The Carrboro Board of Aldermen will resume the hearing on the proposed project at 500 N. Greensboro St. on Nov. 15. The project is called Shelton Station. I’ve written previously about it, as have others in these pages. I’m against the proposed project. I’m not against a project on the site. My complaint is not an instance of NIMBY[Not In My Backyard]-ism. I’m against a project that is misconceived and inappropriate for the location.
The project is not consistent with the surrounding properties. In a recent candidate blog in Orange Politics (orangepolitics.org), Alderman Lavelle talked of projects where “scale fits in with the neighborhood†and of a “community feel.†That’s certainly not something that’s happening here. That this project requires rezoning to allow for its height and density clearly tells us it conflicts with the underlying zoning and the approved vision for that area. Shelton Station is two large buildings: a three-story structure and four-story structure of mainly two-bedroom rental units and almost 150 parking spaces, placed in the midst of predominantly one-story houses. Alderman Coleman, in the same blog, states that “Carrboro is a strong market, and if they [developer/applicants] really want to be here, they must recognize the need for creativity and flexibility in their projects.†This project, with its warehoused units and unrelieved parking, doesn’t display either of these qualities.
I understand that it is difficult to vote against a project. The applicant team sits before the board wanting approval. No one likes to disappoint an earnest applicant. But the board needs to look beyond the hopeful faces in the room and think of Carrboro and of our shared vision. This project is counter to that vision. The approval process and the vote are not about the applicant team, their dedication or their effort. The vote by the board of aldermen is about Carrboro.
I spoke recently with someone who had read the mayor’s remark about there not being much opposition to the project, and that person had assumed that approval was a “slam dunk.†I urge the mayor and board members to read the earlier comments in the Citizen by others and myself speaking against the project. Their minds should not be settled without hearing all of our voices. The board should vote against the project, but encourage the applicant to return with a revised proposal, one that is revised with sensitivity to the site and the neighborhood.
Jack Haggerty
Carrboro