Jump to content

Boylan/Hillsborough/Glenwood area project rumors


wfdude

Recommended Posts

And I have to agree. I find it so silly that Raleigh is fighting development when they are starting with a big disadvantage. The truth is we do not have a huge population of downtown white collar jobs that would flock to high rise opportunitites.

Hmm. Not enough white collar jobs downtown. If only there were a large research park nearby, and a rail line running between that research park and the downtown area ripe for development!

But this is Raleigh, where we can't add 2+2 and make 4, so instead of coming out and advocating more strongly for TTA rail as a way to lower parking requirements downtown while raising densities and expanding taxbase, we'll continue to sit on our hands. :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I actually talked with a person in Furman's firm. He said the prospects of them really developing in Raleigh are growing pretty slim.

The zoning was an issue, but they said in reality there is not as much downtown employment as Charlotte and they are real spooked about being able to find enough pre-sales.

And I have to agree. I find it so silly that Raleigh is fighting development when they are starting with a big disadvantage. The truth is we do not have a huge population of downtown white collar jobs that would flock to high rise opportunitites.

I strongly disagree with that logic, if they build units people people can afford like they said they would, then they won't have a problem with pre-sales most people that work downtown can't afford what is being built right now,also Mr Furman's firm already knew it was not as much employment in downtown Raleigh as Charlotte's downtown, that doesn't even sound right and if that's the case then that's alittle backwards. :huh:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. Not enough white collar jobs downtown. If only there were a large research park nearby, and a rail line running between that research park and the downtown area ripe for development!

But this is Raleigh, where we can't add 2+2 and make 4, so instead of coming out and advocating more strongly for TTA rail as a way to lower parking requirements downtown while raising densities and expanding taxbase, we'll continue to sit on our hands. :angry:

This is my opinion but i think Raleigh should put a small research park were the warehouse district is sense they won't push hard for TTA!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to beleive that Furman's folks may have just been blowing a little smoke. Plus, from what I know of their development model, it will designed and marketed under a true urban paradigm - not just a repackaging of suburban form.

In fact, when you look at who is buying downtown residential right now, a large portion of that group does not work in downtown, but instead are doing so to exercise a preference for an urban lifestyle.

I'd also challenge the assertion that we do not have a high number of white collar jobs in downtow, especially with RBC coming to the area, the headway relocation, and our largest contiguous office space recently coming off the market - to a bank no less.

In fact, the folks best poised for an easy transition into downtown residential are those with consierrable equity in their current homes. Raleigh, as the state capital, has a very large representation of stable, high-level employment opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The RTP TTA bus runs right by this property. It runs plenty of times during rush hour, but having the train would be a lot nicer. This is just far enough away from the St. Mary's neighborhood to keep them from complaining as well...

Then maybe Char-Grill and the gas station next to it could be redeveloped too. I hope they don't base build/don't build on the number of downtown jobs in 2006, although that is pretty high if you count state government in with the Fayetville Street towers.

With West at North, Blooomsbury, 222 Glenwood, etc. proposed/under construction, is the market saturated? I hope not, but can see them coming to this conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at Furman's model it is typically a high rise with very small units. 500 SF. But the good news is even at $300 a SF that is only $150,000. But does Raleigh have people willing to buy 500 SF? Maybe.

My understanding was they were fishing the market but were not too excited by the downtown employment base (not compared to Charlotte), the zoning seemed too troublesome, there is a lot of "proposed" product already waiting, and with rising interest rates and construction pricing the whole thing was borderline at best.

In truth Furman has not developed outside of Charlotte to date and as I said earlier my contact was not too optimistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at Furman's model it is typically a high rise with very small units. 500 SF. But the good news is even at $300 a SF that is only $150,000. But does Raleigh have people willing to buy 500 SF? Maybe.

My understanding was they were fishing the market but were not too excited by the downtown employment base (not compared to Charlotte), the zoning seemed too troublesome, there is a lot of "proposed" product already waiting, and with rising interest rates and construction pricing the whole thing was borderline at best.

In truth Furman has not developed outside of Charlotte to date and as I said earlier my contact was not too optimistic.

Furman's projects are far from entirely 500 square feet. However, they do differentiate themselves from other developers in that they have a significant number of small units at reasonable prices, rather than starting off at 1000sf units with $280k price tags. Boulevard Centro seems more adept than other developers in Charlotte at building to match the market, rather than going way upscale and just hoping to sell a bunch of big expensive units. Furman seems to be just about the only one in Charlotte who is able or willing to make the numbers work with a significant number of small units.

According to the Boulevard Centro webpage, they have some projects in Lexington, KY, and Winston Salem NC, as well - but the only towers so far are in Charlotte.

By the way - was your contact at Furman speaking their personal opinion, or was what they are saying the official company line?

If there are zoning regulations preventing a ~20 story tower from being built anywhere downtown, those regulations need to change. Maybe the system of density "bonuses" for various amenities

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there are zoning regulations preventing a ~20 story tower from being built anywhere downtown, those regulations need to change. Maybe the system of density "bonuses" for various amenities

Here is the link to the Downtown Overlay District zoning. I believe it's not the heght restrictions, but the densities allowed that would limit anything as tall as Centro would need to build a project. 3/4 acre at 80 units/acre (with density bonus of parking deck) would be about a 5-6 story building with maybe 90-120 small units (based on my rough calcs, think The Dawson with much smaller units). I don't believe Centro could build a project like that and make any money.

The problem is to meet the market demand (assuming it's there), they need lots of smaller units, but they densities allowed in the code don't allow enough to be profitable. It's kind of crazy, because you could build the Dawson today with 50-60 units priced at $300k ea, but you the code won't allow you to build the same building (same site, same total sf) with 120 units, because it's too dense. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woops. forgot to finish my sentence above.

I meant to say that "Maybe the system of density 'bonuses' for meeting various criteria (proximity to transit, proximity to open space, inclusion of affordable housing, etc) is too complicated."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Woops. forgot to finish my sentence above.

I meant to say that "Maybe the system of density 'bonuses' for meeting various criteria (proximity to transit, proximity to open space, inclusion of affordable housing, etc) is too complicated."

Maybe the city doesn't really want the common folks or affordable housing downtown anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think about it, the more I just don't see how there isn't enough employment to support this project. What about Centennial Campus? NC State? A condo on Hillsborough would be great for getting to work. I'm perplexed.

If the #2 city on Forbes' list for starting a career or firm just doesn't have enough white-collar professionals who would be interested in condos, I am very worried for the rest of the nation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

I don't think this is from a lack of market. Look at the growth of the Lafayette. I think it was Dana that reported that Bloomsbury Estates was adding a floor to meet increased demand. Their are rumors that site 1 will grow to meet demand.

This seems more like they're stretched a little thin right now and maybe the city staff rubbed them the wrong way a little (I hear they're good at that) and they decided to back off. It is such a great site we need to make sure something good goes in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now, there are so many things go on Downtown that this project not getting built right now is not a problem for me. In fact, I'd love to see this, and others come online a year or two after the current round goes up. The current group is supposed to be up by 2008-2010. Hopefully the site can be developed for the 2011/2012 time frame.

Raleigh should be striving for constant growth, I hope we continue down the path we're headed. Th

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The N&O article is not about the potential TME project. The project in the paper was proposed for the western portion of the block, whereas the TME project is for the western portion. Two different projects.

um...could you clarify that? :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Transplant. With the number of projects already proposed and/or approved, its good to spread things out a bit. In a few years both Furman and Raleigh will be perfect for each other and we may get an even better project. It was exciting to think of the potential design from Furman but with the latest renderings (site 1, Reynolds, the Lafayette) I think we have some excellent designs to look forward to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

N&O reports that Raleigh's planning director will be looking into changing Building Codes in the DT area. This is to keep up with current trends.

Here are the new regs from Mitch Silver--also to be a part of the July 25 public hearing ... see TC-16-06 in the link.

Beginning with a standard 40 units/acre, the new DOD regs give density bonuses of an additional 40 units/acre for each of ten conditions met:

(I) location/preservation... (1) location (ie, transit), (1) historic landmark (ie, natl register properties)

(II) urban form... (3) parking deck, (4) retail

(III) amenities... (5) low income housing, (6) open space, (7) architectural style, (8) public amenities, (9) environmental design, (10) public art

... up to a maximum of 320 units/acre

EX: If Blvd Centro wanted to build dense and tall, they could start with 40 units/acre, then TTA bonus (+40), then parking deck (+40), then retail (+40), then arch style (+40), and LEED cert. (+40), they would be allowed to build 240 units/acre, which could be quite tall for a 3/4 acre site.

:thumbsup: This is VERY GOOD news IMO (if it passes), as it allows developers more flexibility to build more dense projects in more locations than before. It's too bad Blvd Centro already pulled out of Raleigh for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the new regs from Mitch Silver--also to be a part of the July 25 public hearing ... see TC-16-06 in the link.

Beginning with a standard 40 units/acre, the new DOD regs give density bonuses of an additional 40 units/acre for each of ten conditions met:

(I) location/preservation... (1) location (ie, transit), (1) historic landmark (ie, natl register properties)

(II) urban form... (3) parking deck, (4) retail

(III) amenities... (5) low income housing, (6) open space, (7) architectural style, (8) public amenities, (9) environmental design, (10) public art

... up to a maximum of 320 units/acre

EX: If Blvd Centro wanted to build dense and tall, they could start with 40 units/acre, then TTA bonus (+40), then parking deck (+40), then retail (+40), then arch style (+40), and LEED cert. (+40), they would be allowed to build 240 units/acre, which could be quite tall for a 3/4 acre site.

:thumbsup: This is VERY GOOD news IMO (if it passes), as it allows developers more flexibility to build more dense projects in more locations than before. It's too bad Blvd Centro already pulled out of Raleigh for now.

Those are pretty neat guidelines IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.