Let’s just say – the City fell short, big time. The BRT project has become a laughingstock, and the transportation system as-is, is modeled after an airline hub system. Meaning, you must go downtown first to catch another bus. Not to mention that one would have to walk along streets without sidewalks or ample streetlights. What would take 20 min by car is a 1 hour and 30 min ride by bus. But let’s build under the FTOD and TOD.
King Charles NCOD stands as an example of responsible urban planning, balancing growth with livability. Destroying it in favor of unchecked development will result in irreversible damage to its character, community, and environment. The city must seek smarter solutions that protect Raleigh’s legacy while ensuring sustainable growth.
Highlights from February 11 Work Session on Bus Rapid Transit as well as Public Comment session
Highlights from Council’s Planning Retreat
Council discussed the strategic plan during the afternoon work session and heard public comments in the evening.
I have experience valuing homes that are next to duplexes, fourplexes and apartment buildings; I see what’s happening in these neighborhoods. Once zoning is changed from single-family to multi-family, developers move in and start competing against families for older homes. Unfortunately, the builder always wins because they have more money and are willing to pay cash. Homes, perfect for a starter family or in need of being rehabbed will be purchased by a developer who will tear the house down to make way for a new multi-unit building on a small 5,000-square-foot site. (It’s called the highest and best use of the land). The moment construction starts, the value of a nice condition single-family home next door goes down; the appraisal term is called external obsolescence. Welcome to capitalism in America.
INDY Week, please stop referring to me as anti-development. You refer to me as “Livable Raleigh co-founder Stef Mendell, who ran on an anti-development platform.” This has got to stop. I am not and have never been anti-development. And neither is Livable Raleigh. Let’s try to work together and find reasonable ways to accommodate appropriate development. Labeling individuals or groups as anti-development only furthers polarization.
Neighbors are generally supportive of affordable housing, stating “Given Raleigh’s commitment to providing affordable housing, … eventually an affordable housing development will probably be placed on this site. Our efforts are to assure that a smaller number of units will be allowed and thus the development will be more compatible with our neighborhood and the environment.”
Homeowners being sued by a builder in Woodcrest. This lawsuit is made possible by the City Council which allows major developments without neighborhood input or process and rezoned the missing middle without providing protections in established neighborhoods.
Livable Raleigh and other proponents of Missing Middle best practices have lobbied Council for years to engage in a community conversation toward adopting Missing Middle infill improvements on the books in other peer cities that actually promote affordability, compatibility and walkable transit access. The latest, and perhaps best rules so far, have been adopted by Sacramento, CA.
Notifications