A WakePol reader asked about the background of the property at the south end of Fayetteville Street that could soon be the cause of a lawsuit. Raleigh could file a condemnation suit against The Simpson Organization as early as next week as it tries to get the easements it needs to build the City Plaza. We asked City Attorney Thomas McCormick about the history of the City Plaza area. His response is below. Hope this helps.

"Yes, the city once owned the plaza area as well as the parcels where the BB&T building and the Bank of America Building now stand. The land was assembled as part of the property acquisition for the now demolished civic center building. The city sold the two parcels to York-Hannover Development, a New York Developer. The same developer also did the current Sheraton Hotel although it opened as a Radisson. The city entered into a joint agreement with York-Hannover to build the deck now lying beneath the plaza area. That deal contained a provision that allowed York-Hannover to buy out the city’s interest through a lump sum payment and the city’s retention of a surface easement for park purposes. The plaza area was once a part of the Fayetteville Street right of way."

The General Assembly is currently debating the adoption of new drought rules for water systems across the state. A bill that cleared a House committee earlier this week gives the state the power to order water restrictions but leaves the
specifics -- who must conserve and how much -- to individual
water systems.

One issue that could concern Raleigh, Cary and other water systems is linking when a system has to put in restrictions to the state's drought monitor. For example, the Triangle could be in a severe level of drought, but reservoirs such as Jordan Lake and Falls Lake could be full or close to full. This scenario is likely to be faced by Cary many times in the future, as Jordan Lake is much less prone to droughts than Falls Lake. Keep in mind that water systems need to be able to sell water to make their budgetary goals, and having fixed trigger points set by the state or someone else could wreak havoc on some system's budgets. 

What level of state control is appropriate? It would seem that everyone benefits from water systems being extremely well prepared to handle the next drought. But, as this recent drought showed, municipalities often don't know how well their drought plan work until it is put in place and tested. Raleigh ended up tweaking its conservation rules repeatedly between August of last year and May. Should systems continue to have the flexibility to change their rules as conditions change? There's also the question of whether the state has the time or resources to be knowledgeable about every water system in the state.  

Raleigh Mayor Charles Meeker said today he's worried about the Wake County Board of Commissioners decision to not adopt stricter development restrictions along the Little River. The commissioners unanimously voted down those restrictions during their meeting Monday.

"That’s a matter of real concern in terms of the permitting of the next water resource for Raleigh," Meeker said. "I’m hopeful they will study that issue further."

Meeker said he'd spoken to one commissioner about this issue. But, given that the vote was unanimous, it seems unlikely that the commissioners will change their minds anytime soon. The lopsided nature of yesterday's vote raises questions about whether Raleigh did enough to make its case for the tougher restrictions. No Raleigh City Council members spoke in favor of the proposal at yesterday's meeting, instead a consultant and Public Utilities Director Dale Crisp spoke. The city really can't afford to not gain approval to build the Little River Reservoir, and Raleigh officials clearly feel the new restrictions give them a much stronger case with regulators.

Does this show a lack of involvement or leadership on the part of Raleigh officials? Or were these restrictions bound to be voted down by a county board that is clearly worried about unnecessarily stepping on residents property rights?

As some of you may have noticed, the Shimmer Wall in downtown Raleigh now appears fully functional. The N&O is working on a story about the wall for later this week so feel free to post your opinions of it here. ("Neat" and "cool" appear to be the most common opinions of the wall.)

Given that Raleigh's relationship with public art has not always been good, the Shimmer Wall is shaping up to be a major success. Yes, the wall was built with private money, but it will likely be viewed as public art given its placement on the McDowell Street side of the Convention Center. The wall includes an image of an oak tree, which several residents have said is perfect.

Are there any other images that would have been equally perfect symbols of Raleigh? Sir Walter? A garbage disposal? An acorn?

As my colleague Jack Hagel reported today, the City Council gave Greg Hatem and Empire Properties until Nov. 1 to file new site plans for The Lafayette, the project proposed for a city-owned piece of property across from the new convention center. Although most council members went out of their way to lavish Hatem and Empire with praise, the council also included in its action a mandate that this be the last extension given.

This issue of the city giving developers extensions is an interesting one. The City Council can play hardball with developers who've agreed to build on property Raleigh owns, but that tactic doesn't have any effect on the capital markets. Nor is it likely to change the landscape for these projects getting funding. Yesterday, City Manager Russell Allen said other developers besides Empire have expressed interest in the land bordered by Salisbury, Lenoir and South streets. Allen's argument to the council was that there's no point in having Empire sit on a project it can't get money for. Allen admitted rebidding the project could just end up delaying the project further, but he thinks it's worth that risk.

In essence, the city (and the City Council) is acting like a bank. Empire's agreement with the city has certain terms, and once those aren't met the city can move in and take it away. Raleigh adopted this approach to developing city-owned property after several previous projects languished or never got built. The problem with the City Council playing hardball is that it's not like these developers don't want to build downtown, they just can't get the money at the moment. That isn't going to change just because council members beat their chest and say they're frustrated and fed up with delays.

It's all very reminiscient of a line from a Simpsons episode titled "Homer Bad Man." In the scene, Homer begins opening all the Krusty Klump Bar wrappers in the Kwik-E-Mart. Apu, the Kwik-E-Mart's owner, responds:

"Hey. Hey! Hey! I have asked you nicely not to mangle my merchandise. You leave me no choice but to...ask you nicely again."

As mentioned earlier, the City Council voted 6-1 Tuesday to allow a condemnation lawsuit to be filed against The Simpson Organization, owner of the Bank of America building and the underground parking garage under Fayetteville Street. (The vote took place with little comment from council members. Philip Isley was the only member to vote no. Mayor Charles Meeker Meeker recused himself from the vote because an attorney in his law firm is representing Simpson.)

The city attorney’s office could file a condemnation lawsuit as soon as July 15. The goal would be to obtain the easements the city needs to put the plaza and roadway over TSO's property. City Manager Russell Allen told the council on Tuesday that the drawn out negotiations with Simpson are costing the city money. Since May 2007, he said, the price of building the plaza has increased 10 percent, or more than $2 million, because of rising construction costs.
“Time is critical here,” Allen said. “Time is also money.”

If a law suit is filed, it is likely to be ugly. In e-mails to Allen late last week Boyd Simpson, TSO's president, said a condemnation action by the city would be viewed as a "declaration of war." Boyd Simpson sent a letter to Allen on Monday warning the city not to pursue condemnation against his company. The company submitted another document titled “Facts Regarding Negotiation of City Plaza Easement” to the City Council on Tuesday. Both are attached.

Documents:

Sort of. At Tuesday's City Council meeting, Dean Penny with the consultant Kimley Horn, provided an update on The City Plaza, Raleigh's much ballyhooed high-tech gathering place planned for the south end of Fayetteville Street. The update culminated with the council voting to pursue condemnation action against The Simpson Group, owner of the Bank of America building and the parking deck located under Fayetteville Street.

Before that, however, Penny ran through all the bells and whistles planned for the plaza. One of the elements will be a fountain with motion-sensor activated jets. Penny said people have been referring to this feature as Raleigh's "mini-Bellagio." Essentially, the fountains will rise and fall depending on what's happening around them. With a mini-Bellagio fountain and a "Shimmer Wall," downtown Raleigh visitors may soon have to be warned about overstimulating themselves. (Particularly those visitors brave enough to tool around on Segways.)

One other City Plaza note: In order to save money the city has decided to ditch the "torchiere" light fixtures that had been designed by artist Jim Gallucci. Gallucci's fixtures will be replaced by an "off-the-shelf" product. (Ikea?????). Gallucci fans can take some solace in the fact that his bollard designs and designs for the City of Oaks light towers will remain in the plans. There's nothing worse than off-the-shelf bollards.

That appears to be the question being asked of developer Greg Hatem by the City Council. During today's meeting, the council will vote on whether to void an existing agreement that Hatem's company, Empire Properties, has with the city do develop a city-owned piece of property across from the new convention center. The move would essentially rebid the project, forcing Empire to compete with other developers for a project it previously won. In our story today, Hatem said he would probably walk away from the project rather than bid again.

Today's vote should be good political theater for lots of reasons.

1) Hatem and Empire have been instrumental in downtown's renewal in recent years. The company has renovated dozens of buildings, filling them with cafes, restaurants and bars. After giving repeated extensions to other developers in recent years, it would be noteworthy to say the least if the city lost patience with Hatem of all people.

2) Hatem is more than just a developer in downtown Raleigh. Most of the City Council attended his wedding last month, as did a good chunk of the city's Planning Department.

3 ) Developers frequently criticize the City Council for lacking business acumen. If the council rebids the project (known as Site #4), those criticisms could get even louder. City Manager Russell Allen says Empire does not have the financing to move ahead with its plans, and has no idea where that financing will come from in the future. Hatem notes in today's article that the lending environment is terrible and that city leaders are "naive if they think there are people who are lining up that can actually do this faster and better."

Allen states clearly that if the project is rebid the city still desires a project that has a unique design and a mix of retail, restaurant, hotel rooms and condos. That sort of project has become extremely difficult to finance, particularly if a developer is trying to build on land he or she doesn't already own.

So the question becomes: In voiding Empire's agreement and starting over, is the city moving the project along or just making sure nothing will get built on that site for an even longer time? 

The budget approved by the City Council last night includes an increase in the cost of on-street parking downtown. Beginning July 1, the cost of parking at an on-street meter will increase from 50 cents to $1 an hour. The hourly rate in the parking decks will remain the same, which means it will still be cheaper to park on the street than in a deck downtown. The current hourly rate for the decks is $1 per 30 minutes ($2/per hour) with a $12 daily maximum.

As many downtown parkers already know, the city recently extended the hours that its parking deck attendants are in their booths. The purpose was to capture $ from people who were avoiding paying by waiting and leaving after 7 p.m. The practice of waiting until after 7 p.m. to leave was frequently referred to as "car jail."  

Prior to laying out a budget proposal that was quickly approved by the City Council last night, Mayor Charles Meeker handed out copies of an MSNBC feature that merged all the "best places" rankings together to come up with the best places list to end all best places list. (Essentially, the author unscientifically combined the best lists from Forbes, Kiplinger, Money Magazine, Fortune and Relocate-America.com.) And guess who ended up on top? That's right. Raleigh, North Carolina.

Meeker used this press clipping to argue that such a ranking was in no small part due to the recent decisions made by the City Council to tear up Fayetteville Street, build the convention center and make other major investments in the city. According to Meeker, the city is at yet another crossroads now and needs to keep investing if it is to stay on top of the rankings. (Just think what Raleigh will be ranked after the new public safety center gets built!)

Meeker went on to make one of his more astute political moves in recent years. He took the money that will be raised from the recently enacted higher impact fees and put it towards paying down the city's debt. This enabled the council to reduce Russell Allen's proposed property tax increase from 5 cents to 4.18 cents. Granted, the decrease is less than a cent, but it allowed Meeker to make a connection between higher impact fees and lower property taxes. The move was sort of a local version of President Bill Clinton announcing that the budget surplus should be used to save social security.

A final note: The only two council members who voted against the budget were Philip Isley and Russ Stephenson. Bonus points to the person who can come with another vote when those two ideological soulmates represented the only opposition on an issue.