Wake Up!

[ChiefJoJo]

Check it out -->WakeUp!

Our vision focuses on:

>Fiscal responsibility and fairness in public policy

>Sound policies for managing growth and promoting the positive development of our communities

>Spending public funds wisely on the things that matter most

>Conserving the things that make our community a great place to live

What are the potential negative effects of growth? People in Wake County are all too familiar with them: jammed schools, congested roads, new subdivisions without adequate utilities and services where farmland and forest used to be and not enough parks or open space. Water shortages and polluted lakes and rivers; unbalanced commercial and residential development; and increasing stormwater runoff are also problems.

The only thing left out is "sustainablilty." I wonder if they were afraid it sounded to left-wing or green. I think it's a word that sums it all up, and to me implies a focus on transit as well, which is something nearly all of us on this forum would like to see.

[monsoon]

The only thing left out is "sustainablilty." I wonder if they were afraid it sounded to left-wing or green. I think it's a word that sums it all up, and to me implies a focus on transit as well, which is something nearly all of us on this forum would like to see.

From what I can see, the website does not say what position they take on any of these items. If they are too scared to mention something like sustainable cities, then I don't think they are going to be that effective.

[DanRNC]

It either strikes me as a completely left-wing or right-wing group which end being very much similar. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a group led by Russell Capps. Notice the constant reference to "taxes" and "taxpayers".

[plus2]

It is a left of center group. It was started in large part by Independent columnist Bob Geary.

[paletexan]

I was reading their Q&A on Impact Fees. I know they're biased based on reading, and wondered what the opinion is on the board.

I do like the idea of discouraging sprawl, if that's what impace fees accomplish. It would be nice to see more infill developments too.

[Subway Scoundrel]

NIMBY"S UNITE !!!!

and put together a website !!

[plus2]

I definitely think that raising impact fees are important, but not in discouraging sprawl. New developments downtown or in the existing developed city would pay the same fees. The city could look at waving fees for developments downtown as an incentive to build there.

Impact fees are important because the city has explosive growth and the only way to pay for new parks, roads, fire stations, sewers is to get more revenue. I think it's fair to put a greater share of those costs onto the people forcing the growth in infrastructure (developers and new home buyers). Otherwise, the rest of the city will have to pay for it through more property taxes.

Besides, Raleigh's impact fees are only 1/3 of Cary's, 1/4 the average in NC, and 1/8 the national average. Developers have gotten a free ride in Raleigh.

I think most developers that this board would like, don't have such a knee jerk reaction to new fees. Its those sprawl creators that are the biggest problem.

That said, though WakeUp! certainly has its share of NIMBY's I think the group is more focused on "smart growth" that all UPers like as well.

[Subway Scoundrel]

The very comment

" That means making sure that our infrastructure keeps pace with growth - that roads are in place to handle traffic, that schools aren't stuffed way past their capacity, that we add new recreation and parks to serve new development, and not allow infrastructure to fall way behind, worsening our quality of life."

This means slow and stop growth until someone, not saying who, thinks we are ready. But who decides! It is the attitude that I have mine and I don

[c_harmons]

Like a very smart friend of mine said ...."You can not expect to live in a city and enjoy all that it has to offer and not accept some of things you dislike"

EXCELLENT POST!!!

[ChiefJoJo]

Raising impact fees isn't a good idea? Go ahead and waive them for dense infill development, like Crowder and Stephenson want to do. Our fees have been the same for 20 years and are completely outdated compared to our peer and neighboring cities. I would say raise them to the amount recommended by the consultant, just over $3k per new home.

[Raleighsfinest]

Like a very smart friend of mine said ...."You can not expect to live in a city and enjoy all that it has to offer and not accept some of things you dislike"

EXCELLENT POST!!!

Makes sense to me!

[sax184]

A city either grows or it dies!!

DEAD WRONG, and I can refute in one word.-BOSTON.

The city has never been more alive and cleaner. The economy is strong and moving. And the city has 200,000 fewer residents than at the height of its population boom.

Only crappy cities grow or die. The problem with Raleigh is that most of the economy IS suburban growth! (well-subsidized through underinvestment in public infrastructure through the lack of impact fees)

Managed growth can be done without a no-growth posture. Orange County has overshot a little bit in this regard. Wake County is the opposite of managed growth, and the consequences are obvious. It will be interesting to see the Fayetteville St Mall when done. One of the recent letters in the paper I've seen that says it all is that there's nowhere worth driving 2 miles to take an out-of-town visitor in Raliegh that people truly identify with the city. I fear they may be right. Perhaps the Fayetteville St project will remedy this.

[Raleighsfinest]

Raleigh doesn't have the efficient infrastructure like Boston does though transitman. I think their is a million variables that Boston has that Raleigh probably won't see for another hundred years. The odds of Raleigh remaining economically and socially stable without any growth is impossible in this era, for the Raleigh area. Raleigh has to become built up first.

[ChiefJoJo]

Raleigh has to become built up first.

Yes. Built UP, not OUT. Anyone have any rational explanation why we shouldn't approve the maximum recommended impact fee (with a waiver on dense infill) I'd love to hear it.

[sax184]

Yes. Built UP, not OUT. Anyone have any rational explanation why we shouldn't approve the maximum recommended impact fee (with a waiver on dense infill) I'd love to hear it.

Hear, hear! The earlier post abotu Raleigh needing to build out to get the infrastructure makes no sense. The "we can build a city on the cheap" flavor that runs in Wake Co politics has set up an equation where growth creates more demand for facilities and services of all types than taxes pay for. Continuing this policy to raise money to build infrastructure by continually undercharging for the cost of those facilities is the very definition of foolishness.

Of course, to Russell Capps, it's public policy. I'm with the Chief- where's the reason not to raise the development fees? The developers aren't going anywhere. They're just going to have to share a bit of their absurd profits with the communities they desecrate to build cheap ticky-tack houses.

[Subway Scoundrel]

DEAD WRONG, and I can refute in one word.-BOSTON.

The city has never been more alive and cleaner. The economy is strong and moving. And the city has 200,000 fewer residents than at the height of its population boom.

Only crappy cities grow or die. The problem with Raleigh is that most of the economy IS suburban growth! (well-subsidized through underinvestment in public infrastructure through the lack of impact fees)

Managed growth can be done without a no-growth posture. Orange County has overshot a little bit in this regard. Wake County is the opposite of managed growth, and the consequences are obvious. It will be interesting to see the Fayetteville St Mall when done. One of the recent letters in the paper I've seen that says it all is that there's nowhere worth driving 2 miles to take an out-of-town visitor in Raliegh that people truly identify with the city. I fear they may be right. Perhaps the Fayetteville St project will remedy this.

I do think cities like Boston with so much infrastructure and suburbs are different. I will give you a prime example;

If this group were to gain power and the city came in and said: "No more building permits for 3 years until schools, roads, etc and all catch up, do you think Fidelity would still want to come and bring 5000 jobs? Do you think other companies would want to relocate here? I say "no" because it eliminates their pool. Not to mention, if slow or stop growth, it stops it everywhere, including DT. All these new places opening up would not continue as that would not drvie more people DT. The lure of DT and the growth rate of new people are factors in DT growth.

[monsoon]

Well I can offer this up. The three towns in North Mecklenburg did exactly this. They put a moritorium on all new development for more than a year until they could establish a comprehensive growth strategy that would keep the area (about 1/5th of Mecklenburg) sprawling into bedroom communities for Charlotte. And they have succeeded fairly well with it. Several of the other towns near Mecklenburg are doing the same. Ironically its the development within the Charlotte city limits which is lagging behind in proactive controls on how growth occurs.

[ncwebguy]

Part of me wants to join to make the group better from the inside, but a bigger part of me knows I will be yelled/ignored out of the picture by those who already know what is best for everyone *cough* Crowder and Geary *cough*. Its very name implies everyone who doesn't follow them in lock step is a sleepwalking zombie. It is funny they put a picture of the Joel Lane house next to "impact fees". Doesn't that house makes the case for not having any fees to promote development in the county (in its case, away from New Bern and Tryon Palace)?

They appear to only want public support, not public input. The Oberlin Court fiasco is a prime example -- NIMBY NIBMY NIMBY until the cameras stop rolling, then they wind up with something worse. I don't want to see this happen on a citywide scale, and especially to downtown. All their "local political links" are vanity sites. Just schools and fees, as if those are the only two issues that matter. We have time for them, and will get to everything else later maybe.

If Site 1 and 4 development have to go through an even bigger mine field than what Fayetville Street, the CC and Marriott went through, we may never see cranes on the east side of Fayetville Street.

[sax184]

Part of me wants to join to make the group better from the inside, but a bigger part of me knows I will be yelled/ignored out of the picture by those who already know what is best for everyone

Umm, how is this different from what the development community is doing to Raleigh now? I struggle to see how the process in Raleigh could be less inclusive at this point in time.

[sax184]

Pro Impact Fee Robocalls hit Triangle answering machines. Who's doing it?

[ChiefJoJo]

I received a call. I happen to agree that a higher fee is the way to go--with an exception for infill and re-development.

[sax184]

From WakePol blog:

Western Wake Democrats

The Western Wake Democrats will hold a forum on growth issues in Wake County on Tuesday, July 25. The forum will feature Chris Sinclair from the Triangle Community Coalition and Stan Norwalk from WakeUp! Wake County.

The meeting will be held from 7 to 8:30 p.m. at the Herb Young Community Center, located at the corner of North Academy and Chapel Hill Road in the Cary town hall campus.

From WRAL:

Mayor Charles Meeker says Raleigh spends about $25 million a year on projects to keep up with growth. He says the city gets about $4-$5 million back from impact fees. In a public hearing earlier this week, developers like Tom Anhut spoke out against an impact fee increase.

"Why are we taxing our own citizens again?" said Anhut.

Ahnut works for Toll Brothers, the company developing Brier Creek Country Club. According to public financial reports, Toll Brothers made more than $1.3 billion last year. That averages to about a $150,000 profit per house before taxes.

I will give major props to anyone who goes and asks Sinclair: "Would the world really end if Toll Brothers only made, say, $143,000 in profit per house so that our kids would receive their education in actual schools instead of trailer parks?"