CHARLOTTE FUTURE | 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
OUR CITY. OUR PLAN. OUR FUTURE.
MANUALS AND METRICS
(FINAL RECOMMENDED PLAN)
Published July 20, 2021
CITY OF CHARLOTTE
⬚ figure
AUTHENTIC EQUITABLE RESILIENT INTEGRATED
CITY OF CHARLOTTE
⬚ figure
AUTHENTIC EQUITABLE RESILIENT INTEGRATED
| SECTION 1: A COMMUNITY-BASED VISION |
|---|
| SECTION 2: COMPLETE COMMUNITIES AND PLACES |
| SECTION 3: POLICY FRAMEWORK |
| GLOSSARY OF TERMS |
| ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
| SHORT-TERM ACTIONS |
|---|
| PLANNING APPROACH |
| COMMUNITY AREA MAPPING |
| UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE |
| ANTI-DISPLACEMENT TOOLS |
| FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS |
| CIP PREPARATION |
| ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY |
| AMENDING THE PLAN |
| TRACKING PROGRESS |
| A: EQUITABLE GROWTH FRAMEWORK |
|---|
| B: PLACE TYPES MANUAL |
| C: GOAL AND OBJECTIVES METRICS |
A. Equitable Growth Framework Manual
B. Place Types Manual
C. Goal and Objectives Metrics
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Building on the Built City Equity Atlas developed in Phase 1 of the Comprehensive Plan effort, a methodology for measuring access, environmental justice and equity has been developed to help identify areas where residents and businesses may not have access to daily needs, choices for housing, a diversity of employment, or safe and healthy environments. The Equity Metrics described and mapped herein were used to 1) inform the development of Goals and supporting Policies, Projects and Programs in the Comprehensive Plan; 2) to identify priorities for Community Planning Areas for subsequent mapping and planning efforts within sub-geographies throughout the community; and 3) to assess and track progress towards becoming a more equitable, fair and just city over the next 20 years.
Each of the four Equity Metrics comprises a series of relevant indicators and is compared to data that helps us understand where populations that are vulnerable to displacement are concentrated (Populations Vulnerable to Displacement Overlay). The four Equity Metrics described in greater detail after an explanation of the Populations Vulnerable to Displacement Overlay include: Access to Essential Amenities, Goods and Services; Access to Housing Opportunities; Access to Employment Opportunities; and Environmental Justice.
Note: The Equity Metrics are based upon the most accurate and up-to-date data available at the time of the Plan drafting. For future efforts, and during the implementation of the Equity Metrics, the data sets will be updated and the accuracy improved as feasible.
⬚ figure
As a critical layer of analysis, an overlay identifying concentrations of residents that are vulnerable to being impacted negatively by change was developed. The analysis identifies residents that have characteristics that tend to make them more vulnerable to potential displacement. Unfortunately, the same characteristics that make certain populations susceptible to displacement are used in identifying whether environmental impacts are justly distributed. Areas with higher concentrations of vulnerable populations are overlaid on the access to opportunity and environmental justice maps to better understand how physical conditions, access, costs and benefits impact residents that have suffered from systemic racial and other social discrimination and/or are less likely to be able to adapt to economic and other changes. The measures contributing to vulnerability to displacement are often good indicators, along with low or no car ownership, of transit propensity as well. Transit propensity is a concept that measures the likelihood of using public transit.
Four measures have been documented as major contributors to vulnerability to displacement and are used to identify the areas with the most vulnerable populations across Charlotte:
Areas that meet these four conditions will be identified as areas vulnerable to displacement.
Areas with a greater percentage of residents living at or below the poverty level (relative to the County’s average rate) are considered to be vulnerable. The map to the right shows the household poverty rate by grid cell (based on 2018 ACS 5-year estimates by block group, apportioned to grid cells).
Map at right: Household Poverty Rate, 2018
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
-.-.-.-. City of Charlotte Sphere of Influence Boundary ☐ ☐ ☐ High-Capacity Transit Line
| ☐ | No |
| █ | Yes |
Any area with a poverty rate higher than the county-wide rate of 11.2% were considered to be vulnerable.
Map at left: Areas with Household Poverty Rate Exceeding Mecklenburg County, 2018
Areas with a greater percentage of residents that have low educational attainment rates (High School degree/GED or less) are considered to be vulnerable. The map at right shows the rate of low education (among the population age 25 and older) by grid cell (based on 2018 ACS 5-year estimates by block group, apportioned to grid cells).
Map at right: Education of Population Age 25 and Older, 2018
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Any area with a rate higher than the county-wide rate of 27.3% were considered to be vulnerable, as shown in the map at left.
Map at left: Education Compared to County
Areas with a greater concentration of non-white residents are identified as potentially vulnerable. These areas may not truly reflect vulnerability of residents themselves, but likely indicate areas disadvantaged due to historical racially based structural and systematic policies (e.g. redlining) which may still be resulting in lingering issues that cause the areas to lack access to opportunity. The map at right shows the non-white population by grid cell (based on 2018 ACS 5-year estimates by block group, apportioned to grid cells).
Map at right: Percent Non-White Population, 2018
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
--- City of Charlotte Sphere of Influence Boundary ☐ ☐ ☐ High-Capacity Transit Line
| No | |
| Yes |
Any area with a rate higher than the county-wide rate of 45.5% were considered to be vulnerable, as shown in the map at left.
Map at left: Non-White Population Compared to County
Areas with a greater concentration of residents aged 65 or older are identified as potentially vulnerable. The map at right shows the age 65+ population by grid cell (based on 2018 ACS 5-year estimates by census tract, apportioned to grid cells).
Map at right: Percent Population Age 65+, 2018
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Any area with a rate higher than the county-wide rate of 10.6% were considered to be vulnerable, as shown in the map at left.
Map at left: Age 65+ Population Compared to County
Using the described metrics and taking the most vulnerable grid cells from the Vulnerability to Displacement map, the overlay shown in the map at right was applied to all the Equitable Growth Framework Maps.
Map at right: Areas Vulnerable to Displacement Overlay
The following data sets were not included in the measurement of Vulnerability to Displacement for various reasons including lack of available data, poor data quality, or out of date information. If these data sets become more useable and accurate in the future, they should be considered for use in the Vulnerability to Displacement Equity Metric.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Building on the Equity Atlas developed in Phase 1 of the Comprehensive Plan effort, a methodology for measuring access to essential amenities, goods and services has been developed to help identify areas where residents and businesses may not have access to essential amenities, goods and services. The measuring of access to essential amenities, goods and services is closely linked to the bigger Plan concepts related to complete communities and 10-minute neighborhoods. The metrics to measure access to essential amenities, goods and services will primarily utilize data associated with the Charlotte/Mecklenburg Quality of Life Explorer (QLE) tool that looks at the social, housing, economic, environmental and safety conditions in Charlotte and Mecklenburg County. The following measures are proposed to measure access to essential amenities, goods and services.
Access to essential amenities, goods and services is analyzed using seven measures:
Data: Grid cells that meet the “opportunity” criteria for each of the 7 metrics are scored with a 1, while those that do not meet the criteria receive a 0. Scores are added to create a final Access to Essential Amenities, Goods, and Services score. The primary housing data source is Mecklenburg County tax parcel data (2019). Data is reported at the parcel level and aggregated to grid cells based on the centroid location of the parcel. The amenities, good and services data is from a variety of sources and is outlined in the data inventory.
This measure examines proximity of households across Charlotte to licensed childcare/early childhood education facilities. Areas with more than 50% of households within ½ mile of a licensed childcare/early childhood education facilities are considered to have equitable access.
Map at right: Percentage of Households within ½ mile of Licensed Childcare/Early Childhood Education Facility
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
This measure examines the proximity of households across Charlotte to outdoor recreational opportunities. Areas with more than 50% of households within ½ mile of parks, greenway, open space or trails are considered to have equitable access.
Map at left: Percentage of Households within ½ mile of Parks, Open Space and Trails
This measure examines the proximity of households across Charlotte to community facilities and amenities. Areas with over 50% percent of households within ½-mile of libraries, recreation centers, senior centers, nature centers, or indoor rental facilities are considered to have equitable access.
Map at right: Percentage of Households within ½ mile of Community Facilities
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
This measure examines the proximity of households across Charlotte to healthy, fresh food options to assess equitable access. Areas with more than 50% of households within ½ mile of grocery stores, farmers markets, or community gardens are considered to have equitable access.
Map at left: Percentage of Households within ½ mile of Fresh Food Options
This measure examines the proximity of households across Charlotte to health care facilities and pharmacies. Areas with more than 25% of households within ½ mile of a healthcare facility and a pharmacy are considered to have equitable access.
Map at right: Percentage of Households Within 1/2 mile of Health Care Facilities and Pharmacies
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
This measure examines the proximity of households across Charlotte to banks and credit unions. Areas with more than 50% of households within ½ mile of a bank or credit union are considered to have access to financial services.
Map at left: Percentage of Households Within 1/2 mile of a Financial Institution
This measure examines the percentage of households across Charlotte with internet connectivity. Areas with more than 75% of households with internet access are considered to have equitable internet access.
Map at right: Percentage of Households with an Internet Subscription
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The Access to Housing Opportunity index identifies areas where the housing stock does not provide opportunities for all residents to live. Housing Opportunity, for the purposes of this analysis, is defined as the ability for residents of all income, household compositions, and life stages to access housing options that meet their needs and economic conditions.
Access to housing opportunity is analyzed using six measures:
Data: Grid cells that meet the “opportunity” criteria for each of the 6 metrics are scored with a 1, while those that do not meet the criteria receive a 0. Scores are added to create a final Access to Housing Opportunity score. The primary housing data source is Mecklenburg County tax parcel data (2019). Additional data includes building permits (Mecklenburg County, 2017-2019), rental housing (apartment) properties (City of Charlotte, 2020), subsidized housing units (units with development-based rental assistance, Quality of Life Explorer, 2017), and household income (US Census, 2018).
This measure examines the mix of housing types in an area through the percentage of housing units that are single-family detached homes. Areas that are primarily comprised of single-family detached homes and areas that have relatively few single-family detached homes are considered to have less opportunity than areas with a mix of unit types. As shown in the map at right, the center city and the area around UNC Charlotte have comparatively few single-family detached homes (20 percent or less of the housing stock), while in much of the city these homes account for over 80 percent of homes. Areas with between 20% and 80% of housing units single-family detached are considered to have a diversity of housing units.
Map at right: Single-Family Detached Homes as Percent of Housing Units
⬚ figure
| - - . . - - | City of Charlotte Sphere of Influence Boundary |
| □ □ □ | High-Capacity Transit Line |
| ■ | 0% - 20% |
| ■ | 21% - 40% |
| ■ | 41% - 60% |
| ■ | 61% - 80% |
| ■ | 81% - 100% |
⬚ figure
| Legend | Description |
|---|---|
| --- --- | City of Charlotte Sphere of Influence Boundary |
| □ □ □ | High-Capacity Transit Line |
| █ | $100,000 or less |
| █ | $100,000 - $200,000 |
| █ | $200,000 - $300,000 |
| █ | $300,000 - $400,000 |
| █ | $400,000 - $500,000 |
| █ | Over $500,000 |
This measure examines the average housing costs in an area relative to the affordable housing cost for a household earning the citywide median household income for renter households. The median income for renter households in the City of Charlotte in 2018 (the most recent year of data) was $47,650, far lower than the overall median of $60,760 and the homeowner median of $80,380. Utilizing the renter median income highlights the areas that currently offer the most and least access to affordable housing options. Areas with homes that are affordable to the citywide median-earning renter household are considered to have access to housing opportunity. Housing cost includes three sub-metrics: cost for ownership housing; affordability; and cost for rental housing.
For ownership housing, this compares the income required to afford the average home (measured by the average value of single-family detached homes) in a grid cell to the citywide median income to determine whether homes in the area are affordable to the median-earning renter household, examining the opportunity for households that are currently renting to purchase a home. Cost calculations assume a 30-year loan with 5% down and 4% interest, and account for annual insurance, property tax, and other miscellaneous (e.g. HOA dues) costs. The map at left shows the existing distribution of home values for single-family homes (detached, townhome, duplex, and triplex). This reinforces the crescent and wedge pattern seen in other data in the city, emphasizing the concentration of home values in certain areas.
Map at left: Average Single-Family Home Value (Detached, Townhome, Duplex/Triplex)
The map at right shows the percent of single-family homes in a grid cell that are affordable to a household earning the median renter household income. As shown, affordable single-family homes are concentrated in the “crescent” of the city; while this is an indicator of opportunities for households currently renting their homes to afford the purchase of a home, it should be noted that it is also an indicator of historic investment and policy decisions. The vulnerability analysis (presented further on in this document) that will be used as an overlay to the opportunity areas will help inform the types of policies and strategies that will be most useful to utilize these results with consideration to both existing populations and future growth. For this opportunity metric, areas where over 30% of single-family homes are affordable are considered to have access to housing opportunity.
Map at right: Percent of Single-Family Homes Affordable to a Household Earning the City Median for Renters
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
For rental housing, this metric compares the income required to afford the average per-unit rent in a grid cell to the citywide median income for renter households to determine whether rental units in the area are affordable to the median-earning household. Affordability calculations assume 30% of income spent on rent. Map at left shows the income required to afford the average apartment rent in a grid cell as a percentage of the city median income (note that due to data limitations, rental rates are not available for every property; however, properties missing rent information are geographically dispersed throughout the region, minimizing the impacts on the overall metric). As shown, apartments in the center city, near UNC Charlotte, and along major corridors are less affordable, requiring a household to earn at least the median renter income ($47,650). Areas that are affordable to households earning less than 100% of the citywide median renter income are considered to have access to opportunity.
Map at left: Income Required to Afford Average Apartment Rent, as Percent of City Median for Renters
CHARLOTTE FUTURE 2040 PLAN | Metrics and Manuals
This measure examines the average size of housing units in an area to identify areas with options for a diversity of homeownership (i.e. smaller single-family detached homes) and family-size rental units (i.e. larger apartments). Areas with access to these housing options are considered to have access to housing opportunity. Housing size includes two sub-metrics: size of ownership housing; and size of rental housing.
For ownership housing, this is measured using the average heated square footage of single-family homes in the area. For this metric, single-family homes include detached, townhomes, and duplex/triplex homes. As shown in the map at right, smaller homes are more prevalent in the "crescent" to the north of the center city. A home under 1,500 square feet in size is considered an indicator of a housing stock that provides opportunities for a diversity of homeowners (e.g. first-time buyers, individuals, young couples/families, older people looking to downsize) and grid cells where over 25% of homes are under 1,500 square feet are considered to have access to opportunity.
Map at right: Percent of Single-Family (Detached, Townhome, Duplex/Triplex) Homes Under 1,500 Square Feet
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
For rental housing, this is measured using the average unit square footage of apartments in the area. As shown in the map at left, there is variation in average apartment size across the city, however in general smaller apartments are concentrated closer to the center city (note that this dataset only includes institutional apartment buildings, and those grid cells without buildings are not shown). This analysis assumes a 1,000 square foot is minimum for a 3-bedroom (family) apartment. Areas where the average unit size is greater than 1,000 square feet are considered to have a supply of family-oriented rental units.
Map at left: Average Apartment Size, by Building (2020)
This measure examines the affordable housing available in an area through the presence of development-based rental assistance. This metric is based on the data underlying this measure in the Quality of Life Explorer, and includes properties with Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, public housing developments of the Charlotte Housing Authority, developments of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Housing Partnership, developments with funding from the Charlotte Housing Trust Fund, developments with active Section 202 Direct Loans for housing for the elderly or handicapped, units with active Project-Based Rental Assistance Section 8 Contracts through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and units with active HOME Rental Assistance subsidies through HUD. As shown in the map at right, these developments are relatively dispersed throughout the city. Areas where there is a presence of development-based rental assistance are considered to have access to housing opportunity.
Map at right: Presence of Development-Based Rental Assistance, 2017
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
This measure examines the mix of ownership and rental housing in an area. This is a parcel-based measure that (due to data constraints) assumes that “multifamily” units are rented and all others are owned. As shown in the map at left, in many areas of the city multifamily housing accounts for 10% of less of the housing inventory. For this metric areas with a mix of tenure are considered to have opportunity, and those grid cells where between 20% and 80% of housing units are multifamily are considered areas with housing opportunity.
Map at left: Multifamily Housing as a Percent of All Housing Units
This measure examines the level of increased investment into the existing housing stock of an area in order to identify areas that are attracting investment at a rate that does not significantly change the age and composition of the housing stock. This is assessed based on the value of permits for new units and renovations (calculated as the average of the past 3 years to account for single year fluctuations). Areas where there are very low or very high levels of investment are considered to lack opportunity. As shown in the map at right, the per-permit value is higher to the south of the central city, as well as in pockets on the city edges, while there are many areas where the average level of investment per unit is less than $25,000. For this analysis, areas with an average per-permit cost of between $25,000 and $100,000 are considered to provide access to housing opportunity.
Map at right: Average Per-Unit Value of Residential Permits (2017-2019 Annual Average)
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The access to employment opportunity index identifies areas with a lack of employment opportunities for residents. Employment Opportunity, for the purposes of this analysis, is defined as the ability for residents to live proximate to jobs that are attainable for a variety of residents and provide a living wage. For the sake of measuring access to employment opportunity, a commute shed is defined as a 20-minute (2.5 mile) radius from a residence.
Access to Employment Opportunity is analyzed using five measures:
Data: Grid cells that meet the “opportunity” criteria for each of the 5 metrics are scored with a 1, while those that do not meet the criteria receive a 0. Scores are added to create a final Access to Employment Opportunity score.All employment metrics are measured using US Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) employment data (2017). Data is reported at the Census Block level, and aggregated to grid cells based on the centroid location of each Block.
This measure examines the job density within each grid cell, measured as the number of jobs per acre. As shown in the map at right, job density is highest in the center city, as well as in the areas of UNC Charlotte, South End, and along major corridors. Areas with over 1 job per acre are considered to have access to employment opportunity.
Map at right: Grid Cell Job Density (Jobs per Acre), 2017
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
This measure examines the job density within a 2.5 mile area surrounding each grid cell, to indicate the accessibility of jobs within an approximate 20-minute commute shed. This is measured as the jobs per acre within a 2.5 mile buffer of each grid cell (including jobs within each cell). As shown in the map at left, accessibility of jobs is highest in the center city and generally decreases with distance from the center. There is an additional concentration of jobs accessible around UNC Charlotte. Areas with a job density within a 20-minute commute shed greater than 1.0 jobs per acre are considered to have access to employment opportunity.
Map at left: Commute Shed Job Density (Jobs per Acre), 2017
This measure examines the wages of the jobs accessible within each grid cell’s commute shed. Jobs are categorized into low wage (less than $40,000 per year) and living wage ($40,000 per year or more). As show in the map at right, accessibility of living wage jobs is concentrated in and around the center city and UNC Charlotte, as well as in pockets of the south, southwest, and northwest. Areas where more than half of jobs pay a living wage are considered to have access to employment opportunity.
Map at right: Commute Shed Wage Levels (Percent of Jobs with Wages Over $40,000), 2017
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
This measure examines the accessibility of jobs for the “middle skills” workforce – those jobs that only require some post-high school education or training within the commute shed of each grid cell. As shown in the map at left, in most areas between 20 and 30 percent of jobs are available for this workforce, with concentrations in the area surrounding the center city, as well as at the airport and along the western edge of the City. Areas where greater than 25% of accessible jobs are considered “Middle Skills” are areas with economic opportunity.
Map at left: Commute Shed Middle Skills Jobs (Percent of Jobs Requiring Some Post-High School Education), 2017
This measure examines the accessibility of jobs requiring a 4-year college degree or higher education within the commute shed of each grid cell. As shown in the map at right, accessibility of these jobs is concentrated around the center city, UNC Charlotte, and Ballantyne. Areas with over 20 percent of jobs that are Knowledge Jobs are considered to have access to economic opportunity.
Map at right: Commute Shed Knowledge Jobs (Percent of Jobs Requiring a 4-year Degree or Higher Education), 2017
The following data sets were not included in the measurement of Access to Employment Opportunity for various reasons including lack of available data, poor data quality, or out of date information. If these data sets become more useable and accurate in the future, they should be considered for use in the Access to Employment Opportunity Equity Metric.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
| --- | City of Charlotte Sphere of Influence Boundary |
| /// | Vulnerable to Displacement |
| --- | High-Capacity Transit Line |
least just | most just
Environmental justice (EJ) seeks to minimize and equalize effects of environmental hazards among the entire community regardless of income, ethnicity or race. Issues of environmental justice often arise from geographic or procedural inequities. Geographic inequities occur when neighborhoods with high percentages of low-income residents, minority residents, and/or immigrant communities take more than their share of the worst environmental hazards, nuisance impacts, and resulting health problems from exposure to these hazards. Procedural inequities occur when the same neighborhoods face obstacles to meaningfully participate in the decision-making process for projects that directly affect their neighborhoods.
Many factors contribute to these geographic and procedural inequities. These include a development pattern that concentrates undesirable or unhealthy land uses in certain areas, the placement of desirable public amenities outside of disadvantaged communities and limited or non-existing political influence among certain demographic groups. The following measures – focused on aspects of the built environment – are proposed to couple with the Populations Vulnerable to Displacement metric to measure environmental justice (or injustices as the case may be).
Environmental Justice is analyzed using five measures:
Data: Grid cells that meet the environmental justice criteria for each of the 5 metrics are scored with a 1, while those that do not meet the criteria receive a 0. Scores are added to create a final Environmental Justice score.Environmental justice data sources include a tree canopy study (Mecklenburg County, 2016), impervious surfaces (Mecklenburg County, 2020), zoning (heavy industrial zoning districts, City of Charlotte, 2020), major transportation infrastructure (freeways, expressways, railroads and the airport, Mecklenburg County, 2020), and FEMA Existing 100 Year Floodplain (Mecklenburg County, 2020).
This measure examines the percentage of land area covered by tree canopy. Areas with over 50% percent of land area covered by tree canopy are considered to the positive environmental effects of tree canopies.
Map at right: Percentage of Land Area covered by Tree Canopy
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
This measure examines the percentage of land area that is impervious. Areas with 25% or less impervious land (<40 acres) are considered to have equitable access to the positive environmental effects of pervious surfaces.
Map at left: Percentage of Land Area that is Impervious
This measure examines the percentage of households within ½-mile of heavy industrial uses. Areas with less than 25% of households within ½ mile of heavy industrial are considered to have minimal exposure to the negative environmental effects of heavy industrial uses.
Map at right: Percentage of Households within ½ Mile of Heavy Industrial Uses
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
This measure examines the percentage of households within ½-mile of freeways, expressways, railroads and/or the airport. Areas with less than 50% of households within ½ mile of major transportation infrastructure are considered to have minimal exposure to air and noise pollution. This metric can also be used to analyze the relationship major transportation infrastructure (existing or planned) and vulnerability to involuntary displacement.
Map at left: Percentage of Households within ½ Mile of Major Transportation Infrastructure
This measure examines the percent of Households within the Floodplain. Areas with less than 25% of households within the Floodplain are considered to have minimal exposure to the risks of the flooding.
Map at right: Percentage of Households within the Floodplain
The following data sets were not included in the measurement of Environmental Justice for various reasons including lack of available data, poor data quality, or out-of-date information. If these data sets become more useable and accurate in the future, they should be considered for use in the Environmental Justice Equity Metric.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The Place Types Manual presents all of the information about Place Types in one location. It provides additional detail and supporting graphics to help further articulate the aspirational characteristics of Place Types in Charlotte to what can be found in the main Plan document. The Manual begins with an introduction to Place Types and the Place Type palette or typology. A deep dive into each Place Type follows supplementing and providing additional detail to what is provided in Section 2 of the Comprehensive Plan Policy. The section concludes with a summary of how the Place Types were tested during the planning process and guidance for how they should be mapped and utilized after Plan adoption. Please note that references to more specific parameters within this manual are intended to communicate general ranges and high-level expectations. Specific standards, limitations, and requirements will be established by zoning districts and other sections of the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO).
Most comprehensive planning documents provide direction for future growth through a land use map. Future land use, which informs parcel-based zoning, does not give guidance on the aspects of place like building form, streets, multi-modal facilities and connections, and open space, that make it comfortable for those who use it. To achieve the goal of truly Complete Communities, the Charlotte Future 2040 Comprehensive Plan uses Place Types, which provide direction beyond just land use at the parcel level. A Place Type thinks about a place more holistically and at a larger scale, incorporating guidance for land use, transportation, layout, and design. A Place Typology defines a set of Places that are unique and authentic to the community and its needs.
⬚ figure
There are several components of the Place Types guidance provided in this Plan. These are the categories that are used to organize the direction for each of Charlotte’s Places. More detailed guidelines for the Place Types can be found in the following pages. Each component is described in further detail below:
Land Use:
Character:
Mobility:
Building Design:
Open Space:
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Through many rounds of public input and revision 10 distinct Place Types were established for the City of Charlotte. These Place Types represent the types of development and land uses that currently exist in Charlotte, as well as the aspirational character for those types. These Place Types can generally be organized into the categories of the neighborhoods where we live (Neighborhood 1, Neighborhood 2, and Parks and Preserves), the employment areas where we work (Commercial, Campus, Manufacturing & Logistics, and Innovation Mixed-use), and centers where we shop, dine, and play (Neighborhood Center, Community Activity Center, and Regional Activity Center).
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The Place Types in this plan represent the form of future development, as envisioned by the residents of Charlotte. These Place Types will in turn provide the policy-level guidance that will inform the City’s Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). Using the intent and direction of the Place Types in the Comprehensive Plan and the upcoming Future Place Types Mapping, the UDO will identify zoning districts and other ordinances that will further define how the Place Types are realized in actual development. Each Place Type will correspond with multiple zoning districts that will provide a high-level of detail and regulatory guidance on items such as height, lot size, setbacks, adjacencies, and allowed uses.
The high-level policy guidance for each Place Type, that will inform the UDO throughout the life of the Plan, is described in the following sections.
⬚ figure
Goal: Provide places for neighborhoods with a variety of housing types, where single-family housing is still the predominant use.
Neighborhood 1 places are the lower density housing areas across Charlotte, where most of the city’s residents live, primarily in single-family or small multi-family homes or ADUs.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Comfortable sidewalks with planting strips and shade trees B. Alleys in select locations to access garages and ADUs C. Multiple housing types in proximity to each other D. Accessory Dwelling Units typically accessed off alleys E. Transition to Adjacent Place Types
⬚ figure
Ⓐ Infill low- and medium-density residential development (including single-family detached, ADU's, townhomes, cottage courts, and duplexes/triplexes)
Ⓑ Enhanced and additional small public parks/open spaces
Ⓒ Improved vehicular connectivity
Ⓓ New trails, enhanced pedestrian connectivity and walkability
Ⓔ Neighborhood Center at major intersection
Ⓕ Transition in density to surrounding uses
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
⬚ figure
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
| █ | Single Family Residential | █ | Mixed Use |
| █ | Single Family Attached Residential | █ | Office |
| █ | Multi-Family Residential | █ | Parking Lot |
| █ | Commercial | 📷 | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Landscaping and front yards provide residences with a transition from the street.
Townhome style buildings typically include 4-6 units and have a similar character and style to the surrounding neighborhood.
Civic and institutional buildings support the neighborhood and can vary in size.
Wide sidewalks with a buffer from the street provide a comfortable pedestrian environment for all residents and should be consistent throughout Neighborhood 1.
Buildings along a block are usually a similar size and distance from the street to create a cohesive neighborhood character.
Buildings are typically oriented to the street with the main entrances connecting to the public sidewalk. Garages should not be the prominent street facing feature. In some cases, buildings face shared open space, or adjacent parks and greenways or shared pedestrian networks, but street facing sides of buildings still include prominent entrances and provide pedestrian access from the public sidewalk.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Provide a range of moderate to higher intensity housing types, including apartment and condominium buildings, to meet the needs of a diverse population.
Neighborhood 2 places are higher density housing areas that provide a variety of housing types such as townhomes and apartments alongside neighborhood-serving shops and services.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Infill development forming a consistent street edge B. Trail-oriented development C. Shared public open spaces D. Neighborhood trail connections E. Comfortable sidewalks with planting strips and shade trees F. Mix of different housing types (including townhomes, condos, and medium-density residential development) G. Transition to Adjacent Place Types
⬚ figure
(A) Medium- and high-density 2-5 story residential infill and redevelopment (ADUs, townhomes, multi-family residential, and mixed-use)
(B) Buildings oriented toward streets, trails, or open space
(C) Transition to lower-density neighborhoods and Neighborhood Activity Center
(D) Frequent pedestrian connections to and between buildings and blocks
(E) Additional small public parks/open spaces
(F) On-street parking, parking garages, and small parking lots to the side, interior, or behind buildings
(G) New trails, enhanced pedestrian connectivity and walkability
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
⬚ figure
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
| Single Family Residential | Mixed Use | ||
| Single Family Attached Residential | Institutional | ||
| Multi-Family Residential | Parking Lot/Garage | ||
⬚ figure | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Protect land that is intended to remain as parks or natural preserves in perpetuity. These places contribute to the quality of life of residents and visitors by providing places to gather and recreate, and further the environmental quality of our ecosystems including the tree canopy, waterways, and wildlife habitats.
Parks & Preserves serve to protect public parks and open space while providing rest, recreation, and gathering places for Charlotteans.
⬚ figure
Mostly Recreational Land Uses
⬚ figure
A. Community gathering space with small-scale commercial uses such as cafes along roadway
B. Amenities interspersed throughout the public realm (benches, tables, trash receptacles, bike parking, etc.)
C. Active space including sports fields/courts, play area, and community garden
D. Safe multi-use paths, accommodating a lot of people and activation
E. Transition to Adjacent Place Types
⬚ figure
Ⓐ Increased tree canopy in open/passive spaces Ⓑ Frequent paths and connections (including to regional trails/greenways) Ⓒ Active space including sports fields/courts, play area, plaza, and community garden Ⓓ A mix of passive and active spaces Ⓔ New buildings in/along park including small low-intensity commercial node (eg. cafes) and civic buildings (eg. library, nature center, etc.)
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
⬚ figure
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
| ![gold] | Single Family Residential | ![blue] | Institutional |
| ![yellow] | Single Family Attached Residential | ![grey] | Parking Lot |
| ![orange] | Multi-Family Residential | ![camera] | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
| ![red] | Commercial |
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Buildings typically include recreation facilities, nature centers, restrooms, shelters, maintenance buildings, and small shops such as concession stands. Sizes vary depending on the purpose of the building and the setting, but are typically only a few stories.
Preserves provide a natural setting and may include a variety of ways to interact with it, including paths, trails, and recreation opportunities.
Parks include a variety of activities and facilities for active uses such as sports fields/courts, plazas, play areas, and gardens.
Parks and Preserves should all provide easy access and clear paths of travel.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Provide places for the sale of goods and services in locations readily accessible by automobile.
Commercial places are primarily car-oriented destinations for retail, services, hospitality, and dining, often along major streets or near interstates.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Comfortable sidewalks with landscape buffers B. Mid-block crossings C. Active ground floors with patios/plazas typically behind buildings along major roadways D. Buildings oriented to streets E. Signage opportunities F. Transition to Adjacent Place Types
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
Ⓐ Consolidated driveways and access points
Ⓑ Frequent pedestrian connections to and between buildings and blocks
Ⓒ 1-3 story infill buildings oriented towards the street with commercial, office, hospitality, and mixed-use
Ⓓ On street and surface parking (located to the side and behind buildings as feasible)
Ⓔ Increase in housing density near commercial activity
⬚ figure
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
| ■ | Commercial | ■ | Hospitality |
| ■ | Single Family Residential | ■ | Office |
| ■ | Single Family Attached Residential | ■ | Institutional |
| ■ | Mixed Use | ■ | Parking Lot |
| 📷 | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Provide places for large, multi-building institutions, such as educational, religious, civic, or health facilities, or for a concentration of office and research and development uses.
Campuses are a relatively cohesive group of buildings and public spaces that are all serving one institution such as a university, hospital, or office park.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Comfortable and convenient internal multi-modal connections
B. Highly amenitized public realm
C. Enhanced walkable “main street” connection to adjacent commercial development
D. Transition to Adjacent Place Types
⬚ figure
Ⓐ Frequent multi-use path connections between buildings (can double as service drives)
Ⓑ A variety of building heights and densities
Ⓒ Enhanced visual and physical connections to rail and surrounding developments
Ⓓ Open spaces and community gathering spaces as a focal point of site design
Ⓔ Surface parking and garage parking with green roofs when possible
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
⬚ figure
| ■ | Institutional | ■ | Single Family Attached Resi |
| ■ | Commercial | ■ | Multi-Family Residential |
| ■ | Mixed Use | ■ | Parking Lot/Garage |
| ■ | Office | [📷] | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Contribute to Charlotte’s economic viability by accommodating places of employment for a range of uses related to manufacturing, logistics, production and distribution.
Manufacturing and Logistics places are employment areas that provide a range of job types, services, and wage levels in sectors such as production, manufacturing, research, distribution, and logistics.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Improved bike and pedestrian facilities and connections
B. Generous landscaping and buffers
C. Small shared outdoor gathering space for employees
D. Dedicated rideshare pickup/dropoff locations
⬚ figure
Ⓐ Improved multi-modal street connections to accommodate multiple modes of transportation including freight
Ⓑ Frequent pedestrian connections between buildings
Ⓒ Large scale industrial building types of varying forms
Ⓓ Infill cluster of office uses
Ⓔ Infill node of commercial and mixed-use along major arterial
Ⓕ Ample open space transition to surrounding neighborhoods
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
⬚ figure
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
| Industrial | Mixed Use | ||
| Single Family Residential | Office | ||
| Commercial | Parking Lot | ||
⬚ figure | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Contribute to Charlotte’s economic viability by providing mixed-use urban places that include light manufacturing, office, residential, and retail.
Innovation Mixed-Use places are vibrant areas of mixed-use and employment, typically in older urban areas, that capitalize on Charlotte’s history and industry with uses such as light manufacturing, office, studios, research, retail, and dining.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Active and passive community gathering spaces
B. Adaptive reuse of light industrial or underutilized buildings, embracing unique history and form
C. Regular rail crossings
D. Increased tree canopy
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
⬚ figure
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
Ⓐ Infill/redevelopment (adaptive reuse when possible) including light industrial, light industrial mixed use, medium to high density residential, and commercial
Ⓑ A variety of innovation mixed-use uses which may include breweries/distilleries, office, research, light manufacturing, art/exercise studios, hotels, coworking space, etc.
Ⓒ Improved multi-modal street connections to accommodate multiple modes of transportation including freight
Ⓓ Frequent pedestrian connections to and between buildings and blocks and across rail lines
Ⓔ Small parking lots and garages located to the side and behind buildings as feasible
Ⓕ Transition to surrounding neighborhoods
| 🟨 | Light Industrial | 🟪 | Light Industrial Mixed Use |
| 🟨 | Single Family Residential | 🟥 | Mixed Use |
| 🟧 | Single Family Attached | 🧱 | Commercial |
| 🟦 | Office | ⬜ | Parking Lot / Garage |
| 🟦 | Institutional | 📷 | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Provide places that have a pedestrian-friendly focal point of neighborhood activity where nearby residents can access daily shopping needs and services within a 5-10 minute walk or a short drive.
Neighborhood Centers are small, walkable mixed-use areas, typically embedded within neighborhoods, that provide convenient access to goods, services, dining, and residential for nearby residents.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Pedestrian-friendly focal point of neighborhood activity
B. Ground floors with retail, front porches, or other active uses
C. Comfortable sidewalks with street trees
D. Highly amenitized public realm with small plazas/gathering spaces
E. Improved pedestrian connectivity and safe crossings
F. Rooftop patios
G. Transition to Adjacent Place Types
⬚ figure
Ⓐ Infill development on existing parking lots and underutilized parcels
Ⓑ Low-rise buildings (4 stories or less) oriented to the street with active ground floors to support a vibrant pedestrian environment
Ⓒ Increased mix of uses including commercial, residential, office, institutional, and mixed-use
Ⓓ Improved pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular connectivity
Ⓔ Frequent pedestrian connections to and between buildings and blocks
Ⓕ Primarily on-street parking and small surface lots
Ⓖ Transition down in intensity or open space buffer to adjacent neighborhoods
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
⬚ figure
⬚ figure | Commercial |
⬚ figure | Mixed Use |
⬚ figure | Single Family Residential |
⬚ figure | Single Family Attached Residential |
⬚ figure | Multi-Family Residential |
⬚ figure | Institutional |
⬚ figure | Parking Lot |
⬚ figure | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
Aspirational Place Type Layout
Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Buildings come in a variety of styles and uses including commercial, institutional, or multi-family, they are typically small-scale and less than four stories.
Commercial buildings should have a highly transparent and active ground floor uses to support a vibrant pedestrian environment, where uses may spill into the public realm.
A large, comfortable public realm is key to creating walkable, mixed-use environments that support local businesses and other active uses.
Buildings orient to streets with prominent entrances connected directly to the public realm. Buildings also orient toward shared open spaces, parks and greenways.
A variety of uses provide diverse goods and services to neighborhoods.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Provide places that have a concentration of primarily commercial and residential activity in a well-connected, walkable place located within a 10-minute walk, bike, or transit trip of surrounding neighborhoods.
Community Activity Centers are mid-sized mixed-use areas, typically along transit corridors or major roadways, that provide access to goods, services, dining, entertainment, and residential for nearby and regional residents.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Wide sidewalks with hardscape amenity zone or landscape zone
B. Regular street trees on core streets
C. Highly amenitized public realm with frequent open spaces
D. Ground floors with retail, patios, or other active uses
E. Upper story balconies and rooftop patios
F. Improved multi-modal connectivity and mobility hub amenities
G. Well-connected, amenity-rich transit stops
H. On-street parking and screened or wrapped parking lots/structures
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
Ⓐ Infill development on existing parking lots and underutilized parcels Ⓑ Mid-rise mixed-use (5 to 7 stories), active ground floors with office or residential above, orienting to street or public space Ⓒ Transition down in intensity to neighborhoods Ⓓ Small walkable blocks in organized grid pattern Ⓔ Improved pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular circulation and connectivity to adjacent neighborhoods Ⓕ On-street parking and screened or wrapped parking lots/structures
⬚ figure
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
| Commercial | |
| Single Family Residential | |
| Single Family Attached Residential | |
| Multi-Family Residential | |
| Hospitality | |
| Mixed Use | |
| Office | |
| Institutional | |
| Parking Lot/Garage | |
| 📷 | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Goal: Provide major employment locations and cultural destinations for residents from throughout the Charlotte region.
Regional Activity Centers are large, high-density mixed-use areas, typically along transit corridors or major roadways, that provide access to goods, services, dining, offices, entertainment, and residential for regional residents and visitors.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
A. Safe pedestrian connections, including midblock crossings
B. Wide sidewalks with hardscape amenity zone or landscape zone
C. Safe, accessible bike facilities (grade separated or buffered on major streets)
D. Highly amenitized public realm with transit stops and mobility hub
E. Ground floors with retail or other active uses, buildings oriented to street
F. Rooftop patios and upper story balconies
⬚ figure
Existing Place Type Layout
Ⓐ Mid- to high-rise mixed-use, hospitality, office, and high-density residential development
Ⓑ “Point towers” can be used to step down the tallest buildings
Ⓒ Active ground floors and buildings oriented to the street
Ⓓ Organized/gridded street grid with 400-500’ blocks
Ⓔ Frequent pedestrian connections to and between buildings and blocks
Ⓕ On-street parking, screened, or wrapped parking lots and structures
Ⓖ Transition down in density to adjacent neighborhoods
⬚ figure | Mixed Use |
⬚ figure | Hospitality |
⬚ figure | Commercial |
⬚ figure | Single Family Residential |
⬚ figure | Single Family Attached Residential |
⬚ figure | Multi-Family Residential |
⬚ figure | Office |
⬚ figure | Parking Lot/Garage |
⬚ figure | Closeup Graphic Viewpoint |
⬚ figure
Aspirational Place Type Layout Place Type graphics are conceptual and for illustrative purposes only
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Buildings are primarily mid- to high-rise mixed-use, with a variety of forms and uses. They are typically over five stories.
Buildings may be as tall as 20 stories in Uptown or when developed with benefits to the community such as public space and amenities or affordable housing.
All buildings should have a highly transparent and active ground floor to support a vibrant pedestrian environment, where uses spill into the public realm.
A large, comfortable public realm with many amenities is key to creating a dense, walkable, mixed-use environment that supports offices, businesses, residents, and other active uses.
Buildings orient and front directly onto streets with prominent entrances connected directly to the public realm. Buildings may also, secondarily, orient toward shared open spaces, parks and greenways.
A tall ground floor, stepbacks and articulation in the facade helps create a human scale and a vibrant public realm.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
It became readily apparent during the development of the Plan that detailed mapping at the neighborhood and community level would not be equitable and inclusive if conducted on a citywide scale. Thus, a first step in the implementation of the Equitable Growth Framework and the Comprehensive Plan will include mapping of Place Types and then developing Community Area Plans for the entire city.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
In March 2020, the Comprehensive Plan planning team met with City and County interdepartmental staff for a focus area planning, design and visualization process to test the Place Type palette included in the Charlotte Future 2040 Comprehensive Plan. This was held in early March of 2020, just before the COVID-19 Stay Home Order, and included a report-out session to share the work at the conclusion of the work session.
The primary goals for the work sessions were to:
The deep dive work sessions resulted in the following:
A first step in implementing the Comprehensive Plan will be using the palette of Place Types in Charlotte’s Place Typology to map the desired future of the community.
Establishing geographies for the mapping of Future Place Types and for Community Area Planning should consider geographic size, as well as existing and future populations. An initial attempt at establishing Community Areas for the City divided Charlotte’s planning area into a set of 15 smaller geographies. These draft Community Areas should be used as a starting point to further refine the boundaries (and potentially the number of geographies) using the following considerations.
Future Place Type Mapping should be conducted at the Community Area Planning Geography or subgeography. Using a defined methodology and the Place Type guidance provided within this section, staff should create an initial starting map of Future Place Types. Inputs into the initial starting map should include direction provided in previously adopted plans, existing zoning, and development plans and entitlements. The community should be educated about the Comprehensive Plan and the Place Type palette before being asked to respond to and revise the starting Future Place Type Map. A community process with in-person and online opportunities to provide meaningful input and feedback should be organized and conducted for each mapping geography (Community Area Planning geography or subgeography). Community members should be provided with adequate time to review various iterations of the Future Place Type Map, as well as the final Public Review Draft map. After the initial Future Place Type Map is adopted as an amendment to the Charlotte Future 2040 Comprehensive Plan, any future changes should be incorporated into the appropriate Community Area Plan or an amendment to that plan.
Key steps in the Future Place Type Mapping process include:
The following table summarizes mapping guidance for use by staff and the community in mapping Future Place Types. It includes general mapping guidance developed throughout Place Typology and Comprehensive Plan development, preferred adjacencies and adjacencies that should include major transitions or buffers. For many of the Place Types, the General Mapping Guidance column also includes input from the Plan Ambassadors and Strategic Advisors (ASAs) regarding priority geographies for each Place Type. The ASA members identified priority Place Types using the Equity Metrics from the Equitable Growth Framework, existing conditions, and community input from earlier phases of the project. The final column of the table outlines specific considerations for each Place Type when it is located in the Uptown area. The increased density, walkability, and activity in Uptown lead to exceptions or differences in how the Place Types are applied there.
| General Mapping Guidance | Preferred Adjacencies | Major Transition or Buffer Suggested When Adjacent to: | Uptown Considerations (exceptions or differences in Uptown) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Neighborhood 1 | Preserve existing areas of developed Neighborhood 1; look for underdeveloped or vacant areas of Neighborhood 1 to add additional density; provide a transition between Neighborhood 1 and all other Place Types; use Neighborhood 2 or Neighborhood Center around the edges of Neighborhood 1 areas to buffer from more intense uses; avoid mapping new, large areas of Neighborhood 1 without Neighborhood Centers and other complementary Place Types | » Neighborhood 2 (provide transition)<br>» Neighborhood Center<br>» Campus (provide transition) | » Community Activity Center<br>» Regional Activity Center<br>» Commercial<br>» Innovation Mixed Use<br>» Manufacturing and Logistics | » Attached single-family housing may be more prevalent<br>» Neighborhood serving commercial uses should be encouraged at intersections<br>» Front and side yards may be minimal<br>» Parking is likely more balanced between on-street and off-street solutions<br>» Block lengths should not exceed 500 feet<br>» High rate of non-auto mode trips |
| Neighborhood 2 | Map Neighborhood 2 around the edges of existing Neighborhoods to transition to higher intensity uses; map larger areas of Neighborhood 2 around Activity Centers; map Neighborhood 2 near high capacity transit stations; map pockets of Neighborhood 2 along major corridors to give the corridor varied character and density<br><br>Priority Geography Notes:<br>Areas inside the 485 loop are more suitable for density, but Neighborhood 2 areas should be considered City-wide.<br>Uptown excluded as this should be primarily Regional Activity Center. | » Neighborhood 1 (provide transition)<br>» Neighborhood Center<br>» Community Activity Center<br>» Regional Activity Center<br>» Campus<br>» Innovation Mixed Use | » Commercial<br>» Manufacturing and Logistics | » Ground floor non-residential uses may be more the rule than the exception<br>» Lower intensity housing is not included<br>» Buildings tend to be at least five stories and be as high as 20-30 stories in certain areas with benefits to the community<br>» Outdoor community amenities tend to be shared between buildings and on rooftops<br>» Buildings tend to be oriented along the sidewalk edge with little to no setback<br>» Parking is typically structured<br>» High rate of non-auto mode trips |
| General Mapping Guidance | Preferred Adjacencies | Major Transition or Buffer Suggested When Adjacent to: | Uptown Considerations (exceptions or differences in Uptown) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Commercial | Map primarily along corridors that provide essential auto-oriented services (car shops, sales, hotels, etc.); consider all Commercial areas that can be converted to mixed use and mapped as a Center; provide a Neighborhood 2 or Neighborhood Center buffer between Commercial areas and Neighborhood 1 | » Innovation Mixed Use<br>» Manufacturing and Logistics<br>» Campus<br>» Neighborhood 2 | » Neighborhood 1<br>» Neighborhood 2<br>» Neighborhood Center | NA |
| Campus | Primarily map new or expanded Campus in areas that already have this Place Type and the supporting infrastructure; add new Campuses in areas currently lacking access to diverse employment options (see Equity Framework); consider adding Campus in areas near higher density housing to provide jobs and services (medical, education, etc.); consider Campus in areas with low density housing lacking access to employment<br><br>Priority Geography Notes:<br>Prioritize geographies currently lacking a variety of employment types. Add additional area to existing Campuses as feasible. | » Neighborhood 2<br>» Neighborhood Center<br>» Community Activity Center<br>» Regional Activity Center<br>» Innovation Mixed Use | » Neighborhood 1<br>» Manufacturing and Logistics | NA (integrated into Community Activity Center and/or Regional Activity Center) |
| Manufacturing & Logistics | Primarily map or infill Manufacturing and Logistics in areas that already have this Place Type and the supporting infrastructure; add new Manufacturing and Logistics in areas currently lacking access to diverse employment options (see Equity Framework); do not add Manufacturing and Logistics in existing neighborhoods; new Manufacturing and Logistics should be mapped along major roadways or rail corridors to provide easy access to these jobs<br><br>Priority Geography Notes:<br>Prioritize geographies currently lacking a variety of employment types and those farther away from Uptown, where higher density employment types should be prioritized. | » Innovation Mixed Use<br>» Commercial | » Neighborhood 1<br>» Neighborhood 2<br>» Neighborhood Center<br>» Community Activity Center<br>» Regional Activity Center<br>» Campus | NA |
| General Mapping Guidance | Preferred Adjacencies | Major Transition or Buffer Suggested When Adjacent to: | Uptown Considerations (exceptions or differences in Uptown) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Innovation Mixed-Use | Primarily map or infill Innovation Mixed Use in areas that already have this Place Type and the supporting infrastructure; add new Innovation Mixed Use in areas currently lacking access to diverse employment options (see Equity Framework); consider historic industrial areas for transition to Innovation Mixed Use through adaptive re-use and infill<br><br>Priority Geography Notes:<br>Prioritize geographies currently lacking a variety of employment types. Include in other geographies as a buffer around areas Manufacturing and Logistics, particularly adjacent to neighborhoods. | » Neighborhood 2<br>» Community Activity Center<br>» Regional Activity Center<br>» Manufacturing and Logistics | » Neighborhood 1 | NA (integrated into Community Activity Center and/or Regional Activity Center) |
| Neighborhood Center | Map Neighborhood Centers interspersed in all neighborhoods; map Neighborhood Centers in areas of small commercial, vacant, or underutilized land that could easily transition to mixed-use; add new Neighborhood Centers in areas currently lacking access to goods and services (see Equity Framework); map Neighborhood Centers as small nodes (at major intersections, etc.) or small-scale main streets a few parcels deep<br><br>Priority Geography Notes:<br>Neighborhoods farther from Center City are more in need of these pockets of amenities and services, the inner neighborhoods should be primarily served by Community Activity Centers. | » Neighborhood 1<br>» Neighborhood 2<br>» Campus<br>» Innovation Mixed Use | » Regional Activity Center<br>» Manufacturing and Logistics | NA (integrated into Neighborhood 1, Neighborhood 2, Community Activity Center, and/or Regional Activity Center) |
| General Mapping Guidance | Preferred Adjacencies | Major Transition or Buffer Suggested When Adjacent to: | Uptown Considerations (exceptions or differences in Uptown) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community Activity Center | Map pockets of Community Activity Center along commercial, mixed-use, or rail corridors, interspersed with lower-intensity uses to give the corridor varied character and density; add new Community Activity Centers in areas currently lacking access to goods and services (see Equity Framework); consider all single-use areas that could transition to mixed-use Community Activity Centers; avoid adding large Community Activity Centers in areas without existing or planned infrastructure or market demand to support increased density<br><br>Priority Geography Notes:<br>Community Activity Centers are encouraged City-wide, but particularly in the neighborhoods of the “arc” geography that have fewer amenities and services.<br>Uptown excluded as this should be primarily Regional Activity Center. | » Neighborhood 2<br>» Campus<br>» Innovation Mixed Use | » Manufacturing and Logistics<br>» Neighborhood 1 | » Multi-family and office tend to be primary uses with retail, restaurant and entertainment on ground floors<br>» Auto-oriented uses should be discouraged<br>» Buildings should be mid- to high-rise (generally 8 stories or taller with some 5 to 7 stories)<br>» Buildings tend to be oriented along the sidewalk edge with little to no setback except when the setback is used for outdoor seating and urban open space |
| Regional Activity Center | Map Regional Activity Centers in and around large areas of mixed-use; consider creating Regional Activity Centers from Community Activity Centers that can grow in size and intensity; map Regional Activity Centers near high-capacity transit stations; avoid adding large Regional Activity Centers in areas without existing or planned infrastructure or market demand to support increased density<br><br>Priority Geography Notes:<br>All City geographies should have access to at least one Regional Activity Center. The priorities listed above are the geographies which currently do not contain an RAC.<br>Uptown is included because it is the center of the region and should be mapped as primarily Regional Activity Center. | » Neighborhood 2<br>» Campus<br>» Innovation Mixed Use<br>» Community Activity Center | » Manufacturing and Logistics<br>» Neighborhood 1<br>» Neighborhood Center | » The predominant building type is high-rise<br>» Buildings tend to be up to 30 stories (500') tall and may be over 30 stories with benefits to the community<br>» Buildings should step down in height adjacent to Neighborhood 1, but not necessarily to Neighborhood 2 |
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Community Area Plans are intended to provide a more coordinated, efficient and effective structure for neighborhood planning. A neighborhood-based approach to more detailed planning of Charlotte presents logistical challenges related to the number of plans that would be required. This a Community Area Planning approach establishes an achievable approach to 100% coverage of the community, facilitates conversations between neighborhoods, and allows major barriers that often serve as neighborhood boundaries to be addressed in the planning process. Existing and future neighborhood planning will be integrated into the planning for Community Areas. Neighborhoods and districts will become integral sub-geographies of these sub-areas. And existing neighborhood and community plans should be respected and recommendations carried forward, as appropriate, as they are integrated into the Community Area Plans.
Community Area Plans should protect and enhance Charlotte’s neighborhoods. They are plans intended to provide detailed strategies for places, transportation, infrastructure and community facilities and amenities. These plans should catalog and celebrate community character and develop and enhance places through the designation of Place Types and community assets. As described in the previous section, the city’s corridors often serve as focal places within and between neighborhoods. The Community Area Plans should drive the creation of place along these corridors and focus on the scale and design of public spaces.
The Community Area Plans should integrate previous neighborhood plans and community plans. The purpose of the Community Area Plans is to develop actionable strategies for the city’s neighborhoods at a manageable and implementable scale. In addition, developing a single plan that represents multiple neighborhoods is a more effective way to elevate neighborhood-level issues for consideration of policy changes and funding
priorities. These plans can also serve to protect specific communities within or adjacent to larger Community and Regional Activity Centers.
The planning process for Community Area Plans will generally range from nine to twelve months and should include a robust community engagement strategy. They should be updated approximately every 10-12 years. Criteria for determining prioritization will take into account the Community Area’s proximity to regional centers; degree of change reflected in Future Place Type mapping; Equity Metrics; existence and age of existing subarea plans; new large scale development planned, underway or recently completed; new large scale infrastructure planned, underway or completed; and amount and type of public investments recently made in the Community Area.
The following provides the major plan components and steps for a Community Area Plan.
While establishing 15 Community Plan Area geographies will help to ensure that neighborhood level and place specific planning can occur within a timely manner, it will likely be impossible to initiate all 15 planning processes at once. Prioritization criteria should be established to better understand each area and establish groupings for phased implementation of the Community Plan Area planning processes.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Potential criteria include:
It is often helpful to look at both ends of the spectrum for several prioritization criteria. One potential example is market readiness. A neighborhood that has little development and/or investment activity may suffer from a lack of housing diversity, a lack of access to nearby or quality amenities, etc. Initiating a Community Area Plan for this the area that includes this neighborhood may help to 1) ignite some market interest and 2) allow the community to plan ahead and prepare for potential gentrification and displacement. On the other hand, a neighborhood that is market ready to the extent that it is experiencing rapid transactions and investments is likely experiencing dramatic increases in land values, property values and rents and change in mobility, culture and character. Initiating a Community Area Plan for this area can help to provide more detailed guidance for future development, identify infrastructure to support recent and impending growth, and help to ensure that public benefits are communicated and achieved.
The Community Area Planning approach sets out a framework to provide an area plan for every area in Charlotte within the next 5 to 10 years, with multiple areas of the city undergoing a planning process at a time. As the new planning approach makes its way around Charlotte, Community Areas that want to get a head start on the planning process can lay the groundwork by taking advantage of one or more tools that will help them establish valuable resources to guide planning and decision making.
These tools provide ways to connect to existing community resources as well as self-guided activities, some of which are intended for groups or organizations. None of the activities are required for a successful planning process and completing the activities does not mean a Community Area planning process will be scheduled sooner. The activities will help individual and groups to think about and document the Community Area’s unique characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses. This can help residents begin to identify, articulate and research ideas before planning begins.
Existing and potential tools include:
Depending on staffing availability and capacity, it is feasible to complete the Community Area Plans for all 15 geographies within approximately three to five years from when they are initiated. With that said, it may take five to ten years to complete all of the plans depending on the length of individual planning processes and resources available. It is important to note that Community Area Plans should not be initiated until Future Place Type Mapping is completed for all parts of the City. Once adopted, Community Area Plans should be updated every seven to ten years. Prioritization criteria should be updated annually for all Community Area Plans. The order of updates can be adjusted and the timeline for initiating an update can be accelerated if there are significant changes in one or more prioritization criteria.
⬚ figure
The City of San Antonio’s Comprehensive Plan, SA Tomorrow, identified 13 regional activity centers. These Centers are a major building block of the plan and were designed to organize the economic geography of the community and to provide direction and vision for the City’s major employment and activity hubs. The centers were identified based on the presence of major economic, civic, and cultural assets (e.g. large employers, major education institutions, cultural attractions/facilities) and the existing density of employment. Three regional center types were identified including Activity Centers (e.g. downtown), Logistics/Service Centers (e.g. airport area), and special purpose centers (e.g. military bases). Each type identifies the desired mixture of uses and the associated land use strategy. The City has worked to organize its economic development tax incentive policies and affordable housing policies to focus efforts and resources towards the Centers. A set of seven elements needed in a regional center were identified to guide planning efforts in these areas: anchor institutions, enhanced urban planning/design, area identify/brand, partner organizations, enhanced mobility network, capital investments in to place-making and community amenities, and funding/incentive tools.
Image source: https://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/news/2019/12/06/city-council-approves-downtown-development-plan.html
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
The following provides a suggested list of metrics associated with the objectives corresponding to each of the 10 plan goals in the Comprehensive Plan. The list of metrics should be reviewed to ensure that relevant data is available or can be collected. There are several metrics that will be reported on immediately with already available data and other metrics that should be explored in the future. In addition, a baseline should be established for each metric, as well as 20-year and interim targets.
⬚ figure
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| Increase the percentage of households, both new and existing, within a tree-shaded 10-minute walk, bike, or transit trip of: | Percent of increase to transportation modes. | |
| 1.A | Fresh, healthy food opportunities. | Number of food co-ops, community gardens and neighborhood-based food sharing or grocery store within a 10-minute walk, bike or transit trip |
| 1.B | High performance transit corridor. | Number of facilities within a 10-minute walk, bike or transit trip |
| 1.C | Park, plaza, nature preserve, or other public space. | Number of facilities within a 10-minute walk, bike or transit trip |
| 1.D | Trail, greenway, or other “all ages and abilities (AAA)” bicycle facility. | Number of bicycle facilities, sidewalks, transit stops, parks |
| 1.E | A concentration of daily goods and services (applies to a Neighborhood, Community, or Regional Activity Center). | Number of full-service grocery stores in new mixed use developments in food deserts |
| 1.F | Low-cost health care or pharmacy. | Number of facilities within a 10-minute walk, bike or transit trip |
| 1.G | Community Facilities (libraries, schools, senior centers, community centers, early childhood education etc.). | Percent of vulnerable neighborhoods with increase of facilities; number of facilities built in vulnerable neighborhoods; money spent in vulnerable neighborhoods on facilities; percent of households within a 10-minute trip of early childhood education, library, school, community center |
| 1.H | Financial Services (banks or credit unions). | Number of new financial institutions; percent of households within a 10-minute trip of financial institutions |
| 1.I | Family sustaining wage jobs. | Number of facilities within a 10-minute walk, bike or transit trip |
| 1.J | Advanced technology delivery service and supportive digital access. | Percent of households with advanced technology delivery service |
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 2.A | Increase the score of the overall Access to Housing Opportunity equity metrics index for the City. | Access to Housing Opportunity Equity Metric |
| 2.B | Increase the number of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in existing and new neighborhoods. | Number of accessory dwelling units |
| 2.C | Increase the number of middle density units such as duplexes, triplexes, in all neighborhoods. | Number of duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes |
| 2.D | Increase the number of middle density housing options, including fourplexes, along high performance transit and other major thoroughfares. | Number of attached single-family units, fourplexes and multifamily units along arterials |
| 2.E | Increase the number of middle density housing options in transition areas between low intensity neighborhoods and higher intensity Place Types. | Number of attached single-family units, fourplexes and multifamily units within 1/8 mile of Activity Centers |
| 2.F | Increase the number of residential dwelling units that includes less than one parking space per unit. | Number of units with less than one parking space |
| 2.G | Increase the number of small footprint housing units in existing and new neighborhoods. | Number of small footprint housing units (see glossary) |
Charlotte will ensure opportunities for residents of all incomes to access affordable housing through the preservation of naturally occurring affordable and workforce housing and increasing the number of affordable and workforce housing units through new construction.
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 3.A | Increase housing opportunities for households with limited or no vehicle access by increasing the number of affordable rental and deed-restricted housing units, targeting households at 80% AMI or less, within ½ mile of Activity Centers and high performance transit. | Number of new affordable and workforce units |
| 3.B | Retain the number of naturally occurring affordable and workforce housing units in the community by managing changes within existing neighborhoods. | Number of preserved units |
| 3.C | Increase the number of affordable and workforce units targeting households at 80% AMI or less within mixed-income developments (e.g. affordable and workforce units mixed with market rate units). | Number of new affordable and workforce units |
| 3.D | Reduce the cost burden on households spending more than 45% of their income on housing and transportation. | Number of cost burden households |
| 3.E | Reduce the cost burden on households spending over 30% of household income on housing. | Number of cost burden households |
| 3.F | Increase the number of homeownership opportunities for low to moderate-income households, especially in areas with low Access to Housing Opportunity scores, as identified by the Equitable Growth Framework. | Number of homeownership within specific areas |
| 3.G | Dedicate at least 10% of future housing trust funds to home ownership in areas with low Access to Housing Opportunity scores, as identified by the Equitable Growth Framework. | Percent of funds spent in areas with low Access to Housing Opportunity scores |
| 3.H | Increase housing opportunities and supporting infrastructure and amenities for residents choosing to age in place. | Number of housing units and dollars spent in target areas |
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 4.A | Increase the percentage of Charlotte households and jobs (new and existing) within ½ mile access to trail access points. | Percent of households within ½ mile of trail access points |
| 4.B | Increase the share of households and jobs with safe access to high performance transit stations (light rail, streetcar, bus rapid transit, and bus routes with headways of 15 min or less during peak hours). | Percent of households and jobs with1/2 mile of high performance transit station |
| 4.C | Increase the share of commercial (mixed use, entertainment, and employment) development within 10-minute tree-shaded walk or bike of trail access points and high-performance transit stations. | Percent of commercial development within ½ mile walk or 2-mile bike of trail access points and high performance transit |
| 4.D | Approach maximum allowable density under the TOD zoning for development within 10-minute walk or bike of trail access points and high-performance transit stations. | Percent built capacity in TOD zoning districts |
| 4.E | Increase the number of moderate to high-intensity developments along regional transit and trail routes. | Number of residential units and square feet of commercial within ½ mile of regional transit and trails |
| 4.F | Increase safe and connected bike infrastructure within two miles of transit stops and trail access points. | Number of miles of designated bike facilities within 2 miles of transit stops and trail access points |
| 4.G | Decrease the percentage of transit stops without access to sidewalks. | Percent of transit stops with complete sidewalk coverage within ½ mile |
| 4.H | Provide signalized pedestrian crossings at all transit stops on thoroughfares. | Percent of transit stops on thoroughfares with signalized pedestrian crossings |
| 4.I | Increase the number of connections between new trail and/or transit line developments and neighborhoods of varying land uses, density, and architecture. | Miles of trail and transit routes within ½ mile of Neighborhood, Community and Regional Activity Centers |
| 4.J | Increase the number of developments that are transit-oriented in both location and design. | Square feet of mixed use development within ½ mile of regional transit and trails |
| 4.K | Create engaging public spaces near high-performance transit stops, stations and trails. | Number of new public spaces |
Charlotte will provide safe and equitable mobility options for all travelers regardless of age, income, ability, race, where they live, or how they choose to travel. An integrated system of transit and tree-shaded bikeways, sidewalks, trails, and streets will support a sustainable, connected, prosperous, and innovative network that connects all Charlotteans to each other, jobs, housing, amenities, goods, services, and the region.
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 5.A | Eliminate transportation-related fatalities and serious injuries to make our streets safe for everyone. | Percentage of transportation-related fatalities |
| 5.B | Increase access in our historically underinvested communities and modes of transportation to support equitable and affordable mobility options. | Proximity to equitable and affordable mobility |
| 5.C | Increase access to sustainable and zero carbon transportation modes and mobility options to support our Strategic Energy Plan. | Proximity to sustainable and zero carbon transportation modes and mobility options |
| 5.D | Increase the share of trips made without a car to broaden the connectivity and capacity of our transportation infrastructure. | Number of trips made without a car; percent increase in number of bicycle and transit trips |
| 5.E | Prioritize transportation investments that promote economic vibrancy by managing congestion, connecting our workforce with opportunities, and advancing community priorities. | Dollars spent on mobility improvements compared to new jobs by area |
| 5.F | Integrate and implement emerging transportation services, technologies, and programs that align with community goals. | Community satisfaction with mobility choices |
All Charlotteans will live and work in safe and resilient neighborhoods that enable healthy and active lifestyles by reducing exposure to harmful environmental contaminants, expanding and improving the quality of tree canopy cover, encouraging neighborhood investment in walking, cycling, and recreation facilities, and providing access to healthy food options and health care services.
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 6.A | Increase percentage of households (new and existing) within a comfortable, tree-shaded 10-minute access to primary care health care services. | Proximity to health care services |
| 6.B | Increase the number of days that air quality is “good” to 325 and reduce the days that air quality is “unhealthy for sensitive groups” or worse to zero. | Days and air quality |
| 6.C | Reduce rates of obesity from 24% to 20% and reduce the number of neighborhoods where obesity rates are higher than 24%. | Rate of Obesity |
| 6.D | Increase the percentage of low-income households living within ½ mile of a Medicaid health care provider or free clinic. | Proximity to health care services |
| 6.E | Increase the number of urban farming and fresh produce opportunities (e.g. community gardens, farmers markets, co-ops, food forests, neighborhood-based CSAs, etc.) accessible to all neighborhoods within a 10-minute walk or bike ride. | Proximity to fresh foods |
| 6.F | Reduce and eliminate food deserts within the City. | Proximity to fresh foods |
| 6.G | Improve perceptions of public safety and measure perception through community surveys. | Percent of residents that feel safe and % in each neighborhood feel safe |
| 6.H | Improve public safety and public safety perceptions through annual reductions in violent and property crimes. | Crime prevention measures; reduction in property crime and violent crime |
| 6.I | Provide accommodations for diverse populations, including multilanguage capabilities, accessibility and universal design, and culturally responsive programming. | Number of people served with accommodations |
Charlotte will protect and enhance its surface water quality, tree canopy, and natural areas with a variety of trees, plantings, green infrastructure, green building practices, and open space at different scales throughout the entire community as a component of sustainable city infrastructure that addresses the threat of climate change.
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 7.A | Increase the number of small parks and plazas within or near neighborhoods and neighborhood centers that contain community amenities such as recreation facilities, tree canopy, retrofit stormwater facilities, and water quality/natural resource education. | Increase the number of parks with standard set of amenities |
| 7.B | Increase the acreage of protected (including public and private) natural lands (such as forests and natural areas) within the City. | Increase this acreage (within private developments) |
| 7.C | Improve surface water quality such that all City streams meet surface water quality standards. | Keep track of streams removed |
| 7.D | Increase the acreage of amenitized open space and forested or tree-shaded open space within private developments that are open to the public. | Increase this acreage (within private developments) |
| 7.E | Reduce the number of flood prone areas through mitigation efforts. | Reduce number of flood-prone areas |
| 7.F | Strive to source 100% of energy use in municipal buildings and fleet from zero carbon sources by 2030. | Percent of City buildings and vehicles that are carbon neutral |
| 7.G | Reduce per capita carbon emissions in the City. | Per Capita Emissions; percentage of commuters driving along |
| 7.H | Slow canopy loss on privately owned residential properties. | Acres and percent of tree canopy |
| 7.I | Improve quality of tree canopy (age, species, etc.) to ensure it lasts for future generations. | Number and proportion of trees of various ages, species, sizes, etc. |
| 7.J | Increase the number of developments utilizing green building practices or receiving green building certifications. | Increase the number of developments using green building practices or obtaining green building certifications |
| 7.K | Continue to expand the use of green stormwater infrastructure to improve surface water quality and reduce flooding, including in-fill and redeveloping areas. | Number of projects; percentage of impervious surfaces |
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 8.A | Increase the jobs-to-housing balance in Charlotte to ensure housing development keeps pace with job growth. | Percent of jobs increase vs. percent of housing supply increase |
| 8.B | Increase number of workers employed within the City's target industries. | Put out yearly reports of increasing employment within city's target industries / dashboard |
| 8.C | Increase the number of businesses supported and/or participating in business support programs. | Keep track of the number of businesses supported |
| 8.D | Increase the rate of new business formation within the City. | Keep track of new businesses in Charlotte |
| 8.E | Increase the number and proportion of family sustaining wage jobs in Charlotte. | Number of family sustaining wage jobs (see glossary) |
| 8.F | Decrease the number of acres within mixed-use Place Types that are existing single-use commercial and office employment uses by allowing transitions to a mix of uses. | Ratio of housing to commercial uses in areas with Place Type assignments of Center, Campus, Commercial or Innovation Mixed Use |
| 8.G | Grow the presence of "micro-economies," (the number of jobs located within community and neighborhood mixed-use areas). | Define certain micro-economies and monitor percent of growth (new jobs, new businesses, etc.) |
| 8.H | Maintain or increase the number of developed acres within Manufacturing and Logistics and Innovation Mixed Use Place Types. | Maintain percent of developed acres within industrial Place Types |
| 8.I | Maintain or increase the number of jobs located within Manufacturing and Logistics and Innovation Mixed Use Place Types. | Maintain percent of jobs within industrial Place Types |
| 8.J | Grow the number of Minority, Women, and Small Business Enterprises (MWSBEs) and cooperatively owned businesses, operating in the City. | Keep track of number of MWSB businesses |
| 8.K | Increase the share of jobs at MWSBE-qualified businesses and within cooperatively owned businesses. | Keep track of number of MWSB businesses |
| 8.L | Capture a greater share of employment growth within the City's existing and planned Regional Activity Centers. | Keep track of job growth in Regional Activity Centers |
| 8.M | Increase job-training opportunities that allow residents to obtain hard and soft skills needed to qualify for jobs within the City's target industries. | Number of participants in City and/or County affiliated job-training programs |
| 8.N | Maintain or increase the number of middle skill jobs (jobs that require education beyond high school but not a four-year degree). | Increase number of middle-skill jobs |
Charlotte will retain the identity of existing neighborhoods by intentionally directing redevelopment, limiting displacement and cultivating community-driven placemaking that elevates the importance, quality and design of places.
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 9.A | Increase the rate of restoration and adaptive reuse of existing structures originally built for commercial uses and reduce the rate of tear downs. | Number of demolition permits and value of renovations |
| 9.B | Increase the number of publicly funded placemaking and art installations throughout the City, especially within older neighborhoods and areas with populations vulnerable to displacement. | Total number of placemaking and public art projects overall and in areas vulnerable to displacement |
| 9.C | Reduce the speed and scale of older homes and existing trees being demolished and replaced with newer homes in existing neighborhoods, homes within historic districts, and homes within the Old Historic Route 4 Survey area. | Number of demolition permits by location; Acres and percent of tree canopy by area |
| 9.D | Reduce the number of residents experiencing involuntary displacement | Number of evictions; Number of households involuntarily displaced |
| 9.E | Improve jobs-skills match in and near areas with residents who may be vulnerable to displacement. | Jobs-housing ratio in areas vulnerable to displacement |
| 9.F | Preserve and improve the tree canopy in Charlotte (cited as one of the primary aspects of the city that has attracted residents. | Acres and percent of tree canopy |
| 9.G | Increase the capture of new jobs within “work” Place Types proximate to neighborhoods with owners and tenants who may be vulnerable to displacement. | Number of jobs in areas vulnerable to displacement |
| 9.H | Provide financial and technical support to small businesses in areas at high risk for commercial displacement. | Number of participants in City and/or County affiliated financial and technical support programs |
| 9.I | Increase the percent of new jobs and households in Regional and Community Activity Centers. | Number of jobs and housing units in Regional and Community Activity Centers compared to all of Charlotte |
| 9.J | Increase the capture of new jobs within Regional, Community, and Neighborhood Centers adjacent to neighborhoods with owners and tenants who may be vulnerable to displacement. | Number of job in Regional Community and Neighborhood Centers within 2 miles of areas vulnerable to displacement |
| 9.K | Identify, catalogue and understand the patterns of the character defining elements in neighborhoods and places that are uniquely Charlotte. | Percent of Charlotte cataloged for historic and cultural assets |
| 9.L | Increase the number of historic districts that preserve a wide range of Charlotte’s diverse history and character. | Number and size of historic districts |
| Objective Number | Objective | Metric |
|---|---|---|
| 10.A | Increase the capture of new jobs and households in Activity Centers. | Number of jobs and housing units in Regional Activity Centers, Community Activity Centers and Neighborhood Centers compared to all of Charlotte |
| 10.B | Increase infrastructure investments (water/sewer replacement, street lighting, stormwater facilities, streetscaping, etc.) in existing urbanized areas planned for significant new development that are constrained by infrastructure capacity. | Amount and share of CIP dollars spent in areas mapped as future Activity Centers and Neighborhood 2 Place Types |
| 10.C | Maintain or decrease the cost to serve residents per capita (e.g. costs to provide transportation, schools, parks, libraries, police, fire, etc.). | Cost to serve residents per capita |
| 10.D | Increase tax revenue generated per acre by new development. | Tax revenue per acre for all new development completed within a year compared to previous years |
| 10.E | Increase capture of new development in areas with available service and infrastructure capacity (e.g. water/sewer, stormwater, transit, etc.). | Percentage of housing units and jobs added in areas with existing services |
⬚ figure
CITY OF CHARLOTTE