Skip to content
The Archive of The Carrboro Citizen
Menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Community
  • Schools
  • Business
  • Opinion
  • Obituaries
  • Sports
  • Mill
  • Flora
  • Print Archive
  • About
Menu

Issues with Chapel Hill 2020

Posted on April 5, 2012April 4, 2012 by Staff

By Dave Sidor

During the March 26 Chapel Hill Town Council meeting a large group of citizens – representing various neighborhoods and CH2020 theme groups – related many concerns and suggestions about the ongoing Chapel Hill 2020 process.

In the town manager’s presentation to council, he asserted that the 2020 process was moving into the “review and refinement stage” and the comprehensive (vision and framework) plan is on track to be completed by June.

Unfortunately I have to disagree, and so do the 42 other citizens who signed a letter to council in which we shared our experiences as 2020 participants. We believe the 2020 work to date is far from finished and does not answer the fundamental question the council wants answered: How much and in what way do we want to grow?

Our primary concerns lie in the fact that – because of infrequent meeting times, lack of data and a mid-stream change in focus from creating the vision to evaluating specific land-use maps – we have not been given adequate time to formulate and discuss the guiding principles that will set the stage for more specific decisions like land-use and budgeting priorities.

Also missing is a community discussion and analysis of all the information gathered. And glaringly absent is additional information such as: What are UNC and UNC Health Care projections, school capacity limitations and our office- and commercial-vacancy backlog? How many students will need to be housed by 2020? What new UNC medical facilities are planned? How much revenue do a retail store, an office building or apartments generate?

We have asked to evaluate the assumptions being used to drive decisions about growth, and no opportunity to do so to date has been given. Additionally, we question using the results from the fleeting 60-plus-minute mapping exercises and surveys to make important land-use recommendations and zoning-ordinance changes, especially as the 2020 vision is not yet agreed.

Our points were further emphasized by council member Matt Czajkowski, who pointed out that “consensus conclusions … regarding the trade-offs that, overall, the community is willing to make have not yet been determined.” He went on to explain that compared to decisions on growth over the last decade, “We are at a different point. We potentially will transform the Chapel Hill we know; that’s a much bigger deal.” And finally he stated, “The fundamental question is how much growth do we want.”

Needless to say we agree regarding this key question! To date Chapel Hill 2020 leadership, town staff and citizen stakeholders have invested a great deal of time and energy into this process, and we are committed to its success. However, we think that, at this critical point, it is important for council to redefine the product so that it is truly a “vision” document that addresses the broad goals and objectives of our community.

In addition, we feel that they should work with CH2020 leadership and stakeholders to establish a process for additional public discussion of land-use decisions.

Finally, we have requested that maps and results of the Future Focus mapping exercises be left out of the June comprehensive plan, as we feel that they are not yet representative of citizen opinion and input.

Making these adjustments could push the deadline into fall. But most communities take 18-24 months to create a comprehensive plan; we took about that long to create the 2000 comprehensive plan. Additional time would bring opportunities for meaningful citizen discussion of the assumptions and the vision, including goals and objectives, to articulate what’s important to the entire community.

Dave Sidor is a participant in the Chapel Hill 2020 process.

2 thoughts on “Issues with Chapel Hill 2020”

  1. Nancy Tilly says:
    April 6, 2012 at 11:14 pm

    To the Editor: I was glad to read Dave Sidor’s good piece about flaws in the 2020 discussions now taking place in Chapel Hill/Carrboro, about land-use and development. We do have to grow. The problem as I see it is how to keep the charm and small-town atmosphere that made us love the place.
    As an example of what I have in mind, Boulder, CO, began building hi-rise buildings in the 1960s and soon discovered their height threatened the character of the town. In 1972 they passed a law limiting the height of all new buildings to 46 feet or about 4 stories. Many of us who live in or near the Historic District would like to see similar limits on the height of Chapel Hill’s new buildings.
    We’d also like to see more awareness in developers of the need to protect our water sources as well as historic neighborhoods and long-time residents’ peace of mind. As you say, we need more public discussion of the assumptions being used to decide how much and what kind of growth is good.
    Let’s hope we can get some good discussion going.
    Sincerely,
    Nancy Tilly

  2. Diane Robertson says:
    April 7, 2012 at 7:17 am

    Dear David

    Thank you for this thoughtful letter.
    You express so clearly what many of us who have been participants in this process believe.
    I do not live within the city limits of Chapel Hill, but I understand that the choices that will be made for Chapel Hill will impact the region. The implications do not stop at the CH borders.
    I trust that the fundamental assumptions being used to drive the growth discussion, will be central to refining and defining the conversation and planning in the future.

    Diane Robertson, Carrboro, NC

Comments are closed.

Web Archive

© 2025 The Archive of The Carrboro Citizen | Powered by Minimalist Blog WordPress Theme