GDP proposal called harsh
Jennifer Boyd Sidden, Charlotte Business Journal
Charlotte planners are proposing radical changes to the policy that guides the city's development patterns -- changes so sweeping some fear development and economic growth will move outside Mecklenburg County.
"It will just shoot economic vitality in the foot," says Karla Hammer Knotts, a developer and land-use consultant. "It will be a slow, painful draining of blood."
A draft of the new general development policies, which has taken years of work by the Charlotte-Mecklenburg planning staff and is still being revised, calls for focusing the majority of high-density residential development in half-mile circles around the city's proposed future transit stations.
These areas comprise about 30 square miles, leaving about 330 square miles in the Charlotte area for development. Property outside the transit areas must meet a long list of criteria -- addressing such issues as transportation adequacy and connectivity -- before it can be rezoned to allow more than three or four homes per acre.
People in the development industry say the requirements for mixing housing with other uses in the transit areas will make it difficult and costly to build there. And the criteria used to earn higher densities outside the transit areas -- in places planners and developers refer to as "wedges" -- are too restrictive, industry leaders say.
"It's very difficult for a new project outside of the (transit) corridor to get enough points to be approved by planning," says Joe Polite, executive vice president with Mulvaney Properties and vice chairman of the Charlotte Chamber's land-use committee.
Such requirements could wind up pushing development into neighboring counties, say developers, planning consultants and business-development experts.
"We don't live on an island -- it's not like if it can't go here it falls into the ocean," says planning consultant and former Charlotte-Mecklenburg planner Walter Fields. "If it can't go here, it goes into Gastonia."
And if residential development shifts out of Mecklenburg, it will take jobs, retail dollars and property tax money with it, says Brian Schick, the chamber group vice president assigned to oversee the land-use committee.
Last year, Mecklenburg County lost $1 billion in retail sales, dropping to $15.4 billion from the 2001 total of $16.5 billion. Part of that drop can be attributed to the economic downturn, observers say. But, during the same period, retail sales increased in the surrounding counties to a little more than $10 billion.
"To lose $1 billion in retail sales when we have a transit system being largely funded by a half-cent sales tax gives us some concern," Schick says. "This is coupled with the indication that retail sales have been growing in some of our adjacent counties, such as Union and Cabarrus."
'Not a real estate issue'
The concerns have become more pronounced as the policy heads toward the City Council's targeted adoption date in November.
"This is not a real estate issue. It really has risen to the level of impairing all economic development in Mecklenburg County," says Anne Marie Howard, chairman of the chamber's land-use committee and chief executive and general counsel for the Charlotte Regional Realtor Association.
Chamber Chairman Ed Weisiger Jr. has sent a letter to City Council members, urging that the policies -- known in planner lingo as GDPs -- "only be adopted after a thorough review of the economic impact."
The letter cites the draft's labeling of "seven incomplete sections as 'future updates,' including economic development, office, retail and other important considerations."
That concern is echoed by others, who say the proposal has too many holes to be ready for adoption in five months, as well as too many proposed requirements that could be open to interpretation.
"I think probably there's an awful lot of it that's incomplete," Fields says. "There's a lot of unanswered questions."
Critics off base, planners say
Planning staffers say they've addressed the issues they were assigned to handle.
"As far as major pieces of information that are missing, I think we're doing pretty darn good right now," says Garet Walsh, the planning department program manager spearheading the policy's development. "We have never been charged with doing commercial development."
The economic-impact argument doesn't hold water, either, she says.
"We've already got enough acreage zoned for 200,000 more residential units," she says. "If you look at our surrounding jurisdictions, they're not saying, 'Come build higher density here.' ... If you look across our community, I think we're providing a lot of opportunities for higher-density development, but we're looking at where it's appropriate, where the transit can support it."
Developers disagree. They say the proposed policy may make sense on paper, but it won't work in practice.
Take the Charlotte Coliseum property, for example, Knotts says. The city is seeking to rezone the 152-acre tract to allow a mix of uses. But, under the proposed new policy, the site wouldn't meet the criteria for allowing high-density development.
Under the proposed policy, points would be awarded based on several factors -- such as whether libraries, schools and post offices are within a half-mile of the site, whether sidewalks extend to the property and whether area roads, buses or bike lanes are adequate.
"None of which the developer has any control over," Fields says. "If you (want to) build in an area where the property next door has no sidewalks, that is an argument against your project."
Such concerns have prompted planning commission member Del Ratcliffe to suggest case studies, which would apply the proposed policy to specific properties here before deciding whether to recommend approval.
He shares the development community's concerns but also sees the need for managing Charlotte's growth.
"If we make ... developing in Mecklenburg County too expensive, then there is going to be pressure to take that development outside of Mecklenburg County, where the development costs aren't as steep," he says. "On the flip side, we still have to control growth in the areas that we do have control over. We need to make sure we integrate our land-use patterns with our transit plans, because if we don't, transit won't work."
The Washington area provides examples of situations in which restrictive zoning helped developers and home builders remain successful in a community -- as well as examples in which they were prompted to pull out, says John McIlwain, senior fellow for housing at the Urban Land Institute.
"It's a good idea to do what (Mecklenburg) is doing, to concentrate development around transit, around the existing downtown," he says. "However, it could be done in the wrong way. The wrong way would be to reduce the number of units or to slow down the speed of development."
A final draft of the policy is scheduled for completion by September, followed by an October recommendation by the planning commission on whether City Council should approve it in November.
That timeline has prompted questions among some people who've participated in the process. They note the pending departure of longtime Planning Director Martin Cramton, who's retiring in December.
"We're basically going to adopt a document that is totally, radically different than what we have right now in some respects, then bring in somebody new," Ratcliffe says. "What if his vision is not exactly the vision we've had?"
A new planning director also might bring innovative ideas, some say. "I don't know if it's smart to rush to get this done or to bring in a new director with a fresh perspective," Polite says.
Find out what commercial real estate professionals in these companies have been up to!
Colliers Pinkard
First Colony Corporation
Grubb & Ellis|Bissell Patrick
McGuire Properties, Inc/TCN
Trammell Crow Company
Trinity Partners
Vision Brokerage Group, LLC
Get Your News in The Voice!
Email press releases to erica@crcbr.org
Don't wait until June,
2004!
Check out the new education schedule for
Fall 2003...
Mandatory Update - Commercial Ver.
Ethics for the Commercial REALTOR
Technology Classes
Commercial Certificate Program
Click here for more information on these upcoming programs:
Fall Forecast
September 11, 2003
Golf Tournament
October 6, 2003
Mixed-Use Bus Tour
November 7, 2003
Annual
Meeting
December
NEW to The Voice, career opportunities
may be placed in the newsletter by member companies free of charge.
Contact Erica Rohrbacher for more information at 704.377.8982 or email
erica@crcbr.org.
Click on the job title below to view a description.
Commercial Appraiser
Senior Asset Manager
Click on the links below to visit our sponsor websites.
Cousins Properties, Inc.
Floyd Smith
Office Park
Huntersville Business
Park
Kannapolis
Gateway
Business
Park
Lauth Property Group
Barker Corvus
Edifice, Inc.
Kennedy Covington Lobdell & Hickman, LLP
The International
Business Park at Concord
Lichtin Corporation
McGuire Properties, Inc. / TCN
Worldwide
Price Davis Tenant Services
CRCBR
PO Box 36566
Charlotte, NC 28236-6566
704.377.8982 phone
704.377.8983 fax
info@crcbr.org
www.crcbr.org