Raleigh City Council Approves Condemning City Plaza Land

After many months of stalled negotiations, the Raleigh City Council exerted its superior dominion today and voted 6-1 to take back the land for the highly anticipated City Plaza from Atlanta based The Simpson Organization via eminent domain. Currently, these city-spirit party poopers own the land beneath where our Plaza will sit, as well as the adjacent Bank of America building. “He’ll never do business in this town again,“ said Raleighite Michael Calzacorta, after today’s City Council meeting, speaking of Boyd Simpson, president of The Simpson Organization. “My kids were really looking forward to celebrating the opening of our new Downtown. I guess we’ll have to wait until next year.“

The City may file a condemnation lawsuit in two weeks, at the earliest. To the dismay of many, the Plaza project won’t be open at Raleigh Wide Open 3 in September, the event that will mark the opening of the Convention Center. One Raleigh soccer mom commented, “This really sucks. It really waters down everything we’ve been planning for the last seven, eight years.“ The Plaza will form a strong connection between Fayetteville Street and the new Raleigh Convention Center, an area of downtown that has been shut off for construction the past two years. Council members Mary Ann Baldwin and Thomas Crowder expressed their concerns of dealing with pedestrian traffic when the Plaza is under construction.

During the Plaza design presentation, some new design elements surfaced about the forthcoming project. The water fountain has gotten slightly larger, and will include some “interactive features.“ The water feature will be equipped with motion sensors, so that when people walk by or sit at the fountain, the jets react to the movement and concentration of pedestrians. One of the presenters mentioned that this new fountain has been described as the Mini Bellagio. “What’s next?“ asked Raleigh attourney Rachel Bradfute, “neon lights, hookers, and gambling?“

Other controversial design elements may be eliminated initially from the Phase I construction of the Plaza, the four glass pavilions. Presenters for the plaza today showed renderings with and without the pavilions. If they were not built initially, the design would still allow for a possible Phase II to construct the pavilions.

Hang in there Raleigh, only a year and a half to go before you get your Downtown back.

viridari07/02 10:46 AM

Is Michael Calzacorta an out-of-the-closet communist? Or the six city council members who voted in favor of usurping Simpson’s legitimate private property rights?

“In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.“ - The Communist Manifesto

Jason!07/02 11:01 AM

I was going to say “Head on over to WRAL for the right-wingnut view on this in the GOLO comments”, but it seems they’ve made their way over here.

Bellyaching about property rights is one thing when some old lady’s about to get evicted from her hours of 50 years to build a tacky strip mall. It’s quite another thing when investment speculators occupy land in a non-productive way that takes value away from the community (and while I am not a lawyer, I’m sure there are clear legal definitions that separate the first case from the second).

The Greenshields building is an excellent example of this.

viridari07/02 11:02 AM

So property rights are only relevant if you’re poor or middle class? Somehow you lose your rights if you live the American dream and become wealthy?

Jason!07/02 11:18 AM

I think you’re the first to bring up class here, since I never said anything about the relative wealth of the cases.

One, someone is getting evicted from their residence.

Two, an investment speculator who refuses to deal or develop land is getting kicked off the land. To have this particular piece of land remain as it is takes away significantly from the surrounding properties.

I don’t think this will impinge on Boyd Simpson’s American dream one bit. If he’s that wealthy, he’s not stupid, and knew this was a possible outcome and was ok with it.

viridari07/02 11:22 AM

Actually, you said “Bellyaching about property rights is one thing when some old lady’s about to get evicted from her hours of 50 years to build a tacky strip mall.“

While it doesn’t make sense as-written, one might extrapolate from what is there that you were implying that reassignment of private property is only OK for certain classes of property owners.

The property in question isn’t an “investment speculation”. It’s a property that is already in use. It’s just not being used the way that the city council would like to see it used.

The free market has a remedy for your pain. Throw money at the problem. Throw so much money at it that the property owner is willing to walk away from the property. Then it becomes your property and you can do with it as you see fit.

I was just down there last night. That property isn’t taking anything away from the downtown area.

Ken Metzger07/02 11:41 AM

The council has not taken away any legitimate property rights as recently ruled by the Supreme Court. The city would also be required to fairly compensate for the property, right? No one is taking away private property, but rather exchanging real estate for currency.

I must admit that I am a little confused as to what is owned. I thought the plaza was public land. Is this not the same place where the Plensa project was going to be installed? Did the city not own the property when that project was going to happen? Or does the city just require permission, because they have a parking underneath the plaza? If they only own a part of the land to the side, then it could have been done in phases and the city could have worked with the company toward a resolution while the construction for most of it was being done.

Jason!07/02 11:46 AM

While I did intend to write “house” as opposed to “hours”, the classes I was referring to are classes of property (private residence vs. commercial investment), as opposed to classes of property owners. I think there’s a very valid difference between the two.

I don’t think any of us are privy to the numbers that were bandied about before the city decided to go the condemnation route, so any speculation on if Simpson was going to sell at all is just that. Some folks have no price, free market or no.

But clearly, you and I are going to disagree on what the solution to that matter is.

GB07/02 02:47 PM

“One Raleigh soccer mom commented…“

This is just shitty writing. Is that her official title, or were you basing this off appearance? I’m sure she has a name, but it’s easier to make assumptions.

Funny, can’t stereotype the people in “The Slammer”, but you could jump the gun on this lady, by God.

Jason!07/02 02:57 PM

You did read the “parody” part, right, GB?

Al07/02 03:20 PM

What is wrong with the neon lights the lawyer refers to? Why can’t we have neon lights? Is this Cary?

Rusty07/02 03:57 PM

This is a nice counterpoint to the Lafayette article. Too bad, I was looking forward to the mini-bellagio fountain.

viridari07/02 04:03 PM

Given the city’s inability to properly manage it’s primary drinking water source, I’m glad to see the fountain axed. Now if we could just get Falls Lake to be managed as a natural resource instead of a public utility, we might have a better future.

Travis07/02 04:22 PM

Tear the whole BOA building down. What a waste of space.

Dan R07/02 04:23 PM

By the time this thing is done there won’t be anything left-in typical Raleigh fashion.

Aaron07/02 06:23 PM

GOOD. This is government in action. This Simpson guy has slacked off and pushed OUR CITY’S PLAZA plan to the breaking point, and this is exactly what he gets for it. He held our city hostage, or at least the plaza. As much as I love Atlanta, but this guy needs to pack it up and move on.

Wonder how his day went today ; )

Michael07/02 06:36 PM

Fountains are a sign of civilization and this town is sorely lacking them. However restraint is also a sign of civilization, so Bellagio or anywhere in Las Vegas probably isn’t the best reference for design. I think that’s the problem with a lot of Raleigh’s new growth. There’s so much of a mad rush to get a brand new city built immediately that grace and logic are being left in the dust.

Also, I’m pretty sure we already have hookers anyway.

Nate07/02 06:43 PM

“I’m pretty sure we already have hookers anyway”

Something you want to tell us…?

Michael07/03 02:05 PM

City’s have hookers. That’s all.

Michael07/03 02:06 PM

Rather, cities have hookers. That’s all.

MikeB07/03 04:38 PM

“Tear the whole BOA building down. What a waste of space.“

wtf?

gemo07/03 06:40 PM

I love how everyone who writes for this site is snarky and dismissive of anyone who dares try to stand up for the concept of property rights.

Oh I forgot, you are mostly architects, carry on.

That sense of self-superiority doesn’t wear out once you leave design school does it?

go go07/03 06:52 PM

While I like the project tremendously and believe it will certainly increase the value of the BOA property IMO using Eminent Domain for *culture* is pushing that envelope.

I also find it ironic that a company that came to Raleigh’s rescue when the street was closed is now expected to come through again when we wish to fix our mistakes.

Betsy07/04 01:05 AM

Just a legal perspective, since the concept of property rights is being bandied about: eminent domain is simply the ability of the public polity to acquire private property for public use, and it has been part of English law since time immemorial.

Whether the property acquired is a residence vs. a commercial property isn’t relevant to eminent domain from a legal analysis. Whether the use of the property is for “culture” is also irrelevant.

The relevant inquiry is whether the use of the acquired property is a public one.

As for property rights, a required component of eminent domain is just compensation.

Of course, there is a whole huge body of law on the topic of what constitutes public use, and what constitutes just compensation. We could be here for years.

But Raleigh is perfectly within its rights to acquire property by eminent domain for a public plaza. The free-market analysis that viridari provides (offer enough to tempt the seller) would be appropriate if the transaction were between private actors. But that’s never been the function of eminent domain, which is a governmental (public) power.

go go07/04 10:02 AM

I appreciate the clarification.

While I don’t question the legal rights to acquire property by eminent domain for a public plaza I did mean to question the moral rights.

Again - I like the project - I would just wish for a less hostile acquisition.

viridari07/04 12:52 PM

Government can’t handle the responsibility that goes with the power of eminent domain. It’s time that those powers were severely curtailed. I met with NC gubernatorial candidate Michael Munger in downtown Raleigh last night. His opinions on private property rights are a major element of his campaign for governor and he sounds much different from the other two candidates.

brian_M07/04 02:29 PM

Ohhhhhhh, it all makes sense now. All these comments on newraleigh, viridari…I was thinking you were sounding shrill, but you’re just a lil ol Libertarian!

brian_M07/04 02:36 PM

Er, big giant Libertarian.

freshsqueze07/04 03:07 PM

I agree with viridari though, we should just get rid of the government altogether.

viridari07/04 06:04 PM

I am a little-“L” libertarian, yes. Not a big-“L” Libertarian. You almost say that like it’s a bad thing, brian_M.

brian_M07/04 06:35 PM

It is what it is, I was pretty much kidding around.

HelenTart07/05 10:41 PM

Hey…Doesn’t anyone remember that whole section used to a public road (Lenoir Street)—the 2 towers, the plaza area, all of that. It was bad enough they sold (I hope they sold it.) public land to begin with.

Seems like the city ought to be able to reclaim at least the part that hasn’t been built on.

I was just a struggling college student back then and didn’t realize that this city was going to become so important to me. I wasn’t paying much attention so I’m not sure what the deal was to begin with. I just remember trying to drive across downtown and being faced with a massive building where the road used to be.

Any Old Raleigh folks out there know how that happened?

Christopher Triplett09/04 11:19 AM

I am disgusted that plaza construction is continuing with the same RIDICULOUSLY UGLY design with ABSOLUTELY NO connection to Raleigh.

WTF. I can’t think of a better time to use that.

Welcome to New Raleigh. We welcome your participation in the ongoing discussion. Before posting we ask that you read our Comment Policy and we invite you to register with our site. If you want to keep up with the news on our blog, subscribe to the RSS feed or get emailed every time we post.

Mark Wednesday, July 02, 2008