I’m looking for an article similar to this that I believe was posted in this community. It was a critique of public meetings and how ineffective they tend to be, but I don’t think it was this one. For some reason I remember it being posted by @paytonc, or could have been @keita or @orulz, but it didn’t come up from a search. Anyone recall this?
Yes; It’s a 7 season comedy series on NBC called “Parks & Recreation”
2 Likes
The public meetings one. I will often watch this and laugh for a little while, then cry myself to sleep.
2 Likes
I just wanted to make a post here regarding how Livable Raleigh distorts the truth to fit their agenda. I saw a tweet by Livable Raleigh and read the article.
One of the key points it focuses on is how the Raleigh Comprehensive Plan modeled the growth of Raleigh. Since we’re way below the modeled population, our growth is low. I decided to first look at the comprehensive plan for what was modeled:
One of the key points here, and one that I highlighted, specifies that
the CAMPO forecast includes land outside of the city’s jurisdiction in the future annexation areas, or Urban Service Areas)
So, what does that projected land area look like? I wasn’t able to find a 2015 study, but I did fine one from 2012:
The population study assumes that we grow from 145 square miles to 211. We know this not to be true since Raleigh is, as of now, 147.6 sq mi. So, instead of adding over 60 square miles, we’ve added 2 in the last decade. CAMPO didn’t underestimate the population of the area. It overestimated the land that would be considered within Raleigh city limits.
The last comment of that article mentions:
Let’s not overreact to sensational news reports especially when those reports ignore the most relevant data in favor of hype.
How about, instead, we make sure not to skew the data to fit our own agendas, Tim? Growth in Raleigh is absolutely not slowing and you’re an either an idiot or a liar trying to claim that it is.
5 Likes
If you total all of Raleigh’s current Jurisdictional boundaries and add to them both the Raleigh Short Range and Long Range Urban Services Areas it actually does come out to about 211 square miles.
1 Like
I don’t think that anyone is denying that that ETJ exists.
Nearly all of Raleigh’s (proper) growth now comes from densification. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me for Raleigh to aspire to 500/sm per decade to fuel the city’s growth, and that achievement would yield about 70,000 new residents per decade. More than its fair share of density growth will come from downtown development, while suburban SFH neighborhood growth will likely come from the empty nesters/elderly residents yielding to new young families. Liveable Raleigh would have you believe that every SFH is under enormous threat, and reality just doesn’t live up to their doomsday hype. What is happening to many “affordable” in-city neighborhoods is a 1 for 1 replacement of more modest homes with ones that quadruple (or more) the price of the previous home.
8 Likes
I merely gave out data devoid of any opinions. The 211 square miles is the utmost limit in size that the city of Raleigh can reach. Unless something was to change significantly.
1 Like
Understood, and it’s been that way for many years, right. This has always been the foundation to the narrative that Raleigh would be a 600,000 person city. However, with increased density even among new suburban SFH developments, 700,000 in this 211sm isn’t out of the question.
2 Likes
LR doesn’t complain about that, though. Wonder why…(jk I know why)
3 Likes
I"m going to guess that a lot of that Swiss cheese yellow is going to be challenging to ever annex since the property owner has to agree to be annexed. Am I correct? I am not holding my breath on the city ever reaching 200 m2.
Infill annexations happen regularly although they tend to be on the small side. As property values increase in Raleigh it will make infill annexations more likely. Highlighted in blue are annexations since 2018.
3 Likes
The problems arise in those no man’s land sections. Like New Bern between Raleigh and Knightdale. Ugly, chaos. Not sure if that section has been annexed yet.
1 Like
Not sure if this is the most appropriate thread for this, but looking for some community engagement on this Indy Week “Best of the Best”. I highly encourage you to vote for the following category, “Best Local Activist Group”. Hopefully you know where I’m going with this. Let’s show up!
https://vote.indyweek.com/people-and-misc/best-local-activist-group-in-the-triangle
ps. I voted for LGBTQ of Durham…
7 Likes
I voted for Livable Raleigh. Thanks for the tip!
2 Likes
Writing in Jonathan Melton for Best Politician.
6 Likes
I think it’s funny the stupid answers in these stupid polls. Really great job Indy Week
For instance, Best Reason to Leave the Triangle? That’s a real question??? Granted, the next question is Best Reason to Love the Triangle. But the 2 options…if you select “Cost of Living”, you want more development and more inventory to keep the cost of living down, but you can also select “Greedy Developers”. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
My counter…
5 Likes
Everyone knows Raleigh has uniquely money-loving developers. They’re angels in every other city.
2 Likes
Raleigh is hamstrung by the State who placed artificial limits on municipalities ability to expand. A City can’t just annex with some nonsense ‘vote’. A developer can request annexation which is fine but the City can’t just annex without ‘consent’. so basically people in these donut holes get to benefit from City amenities but don’t have to pay for them.
Another brilliant law by the GOP to impede our urban areas…so much for ‘less government control’
5 Likes