But my personal opinions about Greenbridge aside, the implications of the growth represented by these two projects and the scale of their physical presence is a community discussion that should have been addressed outside of the development review process. Better late than never though, the Chapel Hill News tackles the question today.
Village or city?Can this community continue to support a rapidly growing population? Looking at this from a sustainability perspective, there has been proactive planning to protect farmland and natural areas through the rural boundary agreement that has been in place for close to 20 years. But is that agreement working? Are we achieving the environmental protection benefits anticipated by the planners? Do we really have the water and sewer infrastructure needed to support all the growth planned for Carrboro, Chapel Hill and the University?
In her online Web log, Town Council member Laurin Easthom wrote that coming decisions will determine "whether or not Chapel Hill remains a town in which you seem to know everyone, or a small city."Easthom said increasing density downtown is the price to pay for preserving the countryside north and west of Chapel Hill-Carrboro. As long as people want to move to Chapel Hill, she said, developers will want to build here. The Town Council wants to push them downtown rather than into the wilderness.
"I lament the fact that we are going to see density, but I also understand that we need to do that in order to preserve the rural buffer," Easthom said. "I want Chapel Hill to be the small town that I've known it to be forever."
Council member Mark Kleinschmidt, on the other hand, does not believe a denser downtown will destroy the small-town appeal. He envisions a small city where neighbors do know each other, perhaps better than they do under the dominant pattern of developing vacant land into sprawling subdivisions on large lots.
That pattern, he said, "diminished the village quality that a lot of people romanticize when they think of Chapel Hill."
If downtown develops as Kleinschmidt envisions, residents will be able to walk to work and shop, greeting each other and shopkeepers along the way.
"These kinds of redevelopments, particularly in our downtown core, actually bring us back to those elements of our village past that made our community such an attractive place to live," he said.
What about the economic and social impacts of the decision to push growth into the towns in order to protect the environment? Are we sacrificing those aspects of sustainability through our efforts to protect the environment?
The cost of living in the towns has become unaffordable. Is this the result of the managed growth policy? Are we protecting farmlands and open spaces at the expense of our local economy? Should the county be looking at how tax revenues are distributed to help offset the burden on the towns? Clearly both towns need an economic development plan beyond just downtown growth. But if Lot 5 and Greenbridge are both approved, will that provide the stimulus for economic development the Council expects?
What impact is this growth having on the social aspects of the community? We know our community demographics look very different from 20 years ago. How much of that change is the result of growth pushing out long-time residents who can no longer afford to live here? How much is the result of the school system reputation?
I'm glad to see other people asking these same questions. "Can we steer Chapel Hill's growth in a way that will allow us, in 10 or 20 or 30 years, to express the same sort of sentiment? The village has grown up, and it has more growing yet to do. The challenge, as it always has been, is to grow not just bigger, but better." (CHN Editorial)
No comments:
Post a Comment