Author: Mary Newsom

Urban wildlife: friend or foe? Plus, TOD sans T?

This week colleague John Chesser is vacationing so I’m doing the daily news feed for our two online publications, PlanCharlotte.org and the UNC Charlotte Urban Institute’s homepage. It’s a fun part of the job – although somewhat relentless, like owning a dairy farm with cows that have to be milked every day, regardless.

Barred owl, urban wildlife. Photo: Liz Odum

But when you do the news feed you find dozens of interesting articles. John kept finding them and sending links around for us, in-house. So we created a special feed from him on the PlanCharlotte.org homepage, called Chesser’s Choices:

Today, though, you get my picks at interesting articles: 
Valuing Urban Wildlife: Critical Partners in the Urban System or Scary, Disgusting Nuisances? A Columbia University scientist discusses the differing attitudes the public has toward nature in the city. Cute mammals elicit one reaction. Yucky insects? Not so much. As one of the article’s headlines  puts it: “Who would want to make a corridor for bees?” 
Dead malls turned into data center? This article from TheAtlanticCities.com tells how a dying downtown shopping mall in downtown Buffalo (one described as a “superblock eyesore”) and one that appears to be not completely dead but “mostly dead” is bringing in rent by offering vacant retail spaces for a data storage center. (I would not recommend this for Charlotte’s completely dead Eastland Mall.) 

Some wildlife (cicada) elicits “yuck.” Photo: Crystal Cockman
Do people who live in transit-oriented development drive less? Yes, but not for the reasons you think.  People living in TOD neighborhoods do, in fact, drive less. The mass transit is not the reason. A study “Does TOD Need the T?”  from Daniel G. Chatman of the University of California-Berkeley looked concludes that even without mass transit, people in TOD neighborhoods drive less. An article in the MinnPost reported: 
What he concluded from all this was that it wasn’t so much the availability of transit that made people use cars less, but density itself. Higher density means “lower on- and off-street parking availability, better bus service and more jobs, stores and people within walking distance.” 
OK, putting on my pundit hat for a minute: A question for Charlotte, where traffic congestion continues to be a huge public concern, might be: Why not start requiring more in-town development to follow TOD principles? Today, the city’s conventional, suburban-form development standards permeate its zoning ordinance. Developers who want to build TOD must pay, in time and money, for a rezoning. Otherwise, in many cases the standards that apply reflect planning values circa 1970. The city planning department has been engaged in an almost-year-long process to see whether its 20-year-old zoning ordinance needs an update.  I could have saved the city some money. Yes, it needs an update!

Getting creative with Blue Line Extension design

This is about something that was not the big headline from the Charlotte City Council tonight.

The big news, of course, was that the council passed a new budget that raises the city’s property tax rate by a little more than 3 cents, from 43.7 cents per $100 assessed value to 46.86 cents, to pay for a huge bundle of building projects. Those projects include a cross-city bike/ped trail, renovating Bojangles Coliseum (the original 1950s Charlotte Coliseum on Independence Boulevard), building a new 911 call center, and so on. (Read more here. And here’s a link to the city’s budget department.)

But during the dinner meeting, the council heard a short presentation from a couple of planners about an idea to help the new light rail line look a little better than the first one, the Lynx Blue Line. “Some of the components of the Blue Line we wish that we could have done better,” Planning Director Debra Campbell said. So for the Blue Line Extension, city planners and the Charlotte Area Transit System are looking to use some of the already budgeted art-in-transit funds to dress up a number of the walls, bridges and other light rail equipment whose design can range from boring to bleak.

Example of a standard wall finish (taken from tonight’s slide presentation) is above, right.

Now, however, designs have been drawn for concrete for walls that is molded with a flowered pattern. Here’s an example of a typical wall, and then the one CATS and the city hope to build, instead. (All images courtesy of the City of Charlotte.)

And the nicer way to build a wall:

Here’s a rendering of how some of the more artistically designed walls might look:

The light rail bridge that will be built over Harris Boulevard near UNC Charlotte could have an artistic railing, with a pitcher plant design on the piers:

And, for about the 200th time, council member Andy Dulin complained about the gray and orange color scheme on the bridges along the already built Lynx light rail line. Those colors were chosen by artists, he said, and he thinks they are unattractive.  I don’t always agree with Dulin but he is spot on in this assessment. The color that was supposed to conjure the red clay soil of the region instead conjures a Home Depot sign. The blue-gray of the Southern sky is more like battleship gray.

The planners assured Dulin that orange and gray would not be used.

Streetcar wins key council vote

Amid poetry, passion and multiple standing ovations, the Charlotte City Council voted 7-4 Tuesday to move ahead with applying for a federal grant to extend the Charlotte streetcar route another 2.5 miles.

It was one of the best evenings of political theater I’ve watched in recent years. At-large council members Beth Pickering and later Patrick Cannon drew sustained applause from a street-car loving audience when Pickering and then Cannon announced in support of the proposal. Both had voted a year ago against including the streetcar expansion project in the city’s long-range capital program.

But new City Manager Ron Carlee and his staff came back with a different proposal, which wouldn’t put the streetcar into the city’s capital program, and so wouldn’t use property taxes to fund it.

In an election year, with Cannon already an announced mayoral candidate, the many passionate audience members from East and West Charlotte who spoke in favor of the streetcar might have had an effect. (Mattie Marshall quoted Langston Hughes: “What happens to a dream deferred?”)

It’s worth noting that Pickering, a Democrat, won her council seat in 2011 as a newcomer to local politics, coming in fourth for four at-large seats in a heavy Democratic turnout spurred by Mayor Anthony Foxx’s re-election. For a Democrat without huge name recognition to anger the heavily Democratic West Charlotte AND the Democratic-leaning East Charlotte neighborhoods could be a huge political problem.

“All things considered, my No. 1 priority is to revitalize the East and West sides,” Pickering said, as she announced her support. Because only one vote change was needed to switch last year’s 6-5 vote against, her announcement meant the streetcar proposal would pass.

Amid sustained applause, the as-of-late seldom seen mayor walked into the chamber. Foxx, nominated to be U.S. Transportation secretary, has taken a low-profile role in recent weeks. (Question to ponder: Would he have joined the meeting if the streetcar vote were going the other way?)

Then Mayor Pro Tem Patrick Cannon spoke at length about how his concerns last year had been dealt with, and that he would support the streetcar proposal as well.

Important note: The vote Tuesday night does not assure that the 2.5-mile streetcar extension will be built. It was a vote to apply for a federal grant and to use certain unspent city funds as a local match. If the Federal Transit Administration doesn’t award the grant, then it’s back to the drawing board.

Other, slightly less important note: The “streetcar starter project” – a 1.5-mile length along Elizabeth Avenue and East Trade Street – is already under construction. The ultimate streetcar plan would be 10 miles and extend from Beatties Ford Road north of I-85 through uptown and then east to the site of the now-defunct Eastland Mall. The vote Tuesday was to build it from the uptown Transportation Center to just west of Johnson C. Smith University, and east from Presbyterian Hospital (a.k.a. Novant) almost to Central Avenue.

Re Eastland – City Council just voted 10-1 to demolish it. The city owns it, is trying to sell it to developers (two are interested) and neither wants the building. And so passeth the regional shopping mall from the world. At least, from that part of the world.

Streetcar, trolley or light rail?

How many times do you hear people say they love the light rail line in Charlotte but they don’t want a trolley. By which they mean a streetcar. If you know much about transit systems, that sentence may strike you as nonsense. A streetcar does not equal a trolley, although some streetcars may be trolleys. Trolleys typically run in the street, but not always.

Terminology is obscuring the public debate.

I’m sitting at Charlotte City Council meeting awaiting their votes on a couple of items: Whether to apply for a federal grant to extend the already-begun 1.5-mile streetcar project, and whether to spend almost $900,000 to demolish the now-city-owned Eastland Mall, a defunct regional shopping mall on Charlotte’ East Side.

So I took advantage of the attendance of Ron Tober, former CEO of the Charlotte Area Transit System, former executive director of the nonprofit group Charlotte Trolley Inc., and current consultant with Parsons Brinckerhoff. He has worked on transit systems all over the country, from heavy rail (which does NOT mean intercity passenger rail; it means it has a third rail, which is electrified, as in subways, and deadly to touch, as in “Social Security is the third rail of American politics”), to light rail to commuter rail to streetcars to trolleys.

1. What is a “trolley”? 
Tober: The term trolley is used for a historic (or faux historic) car that runs on rails and is fed by an overhead electric wire.

2. Are streetcars and trolleys the same?
Tober: Not if they use modern cars. Trolleys can run in the street or on dedicated tracks.
In other words, streetcar systems such as Portland’s or Seattle’s are fed by overhead electric wires, but aren’t “trolley” systems as the term is generally used in the transit-building world.

3. If the Lynx used old-timey-looking cars, would it then be a trolley?
Tober: Yes.

So there you are. To say Charlotte’s proposed streetcars would “waddle” down the street is true only if the cars are unstable. Which the Federal Transit Administration won’t allow.

To save money, for the early 1.5-mile streetcar starter project now under construction, the city plans to use the faux historic streetcars purchased originally to run on the Lynx tracks, part of the now-comatose Charlotte Trolley nonprofit group’s pre-Lynx-line project that ran a historic and then the faux-historic cars along what’s now the Lynx rails.

So you will see historic-ish cars running on overhead electric wires, along Elizabeth Avenue and East Trade Street. That will be both a streetcar and a trolley.

But when the envisioned modern cars arrive for the envisioned streetcar project — whenever or if that happens — it won’t be a “trolley” line any more. It will be a modern streetcar.

New city manager, new streetcar plan?

Will a new name, a new tie-in to the county’s overall transit plan, and a new funding scheme using no property tax money mean a new outcome that puts an expanded streetcar project into the “yes” column with the Charlotte City Council? (see my article  at PlanCharlotte.org).

(Other news coverage from Erik Spanberg of the Charlotte Business Journal is here, and from the Charlotte Observer’s Steve Harrison  here. For those of you who don’t get the print edition, Harrison’s article was splashed in a major way atop the front page.)

Among the many questions yet to be answered:

Changing minds? Will any of the six council members who last year opposed the streetcar change their minds, now that it’s being paid for without property taxes and will, presumably, have the blessing of the Metropolitan Transit Commission? Council member Patrick Cannon, who is expected to run for mayor, told me those two things make it easier for him to support the streetcar.  Note, however, he did not give an unequivocal “Yes, I’ll support it.”

Thumb on scale at USDOT? Would having Mayor Anthony Foxx running the U.S. Department of Transportation (he’s been nominated but not yet confirmed) increase the chances of the streetcar winning federal transit funding, from either the New Starts or the Small Starts pots of funds?

New name? As new (since April 1) City Manager Ron Carlee told the council Monday night, “The streetcar is not a toy….” By renaming it the CityLynx Gold Line the city hopes to make the point that it’s just one part of the larger transit system strategy. Memo to city: The new name is TOO LONG.

Carlee, city staff, and the CEO of the Charlotte Area Transit System, Carolyn Flowers, teamed to give a presentation Monday night at the council’s dinner meeting, signaling a new approach to the controversial streetcar proposal. Last June, the council’s disagreements over the streetcar helped scuttle a larger proposal for a five-year capital projects plan.

Carlee said he thought the streetcar expansion project – adding 2.5 miles to an already-funded 1.5-mile streetcar “starter” project – would compete well for federal funding from the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Old Charlotte, meet New Charlotte

Old Charlotte met new Charlotte Thursday night. And in this case, “old” doesn’t necessarily refer to people’s ages.

Thursday night, I sat in on WFAE’s latest public conversation, this one on “One Charlotte or Many? A Neighborhood Perspective.“

Among the panelists was Tim Timmerman, a south Charlotte resident and founder of a group called South Mecklenburg Alliance for Responsible Taxpayers (SMART). He’s of the opinion that south Charlotte – the wedge-shaped pie slice with the city’s least crime, highest incomes, highest property values, highest education levels, etc. – is not getting its share of city resources while its property owners pay the lion’s share in property taxes. His part of the city would end up paying for a streetcar nobody wants, he said, and he’s tired of so much city money going to center city. South Charlotte has no voice, he said.

The other panelists – Diane Langevin, president of the Winterfield Neighborhood Association in east Charlotte, Vee Veca Torrence, president of the Thomasboro Neighborhood Association in west Charlotte, and City Manager Ron Carlee, only three weeks into the job – didn’t loudly denounce Timmerman.

But the audience sure did. Several audience members drew applause when they said Timmerman was being divisive. We are one city, they said. Stop being adversarial. We need a strong downtown and strong neighborhoods. We need not only a streetcar but a “spider web” of transit connections throughout the city. Two who drew applause were long-time Charlotte residents, one in her late 60s and a Charlotte native, the other a man who said he, too, lived in “the wedge,” yet he was delighted the city had spent time and attention on uptown. He recalled uptown Charlotte in the 1970s. It was dead, he said, and so much livelier now.

Several 20- and 30-something audience members rose to describe how much they value living in or near uptown and being able to walk and bicycle around the city. They urged better bicycle amenities. One young man said he had moved from Buffalo to Pineville and that he came to Charlotte because it had a transit line (and less snow). He’s looking to move closer to uptown. They talked about living in Villa Heights, Grier Heights, Echo Hills and Shamrock Gardens. Note: Those particular speakers were white, and the first two neighborhoods have been predominantly black for decades.

They don’t want to live in suburban south Charlotte, they said. “I would consider that a step down,” said one.

To a longtime Charlotte resident, this is an amazing sea change. For years, opinions such as Timmerman’s dominated the city’s discourse. And those neighborhoods of little houses and even less  cachet were where you lived until you could afford a new subdivision in south Charlotte.

Obviously, it’s not as though south Charlotte today lacks for people who want to live there. But the enthusiasm of the crowd for living as close to uptown as they could afford was inspiring. They want to live in “the city.” They want to bicycle and walk and take transit. This is a whole new interest group being added to the city conversation, alongside voices like Timmerman’s.

This is not the Charlotte I moved to 30-some years ago. And that, I think, is a wonderful thing.  
 

Which mayors weighed in on airport issue?

More regional voices are diving into the issue of who should control the Charlotte/Douglas International Airport.  This morning’s Charlotte Observer has an article from Jim Morrill, “Mayors urge delay on airport bill.” 

The article quotes Miles Atkins of Mooresville saying a dozen mayors at a regular meeting last week of a group called the Regional Conference of Mayors Central Carolinas Advisory Board

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/04/25/4003485/mayors-urge-delay-on-airport-bill.html#storylink=cpy

discussed the issue with Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx.

It also quotes Matthews Mayor Jim Taylor as concerned that the airport bill is another example “of those in Raleigh trying to whittle away at local control.

“We’re just asking them … to hold off making a decision so there is additional time to investigate all the ramifications with all parties at the table,” Taylor said. “We keep hearing they (Charlotte) have done something wrong, but we don’t know any details.

“We want to know specifically what is driving the need for this legislation. We haven’t gotten a satisfactory answer.”

The sponsors of the bill, N.C. Sen. Bob Rucho and N.C. Rep. Bill Brawley, are also from Matthews.

According to Morrill, the mayors who signed a letter to N.C. House Speaker Thom Tillis, R-Mecklenburg, urging delay on the bill were: Atkins of Mooresville, Taylor of Matthews, plus:

  • Belmont Mayor Richard Boyce
  • Spencer Mayor Jody Everhart
  • Waxhaw Mayor Daune Gardner
  • Statesville Mayor Costi Kutteh 

The issue has created discussion throughout the Charlotte region about regional cooperation. To read more:
Regional cooperation at risk? 
Threatened revote on bypass didn’t happen
 and, from the Observer: 
Emotions high over airport authority push

Threatened revote on bypass didn’t happen

While I was heading out of town last week, the threatened move by Charlotte, planned for Wednesday night, to revisit a vote of support for the Monroe Bypass did not take place.

Robert Cook, secretary to the transportation planning group formerly known as MUMPO (see “MUMPO no more“) reports that, indeed, Charlotte City Council member Michael Barnes told the group that he did not intend to raise the Monroe Bypass issue at the meeting. 

Here’s the background on the issue: “Charlotte council, smarting over airport resolutions, threatens Monroe Bypass.”

And here’s the Sunday article from The Charlotte Observer’s Jim Morrill, “Emotions high over airport authority push.”  He was at the legislative building on Wednesday as city officials and legislators were discussing whether this vote – which was to have been symbolic only, not actually a vote on revoking funding for the project – should happen.

Meanwhile, for those of you following the political soap opera around Charlotte’s airport, the Airport Advisory Committee has been asked to attend the 5 p.m. Charlotte City Council dinner meeting.

The council’s agenda packet includes a complete list of Airport Advisory Committee members, including who appointed them and when, and when their terms end. Want to see?  And here’s a link to download the full council agenda. The Airport Advisory Committee agenda item is on page 5 of the PDF document. And here’s the Observer’s take on the impetus for today’s meeting: Charlotte City Council to grill airport board over power struggle.

MUMPO no more

While reporting further on the Charlotte City Council vote Monday to seek a re-vote on a resolution supporting the Monroe Bypass I learned of a name change.

But first, it’s important to note the vote to be possibly revisited was on a resolution, not a measure directly affecting the project’s funding; I’ve updated the original blog, “Charlotte council, smarting over airport resolutions, threatens Monroe Bypass,” to clarify that.)

The Mecklenburg Union Metropolitan Planning Organization, known for years as MUMPO, has renamed itself the Charlotte Regional Transportation Planning Organization (CRTPO), says MUMPO (or CRTPO?) Secretary Robert Cook.

As I’ve opined in the past, since the 2010 census brought portions of Iredell and Lincoln counties into the jurisdiction of the MPO, I was hoping for MILUMPO. I have an odd fascination with the bizarre names of the regional transportation groups surrounding Charlotte, not to mention a continuing frustration that transportation planning in this huge metro region is fractured among so many groups: GUAMPO, CRMPO, GHMPO, RRRPO (the pirate?) and RFATS. What do those excellent acronyms stand for? Read it here: “No more MUMPO. Get ready for … MILUMPO?“

Charlotte council, smarting over airport resolutions, threatens Monroe Bypass

Charlotte City Council is threatening to withdraw its support for the proposed Monroe Bypass in a key, regional transportation planning group.  And one council member suggested the city should rethink its regional participation in other regional groups, including the Charlotte Regional Partnership.

Council members Monday night directed their representative to MUMPO (Mecklenburg Union Metropolitan Planning Agency) to seek a revote on a MUMPO resolution supporting the bypass. (Update Tuesday, 4/16: The vote at issue is a March 20 “Resolution to Support Prompt Action for the Construction of the Monroe Bypass.” It was not a vote on whether to fund the bypass. It has been in the Long Range Transportation Plan since 2002, MUMPO Secretary Robert Cook told me Tuesday afternoon. This paragraph has been edited to clarify that point.)

Why the switch? It’s all part of continuing anger (a more accurate word might be “livid”) among Charlotte council members over a bill in the legislature that would strip the city of its control of Charlotte/Douglas International Airport by creating a state-appointed regional authority and transfer the airport-owned property to the state. County commissioners in Union, Gaston, Lincoln and Iredell counties have passed resolutions supporting the bill. None of them talked with Charlotte city officials before taking those votes.  (See “Regional counties jump into airport fray, support regional board” and “Charlotte airport fight pits city against region.”)

Last week, council member David Howard told the Charlotte Observer: “It makes you not want to get involved in regional efforts at all.” Howard told the Observer he wondered whether Charlotte should continue to support the construction of the Garden Parkway and the Monroe Connector-Bypass – two toll roads proposed for Gaston and Union counties, whose boards voted in favor of the airport authority bill.

Howard is the Charlotte City Council representative to MUMPO and Monday he told council members that his vote to support the Monroe Bypass resolution came before the Union County vote in favor of taking Charlotte airport control away from Charlotte. Howard suggested that the council should direct its MUMPO representative to seek a MUMPO revote on the resolution. On a motion from council member Warren Cooksey, the council did just that, unanimously.

Because MUMPO votes are weighted according to population, Charlotte has 16 votes. All the other entities have a total of 22 votes. In other words, it’s fairly easy for Charlotte to carry a vote.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/04/12/3976877/charlotte-airport-fight-pits-city.html#storylink=cpy

The next MUMPO meeting is 7 p.m. Wednesday, and Howard can’t attend. Council member Michael Barnes will represent Charlotte at that meeting. Barnes said he would offer a motion Wednesday noting that Howard had sought direction from the full city council and the council had directed its MUMPO representative to seek a revote on the issue of support for the Monroe Bypass. The decision whether to have a revote would come Wednesday, and the actual revote would be a month later.

A few minutes before Howard brought up the Monroe Bypass, council member Andy Dulin asked city staff for information about how much money the city spends on regional groups, including the Centralina Council of Governments and the Charlotte Regional Partnership, a 16-county economic development agency. “If we talk about COG we got to talk about the Regional Partnership,” he said.

No council action was taken on that suggestion.