Creek loses its concrete cap

This is cool, so I’m putting it up right away, but please read my post from earlier today (it’s just below) about transit myth-busting.

Little Sugar Creek is free! It’s being removed from its concrete prison even now. County real estate services project manager Jay Higginbotham shot this photo today from the new bridge over Independence Boulevard.

The old concrete parking lot was built atop the creek when the former Midtown Square — originally Charlottetown Mall — opened in 1959, the first enclosed shopping mall in the South. Engineer Pete Verna supervised the project for developer James Rouse, who went on to national fame for such projects as the planned town of Columbia, Md., and Faneuil Hall marketplace in Boston. It was Verna, who’s still doing engineering work here, who designed the concrete over the creek, he told me in an interview a few years back.

Eventually all the concrete will be removed from the creek, and the county greenway system will run beside it.

Creek loses its concrete cap

This is cool, so I’m putting it up right away, but please read my post from earlier today (it’s just below) about transit myth-busting.

Little Sugar Creek is free! It’s being removed from its concrete prison even now. County real estate services project manager Jay Higginbotham shot this photo today from the new bridge over Independence Boulevard.

The old concrete parking lot was built atop the creek when the former Midtown Square — originally Charlottetown Mall — opened in 1959, the first enclosed shopping mall in the South. Engineer Pete Verna supervised the project for developer James Rouse, who went on to national fame for such projects as the planned town of Columbia, Md., and Faneuil Hall marketplace in Boston. It was Verna, who’s still doing engineering work here, who designed the concrete over the creek, he told me in an interview a few years back.

Eventually all the concrete will be removed from the creek, and the county greenway system will run beside it.

More myth-puncturing — and a little news

Read to the end of this, as I’ve tucked in a news item.

Is it true only 2 percent of the public in Charlotte rides public transportation?

You’ll hear that stat a lot. It counts everyone driving through the region on I-85 or I-77, commercial delivery trucks, tractor-trailers, etc. — trips transit would never compete for. Nearly 10 percent of the workforce in uptown Charlotte takes public transportation every weekday.

Light rail will never reduce congestion.

In a growing metro region, building mass transit doesn’t result in fewer cars on the road than before. However, mass transit will keep congestion from being as bad as it would be without mass transit.

In large and very large urban areas with rail, traffic congestion grows at a 42 percent lower rate than in similarly sized urban areas without rail. That’s from a study in 2000 by Mobility Planning Associates of Austin, Texas.

The well-respected Texas Transportation Institute, in its 2005 Urban Mobility Report and Texas Transportation Index, found that in the Charlotte region, people who ride public transportation versus driving alone reduce congestion delays by 6 percent to 12 percent, or more than 2 million hours of congestion delay per year.

Public transportation provides 3.25 times more congestion relief than operations treatments such as signalization, intersection improvements, incident management, etc., according to the TTI study.

In coming months you’ll hear a lot of people offering up statistics purported to show that light rail transit is a bad, bad, evil and/or spendthrift idea. Plenty of anti-tax folks just don’t like more taxes. Other, libertarian types don’t like public governments spending money on big public works projects. Others just like to make political hay.

Be smart. Statistics are like cakes. How they turn out depends on what ingredients you start with. For just about every stat purporting to show CATS is wasting money and poorly run and light rail is “failing” all over the country, you can find other stats — many of them from groups such as TTI that are neither transit bashers nor transit zealots — that will show the opposite, or will show a more complex, nuanced reality.

Now news, of a sort:
Transit and city officials are looking at whether part of the South Corridor light rail line — which they call the Lynx Blue Line — could open earlier than planned. Target date, CATS chief Ron Tober told me, is Oct. 27. The section that would open, he said, would be from uptown to as far south as they determined they could do it safely.

City Manager Pam Syfert says the City Council will be asked to look at the pros and cons of an early opening.

Betcha they’re looking at that Nov. 6 election, when the kill-the-transit-tax measure is likely to be on the ballot. Generating a lot of positive community enthusiasm right before the election surely couldn’t hurt. But any glitches, and they’re toast.

A “green” NASCAR Hall of Fame?

If they hadn’t kept using the word “sustainable” …

After a lot of talk about the importance of “sustainable” designs, having to do with the NASCAR Hall of Fame, it turns out the city (the owner of the building) hasn’t pushed for a “green” building — i.e., one designed to use fewer resources, fewer polluting resources, and to use less energy in both construction and operation. And it doesn’t look as if it’s going to.

George Miller (at right) of Pei Cobb Freed & Partners, the firm designing the new NASCAR Hall of Fame, gave a briefing at Wednesday’s monthly AIA (American Institute of Architects) luncheon. Among the interesting details — e.g., the “ribbon” wrapping around the building will be stainless steel and no, they haven’t yet figured out structural details — he talked about making the building “sustainable.”

Earlier, Mayor Pat McCrory, in accepting an award from the AIA chapter for his work on behalf of what architects call “the built environment,” said his overall philosophy for development is, “Do it right the first time and make it sustainable.”

I couldn’t stop myself. During the Q/A period I asked Miller whether the Hall of Fame would be LEED certified. LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a rating system devised by the U.S. Green Building Council to encourage builders, developers and architects to build more environmentally benign buildings. Only two N.C. buildings are listed as certified — none in Charlotte — although ImaginOn and the Davidson College admissions office are among a number of LEED-registered buildings in this area.

Miller sort of hemmed and hawed and said, “We haven’t talked in great detail,” and that they were going to try to incorporate as many LEED techniques as possible.

Luckily for me, I was sitting smack next to City Engineer Jim Schumacher, who’s the lead staff person on the Hall project. After all, the city is Miller’s client in this. I asked Schumacher if the city had talked about LEED certification with the architects. No, he said. We told them, he said, “Do what makes sense.”

Schumacher said the mechanical systems would meet LEED standards.

That leaves out techniques such as daylighting, reducing construction debris and using recycled materials. Some of those things, such as daylighting, aren’t just feel-good issues, but have significant long-term implications for future operating costs.

I phoned Anthony Foxx, who chairs the City Council’s Environmental Committee. He confirmed there’d been no discussion on the full council about whether to require/suggest/wish for a LEED-registered or certified project. “I did raise the issue with Engineering and Property Management,” Foxx told me. “They pushed back on it, primarily concerned about the tightness of the budget.”

LEED isn’t a perfect instrument, and anyone who’s familiar with it would agree. But it pushes builders and designers to consider a building’s life-cycle costs along with short-term construction costs, and it helps educate them in new technologies and materials.

And it isn’t necessarily more expensive. A Statesville elementary school that is LEED-certified was built for no more money than a regular elementary school, school district officials have said.

So, Mayor Pat, sir, and your colleagues on the council: How about pushing for the Hall of Fame to be LEED-certified? The city is the client, and the city should demand the best long-term value for its buildings.

Council panel picks a developer for Scaleybark

I’ve been in Charlotte long enough to know that you should never, ever count Crosland out of any city deal until the final buzzer. For decades developer John Crosland Jr. was the city’s preeminent master of getting what he wanted out of elected officials. He’s retired now, and others run the company he and his father, John Sr., built. The company is still doing suburban subdivisions but has done more urban-oriented and mixed-use projects (Birkdale Village, Alpha Mills renovation). Now it’s going for transit-oriented development.

Fast-forward to Monday’s City Council committee meeting, where the Economic Development and Planning Committee (hereafter ED&P) was briefed on the three development teams seeking to build a transit-oriented development (hereafter called T.O.D.) at the Scaleybark station. (Note to you who don’t read all the fine print inside the Observer: Yes, all three original development proposals withered. But all three development teams submitted new proposals.)

David Furman of Boulevard Centro retooled what was formerly known as the Bank of America proposal.

Crosland, which had dropped its St. Louis-based affiliate McCormack Baron & Salazar, offered a retooled proposal.

So did Scaleybark Partners, a coalition that includes Pappas Properties (Phillips Place, the Midtown development, etc.), GreenHawk Partners of Raleigh, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Shook Kelley design and something called Citiventure Associates of Denver, which is run by Marilee Utter who’s been to Charlotte several times to give talks on transit-oriented development.

The committee unanimously recommended —- Scaleybark Partners.

The staff had recommended against Boulevard Centro — the only team to guarantee a parking deck — because it sought a loan from the city. There’s no money now for a loan, said Tom Flynn of the city’s Economic Development office.

Both the Crosland and Scaleybark Partners proposals include affordable housing — 90 units from Crosland (with a commitment to start 30-50 of them in 2008 regardless of whether they have in hand some tax credits to build them) and 80 units for Scaleybark Partners.

Both guarantee parking for the light rail station. Neither guarantees a parking deck (preferable for T.O.D. but more expensive). Both said they’ll build one if market conditions are right, i.e. if they can get enough money from developing land that would otherwise be under a surface parking lot to make it worth the extra expense.

Neither offered a site design. Scaleybark said it would build open space — i.e. a park — before this November and do some landscaping and streetscape improvements by the end of 2008.

Neither offers a guarantee for a new library, though both say they’d like to try to build one.

The city would net a few hundred thousand dollars more from the Crosland proposal. But the council members on ED&P (John Lassiter, Nancy Carter, Andy Dulin, Don Lochman and James Mitchell) seemed to prefer several things about Scaleybark Partners:

–The development team has remained the same.

–Citiventure has T.O.D. experience. (Crosland said its planners would also have experience, but its development team isn’t fully formed yet.)

–They liked Scaleybark’s willingness to build the open space first, so the station area looks more inviting.

–They’re familiar with the Housing Partnership, a local nonprofit with a strong record of building affordable housing.

–And a key point, mentioned by Carter: Crosland owns a big chunk of land across South Boulevard and intends to redevelop it. There’s value in having different developers doing projects near each other, so you don’t have a big chunk of your city looking exactly alike. She’s right, though it’s a point of design likely to be lost on a lot of people.

Here’s a link to a Powerpoint presentation made to council on May 14 that has some of the key information. Here’s a link to Monday’s presentation. (Be forewarned that our online guru notes many of you may not have a viewer that can see it.)

The full council still has to make its recommendation, probably May 29. The memorandum of understanding would go to council July 11, and a development agreement would come in July or August.

Council panel picks a developer for Scaleybark

I’ve been in Charlotte long enough to know that you should never, ever count Crosland out of any city deal until the final buzzer. For decades developer John Crosland Jr. was the city’s preeminent master of getting what he wanted out of elected officials. He’s retired now, and others run the company he and his father, John Sr., built. The company is still doing suburban subdivisions but has done more urban-oriented and mixed-use projects (Birkdale Village, Alpha Mills renovation). Now it’s going for transit-oriented development.

Fast-forward to Monday’s City Council committee meeting, where the Economic Development and Planning Committee (hereafter ED&P) was briefed on the three development teams seeking to build a transit-oriented development (hereafter called T.O.D.) at the Scaleybark station. (Note to you who don’t read all the fine print inside the Observer: Yes, all three original development proposals withered. But all three development teams submitted new proposals.)

David Furman of Boulevard Centro retooled what was formerly known as the Bank of America proposal.

Crosland, which had dropped its St. Louis-based affiliate McCormack Baron & Salazar, offered a retooled proposal.

So did Scaleybark Partners, a coalition that includes Pappas Properties (Phillips Place, the Midtown development, etc.), GreenHawk Partners of Raleigh, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, Shook Kelley design and something called Citiventure Associates of Denver, which is run by Marilee Utter who’s been to Charlotte several times to give talks on transit-oriented development.

The committee unanimously recommended —- Scaleybark Partners.

The staff had recommended against Boulevard Centro — the only team to guarantee a parking deck — because it sought a loan from the city. There’s no money now for a loan, said Tom Flynn of the city’s Economic Development office.

Both the Crosland and Scaleybark Partners proposals include affordable housing — 90 units from Crosland (with a commitment to start 30-50 of them in 2008 regardless of whether they have in hand some tax credits to build them) and 80 units for Scaleybark Partners.

Both guarantee parking for the light rail station. Neither guarantees a parking deck (preferable for T.O.D. but more expensive). Both said they’ll build one if market conditions are right, i.e. if they can get enough money from developing land that would otherwise be under a surface parking lot to make it worth the extra expense.

Neither offered a site design. Scaleybark said it would build open space — i.e. a park — before this November and do some landscaping and streetscape improvements by the end of 2008.

Neither offers a guarantee for a new library, though both say they’d like to try to build one.

The city would net a few hundred thousand dollars more from the Crosland proposal. But the council members on ED&P (John Lassiter, Nancy Carter, Andy Dulin, Don Lochman and James Mitchell) seemed to prefer several things about Scaleybark Partners:

–The development team has remained the same.

–Citiventure has T.O.D. experience. (Crosland said its planners would also have experience, but its development team isn’t fully formed yet.)

–They liked Scaleybark’s willingness to build the open space first, so the station area looks more inviting.

–They’re familiar with the Housing Partnership, a local nonprofit with a strong record of building affordable housing.

–And a key point, mentioned by Carter: Crosland owns a big chunk of land across South Boulevard and intends to redevelop it. There’s value in having different developers doing projects near each other, so you don’t have a big chunk of your city looking exactly alike. She’s right, though it’s a point of design likely to be lost on a lot of people.

Here’s a link to a Powerpoint presentation made to council on May 14 that has some of the key information. Here’s a link to Monday’s presentation. (Be forewarned that our online guru notes many of you may not have a viewer that can see it.)

The full council still has to make its recommendation, probably May 29. The memorandum of understanding would go to council July 11, and a development agreement would come in July or August.

Measuring local business health

How’s business?

The Charlotte Regional Partnership and UNC Charlotte’s Urban Institute, trying to answer that question, have devised the Charlotte Regional Business Barometer.

It’s a regional snapshot, combining data from the region’s North and South Carolina counties. Some notable “down” arrows: unemployment and business investment.

The partnership’s CEO, Ronnie Bryant, says in an e-mail newsletter:

“Our activity over this economic period has remained strong, although we can see some leading indicators that suggest some of the economic sectors and particularly U.S.-based small businesses are proceeding very cautiously with their capital spending programs.”

South End bridge? Wake growing too fast?

Still mad that the pedestrian bridge over I-277 that was to have paralleled the light rail/trolley tracks got scrapped? Then attend an open house Tuesday, 5-7 p.m., to hear about other connections being talked of between South End and uptown. More info here.

Staff from the city and a consultant are looking at several ideas, including a pedestrian and bike path to be built on the I-277-Caldwell Street Bridge, as well as capping the freeway. The idea to cap the freeway has been around since the Center City 2010 Plan, as a way to create land for a park to connect uptown with South End and Dilworth.

Don’t laugh, several cities have put roofs atop freeways and created parks. The meeting’s in Room 267 at the Gov Center uptown.

Could too much growth hobble Wake County? See what the Raleigh N&O has to say.

Also in the Capital City, Raleigh City Council on Tuesday will consider adopting permanent year-round water restrictions beginning this summer. Other N.C. municipalities with similar year-round restrictions include Cary, Greensboro and Fayetteville.

The Washington Daily News in Eastern North Carolina’s Washington County (county seat Plymouth) reports on efforts there to pass a land-transfer tax, and the N.C. Association of County Commissioners’ response to the state Realtors’ contention such a tax would slow growth.

And finally, here’s an idea that’s long overdue for Charlotte: Help increase the number of affordable places to live by relaxing the out-dated zoning rules against garage apartments, granny flats and other so-called accessory units. Here’s architect Roger K. Lewis from the Washington Post on the same, courtesy of Planetizen.com.

Charlotte pols lack guts?

It’s obvious Charlotte-Mecklenburg isn’t the only place slammed by growth that’s outpacing its ability — or at least its willingness to raise property taxes enough — to pay for building the schools needed for all the newcomers.

A total of 46 — FORTY SIX — bills in the General Assembly would give local governments across the state new authority to levy taxes beyond property taxes. Other places want permission to enact land transfer taxes, which adds a fee to real estate transactions. Or they want permission to levy impact fees on new residential construction. Or they want permission to raise sales taxes to help pay for building schools.

WakeUp Wake County, a group that advocates more limits on growth, recently hired a well-known lobbyist to push a fee of up to 1 percent on real estate transfers. At least three Wake County legislators have sponsored bills to let Wake enact some new taxes, if voters approve.

What’s Mecklenburg County asking for? Nada. Zip. Zilcheroonie. (OK, to be fair, I think they passed a resolution supporting an N.C. Association of County Commissioners’ attempt to get broad permission for all counties. But that bill’s going nowhere, and other counties have been far more assertive about asking the Leg for what they need.)

What’s Charlotte asking for? Nada. (Nope, the city doesn’t pay for schools. It does pay for road and street improvements made necessary by new development. Why not ask for an impact fee for street improvements?)

Here’s a roundup story from the Raleigh News & Observer. It mentions the massive campaign being sponsored by the N.C. Association of Realtors, to “Stop the N.C. Home Tax.”

How disingenuous. Let’s see. Right now, school construction is paid for mostly through bonds or other debt, which is repaid with, hmmmm, let me get this right — property taxes. So a real estate transfer tax — which would apply to every transaction, not just homes — is a “Home Tax.” And the tax you pay because you own your home is NOT a “Home Tax”?

The thing is, when you ask representatives of the N.C. Association of Realtors, “Well, how do you propose that counties find money to build schools? Shall we infer that this means you support raising property taxes?” they just hem and haw.

Or, they say, governments should trim their budgets. Oh, for pity’s sakes. That’s like saying Americans should exercise more and watch less TV and parents should teach their kids better manners. In other words, yes they should, but they haven’t done it yet and are most unlikely to do it in the future, because there’s no way to make them.

Furthermore, I don’t think county governments can cut enough to find the billions needed to build the schools they need. What are they going to do, stop paying for social services that they’re legally required to provide? Stop running public health departments? People who say “just cut the budget” either don’t know much about local government budgets or are among the tiny minority who believe that virtually no government services are really needed. And the majority of voters don’t agree with them. Which is why it’s hard for elected officials to cut services enough to find the money to build schools.

Why are Mecklenburg’s local officials so much more passive about proposing impact fees or land transfer taxes than those in Wake? Any ideas?

East side speaks out

What do east Charlotte residents like about where they live? What would they improve?

Those topics generated some deeply felt remarks by a small group of East-siders at a Monday night discussion sponsored by AIA Charlotte (the American Institute of Architects’ Charlotte Chapter. The impetus for this is a project by AIA Charlotte that aims to study the Central Avenue corridor and come up with a vision for improving it, looking at issues of (their words) “safety, connectivity, transportation alternatives, walkability, open space, image and economic vitality.”

So they’ve been talking with residents. Monday night’s session was one stab at that. About two dozen residents attended, although it looked to me as if hardly any were from the Latino community (you can’t always tell from a glance, obviously) or the immigrant community (which takes in Asian, Middle Eastern and Eastern European as well as Latino).

Some of the comments:

— Residents like the diversity of the area and think that newcomers who move to the area do, too.

— They feel as though they get an unjustified bad reputation, especially about crime. “I have such good neighbors,” said one woman, a widow who’s lived in the neighborhood for 52 years.

— Roberta Farman, who lives in Medford Acres and who just resigned from the city-county planning commission, talked with affection about the great old trees and rural look of her neighborhood. “You’re 4 miles from downtown and could almost be in the country,” she said.

— “Someone needs to mention food,” said Tom Tate, school board member who lives in Plaza-Midwood. “Anything you want, you can find it.”

— Schools are an issue, although Tate said some schools in the area are like East Charlotte overall, in that they’re better than the perception. But people who move in with young kids will either move away or put their kids in private or magnet schools because of the reputations of Eastway Middle School and Garinger High School.

— Gentrification, as in rising property values and more upscale development, is generally welcomed. It’s coming out Central Avenue, they predicted.

— That said, Louise Barden whispered to me about two houses for sale, both on half-acre lots, on Progress Lane — a street lined with huge, Myers Park-worthy old oak trees. They’d be eye-popping steals in other neighborhoods. One with four bedrooms and 1,700 square feet and a tax value of $104,000 is to be auctioned this weekend. Another, with a pool and 1,900 square feet, but only two bedrooms, is listed at $195,000.

— There’s much concern about big boxes, dilapidated buildings and generally shoddy development left over from a few decades ago. ” ’60s strip centers,” one man said. “Their life cycle was 20- 30 years at most.” Residents want better guidelines for new development, so they’re not left with 2007’s version of those flimsy ’60s strip centers.

Life, as they say, is complicated. It’s precisely because those dilapidated old buildings are available, cheap, that they’ve attracted the rich mix of ethnic restaurants from all over the world. Start-up businesses tend to need cheap, old buildings.

On the other hand, as some of the residents noted, the grungy look of some of those falling-down 60s strip centers is likely to be a turn-off to the more upscale residents that gentrification is expected to produce.

The Naked City solution — I’ve written this before and I expect I’ll write it again — is for the city to revamp the standards for its older zoning categories, such as B-1. The old standards allow and in some cases even require suburbia — buffers, large setbacks, too much parking. Changing those standards for B-1 would mean when new places are built on old zoning they’d have a more urban look. Examples of new buildings on old zoning: Eckerds in Myers Park and Dilworth, the Bojangles at Third and Indy Blvd, and Burger King on Fourth Street in Midtown. Compare the Bo and the BK to the much nicer-looking buildings along Third street just off Indy.

Like the good planner he is, Kent Main of the planning department attended the East Charlotte meeting. I asked him if there were any plans afoot to change the old zoning standards. It’s on their long-term list, he said, but they’re deluged with other things (rezonings, TODs, etc.) so it’s back-burnered.