I agree, and I’ll add that “urbanism” areas shouldn’t rely on folks having to drive there in order to be effective places. They shouldn’t be just for our entertainment like Disney Springs. They should at least have characteristics of functioning urban neighborhoods. Having less reliance on folks driving to them doesn’t mean that people can’t drive to them. While these “walkable” areas are better for walking once you get there, that doesn’t make them urban, even if they are better than places that are inherently NOT walkable.
Yesterday I visited a friend in Fuquay, and on my way back (and while I was in the car already) I decided that I’d go to White Oak Crossing in Garner to see if I could find a present that I was looking for (I didn’t), and while I was there, I also decided to see what walking was like across that immense strip center and its collection of other strip centers on its periphery. I purposefully parked on one far end and explored by foot. Needless to say, the walking experience within the center was horrendous.
Dude, why are you acting like the victim here? Drivers have it all. You are completely missing the point.
Agreed. For Iron Works, this works in both directions. There is housing density built there, and other dense development happening nearby, but people living at Iron Works are walled in and struggle to walk outside of the pocket. So not only are people being semi-forced to drive TO Iron Works, the hundreds of people who live and work there are also semi-forced to drive FROM Iron Works.
i think john mentioned to me before that while the car may dominate having additional modes of transit and cycling outside of commute trips can reduce some car travel and with a slightly shifting demographic actually see more trips outside of personal cars. i know it might not be a lot as as a former resident who didn’t have a car I would have appreciated better alternative ways of getting around.
To build on the point that urbanists advocates forget that the reality of almost every city that boomed after 1950 is that they were designed around the car (looking at you southeast US). Almost every one outside of a downtown core has to drive into town. I live in the downtown core and I still have to drive. For a downtown to thrive and grow into something more self-sustaining, for now it has to accommodate drivers. And thats okay. We can all grab a beer.
To me, an armchair ubanist, cars changed the way areas developed for better or worse. Instead of a city or town growing along a streetcar line or a carriage way, slowly getting larger like spokes on a wheel, now that growth can be much farther out and those spokes can be quite long and hard to connect. Car dependent “urban-like” areas that you can only drive to causes increased traffic and a cycle of having to build more roads, more lanes, more car depended areas etc. The only way to reduce traffic and improve road safety is to provide people with viable alternatives to driving.
I think that the irony here is that to balance the need to accommodate cars and the need to connect new developments there needs to be a happy medium which personally I think RIW fits that. Can I bike there? Ehhhhh not really. Can I take public transit? Ehhhh not really. But its along an arterial road and with a few improvements it can be connected far more effectively than we could Fenton or North Hills. I’m excited for RIW and I can’t wait to see what else gets attracted to that space! Who knows, maybe it drives more development between downtown and RIW.
I don’t get the happy medium part. You can only drive there, so it’s a good medium between driving and other options?
Nothing is permanent, and cities can be reshaped multiple times—especially one as young as Raleigh.
For example, after World War II, many European cities were rebuilt with cars in mind. In fact, highways once ran through several of these cities. Over time, however, these highways were recognized as inefficient uses of space, and many were converted back into urban spaces.
Anyone claiming that cities are permanently stuck to function in a specific way is either being dishonest—likely to defend the preservation of a car-oriented, car-dominated lifestyle—or is simply misinformed. Cities are designed, and they can just as easily be redesigned.
And for the record, no one is going to take your car away. Relax.
Echoing ADUsSomeday. That doesn’t seem balanced or like a happy medium at all. Sure, it’s on an arterial road that might get better connections someday, but for now it’s still a place you have to drive to. I struggle to understand how making people drive cars to get in and out is a happy medium.
A happy medium would be having more than one option.
My point was that it could be connected in the future more easily than like north hills or if, for example, these developments were build at triangle town center. But ok, maybe ‘happy medium’ is too generous of a description.
In its afternoon meeting today Council discussed this intersection. It looks like it will be discussed in February at the Transportation Committee, along with some other intersections that are particularly dangerous.
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=powUDTvlbU4 at 1:11:37.
Thank you Jonathan for bringing it up!
Let us know if you plan to go. Take screenshots!
The Raleigh Department of Transportation invites you to attend the third and final touchpoint meeting of the Five Points Streetscape and Safety Study. This meeting will be held via Zoom on Monday, January 13, 2025, at
7 p.m., and it’s your opportunity to learn about the latest updates on the project, ask questions, and provide feedback.What’s on the Agenda? During the meeting, RDOT staff, with consultant support, will provide an informative presentation covering:
- Project Overview: A recap of the study’s goals and objectives.
- Recommended Near-Term Improvements: Building on the signal modifications implemented in September 2023, staff will discuss the next steps for improving safety and functionality in the area.
- Next Steps: What’s coming up as the study nears completion.
How to Attend: The meeting will be hosted via Zoom, and all residents are encouraged to participate. You’ll have the opportunity to ask questions and provide your feedback during the Q&A session.
Zoom Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84111555416
Date & Time: Monday, January 13, 2025, at 7:00 p.m.
I didn’t get any screenshots, but there didn’t seem to be much new information. They highlighted three options (the peanut, multi-lane roundabout, and one with just curb extensions), with the peanut being the one viewed most favorably by the public.
They discussed installing curb extensions as a stop gap, and there were several people who spoke against that, with one of them complaining about how “you have to slow down to turn”. 
There will be another touchpoint in March.
I do kind of get that with the curb extensions, though. At least if they’re anything like the couple I’ve seen downtown or at the Fenton (I know, everyone’s favorite model of solid urban design). They make a normal driver have to do such a slow and exaggerated turn, it becomes dangerous to other drivers behind or adjacent to the vehicle. I completely understand the goal is to slow people down, but it just needs to be verified how it’ll be implemented if it’s going to be a good solution.
Meanwhile I like peanuts.
I hate the peanut-bout. It takes up So. Much. Land. In addition, I feel that it will make crossing the street more hostile than it already is. Is the idea everybody likes it for that it supposedly allows Glenwood to be permanently “one lane?” (never mind the inevitable high speed right turn slip lanes that always wind up sneaking their way into these things.) Or that it will “slow” traffic (never mind that it means traffic will flow continuously with zero gaps)
In short, I think the peanut-bout is terrible and will not improve Five Points.
On another topic related to this thread, it looks like the intersection downhill from RIW (Atlantic & Hodges) is getting a call-out (on WRAL) as dangerous as well.
Really sounds like it’s time for Atlantic from at least Capital to Six Forks to get a more people-friendly redo.
I drove by that accident, wild to see the video.
The speed limit on Atlantic is a complete joke, the road is clearly built for higher speeds but the intersections aren’t.
Holy crap that accident was insane. I suppose that nobody lost their life or we would have heard about that? 
To be clear, I only like peanuts themselves, not the intersection design per se. I don’t know or really care about this project. I hope whatever they do turns out well because the 2 times a year I drive through Five Points I can see it needs work. Plus all the high profile accidents over the years.