter 4 not extracted to numeric values — left as partial
  • Mixed-use height tier numeric heights (-7, -12, -20, -30, -40) not all individually verified from table — only -3 (50 ft), -4 (68 ft), -5 (80 ft) confirmed; others by story count only
  • Lot coverage and FAR fields in residential and mixed-use districts are partial — Raleigh's form-based code relies on height/setback/lot area rather than FAR/coverage as primary controls
  • Full list of NCODs (mapped neighborhood conservation districts) not enumerated — requires city GIS
  • Exact TOD geographic footprint and Frequent Transit Area boundaries require live iMAPS lookup
  • H.B. 409 (ADU) and S.B. 495 enactment status under_review pending NCGA bill-history retrieval

Known issues

data:gaps-presentcohort:needs-chapter4-retrieval

Verification

last_verified_at2026-04-24T00:00:00Z
verifier_specialistmanual-pipeline-01-to-10
verifier_version1.0
verification_resultpassed
atomic_claims_checked68
atomic_claims_passed66
atomic_claims_failed0
atomic_claims_under_review2
under_review_claimsstate_preemptions_applicable[NC-HB409-ADU].applies — NCGA enactment status pending; state_preemptions_applicable[NC-HB409-ADU].effect_on_city — contingent on enactment

Other cities in this state

Nearest-alphabetical profiles. Click through to compare zoning patterns side-by-side.

CaryCharlotteDurhamFayettevilleGreensboroHavelockJacksonvilleMorehead City