Do you know the New Bern width from Raleigh to downtown? Do we know what they are planning to do with all of that median and businesses between Raleigh Blvd and Downtown? I assume it all stays and thinking the ROW on the outsides will be changed significantly?
1 Like
As far as I know, fom Raleigh Blvd to Poole Rd, it’ll be the same as the part from Raleigh Blvd to WakeMed.
But from downtown to the intersection of New Bern & Poole, that’s going to continue to be treated as two one-way streets, New Bern (eastbound) and Edenton (westbound). It’ll be functionally more similar to what’s planned for downtown streets: less like a busway, and more like an (unprotected; painted) bus lane along the right hand side of the street. Eastbound buses will cross over from the right hand curb on New Bern to the median with a (presumably) queue-jumper style, dedicated signal phase at the New Bern/Poole intersection. Same idea, but in reverse for westbound buses: dedicated signal phase at New Bern/Poole to cross from the median busway to the right-hand curb along Edenton.
1 Like
The corridor study to plan land use around the Western Blvd. BRT line made it through the Planning Commission yesterday. It was stuck there since November since the commission and city staff kept going back and forth about how to lay out new proposed roads around the Jones Franklin/Western intersection. City Council should be debating about this plan once again (and encounter the same headaches that PC did) in the next few weeks.
There were two votes in opposition. But as commissioner O’Haven pointed out on behalf of himself and his colleague Jennifer Lampman, this was more about a protest to a flawed process that seemingly enabled misinformation about how development works in Raleigh; it was not a vote against the merits of the proposal. Their opinions are best understood alongside their thoughts on the Capital Blvd. North corridor study, which I wrote about here.
4 Likes
Frustrating they can’t make up their minds.
What is a corridor study? since I stopped paying attention to all these boring logistics.
…It’s when the city figures out how they should use the land around BRT routes and stations. They’re making the case for rezoning land so taller and more walkable developments can get built, sketching out new sidewalks and bike paths so that people without cars can still get around etc.
If the city builds BRT but doesn’t put any effort into how we’d use the land around it, then you wouldn’t unlock all of the possible benefits of that massive investment. Developers don’t want to rezone and build on a plot of land unless they know they can do it and it’s worth the effort; this sort of documentation is what they look at to feel more at ease. Plus, the federal government expects this kind of work in the projects they choose to fund (or else they’d just choose to ignore it).
Basically, every time the city needs to make a decision or the state/feds/private developers want to build something new, they have to show they’re not doing it “just because” -but that they put some thought into why and how they’ll do what they want to do. Without it, investors could ignore you for future opportunities, and lawyers might even find ways to sue you for your negligent decisions.
11 Likes
Also, it’s not that the Planning Commission couldn’t make up their minds. Instead, the concerns of a couple residents in specific neighborhoods brought up points that led to very long, very difficult conversations. If you actually watch videos of commissioners’ discussions, you’ll realize that many of them do have their minds made up. They can butt heads with opposing opinions, and it can get tense and dramatic -especially when the people whose lives could be impacted weigh in.
I get that it’s frustrating how the city deliberates forever before a decision is made. At the same time, though, I think you owe our decision-makers a bit more respect.
If you disagree, then I'd have to assume you are capable of, and are happy to replace a Planning Commission member and: (click me)
-
read and understand hundreds of pages of reports about policy, design, and engineering;
-
personally relate to the experiences of people who live in a wide swath of places in Raleigh -even for people you’d never personally meet and places you’d normally never visit;
-
debate the pros and cons of every proposal that comes before you, even when a lot of critical facts are missing (and some risks may even be unknowable);
-
endure the wrath of angry citizens who curse at you and threaten you because a proposal you’re discussing ~feels~ threatening to their way of life (even if their concerns about congestion, socioeconomic inequity, pollution, noise, property value decrease etc. aren’t always rooted in facts);
-
and vote on decisions that could impact people’s lives -sometimes, even in ways that you don’t intend (but can’t help because of limits in the system)…
-
…when you only have 5~10 minutes to talk about each case, and you have a long list of cases…
-
…which you can only do in a specific place due to local and state laws once or twice a month…
…all while being an UNPAID volunteer. After all, city commission members are not paid employees. They’re just ordinary citizens who take time out of their lives, help make the City of Raleigh exist and do better, and dive balls deep into the details without pay just so the rest of us don’t have to.
14 Likes
So the line has been set up and approved for construction there just trying to figure out what going to be build and the design around it.
Nope. Not even the New Bern BRT route is approved for construction yet (they’re still finishing up engineering designs and land purchases), so the Western route isn’t even close to that.
The federal government needs to give a grade for how worthwhile of an investment it’ll be (and the corridor plan is one of many parts of that rating) and choose to partially fund it (over dozens of other transit projects around the country). The land use planning exercise here is one of the first steps of that, so the Western Blvd. BRT project still has a long way to go (including environmental studies, which is the biggest pain in the ass of 'em all).
12 Likes
I didn’t specifically ask for this information, but wow this is great. Thanks so much for breaking it down and really explaining it in a way that makes a lot of sense for those of us who aren’t as familiar with all of the processes!
9 Likes
It annoys me to no end when journalists are either too reductionist and hand-wavy or technical and abstract, and there’s no in-between for the rest of us. So yeah, I’m glad I could help 
One more note: it’s not like people wanted to make the transit-building process in America this complex for fun. It’s the sum of state and federal laws trying to please everyone a little but ending up making everyone angry.
Click for a fun history lesson, which involves how New York's Chinatown almost got destroyed!
Planners like New York’s Robert Moses used to be able to will their ideas into construction like a game of Sim City, indirect consequences be damned. But this pissed off activists like Jane Jacobs who wanted to protect the neighborhoods and parks of Chinatown, SoHo, and Greenwich Village from being literally wiped off the map and replaced by a network of highways that may not have even been that useful. Add to that how Moses was known to make decisions for very racist reasons just before the Civil Rights era, and you can imagine how people wanted to be as far away as possible from his M.O.
…so much that I think we’ve swung too far in the opposite direction. It’s gotten to the point, for example, that laws like NEPA that’s meant to protect the environment get warped into weapons that kill, slow, and/or blow up the costs of transit projects that should be good for the environment. That “biggest pain in the ass of 'em all” I mentioned in my last post is mainly because of this.
8 Likes
We’re straying a bit here, but it’s worth checking out the city’s Station Area Planning study for New Bern. This is the hardest segment to revamp, but again, it makes for a good test case. If TOD efforts are effective here, then imagine how successful they could be on the remaining corridors.
1 Like
Maybe this tangent section of this thread can be picked up and moved to an appropriate thread by @dtraleigh ?
That said, thanks for the link. I opened it, perused it overall, and clicked the presentation for the western station areas and gave a good look at the slide deck. I see absolutely nothing about substantial densification to make the BRT work. I read a lot of nostalgic wants built around what’s existing, history, etc. I see a desire to improve the status quo as well. I mean, seriously, who doesn’t want an improvement of their status quo if asked? Of course they get those sorts of comments, and these things are important, but they aren’t the only things that are important within the context of this infrastructure investment. I see a desire for walkability but no serious summary of how we get to it: as if it’s going to be successful because we will it to be. Sadly, it doesn’t work that way. I see a LENGTHY section about improving and adding parks, but nothing about high density housing to support BRT. In fact, I argue that what I read is preservation and improvement within the status quo with a dream of affordability, but without any serious roadmap. It’s terrific to listen to the community, but it’s a disservice to that same community to not lead the conversations that need to be had if we are to be successful. Professionals owe the community “how” we get to the walkability that they want. Professionals owe the community “how” we get to affordability within the context of a growing city. Professionals owe the community “how” we improve experiences and the money it will take to get there, and how we get those revenue streams to make it all happen.
4 Likes
You’re talking about the Station Area Plan document for the New Bern corridor, right?
That report mentions LOTS of specific policy proposals, though. (click me!)
-
Designating specific parcels to submit city-initiated requests to upzone and/or apply transit-oriented development overlays to certain parcels. This gives transit-friendly features the same legal standing as other zoning requirements. (p. 65-77)
-
Use that same rezoning process to require specific features for yards and sidewalks. This would be just like how the city asks developers in rezoning cases for specific features in the public interest -except now, the city would take advantage of that process to mandate such features out of itself. (Also p. 77)
-
Measure specific kinds of data to track how the city is meeting its own expectations in the realms of mobility, housing affordability, and community development (p. 80). This includes, among others:
- Vehicle and pedestrian crashes
- “Ridership trends by stop/station” (presumably ridership per local density?)
- Number of existing + projected numbers of naturally-occurring (i.e. non-subsidized) affordable units
- Market surveillance on developments built thanks to density bonuses
- Census on new local jobs, annual local investment etc.
-
Establish a New Bern Business Improvement District
-
Build specific trail, bikeway, sidewalk, and greenway connections to improve vehicle-free mobility, building off of upgrades for existing infrastructure (p. 51-55)
-
Fill gaps in sidewalks, and change right-of-way usage patterns in existing local roads (p. 40-47)
-
Build new road calming features like roundabouts, especially around Tarboro St. (p. 45)
-
Acquire the former DMV property as a potential site for new affordable housing units (p. 29)
-
Coordinate city-backed messaging of the historic legacy of Black communities along the New Bern corridor, presenting it as three walkable corridors. This may seem symbolic more than a practical solution, but it’s still significant given that… y’know… they weren’t paid much attention to in the first place. (p. 34)
-
Requiring financial and technical support for existing businesses that may be negatively impacted by BRT (and presumably, other related infrastructure’s) construction (p. 27-28)
It’s also important to remember that this policy doesn’t live on its own. Other new changes like design standards for busway-streets are also being developed, and city staff will be expected to put the correct combinations of standards together for each neighborhood and development application.
If you look closely at the City’s Comprehensive Plan, there’s a placeholder for future Station Area Plans like this one. This means the entire corridor plan like this one would become city policy, and future rezoning cases etc. will be expected to be consistent to it (unless there’s a good reason) per state law, just like the rest of the Comprehensive Plan:
4 Likes
Agreed that planners should ask what and then provide the how. We don’t pay plumbers to ask us how we want our pipes fixed - we tell them what’s wrong, and they provide the how. Same should go for planners, but in reality they can only do what there’s political space for.
Speaking of which, the EDAT report is already incorporated into the comprehensive plan - so it’s already possible for someone to apply for, and receive, a substantial upzoning along the New Bern corridor. The city didn’t include the New Bern corridor in its pre-emptive TOD overlay mapping, but it did include the corridor in the Frequent Transit Area map. So it’s not that straightforward, but there are other tools outside the SAPs that have enabled / will enable much denser housing.
5 Likes
Update on this: staff presented on the New Bern Avenue Station Area Plan to the Raleigh Transit Authority yesterday. You can view the presentation here, but I’ve snagged a few noteworthy slides:
Affordable housing projects the city is actively pursuing along this corridor.
Planned zoning, including heights. Worth noting that height bonuses are granted to developers if at least 20% of units in a residential buildings are affordable housing.
So yeah, not quite as much opportunity as Western and Wilmington, but I still expect to see plenty of action along New Bern over the next few years. The neighborhoods east of WakeMed might even become Raleigh’s third urban center, if they do it right.
20 Likes
Thanks for the update. I still have to say that there’s not a whole of height going on here, especially the closer one gets to downtown proper. Beyond the TOD overlay, there’s a whole lot of R 4, 6, and 10 going on. I’m still left wondering where all these riders for the BRT are coming from?
5 Likes
Well the frequent transit development option will allow for ~21DU/A (2,000sqft of lot area per unit) in 3 story apartment buildings in R-4, 36DU/A in R-6, and 54DU/A in R-10, with a maximum of 12 units per lot. Although the current text says NCODs would control where they conflict, which I find somewhat concerning given the number of them along this route.
1 Like
My biggest concern is that this turns into a glamour project for a rapidly gentrifying corridor that’s just becoming increasingly expensive. If we fail to show results in this BRT corridor, how do we ever get another transit project off the ground?
10 Likes
new bern is a tough one to me. wake med and wake county soacial servics (i think are stil there) just off of new bern (massive employers). if all the densification downtown brings enough young medical professionals in enough volume to that part…maybe a new bern BRT is worth it? but new bern is also borderd by longview gardens, acre plus lots on one side, a country club area…even bigger lots on another side. unlikely these peeps are regular bus users. when i lived on clarendon crescent in the 80s it was a pleasnt walk to new bern (about one mile) to cross the road and eat at franks pizza and get gorceries at winn dixie at the longviw gardens shopping center. i know it changed over the decades but even a sprawling neighborhood like longview had great walkability at the time.
3 Likes