Town progress sees accolades, criticism

It’s an admirable goal, but it’s far from being realized.

That’s what Chapel Hill Town Council members said in matching praise with criticism at a Wednesday work session in which they analyzed the town’s success in providing affordable housing.

“We’ve done a great job of establishing a goal,” council member Mark Kleinschmidt said. “We’ve done a fair job of achieving it.”

The town’s 2000 Comprehensive Plan states that it encourages all developers to draft plans that make 15 percent of housing in their units affordable — or accessible to those making 80 percent or less of the area’s median income.

Senior long-range planner Chris Berndt told the council that its various incentives and advocacy have fostered unparalleled success.

Berndt said that the town has seen 179 new units of affordable housing since it adopted the plan and that 91 percent of those units were developed privately.

But council members said there are still ways to do more.

They unanimously agreed to pursue a town ordinance that would allow inclusionary zoning, a controversial policy wherein the town could require that a set percentage of project units qualify as affordable — even before developers receive council approval.

Davidson is now the only other state municipality to mandate inclusionary zoning. The Town Council has lobbied for state approval in years past without success.

A 2004 report prepared by the UNC School of Government states that about 200 mandated inclusionary zoning policies now exist in 10 states.

But the policy has spawned legal challenges based on municipal authority, Town Attorney Ralph Karpinos said.

While admitting that Chapel Hill would be a prime target for such a challenge, council members agreed that the policy might be best for their ultimate goals.

They agreed to convene a task force to analyze community opinion on such a policy, and more generally, on the need for affordable housing.

“The most uncomfortable moments I have had on the council have been involving unclear policies,” council member Cam Hill said. “Drafting an ordinance could reduce the options (developers have).”

Council members offered varying analyses of the policies now used to encourage affordable housing, including payments in lieu of providing the housing.

“Any new policy needs to really limit the point when payment in lieu becomes an option,” Kleinschmidt said.

Mayor Kevin Foy said rezoning all area land to the lowest density standard — an idea that, like inclusionary zoning, was rejected in finalizing the comprehensive plan — might improve the area’s affordable housing quotient by requiring developers to apply for a rezoning if they want to affect density.

Council member Sally Greene said the area’s distinct zones result in constant tugs of war with developers because they have differing abilities to house affordable units.

Council members also mulled other ideas for aiding the area’s low-income residents, such as reserving town money to help anyone stricken by sudden financial constraints.

Hill said funding home renovations, while important, is less important than helping homeowners in combating the perennial issue of rising property taxes.

And he added that relief should be given first to the area’s poor, not the wealthy or owners of historic homes, as has been suggested.

“Don’t jump on that burning bag when you get home,” Kleinschmidt responded. “It’s gonna be nasty.”

Contact the City Editor at citydesk@unc.edu.