Raleigh and Durham Advance Public Housing Redevelopment

Public-housing authorities in Raleigh and Durham are advancing plans to replace two former housing communities with substantially larger mixed-income developments.

In Raleigh, the former 122-unit Heritage Park site has been rezoned for downtown mixed-use development reaching as high as 12 stories.

In Durham, plans filed for Tribute Rising call for as many as 907 homes at the former Forest Hill Heights property.

Both proposals would introduce significantly greater density near growing downtown districts. They also raise important questions about financing, affordability, resident return and the replacement of the public housing removed from the sites.

Heritage Park Could Become a High-Density Community

Heritage Park occupies approximately 11 acres near downtown Raleigh and Dix Park.

The former community contained 122 public-housing apartments constructed during the 1970s. Raleigh Housing Authority has demolished the buildings as it prepares the property for redevelopment.

The site’s previous RX-3 zoning generally permitted residential mixed-use construction up to three stories. The newly approved DX-12 designation allows downtown mixed-use development up to 12 stories.

Because the property is located within a transit area, additional height may eventually be available through Raleigh’s residential height-bonus provisions. Any building above the approved 12-story zoning would remain subject to the applicable city requirements and development review.

The rezoning increases the site’s theoretical development capacity. It does not represent final approval or financing for every apartment that might eventually be built.

Raleigh Housing Authority Is Pursuing Tax Credits

Raleigh Housing Authority says it submitted a competitive 9% Low-Income Housing Tax Credit application for Heritage Park and planned a separate 4% tax-credit submission.

The authority is targeting a fourth-quarter 2026 financial closing for the first development block.

Earlier city materials described an initial phase containing approximately 51 senior apartments and 120 family apartments.

Those figures remain subject to financing, final design, permitting and construction documents.

The 9% and 4% tax-credit programs serve different financing functions.

Nine-percent credits generally provide more equity per eligible dollar of development cost but are awarded through a competitive state process. Four-percent credits are typically paired with tax-exempt bonds and often require additional gap financing.

Using both programs across separate phases could allow Raleigh Housing Authority to divide the redevelopment into financeable components.

One-for-One Replacement Is the Minimum Commitment

Raleigh Housing Authority says it plans to provide at least one replacement home for every public-housing apartment removed through its broader redevelopment program.

At Heritage Park, that commitment establishes a minimum replacement target of 122 deeply affordable homes.

A larger total apartment count does not necessarily mean the supply of housing available to former public-housing residents will increase by the same amount.

Mixed-income developments may combine:

• Public-housing replacement apartments;

• Project-based Section 8 homes;

• LIHTC apartments at different income limits;

• Workforce housing; and

• Unrestricted market-rate apartments.

Public reporting should distinguish each category instead of presenting the development’s total size as an affordable-housing count.

Relocation and Return Remain Central Issues

Former Heritage Park residents were relocated before demolition.

As redevelopment progresses, Raleigh Housing Authority will need to maintain accurate contact information and communicate regularly with displaced households.

Residents should receive clear information about:

• Expected construction phases;

• Replacement-unit eligibility;

• Screening requirements;

• Bedroom-size availability;

• Accessibility needs;

• Moving assistance;

• The process for exercising a right to return;

• What happens if a household cannot immediately return when a phase opens.

A one-for-one physical replacement commitment is only one part of resident protection. The authority must also ensure that former residents can realistically access the replacement homes.

Tribute Rising Proposes Up to 907 Durham Homes

In Durham, the housing authority and Integral Group are advancing Tribute Rising at the former Forest Hill Heights site near the Durham Bulls Athletic Park.

Current plans contemplate as many as 907 apartments across multiple phases, together with neighborhood retail and other mixed-use components.

The project has been described as an approximately $343 million development.

Public materials indicate that the housing mix may include affordable, workforce and market-rate apartments. A final unit-by-unit affordability schedule has not yet been established in the sources reviewed by NSPIRE Wire.

That distinction matters because 907 total apartments should not be reported as 907 affordable homes unless final financing and regulatory documents support that classification.

The Durham Site Previously Contained 55 Homes

Forest Hill Heights previously contained approximately 55 public-housing apartments.

The property is part of a historically significant area shaped by urban-renewal policies, public investment and displacement.

Redevelopment would return housing to a site that has remained vacant while creating considerably more density near downtown employment, transit and services.

The scale also introduces significant infrastructure and phasing requirements.

A project approaching 900 apartments may require multiple financing closings, separate construction phases, road and utility improvements and long-term coordination among public and private partners.

Early site plans should therefore be treated as a development framework rather than a guaranteed final product.

Both Plans Reflect a Broader Public-Housing Shift

Heritage Park and Tribute Rising reflect a national move away from isolated, low-density public-housing communities toward larger mixed-income developments.

Housing authorities often pursue this model because conventional public-housing funding is insufficient to address major capital needs or finance complete redevelopment.

A mixed-income structure can provide access to:

• LIHTC equity;

• Tax-exempt bonds;

• Private mortgage debt;

• Project-based rental assistance;

• Local housing funds;

• Public land;

• Market-rate revenue; and

• Developer investment.

Those resources can support better building systems, new infrastructure and more total housing.

The model also creates risks. If replacement apartments represent only a small portion of the completed development, the site may become more valuable without materially increasing housing available to extremely low-income households.

Density Creates Opportunity but Does Not Guarantee Affordability

The new zoning at Heritage Park and the 907-home concept in Durham demonstrate the amount of housing that could be supported on centrally located public land.

Density can spread land and infrastructure costs across more homes. It may also support retail, transit and neighborhood amenities.

But zoning capacity is not financing.

Each affordable apartment will still require some combination of tax credits, rental assistance, soft debt, grants, public land value or cross-subsidy.

Rising construction costs and interest rates can also reduce the number of apartments that remain feasible between initial planning and financial closing.

Housing authorities should therefore publish updates whenever the unit count or affordability mix changes.

Construction Standards Must Be Planned Early

Large phased communities require consistent standards for construction, accessibility, inspection and long-term maintenance.

Design teams should address:

• Accessible routes between buildings and amenities;

• Elevator reliability in taller buildings;

• Emergency power and life-safety systems;

• Moisture management and building-envelope durability;

• Ventilation and indoor-air quality;

• Pest-resistant construction;

• Trash and property-maintenance operations;

• Unit turnover and inspection access;

• Replacement-part availability; and

• Long-term capital reserves.

Properties receiving HUD assistance will remain subject to applicable physical-condition requirements after occupancy, including NSPIRE where the program requires it.

High-density development can magnify maintenance failures. A single elevator, electrical or water-intrusion problem may affect many households at once.

What Housing Authorities Should Report

Both agencies can improve public accountability by publishing phase-level information that separates aspirations from executed transactions.

Useful reporting should include:

• Total apartments proposed;

• Public-housing homes removed;

• Replacement homes required;

• Replacement homes financed and completed;

• Units at each AMI level;

• Market-rate units;

• Project-based voucher commitments;

• Former residents contacted;

• Former residents who want to return;

• Households that successfully return;

• Financing secured;

• Construction starts;

• Expected occupancy dates; and

• Changes from previously approved plans.

The number of apartments allowed by zoning should not be combined with completed or funded housing in the same production total.

The Bottom Line

Raleigh and Durham are preparing two former public-housing sites for far greater residential density.

Raleigh’s Heritage Park property, which formerly contained 122 apartments, can now support downtown mixed-use development reaching 12 stories. Raleigh Housing Authority is pursuing LIHTC financing and targeting a late-2026 closing for the first block.

Durham’s Tribute Rising proposal could place as many as 907 homes on the former 55-unit Forest Hill Heights site.

Both projects could substantially expand housing supply. Their affordable-housing impact, however, will depend on the final income mix, financing, replacement commitments and ability of former residents to return.

Until those elements are documented, proposed density should not be confused with delivered affordability.