Charlotte’s 2040 Plan: Bad process leads to bad results

The free market is like a wave in the ocean. It doesn’t care which way you want to go. It isn’t racist. It doesn’t even care if you believe in it. It just is.

You can study the wave and figure out a way to use its momentum to get you to your destination. Or you can chart a course that smashes right into its frothing crest and close your eyes. The latter is what has happened with the Charlotte 2040 Comprehensive Plan.

A ‘Comp Plan’ is the foundation for many decisions — from long-term public policies and investments to resolving weekly conflicts. The key phrase to remember: ‘this isn’t consistent with the plan’.

For years Charlotte City Council members asked for details about our city’s 2040 Comp Plan, but we were never shown them. And then — on Halloween 2020, no less — a 320-page manifesto spookily appeared on a website. Two weeks ago, council members were suddenly told we had 60 days to act on it.

For comparison, when we rezone a few parcels each month, we hold public forums. Staff makes recommendations. An independent committee weighs in. Comprehensive analysis is delivered to our houses, and staff walks us through updates before our decision.

So, why has there been almost no engagement for four months? It’s simple: the plan was never designed for us to be involved. This isn’t the failure of our hardworking staffers who have been at it for years. This is a failure of city leadership to properly engage council members. If that approach isn’t good enough for monthly meetings to rezone a few parcels, it certainly isn’t good enough for a historic rezoning of our entire city.

A flawed process yields flawed results. The 2040 Comp plan is set up for failure, with about 20% of the 404 objectives not even legal. The biggest flaw of all, however, is its inequity — the very goal this supposedly champions. The plan’s hallmark is abolishing single-family zoning, but to be clear, places like SouthPark and Myers Park won’t be ground zero. It will be places where land is less expensive — neighborhoods like Hidden Valley, Derita, Westover Hills, Lakeview, and Howie Acres — that risk being flooded with new units.

It will be a good time to be a developer, a bad time to be a lower or middle-class family, and these same activists will say ‘the market forces’ caused the gentrification as they champion another round of flawed policies. Look no further than the LYNX Blue Line for an example where public/private investments have accelerated displacement from historically minority neighborhoods.

Where do we go from here? I propose five steps:

First, delay approving the plan for another year. There is, in fact, no state requirement this all be done by summer. We should also see the current Unified Development Ordinance draft so we don’t repeat recent mistakes.

Second, invite council members to be more than a rubber stamp. And like we do each month in simple rezonings, allow us to actually preside over an inclusive process as voters elected us to do.

Third, address the need for affordable and diverse housing with a scalpel, not a blunt instrument, utilizing techniques like general development policies and density in transit corridors.

Fourth, find truly disruptive innovations to achieve equity and growth, like boosting home ownership and connecting people to good-paying jobs.

And fifth, perform a comprehensive impact study to reveal likely outcomes and unintended consequences of the plan.

Density alone doesn’t equal affordability. True solutions require precision and nuance, not a one-size-fits-all plan.

This story was originally published March 15, 2021 at 7:05 AM.