...in a very unusual way, according to this nutjob planner as reported by the Independent Weekly: http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=403156
My cynical thoughts in a nutshell:
* At first I thought this article was parody... but this guy is actually serious? He's actually convinced at least one person that he will single-handedly redesign and revive a capital's downtown? Dear God, they can't even pave Wade Avenue.
* So the land will come from private companies that will voluntarily "donate" potentially hot property? Are people really giving away valuable land in a recession? What's the over/under on how many kickback scandals result from this "donation," and where can I place that bet? Free money! If anything, this guy really screwed himself by laying out all of his plans in the news and adding a revenue estimate. The higher he estimates the value of the project, the less likely it is for the land to be donated. Would you give something away for free that will be the primary asset in a billion-dollar investment? I sure as hell wouldn't. And it's not like any tax credit would make giving it away worthwhile since that credit won't remotely approach the estimated value of the project - otherwise, the financial "plan" collapses entirely. Good thing these sellers aren't greedy businessmen looking for $$$ in a recession. Oh, wait...
* Some of these things aren't even consistent within the plan itself. He wants to increase density, yet put story limits on building heights? How does having more buildings as opposed to fewer ones help density?
* I'm glad he's planning massive investment in bus stations ("Grand Central Station" of Raleigh? bahahaha, OK). The bus stations I've been to in Raleigh are certainly where people want to be. Mostly I see people trying not to make eye contact and walking on the far side of the street. But I guess we've been sitting on a gold mine this whole time, and Raleigh needs more of that.
* More bicyclists... great. Now bicyclists will actually have priority instead of just acting like they do. Can't wait for even more unlit bikes rolling through stop signs and expecting every other vehicle on the road to move out of the way for them because, hey, they're on a bike! Nevermind that we built an extensive greenway system for this very purpose. But let's keep subsidizing behavior that is not only hazardous and totally unregulated but a significant inconvenience to everyone else on the road. Smart growth indeed. That scratching sound you hear is Charles Darwin desperately thrashing inside his coffin.
* ANOTHER downtown campus? Again, I am unclear how having two buildings for the same purpose helps the density issue. I'm as big a proponent for community/technical schools as you will find, but even I can recognize that we don't need more of them. On a per capita basis, we have one of the most development secondary school systems in the country, yet unemployment is 10% (actual unemployment is of course significantly higher). How can anyone think this state needs more schools? Can we start investing in things that will actually yield a return?
* A new African-American cultural center... is something wrong with the old one? That reminds me - I'm sure Raleigh's black population has had a strong voice in all of these developments (yes, I realize that is a product of their own fault as much as anyone's). You can see this dialogue coming, can't you? "Good news, guys! We've finally gentrified downtown enough that we can raise rents and supplant all of you outside the city limits, thus perpetuating the problem we claimed to solve! But don't worry about the upheaval... we built you a cultural center!"
* A "Chautauqua" center for culture and entertainment... well, that may be the single most vague, ambiguous thing I've ever read. Who couldn't support a proposition as strong as that one? By the way, does no but me find it a bit odd that a city which admits to having no culture is busy planning so many cultural centers?
* "We just need to think bigger"... really? Are you sure that's not the exact same mantra which got us in this unenviable position in the first place? Apparently spending a ton of money without regard to credit, solvency, oversight, or accountability is both the cause of AND solution for our problems. I guess thinking "smarter" as opposed to "bigger" is asking too much. 'Unsustainable - the new sustainable!'
* On that note, I'm assuming this article has been truncated, because I didn't see a whole lot of info on how these massive redevelopments will actually, you know, be funded. Who's paying for this? And where is that money coming from? Will the ones paying the most for these changes be the ones who receive the most benefit? (Hint: no.) Funny how these pesky details can get in the way of a good idea. "Let's build a bunch of stuff we really don't need and pass the check" seems to be a lot like the real estate market in 2005, don't you think? Why is it acceptable when public funds are at issue instead of private ones? And why do I seem to be the only one asking these questions?
* I love Europe about as much as I hate our country's (well, really our towns') obsession with being like Europe. There's a reason people choose to visit Europe but not live there, yet the push is to make our cities and towns as "liveable" as Europe. Why are we looking to equally bankrupt countries for ideas on economic development? I must have missed the day in economics class where they talked about Spain being an economic superpower instead of the US. This is a case of grass being greener on the other side, and no one is ready to admit that Europe has just as many problems as we do, if not more. Pay no mind to the dirty streets, rampant racism, burdensome taxes, exploding consumer price index, lower standard of living, fewer opportunities, and socialized everything - they have bike lanes!!!
* A new RBC Center might be the worst of these ideas, and that's saying a lot. I guess I didn't realize this city needed a new arena. I hate U2, but if a band of their stature is willing to play at the RBC, what exactly is the benefit of building a bigger place? Do they think The Beatles will reunite to play there or what? Or is it that more people want to watch ncsu basketball? But all seriousness... this is exactly why people make fun of Raleigh and its "little sister" syndrome. It wants to be like Charlotte, with its rail line and new stadium (the latter of which has been a complete failure thus far)... it wants to be like Madrid with a vibrant downtown (but without the litter and abject poverty, of course)... it wants to be like New York with a Grand Central Station... but whatever it is, it doesn't want to be like Raleigh. That is the clearest mark of an inferiority complex. To this end, the last bit in the article is the most telling - Raleigh has no culture, and like any person with low confidence in itself, it envisions itself as the best of everything else, yet failing to realize that culture, like esteem, can only be built from within and not copied. Every one of those places became unique through their own ideas and development, not through emulation. Unfortunately, thinking freely and critically appears to be beyond the intellectual horizon of our politicians, to say nothing of those of us who elect them.