Concrete With a Side of Asphalt
A perspective from Pam Cooper
Lunch at Breadman’s on a lovely fall day turns out to be a mixed blessing. The grilled cheese is melty and sizzling but the traffic on Fordham Boulevard is relentless and the ambience – well, there’s none to speak of. Looming on one side is the Berkshire, angular and featureless, while before me the Blue Hill housing complex clusters like those depressing blocks of flats one saw in East Berlin during the Cold War: uniform, institutional, repellent. Why is Chapel Hill being turned into acres of concrete devoid of real green space and threaded through with cars, cars, cars? Is this really what the people of Chapel Hill want?
It’s apparently what Town government wants, and it clearly fulfills the money-making desires of the developers who seem to steer Chapel Hill around like their own private car. A limousine, in fact, considering the enthusiastic reception given by our Town Council to the seemingly endless proposals to “in fill” city spaces and turn this college town into a city. Housing is important, of course, but could it not be approached mindfully and equitably, with an eye to the climate crisis, to the need for conserving green space as vital to community health, and to the unique character of our town? It is after all that unique character which regularly gets Chapel Hill top billing on popular lists of the best places to live in the country. If tunnel-visioned, promiscuous development continues, we’ll soon be dropping off those lists.
Attending Town Council meetings, as I have for most of this year, I’m struck by two buzzwords reiterated by Councilors and several of those running for office in the upcoming Town elections: “vibrant” and “sustainable.” More about them soon. The other thing I notice is that the words “money” and “profit” are rarely uttered; they drive everything, of course, but it seems shameful to acknowledge them, like farting in public. As opposition to the Aura complex, the proposed Jay Street development, and the rebuilding of Rosemary Street shows, many citizens want to call a halt to the proliferation of mostly high-end housing, declare a moratorium, and think through what it is we’re doing here: what kind of town are we are trying to be?
This difficult question spawns others. Why, for example, are concerned citizens ignored or fobbed off with facile “everyone must compromise” answers from Town officials? Something tells me the developers – many of whom are out-of-towners who swoop in for a killing and care nothing about the neighborhoods they re-shape – aren’t the ones compromising. And let’s bear in mind that the housing challenges in Chapel Hill might not be solved by packing people into buildings that have all the inviting qualities of a clinic crossed with a warehouse. What notion of “vibrancy” is being pursued here? We will never be Manhattan. Dare I say that most of those who come here are not looking for Manhattan. Promoting some vague idea of urbanization at the cost of quality of life is misguided. Vibrancy can’t be created with bulldozers and cement. Structures may be built, but the rich relationships between humans and a diverse environment, the caring for and attachment to place, may never materialize there. Look at University Mall, still refusing after decades of “improvements” – and more coming up — to cohere into an energized place.
I suspect that the word “vibrant” gives shape, among our leaders, to an otherwise vague mix of nostalgia, ambition, and FOMO. The effect is a kind of denial – while the needs of many Chapel Hillians are ignored or disregarded. Our housing imperatives and climate responsibilities must be seen in their full complexity and inter-relatedness. We need creative, far-reaching thought about what’s realistic for our town going forward; and a thorough engagement with our role in both the environmental and socio-political crises of this moment.
Which brings me to “sustainability.” As I hear it used by those in charge, this word has become a cliché – a placeholder which gestures towards but actually substitutes for something real. In practice it seems to mean clear-cutting precious woodland, laying down acres of concrete (which creates its own problems of drainage etc.), and planting a few saplings to make things “green.” This is rubbish. We must critically examine what sustainability actually means, especially in the context of the urgent drive to reduce emissions and conserve trees for their carbon-storing capacity. Housing, particularly our need for equitable housing, must be re-examined in ways that loosen the stranglehold of economic considerations of growth and profit. In 2021 we are under an ethical imperative to look further and deeper. Less materialistic values like compassion, nurturance, real community-building where people are well-housed and have access to the natural world, must be prioritized – however counter-intuitive they seem to a mindset driven by dreams of unfettered growth and wealth (for some). Laying down a few bike paths in places like Aura, with its parking for 500+ cars, doesn’t make community. Ignoring affected citizens whose lives will suffer due to the raising of another “cruise ship” development — unintegrated into its surroundings and weirdly unmoored: these strategies will not do. They are not sustainable.
Finishing my lunch while marking that odd whiff of East Berlin around me, I thought that it is, after all, community we’re mostly looking for in Chapel Hill. If only we knew more fully what it is and were imaginative enough to build structures that invite or make it possible – or far-sighted enough to leave neighborhoods intact and refrain from disrupting functioning communities. This means preserving greenspace, re-thinking the panacea of density, the fetishization of “vibrancy,” and the myth of “sustainability.” It means listening to and taking seriously the views of existing communities and assessing Town needs realistically and responsibly. Right now, it means making smart choices for change in the approaching Town elections. And when it comes to community, here’s an idea for the Town: choose a building that already exists in an area you’re preparing to tear up and make it into a thrift or resale store rather than a posh boutique. In thrift stores classes mingle, goods are recycled and shared, conversations happen, and contacts are made. The potential for community inheres in places like this.
“Viewpoints” is a place on Chapelboro where local people are encouraged to share their unique perspectives on issues affecting our community. If you’d like to contribute a column on an issue you’re concerned about, interesting happenings around town, reflections on local life — or anything else — send a submission to viewpoints@wchl.com
Chapelboro.com does not charge subscription fees. You can support local journalism and our mission to serve the community. Contribute today – every single dollar matters.
That traffic on Fordham has nothing to do with those apartments. It is all the commuters from Southern Village and points south heading to Durham or RTP. Because there is no easy way to circumvent Jordan Lake that is a major route north and east. It is also a state road and major north/south vehicle for moving traffic. So if the traffic at Lunch time seems heavy don’t blame the people living in those apartments – they left for work hours ago,.
I have become your newest fan. A more articulate exposition of the “vibrant” Chapel Hill envisioned by our leadership, born from real estate development, could not be clearer. Hope we hear more from you.