Are we un-friendly to business?

I think you're presenting a false dichotomy here. A town can be both desirable from a market standpoint and burdensome from a regulatory standpoint -- they are not mutually exclusive. Wise businesses will measure the negatives and positives of both the market and regulatory climate in determining where and how to operate.

It's certainly tempting for both sides of this argument to chalk up every tree to "smart planning" and every failed development to "oppressive government", but the fact of the matter is that the effects of regulation are highly complex and not always readily apparent. Unfortunately, far too much emotion is introduced into these discussions based not upon sound logic and reason, but rather the attachment so many have to their existing political or economic biases.

If Carrboro wants to foster a green economy we should be more "unfriendly" to businesses by requiring them to use passive and active solar power and other green tech.

Hawaii, as an example, is requiring all new housing to be built with solar water heaters: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24468002/

We could do the same for businesses, yes? 

 We need to make business pay for the true cost of doing business.

I also want to thank Ruby for making the case for responsible planning. 

What is wrong with trying to approve the best of development in order to enhance, not detract from, quality of life in Chapel Hill?  Although most responsible developers won't submit sub-standard plans, it because of the Town's guidance that we can hope to achieve higher than average quality development.  I don't intend this as a slight to any developer, but a developer who is responsible to his/her bottom line needs incentive to go the extra mile.  As an example, would we have gotten affordable housing units without stringent requirements?

Even with the Town's "rigidity," mistakes could be made.  In another place, I imagine, Glen Lennox might have been a done deal in its original presentation.  Northwest Chapel Hill might have ended up a congested, overbuilt, and neighborhood unfriendly mess.  Green building might only be considered a frivolity.  Hopefully, we will avoid approvals that will negatively impact us now and in the future.

By requiring excellence, we increase the value we put on day to day life in Chapel Hill.  The surest way to stop any population increase is to ignore this fact.

Del Snow

I am trying to pull together some information  so that we can have a conversation around some data points, not just how the business community feels, or how I feel, or how you feel about what is going on in our community.   Some of what I am trying to track down, which I think will help us have a substantive conversation around this issue, is as follows:

What % of our town/county budgets  come from non-residential taxes, how has that changed over time, and how does it compare to surrounding communities, and/or the "best practices" of sustainability in terms of diversifying our revenue streams?  What does our debt to income ratio look like for the future? What about our reserves? 

How do our qualitiative measures compare against similar communities?

 But in the absence of that data, I will add my own gut check to the dialogue.   I think the business climate has steadily improved in our community.  We have elected officials who have recognized that the business community is part of their constituency and have worked hard to understand and respond to the issues.     We have several projects in progress that will be great additions to our community.   We have some upcoming exciting options, like the redevelopment of U Mall and Ram's Plaza, which will be aesthetically and commercially appealing.  

However,  I think we have some catch up to do to be an economically healthy community in the long term.       We have outsourced our  employment growth to our surrounding communities for over 20 years and essentially forced many of our residents to commute down I-40 for jobs that pay enough to support the housing costs in this town.      We have had no significant job growth in any sector--public or private--during what has been a boom period in general for the American economy, and especially for RTP.    

We have allowed our sales tax revenues to flow east and west--Ruby's right, we have businesses clamoring to be near us due to our purchasing power--they are ringed around us like a doughnut in our neighboring communities.  We shop, they collect.    We have the highest retail leakage in the Triangle.   We even have a residential ring around our community now--people who claim Chapel Hill as their home, identify with this community, and have a Chapel Hill address, but who are technically not residents.  

I love the quality of life that we have here, and I applaud our community's efforts to be thoughtful about preserving and enhancing that.   But this quality of life is only going to be an option in the future for people with a lot of personal $$ to pay the cost of admission, both on the cost of housing and on the ongoing property tax bills.     

I just want us to be sure that whatever we do, we get what we want in the most efficient manner possible.     HIgh standards are fine, but  a  clear, predictable, efficient, and smooth process is essential.  

 Go read the state of the local economy reports for the past few years, and while you're at it, read the RTRP reports for our region for the same time period.   Look at the budget.   Look at our capital improvement fund and think about how far 1.8 million dollars goes when we just spent about 500K for a block of sidewalk in downtown.   Look at the upcoming debt obligations.   And then do the math and figure out how much your share of that is going to be on your property tax bill.   That's why I want to see some more development.  

Do we do a good job? Of course.  Could we do better? I think so.  What is most frustrating for me is that we often seem unable to move beyond a defensive posture to a real dialogue.   Until we ALL let go of the need to be right, we can't see what's possible.    You just might have an idea that would change my mind.  And I might change yours---but it won't happen unless we LISTEN. So I am going to shut up and practice what I'm preaching.

Green jobs and green construction would be great, and I would wholly support any planning efforts to encourage them, but not at the expense of socioeconomic diversity. If we continue in the direction we are going, we will end up with very few people like Ruby who have had the luxury to grow from childhood to adulthood in this community. Demographic data already show us that our African-American youth are leaving and not coming back. 

If businesses are clamoring to locate here, then what's the obstacle to supporting those that are consistent with our community values (although I'm not sure we know what those are). Why are we continuing to expect property owners to carry the full economic burden of supporting the luxuries deemed so important here? We're smart--we should be able to create a dynamic economy without having to sacrifice our lower-income neighbors.

Durham County has residents living in Chapel Hill, Durham, and Raleigh. Last year, those who lived in homes assessed at $200,000 in Chapel Hill paid $3,533 in property and school taxes; those in Durham paid $2,894; and those in Raleigh paid $2,582. I think those figures speak for themselves. The cost of living here, in the absence of a vibrant economc development plan, is becoming prohibitive to all but the wealthiest.

1) I believe that if we did a thorough analysis of the review process, we would find unnecessary hurdles that we could dispense with and/or ways to streamline the process and still meet our goals.

2) I am unaware of any attempt at a thorough analysis of the review porcess based upon an actual proposal and the process it went through.

Does anyone know why - given that this issue has been bandied about for decades - there has not been a thorough analysis? Or maybe there has been one that we don't know about?

Three comments- 

"I love the quality of life that we have here, and I applaud our community's efforts to be thoughtful about preserving and enhancing that.   But this quality of life is only going to be an option in the future for people with a lot of personal $$ to pay the cost of admission, both on the cost of housing and on the ongoing property tax bills."

Quality of life and sustainable responsible planning are not mutually exclusive.  I am pretty sure that we all recognize the important and necessary part played by commercial development in broadening our tax base.  But previous Councils have okayed developments that are now cited as sprawl and inefficient use of land.  The key is to try to establish a vision that will minimize  inappropriate approvals. 

Vilcom has presented an interesting twist to this discussion.  For all the talk of lack of Class A office space, Dawson Hall, accepting rentals since construction started, has no tenants eventhough construction is now complete.  A proposal has been made to substitute a hotel for the next building that is already approved for the site...

As far as process goes, I think that a new visionary zoning map needs to be developed that will give guidance to developers and residents alike about where density should be sited AND where it should not.  At this point in time, it seems as though density has become  a buzzword that is being proposed for EVERY available site without regard to an overview of the entire Chapel Hill map and the ensuing consequences of density everywhere.  Density certainly is appropriate downtown.  Some lesser increase in density may be appropriate in other locations.  There needs to be a clear high standard directives for developers so that they know what is expected at the beginning of the process rather than presenting plans that have to be haggled over.

If we don't want to become the town of the landed gentry, we need not only a larger commercial tax base, but a policy that includes affordable residential and a plan that keeps Chapel Hill a desirable place to live.  We don't want a Atlanta-esque redevelopment scenario.

Del Snow

Who do "we" think "we" are? I mean, trying to define the nature of our market here is a challenge. Whatever disarray there might be regarding goals in formal planning and review, it's mirrored in the multiple-personality layers of Chapel Hill/Carrboro as a market entity.

Based on the type of businesses and developments that have arrived most recently, you'd conclude that someone out there believes we are an upscale and ever-rising community. It's worth noting that the empty spaces on Franklin Street aren't there because of approval hurdles. They're there because of building owners' implicit assumptions, after a long boom period, about businesses that ought to be able to pay high rent in return for location.

Yet this is a college town whose economy, at least in theory, depends on students' wallets and tastes. And then there's the populist-green representation and, largely unrepresented, the worker-service group. Any mall that includes Southern Season and Goldworks together with Rose's and the (literally marginalized) K&W is a challenge to description. But most of us seem to like the slight chaos as emblematic of what it means to live here.