U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-26-2008, 06:43 AM
 
Location: Huntersville
1,852 posts, read 4,676,835 times
Reputation: 525

Advertisements

Found this little quip quite interesting about the disappearing green space in NC. I sure hope they plan well, sounds like they are at least thinking about it. I think Charlotte would have been a great area for a downtown park. I wish they could do something near Trade and Tryon, something of a good size. But then again I also wish they had some retail down here. Maybe the old Polk building that just sits there.. waiting.. waiting..

Charlotte Observer | 03/26/2008 | In 25 years, county's<br> green could disappear (http://www.charlotte.com/109/story/552823.html - broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-26-2008, 07:14 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,212,814 times
Reputation: 22375
This really concerns me. Quote from the article aforementioned:

Mecklenburg County does not require developers to set aside green space for typical subdivisions, but offers special zoning for builders who agree to do so.

I just wrote on another thread that I felt developers had gotten off too lightly here in this region b/c they are not required to set aside green space. This confirms why that is happening, and I feel this is really poor planning on the part of CharMeck officials.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2008, 07:46 AM
 
889 posts, read 2,851,709 times
Reputation: 343
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
This really concerns me. Quote from the article aforementioned:

Mecklenburg County does not require developers to set aside green space for typical subdivisions, but offers special zoning for builders who agree to do so.

I just wrote on another thread that I felt developers had gotten off too lightly here in this region b/c they are not required to set aside green space. This confirms why that is happening, and I feel this is really poor planning on the part of CharMeck officials.

It just amazes me as well how developers have gotten away with this. It is part of what makes this state have so much appeal. In the almost two years that i have lived in Irredel County, i just am astonished but the amount of tree's that have been bulldozed down just to make way for homes and commecial buildings.Near the Lowes campus, last year they just flatten out a chunk of land completly.It made me sick not to see them save some tree's dotted in to what ever they are even building there.
This state needs to adopt some strigent rules before the canopy of tree's is non existent for the most part.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2008, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Huntersville
1,852 posts, read 4,676,835 times
Reputation: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821 View Post
This really concerns me. Quote from the article aforementioned:

Mecklenburg County does not require developers to set aside green space for typical subdivisions, but offers special zoning for builders who agree to do so.

I just wrote on another thread that I felt developers had gotten off too lightly here in this region b/c they are not required to set aside green space. This confirms why that is happening, and I feel this is really poor planning on the part of CharMeck officials.
I agree 100%, it's one thing when you have acre+ lots and there are trees around. But with all these .22 acre lots, you need to set aside some green space, not not a community pool and playground, and not just your enterence sign, but some trees and grass and .. ya nothing planned... GRR!..

I think I planned better playing Sim City!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2008, 08:07 AM
 
Location: Seattle Area
3,455 posts, read 6,315,803 times
Reputation: 3583
Greetings Charlotte! I hope you don't mind a Seattleite chiming in here....

As to every issue there are two sides to the coin. Out here in Seattle we have some of the strictest land use regulations in the country...and it shows in our housing prices.

Here is a link to an article in the Seattle Times: Rules add $200,000 to Seattle house price

A quote from the article:

"As an example of how this plays out, Eicher explains that "the statewide growth-management plan gave King County few options but to require that landowners in rural areas that haven't already cleared their land to keep 50 to 65 percent of their property in its 'natural state.' This forced greater density in Seattle."

Another quote:

"In the final analysis, Eicher believes Seattle's regulatory climate exists because its residents want it. "My sense is land-use restrictions are imposed to generate socially desirable outcomes," he says. "We all love parks and green spaces. But we must also be informed about the costs. It's very easy to vote for a park if you think the cost is free."

I have mixed feelings about the whole thing, on one hand I'd hate to see sprawl take over what is left of our green space, on the other we pay dearly for that not to happen.

I'm not sure what the answer is, and I hope the Charlotte area doesn't lose all of it's remaining green space, but maybe Charlotte and Mecklenburg County can come up with a less expensive solution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2008, 09:19 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,212,814 times
Reputation: 22375
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlerain View Post
Greetings Charlotte! I hope you don't mind a Seattleite chiming in here....

As to every issue there are two sides to the coin. Out here in Seattle we have some of the strictest land use regulations in the country...and it shows in our housing prices.

Here is a link to an article in the Seattle Times: Rules add $200,000 to Seattle house price

A quote from the article:

"As an example of how this plays out, Eicher explains that "the statewide growth-management plan gave King County few options but to require that landowners in rural areas that haven't already cleared their land to keep 50 to 65 percent of their property in its 'natural state.' This forced greater density in Seattle."

Another quote:

"In the final analysis, Eicher believes Seattle's regulatory climate exists because its residents want it. "My sense is land-use restrictions are imposed to generate socially desirable outcomes," he says. "We all love parks and green spaces. But we must also be informed about the costs. It's very easy to vote for a park if you think the cost is free."

I have mixed feelings about the whole thing, on one hand I'd hate to see sprawl take over what is left of our green space, on the other we pay dearly for that not to happen.

I'm not sure what the answer is, and I hope the Charlotte area doesn't lose all of it's remaining green space, but maybe Charlotte and Mecklenburg County can come up with a less expensive solution.
Very interesting to see what other areas are doing.

I think developers could have been forced to incorporate green space easily enuff here. At least that would have been on the right track. The thing w/ green space in new developments is - the city is not paying for it. Maintenance can be built in w/ HOA fees.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2008, 09:30 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,212,814 times
Reputation: 22375
Here is an interesting, well-researched and referenced article on the impact of greenways and trails . . . Our city planners need to get a grip and make some hard decisions.

In addition, I think Union County needs to start taking a hard look at land use.

This article is quite thought provoking and addresses cost/tax issues as well as benefits from having a well-developed greenway and trail system.

Economic Impacts of Rivers, Trails and Greenways: Public Cost Reduction
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2008, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Huntersville
1,852 posts, read 4,676,835 times
Reputation: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlerain View Post
Greetings Charlotte! I hope you don't mind a Seattleite chiming in here....

As to every issue there are two sides to the coin. Out here in Seattle we have some of the strictest land use regulations in the country...and it shows in our housing prices.

Here is a link to an article in the Seattle Times: Rules add $200,000 to Seattle house price

A quote from the article:

"As an example of how this plays out, Eicher explains that "the statewide growth-management plan gave King County few options but to require that landowners in rural areas that haven't already cleared their land to keep 50 to 65 percent of their property in its 'natural state.' This forced greater density in Seattle."

Another quote:

"In the final analysis, Eicher believes Seattle's regulatory climate exists because its residents want it. "My sense is land-use restrictions are imposed to generate socially desirable outcomes," he says. "We all love parks and green spaces. But we must also be informed about the costs. It's very easy to vote for a park if you think the cost is free."

I have mixed feelings about the whole thing, on one hand I'd hate to see sprawl take over what is left of our green space, on the other we pay dearly for that not to happen.

I'm not sure what the answer is, and I hope the Charlotte area doesn't lose all of it's remaining green space, but maybe Charlotte and Mecklenburg County can come up with a less expensive solution.
Good Information. There has to be a happy median... I think we have so much housing now, I am not sure how compact we would get, but I for one, wouldn't mind seeing our house pricing go up a bit to see better planning involved. Maybe I say that cause I am already a home owner..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:44 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top