2030 Transit Plan

[monsoon]

^The point wasn't about Larry.

[uptownliving]

Getting rid of the 1/2 Cent Sales Tax isn't going to lower the crime rate, make the schools better, or increase their property values. If the people on the West and East side don't want the local government to invest in their part of town then go ahead and vote for the repeal and like the rest of the county they will get reduced bus service and no train service. The people on the West and East side feel left out because of a lack of private investment dollars coming to their part of town. If they want to increase their chances of getting more private investment in their part of town then I think they should vote against the repeal of the 1/2 Cent Sales Tax.

I feel that the streetcar has a good chance of getting funded and built because of the widespread support for it that crosses all socioeconomic strata. We all know that the rules of the FTA are very likely to change under a Democratic administration...rules that will likely increase funding for public transit in this country and make is easier for streetcars to qualify.

[ES Charlotte]

"""A number of posts back in this thread, I said that many residents in this city, who also happen to be voters and pay taxes, are fed up with all of the city's resources being spent within a few blocks of downtown. Charlotte is building a gleaming emerald city, while significant parts of the city are left to decay into dangerous crime ridden areas where property values are actually falling, the local schools have become marginalized and isolated, and crime is a serious concern. People who live in these areas are feeling completely left out of the decision making process in Charlotte and resent the money being spent by what they see as the "big interests" on themselves. """

Downtown drives growth in every part of the city... If it wasnt for our downtown, we wouldnt even have suburbs. So why not make it the focal point of where we spend our resources..

[Charlotte_native]

It is hard to make the jump from Larry's letter and make the assumption that people on the Westside are fed up. Are they? I don't know any more than Larry does, neither of us live there.

He might have gone to West Charlotte High School, but he lives in Mint Hill. He is hardly a candidate to speak on their behalf any more than any of us are (unless we live on the west side). A candidate to try and sway their opinions, certainly, but because he rails against this and sends a letter to the west side, doesn't mean they will agree or won't agree. I would imagine they'll form their own opinions without someone, from CCCP or Mint Hill on the advisory board, telling them how to do it. Everyone has a right to do what Mr. Bumgardner is doing, but just because you do it doesn't make you an automatic spokesman for others or an expert.

Downtown drives growth in every part of the city... If it wasnt for our downtown, we wouldnt even have suburbs. So why not make it the focal point of where we spend our resources..

[monsoon]

......

If the city government has no interest in other parts of town, why are they even considering what to do about Eastland Mall? .....

[Charlotte_native]

I am not trying to debate these peoples position for them, but the purpose of posting Larry's letter was to show there is a huge amount of discontentment in this city on how it is being developed and a lot of it is being manifested in so many people come out against the transit tax. It's one of the few opportunities for the people to say no and many people are voting for that reason I would presume.

[uptownliving]

I just don't feel the fact that one man wrote and mailed out a letter shows that lots of people are up in arms about this issue. It shows that some people want to argue their side of the argument and possibly show others how they may be impacted. I fully believe in his right to do so, I just can't see how he could be considered representative of them, he is hoping to sway their vote, they haven't asked him to do this.

[uptownliving]

The city leadership in response has started another campaign very similar to what it did the the vote on the Arena and that got the smack down as much because of the way it was done and not what was being asked to be done.

[dubone]

Why do so many people omit that downtown is the focal point for a significant amount of this region's economy. It isn't like this transit system is being built for the 10000 people who live downtown! In fact, I will only be a periodic customer of transit because I WALK most places these days. Transit focuses on downtown because that is where there is a significant density of destinations for visitorship and employment, so that is the most efficient destination for transit.

The fact is, even the streetcar, which is my personal favorite project after the South line, doesn't really help me as a much as a resident of downtown. That project is devised to support the fragile areas on the east and west side that also have the density to support transit signficantly.

The transit plan is devised to create urban development outside of downtown, to create economic growth outside of downtown (especially in fragile and ex-industrial corridors), to slow the growth of automobile traffic, and to provide mass transit access to the amenities downtown that were built to serve the whole region (office towers, arts, sports, colleges, hospitals, county and city government, etc).

Look, there is a lot of criticism about Charlotte being a sprawling city without any true urban core. The suburban neighborhoods combat infill and density relentlessly. The only areas that have the zoning, the street network, the political feasibility of becoming truly dense urban districts are downtown, and much of the area served by the 2030 transit plan. Without the cultural lifestyle that expects urban city designs, we need a carefully crafted coalition of development interest, government infrastructure support, and organic growth of the urban niche buyers willing to try out urban living. Developers can't build without the buyers and the government infrastructure. Buyers will only be a zealous niche unless developers and infrastructure is in place. But government can opt to make the first move and put zoning and infrastructure in place in advance of the people and the developers.

This is where we are right now. We have a zealous niche of urban dwellers, we have developers supporting that niche of buyers that are crying for the infrastructure to expand that pattern. We finally have the majority of local political leaders seeing the wisdom of a more urban and dense future, to put the zoning and infrastructure in place. Now, we have reactionary and defeatist interests trying to stop it.

It is hypocritical for people to complain about the city not being urban enough, but then say that the local government should not put density supporting infrastructure in the areas it has already zoned for high density development. We have highly dense zoning just sitting there right now as nothing but surface parking because it still needs infrastructure and investments to build critical mass. Every dense city in the modern era has gotten there by investing in transit. If we skip that step, the rest won't happen. That is exactly what Bumgarner, Puckett, Morrison, Bishop, and Reid want. Others who want a pie in the sky urban city with 40% on transit daily will get the polar opposite by supporting this repeal

[monsoon]

I just don't feel the fact that one man wrote and mailed out a letter shows that lots of people are up in arms about this issue. It shows that some people want to argue their side of the argument and possibly show others how they may be impacted. I fully believe in his right to do so, I just can't see how he could be considered representative of them, he is hoping to sway their vote, they haven't asked him to do this.

[uptownliving]

I guess we shall see. He is the second member of the CATS citizens advisory group to come out against the tax in a very public manner.

[cinco]

for every bumgarner - there is an opposite reaction. i was watching the tube last night and saw an ANTI-REPEAL the tax ad... it starred 2 former mayors... democrat Harvey Gantt and republican Richard Vinroot. it was well done (and even humorous). hopefully this will suede the opinions of some who haven't taken the time to be fully informed. these 2 mayors were well liked by many and their word has credence. i've always respected harvey gantt and if i wasn't up to par on the issue - i would rely on his opinion. certainly more than mr. bumgarner.

IMO, the overwhelmingly majority of anti-transit folk - show no promise, no future, no alternative, and no progression... just a lack of vision, political bitterness and tax hating. that may sound like i'm simplifying the issue... but, honestly that's the jist of it. the finer details, just do not exsist in the big picture of their cause.

case in point - mr. bumgarner's letter.

[Raintree21]

The letter says: Dear Ministers and Community Leaders. I wonder how much this will actually affect people's views since several community leaders have already come out in support of the tax.

[Charlotte_native]

Why do so many people omit that downtown is the focal point for a significant amount of this region's economy. It isn't like this transit system is being built for the 10000 people who live downtown! In fact, I will only be a periodic customer of transit because I WALK most places these days. Transit focuses on downtown because that is where there is a significant density of destinations for visitorship and employment, so that is the most efficient destination for transit.

The fact is, even the streetcar, which is my personal favorite project after the South line, doesn't really help me as a much as a resident of downtown. That project is devised to support the fragile areas on the east and west side that also have the density to support transit signficantly.

The transit plan is devised to create urban development outside of downtown, to create economic growth outside of downtown (especially in fragile and ex-industrial corridors), to slow the growth of automobile traffic, and to provide mass transit access to the amenities downtown that were built to serve the whole region (office towers, arts, sports, colleges, hospitals, county and city government, etc).

Look, there is a lot of criticism about Charlotte being a sprawling city without any true urban core. The suburban neighborhoods combat infill and density relentlessly. The only areas that have the zoning, the street network, the political feasibility of becoming truly dense urban districts are downtown, and much of the area served by the 2030 transit plan. Without the cultural lifestyle that expects urban city designs, we need a carefully crafted coalition of development interest, government infrastructure support, and organic growth of the urban niche buyers willing to try out urban living. Developers can't build without the buyers and the government infrastructure. Buyers will only be a zealous niche unless developers and infrastructure is in place. But government can opt to make the first move and put zoning and infrastructure in place in advance of the people and the developers.

This is where we are right now. We have a zealous niche of urban dwellers, we have developers supporting that niche of buyers that are crying for the infrastructure to expand that pattern. We finally have the majority of local political leaders seeing the wisdom of a more urban and dense future, to put the zoning and infrastructure in place. Now, we have reactionary and defeatist interests trying to stop it.

It is hypocritical for people to complain about the city not being urban enough, but then say that the local government should not put density supporting infrastructure in the areas it has already zoned for high density development. We have highly dense zoning just sitting there right now as nothing but surface parking because it still needs infrastructure and investments to build critical mass. Every dense city in the modern era has gotten there by investing in transit. If we skip that step, the rest won't happen. That is exactly what Bumgarner, Puckett, Morrison, Bishop, and Reid want. Others who want a pie in the sky urban city with 40% on transit daily will get the polar opposite by supporting this repeal

[Justadude]

While you guys take the time to personally deride Larry Bumgarner, and refer to the people who might take notice of what he placed in this letter as gullible idiots, you completely miss the importance and relevance of what is in this letter.

[Spartan]

Where is the lack of investment by the city in places other than Uptown? Should the current council and the current city residents be faulted for the mistakes of the government 10 and 20 years ago? I see the policies as being pretty equitable to all parts of the city.

I do see a lack of private investment on the westside, but the city can't control that.

[monsoon]

.....

Would it be fair to collect all of this and then spend it in the rest of the city? Not that I would be opposed, I don't want other parts of town neglected, but there just might be more of a correlation than is being presented.

[uptownliving]

It is also striking, when you think about it, that so many argue about an unfair amount of city and/or county money being spent downtown...is it? I have no idea, but what is the tax base and amount of property taxes being paid BY these downtown property owners for their properties? How far out of whack is it, actually? Again, I don't know how much tax revenue is generated from the very valuable properties in center city compared to how much is spent back in center city, but I'm sure there is quite a bit collected from these towers, condos, and expensive dirt sites.

[dubone]

That $4.6B is going to be shooting up in the coming years, not only with reevaluations, but with the significant amount of new construction going on. In today's CBJ, it lists the top 25 construction projects in the region. As we know from any cross-eyed glance at UP, almost half most are in downtown (11 in downtown Charlotte, 7 outside Meck county, and the rest in suburban locations within Charlotte). The construction costs just for those 11 projects are roughly $2.5B, and that doesn't count the many other projects going in downtown that aren't in the top 25, but will dramatically increase the tax value of the land (Twelve, Novare offices, Park, Trademark, Garrison, Knights Stadium, Encore, Trust, etc.). People balk at the concentration of investments going to downtown, but they don't realize the tremendous concentration of the tax bill is picked up by downtown.

Even though old projects only get reevaluated, new construction goes on the books immediately, so the $2.5B+ in construction going on now is going to have a significant impact. Also, the magic of density-supporting infrastructure is that the gift keeps on giving, with 25-30% of the land downtown is vacant or semi-vacant ready for new dense construction when the market can bear it. When you then consider that the whole idea of fixed-guideway transit is to create a wick for similar development along a whole corridor, you then start to create a situation where the tax revenues can keep coming in and multiplying after the initial investment is made.

Anti-tax people often say that governments should act more like businesses. Investing in areas that can yield the highest return is exactly what businesses do. The only thing is that when a city ends up growing its tax revenues better due to solid investment and planning, they either offer more services or lower the tax rate rather than keep the profit. Somehow uptown interests are the boogeymen lately, so it is hard for people to realize that they're practically the cash cows funding the whole dang place.

(That is, if cityboi's aliens (friendly shout out) scoop up 28202 and everything in it and bring it back to Gliese 581C, the rest of the city wouldn't be much to speak of. But Bumgarner and Puckett would be so excited, they just might decide to puckett eachother in the bumgarner.)

[monsoon]

...... Anti-tax people often say that governments should act more like businesses. Investing in areas that can yield the highest return is exactly what businesses do. The only thing is that when a city ends up growing its tax revenues better due to solid investment and planning, they either offer more services or lower the tax rate rather than keep the profit. Somehow uptown interests are the boogeymen lately, so it is hard for people to realize that they're practically the cash cows funding the whole dang place. ...

[Spartan]

To pull this back on topic- what types of things need to be done in other parts of the city, as far as transportation goes, that aren't currently being done? The way I see it, the vast majority of investment is being done in places other than uptown.

[Justadude]

I would venture that transit initiatives in the middle-ring neighborhoods would fail without a strong center city. I love the streetcar idea, and agree that it should be built sooner rather than later; but what good would the streetcar be without a healthy uptown as the destination at the end of the line? Most of the people using the streetcar on a daily basis would be working in the middle-class jobs offered uptown -- security, hospitality, food service, etc. The more development occurs uptown, the more jobs are available to those living on the streetcar line. Conversely, every job that goes to SouthPark or University City is unavailable to streetcar dependents. So it makes sense both in the short term and the long term for the city to focus its efforts on building a strong core, so the transit system has a foundation to grow on. I don't think that it's to the disadvantage of westsiders for uptown to continue adding economic strength uptown, as opposed to letting it sprawl out into the suburbs where its inaccessible to public transit.

[monsoon]

^That isn't the point of this kind of transit. They have not made the decision to build a singular commuter system for downtown workers, and I would also add that downtown isn't that much of a destination to make spending billions of dollars just to deliver people to the center city, worth it. When the LRT is opened, relatively few people will use it to go to downtown jobs.

The purpose of transit, as was voted on in 1998, was to build a different kind of city than what was, and unfortunately still is, being built now. One where you don't need cars as much and one that would attempt to do something about air pollution. For the most part the 2030 plan and its implementation really doesn't do this as one LRT line with the ability to move 35,000 people isn't much of a transit system.

The downtown area already has the best access to bus service in the county, but by far, the vast majority of people who work downtown, choose not to use it. There is no reason to believe that people will instead go out of their way to board a train if it is built to get to their jobs. Downtown Charlotte isn't really anything more than a built up office park with some expensive condos and clubs thrown in. In the last 17 years the population has managed to grow by about 3-4 thousand people. By almost any measure, putting more investment there is a huge waste of resources when so many other parts of the city have similar needs.

[dubone]

Isn't taxing a business without giving it representation a violation of section 8? No, because businesses are just a large group of people and each of its people (shareholders, clients and employees) can do the voting based on a weighing of their economic interests against their social or other interests. I'm not proposing that the Bank of America or Wachovia should be allowed to cast any votes based on what it creates economically, I'm am trying to convince PEOPLE that investing in areas that help the whole region thrive economically is the right thing to do.

Besides, it doesn't really matter to Bank of America economically whether or not its employees get to work by bus, car, train or dirigible, but it matters to the people who either want to use a bus or train. It matters to the people who must suffer the quality of life consequences of an entirely auto-dependent city. Also, I'm not trying to say that the people opposed to the tax should be stripped of their right to vote, but I am trying to convince voters that it isn't wise to listen to political rhetoric that wants to stop all public investment from going to downtown. I have only one vote, but I'm going to try to convince the people around me that greater good will benefit from investing in transit.

As to Spartan's point, the problem is that uninformed voters often see all public spending as coming from one vast pool of resources, without any divisions of purpose or control. They think that they themselves are paying for all $460 million of the LRT, even though local taxes only covered ~$140m of it, and 30% of those local taxes are paid for by non-locals, so theoretically locals covered $100m of the $460m line with the 1/2-cent sales tax. The issues have come up for other projects like the arena which are entirely paid for by hotel guests from out of town (gee, where is their representation?). Somehow, it always comes to the question of why those funds aren't going to whatever that group of voters want like suburban schools or roads or something. Somehow, the idea is that because schools and roads are underfunded (schools are overcrowded because of failed school bonds, roads are underfunded because they are supposed to be entirely paid for by the state, which uses road money to balance the budget).

I personally find that the core problem is that our tax system so dramatically favors the federal government, which spends a vast percentage of it doing things which don't offer much benefit to ANY of the state or local population (like Iraq War or interest of debt which goes chiefly to our trade deficit countries like China and Japan). The reason cities in the early 1900s were able to invest at significantly higher levels to local infrastructure, was that the tax structure was not so focused on the federal government. In Charlotte, right, now, vast sums of our total individual tax bills go out and never come back to Charlotte for ANYTHING. The local government which spends almost ALL of that money on something that we or our neighbors will use, fights over the crumbs, and thus has the highest scrutiny. If the federal government had some drastic shift, like Ron Paul's philosophy, and abolished the income tax, local governments could do things that had much higher revenues and we could do dramatic things like cities could do in the previous century. Imagine if we had enough money to actually build a grid system without waiting for developers to do it. Imagine if we had enough money to build a proper heavy rail transit system. Imagine if we could build what people in the city want to build instead of needing to go through significant hoops to get the federal government to pay for it.

Anyway, there are a lot of things wrong, which causes a lot of the angst, but the 1/2 cent sales tax to fund local transit infrastructure is the wrong scapegoat for the dissatisfaction.

[Charlotte_native]

So what you are saying is the people with high tax valued property are more deserved of governmental benefits than those not so fortunate. I think this is the crux of the beef that many many people have with what is being called the uptown establishment.