Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by kayman

  1. 1 minute ago, JBS said:

    Dan McCready was the best chance we had in the 9th and he barely lost twice (he may have actually won the first time but the party always complaining about voter fraud was once again the culprit in this instance). I don't think Bishop can be beaten in the next election (which will probably be good for Republicans unfortunately, largely because of the craziness (lesser so but still) of Democrats and the incompetence of Biden).  We need better options and an electorate that isn't blindly partisan and stupid.  I'm not at all hopeful. Today, the national Republican party is completely unprincipled/insane and Liz Cheney (!) is who passes as principled and reasonable in the party. And Democrats are too damn woke (among other things) for their own good. God help us.

    I don't know about that.  With the right resources and a strong Democratic candidate NC-9 along with a couple other districts could be flipped. Bishop isn't politically invincible. The fact that a relatively new to the political scene black female candidate like Cynthia Wallace was a formidable opponent in 2020 shows that the only way Bishop would continue to win is via gerrymandering.  The pandemic caused depressed turnout in NC-9 in 2020.  NC GOP has known this for awhile now hence why they drew the court-contested maps now. 

    • Haha 1
  2. On 1/6/2022 at 10:06 AM, JBS said:

    Bishop is unfortunately my Representative and I call and email regularly to tell him what an embarrassment he is. FWIW, his staff is very nice when I call (even when I ask how they can work for him).  Considering he literally cost us CoStar headquarters and a PayPal operation in Charlotte, everyone on this board should detest him.

    Vote him out then! I'm beyond being helpless, hopeless, and passive about bad political actors in 2022

    He pretended to be faux moderate in the special 2019 election with the convenient black black couple in his campaign commercials that he "helped".  Bishop gives me outright racist and bigot. He can be defeated in 2022 as even the potential new congressional district configuration as most people in that district don't even know that Bishop reps it. He's nothing but a do-nothing puppet for more GOP-led political obstruction in DC.

    • Like 1
  3. On 1/4/2022 at 8:48 AM, Hushpuppy321 said:

    About CATS I agree, but it also seems that Charlotte/CATS is screwed because of a lack of major support from the state.  If you look at Atlanta (MARTA) and Denver (Fast Tracks), they had the benefit of Major State & Federal Support to develop their regional systems.  CATS is largely a City & County affair.

    The State of NC only stopped supporting transit funding statewide when the GOP took over NCGA in the mid-to-late 2010s (see whe the supermajority was formed).  Although broken things arent going to straightened out until more newcomers and existing folks regularly vote for better officials to rep them across all urban areas statewide. Adds fuel to the fire that people need to vote the bad actors (the GOP) out of the majority in Raleigh to me. 

    • Like 1
  4. On 1/3/2022 at 10:53 PM, kermit said:

    Fiscally things continue to go well for the city. Charlotte is still AAA rated, something that Nashville, Atlanta, Columbia, Richmond, Orlando, Jacksonville, Arlington (VA), Dallas and Houston are not.  Despite fiscal stability, I am not at all convinced the city leadership is at all capable of planning for the future, although this has never been a strong suit. The departure of Taiwo, and his interim replacement coming from a real estate background, rather than a planning background, gives me some concerns about the UDO -- the only real effort the city has made to accommodate its growth since the Blue Line was conceived 25+ years ago (the Southend sewer capacity issues from a couple years ago being exhibit number 1 of lack of preparation).

    Don't get me started on CATS and its ability to avoid accountability…


    I wouldn't count Alyson Craig out.  She has a strong planning background which is evident in her work and work history.  By the way, she was the director of the Masters of Real Estate program at UNCC which means she wasn't exactly a real estate person just an education program director.  Prior to that she was a land use planning and zoning professional both in the public and private sectors. 

    CATS is shielded by the COC (City of Charlotte) as it's a regional transit entity operated as a direct municipal department unlike peer systems. Until they separate, expect more of the same bs with a different day.  Blame the COC and its city council for that

    • Like 3
  5. 3 hours ago, KJHburg said:

    In looking at the NC megasites none are near Charlotte.  Not even close.   The Charlotte Regional Business Alliance needs to push a county or two to come up with some sites in our region.

    Toyota landed in the Greensboro Randolph County site.   2 microchip manufacturers are looking at Triangle Innovation Point Moncure megasite in Chatham County.  

    Look at this map .https://edpnc.com/megasites/

    now Mecklenburg it would be hard to put one together but a ring county like Cabarrus Lincoln Iredell Union should consider some sites.  Gaston County maybe already too developed for such a 1000 acre plus site.   But some regional cooperation is needed like Greensboro providing the water and sewer to the Randolph County site.  City of Sanford providing water in exchange for some of the taxes in the Chatham County TIP site even though it is in another county.    One hope for Mecklenburg would be a site of airport owned land south of the airport.   Could be a couple of hundred acres.  

    Otherwise look for these major projects to land elsewhere in the state.  And as  a state we are going to need more of these sites as ours are finally getting taken.  


    The likelihood of such megasite if such scale being in Metro Charlotte led by CRBA would be in the South Carolina suburban and exurban areas like Chester, York, or Lancaster counties. 

  6. 20 hours ago, KJHburg said:

    I did not say I believe the current system of paying for infrastructure is working. I said newer homes are paying a higher share of their market value in  property taxes which in turn pays for infrastructure.  I am concerned about impact fees raising the cost of homes across the board which those studies from Texas showed.   What what you suggest an impact fee be then?  $10,000 per unit? More less?  We live in a growing area with a growing population.  There are plenty of cities in this country that are not growing yet have infrastructure problems as well. 

    Yeah there are plenty who aren't growing but they will be able to handle their infrastructure issues with adequate support as it's maintenance for them.  However,  our issues are both maintenance and rapid expansion of infrastructure. Hence why the explosive infrastructures bursts like the one that occurred with Charlotte Water on the west side last year will become more common occurrences. Especially if we have to choose btwn regular maintenance versus the continued rapid expansion with no way to pay for either our growing needs because of developers incentives.  

    That Texas study is one study but that's not looking impact fee case studies in other southern state peers.  Fear of change is how Charlotte wind up with this affordable housing issue in the first place.  Meanwhile several jurisdictions in the Triangle have impact fees right now yet their housing prices are comparably similar to Charlotte's current prices despite we both practically have the same growing rates.

  7. That still doesn't change the need for impact fees. You also didn't even mention GA who is much more comparable to NC in pretty much all metrics yet enforce impact fees.  Impact fees don't have impact on housing prices at all except strongly encourages more infill development versus further greenfield development. Who wants to pay more for connections to infrastructure when it could be avoided? You're going to pay today or tomorrow. I'll rather see it paid up front. The Charlotte 2040 Plan and the accompanying appendix documents are basically saying that exactly I'm saying with stats, figures, and case studies.  

    It's all whatever to me because you believe a clearly broken system is working when it's not here with both housing prices & avoiding adequately charging developers for more impact strains on infrastructure. *shrug*


    • Like 1
    • Confused 1
    • Sad 1
  8. 5 hours ago, KJHburg said:

    @kaymanlets talk about impact fees and housing over here not in the Southend thread.

    Land values in the upstate and midlands of South Carolina are much less than Charlotte area or Raleigh Durham for example.  Adding even a few thousand more to the cost of every home, townhome and apartment does raise prices.  Here is an academic study from Texas  NC already uses tap on fees for water and sewer in manner somewhat like an impact fee. 

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/24861478   Texas study

    another study http://www.impactfees.com/publications/burge-Impact_Fees_in_Relation_to_Housing_Prices-2016.pdf

    To say there is not evidence of increased costs with impact fees as a blanket statement is incorrect.

    I look at tax values all the time in this area.  Most new homes are assessed very close to their sales price not quite but very close.  Older intown homes in Charlotte have tax values much less than their market values.

    For example a home closed on Kingston Ave in Dilworth its tax value is $634,500 and the home sold for $1,075,000. Built in 1895. 

    Here is another home built in 2020 with tax value $1,165,000 that sold this year for $1,280,000 on Marshall Place.  It actually sold less than tax value.

    ( I picked these homes randomly from a list of Dilworth homes sold and one that was newer) 

    Newer homes pay much closer to their tax values than older homes.  This is repeated all over the metro area.  New homes are paying MORE than their fair share of property taxes.  

    Lets talk about SC property taxes.  When a home sells in SC the county is allowed to jump its value to a market value.  That is not done in NC.   I own a condo in SC and ,my tax value is based on what I bought it for 16 years ago and is capped at how much it can go up a year (usually a few % or less)  However when a condo in my same complex sells today they are jumped to a new market value and pay taxes 2x o r 3x what I am paying.   This is done all over SC.  




    All you've said and posted links saying that some states caps the taxes to subsidized and offset prices. Classic bait and switch.  All you're doing is saying "kick the can down the road when it doesn't impact my pockets"  However, that still doesn't change my stance on impact fees enforcement. 

    • Like 2
    • Haha 1
  9. On 12/15/2021 at 10:14 AM, kermit said:

    IMO our current political system makes infill much more difficult than it needs to be, this discourages developers who are comfortable with greenfield subdivisions reluctant to do any infill (and infill does not offer the same scale of opportunities that greenfield does). We have plenty of developers, but not enough willing to do infill. It would help a lot if the real estate finance system was better set up for small projects.

    I dunno if public financing is necessary. Most infill projects are very profitable. The bulk of the risk comes from the difficulty of getting construction started. Rezoning (and angry neighbors) remediation and infrastructure issues all add to project uncertainty. If government can streamline that part of the process (more allowed by right, less neighborhood and council pushback, less uncertainty about sewer capacity etc.)  then intown development would be much more common.

    I think builders are generally happy to build on shovel ready sites. The roadblocks here are 1) the required zoning change; 2) reluctant financiers; 3) potentially lower profit margins due to the suboptimal site (other, better, sites still exist so a developer’s board will be reluctant to approve a project unless prices are super low)

    Edit: I’ll add that there need to be sticks used to make greenfield development pay more of its fully allocated costs. End subsidies for suburban housing such as road and utilities extensions at public expense, add a carbon tax, have homeowners pay the full costs of their low density lifestyles. Changes like those would make infill development much more attractive to everyone.

    Two words must be done: impact fees

    It can be done and must be done here in Charlotte.

    We must vote for more civic responsible and responsive to the explosive growing urban area needs in Metro Charlotte but also in the Triangle in a certain extent as well here in North Carolina in November 2022.  

    Ironically, (conservative-led) South Carolina has an statewide impact fees statute. Impact fees are strictly enforced with larger development in York and Lancaster counties. 

    The constant excuses are inexcusable about impact fees laws being passed. Moore & Crew aren't doing us any favors by blocking this law.  You all must vote and vote for more responsible state legislative officials every election cycle in NC. No more excuses


    • Haha 1
  10. 20 hours ago, tozmervo said:

    I have one for the list: For people on UP to stop being so effing pessimistic about every single damn thing. It's been real bad the past year or two. You'd think Charlotte was a real POS city going off what you read here.

    I agree to a certain extent about the constant complaints about "how Uptown has become unsafe". It was a perception for those who really wanted to live in the suburbs anyways.  That's fine but don't trash the city in the process.  The urban core of the city outside of museums and family-oriented attractions generally for those want the urban lifestyle.  

    19 hours ago, davidclt said:

    Maybe our pessimism is the longstanding hope that Charlotte will learn from other cities' mistakes and do better for her citizens to make an urbane, livable, modern 21st century city. Rather than looking back and lamenting all that we have lost and can't recover, how do we move forward in making a place that's great to live, nice to visit and noted or what and how we are - Esse quam videri, right?

    I agree with this as well.  Charlotte should not be looking backwards towards when it was more socially conservative & button-up with the urban core was dead after 5PM .  We must aim to become a world-class, global city outdoing in quality and giving all an equally as diverse alternative to Atlanta in the Southeast. 

    • Like 3
  11. On 12/27/2021 at 11:13 AM, Urban Cowboy said:

    I had friends walking out of the Ellis the other day when gun fire erupted from the Hookah Lounge parking lot. They could have been killed if a stray bullet hit them. Remember when that visiting doctor was killed on College from a stray bullet? It unfortunately can happen anywhere (even pre-Covid as was the case with the doctor).

    I feel safe uptown and have never felt unsafe either. But perception does matter. And these anecdotes do exist. And while South End is booming (rightfully so) I do think it’s created a vacuum north of Trade as momentum has swung south. Vacant buildings and lots don’t inspire energy and they attract blight. The reality is that our corporations are the ones that drove much of the development in uptown. And the scale and street interactions of the buildings are focused on WORK. Whereas south end’s buildings (historically) are smaller and have a better human scale/street interaction. They’re focused on LIVING and PLAYING. Where would you rather be?

    Hopefully workers return soon because like it or not - most of uptown’s character and charm was leveled for beautiful skyscrapers (that we all love and appreciate!). But there’s few retail options uptown. Better dining elsewhere. And if there are no workers - what’s the draw? A few museums yes. I love what’s happening in South End but there needs to be more focus on a vibrant and safe-feeling city center. If that means reducing rent rates for street level retail or other incentives - bring it on. People need a reason to be uptown. 

    Millennials and GenZ are leaving traditional office jobs in droves for remote working.  Check LinkedIn and all of the articles and detail commentary from economists as that's proof of it occurring widespread.  That's the majority of Charlotte's population growth are Millennials and GenZ professionals and entrepreneurs.  They want more work/life balance so the office-centric Uptown ideal is dying or soon to be dead. The CCCP/Charlotte Central Ciry Partnership has to work hard to come up with non-employment centric development as the future of urban core skyscrapers will need to more a mixture of uses outside of office for Uptown to thrive. More residental, a variety of commercial, more entertainment oriented, and hotels 

    The same issues are occurring with crime in Midtown Atlanta but the developments and people are still coming there. It is why I said it's an enforcement issue because if developers see a potential market with growing numbers of clients and consumers then they will continue to come. That's what I see with SouthEnd along with Uptown but only if the latter continues to diversify its mixed use development. Otherwise SouthEnd will outflank Uptown much like how Midtown Atlanta has with Downtown Atlanta as the go to place there. 

    • Like 1
  12. If there's more things to draw people to Uptown outside of offices then it'll be fine.  With growth comes different types and sometimes there are petty property crimes.

    The hookah lounge is an enforcement issue.  The City of Charlotte and the Mecklenburg ABC Board should step up stipulations on this place when it comes to security and enforcement. The same things have in occurred in other places and young people, professionals, and thoses who want to go out and party at clubs still moved there for the nightlife regardless.

    More places like the Ellis should be constructed throughout Uptown so that the younger and economically upwardly mobile population choose it like they choose  other parts of the urban core.  CCCP should be as focused on quality of life amenities, leisural destination placemaking, and residential growth as they are on major employment generators

    • Like 1
  13. 1 hour ago, Windsurfer said:

    I'm confused with this comment, besides the fact that I think "rapid growth" for the sake of growth is a good thing.  If we have too many folks looking back and wanting to maintain status quo, how is it we're in the "top 10" ? Apparently,  yearning for smart growth accelerates just the thing some of don't want. (?)

    The negatively thinking individuals who wrote that wants everywhere to be growing like Charlotte an the Triangle. However unless the Millennials and GenZ  professionals chose otherwise then these two places are the main draws to NC. If the other 74 counties are losing population then it says the said younger professionals are not drawn there. That's what's an economic development problem the state leaders need to solve and stop downplaying the high growth happening in Charlotte and the Triangle.

    • Like 2
    • Confused 1
  14. 2 hours ago, kermit said:

    What is your source on this?

    I can use my own career field for example.  In my area of work, we all having more things done. I work in the urban planning and development industry and it's exploding locally in work yet I complete all of my assignments and responsibilities as a very high quality product and prompt. 

    Guess what, my work performance and productivity has been stellar and exceeding performance expectations for nearly 2 years straight.  The reason why I don't work a traditional 8-5 M-F schedule.  I've haven't been in an office outside rare occasions except for specific reasons since March 2020. No complaints from my direct supervisor at all because he knows my work ethic as well as others.

    Oh yeah, I am one of those Millennials/Gen Z professionals. 

    The whole notion of people needing to be in an office in asinine because you're only wasting time, space, and resources for someone who doesn't really care about how your work is done as long as it's done correctly and on time. Overseeing some one who you don't trust to do their job is a truly waste of company resources, period.

    This is why I said what I said and resources should be better utilized for making Uptown like Downtown Austin or Midtown Atlanta. The excuses for return to the office are b.s. at best from individuals who do not understand that things aren't going back to the way it was pre-COVID. That toothpaste is out of the tube...

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  15. 12 hours ago, CLT2014 said:

    Wells Fargo has delayed return to work indefinitely due to omicron so a significant chunk of Uptown workers aren't coming back in January now.

    All the more reason for the Charlotte Center City Partners (CCCP) should focus on converting and constructing more mixed use developments with multifamily  rental and owner-occupied residential units in Uptown.  Hoping for masses of individuals being forced back to open-office-format cubicles for work is downright foolish and selfish. Productivity of work-from-home (WFH) individuals in white collar jobs are at an all time high so this office overseer and capative audience of in-office workers mindset is garbage and will ultimately hurt Uptown growth with Millennials and Gen Z professionals recruitment and retention for our major HQs.  COVID-19 has revealed a major weakness of Uptown and this is not an opportunity to continue status quo of forcing office workers to return when this pandemic isn't over.

    The CCCP need to promote for Uptown to be more like Downtown Austin and less like the Lower Manhattan.  A strategy of more mixed development with residential and hotels along with more leisurely tourist destinations in Uptown will help Uptown to shift from the constant ups and downs from this ongoing global pandemic. In this metro area and surrounding region  there are thousands of people who have disposable income and the desire to spend it having fun and enjoying themselves not working in the city. There are no good reasons for local small establishments in the Overstreet Mall and Uptown niche businesses that don't know how to advertise or utilize social media promoting their existence to the non-office worker consumer.  Uptown must innovate and evolve from mainly office-centric to the first or second 24/7/365 regional activity center (with SouthEnd) of a region of 3M+ population 

    The CCCP & COC (City of Charlotte) should be using their excess COVID-19 relief funds to help these establishments with resources to advertise, promote their business to the masses.  Also the COC & CCCP should make parking in these areas free or discounted parking, use CATS transit, and better wayfinding signage to encourage more non-working visitors to the Overstreet Mall as a destination in Uptown.

    • Like 2
  16. On 12/21/2021 at 10:35 AM, QCxpat said:

    This morning, the U.S. Census Bureau released population estimates for the nation, states and Puerto Rico.

    The estimates are as of July 1, 2021.  Please see tables and a link below.

    Link:  https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2021/2021-population-estimates.html


    "The South, with a population of 127,225,329, was the most populous of the four regions (encompassing 38.3% of the total national population) and was the only region that had positive net domestic migration of 657,682 (the movement of people from one area to another within the United States) between 2020 and 2021.  The Northeast region, the least populous of the four regions with a population of 57,159,838 in 2021, experienced a population decrease of -365,795 residents due to natural decrease (-31,052) and negative net domestic migration (-389,638).  The West saw a gain in population (35,868) despite losing residents via negative net domestic migration (-144,941).  Growth in the West was due to natural increase (143,082) and positive net international migration (38,347).  Between 2020 and 2021, 33 states saw population increases and 17 states and the District of Columbia lost population, 11 of which had losses of over 10,000 people.  This is a historically large number of states to lose population in a year."


    Table 1.

    Top 10 Most Populous States: 2021
    Rank Geographic Area April 1, 2020
    (Estimates Base)
    July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021
    1 California 39,538,223 39,499,738 39,237,836
    2 Texas 29,145,505 29,217,653 29,527,941
    3 Florida 21,538,187 21,569,932 21,781,128
    4 New York 20,201,249 20,154,933 19,835,913
    5 Pennsylvania 13,002,700 12,989,625 12,964,056
    6 Illinois 12,812,508 12,785,245 12,671,469
    7 Ohio 11,799,448 11,790,587 11,780,017
    8 Georgia 10,711,908 10,725,800 10,799,566
    9 North Carolina 10,439,388 10,457,177 10,551,162
    10 Michigan 10,077,331 10,067,664 10,050,811


    Table 2. 

    Top 10 States in Numeric Growth, 2020 to 2021
    Rank Geographic Area April 1, 2020
    (Estimates Base)
    July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Numeric Growth
    1 Texas 29,145,505 29,217,653 29,527,941 310,288
    2 Florida 21,538,187 21,569,932 21,781,128 211,196
    3 Arizona 7,151,502 7,177,986 7,276,316 98,330
    4 North Carolina 10,439,388 10,457,177 10,551,162 93,985
    5 Georgia 10,711,908 10,725,800 10,799,566 73,766
    6 South Carolina 5,118,425 5,130,729 5,190,705 59,976
    7 Utah 3,271,616 3,281,684 3,337,975 56,291
    8 Tennessee 6,910,840 6,920,119 6,975,218 55,099
    9 Idaho 1,839,106 1,847,772 1,900,923 53,151
    10 Nevada 3,104,614 3,114,071 3,143,991 29,920


    Table 3.

    Top 10 States in Percent Growth, 2020 to 2021
    Rank Geographic Area April 1, 2020
    (Estimates Base)
    July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Percent Growth
    1 Idaho 1,839,106 1,847,772 1,900,923 2.9%
    2 Utah 3,271,616 3,281,684 3,337,975 1.7%
    3 Montana 1,084,225 1,086,193 1,104,271 1.7%
    4 Arizona 7,151,502 7,177,986 7,276,316 1.4%
    5 South Carolina 5,118,425 5,130,729 5,190,705 1.2%
    6 Delaware 989,948 991,886 1,003,384 1.2%
    7 Texas 29,145,505 29,217,653 29,527,941 1.1%
    8 Florida 21,538,187 21,569,932 21,781,128 1.0%
    9 Nevada 3,104,614 3,114,071 3,143,991 1.0%
    10 South Dakota 886,667 887,099 895,376 0.9%


    Table 4.

    Top 10 States (or Equivalent)in Numeric Decline, 2020 to 2021
    Rank Geographic Area April 1, 2020
    (Estimates Base)
    July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Numeric Decline
    1 New York 20,201,249 20,154,933 19,835,913 -319,020
    2 California 39,538,223 39,499,738 39,237,836 -261,902
    3 Illinois 12,812,508 12,785,245 12,671,469 -113,776
    4 Massachusetts 7,029,917 7,022,220 6,984,723 -37,497
    5 Louisiana 4,657,757 4,651,203 4,624,047 -27,156
    6 Pennsylvania 13,002,700 12,989,625 12,964,056 -25,569
    7 District of Columbia 689,545 690,093 670,050 -20,043
    8 Michigan 10,077,331 10,067,664 10,050,811 -16,853
    9 New Jersey 9,288,994 9,279,743 9,267,130 -12,613
    10 Ohio 11,799,448 11,790,587 11,780,017 -10,570


    Table 5.

    Top 10 States (or Equivalent) in Percent Decline, 2020 to 2021
    Rank Geographic Area April 1, 2020
    (Estimates Base)
    July 1, 2020 July 1, 2021 Percent Decline
    1 District of Columbia 689,545 690,093 670,050 -2.9%
    2 New York 20,201,249 20,154,933 19,835,913 -1.6%
    3 Illinois 12,812,508 12,785,245 12,671,469 -0.9%
    4 Hawaii 1,455,271 1,451,911 1,441,553 -0.7%
    5 California 39,538,223 39,499,738 39,237,836 -0.7%
    6 Louisiana 4,657,757 4,651,203 4,624,047 -0.6%
    7 Massachusetts 7,029,917 7,022,220 6,984,723 -0.5%
    8 North Dakota 779,094 778,962 774,948 -0.5%
    9 West Virginia 1,793,716 1,789,798 1,782,959 -0.4%
    10 Mississippi 2,961,279 2,956,870 2,949,965 -0.2%

    Last Revised: December 21, 2021

    How Does Your State Compare?


    North Carolina is now going faster than Georgia again. It's interesting to see how this translate throughout the 2020s.

    • Like 3
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.