I don’t think it implies that, though? The key word here is “publicly funded improvements”; doesn’t pre-construction work, initial structures etc. fall under Hoffman’s scope, making it a private facility (which sound like they’re farther ahead in the process, and might reasonably have some documents ready)? If so, doesn’t that need to come first before GoTriangle can do its public infrastructure improvements? Hoffman is the one leasing development/land/air rights from GoTriangle, after all, so I thought GoTriangle’s designs aren’t strictly necessary yet.
2 Likes
Ticktock tick-tock time is running out tick-tock
1 Like
doesn’t pre-construction work, initial structures etc. fall under Hoffman’s scope, making it a private facility
I think they’re both under Hoffman’s scope? Unless there’s a different developer GoTriangle is releasing the funds to that I’m not aware of. I’d imagine both public and privately-funded components are being designed by Perkins Eastman of the Hoffman team; GoTriangle will just be intimately involved for the bus component. Maybe I’m misunderstanding your question here though
(which sound like they’re farther ahead in the process, and might reasonably have some documents ready)?
That’s a good point. The memo specifically was referring to the public component; the private could be further along. My friend’s working on this; just texted him to see what he says 
If so, doesn’t that need to come first before GoTriangle can do its public infrastructure improvements?
Not necessarily. It would make sense for them to advance the tower to a level where there’s a skeleton to work with – massing, structural grid, access, etc. would’ve been set by DDs, which should be enough to begin design on the upfit for the public component. It might even be advantageous to develop them somewhat simultaneously so that the mechanical needs of the public component can be considered more realistically as the engineers develop the tower. I’ve even been on fast-tracked projects where we had multiple phases going at the same time, way earlier than was practical. Something major changes in one; you have to scramble to track the impact through all the project components. It can be really chaotic and frustrating, but accelerated schedules are becoming more and more common.
7 Likes
Thanks! Yeah no, I think you answered my question, though indirectly.
To @Boltman’s point, it’s hard to trust a big, complicated project like this or to hold it accountable when you struggle to tell apart what each stakeholder’s working on. As long as the Joint Development Agreement can be approved by the FTA and the site work actually begins next month, I guess it’s ~fine~ in the end? Maybe?
True, and that’s what I thought they were doing from the beginning. I don’t think the timeline of project development was very clear in the BUILD grant application, though (and to be honest, I should’ve expected the actual project development Gantt chart to look way more complicated…).
1 Like
The skepticism is valid, but I’m optimistic because there’s a hard deadline to begin work. I’ve only worked on one public/private partnership, which was even more complicated than this one, but it was a hard, non-negotiable deadline that held it accountable.
You may be familiar with this.
Currently underway in Chapel Hill. Developer is renovating an office building attached to an undersized 60s-era parking deck. The town owns another parking deck across the street. The developer proposes a land swap with the town to exchange the two parking decks, and pursues a cooperative agreement to demo the city-owned deck and replace it with a lab building bringing 800 jobs. The town would demo the parking deck currently owned by the developer and replace it with a larger one. Meanwhile, they would lease space from the developer for parking. Both the future lab building and the existing office building that was being renovated would rely on the new deck for parking, which needed to be completed before the lab building could open. The lab building – the final phase of the project – had to begin construction in time to take advantage of opportunity zone tax benefits, which were expiring in two years, or else the entire project became infeasible. Looks like they’re pulling it off, but boy was this a crazy time for our PMs coordinating all three components at the same time.
2 Likes
A complicating factor is that the city has not given site plan approval for the project yet. I’m not sure how much you can do until the site plan is approved. Demo probably, but not much else.
1 Like
And I think that’s fine. Demolition counts as construction activity, and paying for that by the end of April keeps GoTriangle eligible for using the money it won.
@elevatoroperator that’s awesome that you got to work on the Rosemary project! Though… I’m so sorry y’all had to deal with all the NIMBY complaints about the shadows, parking spaces, and building aesthetics. That whole process really makes you grateful for how RUSbus hasn’t gotten grilled too hard.
No but Unión station if I’m correct was built to accommodate light rail, commuter trains among others. But after this public-private partnership the city or transit organization take over.
That’s not true. Earlier concepts for RUS did involve light rail, but that got thrown out when Raleigh was advised against light rail in preparing for its transit tax referendum. By 2013, concept sketches and site plans for RUS no longer included anything related to light rail.
11 Likes
Mmm got ya, still pro-light rail but I get it. If I was reading it was a safety complaint that killed the light rail right?
Raleigh’s light rail project was scrapped in the Alternatives Analysis stage, which means they couldn’t show that light rail is the better choice for mass transit over BRT.
You're probably thinking of Durham's light rail attempt, which was a separate thing. (click me)
That failure was from a lot of reasons, but it was mainly a combination of:
-
The General Assembly refusing to fund its share of the project despite federal requirements, and;
-
GoTriangle pissing off lots of powerful stakeholders (Duke, the owners of WRAL, plaintiffs of an eminent domain lawsuit etc.) by trying to ram its own agenda through despite legit objections.
Duke claims that complaints about hospital and equipment safety are why they were against light rail, but it’s obviously in bad faith. After all, they announced them years after GoTriangle’s environmental study (the whole point of them is to talk about issues like these), and Duke’s then-new president appointed one of the school’s most notoriously racist vice presidents to lead their discussions with GoTriangle.
Just to be clear: I’m not coming at this as a pro/anti-light rail thing. I just want fast, frequent, convenient, and effective ways to get around key parts of the Triangle without a car. And right now, studies and historical experience have shown that there’s other modalities that just make much more sense to use around here. You’ll see me be an enthusiastic advocate for light rail in Raleigh if (when?) the day comes when someone can put together a case that light rail does make more sense in some specific corridor -but today is just not that day.
13 Likes
It looks like this passed it’s site plan review today. 
31 Likes
Saw that they closed off this side off the old warehouse building now. You all think they’re kicking off this project soon? They have some heavy machinery staged outside the building.
26 Likes
Utilities prep prior to construction
2 Likes
They have a street closure permit to remove a gas line. They have a grading permit ready to be issued. And, they have submitted for the demolition permit.
27 Likes
the-office-oh-my-god-its-happening.gif
ready, set…. dig!
28 Likes
Oh, I got way too happy way too soon. They are announcing that the groundbreaking is slated for spring 2023. 
13 Likes
Still (bus station) slated for 2025 completion at least. Commercial tower spring 2026 according to WRAL.
15 Likes
Oh wow, why was I under the impression this would start building up this year…?
2 Likes