326 replies to this topic

[urbanesq]

plus2, on Dec 6 2005, 10:48 PM, said:

As for the statue...I have always thought we should honor Jesse Helms and Jim Hunt with complimentary statues somewhere in Raleigh.

Oh, my.  

I imagine that the one of Jesse would become an international target for vandalism.  Which, now that I think about it, would promote tourism and visitor dollars being spent downtown.

[Jones133]

plus2, on Dec 6 2005, 10:48 PM, said:

As for the statue...I have always thought we should honor Jesse Helms and Jim Hunt with complimentary statues somewhere in Raleigh.

Uh hehe No and No.

[urbanesq]

N&O article about the Site 1 process is here

[MR-2]

Quote

As for the statue...I have always thought we should honor Jesse Helms and Jim Hunt with complimentary statues somewhere in Raleigh.

That would not go down well. Hunt was an average governor, and Helms didn't leave a particularly positive legacy for NC. We already have a statue for our presidents. Polk was the only good one of the three, though.

We don't have much statue material really. That's unfortunate.

Maybe the Wright Brothers?

Edited by MR-2, 07 December 2005 - 10:03 AM.

[Justin6882]

TBJ Article on Raleigh declining Duke Realty

Quote

However, Kelton said prior to the city council vote that if he can't build on the city-owned site near the convention center, he likely won't build in downtown Raleigh. "With Highwoods' project and Craig Davis' project, ... it's about as much as the market can bare at this time. I think you can do two big projects, but not much beyond that," he said.

That kinda hurts - I hope Reynolds doesn't feel the same way!

[DanRNC]

It may be sour grapes. Remember that Duke jumped in on RBC pretty late, got rejected, turned its focus to site 1 late once again, got rejected again. They sound like opportunists-which I guess all developers are. I think the future Reynolds tower hinges on recruitment of a Fortune 500 company to fill the space so this may or may not happen.  There still is well over $1 billion being invested in downtown right now.

[urbanesq]

Justin6882, on Dec 7 2005, 10:06 AM, said:

TBJ Article on Raleigh declining Duke Realty
That kinda hurts - I hope Reynolds doesn't feel the same way!

Like I've said before, these guys aren't in the business of building empty towers just for kicks, so unless something tells them that there will be demnd for their product, they'll stay out of the market.

My concern has been that the City Council may have just missed its only opportunity to get a competitive offer for a downtown site for several years.  But who knows-- if the market fundamentals are there, the development will follow.

[dmccall]

Justin6882, on Dec 7 2005, 10:06 AM, said:

TBJ Article on Raleigh declining Duke Realty
That kinda hurts - I hope Reynolds doesn't feel the same way!

Kelton's quote about Site 1 or nothing sounds SO HOLLOW. Either the market is ripe for development or it's not, dude. You're making Jesse T., who went to bat for you, look like your lapdog.

I think there are PLENTY of alternative sites for Kelton to explore, especially on the west side of downtown.

[Damien]

I dont quite buy the whole "downtown can't handle much more development" idea. Momentum has been building for several years in downtown, and I believe it has reached a point now where there is no stopping it. Downtown Raleigh's star is ascending, and I think in the near future we will be seeing bigger, better, and more fabulous things than most people around here would've expected 10 years ago or even 5 years ago. Raleigh needs its residents and supporters to have faith, and admiration for all the hard work that has been put into revitalizing downtown, not the constant criticism that almost every project seems to get. In the coming years downtown will be incredible. I have complete faith in that. This is the capital city. It should be just a grand as our beloved state, and will be in a few short years.

[avery]

plus2, on Dec 6 2005, 10:48 PM, said:

I agree with the plaza/roundabout.  I think it would be nice to have two complementary buildings with round facades facing the circle.  Does the Site 1 have room for a library?  If not, Site 3 or 4 would be good as well.
As for the statue...I have always thought we should honor Jesse Helms and Jim Hunt with complimentary statues somewhere in Raleigh.

A library would be a grat addition to this part of downtown.  I think an aquarium would be pretty cool opposite a library or something to attract tourists and locals at the same time.  

I'm not sure a Hunt or Helms statue would work here.  I can definitely see something like the Wright Brother's plane there.  Something dramatic like the statue/fountains seen in Rome would really make everyone proud.  It would be quite an eyecatcher looking from the state capitol building up the street to something like this.  Boy, I fantasize too much about downtown projects.  

[DanRNC]

I think Capitol Broadcasting is chipping in $2 million for art on Fayetteville St./Downtown and I believe RBC is pledging $1 million in upgrades in lighting etc. for Fayetteville St. It will be interesting to see what they come up with.

[urbanesq]

DanRNC, on Dec 7 2005, 10:29 AM, said:

It may be sour grapes. Remember that Duke jumped in on RBC pretty late, got rejected, turned its focus to site 1 late once again, got rejected again. They sound like opportunists-which I guess all developers are. I think the future Reynolds tower hinges on recruitment of a Fortune 500 company to fill the space so this may or may not happen.  There still is well over $1 billion being invested in downtown right now.

Doubt it has much to do with sour grapes and more to do with market pragmatism.  As I've heard it, RBC courted Duke, not vice versa.  Not sure how responding to the bank's overtures makes them (or any developer) any more opportunist than any player in any industry.  

If anything, RBC played them so it could get a better deal from Highwoods.  Once that happened it only makes sense that they'd have an interest in Site 1.  They've invested something like $500 million in Raleigh real estate, including about $80 million in Southeast Raleigh.  I'm confused as to why everybody's slamming them.

[urbanesq]

dmccall, on Dec 7 2005, 10:49 AM, said:

Kelton's quote about Site 1 or nothing sounds SO HOLLOW. Either the market is ripe for development or it's not, dude. You're making Jesse T., who went to bat for you, look like your lapdog.

I think there are PLENTY of alternative sites for Kelton to explore, especially on the west side of downtown.

I've posted this previously, but I gotta say again I'm confused as to why this guy's assessment of what the market can bear is suspect.  He's in the business, I gotta think maybe he knows what he's talking about.


OK.  Quick show of hands from everybody slamming these guys:
How much of YOUR money are you willing to risk on a spec investment in a market that has been historically very slow to absorb new space, and into which your competitors have just promised to infuse tons more product?  


Anyone?  Anyone?  





Didn't think so.

Edited by urbanesq, 07 December 2005 - 12:49 PM.

[ChiefJoJo]

Quote

Kelton's quote about Site 1 or nothing sounds SO HOLLOW. Either the market is ripe for development or it's not, dude. You're making Jesse T., who went to bat for you, look like your lapdog.

I think there are PLENTY of alternative sites for Kelton to explore, especially on the west side of downtown.

I think Duke doesn't see a market big enough to support RBC, site 1, and another large office tower somewhere else in DT at once--at least without recruiting another company to move in first (are you listening Reynolds?).  I can't argue too much with him.  I know of several small companies that are planning to move DT in the following months, but nothing of the size that would require in the 100k sf range required for another tower.  Who's going to fill the 200-300k sf of office in site 1 anyway?

[urbanesq]

ChiefJoJo, on Dec 7 2005, 01:48 PM, said:

I think Duke doesn't see a market big enough to support RBC, site 1, and another large office tower somewhere else in DT at once--at least without recruiting another company to move in first (are you listening Reynolds?).  I can't argue too much with him.  I know of several small companies that are planning to move DT in the following months, but nothing of the size that would require in the 100k sf range required for another tower.

Can I get an Amen!

ChiefJoJo, on Dec 7 2005, 01:48 PM, said:

Who's going to fill the 200-300k sf of office in site 1 anyway?

Good question.

[avery]

urbanesq, on Dec 7 2005, 01:42 PM, said:

Doubt it has much to do with sour grapes and more to do with market pragmatism.  As I've heard it, RBC courted Duke, not vice versa.  Not sure how responding to the bank's overtures makes them (or any developer) any more opportunist than any player in any industry.  

If anything, RBC played them so it could get a better deal from Highwoods.  Once that happened it only makes sense that they'd have an interest in Site 1.  They've invested something like $500 million in Raleigh real estate, including about $80 million in Southeast Raleigh.  I'm confused as to why everybody's slamming them.

I don't think Duke should be slammed by any strecth of the imagination either.  As far as the RFP is concerned for site 1, I am glad that Duke was not allowed to be reconsidered by the city after the proposal for RBC fell through.  Anytime a developer is interested in investing money into Raleigh, I am pleased.  Hopefully they will continue to seek opportunites elsewhere in the area if not downtown.  Maybe they can take their plans they had for RBC and shelve them until another potential suitor comes along.  I'm sure their design with the retail/office/residential elements will be common in all new structures and will be able to be used again with some tweaking.

[urbanesq]

avery, on Dec 7 2005, 01:54 PM, said:

Hopefully they will continue to seek opportunites elsewhere in the area if not downtown.  Maybe they can take their plans they had for RBC and shelve them until another potential suitor comes along.

I think the Duke proposal was specific to Site 1, but I agree:  hopefully they have downtown on their radar now so if they find a tenant who needs space, they can make a run at another site.

Or, in the (highly unlikely) event that the City determines that the current proposal for Site 1 doesn't meet their expectations, Duke and/or others will be at the ready if the process is re-bid.

[ncwebguy]

I'm not "slamming" Duke realty, but I'm not going to shed a tear for them either.

If they didn't see enough of the potential of downtown Raleigh to propose something during the Site 1 (and 4) RFP period when three other developer interests did, whose fault is that?  If after Progress 2 and the Quorum center they *still* didn't take note of the CBD's potential until the RBC Tower project came into play, that says a lot about how late to the party they are.  The downtown submarket has now changed, and it is entirely up to them if they want to be a participant or a spectator.

I think most of the RBC tower's office space will be filled with RBC itself (and Capital Broadcasting), so that structure won't create empty inventory.  Site 1, on the otherhand, will add new, unoccupied space.  But I don't think the TMC group would be so gung ho if they didn't have a few tenants lined up already.  Also, Capital Bank and the city of Raleigh are taking a lot of empty space out of the market via the old First Union building and 333 Fayetville.  This means any existing downtown tenants who want to expand/relocate *cough* N&O *cough*, or new players who want to come to DT, will only have Site 1 and the Reynolds Building (if that) as potential locations if nothing else is on the drawing boards.  Drawing boards Duke Realty now has and could modify for a nominal fee.  Or "the Old Reliable" could fill up Site 1, and then turn around and let Duke redevlop their McDowell/Hargett/Salisbury/Martin block?   Even though they've been twice spurned, they now have their name out there as an interested downtown player.

I think it is Not A Good Idea to take the "build it and they will come" mentality -- an anchor tenant who wants their name on the building would be necessary now.  But that may change in the next six months/year as Fayevtille Street comes alive, Glenwood South keeps its momentum, and maybe the TTA rail project could be a tipping point that opens the floodgates.

[DwnTwnRaleighGuy]

ncwebguy, on Dec 8 2005, 04:05 PM, said:

I'm not "slamming" Duke realty, but I'm not going to shed a tear for them either.

If they didn't see enough of the potential of downtown Raleigh to propose something during the Site 1 (and 4) RFP period when three other developer interests did, whose fault is that?  If after Progress 2 and the Quorum center they *still* didn't take note of the CBD's potential until the RBC Tower project came into play, that says a lot about how late to the party they are.  The downtown submarket has now changed, and it is entirely up to them if they want to be a participant or a spectator.

I think most of the RBC tower's office space will be filled with RBC itself (and Capital Broadcasting), so that structure won't create empty inventory.  Site 1, on the otherhand, will add new, unoccupied space.  But I don't think the TMC group would be so gung ho if they didn't have a few tenants lined up already.  Also, Capital Bank and the city of Raleigh are taking a lot of empty space out of the market via the old First Union building and 333 Fayetville.  This means any existing downtown tenants who want to expand/relocate *cough* N&O *cough*, or new players who want to come to DT, will only have Site 1 and the Reynolds Building (if that) as potential locations if nothing else is on the drawing boards.  Drawing boards Duke Realty now has and could modify for a nominal fee.  Or "the Old Reliable" could fill up Site 1, and then turn around and let Duke redevlop their McDowell/Hargett/Salisbury/Martin block?   Even though they've been twice spurned, they now have their name out there as an interested downtown player.

I think it is Not A Good Idea to take the "build it and they will come" mentality -- an anchor tenant who wants their name on the building would be necessary now.  But that may change in the next six months/year as Fayevtille Street comes alive, Glenwood South keeps its momentum, and maybe the TTA rail project could be a tipping point that opens the floodgates.

I agree totally!!

[ChiefJoJo]

I can see Duke's point of view though.  They didn't get to the point they are in real estate development by making bad decisions.  They saw site 1/RBC as a huge "no brainer" opportunity to get a major anchor tenant in a prominent DT site on the new "NC Main St."  The fact they don't see that DT Raleigh can support multiple (3+) major DT office towers at this time, isn't that hard to understand.  I'm sure Duke will keep an eye out on this market.

BTW, I still think RBC was using Duke as leverage with Highwoods on their site.