Opposition to new Apple campus emerges in North Carolina's Research Triangle
Apple's new campus in the North Carolina Research Triangle, considered a "done deal" months ago, remains uncertain, and a new report finds some opposition in the area to the potential project.
Apple, for much of the past year, has been seeking to find a spot for a large new corporate campus, with the Research Triangle in North Carolina emerging as a favorite. But a new report says some opposition has grown in academic and activist circles to Apple's presence in that region.
According to U.S. News and World Report, some in the region are skeptical that the arrival of a major new corporate campus is the best thing for the Research Triangle.
"It'll be terrible from a housing perspective. We have not planned ahead for that," Mai Thi Nyguen, a professor of city and regional planning at University of North Carolina, told U.S. News. Samuel Gunter, a housing advocate, argued that the region's housing market is already stretched by the last several years of growth, even before Apple enters the conversation. In Raleigh, the median home price has risen 50 percent in the last five years.
"All these new workers are going to need to go to school; they're going to need to go on the highway," Allan Freyer, of the North Carolina Justice Center, told the magazine. "It's not the worst problem to have. We want new jobs and big companies. The question is, are we well-positioned to provide the infrastructure and public services that we're going to need?"
Freyer went on to argue that if Apple arrives, it's important that the state meet the new demand by building schools.
Similar opposition has emerged in various cities considered by Amazon in their "HQ2" campaign, in which the e-commerce giant has pitted different locales against each other for the right to build a second headquarters.
The Research Triangle area of North Carolina, consisting of Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill, emerged in the spring as the favorite, with reports in early June that an announcement of a deal was "imminent."
But no such announcement ever came, and a report last weekend stated that Apple was continuing to eye the region but is concerned about some constitutional amendments under consideration in North Carolina. The state is weighing amendments on voter identification, as well as on efforts to take some appointment powers away from the state's governor and give it to the legislature.
Apple already operates a data center in the state, as well as solar farms and several Apple Stores. In 2016, Apple was one of several tech companies to assail North Carolina for its passage of a "bathroom bill," although the law was later amended.
Apple, for much of the past year, has been seeking to find a spot for a large new corporate campus, with the Research Triangle in North Carolina emerging as a favorite. But a new report says some opposition has grown in academic and activist circles to Apple's presence in that region.
According to U.S. News and World Report, some in the region are skeptical that the arrival of a major new corporate campus is the best thing for the Research Triangle.
"It'll be terrible from a housing perspective. We have not planned ahead for that," Mai Thi Nyguen, a professor of city and regional planning at University of North Carolina, told U.S. News. Samuel Gunter, a housing advocate, argued that the region's housing market is already stretched by the last several years of growth, even before Apple enters the conversation. In Raleigh, the median home price has risen 50 percent in the last five years.
"All these new workers are going to need to go to school; they're going to need to go on the highway," Allan Freyer, of the North Carolina Justice Center, told the magazine. "It's not the worst problem to have. We want new jobs and big companies. The question is, are we well-positioned to provide the infrastructure and public services that we're going to need?"
Freyer went on to argue that if Apple arrives, it's important that the state meet the new demand by building schools.
Similar opposition has emerged in various cities considered by Amazon in their "HQ2" campaign, in which the e-commerce giant has pitted different locales against each other for the right to build a second headquarters.
Weighing the triangle
While not as high-profile an effort as Amazon's campaign, Apple has made it clear at the start of 2018 that they're looking for a new location outside of California to build a significant presence.The Research Triangle area of North Carolina, consisting of Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill, emerged in the spring as the favorite, with reports in early June that an announcement of a deal was "imminent."
But no such announcement ever came, and a report last weekend stated that Apple was continuing to eye the region but is concerned about some constitutional amendments under consideration in North Carolina. The state is weighing amendments on voter identification, as well as on efforts to take some appointment powers away from the state's governor and give it to the legislature.
Apple already operates a data center in the state, as well as solar farms and several Apple Stores. In 2016, Apple was one of several tech companies to assail North Carolina for its passage of a "bathroom bill," although the law was later amended.
Comments
FYI, it's interesting the article says the median house price has increased by 50% over last 5 years but I can tell the price of a given house (not a median) has increased maybe 20% over that same period - I know because I live there and you can check Zillow as well. The RTP area has very affordable housing and does anyone really think Apple adding 5,000 jobs over a few years to a region of 2.1M people is a big problem? Keep in mind the brainiacs at UNC also wanted all of us out of the suburbs and back into the city because we were ruining the environment. Ever been to Raleigh and RTP, there are forests everywhere.
In any case, the quotes in the article don't sound like "opposition" so much as cautionary advice to the decision makers. "If Apple comes here, you'll need to invest in schools and other infrastructure and plan to approve more housing." That sounds reasonable to me.
edited to correct professor Nguyen's name.
Sorry this is pure media attention, these specialists (and I do not doubt their skills) have a way of getting their 5 minutes of attention. They probably need another research grant, such a shame they abuse the situation for their personal agenda.
The area currently cannot keep up with the influx of jobs and associated needs of all those people, and has made it harder for residents and local governments in the area. This has been an ongoing problem for several years. With Apple possibly adding 10-20K jobs and Amazon ~50K should they locate their HQ2 there (not to mention there are others adding locations and jobs at the same time), there needs to be adequate planning.
With the legislature giving out tax breaks for up to 30 years, where will the financing come from for the necessary infrastructure? Roads, transportation, schools, hospitals, etc. won't pay for itself. Especially since they killed light rail as an option, meaning there will be no Federal grant matching. Taxpayers are not keen on having their taxes raised to pay for infrastructure while these rich corps are being catered to and having their taxes lowered, resulting in higher costs all over the place.
Right, got you. Back to sleep everyone it was only a false alarm.
If just 20% of the 5000 employees have 1.5 school-aged kids, that's 1500 kids who have to be accommodated. Depending upon the school size, that can mean 3 to 5 schools. And if 80% of the employees are new to the area, that's 4000 housing units that would be needed. That's the equivalent of around 5 23-story large apartment buildings.
And if people around you sell their houses to take advantage of high prices caused by the sudden high demand, chances are that your property taxes rise substantially as your property is re-assessed. Meanwhile, you're still in the same house with the same job earning the same money. So how do you pay those increased taxes?
The downside is that if a locale rejects every large company because of this, it can reduce growth, taxes, employment rates, etc.
One away around the issues is to extract a promise from the new company that X% of the employees will be hired locally.