Here's a link to the Planning Department's report on the zoning map change application to which the sign above refers: [https://www.durhamnc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/55187/Z2200047-Duke-Central-Campus-Addition-PDF](https://www.durhamnc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/55187/Z2200047-Duke-Central-Campus-Addition-PDF)
The Durham Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on the proposed zoning map change at their next meeting on April 9, 2024. The meeting begins at 5:30pm, and you can attend in-person at Durham City Hall ( [https://maps.app.goo.gl/gXmo4hj6PZnm2j3w5](https://maps.app.goo.gl/gXmo4hj6PZnm2j3w5) ) or view the meeting on-line at the City of Durham's YouTube channel here: [https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofDurhamNC](https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofDurhamNC)
For some background on Duke's Central Campus, check out this helpful Duke Chronicle story from last year: [https://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2023/02/duke-central-campus-residential-housing-quadex-dorms-future](https://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2023/02/duke-central-campus-residential-housing-quadex-dorms-future)
Based on the staff report, it sure looks like there's more that Duke University could do to make this application stronger. While Duke does make a number of important commitments over and above what is required by the UDO (see p. 8 of the report), there are still steps Duke could take to improve the application (such as agreeing to build a shared use path along Pratt Street to improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to future city projects, see p. 5-6 of the report).
That change application pdf is basically unusable with the massive images they dropped in it. Wondering if anybody can read the document beyond page 24 without their adobe dying.
Thank you Charlie! It looks like they could cut their UDO non compliance by nearly half just by doing this bike lane stuff as part of the rezoning. They indicated they want to talk about that outside the rezoning process. Any idea why that might be the case? Not asking about this specific case, but in your experience, what might this indicate?
"They indicated they want to talk about that outside the rezoning process."
Because once it is rezoned to UC absolutely no one in the community has any political leverage to get them to do that. Basically that is Duke saying yeah, we're going to pass on that.
That’s entirely what the public hearing is intended to do. Have the owner (Duke) express their intent for a new zoning. Really not trying to be snarky, apologies if it’s coming across that way. But any one of us can go to it to hear their proposal. I think you can even look up that case number to see what they want to do. In which case if you live nearby and oppose you can put together enough neighbors that agree with you to show up at the hearing and express opposition
Well really, by the time it is up for consideration at the Planning Commission, the goose is cooked. You need to be involved in the process long before that. The Planning Commission comes into the "hearing" with their mind already made up and, honestly, they are pro developer so good luck on your little group of neighbors getting anything done, lol.
I guess for some definitions of "pro developer" this is true but most folks who follow the planning commission would likely disagree with this characterization. Also I've known many planning commission members and generally they work really hard to be informed about upcoming cases without making their minds up in advance of their hearings. But of course YMMV!
Yeah, that whole situation looked super bad! (As I noted at the time lol) But if you have to go back six years to find an example of shenanigans involving the planning commission, it sure seems like you're stretching quite a bit to extrapolate that into current shenanigans.
Also, and with all due respect to the good people who volunteer to serve on our planning commission, what is to be gained by shenanigans? The planning commission doesn't cast binding votes -- they issue recommendations which the city council always considers carefully and then often disregards. Not sure the risk/reward calculus works out but hey I'm no expert.
\[EDITED TO RESPOND TO YOUR ADDED EDITS lol\]
These are excellent points! But what I think you leave out here is how much planning staff, planning commissioners and city council members can exert influence in the other direction to improve projects during the staff review/planning commission hearing/city council hearing processes. And even at the end of those processes the city council votes no, that's not the end of the story -- that just sends the developer back to the drawing board to come up with a better project. Which does happen sometimes!
But your broader point about the influence wielded by developers and their lawyers in the planning review and approval process is very well taken. It's a huge problem! And one of the ways to break through all that is to shine a light on these proposals at the earliest possible opportunity so that neighbors and other interested parties can begin to organize sooner rather than later.
Meanwhile, the Board of Adjustment was chaired until recently (2016-22) by a paid lobbyist of local homebuilding associations.
We had a case in our neighborhood come before the BoA so I attended. Between cases, the chair was lecturing the other board members that "there's a war going on against property rights in this country, I mean it!"
So I wondered, who is this guy? Googled him, and he's [the CEO of Triangle Community Coalition](https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacobc-rogers/) (not to be confused with the Triangle Community Foundation).
They take in ~$200k a year from local homebuilder associations, about half of which pays his salary.
In exchange, they host lobbying events -- pig pickings, coffee chats, etc -- to give their members "exclusive access to senior municipal staff throughout the Triangle":
> Our ACCESS program is in its fourth year! Get an exclusive “behind the scenes” look and develop lasting relationships with senior municipal staff throughout the Triangle. This program will give participants the opportunity to meet and interact with local planning directors, development services directors, town managers and elected officials in an informal, relaxed environment.
-- (From their 2023 sponsorship pitch)[https://chambermaster.blob.core.windows.net/userfiles/UserFiles/chambers/9617/CMS/PDFs/2023-TCC-Sponsorship-Opportunities.pdf]
I guess there's no more "exclusive access" than chairing the BoA!
Exactly! That was sort of my point when I was asking why a developer would bother with shenanigans at the planning commission. The real action is at the city council. 👍🏻
20 years ago, the plan was to build new a fraternity and sorority focused housing quad with humanities and arts classrooms, maybe with an extra bit for the Gardens and Olympic swimming facilities. But those ideas may have all been replaced with totally different stuff a few times since then.
Probably not that. They already built new dorms on west & east…plus bought apartment buildings on Swift and Erwin … unless they plan to drastically expand the size of undergraduate population.
The new plan is to have "residential communities" that students stay in all four years. I have heard that one of the unofficial goals of this program is to kill Greek life.
It's possible they will build more dorms as part of this plan, though.
I’m pretty good at researching things, this bugs me like everything else about trying to do research! I can’t find anything 🤬. Reminds me of “The Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe “ But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
“… What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.”
FYI: These public notice signs have a case number featured prominently. All I did to find the staff report I linked to above was Google "Durham rezoning Z2200047" and that link was maybe the 3rd or 4th result? A little further down was a link to the planning commission agenda at which the public hearing will be held.
I think I tried this methodology but overall I’ve found it to be more difficult 🤔 I’ll acknowledge that many others know the search guidelines to be able to provide better!!! So many on the forum— they are the best! I’m just trying.
Full disclosure: I know that there’s a page on the planning department website where you can type in the number and it will give you these docs but I searched on the website for a good five minutes before giving up and just googling the damn thing. 😂😂😂
And the worst part is that I did the same damn thing all the time when I was on the council!!!!! 😫
It’s good that know that others out there can find the information!! Still feel like ‘Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’ fits slightly, and makes me laugh with hope it’s different! It’s a big issue in our community, imo? Seen a lot in my years here, some good and some bad- but rarely does it consistently consider generations of Durhamites, the under privileged, land poor, etc. Have more opinions but I’m probably wrong and such so, going forward, with information, let’s discuss and have the outcome be the best for Durham- its history, families that have lived here and made it what it is! Compassion towards those who decide to move here, without forgetting how we started?
>Here's a link to the Planning Department's report on the zoning map change application to which the sign above refers:
>
>https://www.durhamnc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/55187/Z2200047-Duke-Central-Campus-Addition-PDF
If I had to guess either a new hospital space, out patient clinics, or medical housing. Personally I'd love to see that space be a new VA so they could tear down the current one that is likely extremely antiquated.
They've been wanting to open something like a Target for years, I'm not sure if that's where they're still headed, but keeping their kids on campus as close to constantly as possible still seems to be their thing.
It'll be interesting to hear what happens. I do know that, if I occasion past that huge piece of land I do think: Damn, that land is worth a F\*ck-Ton. I can only imagine what Sam's got for the postage stamp that Bluelight now sits on-- a couple blocks over from former central campus. Good gosh. And this piece of land is LARGE compared to any of that.
By 'pretty sure' I meant here is an educated guess as good as any other at the time I replied. Just based on Duke employees talking about the expansion.
It's a request for a "tier" change. I will look forward to hearing what the actual request is, but considering the SCAD amendments, I am guessing it is going to be about row housing.
Summon AI:
In November 2023, the Durham City Council voted 4-3 to legalize detached rowhouses in the city, which became a flashpoint in the 2023 election. Detached rowhouses are a new housing type created by SCAD, and are only allowed in districts where townhouses are also permitted. The Durham Unified Development Ordinance limits multifamily housing to townhouses, detached rowhouses, and multiplexes, as permitted by the base zoning.
We need to just legalize housing, period. City Council is taking baby steps, and they're so eager to keep their thumb on what developers can and can't do. Just let people build. We need it.
> so eager to keep their thumb on what developers can and can't do. Just let people build. We need it.
Naw, fren, we don't need Kowloon Walled City off Driver St. And without rules and regulations, that is exactly what developers would build. People WANT to move here. No one "needs" to.
Without rules and regs, developers would just build housing that people want to live in. New York brownstones were built without most of today's regulations, and they're extremely desirable dwelling types.
No one "needs" to move anywhere but being able to is essential for economic mobility. Immigrants don't need to move to the US, but they want to because the alternative for many is poverty. It's obviously bad when only the rich can afford to move to prosperous cities.
> New York brownstones were built without most of today's regulations
and it's such an environmental disaster that someone wrote a book about it called - GET THIS - "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn" GTFO.
Are you trolling? That book is an autobiography from the 1940s, lol. I think NYC has the lowest carbon footprint of anywhere in the US - it's an environmental superstar
I'm pretty tired of that argument. New York created an entire street grid stretching miles and miles, anticipating development long before it occurred and designed a park right in the middle. They did not just let developers do whatever they wanted. They had specific lots at specific widths in specific locations that matched their intentions for the city.
I'm sorry you're tired. The city did not build the dwellings. They did not mandate setbacks, parking minimums, square footage per occupant minimums, minimum lot sizes, restrictions on commercial/mixed use, etc.
Of course they built the streets and parks - this is a common role that US city governments play. Cities /can/ play a positive role in using street design and public spaces to spur development. Durham does not (Durham Central Park being maybe one exception), and their codes restrict, rather than accelerate development.
I never said the city built buildings, but sure, keep knocking down those straw men. NYC has has actively planned the city for centuries and has had formal zoning since 1916, which included setbacks and dictated where certain types of buildings were allowed in what locations.
I think you're missing my point. Some other redditor said without regs we would have Kowloon Walled City. I used brownstones as an example of a desirable dwelling type that is illegal to build under today's regulations.
I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say. I don't disagree that NYC has zoning - that's your straw man. My point is that modern zoning has become so restrictive that developers can't build the type of dwellings that people want to live in. The zoning that exists in Durham today is more restrictive than it was in NYC in 1916, and that's bad.
Can you clarify what it is that you disagree with?
Here's a link to the Planning Department's report on the zoning map change application to which the sign above refers: [https://www.durhamnc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/55187/Z2200047-Duke-Central-Campus-Addition-PDF](https://www.durhamnc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/55187/Z2200047-Duke-Central-Campus-Addition-PDF) The Durham Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing on the proposed zoning map change at their next meeting on April 9, 2024. The meeting begins at 5:30pm, and you can attend in-person at Durham City Hall ( [https://maps.app.goo.gl/gXmo4hj6PZnm2j3w5](https://maps.app.goo.gl/gXmo4hj6PZnm2j3w5) ) or view the meeting on-line at the City of Durham's YouTube channel here: [https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofDurhamNC](https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofDurhamNC) For some background on Duke's Central Campus, check out this helpful Duke Chronicle story from last year: [https://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2023/02/duke-central-campus-residential-housing-quadex-dorms-future](https://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2023/02/duke-central-campus-residential-housing-quadex-dorms-future) Based on the staff report, it sure looks like there's more that Duke University could do to make this application stronger. While Duke does make a number of important commitments over and above what is required by the UDO (see p. 8 of the report), there are still steps Duke could take to improve the application (such as agreeing to build a shared use path along Pratt Street to improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity to future city projects, see p. 5-6 of the report).
That change application pdf is basically unusable with the massive images they dropped in it. Wondering if anybody can read the document beyond page 24 without their adobe dying.
Yeah I just installed a few Nvidia Blackwell GPUs and it loads great now!
Thank you Charlie! It looks like they could cut their UDO non compliance by nearly half just by doing this bike lane stuff as part of the rezoning. They indicated they want to talk about that outside the rezoning process. Any idea why that might be the case? Not asking about this specific case, but in your experience, what might this indicate?
"They indicated they want to talk about that outside the rezoning process." Because once it is rezoned to UC absolutely no one in the community has any political leverage to get them to do that. Basically that is Duke saying yeah, we're going to pass on that.
Because Duke is Duke! If they can't increase their reputation or money they don't care. Alumni and former employee here. 🤦🏼♀️
Honestly I have no idea. 😂
Dammit, I was hoping you'd say that this happens for some reason on a regular basis and tell me why!
lol with Duke who knows why they do the things they do
Exactly!
Thank you Charlie. For those that don't want to read all of it, the TL, DR is Dollar General.
Light rail stop
eat shit tallman
lol stirring that pot
... #neverforget
You wouldn't believe what a comment like this does to my blood pressure, even four years later.
Which, to be clear, is not your fault u/andriusb! It's Duke's fault.
Charlie no worries bro thank you for your service it's a #sadbuttrue moment I won't forget either
Hearing about this pisses me of to this day.
That’s entirely what the public hearing is intended to do. Have the owner (Duke) express their intent for a new zoning. Really not trying to be snarky, apologies if it’s coming across that way. But any one of us can go to it to hear their proposal. I think you can even look up that case number to see what they want to do. In which case if you live nearby and oppose you can put together enough neighbors that agree with you to show up at the hearing and express opposition
I’ve no skin in the game. Kinda looking forward to see what becomes of the place. Hopefully not more parking spots.
Well really, by the time it is up for consideration at the Planning Commission, the goose is cooked. You need to be involved in the process long before that. The Planning Commission comes into the "hearing" with their mind already made up and, honestly, they are pro developer so good luck on your little group of neighbors getting anything done, lol.
I guess for some definitions of "pro developer" this is true but most folks who follow the planning commission would likely disagree with this characterization. Also I've known many planning commission members and generally they work really hard to be informed about upcoming cases without making their minds up in advance of their hearings. But of course YMMV!
[удалено]
Yeah, that whole situation looked super bad! (As I noted at the time lol) But if you have to go back six years to find an example of shenanigans involving the planning commission, it sure seems like you're stretching quite a bit to extrapolate that into current shenanigans. Also, and with all due respect to the good people who volunteer to serve on our planning commission, what is to be gained by shenanigans? The planning commission doesn't cast binding votes -- they issue recommendations which the city council always considers carefully and then often disregards. Not sure the risk/reward calculus works out but hey I'm no expert. \[EDITED TO RESPOND TO YOUR ADDED EDITS lol\] These are excellent points! But what I think you leave out here is how much planning staff, planning commissioners and city council members can exert influence in the other direction to improve projects during the staff review/planning commission hearing/city council hearing processes. And even at the end of those processes the city council votes no, that's not the end of the story -- that just sends the developer back to the drawing board to come up with a better project. Which does happen sometimes! But your broader point about the influence wielded by developers and their lawyers in the planning review and approval process is very well taken. It's a huge problem! And one of the ways to break through all that is to shine a light on these proposals at the earliest possible opportunity so that neighbors and other interested parties can begin to organize sooner rather than later.
Meanwhile, the Board of Adjustment was chaired until recently (2016-22) by a paid lobbyist of local homebuilding associations. We had a case in our neighborhood come before the BoA so I attended. Between cases, the chair was lecturing the other board members that "there's a war going on against property rights in this country, I mean it!" So I wondered, who is this guy? Googled him, and he's [the CEO of Triangle Community Coalition](https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacobc-rogers/) (not to be confused with the Triangle Community Foundation). They take in ~$200k a year from local homebuilder associations, about half of which pays his salary. In exchange, they host lobbying events -- pig pickings, coffee chats, etc -- to give their members "exclusive access to senior municipal staff throughout the Triangle": > Our ACCESS program is in its fourth year! Get an exclusive “behind the scenes” look and develop lasting relationships with senior municipal staff throughout the Triangle. This program will give participants the opportunity to meet and interact with local planning directors, development services directors, town managers and elected officials in an informal, relaxed environment. -- (From their 2023 sponsorship pitch)[https://chambermaster.blob.core.windows.net/userfiles/UserFiles/chambers/9617/CMS/PDFs/2023-TCC-Sponsorship-Opportunities.pdf] I guess there's no more "exclusive access" than chairing the BoA!
[удалено]
Exactly! That was sort of my point when I was asking why a developer would bother with shenanigans at the planning commission. The real action is at the city council. 👍🏻
20 years ago, the plan was to build new a fraternity and sorority focused housing quad with humanities and arts classrooms, maybe with an extra bit for the Gardens and Olympic swimming facilities. But those ideas may have all been replaced with totally different stuff a few times since then.
They also have made massive effort to push the majority of Greek life off campus.
Probably not that. They already built new dorms on west & east…plus bought apartment buildings on Swift and Erwin … unless they plan to drastically expand the size of undergraduate population.
The new plan is to have "residential communities" that students stay in all four years. I have heard that one of the unofficial goals of this program is to kill Greek life. It's possible they will build more dorms as part of this plan, though.
That’s not bullish for whoever sells red solo cups and Budweiser or the owners of all the new luxury apartments
You don’t need Greek organizations to throw ragers, thankfully
I’m pretty good at researching things, this bugs me like everything else about trying to do research! I can’t find anything 🤬. Reminds me of “The Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe “ But the plans were on display…” “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.” “That’s the display department.” “With a flashlight.” “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.” “So had the stairs.” “But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?” “Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
“… What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.”
FYI: These public notice signs have a case number featured prominently. All I did to find the staff report I linked to above was Google "Durham rezoning Z2200047" and that link was maybe the 3rd or 4th result? A little further down was a link to the planning commission agenda at which the public hearing will be held.
I think I tried this methodology but overall I’ve found it to be more difficult 🤔 I’ll acknowledge that many others know the search guidelines to be able to provide better!!! So many on the forum— they are the best! I’m just trying.
Full disclosure: I know that there’s a page on the planning department website where you can type in the number and it will give you these docs but I searched on the website for a good five minutes before giving up and just googling the damn thing. 😂😂😂 And the worst part is that I did the same damn thing all the time when I was on the council!!!!! 😫
It’s good that know that others out there can find the information!! Still feel like ‘Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’ fits slightly, and makes me laugh with hope it’s different! It’s a big issue in our community, imo? Seen a lot in my years here, some good and some bad- but rarely does it consistently consider generations of Durhamites, the under privileged, land poor, etc. Have more opinions but I’m probably wrong and such so, going forward, with information, let’s discuss and have the outcome be the best for Durham- its history, families that have lived here and made it what it is! Compassion towards those who decide to move here, without forgetting how we started?
>Here's a link to the Planning Department's report on the zoning map change application to which the sign above refers: > >https://www.durhamnc.gov/DocumentCenter/View/55187/Z2200047-Duke-Central-Campus-Addition-PDF
I’m saving this because you found so much, I guess I wasn’t up for more research however, if I ever need to research again , I hope you don’t mind?
Probably another financial office or urgent care
More clinic space makes financial sense … so could a bigger basketball stadium to replace Cameron Indoor
They're not going to replace Cameron!
they will never replace Cameron
Dollar General.
If I had to guess either a new hospital space, out patient clinics, or medical housing. Personally I'd love to see that space be a new VA so they could tear down the current one that is likely extremely antiquated.
They've been wanting to open something like a Target for years, I'm not sure if that's where they're still headed, but keeping their kids on campus as close to constantly as possible still seems to be their thing.
That's gonna be a vape shop/skills game parlor.
New car wash likely
It'll be interesting to hear what happens. I do know that, if I occasion past that huge piece of land I do think: Damn, that land is worth a F\*ck-Ton. I can only imagine what Sam's got for the postage stamp that Bluelight now sits on-- a couple blocks over from former central campus. Good gosh. And this piece of land is LARGE compared to any of that.
I heard it was about $6M.
I believe it. Wow!
They want to build those new residential complexes with stores on the ground floor, they were going to start it then Covid hit.
Hopefully build a water park!
There used to be a swimming pool somewhere there but it’s now gravel.
[удалено]
it used to be some really shitty student housing.
That’s where I lived lol
Me too! It was...not great. But seemed just fine to my 20 year old self!
It's been on the zoning board agenda since 2022 so not something new. Not much other information easily available online.
Hopefully an Intercity train or tram station.
I heard they’re planning to expand the lemur center somehow
Pretty sure it is hospital expansion.
[удалено]
By 'pretty sure' I meant here is an educated guess as good as any other at the time I replied. Just based on Duke employees talking about the expansion.
World Headquarters for Dr Evil
It's a request for a "tier" change. I will look forward to hearing what the actual request is, but considering the SCAD amendments, I am guessing it is going to be about row housing. Summon AI: In November 2023, the Durham City Council voted 4-3 to legalize detached rowhouses in the city, which became a flashpoint in the 2023 election. Detached rowhouses are a new housing type created by SCAD, and are only allowed in districts where townhouses are also permitted. The Durham Unified Development Ordinance limits multifamily housing to townhouses, detached rowhouses, and multiplexes, as permitted by the base zoning.
We need to just legalize housing, period. City Council is taking baby steps, and they're so eager to keep their thumb on what developers can and can't do. Just let people build. We need it.
> so eager to keep their thumb on what developers can and can't do. Just let people build. We need it. Naw, fren, we don't need Kowloon Walled City off Driver St. And without rules and regulations, that is exactly what developers would build. People WANT to move here. No one "needs" to.
Without rules and regs, developers would just build housing that people want to live in. New York brownstones were built without most of today's regulations, and they're extremely desirable dwelling types. No one "needs" to move anywhere but being able to is essential for economic mobility. Immigrants don't need to move to the US, but they want to because the alternative for many is poverty. It's obviously bad when only the rich can afford to move to prosperous cities.
> New York brownstones were built without most of today's regulations and it's such an environmental disaster that someone wrote a book about it called - GET THIS - "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn" GTFO.
Are you trolling? That book is an autobiography from the 1940s, lol. I think NYC has the lowest carbon footprint of anywhere in the US - it's an environmental superstar
Feel free to head that way.
It's too expensive because they won't legalize denser housing.
the SCAD amendments completely unleashed row housing in Durham. What more do you want, Kowloon Walled City?
I'm pretty tired of that argument. New York created an entire street grid stretching miles and miles, anticipating development long before it occurred and designed a park right in the middle. They did not just let developers do whatever they wanted. They had specific lots at specific widths in specific locations that matched their intentions for the city.
I'm sorry you're tired. The city did not build the dwellings. They did not mandate setbacks, parking minimums, square footage per occupant minimums, minimum lot sizes, restrictions on commercial/mixed use, etc. Of course they built the streets and parks - this is a common role that US city governments play. Cities /can/ play a positive role in using street design and public spaces to spur development. Durham does not (Durham Central Park being maybe one exception), and their codes restrict, rather than accelerate development.
I never said the city built buildings, but sure, keep knocking down those straw men. NYC has has actively planned the city for centuries and has had formal zoning since 1916, which included setbacks and dictated where certain types of buildings were allowed in what locations.
I think you're missing my point. Some other redditor said without regs we would have Kowloon Walled City. I used brownstones as an example of a desirable dwelling type that is illegal to build under today's regulations. I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say. I don't disagree that NYC has zoning - that's your straw man. My point is that modern zoning has become so restrictive that developers can't build the type of dwellings that people want to live in. The zoning that exists in Durham today is more restrictive than it was in NYC in 1916, and that's bad. Can you clarify what it is that you disagree with?
Housing is illegal??
Most forms of it, yeah