Primary Source Set

Urban Development and Renewal

Beginning in 1949, the federal government provided funds for cities across the United States to seize and demolish buildings in “blighted” areas with the intention of inviting in new industries and improved housing. Neighborhoods with a high percentage of Black residents, many of whom were displaced by redevelopment efforts, were disproportionately targeted by urban renewal. This set uses photographs, maps, pamphlets, scrapbooks, newspaper articles, and government records to depict the impact of urban renewal on communities throughout North Carolina, with a focus on two neighborhoods in Durham and Raleigh.

Proceed with caution and care through these materials as the content may be disturbing or difficult to review. Please read DigitalNC’s Harmful Content statement for further guidance. 

Time Period

1954-1974

Grade Level

Undergraduate

Transcript

Fourth Ward Residents Discuss Housing; Edwards Talks Citizens Discuss Community Concern Gives Purposes of Redevelopment Work (EDITOR’S NOTE: The Raleigh Redevelopment Commission, whole executive director is H. Palmer Edwards, with headquarters at 504 Odd Fellows Building, is reportedly planning to redevelop the 4th Ward area, from Fayetteville Street (800 and 900 blocks) to South Saunders Street East side). It has been said by home owners and renters in the section that new plans call for the construction of a 16-story high-rise apartment building to accommodate most of the 400-odd families there. Both home renters and owners were interviewed regarding their feelings about th [sic] proposed redevelopment of Fourth Ward. Following are some of the answers given): Interviews Made BY CHARLES R. JONES MRS. ALICE DEWER MANUEL, 818 Manly Street, renter: “I certainly hope this neighborhood is not disturbed by redevelopment. I have lived in this house for four years and I’ve always lived in the area. “I used to live at 218 Fowle Street, and my children were raised in the Fourth Ward area, also.” MR. ROBERT SHARPER, 217 Fowle St., painter, home owner: “I don’t think much of it. What they should have done was to go from house to house and examined each residence to see if it passed inspection.” “The slub homes are mostly owned by whites and they should be made to repair those houses. My father-in-law built this house and my wife was born here. “I have lived in this house for 49 years, since I was married, and both my son and daughter were raised here. At my age now, it is almost unthinkable for me to consider buying a new house.” MR. E.G. MITCHELL, Sweet shop owner, 810 Manly Street: “ I have the understanding that this will be a business area after the redevelopment. I also was informed that a man, who already had a business down here, would be given priority to rebuild. This is my eighteenth year in this spot. Mr. Mitchell’s business is called Blue Front Sweet Shop. It is located across the street from the Manly Street Christian Church. MRS. BLANCHE DOVER, 209 Cuba St., church-civic leader, homeowner: “I hope it’s going to happen. I am all in favor of it,” (the Redevelopment Commission’s plans). She has lived in the Fourth Ward area for many years. MRS. ELIZABETH M. WILSON, 806 Manly Street, Wake County teacher, home owner: “I think it will be a fine thing if they (the Commission members) do as they say they’ll do. “If Redevelopment is going to make the neighborhood better as is my understanding, and if it’s for the betterment of the community, then I’m all for it.” Mrs. Wilson, Mrs. Dover’s sister, has resided at her present location well over twenty years. MR. OTIS L. HINTON, SR., 719 S. Saunders Street, telephone company employee, home owner: “I don’t think anything of the proposal if it’s going to be another Smoky Hollow (a section redeveloped for business on the western side of the city, near the train station). Those people had nowhere to go. However, if the federal government takes it over and provides people with decent homes, in which to live, then I think it might be good.” Mr. Hinton’s son is an officer with the Raleigh Police Department. MRS. MARY J. MARABLE, 219 Fowle St., Wake County school teacher, home owner: “This is my home placewhere [sic] I’m living and I would like to continue living here, if it’s at all possible. I have lived here for over 50 years. If the Commission does take my house, I have no plans, as of now, of where I would go. I hate to think of my moving into a new place now.” MRS. JEWEL M. LASSITER, 828 Fayetteville Street, PTA leader, home renter: “Well, I believe that what’s best for the community is best for the entire neighborhood. If it would help the environment, the area, and surroundings areas, it then has my blessings. “I was born in this vicinity, although not in this house. The individual has not to take care of himself.” This young mother is publicity chairman for the Washington Elementary School PTA, and represents the school on the executive board of the Raleigh PTA Council. MR. J.W. EATON, 123 S. Tarboro Road, principal of Washington Elementary School, 1000 Fayetteville Street: “I think it’s a good idea. When I first started to work with the Walnut Terrace situation, almost everyone in that section said they were opposed to my ideas. Now they are saying, ‘Why didn’t I realize this before (Walnut Terrace).’ “There are many ifs, but I approve of Redevelopment if they build something decent over here. If they are going to put some people in houses to live, then I certainly approve of the plans.” MR. LAFELL ATKINS, college senior, 212 Fowle Street: I think I understand the situation. A lot of these people own houses down in this area. I think it is a good idea in a way, but I am still against it as it would affect older people. My parents have lived in this area for many years, although I wasn’t born here.” MR. JOSEPH WHITAKER, 806 Manly Street, employee of Norfolk & Southern Railway Company, home owner: “This is kind of a hard thing to say. We have some houses over here that really need to go. We also have some very good homes in this area. Even at my age, now I hate to think of having to buy another home. “Those persons who are unable to buy anywhere else, I feel sorry for. But I think it might be a good idea, even if I have to suffer. Most of these houses belong to Mr. Gurley or Mrs. Jesse Helms. One woman was living in a house that hadn’t been painted. The white woman owner gave her some paint and she had to see to its being painted. “I moved into this neighborhood in 1938 and have been living in Fourth Ward every [sic] since. I built this house about 17 years ago. “If they would give me a fair price, I would think better of this proposal.” A veteran deacon at the Fayetteville Street Baptist Church, Mr. Whitaker is also a member of the Southside Redevelopment Group. MRS. CARRIE M. WHITAKER, retired Raleigh teacher, of 820 Ellington Street, owner of three houses in the Fourth Ward area: “I have lived in this house only about a year. I own three other houses over there; one my old home place, and two on Dorothea (Cannon Street) Drive. “I was much concerned about it, when I first heard about the Redevelopment Commission’s plans. I do, however, see such a great need for improvement over there, but nothing has been done.” “I’m not so in favor of putting people out because they have worked hard in that area. I am in favor of community improvement.” MRS. FAYE HENRY owner of Jerome’s Tourist Home, 622 Jamaica Drive: “I don’t appreciate it, but what can I do. I have been here for nine years, and the building is only 12 years old. Since the death of my father I have been running this establishment, which has 16 rooms to let, not including my quarters. “I am at a standstill now. I last heard from the Redevelopment Commission in 1959, when I was informed not to go through with the expansion plans which I had anticipated, because a highway or redevelopment was coming through here.” H. Palmer Edwards is a soft-spoken, quiet man, whose confidence in his position of seven years and six months duration, exudes from him as he discusses the purposes and aims of the Raleigh Redevelopment Commission, of which he is executive director. Mr. Edwards, whose immediate domain in the industrial world comprises two offices–his and his private secretary’s at 504 Odd Fellows Building, and who was interviewed early Wednesday of this week, shied away from the word “plans,” when queried about the future plans of the Fourth Ward section, rumored to be next for redevelopment in the eyes of residents of that area (as evidenced in their statements, also printed on this page). He said the aim of the Raleigh Redevelopment Commission is slum clearance. “We go into blighted areas and see what can be done for the people,” stated Mr. Edwards. “Our job is to comb the community and look for available housing for these people.” Referring to the well-known Smoke Hollow redevelopment of a few years ago, in which every single tenant of the area was evicted, Edwards stated, “In the case of Smoky Hollow (formerly located near the site of the present Seaboard Railway Station) everyone was moved out. Luckily, the Smoky Hollow job came out all right. Some people went into public housing, some rented and others bought homes. “The Smoky Hollow property is now an industrial and commercial site,” stated the executive director. “When we decide on redeveloping an area, two appraisers, working independently of each other and hired by the Commission, are sent into the neighborhood and come back with two different appraisals of the same house,” Edwards declared. “These persons are under contract with our Commission.” When asked if sentiment on the part of a home owner played any part whatever in the decision to redevelop, Mr. Edwards replied, “No.” “What we are aksing [sic] now is for money to plan with, which will have to come from Washington. Each project must be approved by federal officials. Our application is now in Washington.” The Raleigh Redevelopment Commission has acquired 165 pieces of property, stated Edwards, “and we have only been before the jury on the problem of price on two different occasions. However, we have been called before the clerk of court about a dozen times.” J.E. Strickland is the only Negro member of the Commission. He is an official of the Raleigh branch of Mechanics and Farmers Bank. In concluding remarks, Mr. Edwards stated, “The Commission recommends a price (to be paid the homeowner), then it is sent to our regional office in Atlanta after approval in Washington. “If Atlanta concurs with our figures, we go to the owner to buy his property.” Edwards came to his present position on April 1, 1959, from a position at the then First National Bank of Raleigh. He served as city clerk and treasurer in Raleigh for seven years prior to his present employment. Former Raleigh mayor, William G. Enloe, is chairman of the Commission, which was first created by the N.C. Legislature in 1958. Dr. Robert Clifton Weaver, a Negro, is head of the Housing and Urban Renewal Commission, a relatively new branch of the Cabinet. His office would be required to approve any plans laid before it by any redevelopment commission in the country. Many dispossessed citizens of the Smoky Hollow section expressed deep sorrow at being made to leave the neighborhood. Some were born in the houses demolished by the laws of redevelopment, others had moved into their homes, and still others refused to leave their residences because of what they claimed was “deep sentimental attachment to my home.” However, when the wrecking project bore down on these home owners, and the house next door was being destroyed before their own eyes, every tenant decided it was about time to put into use the well-known phrase, “If you can’t lick ‘em, join ‘em.” The same is true of the Fourth Ward area. Many are reluctant to move out, while others are anxiously awaiting the opportunity. The CAROLINIAN will keep its readers informed of all redevelopments in the area. Other areas of the city are heading for future redevelopment, according to a map seen in Mr. Edwards’ office Wednesday. Rumor, backed by facts printed in newspapers, has it that the area starting at S. East Street, with boundaries at E. Lenoir and E. Hargett, are also on tap for eventual redevelopment. The community now known as South Park, located in the southern part of Raleigh, is another frequently discussed controversy . However, the citizens of South Park have already begun work on what they hope will be a challenge to whatever redevelopmnt [sic] might present. At the present time, Walnut Terrace is a result of Urban Redevelopment. This 500-unit federal project, was completed about 1960 after the residents either moved out temporarily or bought other homes. Many of the persons of that area were provided temporary shelter until the project was completed, and moved back into it. Most, however, found other homes to rent and buy, mainly in Rochester Heights and Biltmore Hills. THIS SECTION OF RALEIGH TO BE RAZED - The homes shown on this page represent what is to be torn down to make way for a project planned by the Raleigh Redevelopment Commission, in which all of the houses, from the west side of Fayetteville Street, to the east side of S, Saunders are to be razed to make way for what some say will be a 16 story high rise apartment building, meant to hold some 400 of the families in this area. You will note that the house at top left, appears to have been built during the last century, as does these in photo below it. These homes are on Cannister and Dorothea Drive. The row of modern brick homes, third from left, however, are modern in every detail and are located on S. West Street. Manly Street United Church shown at the top right center, is included in the plans of the RDC, also. This church is as modern as many another in the city, both inside and out. Jerome’s Tourist Home, located in photo, second from top right center was built just 12 years ago, and the owner, Mrs. Faye Henry, said she received a letter 7 years ago advising her to cancel any improvement on her property as the Commission was planning to take possession of the property. The home at top right, complete with steel fence, located at 333 Battle Street, appears to be less than one year old. Many families and business establishments are expected to be affected by the action of the RD Commission.

"Fourth Ward Residents Discuss Housing; Edwards Talks"

When urban renewal for the Fourth Ward neighborhood of Raleigh was first proposed, residents’ reactions to the news were varied. This article from Black-owned newspaper The Carolinian includes short interviews with thirteen Fourth Ward citizens who shared their perspectives on renewal. While some of the residents expressed concern or uncertainty about urban renewal, others hoped for redevelopment to happen in Fourth Ward.

Contributed to DigitalNC by Olivia Raney Local History Library

View Original View Transcript

Raleigh, N.C. (Wake County)

Background

Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, the term “urban renewal” was used to describe the redevelopment efforts passed into law by the Housing Act of 1949. The Act spawned a federal program that funded the seizure and demolition of “blighted” or “slum” neighborhoods for redevelopment purposes. Although the intended goal of urban renewal was to build better housing and revitalize urban areas, redevelopment efforts disproportionately targeted predominantly Black neighborhoods. In North Carolina, Black communities in cities like Durham and Raleigh were displaced from their homes in the name of urban renewal, though many of the redevelopment promises made to those communities never arrived.

Urban renewal came to Durham’s Hayti neighborhood in the early 1960s, when the commission that oversaw the city’s redevelopment began to map the area, evaluating elements like the structural condition of buildings and creating plans for future land use. The Durham Redevelopment Commission also conducted appraisals on properties in Hayti to estimate their value. As the project progressed, the Commission distributed pamphlets that explained urban renewal as a way to revitalize “blighted” areas, promising that better infrastructure and new housing would come to Hayti. Initially, many of Durham’s Black citizens supported urban renewal, as they believed that the federal funds would be used to benefit their communities. City officials, eager to use those federal funds with little oversight, also approved of urban renewal. With the construction of the Durham Freeway (NC-147) included in redevelopment plans, white business owners who hoped that the freeway would relieve traffic congestion were also supportive of renewal efforts. 

Urban renewal forced citizens to leave their residences. Although the Durham Redevelopment Commission provided compensation to Hayti homeowners before they seized and demolished their houses, many residents felt that the prices they received were unfair. Residents who were displaced from rental housing experienced similar frustrations about the lack of new low-income apartments in Hayti, which the Durham Redevelopment Commission had said they would build. Low-income housing and other redevelopment promises made by the Commission never materialized, even many years after urban renewal began. Similar events transpired in Raleigh, where redevelopment displaced residents of a predominantly Black neighborhood called Fourth Ward (also referred to as Southside).

While the Housing Act allowed redevelopment to occur across the United States and in North Carolina, this primary source set places its main focus on the areas of Hayti and Fourth Ward to illustrate how urban renewal impacted primarily Black neighborhoods, causing people to lose their homes, businesses, and communities for little in return. 

Discussion Questions

  1. While the existing land use map depicts Raleigh’s Fourth Ward neighborhood before urban renewal, the preliminary site plan map shows a proposal for land use after redevelopment. Compare the two maps, making sure to notice how the types of land (residential, commercial, industrial) change from one to the other. What changed? What do the changes indicate about what the Durham Redevelopment Commission valued?

  2. What did urban renewal attempt to accomplish? What did it actually accomplish in neighborhoods like Hayti and Fourth Ward? Do the goals and outcomes of urban renewal conflict with each other?

  3. Consider this article from The Carolinian, in which residents of the Fourth Ward neighborhood express their opinions on urban renewal potentially occurring in the area. What are their perspectives on renewal? What may have caused residents to be supportive of or concerned by urban renewal? Do you think the opinions of some residents changed after redevelopment occurred in Fourth Ward, and if so, why?

  4. Review this booklet distributed by the Durham Redevelopment Commission. How does the booklet describe and portray urban renewal? How does it differ from the portrayal in other sources, like the one in this The Carolina Times article?

  5. The Asheboro Finer Carolina scrapbook features before and after photos of many old buildings that were demolished as part of the community improvement contest. The scrapbook refers to the effort as “beautifying.” How does the scrapbook describe the buildings that were destroyed? In what ways does Finer Carolina relate to urban renewal?

  6. In this The Carolinian article, the director of Raleigh’s United Poor People’s Organization refers to urban renewal as a removal: “The whole project should be geared to rehabilitation rather than removal.” In contrast, this The Jones County Journal article claims that “nobody’s property is ‘stolen, seized, or confiscated’” during urban renewal. Why do the two articles hold such different views on urban renewal? What does each perspective indicate about that era’s attitude on the well-being of communities, particularly Black communities?

  7. Several sources in this set use terms like “blighted,” “decayed,” and “slum” to describe areas that were set to undergo urban renewal. This booklet states that such places were a “cancer.” Considering that redevelopment mostly occurred in low-income Black neighborhoods, what do these negative descriptions reveal about the people that supported urban renewal? What do the descriptions indicate about urban renewal as a program?

  8. Take a look at aerial photographs of Hayti here. How did the area change from the 1950 photo to the one from 1972? Considering the aerial photos and the sources on Hayti in this set, how do you imagine the impact of urban renewal is still felt today? 

This primary source set was compiled by Isabella Walker.

Updated January 2025