Dorothea Dix Property

[Tayfromcarolina]

I wish I could make it. Make sure you make enough noise for me too. And give us plenty of info tomorrow. Good Luck against the nimby's.

[Justin6882]

^^ According to WRAL, it lasts until 8:00 pm.

[catdaddy]

Well 7:30 will be too late to go i was gonna try to make it.

[ericurbanite]

i accidentally fell asleep and didnt attend, so whoever goes post the info as soon as you get on the computer!!! I don't know if it is possible to take pictures there but if it is i hope somebody took some.

[orulz]

I went, and I didn't take any pictures, but I believe Romec did and hopefully he'll share some with us sometime later. But here's what I thought:

THE PLANS

The plans presented today were much more fleshed out and balanced than what we saw at previous meetings.

The "central park" plan called mostly for preserving/reusing the old buildings, closing some streets to traffic, and leasing 190ish acres of contiguous park space to the city of Raleigh.

The "city in a park" plan called for preserving the "contributing" historical structures, demolishing most of the the "non-contributing" buildings and building new 3-5 story structures in their place. The city in a park plan also called for more street connections, integrated parking decks, a grid layout, and a total of 160ish acres of contiguous park space.

Interestingly, both plans called for preserving at least part of the original 1850s hospital, and actually restoring the original entryway which has been built over with an ugly addition. Good move.

PUBLIC COMMENT

The anti-development folks were out in full force and while some made coherent arguments, most missed the point entirely. At one point somebody asked for a show of hands. Fully 1/3 of the people in there said they favored the "city in a park" idea, and yet every single person who got up and spoke acted like not a single person raised their hands.

anti-development fallacy 1: By adopting this plan, we are shutting Dix down.

Many people argued that it was a travesty to shut down a mental health facility. Problem is, that decision has already been made. Dix IS closing by 2008, and unless the legislature "takes it back" there's nothing that can be done. Not to mention that these people are making the assumption that outmoded space like Dix is the best thing for the mental healthcare system of North Carolina, which it is not. Dix will cease to be a mental hospital, and there's nothing that's going to stop it.

anti-development fallacy 2: Preventing new construction preserves Dix's "historical character" and gives us more park space.

Still more people advocated for "no new construction on Dix so we can have more park space." Well, as we see, by preventing new construction we get 30 extra acres of park space. And by taking out a couple of the new buildings in the "city in a park" plan you could probably gain those 30 acres back. Both plans restore the historical sections of the Dix hospital (including the original entrance) but the "central park" idea keeps most of the additions that were tacked on over the years, giving the hospital a very haphazard and almost useless character. The idea of being stuck with all of the poorly layed-out, asbestos-infested, old buildings on Dix isn't exactly attractive to me.

anti-development fallacy 3: Unless the land stays 100% public, we'll end up with McMansions and shopping malls.

Still more people wanted all the land to stay completely in the public hands. I still get the feeling that the people are expecting a shopping mall and a super wal-mart if private developers are brought into the mix. The truth is, LandDesign recommended that the state remain a steward of this land responsible for maintaining and carrying out the master plan. This means that any private developments will be subject to RFPs and will be held up to a very high standard. By letting people live on the dix land, you're not making it "their land." The streets, sidewalks, shops, and most of all the huge park would all be public space, to be enjoyed by all. Just because a developer is making some money off of a deal doesn't automatically mean that the public loses out.

anti-development fallacy 4: Dix should be like an underdeveloped version of New York's Central Park, minus the accessibility.

Many people drew the parallel to Central Park in New York City again. What they're not getting is that what makes central park WORK is that millions of people live and work around it. There are high-rises and mid-rises built RIGHT UP to its edge - no buffers. You can walk through central park on your way home, or walk to it from your office for a picnic at lunch - it's accessible, with private development right up to the edge. Central park is accessible from EVERYWHERE, rather than an isolated park that you have to DRIVE to as the anti-developers want. Oh, and let's not forget to metnion, that there are numerous transverse streets through Central Park, and yet nobody seems to complain. It provides better access and visibility.

in conclusion:

The audience was stacked in favor of the anti-development crowd. The truth is, however, many of the people were just there to push their personal agenda and were just playing off of the audience's "pro-park/anti-development" leanings to get a favorable reception.

In a conversation with the LandDesign folks afterwards they made it clear that while the anti-development folks have dominated the public meetings, the feedback that they've been getting outside the meetings is much more varied and much more open to the idea of private development. I really would have liked to get up there and say something but the audience was so hostile I couldn't muster up the courage.

Anyway, maybe I'll write a letter to the N&O tomorrow. We'll see what happens from here.

Edited July 20, 2005 by orulz

[Miesian Corners]

Just curious, I worked on the three comparable developments in other parts of the country that were presented in the power point presentation. How'd people react when they saw JUST how much open space they're getting?

[romec]

I'll make a longer post later today, but in general they really didn't care. There was only a 30 acre difference in the amount of open space in the city in the park vs central park plan. 160 acres of open space didn't really seem to qualify as a "park" to the friends of Dix (I'm not making up that name). I was surprised at the strong reaction, because Land design did everything in their power to preserve historic buildings, vistas and trees. Truth be told, the city in the park still looked like a "central park" except there was actual useage of the land where the hospital buildings currently sit.

[Miesian Corners]

Well that's just great. You spend days researching this stuff and then no one pays any attention.

[orulz]

How'd people react when they saw JUST how much open space they're getting?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Many people seemed incredulous that they weren't getting 1000 acres of open space out of a 300- acre site. Sigh.

Truth be told, the city in the park still looked like a "central park" except there was actual useage of the land where the hospital buildings currently sit.

Exactly. The previous "city-in-a-park" plan really chopped up the park space with development, which made it seem small and useless. This time around, however, they made it contiguous except for Umstead Drive (and the railroad tracks, which would be crossed by a pedestrian bridge or tunnel).

The park combined with the residential and commercial portions of the plan really made it seem like a really great place to while away a lazy Saturday afternoon. Take out the commercial and residential aspects of the plan, and the entire eastern half of the property is DEAD on the weekend.

Edited July 20, 2005 by orulz

[ericurbanite]

all i can say is what a waste of land. These tree huggers are crazy!! I have never been to the dorthea dix site and now i probably never will because i will have this hard decision to go to pullen park or dorthea dix park.... well i guess i probably wouldnt go to either. This place needs some kind of development. Im sorry but those people are ignorant if the development plan only subtracts 30 acres from the central park plan.

Also for more in depth look at what happened at the meeting this is from the n and o.

Dorthea Dix Meeting

[Miesian Corners]

Most people (NIMBYs) fail to realize that the State is not going to simply give the land to Raleigh. Even if it did, how would Raleigh pay for developing and maintaining it as a park? The City is having severe budget problems now, not to mention the distain north Raleigh residents have for downtown development.

No one uses urban parks when there are no "eyes and ears" on it. Urban spaces work best when people actually live and work around them. Somehow I doubt the eyes and ears of the residents of Central Prison and the 40 or so people who live in Kirby-Bilyeu would deter crime and loitering.

[ericurbanite]

well you could have a central prison guy escape possibly eh....?? ha

i see what your saying though, it wouldnt work if there is no Quality residential around there and if nobody works around there. That area near the farmers market next to dorthea dix is probably the worst area in raleigh for crime and just pure project ghetto looking. Maybe there is hope though ORULZ did say that he talked to a landesign guy.

Also is there any pictures anybody??? What can someone tell us about the renderings are they sweet looking or just blah.

[romec]

I didn't take any pictures at the meeting, (I assumed that the power point presentation would be up in the next few days or so.) Essentially the layout for both plans looks very similar to Dix today. They had some nice drawings, however, of areas of the "city in the park". 1 Region near "the grove" represented sort of a mental health in NC museum/public space. Another region near Lake Wheeler was a pretty cool retail area. In general the size of these developments were all 3-5 stories. Personally, the entire plan for the city in the park reminded me of UNC-CH's campus.

[Jones_]

Funny enough, the city in a park idea is almost exactly like what I submitted to Landesign with two exceptions. 1) I suggested moving the single family houses from the hill to over near Lake Wheeler and configure the streets into a grid aligned with the Fuller Heights subdivision and 2) I suggested putting the botanical piece as the centerpiece of the office park off Centennial Pkwy.

As I self professed tree hugger AND an advocate of smart urban development as a method of enviornmental preservation, AND as a staunch supporter of historical preservation (in and of itself and as a method of 'recycling') I think this plan is very very good.

[ChiefJoJo]

I went to the last meeting (in May I think), and I think the main things I want to see are:

1. Maintaining the grove (near W blvd)

2. Retaining the ball fields

3. Mixed used development along Lake Wheeler (incl widening of that road to 4 lanes with bike lanes and median towards the farmers market)

4. Retaining the character of the historically valuable bldgs on the Dix campus (and razing the ones that are of little value)

5. Constructing walking/biking trails

6. Improve interconnectivity in the area

I think this can all be done while maintaining a large amount of open space for public use.

[avery]

What the NIMBY's have going for them is their support at these meetings. I'm sure a majority of people would disagree with them but do not go to the meetings to voice their opposing views. Hopefully, the city will use their best judgement and not focus all of their attention on the few who vocalize their love of nature.

Listen, Pullen Park is down the street, greenways are one of the best in the country, Umstead Park is smack dab in the middle of the Triangle and their are numerous other parks within the city. 30 acres less park space is not that big of a deal...

In my opinion, if you live in Raleigh, expect change. If you don't like it, move to Franklin County. Like I said earlier, Raleigh is growing and some projects maybe scaled down, but they will progress forward. It is inevitable. The NIMBY's didn't want the Coker development on Wade and Oberlin, but development took place their anyways. Unfortunately, they got a development with and awful looking parking deck facing the main vista onto the property.

I'm pretty confident that the city will do enough to make both sides happy. One, there is a park element involved which meets the concerns of the nature lovers eventhough not to their satisfaction. Some development will take place meet the concerns of those in support of further development of the property. Irregradless, no one will be totally happy...it's called comprimise.

On a side note, I saw on WRAL the suggestion to create a new downtown there with 60-80 story buildings...did that guy need security protection getting out of there? What was he thinking???

[orulz]

You're right, it just happens that the "friends of Dix Park" are the most organized and the most vocal, probably because they're made up of people who are used to political activism.

The more moderate people in the city and state (which comprise a sizeable majority, I'm sure) can certainly see the benefit of a public/private partnership in the post-hospital future of the Dix property.

[avery]

I probably should not let the sarcasm get the best of me, but groups the likes of "friends of Dix Park" irritate me when they take on the "all or none" attitude. I applaud them for their public support and their activism does have some merits. I have just seen enough in the past few years of living here to leave a somewhat bitter taste in my mouth.

My indifference towards their views always beg the question: If they oppose development at site X, where is site Y? Development and growth happens. Companies grow and relocate here, people move here, those people have children and so on. What do they think is the appropriate approach to growth planning?

[Raleighmark]

Thanks to everyone for the reports. I almost don

[NCMike1981]

LOL I saw somewhere a while back where they showed the 2 options illustrated. In one they covered the entire Dix property with Wal-Mart type buildings, and the area around it remained the same. In the other option they kept it all a park, and had all of these high rises surrounding the property, as if companies would want to build these super tall buildings around the park, just b/c it's labeled a park and not a hospital campus....

[ericurbanite]

hey guys heres a video clip of the meeting last night. Its funny to see how upset these people were getting.. I wish i was there to tell them how annoying they were being. The thing i hate about this news clip is that they dont reveal why the crowd is so biased! I mean they should say a group called friends of dix park showed up in a big force and didnt help the design team at all to progress on any ideas because of there vocal opposition to anything other than...

We should get a petition together to have some kind of use of the land.

video clip

Oh the pictures you are talking about are these

without development..

with development

that is very funny. Raleigh has a park everyone lets build around it!!

Edited July 20, 2005 by ericurbanite

[orulz]

LOL I saw somewhere a while back where they showed the 2 options illustrated. In one they covered the entire Dix property with Wal-Mart type buildings, and the area around it remained the same. In the other option they kept it all a park, and had all of these high rises surrounding the property, as if companies would want to build these super tall buildings around the park, just b/c it's labeled a park and not a hospital campus....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Those graphics (made by Friends of Dix Park) aren't well made, and they're blatantly manipulative. Whoever made them probably just took screenshots of SimCity 3000 and cut and pasted. As I recall, in one of the options, Boylan Heights was replaced by a parking lot or a large, low building, but in the other its tree canopy was left intact. Central prison was redeveloped as high rises in one but turned into another parking lot in the other. You'd be surprised how many people are swayed by them, when they're nothing more than smoke and mirrors.

Some people (most people?) just like to argue that way: appeal to people's emotions, with no regard for facts or logic. Alas. They accuse the people who want to see development on Dix as having an agenda. I say that they're the ideologues with an agenda. The "city in a park" plan really was well done.

[ericurbanite]

heres some renderings of the plans

with development city in a park

central park plan

They both have so much park space i cant see what the huge argument is here. They both have an ampitheatre, recreational, and health services. Just residential in the other one with some retail and no botanical garden.

[orulz]

The original "city in a park" plan called for rimming the "big field" with parking lots and buildings. I get the feeling that the Friends of Dix came to the meeting ready to argue against that plan, but what was presented was actually much more in line with their demands.

I don't particularly care, but if you remove the buildings and the loop road south of the roundabout at Barbour and Umstead, boom, you got yer 30 acres back.

These people are arguing on principle and emotion, not fact or logic.

I would rather see mixed-use, form-based zoning rather than use-based, but as long as the area is mixed use on the whole, I'm just fine with it.

On an unrelated note, I just sent a letter to the News & Observer. It's a trimmed down version of the post I made last night. Cutting a 900 word post down to 250 words was not an easy task. Hopefully it gets published.

[Jones_]

I should have showed up, my voice next to NIMBY's would have been relevant since I live in Caraleigh Mills just off Lake Wheeler and am equally impacted by any move made with the property. Once again...I love the city in a park plan.