The chicken bones say.....

[StanN]

Some use chicken bones to foretell the future. My chicken bones foretell
DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT.

As i see it the question is not "if" but rather what is the role of government? ...and what is the role of private enterprise, i.e. the developers? Where do you draw the line? What is an acceptable role for the TOC...and what is unacceptable, i.e. corporate welfare? Further, what should be the guiding vision? A major destination for corporate headquarters? Botiques and restaurants? A mixed use development? An arts and entertainment center?

A secondary question involves timing. Will "the powers" delay the push for downtown redevelopment until after this year's election or will they make the move now? Essentially. is the issue a plus or a minus for the Republicans.

What do you think?

Stan

[dhyatt]

I think those with the money for downtown re-development have a different vision from what I think will be successful. I believe they are looking for a quaint strip of boutiques and antique stores anchored by a historically significant drug store. I can already see the parasols and horses on a Sunday afternoon. I also think it's doomed to fail.

If you want to draw people downtown, you have to have people downtown - and you have to a place where they can be seen. Live music, patio restaraunts, a park with a grassy knoll visible off the main drag. These things will draw people in. Quiet cafe's and contrived antique stores just won't do it...

You have to attract the young downtown. A downtown built by old money - for old money - is nothing more than a waste of money.

[StanN]

....the right answer, and all the clues they dropped at Mid Pines to do mind prep....It will be an upscale, mixed use development with a luxury hotel, office space and high priced, high rise apartments...similar to the new North Hills Dev. in N. Raleigh. The clues included: North Hills Mall, stay close to developers, "new urbanism", "think big", and like Buckhead St. in Atlanta.

"This will be true urban, secure living," Kane (the developer) says. "You'll be able to walk to the grocery store, the dry cleaners, the movie theater ... I just wish I was still 25. It's going to be a fabulous place to live."

"About 60 percent of the Alexan North Hills units will be studio and one-bedroom apartments with much higher rental prices than most of Raleigh's traditional apartment communities, Baker says, declining to speculate on the Alexan North Hill's exact pricing points. "

I think that the Ashworth's are more interested in big $'s than in parasols and boutiques. And the above fits with the Chamber's chairmans pitch.

stan

[dhyatt]

Hopefully, we will wind up with something more than quaint boutiques but a little less intense than Buckhead St...

[washere]

Well Stan, if that's really the plan I guess we should go ahead and pack up and move. Tim and I figured that our neighborhood would be rezoned and condemned eventually for high density residential, but it sounds like that may be sooner than we thought.

[StanN]

...forecasting is very difficult, particularly if its about the future. And if I'm wrong I will blame it on the chicken bones.

stan

[Wuptdo]

Okay, two things on my mind for downtown.

First, when are the three traffic circles going to be built? I thought they were supposed to start constuction this winter?

Second, whatever happened to the "Canals of Cary?" These canals were supposed to be built downtown for stormwater management.

*****Oh, OH*****Dream Sequence*****No, not again****Stop!******

What I what to see in Cary's future. I see a system of canals and walkways. I see where you can live in a hi-rise in downtown Cary, that not only has a parking garage, but a marina as well. It is also "gated" to keep out the rift-raff. I see taking my boat to dinner in another location in downtown Cary; there's always ample dock space. It is like someone had the vision of Buckhead, Southpoint Mall and San Antionio, Texas all rolled into the new Cary. As we eat dinner, we see Paris Hilton and her people, and look, there's Fantasia with her new hubby, Clay Aiken, and over there, it's Mayor Joyce and his wife. We decided to do dessert down on Jordon Lake. As we take the main canal down to Jordon Lake, we see beautiful hi-rise condo's (like Miami), large waterfront mansions, and look, there is the Cary Swim Club practising in one of the side canals. Due to town investment of $50 millions dollars and private development, Cary has become the "Jewel of the South!" Check that out, looks like Donald Trump is adding another addition to his home. Celebrate Cary!

*******the dream fades away******going, going, gone*********

Some of us dream real big!

Wuptdo B-)

Thanks Stan - PIMF (Preview is my friend)

[washere]

Egads Wup!

Paris Hilton?!?!?!?

I thought you wanted to bring the class back to Cary. :wink:

Somebody pass the smelling salts. :-D

[StanN]

Wup,

its CANAL ...otherwise a great post. I can see it now.

stan

[Cathy]

Well Stan, if that's really the plan I guess we should go ahead and pack up and move. Tim and I figured that our neighborhood would be rezoned and condemned eventually for high density residential, but it sounds like that may be sooner than we thought.

Char Char,

You might start packing, but just look at the Town Center Map (available at Town Hall) and if your house is in that area, chances are that the push from planners will be to convert most of the single family to high density mixed use one way or the other. With Amendment One, if they get real impatient to make it happen, they can designate the Town Center a TIF Redevelopment Area and start "assembling" the available land for some developer to build the "Celebration Station" vision that they have clearly laid out. The developer at the Heart of Cary breakfast that I attended, was not shy about saying that they fully well expected the Town to use their powers of eminent domain to assemble the necessary parcels of land.

Today, on Presidents Day, the Supreme Court heard the opening arguments of Kelo Vs City of New London CT. This case will be the one to determine if this kind of abuse of eminent domain can continue around the country. The Supreme Court will set the definition of "Public Use" for all the States to follow. Let's all pray that they decide that Public Use does not mean "Take the land from you to give it to some other private party because the new use will pay more taxes than you do." _and define it to strictly mean that the land has to be used by the public.

And you can thank the League of Municipalities for working against your interests by filing a brief in support of the City of New London and AGAINST the property owners they want to push out.

Cathy

[washere]

Cathy-
It's a real tough call. We'll either be right in it, or right on the edge of it. I'd love to be right on the edge of that area. I love living right near downtown now. We live about a 1/4-1/2 mile up Madison from where the new Drees townhouses are being built/sold.

I'm really afraid of what will happen if we stay here much longer though. I suspected that this would happen, but I figured it was a long way off. Now it sounds like it could literally happen at any time. :cry:

[washere]

I think downtown redevelopment is best left to the forces of capitalism and the free market (I ofcourse think it's reasonable for the TOC/CTC have a "vision" for what they want to happen and to incent busniesses accordingly). I think it's reasonable for the TOC/CTC to have aesthetic standards for the downtown area. Ultimately, what the community wants will exist in downtown (generally speaking). I don't think it's acceptable to condemn people's property or decide certain businesses (and homes!) aren't acceptable to speed up the process.

Personally, I really enjoy downtown the way it is now- an eclectic mix of restaraunts and specialty shops. There are several one of a kind stores downtown (the most notable being Elegant Stitches, the only store of its kind in NC, but sadly, they relocated to Waverly Place last October).

The big problem (as Hyatt) mentioned, is visability. I drive through downtown a couple times a day, and *just* discovered that there is a gourmet Italian foodstuffs store on the lower level of Olde Cary Commons. :lol:

The other problems right now are parking issues and the fact that lots of those little shops keep really lousy hours. I think a lot of this could be addressed in part by the individual shop owners (ie, shop owners/workers parking places other than the limited number of spaces right in front of their stores and better hours).

From the other comments on the subject, I think we all agree that we have to make downtown a destination. I just hope they don't make downtown like Buckhead Street. There's something about a string of bars and clubs and drunk people leaving and driving home at unGodly hours that just rubs me the wrong way.

I just sold a house to a guy who moved up here from Atlanta who says he never went to Buckhead St because it was just too dangerous ("Some rap guy gets shot there every other week it seems like," was his comment). Now I'm not sure how *accurate* that perception is, but the perception is very important. This fellow mentioned some other area that he thought would fit the TOC better as a model for downtown...I'll ask where it was.

I think live music downtown is a great idea!!! They did something like that in the summer where I grew up. It was a HUGE draw for the community and really did a lot to increase awareness for downtown businesses and restaurants. I wonder where they could do something like that in downtown Cary...It seems like people relaxing with a glass of wine at Vespa listening to great music on a gorgeous summer evening really embodies what Cary is all about/is trying to be.

[Cathy]

Char char,
I wonder if the majority of Cary citizens agree with you. I'd like to think (and suspect) that they do.

Cathy
Since you mentioned "Hot-lanta", I'd like to share this with you all:


----- Original Message -----
From: Ken Masugi
To: PreservingtheAmericanDream@yahoogroups.com ; The Practice of New Urbanism
Cc: Ken Masugi ; Matt Peterson ; Lindsay White
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2005 11:21 PM
Subject: [PreservingtheAmericanDream] pro-sprawl article, LA Times


I am sending this pro-sprawl article in Sunday’s LA Times to both Preserving the American Dream (Randal O’Toole’s listserv)

and The Practice of New Urbanism listserv: The developer site featured in the article is http://dirt-e.com/, which will amuse and infuriate.

I think the pro-sprawl haiku is tongue-in-cheek. But maybe not.

Developer Pens Paean to Growth in Atlanta
· A Newsletter Gets the Scoop on Suburban Sprawl's Joys

By Ellen Berry

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-sprawl20feb20,1,2327389.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

My blog on this: http://www.claremont.org/localliberty/archives/002294.html

Dr. Ken Masugi

Director, Center for Local Government

The Claremont Institute
937 West Foothill Blvd., Suite E
Claremont, CA 91711
(909) 621-6825, X104
Mobile: (202) 669-7007
Fax: (909) 626-8724
kmasugi@claremont.org
www.claremont.org

"All politics is local."

[StanN]

I have just spent a couple of hours familiarizing myself with info from the town's web site on TCAP (downtown redevelopment).

The magnitude of the issues and complexities is mind boggling. The infrastructure requirements, (although I couldn't find even a rough calculation of the $'s required) will be many tens of millions of dollars, including:
*major road improvements involving roundabouts, grade separations, widening of Chapel Hill Rd., extension of Harrison Ave;
*special improvements to deal with the railroad noise which is slated to increase enormously when the commuter rail project is implemented;
*major storm water improvements;
* parking decks (as many as 2,300 new spaces in multi-story decks);
*sidewalk and streetscape improvements.

The following is a quote from a presentation given by Nellie Tomlinson (real estate attorney and former Chair of the Cary Chamber and recently appointed to the Eco. Dev. Comm.) in Feb. 2003 to the CTC. At that time she was chair of the TCAP Implimentation Committee.

"General Implementation Approach
The committee were presented with six options ranging from a free market approach, where the town would take the most minimal role in the development process, to an approach that would involve land acquisition and land assemblage. The committee adopted an approach which would have the town step in to facilitate “linchpin” activity where the free market would be unlikely to act on its own. Where land assembly is needed, the Town should first seek to implement the plan through negotiation and agreement." (See http://www.townofcary.org/agenda/pl03-050.htm for the full report.)

What is inescapably clear is that short of massive, new debt financing (TIF or otherwise), and possibly the use of the TOC’s police powers (eminent domain) the plan cannot be realized.

So lets consult the "chicken bones" again. There are three possibilities:
1. The TCAP plan will be abandoned - very unlikely.
2. The launching of a major sales job promoting the glories of downtown rredevelopment and a recommendation for a large new bond issue to be voted on by the public - possible but less than likely.
3. The Chamber will crack the whip and the CTC will create a TIF district for downtown Cary - most likely alternative. A public vote in support of the necessary bonds will not be pursued as a no vote would set the project back by years.

Whem will option #3 occur? Two key indicators will be the ED consultant's recommendations and next years proposed capital budget. The chicken bones predict that the heart of the plan will move forward after the November election. The last thing the powers behind this want is to see the issue of TIF's and police powers become entangled in the election debate.

Finally, I am all for downtown redevelopment brought about by market forces and sharply limited infrastructure improvements by the TOC once the market has spoken. An economic development plan with a focus of creating high quality jobs would raise all boats, including those of the Chatham St. merchants and land owners and the Chamber's developers who are behind the current political pressure play. But that is not what the chicken bones are saying.

stan

[johnb]

There are going to be some property owners in downtown who stand to loose quite a bit. It probably is true that the council will keep this under wraps until after the election, no sense in having to debate this in front of the public prior to an election. That would just gum up the works. The intent will be to run this through while greasing the rails.

Of course, anyone who objects is just trying to stop the "community from moving forward together" and they'll be classed as hateful, spiteful, emotional, etc...etc... It'll be interesting to see how close to form this pans out. I suspect that since these folks have a limited number of options in their playbook and those options are quite effective we can safely predict the way it'll play out.

It won't get stopped.

[Cathy]

It is pretty obvious, (and mind boggling) when you really look at what is being proposed,_that there is only one likely avenue for it to come to pass, _isn't it?

Pretty ambitious, and not likely to be friendly to opposition, whether that is physical or vocal. Bye-bye individual property rights_welcome to the "collective".

You can count on me though to be (or already identified as) one of those "hateful, spiteful, emotional, etc...etc... " obstructonists because, ...well, I guess that doesn't need to be further explained...does it?

Cathy

www.americandreamcoalition.org

"There! His Majesty can now read my name without glasses.
And he can double the reward on my head!" --John Hancock

[washere]

We as residents of the area do have choices:
1) Move
2) Stay there

Personally, I'd just as soon move. But then it's no skin off my back to randomly look at available housing inventory one day :lol:. Heck, there's a nice little house on the market right across the street from Brent :wink: (I've heard it smells pretty bad though :cry: ).

For me the problem isn't eminent (I know I spelled that wrong...) domain. The problem (for me) is that they'll give me a lousy value for my house- one that doesn't even begin to compensate me for my time spent moving, and the emotional attachment felt with my home.

Stan brings up an excellent point about the trains: it's totally not a problem now, but commuter rail would really make my house (and the whole area!) a crummy place to live.

I figure I know about it, so if I don't like it I can just move. Somehow I feel like I should be really upset over this but I'm not :lol: .

[StanN]

Quote from Mayor McAlister 1/05 in Cary magazine:


“We were a railroad town originally,” says McAlister, “and to complete that loop, to have that vital link to Research Triangle Park and Raleigh is going to mean a lot to us. Having the station right in the middle of Cary is going to be huge. It will define the type of development that occurs downtown because people want to live close to the station. It will be very good for businesses downtown now and those coming in the future.”

The following is the conclusions section of the TOC staff report on train noise in the TCAP area. See http://www.townofcary.org/depts/dsdept/P&Z/tcap/4trainnoise.pdf for the full report.

Conclusions -
The Town of Cary, in establishing a goal of increasing the density and types of land uses downtown, in an area already moderately impacted by train horn noise (which will significantly worsen over time with TTA's regional Rail project) will likely face increasing complaints from residents and business owners regarding the volume and frequency of train whistles.

Conclusions from the analysis -
• There will be great difficulty and costs associated with adequately assessing and devising suitable noise mitigation standards on a land use or project-specific basis for the proposed TCAP project area.
• Any noise mitigation as a component of project design, if mandated by the Town, will add new costs for downtown projects (that will not apply to non-TCAP areas of Town), thus providing a deterrent to new development, rather than an incentive.
• Even if inside noise levels on new uses could be reduced to reasonable and acceptable levels (which is questionable, given the high levels of mitigation needed), outside uses and existing uses would still be impacted from excessive train horn noises
• TTA has committed to improving railroad crossings along 3 NCRR crossings in order to assist Cary in receiving a "quiet zone" designation from FRA (at a cost of $0.6 to $3 million to TTA). With the addition of Reedy Creek crossing, this would make TTA responsible for 4 out of 11 of the crossings in the TCAP area. However, according to FRA rules, if even one of the crossings in the planning area is left unsecured, the Town cannot achieve a "quiet zone" designation, and the noise impacts from the TTA Regional Rail System project will remain unmitigated. Bottom line, if
no other crossings in the proposed "quiet zone" are mitigated, 55 - 142 trains per day will be blowing their horns through downtown Cary. The potential noise from all these horns would be considered a significant, unmitigated impact of TTA's proposed project. It is hereby recommended that the Town of Cary enter into negotiations with TTA through the DEIS
process, in order to pursue their assistance with paying to secure the following additional crossings, which are intimately linked with their proposed project -
• #6 - N. Harrison Avenue / CSX - This crossing is 433 ft to the south of a crossing with NCRR that TTA is proposing to upgrade to a quad gate or other approved SSM/secured technology. It makes sense that both crossings are upgraded to the same status for safety and noise
abatement. If this crossing is not also secured, the Town cannot receive a "quiet zone" designation for any of TTA's project-impact area.
• #8 - N. Academy Street / CSX - This crossing is 180 ft to the south of a crossing with NCRR that TTA is proposing to upgrade to a quad gate or other approved SSM/secured technology. It makes sense that both crossings are upgraded to the same status for safety and noise
abatement. If this crossing is not also secured, the Town cannot receive a "quiet zone" designation for any of TTA's project-impact area.
• #10 - Reedy Creek Road / CSX / NCRR - This crossing is currently identified in the TTA DEIS for eventual closure. However, this crossing provides important access for a business and therefore
must remain open. The crossing needs to be added back to the TTA DEIS, and obviously would then need to be mitigated and upgraded to a quad gate or other SSM technology along with the other TTA improvements.
If even one of these crossings in the TCAP area is left unsecured, TTA's mitigation will be meaningless, given that all crossings must be secured to gain "quiet zone" designation from FRA. Given the 226% and
373% increase in train traffic that will be impacted downtown Cary as a result of TTA's proposed project, it is reasonable that TTA pay to mitigate additional crossings that are necessary for the Town to receive a
"quiet zone" designation. Otherwise, TTA's project will result in significant, unmitigated noise impacts to the Town of Cary. For its share, it is recommended that the Town of Cary commit to providing improvements as necessary to the remaining crossings in the TCAP area that are farthest removed from proximity to the TTA project
(but which are still recommended to be upgraded to the most appropriate and cost-effective SSM status to allow the entire TCAP area to be designated a "quiet zone") -
• #1 - High House Rd / CSX
• #2 - Old Apex Rd / CSX
• #3 - Dixon Ave / CSX
• #4 - N West St / CSX
Quad gates are the most expensive SSM alternative, but other less costly alternatives exist. Using the quad gate option (with an estimated cost of $200,000 to $1 million each) as the highest cost SSM option, the
highest cost to the Town to receive a "quiet zone" designation would therefore total $0.8 to $4 million. The benefits of this option include the complete elimination of horn noises from downtown and the improved
safety benefits of eliminating bypass attempts by vehicles or pedestrians in the entire TCAP planning area. To complete this task, the Town should hire a consultant to study the most cost-effective SSM alternatives for each of these crossings and assist the Town in acquiring and implementing a "quiet zone" designation from appropriate federal and state agencies and private railroad companies.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the noise issue, commuter rail will precipitate a major N/S traffic flow issue that will be greatly exacerbated by high density developments proposed for TCAP. Consider that there will be as many as 6-7 trains coming thru the proposed commercial center of Cary during peak hours. IMO there will have to be a second grade separation in the TCAP zone, likely an overpass at either Academy or Harrison. That will be big $'s.

The public deserves to know all the proposed infastructure costs for the TCAP plan as currently envisioned. And we need some straight talk about how the project will be financed. If we are not to go deeper in debt, will the infrastructure improvements needed for TCAP detract from roads and parks needed elsewhere?

As the high cost for TCAP becomes more apparent, I have to wonder about the suitability of Chatham St. as the commercial center of downtown Cary. The RR is a big problem and poses big risks to the commmercial success of the TCAP plan. It seems to me that the area around Academy and Weston already has the necessary infrastructure with far fewer problems than Chatham St. It also offers superior proximity to I40, I540, RTP and RDU. Why is everryone fixated on Chatham St.?

Stan

[Cathy]

Stan,

I am so glad that you are bringing all of this to everyone who reads this forum's attention. More people need to become aware.

The only real good answer to it all _if they INSIST on cramming this train on everyone, just to boost the ego's of inner city politicians_, would be to dig down and put the rail line below grade.

But Stan, this is Smart Growth in it's purest form. It doesn't matter if it's logical, cost effective, marketable, or anything that most people want.
THIS IS WHAT SMART GROWTH IS WORKING TO ACHIEVE!
High density, pedestrian, mass transit oriented, pack 'em and stack 'em so they don't keep sprawling, and make it as hazardous and annoying as H@## to drive a car to get anywhere.

That is what the Presidents Council on Sustainable Growth, the EPA & the APA has decided is the only truly "sustainable" way to live (unless you are really rich). Then you can buy your way out of it. You'll be able to buy some land from the Nature Conservancy or some other land trust.

The rest of us will be screwed and paying out the A$$ for it.

Cathy

[StanN]

Cathy,

We differ on density, and I prefer to draw my conclusions case-by-case but the TCAP project looks more and more like DUMB GROWTH rather than SMART GROWTH - and you are correct as who will pick up the bill.

Stan

[Cathy]

North Carolina
Department of State Treasurer
Financial Information
Town of Cary

http://www.treasurer.state.nc.us/lgc/units/D_068.htm

Interesting.......

And also interesting:
http://www.capitalresearch.org/pubs/pdf/FW1104.pdf

[Brent]

The TCAP is indeed shaping up to be dumb growth. Mythical-Train-centered density. Noise and taxpayer-subsidized infrastructure improvements to support that density.

And what about stormwater and air quality? I don't believe that the town can build what Staff is drooling to build and still protect the environment. It very well could be that air and water quality will end up setting the limits of what and how we can develop. And that's sad, because Staff will throw out Cary's leading practices and build right up to those limits. Traffic, stormwater, air quality, all to be sacrificed.

[StanN]

Brent,

Staff doesn't have a single vote. Staff produced the damning report on noise that I quoted. Wharever theri motivation they don't have the vote. Put the responsibility on those that do.

stan

[StanN]

Brent,

Unlike you I have nothing against density or even train centerd density. Density and mass transit help reduce air pollution - as counter-intutitive as that may be. The major source of air pollution is burning fossil fuel. Around here thats gasoline consumed by cars and coal fired power plants.

What consumes more fossil fuel - living miles from shopping, work centers, theaters, etc. or walking to them in a mixed use development? And mass transit is far more fuel efficient than the personal car/light truck.
And density is needed to make mass transit feasible. People will use mass transit if it is within a ten minute walk. Once they get into their car to drive to the train station - and then have to transfer from the train to a van to get to their workplace...forgetaboutit. One of the major arguments for commuter rail is that it will encourage density, especially around rail stations.

However, the choice of surface rail creates some big problems that work against the dense developments that are used to justify it. The 110 db noise of a train whistle, needed for safety at intersections, is equivalent to a jet plane taking off at 200 feet. And even if the noise problem can be eliminated by sealing intersections with special gates, surface rail and density conflict when auto traffic is a key part of the transportation mix. And commuter rail will have only a minute impact on auto traffic.

To have commuter rail and auto traffic coexist with a mixed use subdivision of apartments and hotels, there must be grade separation eliminating both the noise of the whistle and the conflict with the free flow of traffic. Either the cars have to go over the trains or the trains over the cars. Sealing intersections with special gates will not work when you are talking about several trains per hour moving through heavily trafficked areas. And grade separation is very expensive. And no one has budgeted for or anticipated that cost.

The present commuter rail line was chosen because there was an existing right-of-way that could be employed. Buying a new right-of-way was deemed far too expensive. But the cost of grade separation was not considered.

Assuming the consumer rail project will go ahead, the TOC has three choices. 1. Abandon the TCAP plan; or 2. face up to its true long-term cost; or 3. move TCAP.

Some may argue that the cost of infrastructure for TCAP can be justified by the added income to the town from the additional property taxes generated by the new developments it will attract. But that assumes that the apartments, hotels and retail outlets of a mixed use development couldn't be developed elsewhere at a site not requiring the added cost of infrastructure. Or that the demand for such developments is infinite.

Consider TCAP relocated to the Weston/Harrison area. It would be closer to RTP, SAS, the offices in the Weston area and RDU. A hotel already exists and another is in the works. Restaurants and shops are close at hand. It is near I 40 and I 540. The newly widened Harrison Ave. would become "Main St." And no railroad.

What would be wrong about high-rise apartment complexes there? Add express buses to RTP/RDU and vans or buses to SAS and the Weston office area - at a relatively low cost because of the short distances involved - and you have all the advantages of TCAP without the added cost of new infrastructure.

Even if commuter rail does not get funded, the above is a better option than dense mixed use developments along the Chatham st. business district. Unless you regard town hall and the Chamber's offices as the center of the universe.

What does the above scenario lack? The backing of the Chamber, the Mayor and his followers on the CTC, Mr. Ashcroft and the Downtown Merchants Assoc.

What do you thinK?

Stan

[Brent]

Brent,

Staff doesn't have a single vote. Staff produced the damning report on noise that I quoted. Wharever theri motivation they don't have the vore. Put the responsibility on those that do.

stan

OK, the responsibility is shared between Staff and Council. I get your point that Council has the votes and supposedly sets policy...on the other hand, Staff has training and "indoctrination" in urban planning.

But granted, at the same time, Staff ultimately will do what council tells them to do. Right now it appears that a majority of council will pursue dumb growth (the TCAP) downtown.

[Brent]

Brent,

Unlike you I have nothing against density or even train centerd density. Density and mass transit help reduce air pollution - as counter-intutitive as that may be. The major source of air pollution is burning fossil fuel. Around here thats gasoline consumed by cars and coal fired power plants.

...and those cars will spew more fumes once the train is here, because they'll be stuck waiting at RR crossings for the empty trains to pass by. Oh, and the trains? Burning diesel fuel.


What consumes more fossil fuel - living miles from shopping, work centers, theaters, etc. or walking to them in a mixed use development? And mass transit is far more fuel efficient than the personal car/light truck.
And density is needed to make mass transit feasible. People will use mass transit if it is within a ten minute walk. Once they get into their car to drive to the train station - and then have to transfer from the train to a van to get to their workplace...forgetaboutit. One of the major arguments for commuter rail is that it will encourage density, especially around rail stations.

This is all what is supposed to happen, according to the theory. I am talking about the practical realities in the triangle.

Just where is it that these people are going to go on the train? The airport? Nope, rail won't go there? RTP? That's supposed to be the answer, but most riders would need to transfer from the train to a van to get to their workplace...so forgetaboutit. The fairgrounds? Yeah, for some people, once a year. Mixed use/pedestrian friendly developments have some merit when planned and built intelligently. Linking that with density and the train, here in the Triangle, given the TTA's approach to mass transit, is foolish.


However, the choice of surface rail creates some big problems that work against the dense developments that are used to justify it. The 110 db noise of a train whistle, needed for safety at intersections, is equivalent to a jet plane taking off at 200 feet. And even if the noise problem can be eliminated by sealing intersections with special gates, surface rail and density conflict when auto traffic is a key part of the transportation mix. And commuter rail will have only a minute impact on auto traffic.

Yes, so the people in Carousel who complain about the train whistle once a day will have a real cow when it blows all day long. And air pollution will get worse, not better (owing to the minute impact on auto traffic).


To have commuter rail and auto traffic coexist with a mixed use subdivision of apartments and hotels, there must be grade separation eliminating both the noise of the whistle and the conflict with the free flow of traffic. Either the cars have to go over the trains or the trains over the cars. Sealing intersections with special gates will not work when you are talking about several trains per hour moving through heavily trafficked areas. And grade separation is very expensive. And no one has budgeted for or anticipated that cost.

The present commuter rail line was chosen because there was an existing right-of-way that could be employed. Buying a new right-of-way was deemed far too expensive. But the cost of grade separation was not considered.

Agreed. The TTA's approach to mass transit is foolish.


Assuming the consumer rail project will go ahead, the TOC has three choices. 1. Abandon the TCAP plan; or 2. face up to its true long-term cost; or 3. move TCAP.

You forgot "4. Modify TCAP so it's sane and fair to all stakeholders"


Some may argue that the cost of infrastructure for TCAP can be justified by the added income to the town from the additional property taxes generated by the new developments it will attract. But that assumes that the apartments, hotels and retail outlets of a mixed use development couldn't be developed elsewhere at a site not requiring the added cost of infrastructure. Or that the demand for such developments is infinite.

Consider TCAP relocated to the Weston/Harrison area. It would be closer to RTP, SAS, the offices in the Weston area and RDU. A hotel already exists and another is in the works. Restaurants and shops are close at hand. It is near I 40 and I 540. The newly widened Harrison Ave. would become "Main St." And no railroad.

What would be wrong about high-rise apartment complexes there? Add express buses to RTP/RDU and vans or buses to SAS and the Weston office area - at a relatively low cost because of the short distances involved - and you have all the advantages of TCAP without the added cost of new infrastructure.

This is a very innovative idea. It may very well make more sense than the existing TCAP. A couple problems are that the planners themselves were the ones who shot down the multi-story, 5-star hotel on the site where it was originally proposed (and where the long-term plan called for a hotel), so you would have to drag the town officials kicking and screaming into such a plan; and second, that would finally bust the myth of the link between the train and the density, each of which feeds off of the other as justification for itself, so you'd have a harder time selling it.


Even if commuter rail does not get funded, the above is a better option than dense mixed use developments along the Chatham st. business district. Unless you regard town hall and the Chamber's offices as the center of the universe.

What does the above scenario lack? The backing of the Chamber, the Mayor and his followers on the CTC, Mr. Ashcroft and the Downtown Merchants Assoc.

What do you thinK?

I think it's an intriguing idea, and it will never take off for the reasons that you and I both have listed here.

[washere]

Yes, so the people in Carousel who complain about the train whistle once a day will have a real cow when it blows all day long. And air pollution will get worse, not better (owing to the minute impact on auto traffic).

A train comes through here once a day? Really?! I think I probably hear 2 trains a week (and I'm here all day). We're probably half a mile from the tracks. They're VERY well insulated by trees, and other people's homes. :lol: It's really not bad at all. A hundred trains a day...now that would really stink. We wouldn't be able to leave our house! We have to cross several sets of train tracks in every direction just to get anywhere. That many trains would cause a HUGE traffic snarl.

Speaking of train noise....

When I went to State, I live in Carroll Hall (Wup- that's the one right there at the end of the free expression tunnel)-- that's the dorm closest to the tracks. I lived on the 4th floor (parallel to the tracks) and on the corner of the building closest to the tracks. I'd say my room was *maybe* 50 ft away from the tracks.

When that train came through, it was sooooo loud that I don't have any description for it. It did wake me at 3 o'clock one morning. I thought Jesus had come back or something. It took about 10 minutes for everybody to convince me that Jesus hadn't left me behind. :lol:

Point is, the people around me don't know what train noise is...yet. :wink:

[StanN]

CharChar,

the loudness of the train whistle is equvialent to a jet plane taking off 200 feet away.

Stan

[StanN]

Brent said:


Just where is it that these people are going to go on the train? The airport? Nope, rail won't go there? RTP? That's supposed to be the answer, but most riders would need to transfer from the train to a van to get to their workplace...so forgetaboutit. The fairgrounds? Yeah, for some people, once a year. Mixed use/pedestrian friendly developments have some merit when planned and built intelligently. Linking that with density and the train, here in the Triangle, given the TTA's approach to mass transit, is foolish.

Right on! A bus has the further advantage of being able to go where people live to pick them up, and once at sprawled RTP, they can drop them off at several stations near their offices and labs. Ditto for the terminals at RDU. But when I have brought this up to the rail planners, they tell me that express busways were more expensive than the train. One wonders when ALL the costs, including the ultimate need for grade separations, are added up. But the project has been sold without including the cost of grade separations.

Incidentally, diesel is not necessarily more polluting than gasoline powered internal combustion engines. The most fuel efficient (least polluting) European cars are high efficiency diesels. The do emit more particulates and many do not meet US regulations on this score. But they emit less SOx, less NOx and less CO2. But you are correct about the polluting effects of congestion at intersections. But the public will not stand for the added congestion and sooner or later someone will have to pay for the grade separations.

stan

[StanN]

From a planning department background paper.
See http://www.townofcary.org/depts/dsdept/P&Z/tcap/5stormwater.pdf for the full report.

Stormwater Drainage Considerations
The TCAP recommends several areas for eventual redevelopment into higher intensity uses. These higher building densities will increase the impervious surface area, resulting in the need for increased
stormwater runoff capacity. Of concern to the potential redevelopment of the Town Center area is the condition of the storm drainage
infrastructure, such as piping, catchbasins and drop inlets. Cary is currently undertaking an inventory and mapping of its stormwater system downtown. There are 487 catch basins, 105 drain inlets, and 19 storm manholes in the Town Center area, according to Town engineering data.

Much of the storm sewer in the Town Center area is of pre-World War II construction, and would be inadequate to support runoff from
redeveloped, high-density areas. Several locations with significant drainage problems have already been identified in the Town Center
area. These include First Baptist Church, William Street, Ridgecrest, South West Street, Dry Avenue, and West Park Street. Several new culverts have been recently installed in the southeastern Town
Center area to more efficiently convey stormwater runoff. Culverts have been or are being replaced at Clay Street, Urban Drive, Webster Street, East Park Street, Hunter Street, and Fairview Road.
In general, redevelopment in the Town Center area will likely require a major investment in stormwater drainage infrastructure, due to age and lack of capacity. The Engineering Department will be identifying specific improvements needed for downtown in its ongoing stormwater system inventory.

stan

[StanN]

In this years capital budget, although roads and parks were cut back ~70%, $838,000 was approved for improvements involving TCAP. Roundabouts, a "Gateway Project" and streetscape improvements were included in the $838,000.

In addition at least half the land required for a TCAP park has been purchased at an unreported cost.

What will be included in next years budget?

stan

[johnb]

Gotta hand it to you Stan, you've done your homework.

Of course, since you're lining up on the "wrong" side of this from the city council's perspective your voice now has no legitimacy and your arguments no integrity. Whether your claims are accurate and truthful are irrelevant.

Seems to me that when government takes the lead in trying to remake society according to the whims of government employees or sheltered academics lots of real people with jobs and businesses get hurt. Sometimes very badly. Our citizens against the train organization should be called the KULAKS. Another group roughed up by an oppressive totalitarian government. ;)

If you have to ask google the word.

[Brent]

In this years capital budget, although roads and parks were cut back ~70%, $838,000 was approved for improvements involving TCAP. Toundabouts, a "Gateway Project" and streetscape improvements were included in the $838,000.

In addition at least half the land required for a TCAP park has been purchased at an unreported cost.

In one respect, it's nice that they're at least moving beyond "planning" to "doing". On the other hand, trees and benches don't seem like the first priority if they're going to be underwater from stormwater flooding several times a year and if the trees die and the benches sit empty because of poor air quality throughout the summer.


What will be included in next years budget?

I'll place a bet on "consultants fees" :P Probably including consultants for a new downtown arts facility.

[johnb]

This "Quality of Life" issue is one that troubles me.

Putting up benches and pretttying bridges is cute and in light of budget cuts in roads it seems almost smarmy.

The first measure for "Quality of Life" should be the safety aspect. Are we able to move about the city as quickly and efficiently as possible? If no, stop spending money on "art" and other such nonsense.

"Quality of Life" measurements should factor public safety first, not much "quality" to that life if you're in a hospital due to an auto accident because of over loaded roads or poorly designed roads. Second factor should be time. Having to traverse failing intersections is a negative that cannot be made up with a chrome thingys placed at various, random locations throughout the city.

I'll put the quality into my life, I would be happy if the city government wouldn't degrade that through incompetant budgeting.

[Wuptdo]

Lest we forget about "Big Brother":

http://www.wakegov.com/news/020705bocretreat.htm

Goals for this year.

Wuptdo B-)

[StanN]

The following is excerpted from a Parks and Recreation background document.
See http://www.townofcary.org/depts/prdept/culturalreco.pdf
for the full report.


It is important to develop a high-visibility cultural center in the downtown of Cary. Indeed, Cary is the largest municipality in North Carolina that does not have a municipal auditorium. The economic logic for a downtown location is persuasive. An economic analysis was recently conducted by The Chesapeake Group that compared the total economic impact of a
downtown site for a cultural arts facility with other non-Town-center locations. The analysis estimated increases in revenue from a wide range of sources, based on estimates of the usage of the cultural arts facility and ancillary spending as well as likely tax revenue increases.
That analysis indicates the total accrued revenues for a non-Town center location can be estimated at $193,000 annually compared to between $459,900 and $509,080 for a Town center location. This is a striking difference. The Town center location represents an increase in
accrued revenue of 140 percent, using the lower estimate provided……

Option 1
Perform the proposed renovations on Cary Elementary and develop a downtown site for the Lively Arts Center facility. This option envisions, as a first phase, a highquality renovation of Cary Elementary to provide a mix of performing and visual arts spaces, specifically designed to meet the needs of users. The renovated Cary Elementary School Cultural Arts Center would include the following components:
• A well-equipped and comfortably appointed
performance space seating between 400 and
450 people
• A small (between 1,000 and 2,000 square
feet), well-lighted visual arts gallery space
• A mix of studio/classrooms (numbering
between 15 and 20), including multiple a
mix of spaces for visual art and craft, dance,
drama, and music
• Office space for cultural groups and for
Division of Cultural Resources Arts staff.

Estimates of Cost: The estimated cost for the renovation of Cary Elementary ranges from approximately $6 million to $8 million, depending on such factors as site development costs, whether parking is integrated into this project, the scale of the auditorium, how extensive new construction is, and other factors.

In a second phase, this option proposes developing a “Lively Arts Center” near Cary Elementary. While the cultural arts center described above will provide some spaces for performing and visual arts, it will not be sufficient to meet the needs of the Town of Cary at the present time, much less into the future. A larger performance venue and more exhibition space is required than can be accommodated as part of the proposed renovation of Cary Elementary….

….estimated cost for both phases, $20.7 million

Disadvantages of Option 1
It may be difficult to find an appropriate site for the Lively Arts Center that is near to Cary Elementary. Because of the distributed nature of this option, parking may be problematic as well. While Cary Elementary is sound, any renovation may uncover unexpected problems that can lead to increased costs.

Option 2
Construct a single cultural arts facility in the heart of Cary with a fully-equipped, 1,000-seat multi-use performance space, 4,000 square feet of exhibition space and necessary support spaces
as well as the complete mix of spaces proposed for Cary Elementary. While the specific components of the facility proposed in this option are identical to those in the first option, this approach focuses on developing a single, purpose-built cultural arts facility.

….estimate of cost $20.7 million.

[Don]

Although many great points have been made in this thread, I want to remind everyone that:

1) Whether budgeted or not, No money has been spent downtown on TCAP this year that I know of, but last year the town did spend about 150 grand on a consultant. (whoopie right?)

2) until stormwater / infrastructure / and neighborhood concerns are resolved, TCAP is and will be a pipe dream. Here's an example of stormwater flooding a neighborhood street photographed on the way to work this morning. BTW, it's directly opposite the Coronado Village Pond across Walnut.

http://www.posmoroda.com/images/457_Stormwater1.jpg


A thriving and vibrant downtown needs people living close by in quality neighborhoods to support it. But until concerns such as this are addressed, neighborhoods downtown will continue to deteriorate, and with it, the potential success of downtown.

[johnb]

Don,

That hurts.

If the roads in Preston or Lochmere flooded like that after a minor storm I wonder if the city would drag it's feet and continue to ignore/neglect the situation?

I have to ask, what does the city gain by neglecting the situation? Aside from the relief of not having to spend money to fix the problem thereby allowing the council to spend it on pretty bridges and doggie parks?

[Don]

John,
I do not know that I have the answer. I DO know that to address the problem will take millions the town doesn't have.....or can't find (maybe that's the correct wording?) I do know that the longer nothing is done, the more costly the problem becomes.

Years continue to go by with no creation of a stormwater management fund and no idea of how to really fix the problem. We are however going to float a bond that will buy a bunch more open space though. I "assume" these residents are cool with that?

[Wuptdo]

Let me see: $100 Million for Waste Water Treatment Plant plus another $10 Million for openspace -- that is for the next bond "go-'round."

Am I the only one who remembers the "Canals of Cary" for $6 to $8 million?

I would rather drop the "open-space" feel good bond and change that $10 million bond is to be use for inferstructure, with focus on storm water management. But that's just me.

Good picture, Don. A picture is worth a thousand words!

Wuptdo B-)

[washere]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Open Space stuff were trying to address the stormwater issue.

Now this is really gonna crack you guys up:

A couple years ago I did some research into this (as a side project looking at bioremediation) sort of occurance. The "standard" protocol for addressing stormwater mitigation is to promote high density development (thus limiting the impervious surfaces) and off-set that with large amounts of open space elsewhere.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why that won't work in downtown: if you've got a mitigation problem downtown, developing EVERYTHING in that area isn't going to help, no matter how much open space you put somewhere else.

To solve the problem, they're going to have to look at some form of Wup's "canals" idea and divert the water somewhere else and then find a way to hold it there until it can leech into the ground.

[Don]

I would rather drop the "open-space" feel good bond and change that $10 million bond is to be use for inferstructure, with focus on storm water management. But that's just me.

As would I. However, convincing the majority of Cary to vote to fix a problem that isn't affecting them would be tough. BUT IT CAN BE DONE! It just takes a little rearranging of priorities at town hall. I love the TOC's goal of preserving open space and support it, but we gotta have priorities.


Good picture, Don. A picture is worth a thousand words!


That's why I posted it.

[Don]

What will be included in next years budget?


I'll place a bet on "consultants fees" :P Probably including consultants for a new downtown arts facility.

You don't know how right you are Brent......or do you? 8O

[Cathy]

The planners are going to REALLY hate you guys, ya know.
There is entirely too much logic going on in this thread from everyone.

They don't like logic much. It clashes with their plans too often.

Oh_ BTW Stan_ The Environmental Impact Statement that TTA had to do when they proposed the rail line might be interesting to you.

It compared three options. No Build, Rail Line, or Bus Transit. The new bus transit system that they compared against rail was estimated to cost 1/10th of the initial projections for the rail line. Rail construction elsewhere has always ballooned enormously as the project moved along (Charlotte for example), so that difference is probably understated.

I was told by a transportation policy expert that the numbers that TTA was plugging into the EIS for the bus estimate were on the high side, so it should be a pretty nice bus system for a tenth of the cost to put in a noisy, inflexible, traffic congestion causing, limited rail line.

[StanN]

Don raised an interesting point about the lack of preapproved funds being spent. What could be the reason? I'll speculate.

1.EM and the Chamber don't have four votes. E.g. can you imagine MJ voting for TIF's or a cultural arts center? Others might but after last years budget fiasco they are going to negotiate like mad for their positions on the upcoming budget. NR, MD and JuR were miffed over the cuts in the road budget and will dig in their heels without getting their pound of flesh.. And those up for re-election are going to think twice about voting for TCAP goodies. After November is another story. All-in-all, this years budget negotiations are going to be something else.

2. They are trying to line up a developer who will say OK if the infrastructure dollars are approved. Having something concrete to point to will put the Chambercrowd in a much stronger position.

3. The Chamber crowd is waiting for the ED consultant to sanctify the project.

4. They are waiting for staff to crunch the numbers to justify TCAP and produce a nice shiny brochure extolling its virtues.

What do you thinK?

stan

[Wuptdo]

Stan wrote:


What do you thinK?


I think about a lot of things. :D But in regards to your last post, I have a feeling that a few folks at City Hall (and the Chamber) will be wiping coffee off their monitors this morning. That is after they read the last few post on this thread. :wink:

Any suggestions on how the serfs, whoops, I mean citizens can stop this?

Wuptdo B-)

[Don]

Don raised an interesting point about the lack of preapproved funds being spent. What could be the reason? I'll speculate.

1.EM and the Chamber don't have four votes. E.g. can you imagine MJ voting for TIF's or a cultural arts center? Others might but after last years budget fiasco they are going to negotiate like mad for their positions on the upcoming budget. NR, MD and JuR were miffed over the cuts in the road budget and will dig in their heels without getting their pound of flesh.. And those up for re-election are going to think twice about voting for TCAP goodies. After November is another story. All-in-all, this years budget negotiations are going to be something else.

LOL...no, I can't say that I see Mike voting to use TIF. I also can't say that I have seen any councilor (except maybe Nels ) lobby or fight for any downtown improvements. Apparantly it's not as big of a priority as pretty bridges, acquatics centers, or trains?


2. They are trying to line up a developer who will say OK if the infrastructure dollars are approved. Having something concrete to point to will put the Chambercrowd in a much stronger position.

Which is on the way - the corner of Harrison and Chatham will see a huge parking deck with mixed use development in the near future.


3. The Chamber crowd is waiting for the ED consultant to sanctify the project.

Still can't get over it huh?


4. They are waiting for staff to crunch the numbers to justify TCAP and produce a nice shiny brochure extolling its virtues.

there already is a nice, full color shiny brochure. It's the one that also has the before and after pics of downtown. You know, the one that showed auto shops in the before pic and they mysteriously vanished in the after pic? I think it's horible myself......but that's just me. :wink:

[StanN]

Don,

Harrison and Weston is moving along as well. Ann Goodnight certainly recognizes the advanages of the location. In addition to the hotel she will build there she is planning a 8000 sq. ft. luxury restaurant nearby. And Phase II of the retail shops on the corner (the one's including Ruth Chris) is in the pipeline as is an apartment complex to replace the hotel originally planned for the site.

The Chamber can promote any area it wants but the market has an even more powerful voice....without the public's purse being robbed in the process.

stan

[StanN]

Wup,

Easy. Make sure its an issue in this years election and make every candidate take an unambiguous position. TCAP can't stand public disclosure, especially the gory details.

stan

[Cathy]

Speaking of MJ,
At the recent workshop, Council was discussing TCAP.
The stormwater implications were discussed and MJ did some calculations on the volume of stormwater that would have to be "handled" due to impervious surface and what it would take to contain/divert the stormwater properly.

VERY interesting and enlightening to some Council members.

If you would like to have a copy of the worksheet for TCAP stormwater, just ask.
I'll email it to you because I don't know how to post it here.

Cathy

[StanN]

Cathy,

I'd appreciate seeing the info from MJ. Please send it to stann@nc.rr.com

I've heard rumors that the problem would cost $30M-$40M to fix. If that is correct the total bill for TCAP infrastructure has to be in the neighborhood of $100M - very rough guesstimate.

stan

[dhyatt]

This will certainly irritate a few people but little is going to happen with TCAP downtown unless the landowners and developers are willing to take some risk. As it stands now, they want the town to build all the necessary infrastructure, do all the cleanup (all with taxpayer money of course), and once everything's 'ready', they will be more than happy to start proposing and building projects. Some on CTC are evidently willing to accomodate them at least to some extent but I have my doubts as to whether it will be enough.

Unfortunately, I suspect we are looking at the same old slow urban rot until enough vacant and abandoned lots become available for some tax funded urban 'redevelopment' shark to come in and get a fat contract to put up a new convention center....

[StanN]

Does anyone out there have an estimate for the cost of an overpass over the RR at Maynard - and I'll bet Harrison as well?

How about the cost of puching through Harrison to Kildaire and widening Chapel Hill in the TCAP district?

SteveG, DonF, DonH - any other historians or road mavens.

stan

[HW]

Does anyone out there have an estimate for the cost of an overpass over the RR at Maynard - and I'll bet Harrison as well?

How about the cost of puching through Harrison to Kildaire and widening Chapel Hill in the TCAP district?

Stan,

Rough estimates used to say $1 million per lane mile for roads and $2 to $3 million (and up) for bridges. Hope that helps. Of course the estimates don't include eminent domain acquisitions, etc. They are strictly constuction costs.

HW

[dhyatt]

Speaking of MJ,
At the recent workshop, Council was discussing TCAP.
The stormwater implications were discussed and MJ did some calculations on the volume of stormwater that would have to be "handled" due to impervious surface and what it would take to contain/divert the stormwater properly.

VERY interesting and enlightening to some Council members.

If you would like to have a copy of the worksheet for TCAP stormwater, just ask.
I'll email it to you because I don't know how to post it here.

Cathy

I believe this is the worksheet to which Cathy was referring:

Rainfall Volume Capacity (http://carypolitics.org/Rainfall_Volume_Capacity.pdf)

[Brent]

...$2 to $3 million (and up) for bridges. Hope that helps. Of course the estimates don't include eminent domain acquisitions, etc.

...let alone making the bridges pretty with "design elements" :wink:

[Don]

Cathy,

I'd appreciate seeing the info from MJ. Please send it to stann@nc.rr.com

I've heard rumors that the problem would cost $30M-$40M to fix. If that is correct the total bill for TCAP infrastructure has to be in the neighborhood of $100M - very rough guesstimate.

stan

Stan,
You heard right, at the worksession yesterday, which I attended, the consultants #'s were 33 - 40 Million (assuming worst case scenario)

In regards to redevelopment/new development, The cost of BMP's to deal with volume, nitrogen, and solids varied significantly depending on what type of development would take place. But lets just focus on one parcel for a bit - Ultra Urban (stack and pack as I like to call it) had a "rough" est of $400,000.00 for stormwater mitigation using swales, bioretention ponds, and even greenroofs. LDR, MDR, or even commercial had a rough estimate of around $40,000.00

Which do you think the developer will want to build?

Turns out that the TOC's goals for stormwater quality is a disincentive to development, and in fact goes against the TCAP vision.

To quote Nels yesterday (who I thought did a GREAT job BTW) "This would have been good information to have 3 years ago"

[StanN]

A RR overpass proposed at Trinity Rd. was estimated to cost $16 million including 1 1/4 miles of roadway. There is one in the TCAP plan slated for Maynard. There is an existing underpass near Town Hall that likely needs a new access road and an almost certain need for an overpass at Harrisson.

Short of commuter rail being shelved, I can't see any developer be willing to invest in any substantial project without the taxpayers picking up the bill for the necessary road infrastructure; the grade separations; a large part of the parking deck; the stormwater improvements; and the investment to create a train whistle quiet zone. An entertainment center and/or a park would add to the attractiveness of the deal to the developer.

If my back-of-envelope estimate of $100 million is anywhere near correct,
the TOC's negative cah flow would be ~$10 million/yr. The new property resulting from the development would have to be valued at $250 million for cash flow to break even - or a tax increase would be needed. If the project was not commercially successful, the property value would eventually go down - so the taxpayer is partly bearing the risk of the venture.

Some hard numbers are badly needed + an analysis of the infrastructure costs and pro's and con's of alternative locations for TCAP.

stan

[StanN]

DonH,

Good post - but consider the alternatives. For the cost of improving Harrisson private investors have been willing to put in two hotels, numerous new restaurants, a major new shopping area and a proposed apartment complex. (Thank you Glenn!)

How sweet it is when you go with the flow of the market.

Some of the problems involving Chatham St. are going to have to be solved sooner or later in any case. But why blindly follow the Chamber's lead when there are better options? And why should developer's take the risk of putting in infrastructure (if that's what you meant) when they have lower risk options elsewhere?

stan

[Cathy]

Stan,

You might want to look at this website to see what Portland OR has done to encourage developers to build what they want where they want.
"Metro" is Portland's Regional Land Use Authority.

http://www.stopmetro.com/Exemption.htm

Apparently they have used TIF extensively along with tax exemptions.

Cathy

[johnb]

Stan,

I have very little hair left on top of my head and now you are hurting the hairs I do have left.

I read this stuff and the numbers sort of run together after awhile. I feel like Everett Dirksen, "a billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money!".

The downtown area is what it is now because of an accumulation of bad decisions or no decision when action was required. The roads in and out are rotten, parking is difficult, storm water flooding is a problem, and the train tracks.

*IF* the city would have handled their responsibility to ensure safe and adequate roads Chatham would have been punched out to four lanes long ago. From east Maynard to west Maynard. That change alone would draw commuters through the area providing them the unique opportunity to see DonF's public art project and his business as well. Harrison should have been connected to Kildaire Farm Road as a four lane road as well. That, however, would have been a reasonable and expected use of the city's eminent domain power. Can't have that, not when they're salivating at the chance to seize property and do an old MCI impression and give it to Friends and Family.

[StanN]

John,

I largely agree with your analysis. And despite my objections to the TCAP project, which piles on bad decisions on top of bad decisions, the town cannot ignore the impact of the "chinese wall" of commuter rail on traffic flow throughout town - not to mention the other problems of Chatham St.

What is needed is to go back to square one on the drawing board and figure out what is the most economical solution to the issues. Solving the several problems involved will be a matter of priorities and timing. Throwing money at grand redevelopment schemes and going deeper in debt can't be the answer.

If there is anything we have learned from the major additions to the tax base going into the Harrison/Weston area it should be the impact of road infrastructure and jobs. The good roads combined with the jobs in the area (SAS and Deere,etc.) are responsible for the strong market.

Instead of cutting the roads budget 70% the CTC should focus on how we can add to Cary's major regional asset - its superior road infrastructure. Combine that with an effort to grow, retain and attract high quality jobs and you would have a powerful force to strengthen Cary over the coming decade.

stan

[Cathy]

Stan,

Amen.
Let's hope the right people come to realize this before the Town is ruined by planning fads and political ego's.

Cathy

[johnb]

If there is anything we have learned from the major additions to the tax base going into the Harrison/Weston area it should be the impact of road infrastructure and jobs.

Absolutely, as much as the APA fanatics may want to deny it, few things control traffic flow and spur efficient transportation and economic development quite like adequate roads. Weston is what it is because the road was punched out then it was developed. Putting narrow goat track roads in or keeping them constricts traffic and economic development. Chapel Hill Road, Chatham, Evans, and a host of others are 5 foot high speed bumps to progress and problem resolution. Much like the council and staff.

[Brent]

*IF* the city would have handled their responsibility to ensure safe and adequate roads Chatham would have been punched out to four lanes long ago.

Yes indeed. You will love this, John: the TCAP actually calls for REMOVING an EXISTING travel lane from West Chatham on a current 4-lane stretch and replace the travel lane with parking!

[Cathy]

Not surprised.

It's a National Trend with the APA planning crowd.
They removed an entire highway in Portland OR.

Hillsborough St in Raleigh is supposed to get the lane/parking constriction treatment also. Complete with a roundabout and center divide where they can plant things for cars to run into and restrict left turns into the few existing parking lots.
Just think what THAT will do for those struggling businesses.

Cathy

[washere]

Not surprised.

It's a National Trend with the APA planning crowd.
They removed an entire highway in Portland OR.

Hillsborough St in Raleigh is supposed to get the lane/parking constriction treatment also. Complete with a roundabout and center divide where they can plant things for cars to run into and restrict left turns into the few existing parking lots.
Just think what THAT will do for those struggling businesses.

Cathy
Don't make me get out my soap box on that one :evil: !!!

[SteveG]

*IF* the city would have handled their responsibility to ensure safe and adequate roads Chatham would have been punched out to four lanes long ago.

Yes indeed. You will love this, John: the TCAP actually calls for REMOVING an EXISTING travel lane from West Chatham on a current 4-lane stretch and replace the travel lane with parking!

The existing 4-lane stretch does not really improve traffic capacity or travel time on Chatham. The capacity and travel times are determined by the signalized intersections, which on Chatham only provide one through lane in each direction. Bumping out to 4 lanes mid-block does not boost capacity or reduce average travel time.

A 4-lane to 3-lane (or median with center turn lane pockets) conversion will likely boost capacity and improve average trip times over existing conditions by getting left turning traffic out of the way of through traffic and consequently smoothing traffic flow between the signals.

Providing four through lanes (2 in each direction) on Chatham all the way through signals through the heart of downtown would certainly increase capacity and reduce trip times for through trips. However, this would eliminate all of the existing on-street parking, and would be opposed by most of the business owners whose patrons enjoy such nearby.

Chapel Hill Road is the better road to 4-lane, since the developed properties on it feature longer setbacks and adequate off-street parking. There is also less pedestrian activity on Chapel Hill Road due to the types and distances between the land uses found on it.

[Cathy]

Char-Char,

I take it you're familiar with the Hillsborough St plans?


Steve & Brent,

In order to preserve the on street parking, improve pedestrian AND bike safety while increasing capacity, AND not tear down existing businesses that have little land to give for a wider road, this may be the place to look at some type of one way street configuration for getting through and around downtown Cary.

Cathy

[SteveG]

In order to preserve the on street parking, improve pedestrian AND bike safety while increasing capacity, AND not tear down existing businesses that have little land to give for a wider road, this may be the place to look at some type of one way street configuration for getting through and around downtown Cary.


Sure, but what street would go the other way?

Chapel Hill Road wouldn't do as a complementary one-way, because the RR tracks will mean too few places to connect them.

A new through route would have to be plowed through in the vicinity of Cedar Street to the north or Waldo street to the south. I don't know if anybody is willing, politically, to swing a wrecking ball through whatever sits in the way. I think there's a whole lot more public support for the Harrison to Kildaire connection, and look how long that is taking.

[washere]

Char-Char,

I take it you're familiar with the Hillsborough St plans?
Cathy
Yeppers.

It's a terrible situation.

Unforunately, the problem is just as much NCSU as it is inadequate roads. It's much more complex that what we've got going on here in downtown Cary. Here's why:

Hillsborough street is to NCSU as Franklin Street is to UNC. Hillsborough counts on the business of the student population to survive. Logistically, Hillsborough street has a couple things working against it: crummy streets (2 lanes, head on turn lanes, very much like Chatham going thru downtown Cary), unfriendly to pedestrians, and inadequate parking.

Since starting at state in the fall of 2000, I've seen more things come and go than I can count- including national chains. Let's see...Starbucks, Eckerds, Cream and Bean, and most recently, Two Guys (an NCSU institution, all of us legacies have parents who tell stories about eating there) and Brothers. That's the short list. I can't tell ya how many "mom and pop" eateries, boutiques, etc. have had to leave.

It's truly a stigmatized area.

Part of the problem is parking and poor roads. But NCSU (a state-funded school) has muscled a great deal of the merchants out of the area with their policies. About the only place to park was in one of the campus lots across Hillsborough. NCSU changed the parking on those lots to 24 hour towing for awhile so no one could park there. The university built competing eateries (coffee shops, etc- Wup, the Atrium) to compete with the Hillborough merchants (and make more money themselves).

Normally I wouldn't have a problem with this. Businesses compete, may the best man win. But I have a HUGE problem with a state supported school, run by my tax dollars, muscling out competition for their shitty self-funded university dining program while continuing to increase tuition and student fees.

University dining is self-funding. They MORE than break even on that as it is. If they want to muscle out the competition so they can continue their unregulated monopoly on food at NCSU, that's fine, but they need to quit jacking student tuition/fees, or send the rest of us a check back. :evil:

</end rant> :lol:

[Cathy]

Char-Char,

It is an ugly mess, ain't it??


Steve,

It would be interesting to have a real traffic engineer, who isn't worried about bucking the rail oriented New Urbanist dreams of the planning staff, take a look at the situation. I have a feeling it wouldn't be as impossible as it first seems.

Cathy

[Don]

DO NOT LOOK DOWN THIS STREET - THERE IS NOT A FLOOD PROBLEM IN DOWNTOWN CARY - IT IS JUST YOUR IMAGINATION.

Same place, same problem, different storm. I saw this on my way home last night......again.

You would think that if the SAME areas flooded over and over, as is the case here, that the town would finally admit that there is a problem, and fix it.

http://www.posmoroda.com/images/457_DFFlood1.jpg

http://www.posmoroda.com/images/457_DFFlood2.jpg

http://www.posmoroda.com/images/457_DFFlood3.jpg

[Anonymous]

Looks to me like an opportunity for the Cary swim club

[johnb]

Nah, they couldn't lock the doors to keep out the riff raff that aren't dues paying members. That's the beauty of the aquatics palace, paid for by someone else PLUS they get the keys to lock the doors to keep you, me, and the rest of us out of their pool.

[washere]

We never had a stormwater issue until the Townes of Madison (townhouses over by the railroad tracks in downtown) was built.

We have a little creek in our backyard about 100 feet from our house. You know, the kind we all used to play in as kids....icky and muddy, dries up in the summer, you get the idea.

Last night, stormwater run off caused our little stick in the mud creek to swell to nearly 100 feet across, and it came perilously close to our home.

It gets better.

The stormwater caused a sewer (manhole) in our backyard to flood, leaking (you guessed it!) RAW SEWAGE all over my backyard!!!

This is out of control. This isn't just annoying- it's a freaking PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARD!

Maybe now the town will see fit to do something about the problem, seeing as the Feds and the EPA MANDATE that they address the problem once it causes sewers to leech raw sewage everywhere.

[Brent]

You would think that if the SAME areas flooded over and over, as is the case here, that the town would finally admit that there is a problem, and fix it.

Instead, they are trying to change the stormwater rules for TCAP to be more lax so that they can get away with making the problem worse.

Shame, shame.

[johnb]

Brent,

Don't worry pal, the next city ordinance will compel God to not flood the storm water system in Cary *AND* make Him pay an impact fee for rain as well.

John