LiVaBLe RaLeiGh be like “We Won! Less housing!!! That’s what makes Raleigh so Livable!”
2 Likes
I think that name is in the eye 
of the beholder for sure.
It makes ‘their neighborhood” more livable for the folks already living there. While making it less livable for the rest of Raleigh.
3 Likes
I don’t have anything else to say other than, this design is what we desperately need to see in Raleigh:
23 Likes
Paywalled, but on headline and first line alone this feels like a PR layup for YIMBY types if they can take advantage.
4 Likes
Yeah. This is nothing like the other case. Go watch the BOA case from May. I don’t think the judge will reverse this one.
What is the proposal exactly? & where is it being proposed?
Market rate hopefully…ER has enough “affordable”
Yes market rate is what was proposed.
1 Like
Where is the proposed site?
2501 Poole Road in the King Charles neighborhood.
The Country Club is to the rear and they don’t want the TH’s.
That’s some egregious NIMBYism. Poole is about as busy and bereft of “neighborhood character” as it gets.
I’ve always liked the double porch on that house driving by it, but it’s really nothing special.
3 Likes
from the above: and everyone from Raleigh Country Club did not comment
Another “missing middle” housing project in Raleigh faces opposition from its neighbors.
The Raleigh Country Club has filed a petition in Wake County Superior Court asking the court to reverse the city’s approval of a townhome-style development at 2501 Poole Road in the King Charles neighborhood. The City of Raleigh and local businessman Mark Thompson are listed as the respondents.
The petition asks the court to reverse the project’s approval by the city’s Board of Adjustments. The project was approved in May 2024.
It’s just the latest challenge to the city’s efforts to attract higher-density residential development in areas that have traditionally held single-family homes. The lot in question backs up to the golf course at Raleigh Country Club — a group of trees separate the property from the 11th green.
5 Likes
McConnell (RCC owner) is good at planting trees between his course and the neighbors (see Sedgefield), they’ll be fine.
4 Likes
Mcconnell has a lot of money. You can litigate this for 2-3 years. Time = $$
1 Like
I’ve had Missing middle on the mind a lot in the past week or so. First, I’ll plug a City Builder article I wrote this week about a big pipeline of MM homes that could be hitting construction soon. Thousands of units have been permitted according to the city’s metrics. Read more below:
I had some time on Friday and after thinking about the lawsuit over MM coming from the country club, I decided to go out there and just take a look at the property. The same was true over the Williamson Drive property. I’d never actually seen it in person. Below are some photos I took.
908 Williamson Drive
The first three photos are of the house and the large property it sits on. Plenty of space for more, if you ask me, but if you turn around you can see all the yellow “Save our Neighborhood” signs from those living nearby.
2501 Poole Road
The property next to the golf course is also quite large and can hold plenty of additional MM homes. It’s also a nice corner lot with Poole Road and Kind Charles, just a short walk up to the Long View Shopping center.
I have some more thoughts on this but I’ll be interested to see how the lawsuits play out. I would have thought that after the Hayes Barton lawsuit got denied that it would have been unwise for the country club to pull the trigger but I’m not a land use attorney.
9 Likes
I’ve walked Hayes Barton and by that house dozens and dozens of times. I don’t think it’s an ideal place for densification, and I don’t think there’s anything altruistic about the effort to put multimillion dollar townhouses there. It’s certainly no “missing middle” in the way that we talk about the housing needs in the city of Raleigh. IMO, it’s a money grab. I also don’t think it’s an ideal site for the townhouses as proposed with its odd shape and rising elevation.
While I have nothing against infill and density ITB, I do think multifamily should be concentrated in walkable areas, and should build upon making those walkable locations better. The condos on Whitaker Mill near 5PTS are a perfect example of doing this within the context of a neighborhood village. I’d like to see more of that happen where folks who live there can do more things by foot.
I have to wonder if the developer of the townhouses had been more thoughtful in the way the townhouses were proposed, would have the neighbors been more amenable to them? The last I saw, the site plan was pretty crappy and thoughtless, and only seemed to have been proposed that way because it crammed the greatest number of $2M+ townhouses on the property.
I have zero personal interest in “protecting” the rich, but I also don’t have a “stick it to them” sort of vendetta POV either. I just don’t think that this is a good location for that sort of housing product, and I don’t think that the way it was proposed was good either. I’d rather see us building density in places where it will benefit the entire community, not just line the pockets of a particular land owner/developer. Go ahead and carve it up into smaller parcels and develop it like was done a block east on Caswell. That seems perfectly reasonable and appropriate for that location. Lastly, I think that this sort of insensitivity will eventually backfire on the city if the product built sticks out like a sore thumb. It will be referenced for decades to come as to why we shouldn’t build “missing middle” in single family neighborhoods. It could become the “Light+Time Tower” of Raleigh’s city planning, and hung around the neck of the city like an albatross. For those who don’t remember, the Light+Time Tower was used as narrative against funding public art for quite some time.
I haven’t personally walked the site on Poole, but its context seems a bit different. I can’t really weigh-in without really exploring it by foot.
5 Likes
Well said. The HB project in no way addresses MM in Raleigh & if allowed could very well prove a long-term tremendous setback for MM proponents.
1 Like
I disagree @John - The surrounding area features a blend of mixed-use zoning and higher-density development, complemented by excellent connectivity.
The 908 Williamson Drive evolving to permit higher density marks the beginning of creating walkable areas. That area has decent residential, some office, and hopefully retail pioneers will be next!
9 Likes
The “surrounding area”??? Is nothing but multi-million dollar single family homes. Bishops Park is across Wade…I don’t consider that ‘surrounding area’
You have to remember neighborhoods are constantly evolving and things are not going to maintain, cities incrementally change to survive, they add density to support resilient growth.
Currently, there is a significant amount of land with low density. Over time, the mixed-use property is expected to transition into midrise developments near Wade Avenue. The concept of the “missing middle” involves transforming the nearby blocks into the types of developments outlined above, which is why the townhome planned is following the transformation plan. With land costs too high for single-family homes, increasing housing supply is crucial to maintaining affordability for residents. As for Fletcher Park, its location just south of Wade Avenue shouldn’t exclude it from being considered part of the “surrounding area,” as, in urban contexts, a few adjacent streets often constitute a reasonable definition of such an area.
@UncleJesse I’m curious to hear your thoughts on when it might be appropriate to begin transitioning areas like Five Points and Glenwood, currently home to multi-million dollar single-family residences, into higher-density developments. Would it be when home values exceed $10 million due to severe supply constraints or how does the evolution work in your mind?
10 Likes