Dear Chapel Hill East Observer Editors,
Ms. Caroline Chen wrote an article about CHALT in the East Chapel Hill Student Newspaper. that was also picked up and printed by the Independent. The article is full of inaccuracies widely read. Our corrections and comments for each assertion indicated in bold follow.
The Independent complimented this article as a “scathing and well-researched take-down of CHALT” and distributed it in a news feed.
- The point is, when you dig even a little bit deeper, it’s clear that their idea of a livable town is the status quo—everyone who can afford a median property of nearly $500,000. Utter baloney! CHALT has always favored environmentally responsible modestly priced medium density for sale housing developments with 15% affordable housing units. (According to US Census median Chapel Hill pricing is &400K.) Over the last several years, out of town developers have successfully curried favor with Town government to successfully get only market rate apartments approved with little or no affordable housing.They’ve convinced a Council majority that building more housing of any type will bring down prices. The “trickle down theory” when applied to housing hasn’t worked so far in Chapel Hill. Rents and prices are as high as ever.
- One area CHALT becomes uniquely silent on is when it comes to constructing giant parking facilities downtown. This was Pam Hemminger’s project and we did not support it as proposed. We raised detailed concerns about the traffic management plan, the construction cost, and the financing scheme. We oppose the two way single lane design and providing huge amounts of
concentrated parking and at a great cost that will create indebtedness for the town. We lobbied the Town Manager, Mayor and council members to hire a construction management expert to contain costs, but the Manager chose an in-house team with zero large scale project expertise. Now costs have doubled from $20 million to $40 million. Our endorsed mayoral candidate Hongbin Gu was a vociferous opponent of the overly optimistic parking revenue projections on which the financing is based.
- For instance, the Rosemary Street “CVS” parking building is being taken down and reconstructed into a new 1,100-space, seven-story deck, to be completed in 2022. The 1100 space capacity is far in excess of need, particularly when considering the 200 spaces to be constructed under the new office/laboratory building across the street.
- If CHALT really stands for a livable town for everyone, why not protest the gentrification of university-adjacent neighborhoods by student rentals? CHALT has vigorously encouraged UNC to provide on campus housing. We have protested many rezonings to prevent the destruction of moderate priced rentals. We were noisy fans of the lower priced Town House Apartments and Park Apartments that provided reasonable rents. If the Town had not approved those rezonings, this affordable housing would still be available. We strongly opposed the Form Based Code that abandoned affordable housing, as well as stormwater controls and public hearing. At a CHALT Affordable Housing Forum, we featured the work of the Jackson Center who has worked tirelessly to save Northside homes owed by residents from investors. The Town continues to favor “clusters” of affordable housing, instead of disbursed affordable housing located within every new development which has produced much more acceptable outcomes for their residents. Town policy frequently allows new developments to just provide “payments in lieu” instead of actual housing units.
- Not to mention, if the development is a grocery store, it’ll be fine. Wegmans’ 100,000 square feet and 750 parking spaces, all impervious concrete, suddenly aren’t such a problem. Bringing Wegmans to Chapel Hill was Mayor Hemminger’s idea and she was able to obtain Council support for an overly generous incentives package, not required by any other Wegmans location in NC – which we criticized in letters to the Mayor and Council. The big concern everyone shared was the traffic that such a popular grocery would bring to adjacent neighborhoods. CHALT worked with the neighbors and Chapel Hill transportation department
to change the 15/501 access design from a right-in right-out only to a full access entrance, thus keeping the surrounding neighborhoods from becoming a conduit for massive new traffic. Further we did not favor the acres of impervious surface parking and supported Council Member Gu’s proposal for structured parking. Wegmans did bring tax base diversity and paid for hazardous water cleanup from the previous car dealerships.
- When they vote against developments like Aura that could provide multiplexes, denser housing, or at least more affordable housing, they comment further about a report by the Town Council and UNC calling Chapel Hill’s transformation into an “East Coast Palo Alto.” Many of the daily workers who drive our town forward, sometimes literally, do not live here. The writer is confused. The reference to Palo Alto is from the jointly commissioned Town-UNC Rod Stevens Housing report. Everyone who has actually reviewed the report has found the findings enlightening, especially with its focus on “missing middle” for sale housing. We want the Town to implement this strong well researched recommendation in order to reverse the present Council trend that has resulted in vast amounts of current market rate apartments, such as Aura. More workers will live here in town when the town provides affordable housing options.
We are inviting the High School Observer editors to our “What is CHALT?” discussion of town issues October 21st.