Reeves Peeler is a Raleigh native, went to Lacy Elementary, Martin Middle, Broughton High School, and NC State University. He works in affordable housing finance at First Citizens Bank and serves on the Raleigh Planning Commission. He ran for City Council At-Large in 2024 and is a former political campaign and union organizer.
Reeves responded to an article by INDY Week from his campaign account and has given us permission to reprint his comments here:
Raleigh Needs Affordable Housing
So, why are we telling developers they don’t need to build it?
As reported by the Indy Week, the City of Raleigh is seeking to remove affordable housing requirements for GoTriangle’s Union Station tower in downtown.
This affordable housing requirement was set in 2019 and says that 10% of the future Union Station apartments will be priced as low-income affordable housing for 15 years.
This requirement is a great thing. Downtown is highly unaffordable for most people and affordable housing by a public transit station is one of the best ways to plan a city.
This case to remove the affordable housing (named TCZ-3-25) came to Raleigh’s Planning Commission on March 25th. I voted against the removal of these affordable housing conditions. While the motion still passed the Planning Commission on a 4-2 vote, my hope is that it does not pass Raleigh’s City Council, as the case now moves to them.
What can we do?
This case will come to Raleigh City Council soon. We don’t know the date yet, but possibly during April.
Before it does, I urge you to email and call your City Councilor(s) and tell them you want affordable housing in downtown Raleigh.
Raleigh Deserves Better!
The Union Station affordable housing slated for removal is based on a common practice called inclusionary zoning.
It has been long-standing practice in most major US cities, but only relatively recently has been offered in Raleigh. And, even then it’s been in very small quantities.
Read here about how successful this program has been in Portland, OR – a city with very similar demographics to Raleigh.
When I ran for City Council in 2024, I often brought up the need for new luxury housing developments to include these types of inclusionary commitments, because otherwise, we have to rely solely on our ever-rising property taxes to incentivize affordable housing.
It’s Our Land!
New developments on public property are the easiest opportunities to build this badly needed inclusionary affordable housing, because it’s our land.
And, we can choose what to do with it!
GoTriangle’s Union Station, a City-owned site at 200 South West Street is a rare opportunity for Raleigh. The developer in 2019 committed to build 10% of the planned 385 homes at affordable prices, limited to 15 years. This would be great for the city and great for our working class neighbors who need a safe and secure place to live near public transit.
Comprehensive Plan Chapter 7.2 – Affordable Housing
Policy H 2.7 (Affordable Set-Asides in Projects): “Encourage a 20% minimum set-aside of affordable housing units in housing or mixed-use projects involving city-owned properties.”
Removing this affordable housing from 200 South West Street is inconsistent with this policy of Raleigh’s Comprehensive Plan, yet was not included in the City Planning Department’s analysis of the case.
View here: 2030 Comp Plan 7.2 Affordable Housing
There’s a consolation… but it’s relatively tiny
While some affordable housing funds are being offered as a consolation, there is no guarantee when or where this money will be spent, or if future affordable homes will be built near downtown, one of the places we need it the most.
Roughly $1.4 million in affordable funding is being offered to Raleigh as an alternative for not building our affordable housing. This amount is a small fraction of what comparable US cities require for such a development. Similar rules in Portland would require roughly $7.8 million, and in Minneapolis, rules would require roughly $5.9 million.
Raleigh’s housing market is just as unaffordable as these comparable cities, so why do we put less emphasis on including affordable housing in new developments?
If you appreciate the kind of reporting we bring to you
|
Please donate $10 or $20, Thanks for supporting |
 |