Envisioning streetcar stops

What should the stops look like for the city’s proposed streetcar project? You can weigh in next Thursday, Feb. 18, 6-8 p.m., at the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center in Room 267.

A press release from the city and from the Charlotte Area Transportation System (CATS) quotes John Mryzgod, civil engineer with the city: “It is important we understand what the public would like to see because it gives us the tools to not only design a streetcar stop, but to design a stop that ties in with the fabric of the community.”

(Background: The CATS plan for transit for 2030 includes a streetcar. The city of Charlotte doesn’t want to wait that long so it is going to try to build the streetcar without CATS funding. So far, it is working on planning and engineering but doesn’t have construction money. It is, though, applying for a federal grant to build a 1.5-mile segment of the proposed 10-mile project.)

I will add my two-cents’ worth here, instead of at the hearing:

• Why does a streetcar line need “stops” that must be “designed”? On other streetcar systems I’ve seen – most recently Toronto, but including Rome and New Orleans – you just got onto the streetcar in the street, as you would a bus. Obviously, thought must go into things such as where it stops, how to sell the tickets (or maybe just use machines that take money, as buses do?) and which stops will be busy enough so benches and shelter might be offered. Other than that, don’t spend money on anything more than an easily spotted sign and the same amenities you’d offer at a bus stop.

The stations on the Lynx Line were way, way over-designed, IMHO, and more reminiscent of subway (aka “heavy rail”) stops or commuter rail stations. Maybe CATS figured that in a city of transit newbies we’d need something prettier and more noticeable than just a spot to buy tickets and some shelter while we wait.

• That said, shade, shelter from the rain and a spot to sit would be welcome at the busier streetcar stops. So, too, would be system maps plus route and schedule information about the streetcar. The maps should show what major attractions are at each stop – the arena, the county courthouse, police station, Central Piedmont Community College, Presbyterian Hospital, Johnson C. Smith University, etc.

• And I will take this opportunity to lodge a gripe about something that’s bugged me for years about CATS bus stops, although to be fair I’ll note bus stops are much improved in recent years. But why not a shelter with a roof that shades you from the sun? Bus shelter roofs should be opaque, not tinted plastic. This is the South, for crying out loud. It gets mighty hot here. Shade is vital.
To learn more about the Charlotte Streetcar Project, please visit http://www.charlottefuture.com/ or try this link.

Without tax reform, is NC bond rating at risk?

State Treasurer Janet Cowell, speaking Wednesday night to the annual dinner for the Centralina (NOT Metrolina) Council of Governments, said something that perked up my ears considerably.
She said, in response to a question from Belmont Mayor Richard Boyce, asking what the role of the state treasurer is in comprehensive tax reform:

Cowell said that in talks with bond rating agencies N.C. officials were told that they want the state to reform its tax structure, so it’s more stable. Without reform, she said, we could be put on a watch list. Cowell says she told this to N.C. Senate Majority Leader Martin Nesbitt, D-Buncombe. “I don’t think we have the luxury of doing nothing,” she said.

Here’s why this should be of interest to more than just tax policy geeks (I plead guilty to being one). The state’s revenue system, which depends primarily on income taxes and sales taxes, was set up in the Depression. It doesn’t recognize the many economic changes that have taken place in the 80 years since then – the loss of manufacturing, the rise in the service economy, the explosion of online commerce (most of it untaxed). The sales tax is among the most volatile of taxes, fluctuating greatly when times are good, or bad. Income taxes are less volatile but still show big dips and surges depending on the economy’s strength. (Update: 4:45 PM – State Sen. Dan Clodfelter tells me that the problem in North Carolina is that income tax revenue is more volatile than sales tax. “The single most volatile, unpredictable, unreliable tax is the corporate income tax, and that fact has nothing to do with exemptions, loopholes, concessions, or anything of that ilk,” he e-mailed me. He’s a major mover pushing for tax reform and wants to do away with the corporate income tax.)

The state keeps going to those same buckets – sales taxes on goods, and income taxes. A tax reform proposal in the legislature would lower the general sales tax rate but extend the sale tax to some – not all – services. It would do other stuff, such as tinker with business privilege license taxes – which has alarmed the folks at the city of Charlotte, which gets about $16.6 million a year from that little revenue stream.

The upshot of all this is that many states have attempted comprehensive tax reform and few have succeeded. Every business with a loophole fights like mad to keep it. Because the reform would raise some taxes and lower others, some of the “I’m anti-tax” blowhards take up sloganeering against it on grounds that it raises taxes, carefully neglecting to mention that some taxes go down (like, say, the overall sales tax rate).

But for Cowell to weigh in with the specter of bond rating repercussions does imply that folks in the power offices in Raleigh are taking this reform effort seriously. Or at least, that they ought to.
(And if you’re still with me here, you are clearly a tax policy geek, too, in which case you’ll enjoy the latest State of the States 2010 report from the Pew Center on the States.)

Another road diet, this one for South Tryon

This is a street project I can love. The city wants to widen the sidewalks on South Tryon Street over I-277, plus create bike lanes. The picture above is an artist’s rendering of what it might look like, looking north toward the skyline. Note the lovely Charlotte Observer building at left, just over the bridge. Here’s what it looks like now. The idea is to make South Tryon Street between Stonewall Street (the corner where the Observer office and the Gantt Center sit) and Carson Boulevard (the street formerly known as Independence Boulevard until I-277 was born) more suitable for pedestrians and bicyclists. If you want to hear more, there’s a public meeting today at 5:30 p.m. at the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center, in room 280.

The city intends to start with a 90-demonstration project, starting March 15. They’ll temporarily restripe the lanes on the pavement and put up bollards. Tryon will go from four lanes to three – two northbound and one southbound – between Stonewall and Carson. “It’s going to require some signal phase tweaking” for the traffic light at Morehead and Tryon, says Jim Kimbler with the Charlotte Department of Transportation.

The goal is to turn the excessively wide four-lanes into three lanes with better sidewalks, especially over the bridge. Currently when you walk over the I-277 bridge you’re on a 5-foot back-of-curb sidewalk looking down on traffic zooming below. It is not pleasant. And because I work at that spot I can report that traffic on Tryon is usually sparse. Jay-walking is routine, and easy.

Why a demonstration project? The bridge is state-owned, as is South Tryon south of Morehead, so the N.C. DOT has veto power, and it wants to make sure that the changes won’t foul traffic or hurt the bridge. If the state agrees the “street diet” will work, then the city will move forward.

Tryon between Morehead and Carson isn’t as wide as the section over I-277. Kimbler said the sidewalks there won’t be widened right away, because the city hopes development in the near future will produce better sidewalks. Let us hope that is the case, or that the city will improve the sidewalks if no development ensues in a year or so. The photo here is what the sidewalk is like now. It is not a scene that makes your heart sing.

1977 Charlotte plan – Back to the future?

From the files of things I found looking up other things:

I was leafing through the dusty old reports my former colleague Tom Bradbury bequeathed, in hopes of finding when Park Road was four-laned, before writing our editorial opinion in the trees vs. sidewalk flap. (I shall note that from what I can tell, most readers prefer the trees.)

The stack of old reports even includes the 1960 Wilbur Smith and Associates “Charlotte Metropolitan Area: A Master Highway Transportation Plan.” Cool. Someday I’ll read it more thoroughly.

But it was in the 1977 Charlotte-Mecklenburg Thoroughfare Plan, prepared by H.J. “Herman” Hoose, transportation planning coordinator, and W.E. McIntyre, director of the Planning Commission, that I found some interesting recommendations.

They’re taken from the 1995 Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1975. You be the judge of how well Charlotte-Mecklenburg followed those 1975 recommendations (bold-face emphasis mine, in case you are missing the sarcasm):

• To meet the needs of a diverse population, plan for different types and densities of housing in all areas of the community through carefully controlled implementation procedures.
• Plan for all types of services, commercial, governmental and other needs, through carefully controlled implementation procedures to minimize the impact on the land. These to be provided in convenient proximity to residential communities.
• Plan for a more efficient transportation system; for a more equal balance between auto travel and mass transit opportunities.
• Plan for more parks and open spaces to enhance the visual and physical environment of the community.
• Plan for high visual quality of suburban growth with higher density uses located and designed to support mass transit.

Hmmm. About those parks: I heard once that the City of Charlotte went for something like 75 years without buying land for a single park. Not until city and county park departments were combined in the 1990s were any new parks created inside the city. A shout-out to those decades of City Council members throughout the 20th century whose legacies include a sadly park-poor city.

A quick bit of research in the Observer’s archives found this from a 1985 article by then-Observer reporter Mae Israel (who’s moved back to Charlotte after years at the Washington Post, for those of you who remember her). The piece is about 1985 city candidates’ support (or lack of it) for a 2005 plan.

“One policy in the 1995 Plan encouraged city council members to clip the spread of restaurants, car washes and convenience stores along busy streets by denying rezoning requests.
For the most part, they didn’t do it. Albemarle Road in east Charlotte, for instance, now is lined with commercial development and choked by traffic. … (Remember, this was written in 1985.)
“The plan’s centerpiece policy called for encouraging metropolitan service centers, or urban villages, to slow suburban sprawl. Concentrating public services, homes and businesses was expected to ease traffic congestion and strain on utilities.
“Politicians never directed city staffers to develop strategies for starting such centers, and the sprawl continued, mostly in southeast Charlotte. “

Of course, I can’t be too negative. After all, in 1994 (a short 19 years after the 1975 plan) Charlotte City Council adopted a “Centers and Corridors” concept – not an adopted plan, certainly nothing as specific as actual zoning standards. Since 2008, an effort to update that concept and create more specific policies has been ongoing on in the Planning Department. It hasn’t been adopted yet.

I think it takes a heap of patience to be a city planner here.

Revamp of transportation planning? (Or, toss the dwarfs?)

TRYON, N.C. – During council discussion about transportation, Mayor Anthony Foxx mentioned a key issue: Among the many challenges to finding federal funding for Charlotte-area transportation projects – streets, roads and mass transit alike – is that the feds are looking closely at how well a region is supporting regional transportation planning.

And the Charlotte region plans its transportation regionally about as well as I can dunk a basketball. Is there any other large metro region with more different “metropolitan planning organizations” – aka, the state-established way to plan transportation? Charlotte region transportation is split among 4 or 5 MPOs and two Rural Planning Organizations. Just one small example of the ridiculousity: The Lake Norman area is considered a Rural Planning Organization and not part of the Charlotte metro transportaton planning.

I’ve ranted about this previously. Small hope in the offing? At least the mayor and other transportation officials are talking about it. And MPOs must be reconstituted after every census. And NCDOT chief Gene Conti is actually paying attention to Charlotte. NCDOT now has a staffer with an office on the 8th floor of the Char-Meck Govt Center.

If you’d like to know a bit more about the unbelievable insanity of transportation planning in the greater Charlotte region, read this piece from early January – you have to go to the very end to read about what “sounds like a bizarre camaraderie of dwarfs: MUMPO, GUAMPO, CRMPO, GHMPO and RFATS (in the Disney version he’d be the chubby, clumsy one). Let us not forget LNRPO and RRRPO (the small but snarling pirate dwarf?).”

‘Differences of opinion’ on transit plans

TRYON, N.C. – After the lunch break at the City Council retreat (great blackberry cobbler! – and yes, the Observer journalists pay for their own lunch) talk has turned to transportation.

Hard to blog and take notes and listen simultaneously, but lotta talk about concern in North Meck and on the MTC about whether the North transit line should have been built ahead of the NE line and the streetcar. Of course, no MTC money is being used to build the city’s streetcar project, but, as City Manager Curt Walton said, at the recent Metropolitan Transit Commission meeting, city officials showed CATS data to prove that no CATS/MTC money going to the streetcar, “But they didn’t believe it.” He also cited what he said was “a legitimate difference of opinion” about whether the Northeast line or the North line should be moving forward next.

What Walton didn’t say, but that savvy transit officials would, is that the Bush administration’s rules on how to rate transit projects’ cost-efficiency meant the North corridor did not qualify for any federal money, and the NE corridor just squeaked in by the skin of its teeth. If someone is to be bludgeoned about why the North corridor is not being built, folks might want to be looking toward the Federal Transit Administration and the previous administration. ( Note: The Obama administration has announced that it’s changing those rules on how to rate transit projects.)

And CDOT director Danny Pleasant just now made that point, as I was typing the above. Neither the North Corridor nor the streetcar qualified for fed transit funds under the old rules. But things are changing.

‘I think that I shall never see … ‘

(Something more interesting for you, while the council debates wording of its Focus Area Documents – “public” safety vs. “community” safety vs. “Focus Area Two”):

Those readers interested in the sidewalk v. trees issue from Park Road (story here, editorial here) might enjoy this 1952 exchange of letters between Ray Warren, executive director, Greensboro Housing Authority, and H.L. Medford, Greensboro director of public works.

In a March 18, 1952 letter, Warren asks that a huge oak tree on Florida Street not be removed for a sidewalk. His letter uses some effusive prose, ends with Joyce Kilmer’s ode to trees: “I think that I shall never see,” etc. etc.

Medford, in a March 21, 1952, response, uses even more florid prose (“The poet, drunk with the goodness of nature, nature as moulded by the hand of God with no adulterations of mimicing man …”) and concludes with a parody of the famous Kilmer poem:

I think that I shall never see
A tree where a tree shouldn’t be;
A tree whose hungry roots are pressed
Into the sewer, choking its breast.
A tree that drops its leaves all day
and clogs all drains unless we pray,
A tree that may in summer tear
A block of street and cause grey hair
Its branches on the street are lain,
They must be removed in torrents of rain;
It heaves the walk day by day
An accident occurs: the City must pay!
Nobody loves a tree like me
but I like a tree where a tree should be.

And, Medford’s letter concludes: “In other words, Ray, I still think the tree should be removed.”

Two immediate observations:
1. I don’t think city bureaucrats today write as well, or as poetically.
2. I’m glad municipal public works officials today aren’t quite so anti-tree as to think none belong in a city!

How special interests affect city business

TRYON, N.C. – From Charlotte City Council retreat. They’ve just wrapped up discussion on the council-staff operating agreement. And Michael Barnes (District 4) brought up an interesting point: With all this talk about treating people with mutual respect and sharing information, etc., how do you account for the reality of special interest groups? (I’m paraphrasing there.)
“A lot of people are impacted by special interest groups and they don’t tell us – staff and elected officials.” Third-party groups will meet with staff, or elected officials, and then things change. “If you’re not party to those third-party discussions, you don’t know what’s happening,” Barnes said. “You don’t know what the arrangements are between the special interest groups and staff or elected officials.”
Ultimately, he said, that’s the reality of politics.

He’s hit on a key point – and one that hurts mutual trust. If a staffer has been browbeaten by developers (just to take an example), and dials back on a proposal how are elected officials to know? Or, for instance, if elected officials decide to throw some candy toward a civic group they favor, how is staff supposed to deal with that?

But after Barnes brought that up, the honorables just sort of said um, and ended that chapter of the retreat agenda.

Live, it’s pols in Tryon (NC, not Street)

I checked in about 8:15 to the Charlotte City Council retreat in Tryon, N.C., where a “winter storm event” is scheduled to hit about midnight. So far, no word that the honorables plan anything other than to gut it out and then slide home on U.S. 74 and I-85 tomorrow afternoon.

This morning they’re hashing out the “council/staff operating agreement” which, if you pay attention to issues as they move through the process, is actually rather significant. Maybe. Depends on whether they abide by what they come up with. It repeats the words “mutual respect” several times. As if, perhaps, staff has been feeling beat up on by some elected officials in the past? AND as if, perhaps, elected officials have felt as if staff was treating them like children in the past? (Those are my observations only. Nothing that direct has been said here.)

The issue of whether to include the word “risk” in the document vs. adding the word “creative” came up. CDOT head Danny Pleasant suggested that the document should pair creativity with “risk tolerance.” I.e., creativity means you take some risks.

MORE to come, on the role of special interest groups.

City Council, here we come

Heading out to Tryon, N.C., to attend the Charlotte City Council’s annual retreat. Will be blogging and Tweeting (@marynewsom and, sometimes @nakedcityblog) if wireless connections are good. Stay tuned, starting Thursday ayem.