Lightner Stalls at Council Vote

Daniel A
03/02 04:40 PM

Don’t understand why NR is so deeply invested in the success of the building.  The building is so poorly designed, architecturally, that I am happy with the failure in obtaining the necessary approval, as it is.

mb
03/02 04:44 PM

^doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

Mike
03/02 04:52 PM

I’m glad they voted it down - only if they take that money and invest it in improving existing infrastructure and creating new infrastructure.

gd
03/02 05:42 PM

and raleigh fails again.

mb
03/02 05:56 PM

^^a public safety center is part of a city’s infrastucture btw.

roberto
03/02 06:19 PM

engineering/architectural people - is the ~$700/Sq Ft cost on par with similar buildings?  just curious.

nate
03/02 06:38 PM

I think its pretty obvious that the cost of the “building” includes more than just a shell building cost.  Furniture, demolition, etc…

DPK
03/02 06:42 PM

Wow city council… way to fail.

Mike
03/02 06:45 PM

True, I gues I mean transportation infrastructure, sewer, water etc.

CM
03/02 07:13 PM

Roberto:  $700 psf is a ridiculous amount to pay for a building.  Here is a great article from the Independent summarizing several of the key issues.

http://www.indyweekblogs.com/citizen/2010/02/lightner-the-7-good-questions-that-havent-been-answered/

David
03/02 07:22 PM

That’s not an article from the Independent, it’s a blog post on the opposition’s talking points.

AW
03/02 07:24 PM

The City Council didn’t fail to disappoint on this one at all.  I’ll remember this next year when I can cast my vote for someone other than Crowder and Stephenson.

Daniel A
03/02 07:37 PM

@mb

I’ve only studied and practiced architecture for 10 years.  I think I am entitled to an educated opinion!  The clash of whisical architectural ‘languages’ can’t be ignored, just because it would mean a new public works building for Raleigh.

Todd Morman
03/02 09:31 PM

I too fail to understand New Raleigh’s odd cheerleading for this building. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I can’t remember NR actually addressing at any point the criticism that the design stupidly requires the fortification of non-essential spaces against terror attacks. Seriously, has NR - or Meeker, for that matter - ever directly addressed that relatively calm and thoughtful bit of critique? I haven’t seen it.

Merboy
03/02 09:53 PM

So can we use that money to build the soleil center or something?

Phillo
03/02 10:29 PM

^Yikes. 
 
I understand the criticism of Lightner, my problem is that Raleigh has a tendency of trying to save money on necessary public works projects only to realize a few years down the line that the initial investment was inadequate and they need to start from scratch on a project that actually meets their needs. 

I have a feeling that they’ll approve something barely adequate for existing needs only to have to spend this money anyway in a few years.  We’ll probably, long term, end up spending considerably more on two projects in the interest of saving money. 
 
tl;dr; Raleigh wastes more money trying to save money when they should be more interested in sound, long term infrastructure investments.

ncmyk
03/02 10:31 PM

^ (merboy) you want public tax money to fund a hotel/condo project at the mall???

ncmyk
03/02 10:39 PM

i recently finished a data center, which has a lot of similarities to a ‘first responder command center.’  it was around $800 a square foot - and - about half the national average for a data center.

btw…national construction data from last month reported that construction prices have shown to be stabilizing.  prices won’t be going up in a hurry, but the rock bottom prices are disappearing quickly.

bcb
03/02 10:56 PM

NR’s cheerleading has absolutely nothing to do with public safety concerns.  Were the building not to add to the skyline I seriously doubt this blog would be so raa-raa about the whole thing.  For the record I am not opposed to giving first responders what they need, but given the current economic uncertainties frugality should be a major concern.  The argument about construction prices assumes that things will be getting better…

Jonn
03/03 12:39 AM

Really glad this failed. Unnecessary at this time.

DPK
03/03 09:35 AM

@Jonn: People like yourself are cause for concern.  Just because it’s “unnecessary” at this time” doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be planning ahead for our future.

If we wait for the future for when it is necessary, then we are shooting ourselves in the feet.

gd
03/03 09:50 AM

DPK: I agree 100%.

rl
03/03 10:22 AM

Man o man is raleigh lame as hell! Once again raleigh has failed BIG TIME HERE! Like i said before this is an excellent reason as to why raleigh remains FORGETTABLE to alot of people. Its like the city doesnt care about itself to give itself a nice state of the art facility. If this was charlotte i guarantee this would have passed easily. The city leaders around here dont build for raleigh of 2030 they build for raleigh in 2013. I completely agree with phillo, raleigh tries to save money by not building it now and then eventually build something that is of inadequate size. Then 10 years later it will be outdated again and they will have to rebuild something else… inevitably spending much more then if they would have build the damn thing on a large scale from the jump. You build large facilities like this so the city can grow into it over a 35 year time span. How is it that people in this area cannot see this? This might be the worst capital city in america as far as advancement is concerned. This is a prime reason as to why raleigh will never be considered a major city. Even my hometown richmond cares more about itself than raleigh and it is half the size. People here cant really get mad at charlotte people when they talk bad about raleigh because they have alot more to show for it then raleigh does! Where is the proof?

rob
03/03 10:30 AM

funny thing is they already spent money moving the police to a different building. about 22 million has already been spent. this is one reason why they should have built it. rl you are correct buddy raleigh will never be a major city just a major embarrassment lol

gd
03/03 10:39 AM

Richmond feels larger than Raleigh and is hella more urban feeling. 

I too think this would have passed in Charlotte and I also agree that Raleigh looks just a couple years in the future instead of long term. 

Raleigh will remain where it is and with the new school board - all the recognition Raleigh has gotten for being a great place for families, will slowly disappear since the public schools are definitely going to worsen.

Ken Metzger
03/03 10:57 AM

To be honest, the only real loss in this so far is what appears to be a sunk cost of $22 million.  They can still build for the future with a few separate buildings.  I really could care less if we build a tall building, and would actually prefer not to have buildings over six stories tall.

The real concern is what they do now.  If they still build the same square footage somewhere else then that is great.  This building would add close to zero for downtown, except something to look at, which is really only good for photos and people passing by on the interstate.  My hope is that they sell this parcel off for a project that could really take advantage of the premier real estate. 

The problem, of course, is that the final plans in all of this will probably be a crappy building with less public use in the current spot built when construction prices have risen.

150
03/03 11:15 AM

I agree with DPK, gd, and rl.  Sure seems like short term thinking from Raleigh.

John
03/03 11:40 AM

What irritates me is that Crowder and Stephenson were alright with Raleigh spending $22 million or whatever the amount is, and keep their mouths shut until now. Lame.

hackles10
03/03 12:29 PM

Someone with some city council experience help me out.  This vote was a tie, and the city has already invested 15-25 million (depending on who is spouting figures) on the planning of this building.  Does a 4-4 tie vote mean that the building as we know it goes away?  That money was all for not.

I honestly understand the opposition, but there is no doubt that construction costs and borrowing put us in an advantageous position to get this thing built.  When you consider the $$$ already invested in the project and the potential $50+ million in savings, it seemed like we were getting better value out of the project.  I will be disappointed if something gets built later, in 3 or 4 smaller buildings, costs the taxpayers the same or more money, and adds nothing to the downtown infrastructure.

Follow up question….why do we not have a city council set up with an odd number of votes.  I have heard that we have a weak mayoral position in Raleigh, so this vote is important to the office.  I am fine with that, but just add another at large vote so that ties aren’t possible.  It is frustrating to see something go down in flames because of a tie.  /rant

stovepipe
03/03 12:30 PM

No, Crowder and Stephenson tried to raise their questions last year, but the Mayor and city manager told them to save their inquiries until after the preliminary work was done.

That preliminary work cost $22 million.  So by stifling questions early on, the Mayor and City Manager were the ones who caused the loss of $22 million.

Andrew
03/03 12:40 PM

It seems like most of the people who support Lightner are doing so because they think building an 18-story tower will make Raleigh look and act like a big city.  They seem infatuated with the idea of adding to the skyline.  I agree with bcb above.  Were it not for the fact that this was a tower downtown, most of the cheearleaders wouldn’t probably care nearly as much.  If terrorism is a legitimate concern the council has, then such a prominent building probably isn’t the best place to put all the city’s first responder resources.  Perhaps 20 years ago there were benefits to having all departments together for efficiency purposes.  But in a city that was just named the most wired, you would think that there are technologies that would make the need to be in the same physical location obsolete.  I’m all for downtown boosterism.  But doing it in the name of public safety is stupid.

Phillo
03/03 12:53 PM

(@Andrew) 
 
I think you missed the point of many of the posts above you.  It has nothing to do with a small building in the skyline and everything to do with short-sighted thinking by the city.  The city requires modern emergency services infrastructure, not one that dates from back when Raleigh had 150 thousand people. 
 
What people are afraid of is that we are going to pour a ton of money into some cobbled together facility that will be inadequate for the size of the city today only to have to build this building anyway in a few years.

rl
03/03 01:00 PM

Once again there are alot of people here who dont even know the importance of downtown. So many people are saying ‘who cares if its in downtown or that they dont want it to be a large tall building’ but those things are important as well. Raleigh needs way more density downtown thats a huge problem here. The city itself is beautiful… until you go downtown which itself is a huge eyesore. People here are too neighborhood friendly. This is a CITY real cities build things as important as a public safety center in DOWNTOWN, NOT NORTH RALEIGH! Once again its thinking like this that keeps raleigh in the joke category for real! A terrorist attack in raleigh… are some people serious? Ha ha that is laughable just another flimsy excuse to move it next to north raleigh. How can this city not give the people who are gonna save your asses when your house catches on fire or if you get robbed a nice home? To any REAL city this would have been a major priority and i guarantee that there would have been no arguments what so ever on public safety regardless of a tax hike which in this case is still pound cake ($20 more a year, i know people who spend that on cigarettes in a day or liquor). Richmond is half the size of raleigh and has its faults but boy does my hometown feel and look good when you come into it from 95 north. It has a big city feel even thouh it is no where close.  Dont give these police a state of the art facility and see how long the response time will start to get… watch what i tell you.

Andrew
03/03 01:29 PM

(@ Phillo)

Exhibit A is the post immediately following yours.

(@rl) I don’t think Raleigh tops the list for terrorist attacks.  I was merely restating concerns raised by some council members about the high cost of reinforcing lightner to withstand bomb blasts.

Thanks for your post, though, because it validated my point on downtown boosterism.  Your concerned about Raleigh having a “big city feel” and downtown density.  You didn’t even mention the first responders until your last sentence.  I’m assuming it was an afterthought.

Phillo
03/03 01:45 PM

(@Phillo) 
Yeah, that really doesn’t help my case.

(@rl) First, the public safety center would have minimal impact on any of the money shots of downtown.  From a planning perspective, I believe that the city has decided that service infrastructure should be located downtown because it already owns the land downtown and it believes that city government entities should be geographically close to each other. 
 
The density in downtown will come from businesses relocating to downtown and workers moving to the area for those downtown jobs.  Not from a public works project.

matt w
03/03 02:18 PM

And once again, the debate has come around to Downtown Raleigh vs. everyone else.  God damn this city is pathetic sometimes.

One of the reasons the majority of residents of this city have so much trouble getting behind projects for downtown is because its proponents act so f’ing entitled to everything.  Downtown proponents feel entitled because they think OTB Raleigh is getting all of the handouts.  The whole thing is absurd.  I have never, ever lived in a city where residents on either side of a highway were so at war with each other.

Philo
03/03 02:57 PM

Was there any question that this thing wouldn’t be built on the land the city already owns in downtown?
 
I think the case is more that Republicans on the council feel snubbed by the Democrats on the council (as they feel they were locked out of the planning process). 
 
That highway is not just the dividing line between OTB and ITB, it’s an ideological divide.  Conservatives to the north and liberals to the south. 
 
I imagine Meeker thought that Republicans would never oppose a large public safety project (for police and firemen, FNDY,911, blah blah blah) and didn’t consider that by snubbing the Republicans, they’d turn it into a tax/spending fight.  Then OTB and ITB line up behind their sides and pick the old downtown-attention fight, where in this case, it has nothing to do with the issue at hand. 
 
I’m sure this facility will be build - it has to be.  Whether it is now, or in five years after another facility is built and obsoleted is another question.  If there is one thing that will spark fiscal conservatives to spend money, it is to prove a point.  That point being that the Mayor offended them.  And they may have a point. 
 
The end result is maybe not that the city won’t look past this week, next year, or five years from now, it is that it is unable to think long term because there are too many petty pissing matches today distracting everyone.

stovepipe
03/03 03:01 PM

Philo—Which “Republicans” are you talking about?  There’s only one R on Council.  Of the four votes against Lightner, one was an R, two were Ds, and one is Independent! 

Maybe before you write six-paragraph opinions on the matter, you could get a few basic facts straight.

Phillo
03/03 03:20 PM

This is still a political fight, with Odom leading what is essentially a fiscally conservative block to counter the Democratic mayor. Ideologically, the 2 Ds and the I aligned to the right. The result is still the same.  A pissing match between people that feel slighted and OTB and ITB lining up to revive an old fight.

ncmyk
03/03 03:35 PM

for those of you who keep harping about selling the land to pay for a building somewhere else (where’s betsy lately?)...

remember there’s a nice piece already for sell:  its supposed to cover up the ugly side of the city’s new parking deck.

Ken Metzger
03/03 04:05 PM

I do not see this as a ITB vs OTB fight, at all.  I think three of the four that voted no live ITB.  It seems to come down to reelection and the link to new taxes.  If there was not a need to raise taxes, then this would have passed at least a month ago.  I also do not think many people are talking about moving the location to North Raleigh.  I would think the other locations may be more like just north of downtown on Capital/Atlantic or just south of Downtown on Wilmington/Hammond.

RaleighHound
03/03 05:43 PM

This building was a poor design from the beginning. Is it really a smart thing in this day and age to put police, fire, and rescue all in the same building? Can you imagine the implications of a terrorist attack on the building? Additionally, Raleigh has wasted enough taxpayers money already. Has the Civic Center really done that much for downtown? The RBC Center has been operating at a loss from the beginning. If Raleigh were smart, then that would have put the RBC Center downtown. It’s amazing Meeker’s focus has pretty much centered on downtown Raleigh. Is it only a coincedence that his son owns the Busy Bee and he lives in Boylan Heights? I don’t think so.

hackles10
03/03 05:47 PM

^You are a genius….you figured it out deputy dog.  And here I thought this whole Lightner thing was for the city of raleigh and its people to debate, but alas…it was an inside play by meeker all along to increase his own personal property value and to bolster the image of his sons establishment 6 blocks away…its all so clear now!

Daniel A
03/03 05:47 PM

The lead designer/architect needs to put a bag over his/her face if this current gets built.

Tico
03/03 06:44 PM

As I skim these blogs trying to understand the opposition to what appears to be a much needed facitlity, it just doesn’t all tie together for me.  Any alternative solution to the proposed Lightner will face the exact criticism and at much higher price tag.  It’s like there is a wheel turning inside peoples head that says:  Plan B is simply to find a better location with a building that perfectly suits everyone’s architectural taste and no one will think a single tax dollar was wasted.

Todd Morman
03/03 08:50 PM

Tico, the concerns are clear and have been stated over and over again. Chief among them for me: the cost per square foot is almost unbelievably high compared to similar construction, mainly because the design stupidly requires the expensive fortification of non-essential service spaces against terror attack. These are serious design flaws, and not the only ones. Stephenson and Crowder have also pointed out that the process was flawed, claiming (as noted above) that they were told to hold off criticism until later. Well, now it’s later, and the plan as submitted seems awful to a helluva lot of folks. The people here who are claiming the opposition is some sort of kneejerk conservatism or myopic vision are deliberately avoiding direct engagement with the most important criticisms. That’s very strange, and doesn’t reflect well on them at all.

Tico
03/03 09:47 PM

Todd, my mental flow chart would go like this:  IF you favor putting ALL emergency services in one building to increase efficiency, THEN you should favor increased expenses for non-essential service spaces against terrorist attacks.

matt w
03/04 01:09 AM

I understand that the readership of this site may be too young to remember this, but everyone snickering about the “terrorism” issue should keep in mind that two guys were able to take out an entire federal building in Oklahoma Freaking City.  Not to mention that if Raleigh continues to grow as projected, our little town won’t be so little any longer and the idea of someone blowing up a building containing all of our public services won’t be so cute.

Look, I’m a left-winger, and it is ridiculous how gripped with fear this country has become with the specter of terrorism.  That said, if you are going to build a large building that holds all of our public services, and you are going to build it in downtown where it is much more expensive to secure, and you are going to put a freaking cafe on the bottom floor, well…that doesn’t make a lot of sense if you ask me.  I think that those people that are blindly supporting this project because it adds another skyscraper downtown should reconsider if this is truly the right project to move forward on.  The growth (and tall buildings) will come downtown, with or without expensive publicly funded projects like this one.

Todd Morman
03/04 09:44 AM

Tico, I’m trying to see the logic in your last comment but am coming up empty.

Betsy
03/04 03:30 PM

You know that first-floor art gallery and public cafe will be the first thing to go when questions of the building’s defensibility come up.  And then we will have a hardened bunker with concrete bollards out front, facing Nash Square.  Nice urbanism, that!

gd
03/04 04:15 PM

Betsy:  yep.  Raleigh wants to be a plain jane, unrememberable place to visit…

matt w
03/04 05:47 PM

Well, at least you are admitting that all you really care about is downtown vitality and not public safety.  Someone should get New Raleigh to change the form e-mail.  “Dear Council Members, as a resident of DOWNTOWN Raleigh I really want another big building to make the DOWNTOWN skyline look nice.  Please do the right thing and vote for the Lightner Center, no matter the cost.  Thanks.  PS - OTB can suck it.”