JacksonH

That's an interesting idea! Maybe you should be part of the airport authority.

My only complaint about the airport is when I have a flight at a gate in Terminal B. The corridor is too narrow for the number of gates/flights in and out of that terminal. With the new A terminals and their ample space, it would be nice if the airport could close a few of the gates in Terminal B and move them to a new A gate to reduce some of the crowding in Terminal B.

Just to be clear, Texas is nowhere close to being the "wealthiest state per capita." In fact, it's ranked #35 (below average and #36 if you count DC). And North Carolina is just one place behind at #36. So the two states are almost the same by that measure. In terms of household income, Texas is #19, NC is 34. I think CLT Development pointing to spending habits of certain industries as the real factor here on why Charlotte is not buliding as tall lately. But I'm with CLT Development, RANYC and SidneyCarton that Charlotte should be more focused on building a vibrant central core than on tall buildings. Too many U.S. cities, especially in the Sunbelt, are soulless, forgettable deserts. People don't visit cities to just stare at a skyline. They want, fun, excitement and memories. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/per-capita-income-by-state

I didn't realize until now there was so much hatred for CLT. Personally, I love that airport, but maybe I have blinders on because CLT is always either my destination or my starting point. But for those making connections at CLT, which is the majority of travelers, it seems the experience is completely different. https://viewfromthewing.com/charlotte-airport-chaos-new-law-lets-passengers-drink-to-cope-with-misery-of-american-airlines-hub/

The parking garage lights are truly captivating.

OKC and Tulsa? I can't imagine people moving to those places on purpose.

Here's a headline worth some attention: "Census: St. Louis metro now smaller than Charlotte, Orlando" https://fox2now.com/news/missouri/census-st-louis-metro-now-smaller-than-charlotte-orlando/ There's a simple lesson here, and a warning: cities can rise *and* fall. At the beginning of the last century, St. Louis was the 5th biggest metro in the U.S., behind just New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, and Boston. And it was was 4th largest in 1870, ahead of Chicago. Now it's 23rd. As recently as 1970, the St. Louis metro was still in the top ten. And hardly anyone outside of the Carolinas had even heard of Charlotte. Orlando was pretty unknown as well, until Walt Disney put it on the map a couple years later. Who knows what the future will hold for any of these cities.

Thanks for your insights. I don't know much about Georgia laws with respect to annexations, though what you're saying sounds very similar to Virginia. But with respect to Georgia, I understand there was quite a bit of racism involved that limited the size of Atlanta, with surrounding white communities ensuring they not get annexed by the largely African American Atlanta. But outside of Atlanta, what cities in the state might have a population over 250,000 were it not for state laws? The only one that I can think of that might possibly have been impacted is Savannah, which currently has a population of 148k.

This may not be the right thread for this because it's about more than just Charlotte, but I found this interesting. Here's a graphic showing states with at least one city with a population above 250,000. There are five such cities in North Carolina but only ONE in Georgia, yet both states have a similar population, around 11 million. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-u-s-states-by-number-of-cities-over-250000-residents/

Charlotte is the 13th most walkable city in the U.S.? Can someone explain this to me? https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/most-walkable-cities-us-ranked-190637611.html

Can't they be relocated? Weren't the old Victorians in 4th Ward relocated there from this part of town?

Good analysis here, but this statement is pretty much my point: "don't know if San Diego or Sacramento are a good example of moving faster at light rail construction, they have just been at it longer / started earlier." Charlotte *should* have been building lightrail way before 2007, and should be expanding much faster than it is. And just one example, Charlotte's Gold Line extension started and was completed on almost the same schedule as San Diego's 11-mile Blue Line extension I wrote about above (both projects began and were completed within abouta month of one another), which included this massive bridge structure that you need to see in person to fully appreciate.

Check out Sacramento. It's much smaller than Charlotte but has a far more extensive lightrail system. San Diego is larger than Charlotte but not by much (3.3 million metro population) but lightrail is several times larger than Charlotte's. I major extension (about 11 miles, I think) to one of the lines was recently completed and involved building a mile or so long bridge high above very complicated terrain, but it only took a few years to build the whole thing. Baltimore is another that comes to mind.

It shouldn't have taken as long as it took to build the Blue Line and Gold Line. It shouldn't take as long as it's going to take to build the Red Line and Silver Line. Charlotte is way behind similar-sized (and smaller) cities in building out a mass transit system. I guess the state legislature in Raleigh is to blame for that. https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/charlotte-ranked-10th-worst-city-for-public-transportation-in-new-survey/ar-AA1hWzem

I would! I HATE that drive.