Thanks for this, councilmember. There’s a ton of misinformation going around and a lot of (IMHO) unwarranted fears about what the proposal might mean, and this was a very clear statement of its goals and your intentions.
This is a thoughtful treatment of a complex problem. However, I sincerely hope our city government will give as much thought and care to the almost guaranteed abuse of looser zoning that this proposal would allow. Entities buying single family lots in order to build multi-unit housing are not doing it for their own living arrangements. They are building investment properties. The priority for investment developers will always be their bottom line, not the communities in which they build. The result is likely to be cheap, ugly architecture, diminished green space, transient residents, and remote property owners with no stake in the quality of life in our neighborhoods. There might be MORE places to live in Chapel Hill when all is said and done, but living here will be a little bit worse for everyone, including those in the newly realized housing. Please, please put some thought into creative ways to keep our community from becoming someone else's profit margin before you pass this.
I am grateful we have such thoughtful, well-informed leaders thinking through these issues. Housing affordability is a complex problem and I appreciate this approach.
The proposed rezoning won’t accomplish the stated goals of improved affordability and increased home ownership.
Developers build to meet market demand. For in-town neighborhoods (where zoning allows), this means multi-unit student housing. The most affordable existing homes will be prime candidates for redevelopment as multi-unit student housing, reducing opportunities for affordable home ownership and decreasing home ownership overall. Developers/investors will benefit. The communities you represent will be negatively impacted.
The Town Council is positioning this rezoning as a “text amendment”, avoiding notification requirements required by a zoning change. The Council’s approach undermines community trust.
Ugly and profit for developers . Not a win for the Chapel Hill Community. Have we mentioned yet the increased traffic and danger to our children near elementary schools? Because those are the modest neighborhoods unprotected by HOA’s who will bear the brunt of ugly and dangerous density. It is already happening at the Fordham / Ephesus intersection by the school. We need less myopic vision from our elected officials. I cannot tell you how many people I have spoken to who are disappointed in our Mayor and entourage. And these are people who voted for them…
Thank you for sharing your thought process. This is hugely helpful, rational and makes a lot of common sense. I hope the council passes this and moves Chapel Hill forward to being a Connected Community.
Sorry, I don’t buy it . « No can do » for the wealthiest most privileged golf course entitled neighborhoods? And you want to eliminate segregation? How? By building in poor and modest communities backyards and eliminating their green space ?
Thanks for this, councilmember. There’s a ton of misinformation going around and a lot of (IMHO) unwarranted fears about what the proposal might mean, and this was a very clear statement of its goals and your intentions.
i greatly appreciate your efforts to dispell some of the wild fear mongering that is circulating around this proposal
This is a thoughtful treatment of a complex problem. However, I sincerely hope our city government will give as much thought and care to the almost guaranteed abuse of looser zoning that this proposal would allow. Entities buying single family lots in order to build multi-unit housing are not doing it for their own living arrangements. They are building investment properties. The priority for investment developers will always be their bottom line, not the communities in which they build. The result is likely to be cheap, ugly architecture, diminished green space, transient residents, and remote property owners with no stake in the quality of life in our neighborhoods. There might be MORE places to live in Chapel Hill when all is said and done, but living here will be a little bit worse for everyone, including those in the newly realized housing. Please, please put some thought into creative ways to keep our community from becoming someone else's profit margin before you pass this.
Thank you for writing this, Karen.
I am grateful we have such thoughtful, well-informed leaders thinking through these issues. Housing affordability is a complex problem and I appreciate this approach.
Nonsense, Ms. Stegman.
The proposed rezoning won’t accomplish the stated goals of improved affordability and increased home ownership.
Developers build to meet market demand. For in-town neighborhoods (where zoning allows), this means multi-unit student housing. The most affordable existing homes will be prime candidates for redevelopment as multi-unit student housing, reducing opportunities for affordable home ownership and decreasing home ownership overall. Developers/investors will benefit. The communities you represent will be negatively impacted.
The Town Council is positioning this rezoning as a “text amendment”, avoiding notification requirements required by a zoning change. The Council’s approach undermines community trust.
Your wild plan to urbanize Chapel Hill will wreck the peaceful town we all moved to. Why do you hate our community so much?
Ugly and profit for developers . Not a win for the Chapel Hill Community. Have we mentioned yet the increased traffic and danger to our children near elementary schools? Because those are the modest neighborhoods unprotected by HOA’s who will bear the brunt of ugly and dangerous density. It is already happening at the Fordham / Ephesus intersection by the school. We need less myopic vision from our elected officials. I cannot tell you how many people I have spoken to who are disappointed in our Mayor and entourage. And these are people who voted for them…
Thank you for sharing your thought process. This is hugely helpful, rational and makes a lot of common sense. I hope the council passes this and moves Chapel Hill forward to being a Connected Community.
Sorry, I don’t buy it . « No can do » for the wealthiest most privileged golf course entitled neighborhoods? And you want to eliminate segregation? How? By building in poor and modest communities backyards and eliminating their green space ?