712 Tucker

[Jones_]

I don't know a lot about building costs and how they affect the price of individual units, but it seems to me that if developers purchased a smaller plot of land and went taller with the structure they could offer reasonably priced units. Does anyone have any insight on this?

Taller brings down prices until the structure reaches the point where reinforced concrete and steel are required. This has always been the case but that threshhold is being reached sooner now with the dramatic price increaes in steel and concrete. Despite the price of gas, the concrete and steel are so expensive that pressure is being exerted to sprawl because densifying is so expensive too. In competitive bidding for municipal projects, contractors are having a hard time getting suppliers of concrete and steel to give quotes they will stand by because prices are changing so fast.

[c_harmons]

http://www.raleighing.com/area_downtown/index.html

I have always said Raleigh REALLY needs this type of housing. Condos that start at $120,000 and don't exceed $300,000. Plus I think this project has an apartment component.

I have heard however that Crosland is struggling with the City about having retail on the first floor. The City has said it is required. At the public hearing Crosland said that would raise the cost of the project and in return the sales prices. Plus they said retail did not make sense that far over from the commercial alley of Glenwood. They instead proposed stoops from the condos down to the street. But the City was giving them a lot of grief.

Not so sure I side with the City on this one. We don

[Jones_]

http://www.raleighing.com/area_downtown/index.html

I have always said Raleigh REALLY needs this type of housing. Condos that start at $120,000 and don't exceed $300,000. Plus I think this project has an apartment component.

I have heard however that Crosland is struggling with the City about having retail on the first floor. The City has said it is required. At the public hearing Crosland said that would raise the cost of the project and in return the sales prices. Plus they said retail did not make sense that far over from the commercial alley of Glenwood. They instead proposed stoops from the condos down to the street. But the City was giving them a lot of grief.

Not so sure I side with the City on this one. We don

[ChiefJoJo]

Until this area matures, i think the city should exempt them from retail on the bottom floor (Paramount has no retail). It's more important to get a condo/apartment project built relatively cheaply than it is to try to force the market to accept retail at that location. Once the area is active with foot traffic, then the market will bear ground floor retail.

[dukedoc9]

Agree. Especially after that TBJ article. We need the proposed housing to be built first and foremost.

I have a hard time believing the City would turn down an opportunity like this because they did not put retail destined to fail in the short term in the project.

I hope.

[avery]

Until this area matures, i think the city should exempt them from retail on the bottom floor (Paramount has no retail). It's more important to get a condo/apartment project built relatively cheaply than it is to try to force the market to accept retail at that location. Once the area is active with foot traffic, then the market will bear ground floor retail.

I agree with respect to certain locations. I think the city should go ahead and get some more concrete zoning in certain areas. If a project fronts Fayetteville Street or Glenwood, I can understand them wanting retail incorporated. If it is tucked away like Tucker Street (no pun intended), I don't see a need for a retail element. They out to establish these retail/housing corridors a little more. I don't know that they ought to make a general precedent on this issue regarding all projects and go back to change it later.

[urbanesq]

^^even if it's not retail use, I think there should be strong stree-level activity. I wuold love for this area to develop with browstones or other styles that have multiple entrances onto the street, and not just suburban-style single-entrance fortresses that add residents (which is great) but don't fully generate the buzz and activity of a living, livable streetscape.

[Jones_]

^^even if it's not retail use, I think there should be strong stree-level activity. I wuold love for this area to develop with browstones or other styles that have multiple entrances onto the street, and not just suburban-style single-entrance fortresses that add residents (which is great) but don't fully generate the buzz and activity of a living, livable streetscape.

My sentiments exactly

[ncwebguy]

According to the city's website linked to in the first post of this thread, the Paramount is noted as having 1,000 square feet of retail. I can see them "forgetting" to have done this though.

This project is partially replacing existing street retail.... Raleigh Office Supply had a showroom/retail outlet with big windows that fronted Tucker, although it has been closed for years (except for the yearly Wake County Library book sale). The surrounding neighborhood has a lot of office space, so if not retail, maybe sell them as office condos for doctors, lawyers, designers, etc. on the ground floor that may live in the condos above?

The old folks tower on the block east of the site provides next to no street level activity, and is fenced in giving a prison-like feel. There is some street life in the form of Around the Corner on Tucker just southeast of this block. The Tucker/St. Marys/Johnson/Boylan block also has retail in the form of a hair salon and BBQ and Ribs on St Marys, a PC/video game cafe and a couple of other offices on Johnson. There are some offices on Tucker south of the property, and Office Tavern and the funeral home north of Johnson.

There is *no* opportunity for retail of any kind east of St. Marys (or north of Peace) until you get to Cameron Village or the Morgan/Hillsborough St. intersection. There are a few redevlopment opportunities on the two blocks on Peace between St. Marys and Glenwood, but will that be enough? Glenwood South has a difficult time as it is, with this, the Glen on Peace, the Paramount, 222 Glenwood, and the Quorum Center all not being on line yet.

The collector creek that runs parallel to Johnson and Tucker on the north side of the property could be enhanced and seen as a feature instead of the current hidden eyesore. Can this be done *and* keep prices low? I don't know, but a lot of dirt will be moved around during construction.

The area could be similar to the neighborhood in DC between Dupont Circle and Adams-Morgan, but even it has several embassies and other offices at street level.

[Subway Scoundrel]

I agree with respect to certain locations. I think the city should go ahead and get some more concrete zoning in certain areas. If a project fronts Fayetteville Street or Glenwood, I can understand them wanting retail incorporated. If it is tucked away like Tucker Street (no pun intended), I don't see a need for a retail element. They out to establish these retail/housing corridors a little more. I don't know that they ought to make a general precedent on this issue regarding all projects and go back to change it later.

I understand when one looks at today on needs on retail, but I am not sure I agree that Tucker St is that far off that it does not need retail. Glenwood South frontage is so expensive; it keeps the average person or company from starting a business there. In 20 years, who knows what the requirement will be. I think the city should push hard for this and see where it comes out. I do not think Glenwood South is that urban. It is a street with bars and restaurants and there is more to that to really be called urban. If they don't it now, it will never happen, especially as companies like Crosland come knocking. Crosland most likely does not want to do it retail because they are a housing company and do not want to mess with tenants and property management. Come in, make a buck, and get out. Glenwood South will be full in 5 years or less and growth of retail will have to move to side streets. I just think the city is actually looking out to the future.

I agree, DT needs cheaper housing but I would rather see it done right instead of patting ourselves on the back and saying

[dukedoc9]

Crosland does retail! Go look at their website. It appears they do more retail than housing.

But I am against doing retail just to do it. If we start building empty storefronts, I think Raleigh will quickly regret it.

We need to get the residential first and then the retail will follow. If there is demand, they will come. No need to force it and have empty windows, or users that will pay rent but are far from what one would put on their wish list.

I also have faith Crosland will keep their prices low because that TBJ article just showed if they get too high, there is limited demand.

[c_harmons]

Crosland is building Poyner Place so they definitely do retail.

[avery]

It takes a lot more residents to sustain retail than what many of you may think. There has to be enough potential for a person to consider opening a small business not only to survive, but to even qualify for lending. I'm not saying that retail won't work in downtown, but I am not so sure that every project needs leasing space on the ground floors. There could be a lot of empty storefronts or a lot of turnover on these spaces if the business is not there.

[ChiefJoJo]

^ That's what i am saying. Essentially, the city is saying we want you to have ground floor retail whether you can realistically lease it or not. It's kind of like these mixed use communities like southern village that build in retail as part of a city zoning requirement, but then many of the spaces are empty, becasue there's just not enough dense population to support it. It might take 5-10 years for significant retail on Tucker St to be feasible, so then for the developer to make a decent profit on the project with no leasable space, he must jack up the price of the condos and rent for the aptmts to compensate. This defeats the appeal of this project: an affordable apartment/condo community near Glenwood South.

Maybe there is a compromise. Build a minimal amount of retail to satisfy the city, maybe a bit more than the Paramount's 1k sf (which is so small, it nearly doesn't count), and then approve it.

BTW, someone mentioned Pigeon House Creek, which cuts an open (eyesore) concrete channel between Tucker and Johnson St--I think the DWQ's requirements for what is allowed here could add significant delays and cost to the project. I know Jones 133, and Capital Aptmts know more about water quality than I do, but there could be some major environmental hoops to jump through there in order to obtain a permit to build next to the channel. Perheps one of you could comment?

[Jones_]

^ That's what i am saying. Essentially, the city is saying we want you to have ground floor retail whether you can realistically lease it or not. It's kind of like these mixed use communities like southern village that build in retail as part of a city zoning requirement, but then many of the spaces are empty, becasue there's just not enough dense population to support it. It might take 5-10 years for significant retail on Tucker St to be feasible, so then for the developer to make a decent profit on the project with no leasable space, he must jack up the price of the condos and rent for the aptmts to compensate. This defeats the appeal of this project: an affordable apartment/condo community near Glenwood South.

Maybe there is a compromise. Build a minimal amount of retail to satisfy the city, maybe a bit more than the Paramount's 1k sf (which is so small, it nearly doesn't count), and then approve it.

BTW, someone mentioned Pigeon House Creek, which cuts an open (eyesore) concrete channel between Tucker and Johnson St--I think the DWQ's requirements for what is allowed here could add significant delays and cost to the project. I know Jones 133, and Capital Aptmts know more about water quality than I do, but there could be some major environmental hoops to jump through there in order to obtain a permit to build next to the channel. Perheps one of you could comment?

I am not sure what DWQ's requirements are for a channelized stream.....if this is treated like a regular stream with sufficient minimum flow then a 50' setback from the stream bank is required. Neuse River rules may require additional measures such as stormwater filtering before it leaves the site but I am less sure of this. From an environmental standpoint, returning the stream to some semblence of its natural state would be beneficial and would make the site more attractive but I do not think the City or State have any power to force the developer to do this. In short I would not think Pigeon House will cause any serious delays.

[bdp]

^ That's what i am saying. Essentially, the city is saying we want you to have ground floor retail whether you can realistically lease it or not. It's kind of like these mixed use communities like southern village that build in retail as part of a city zoning requirement, but then many of the spaces are empty, becasue there's just not enough dense population to support it. It might take 5-10 years for significant retail on Tucker St to be feasible, so then for the developer to make a decent profit on the project with no leasable space, he must jack up the price of the condos and rent for the aptmts to compensate. This defeats the appeal of this project: an affordable apartment/condo community near Glenwood South.

Maybe there is a compromise. Build a minimal amount of retail to satisfy the city, maybe a bit more than the Paramount's 1k sf (which is so small, it nearly doesn't count), and then approve it.

BTW, someone mentioned Pigeon House Creek, which cuts an open (eyesore) concrete channel between Tucker and Johnson St--I think the DWQ's requirements for what is allowed here could add significant delays and cost to the project. I know Jones 133, and Capital Aptmts know more about water quality than I do, but there could be some major environmental hoops to jump through there in order to obtain a permit to build next to the channel. Perheps one of you could comment?

I am not trying to argue... but i have to disagree about Pigeon Creek or whatever it is called. I used to cut through this property on my way downtown when i lived off Peace, and the creek was one of the few, unexpected jewels I discovered when i got out of my car and WALKED somewhere for once. It reminds me of an old canal or something, and runs directly behind several buildings, right up to the foundations. I think it adds a lot of character, and it is not all concrete, some of it is actually stone foundations of the older buildings. Raleigh needs more quirky, character-building things, not less. I actually think it could be a selling point. Imagine a balcony justting over running water in downtown raleigh. Ok, I'm sorry, I just had to stick up for my creek, because I really fell in love with it that night last summer. ; )

[ChiefJoJo]

Update: this project was approved by the planning commission yesterday (8-2).

My neighborhood CAC ("Hillsborough" district) is meeting thursday at the new Cameron Village Library (7pm, rm 202A), and an architect from the Raleigh Office Supply condo project is coming to present.

[thewhister]

It takes a lot more residents to sustain retail than what many of you may think. There has to be enough potential for a person to consider opening a small business not only to survive, but to even qualify for lending. I'm not saying that retail won't work in downtown, but I am not so sure that every project needs leasing space on the ground floors. There could be a lot of empty storefronts or a lot of turnover on these spaces if the business is not there.

We seem to forget that this space could be used for Offices - Professional, Service that would not need the pedistrian/auto traffic to go by. If the activites on Glenwood move to other streets then the opportunity presents itself later on for retail - shops, restauants. Planning ahead for potential? Hopefully we will see.

[pack-man]

I am not trying to argue... but i have to disagree about Pigeon Creek or whatever it is called. I used to cut through this property on my way downtown when i lived off Peace, and the creek was one of the few, unexpected jewels I discovered when i got out of my car and WALKED somewhere for once. It reminds me of an old canal or something, and runs directly behind several buildings, right up to the foundations. I think it adds a lot of character, and it is not all concrete, some of it is actually stone foundations of the older buildings. Raleigh needs more quirky, character-building things, not less. I actually think it could be a selling point. Imagine a balcony justting over running water in downtown raleigh. Ok, I'm sorry, I just had to stick up for my creek, because I really fell in love with it that night last summer. ; )

I love that creek too. It is one of the cooler things in downtown Raleigh how it is just there. It reminds of something out of L.A. They need to keep that thing.

[ChiefJoJo]

UPDATE

So I went to the CAC meeting last night... Cameron Park neighborhood isn't too happy because of the parking deck that will not be screened in the back view from St Mary's St near the culvert behind the property. The CAC voted 9-2 to recommend that it be placed in committee for further discussion with the neighborhood--council votes on it next Tuesday, although there's a condition that the developer negotiate with Planning Director Mitch Silver for a better facade for the parking deck.

Its a 179 unit 4-5 story bldg wood framed with hardy-plank, and other trims on exterior--kinda looks like Oberlin Court on Wade. 60 units are condos (St Mary's side), and 119 (Boylan side) are apartments. Crosland said they are targeting the condos at ~$200/sq ft and start at about ~800 sf to ~1700sf... apartments will be market rate = $1/sf per month, so about $1k/month for a 1000sf aptmt. I think it looks pretty good except for the parking deck in the back, which could be an issue. It has 2 interior courtyards, one with pool and landscaping, etc. The parking deck is 3-4 levels in the back middle of the property.

If council approves it, they will be looking at breaking ground this summer, and opening 14 months later.

[Transplant]

Thanks for the update. Maybe its time for the City to require all above ground parking decks have facades that blend with the rest of the area/buildings.

[pdxheel]

Coming from Portland and having lived in Seattle I'm not used to above ground parking decks in dense urban areas. I'm not sure if it is an official ordinance or not, but in both cities it seems like everytime a new condo/apartment building or business is built near the CBD they use underground parking. I wish Raleigh would do this. Its probably a cost thing.

[Transplant]

Coming from Portland and having lived in Seattle I'm not used to above ground parking decks in dense urban areas. I'm not sure if it is an official ordinance or not, but in both cities it seems like everytime a new condo/apartment building or business is built near the CBD they use underground parking. I wish Raleigh would do this. Its probably a cost thing.

I've complained about this same thing. I know in DC the General Contractor sells the dirt, which basically pays for the dig. I would guess that Seattle and Porland have similar situations. Here, I think dirt is easy to come by, so the dig just adds to the expense.

[pack-man]

I've complained about this same thing. I know in DC the General Contractor sells the dirt, which basically pays for the dig. I would guess that Seattle and Porland have similar situations. Here, I think dirt is easy to come by, so the dig just adds to the expense.

Good point, around here fill is cheap. It's unfortunate. At least the city has realized that going underground is the way to go. They just need to enforce this to the new projects around town.

With the lot the size it is down there, they wouldn't even need to dig deep. I guess it is a matter of materials and expenses to build a structure underground that would be able to hold structures above it.

This sounds like a cheaper more affordable project which has a lot to do with it as well. My guess: these things sell out before they even start building....

[dukedoc9]

How can you put parking underground with the creek next to it?