Jump to content

Dorothea Dix Property

ericurbanite

By ericurbanite
in The NC Triangle

 Share

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 552
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Richhamleigh, DC
Richhamleigh, DC
nicholas
nicholas

Updated plans for Dorothea Dix Park have been revealed: http://amp.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/wake-county/article219492075.html?__twitter_impression=

rancenc
rancenc

From October's edition of Business NC magazine. https://businessnc.com/nc-trend-the-gipsons-love-for-raleigh-promises-to-pay-off-at-the-park/

Posted Images

Jones_ City

Jones_

Posted
Posted (edited)

Here is a nice map I found of the area...its called a "concept" map but really has few concepts...just what buildings to eliminate and where access points would be. Noteworthy are 2 or 3 trolley access points. 

 

I agree with ya'll that too much stuff would destroy it in my mind....I'm seeing people wanting very narrow uses to be addressed....cyclocross course, world class disc golf course, off leash dog park....this space isn't all that big and the topo limits a great deal of it. Simple green space should be the primary use IMO. 

Edited by Jones_
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RALNATIVE Burg

RALNATIVE

Posted
Posted

 

I find it interesting that Senator Pate is concerned about not honoring the original landowner's request to use the land for the mentally ill. If this is the basis for his objections than I say it's irrational. The land was used for decades as home to a facility that treated the mentally ill. The land now has new ownership and those owners have the right to do whatsoever they choose with the land. Thankfully his concerns have no legal standing. If everyone held his same convictions then large parts of the US would still belong to Mexico and Native Americans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ctl Hamlet

ctl

Posted
Posted

Ultimately the General Assembly can do anything, subject to the NC Constitution and federal law. The land doesn't have new ownership yet, and even when it does the General Assembly can unwind the transaction just as they did before. The question is not whether Pate has legal standing, in the sense of suing to enforce a restrictive covenant arising from the state's original purchase of the land. He has political standing, and that's what matters -- but it takes a number of legislators, not just one, to make an issue of it. Do his Republican colleagues really want to pick this fight with McCrory? Or are his comments just a predictable face-saving maneuver? I think the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RALNATIVE Burg

RALNATIVE

Posted
Posted

Ultimately the General Assembly can do anything, subject to the NC Constitution and federal law. The land doesn't have new ownership yet, and even when it does the General Assembly can unwind the transaction just as they did before. The question is not whether Pate has legal standing, in the sense of suing to enforce a restrictive covenant arising from the state's original purchase of the land. He has political standing, and that's what matters -- but it takes a number of legislators, not just one, to make an issue of it. Do his Republican colleagues really want to pick this fight with McCrory? Or are his comments just a predictable face-saving maneuver? I think the latter.

 

The point that I'm trying to make is that the State of NC (in this case McCrory and his administration acting on behalf of the state) has the right to sell the land to Raleigh. Since the state is fully aware of what Raleigh intends to do with the land, and still elected to sell should be enough to put the matter to rest. The legislature, on the other hand, seems to have a bone to pick because they had no control over the actual deal itself.

 

The argument that this land will no longer support the mentally ill is a weak argument at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ctl Hamlet

ctl

Posted
Posted

I understand what you're saying, but the history of North Carolina is replete with situations when a Democrat-controlled General Assembly disagreed with actions of a Democrat governor. When that happens, the General Assembly always wins. Always. The question now becomes whether a Republican-controlled General Assembly will go along with a Republican governor on Dix. I think the answer is Yes but it's not a certainty.

 

The Council of State isn't likely to push back against McCrory because Democrats still have a majority on the Council.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jones_ City

Jones_

Posted
Posted

I find it interesting that Senator Pate is concerned about not honoring the original landowner's request to use the land for the mentally ill. If this is the basis for his objections than I say it's irrational. The land was used for decades as home to a facility that treated the mentally ill. The land now has new ownership and those owners have the right to do whatsoever they choose with the land. Thankfully his concerns have no legal standing. If everyone held his same convictions then large parts of the US would still belong to Mexico and Native Americans.

Ok, I have to share a WRAL quote that this brought to mind...I'll paraphrase...."this ain't what the Dix family said the land could be used for!!!" The Dix family? Really?

The land of course belonged to Theophilus Hunter the later portion of his Spring Hill house still standing on the property. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RALNATIVE Burg

RALNATIVE

Posted
Posted

I understand what you're saying, but the history of North Carolina is replete with situations when a Democrat-controlled General Assembly disagreed with actions of a Democrat governor. When that happens, the General Assembly always wins. Always. The question now becomes whether a Republican-controlled General Assembly will go along with a Republican governor on Dix. I think the answer is Yes but it's not a certainty.

 

The Council of State isn't likely to push back against McCrory because Democrats still have a majority on the Council.

 

 

This may be the reason why Poole pulled together a powerful coalition of area business leaders to support the effort. He was probably hoping to marginalize the opposition before it really had a chance to gain traction in the legislature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
BHennington Unincorporated Area

BHennington

Posted
Posted (edited)

Am I seeing development starting today around the Dorthea Dix property? Any ideas? Below I have added a photo of the area where I saw major clear cutting of trees today after work. Looks like a possible new pullen road extension through Dorthea Dix... hmm

 

ScreenShot2015-01-29at54054PM_zpsf72f4c3

Edited by bthennington1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jones_ City

Jones_

Posted
Posted

This is the new cathedral being built by the Roman Catholic Diocese on the land formerly occupied by Cardinal Gibbons school.

They are building the first piece of the Centennial-Pullen connector but not punching it all the way through.

How much of the connector? Just a little stub to access their property I assume? Is there a timeline for the rest of it? Man a straight connection from Hillsborough St to Centennial would be great. I hope Pullen would get sidewalks north of Western as part of a complete project too but perhaps I am outside the bounds of this project, whenever it's slated to happen...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BHennington Unincorporated Area

BHennington

Posted
Posted (edited)

How much of the connector? Just a little stub to access their property I assume? Is there a timeline for the rest of it? Man a straight connection from Hillsborough St to Centennial would be great. I hope Pullen would get sidewalks north of Western as part of a complete project too but perhaps I am outside the bounds of this project, whenever it's slated to happen...

Jones, I have tracked down plan for the 30 acre tract. You can see the connector on the east side probably will get 1/3 the way done. It would be a shame for NCSU to not finish the rest quickly. What a great bypass for traffic. 

 

NC0514-siteplan_zpsf2c694c0.jpg

Edited by BHennington
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
15895 City

15895

Posted
Posted

It looks like the legislature is at it again, undoing the latest contract to sale the Dix land to Raleigh:

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article16417289.html

This is getting crazy. I am really starting to dislike our Rural and suburban legislators. Looks like one of the main proponents of this bill is from Waxhaw, Union county. A wealthy bedroom suburb of Charlotte. A taker county.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NCMike1981 Burg

NCMike1981

Posted
Posted (edited)

I could see this stalling in the slightly more moderate House....or if it passes hopefully the Wake County GOP reps would side with the Democrats on this issue as they have in the past so that if it reaches McCrory's desk and he vetoes it (I'm assuming he'd be mad and veto the bill that unravels the deal he helped craft) there won't be enough votes to override the veto so the deal stays....

Edited by NCMike1981
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
ctl Hamlet

ctl

Posted
Posted

Council's designation of the "private placement option" (i.e. a direct loan from a bank) as the preferred way to finance the $52M purchase has the interesting consequence of keeping the matter off the ballot. There's not a doubt in my mind that a referendum for the Dix purchase would easily pass. However, I suspect Council's real motivation is not to have two referendums hit the public anytime soon -- and they are anticipating that the County will put forward its referendum for a tax for the transit program, which the Council very much wants to see pass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.