Jump to content

Raleigh, USA - Big City?


RALNATIVE

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Big cities have BIG amenities. Take a short 4 or 5 hour trip up 95 to DC or Baltimore and you will see and feel what I mean. Those cities have grown then grown some more and the whole time the infrastructure has grown with it. I know a lot of us on here don't like huge multilane interstates disecting downtowns and urban districts but that is one criteria of a big city. Also mass transit options other than a couple of bus lines is on that list. Neighborhoods that were zoned and designed to be dense with multiple midrise buildings clusters througout the city are also some things that NC cities have been lacking. I love that Raleigh and Charlotte are growing up and want to garner some more respect but they have a ways to go to get to that next level. One example is Richmond. Driving up 95 the feel you get when entering the area is that you are in an urban area. The way the skyline unfolds and the way the flyovers on the interstates are arranged gives you a city "feel". The only city in NC that can give that kind of "feel" is Charlotte and that is due to that its just BIGGER. Again I love my NC big 3 metros but we have some work to do. I challenge anyone to take the "feel" test and then compare our cities. The impression of Raleigh from a transiet is not very good. Especially on 40. As for importance I don't think that will be the problem. I have co-wokers who have relatives that have moved there and they love it. Its seems when I say I'm from NC I get asked how far is that from Raleigh.

If the Triangle wants in the big boy club then the TTA needs to get rolling and build the d*@# trains. Next, put some D@#$ lights on 40/440. Next stop building these 1950 style interchanges in urban or soon to be urban areas. Next, stop work on 540 and expand 40/440 to 8/10 lanes all the way to the 40/85 split. Next, support projects like North Hills. If you want urban cities multiple business disticts with midrises have to exist. I am a city/scraper junkie and have always compared cities since I was 10 years old. Our cities are just now catching up. Finally though Charlotte has shed some of that NC "conservatism" and began to grow up. Raleigh has just as good or better chance. The area is on fire and the national attention is there. Now its time to channel that in to some awsome projects that takes some civic leaders with some b@lls and build a big city. People always want to look at ATL in awe and wonder how did that happen so fast. It takes some forward looking people with the same vision. Can anyone tell me why Raleigh cannot replicate that. Does ATL have something Raleigh does not. I would like to think Raleigh has what a lot of SE cities envy. A highly educated bio/tech related workforce with three great univesities at its disposal. My only question is...what are you waiting for RALEIGH!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Triangle wants in the big boy club then the TTA needs to get rolling and build the d*@# trains. Next, put some D@#$ lights on 40/440. Next stop building these 1950 style interchanges in urban or soon to be urban areas. Next, stop work on 540 and expand 40/440 to 8/10 lanes all the way to the 40/85 split. Next, support projects like North Hills. If you want urban cities multiple business disticts with midrises have to exist. I am a city/scraper junkie and have always compared cities since I was 10 years old. Our cities are just now catching up. Finally though Charlotte has shed some of that NC "conservatism" and began to grow up. Raleigh has just as good or better chance. The area is on fire and the national attention is there. Now its time to channel that in to some awsome projects that takes some civic leaders with some b@lls and build a big city. People always want to look at ATL in awe and wonder how did that happen so fast. It takes some forward looking people with the same vision. Can anyone tell me why Raleigh cannot replicate that. Does ATL have something Raleigh does not. I would like to think Raleigh has what a lot of SE cities envy. A highly educated bio/tech related workforce with three great univesities at its disposal. My only question is...what are you waiting for RALEIGH!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we need a better looking skyline from 40. Solution: - buildings with good tops. Focusing on the tops of buildings can put an area in trouble. I am putting together a photo series called "What's wrong with Atlanta" and it doesn't even mention sprawl. Downtown Atlanta (not midtown) has some of the worlds greatest buildings. The problem is that the bases are so bad that the area is a ghosttown, even to visitors. Residents have REALLY avoided these areas. But hey, it looks good from the highway, right?

Bigger cities have transit systems so we need one too? By implementing a diesel train that doesn't serve existing origins or destinations we would have a "transit system", however aren't we putting ourselves into a position of falling into the same traps those bigger cities are in? Atlanta, DC, Philly, NYC, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago...all have one thing in common. SPRAWL. Their very expensive transit systems have had little to no effect at curbing sprawl and traffic. MARTA in Atlanta is twice the system that we propose here. It has 37 stops to serve an area of 4.4M people. Controversial numbers show that MARTA carries at most 5% of the area's population every day. In order for the system to really serve residents (give everyone .5mi radius access), Atlanta would have had to implement no less than R220 zoning laws back in the 1960s. There are good reasons for building a fixed guideway transit system, but big-city-envy isn't one of them.

Richmond has an impressive view of downtown approaching from the south. Building placement and topography are largely responsible, however. That city has more blight than the entire Triangle moretimes over, however. They also have one of the worst servicing airports in the country and have been completely overtaken by numerous southern cities.

Yes, we have work to do. However I'd rather focus on having things to do on every single block of downtown over building tall, creating a transit system that is the ENVY of bigger cities, and making new parts of the city where residents want to visit for the day. I'll take that over brutal tall buildings that repel people and heavy-handed transit that insists that people conform any day. I'd rather avoid other cities' mistakes than imitate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to disagree with NCsc74. I understand where you are coming from though. Richmond does have a much more urban feel than Raleigh and I sometimes wish we had more of that feel. I think it's pointless to try to recreate something like that though. We'll never have the rich history they have; it was the friggen Confederate Capital for pete sake! Most older cities like that have a head start on urban-ness... so be it. We have to do what we can one project at a time.

I agree with Dana--why do we want to emulate Atlanta? Sure they hosted the Olympics, have some cool skyscrapers and wide freeways, but it's probably the worst planned city in America (Houston?), has maybe the worst traffic, and the downtown is pretty much vacant at night (not Midtown).

In Raleigh, we are starting to focus on the right things... street level emphasis, urban design, smart growth, better planning, downtown investments, etc. Hopefully we can get a transit system going soon. It wasn't all that long ago that Raleigh was a relatively small city; change is difficult and usually slower than us urban-niks would like, but we are starting to get some exciting projects and urban growth is fueling them. If we can continue to offer what the people who live here and are moving here want (strong economy, weather, excellent education, liveable, affordable, etc), then that's a good start.

If you want to emulate other cities, let's look at some that are more reasonable comparisons: Austin & Portland are two 2nd tier cities that are very liveable, vibrant, interesting, and more along the lines of what I hope for in our future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny thing is that despite the looks of Richmond it is quite a bit smaller than Raleigh. As Richmond is just now approaching 200,000 people after losing ground after the industrial age and it's quite a bit more worn and dirty than Raleigh. There downtown entry looks nice, but looks can be deceiving. Meanwhile Raleigh is approaching 375,000 people and the downtown is taking off dramatically, so it won't be long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To turn "new south" cities like Raleigh and Charlotte into what we consider to be "big" cities based on standards set by older, more established cities is virtually impossible. As ChiefJoJo stated, those cities have a headstart and were planned during a different era, when Raleigh and Charlotte were mere towns not even on anyones radar.

What we can do is plan and build modern cities that incorporate modern technology and are designed to meet the present day needs and demands of all citizens. We have one of the best technology and design schools in the country right here in our midst, why not capitalize on it? We also have the population and growth to merit such progressive thoguht. Progress starts with cooperation, and Raleigh needs to put more emphasis on utilizing the core competencies that exist within.

If we can do these things, then we can compete with any "old school" city in terms of modern urbanization and win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The topic is Raleigh a big city. I pointed what BIG cities have that makes them that way. Where did I say Raleigh should emulate ATL. I eluded to why can't Raleigh aspire to invent itself to be as big. ATL branded itself and it grew to what it is today. If it is sprawled out then so be it. However you won't find many cities in this country that add hundreds of thousands of people in a one to two year span. Its clear they did something right down there. Sure Raleigh can grow to be big but like I said the topic was is it. No its not. Cities are more than tops of buildings and loops and all of that jazz. Its called urbanism. All of the aspects I mentioned are characteristics of large cities. You can't hide from it be afraid to make some groundbreaking decisions. It angers me to see the transit tax possibly go to another vote in Charlotte. TOD developments add to the urban feel and "bigness of a city". Some companies look at transit as a quality of life indicator when considering relocations. In the end what do you want your NC cities to end up like. A sprawling mass of strip malls and subdivisions a la Las Vegas. IMO one of the most car oriented places on earth. Or do you want a cosmopolitan metro that reduces traffic by offering affordable mass transit option for all to use and smart building of expressways in and out of the metro area. Also protecting older traditional neighborhoods and designing and building denser transitional ones that complement the urban experience.

Someone mentioned something about loops. Well time and time again loops have not done what they were built to do. Alleviate rush hour traffic by separating local and transiet traffic. Instead developers get the green light to create more demand on the road that was buitl to decrease it. I admire the passion of this topic and welcome all comments. To be big is not easy and many times people don't want their cities to be that way. Thats cool and as I see in this topic everyone cares what Raleigh will grow up to be. Pandoras box is open and the Triangle is as hot as any place in the country. What do you guys consider big?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Sure Raleigh can grow to be big but like I said the topic was is it. No its not. Cities are more than tops of buildings and loops and all of that jazz."

Let me clarify this. Raleigh is big for its sphere of influence. Like say someone moving from Sampson county. Or even Fayetteville (myself included). When I was in middle school we would visit the museums and universities and I would marvel at downtown. Mind you this was before Wachovia and Hanover buildings...yeah showing my age a little. But anyway to me there are levels of "bigness". IMO there are only 4 world cities in the US. NY, Chitown, Friso and LA. Dallas, Miami, Philadelphia, Houston and ATL make a good case but are major national players to me. Charlotte is nudging trying to get to the national level now but it can't bogged down with politics and thinking "small". Raleigh is right on Charlotte heels but like I said you can't get big and be big by thinking small. One last thing I would like to point out. In making its case to grow and have more influence Raleigh has to overcome what those other big cities didn't. Competition within its own state from other similar sized metros. Taking in to account for the total poplation NC has a huge task ahead. Balancing growing metro population with 3 others is not going to be easy. One can say Texas and Cali had the same problem but look how large and how many more people they have to work with. Trying to get some elbow room isn't going to be easy. What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way the skyline unfolds and the way the flyovers on the interstates are arranged gives you a city "feel". The only city in NC that can give that kind of "feel" is Charlotte and that is due to that its just BIGGER.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interestingly, everyone talks about urban "feel." What is it? I think to some it's an Atlanta-type, new south, big freeway and gleaming skyscraper-filled, city. To me, and I think others who mentioned Richmond, Baltimore, Boston, etc, it's more measured by row houses, lofts, old converted warehouses, urban parks, grittiness, preserved history, lots of urban, walkable streets lined by 3-5 story mid-rises and yeah, some skyscrapers too. These are the sorts of thing that we just can't recreate. Probably the closest place we have outside of downtown is Hillsborough St--that's our only urban corridor.

We can preserve the urban history we have in the downtown core (we should!) and fill it in with plenty of urban mid and high-rise buildings (plenty of surface lots left to be developed!) built one by one along existing roads (and transit corridors!) that are walkable, well-designed, and offer plenty of active uses... then we'll be doing great in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having lived in a rowhouse in DC for 2 years, I must say that urban experience was truly OVERRATED. I practically had to drive everywhere to get anything but liquor. Seriously, typical rowhouse neighborhoods remind me of canned subdivision developments, can you really tell if you're in DC, Baltimore or Philly. Of course the "ritzy" parts of the city are nothing like this, but dare I say typical. Too much blight, neglect, etc and you wonder if you're in America. At least in DC, the rowhouses have porches, in Baltimore you could fall out the door into the street if not careful.

Not that southern cities don't have their share of neglect, blight, etc., - reality check, I do live in Durham, but to the extent where people are living on top of people seems to intensify the ugliness.

I do see southern cities building 3-5 story mid-rises, but as to where it's block on top of block development, ie neglected rowhouses, I hope not. Many parts of inner ring neighborhoods in Charlotte, Raleigh and Greensboro are jewels.

A good mixture of urban with surburban type (new and old) development is the city of Seattle. There isn't a ton of rowhouses or history (to the extent of Boston, San Fran or Philly), but Seattle is quite urban and very interesting. This is a city that southern cities should attempt to emulate. The Lake Union area of Seattle is rather impressive.

It can be done here, it'll take time, energy and effort, which I think is happening on a small scale.

Urban shouldn't be limited in definition to 20 blocks of rowhouses with mid-rises and a park between or 12 lane freeways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though Raleigh and its metro area is rapidly growing, I wouldnt classify Raleigh as a Big City... far from it. Though I dont venture there much... it always had the feel of a giant suburb with a few tall buildings at the core. When I think Big City, of course population is the most over-riding factor, but population density is another huge key. In terms of urban feel... I agree that Richmond seems like a much larger place, and I find it to be far more interesting. Actually in many ways, Winston-Salem seems like a bigger place than Raleigh, especially if you drive along Business 40 at night. Raleigh seems rather vanilla on the whole, but it is improving in that regards as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though Raleigh and its metro area is rapidly growing, I wouldnt classify Raleigh as a Big City... far from it. Though I dont venture there much... it always had the feel of a giant suburb with a few tall buildings at the core. When I think Big City, of course population is the most over-riding factor, but population density is another huge key. In terms of urban feel... I agree that Richmond seems like a much larger place, and I find it to be far more interesting. Actually in many ways, Winston-Salem seems like a bigger place than Raleigh, especially if you drive along Business 40 at night. Raleigh seems rather vanilla on the whole, but it is improving in that regards as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good one I forgot to mention Winston. I have always wondered does historical importance have an absolute effect on how big a city will feel. I guess population does play a factor but mention that to someone in Philly when the name Houston is brought up. I think its new south big versus traditional big. In 10-15 years I say Raleigh will be new south big if that makes any sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny thing is that despite the looks of Richmond it is quite a bit smaller than Raleigh. As Richmond is just now approaching 200,000 people after losing ground after the industrial age and it's quite a bit more worn and dirty than Raleigh. There downtown entry looks nice, but looks can be deceiving. Meanwhile Raleigh is approaching 375,000 people and the downtown is taking off dramatically, so it won't be long.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we need a better looking skyline from 40. Solution: - buildings with good tops. Focusing on the tops of buildings can put an area in trouble. I am putting together a photo series called "What's wrong with Atlanta" and it doesn't even mention sprawl. Downtown Atlanta (not midtown) has some of the worlds greatest buildings. The problem is that the bases are so bad that the area is a ghosttown, even to visitors. Residents have REALLY avoided these areas. But hey, it looks good from the highway, right?

Bigger cities have transit systems so we need one too? By implementing a diesel train that doesn't serve existing origins or destinations we would have a "transit system", however aren't we putting ourselves into a position of falling into the same traps those bigger cities are in? Atlanta, DC, Philly, NYC, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago...all have one thing in common. SPRAWL. Their very expensive transit systems have had little to no effect at curbing sprawl and traffic. MARTA in Atlanta is twice the system that we propose here. It has 37 stops to serve an area of 4.4M people. Controversial numbers show that MARTA carries at most 5% of the area's population every day. In order for the system to really serve residents (give everyone .5mi radius access), Atlanta would have had to implement no less than R220 zoning laws back in the 1960s. There are good reasons for building a fixed guideway transit system, but big-city-envy isn't one of them.

Richmond has an impressive view of downtown approaching from the south. Building placement and topography are largely responsible, however. That city has more blight than the entire Triangle moretimes over, however. They also have one of the worst servicing airports in the country and have been completely overtaken by numerous southern cities.

Yes, we have work to do. However I'd rather focus on having things to do on every single block of downtown over building tall, creating a transit system that is the ENVY of bigger cities, and making new parts of the city where residents want to visit for the day. I'll take that over brutal tall buildings that repel people and heavy-handed transit that insists that people conform any day. I'd rather avoid other cities' mistakes than imitate them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though Raleigh and its metro area is rapidly growing, I wouldnt classify Raleigh as a Big City... far from it. Though I dont venture there much... it always had the feel of a giant suburb with a few tall buildings at the core. When I think Big City, of course population is the most over-riding factor, but population density is another huge key. In terms of urban feel... I agree that Richmond seems like a much larger place, and I find it to be far more interesting. Actually in many ways, Winston-Salem seems like a bigger place than Raleigh, especially if you drive along Business 40 at night. Raleigh seems rather vanilla on the whole, but it is improving in that regards as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way Raleigh is or is perceived as a big city. As stated, density is critical to being a big city. Raleigh lacks the type of high density population associated with being a big city. Raleigh lacks many of the indicia of a big city such as a subway/light rail system; swanky thriving nightlife; 24/7 dining, entertainment; huge ethic sections of town such as CHinatown, Little Italy, gay section, Ethiopian section; and cutting edge social liberalism. The culture of Raleigh is way too reserved, conservative, and traditional to be thought of as a big city. It's population is largely consumed with working and raising traditional families to be concerned about fashion, clubbing, 24/7 entertainment. Of course, there are people in big cities that live tradtional lives, but the overall vibe of such places is fast-paced, crowded, and 24/7 excitement. Raleigh's demographics and culture are just not consistent with being a big city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • 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.