“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.
Do as I Say, Not as I Do: On Rezoning Single Family Neighborhoods
A perspective from Breckany Eckhardt
(Editor’s note: Breckany Eckhardt is a candidate in this year’s Chapel Hill Town Council election)
In my early 30s, I put everything I owned in storage and traveled for work for 6 years,- literally living out of suitcases – to save for the down payment of a house.
I chose to buy my modestly sized home in 2017 in Chapel Hill because it had a small 650 sq ft in-law suite, and I could not afford the mortgage by myself as a single young woman.
It was previously an unkempt rental and I put in years of sweat equity and incremental updates, losing 40 pounds in 5 months pulling ivy and hand-digging walkways.
I currently rent the in-law suite as affordable housing to college students and nurses.
- I encourage in-law suites.
- I encourage existing home duplex conversion.
- I encourage 700 sq ft cottages/ADUs.
These meet density increases while ensuring we don’t drown ourselves in runoff and corporate-owned rentals or increase the already high prices of our neighborhoods.
Guess what?
These options existed before the town council chose to meddle with the zoning amendments.
Jess Anderson stated in forums her opponents are “afraid of duplexes”, but they don’t divulge the “devil in the details”:
Per town records from Town Manager Christopher Blue, a Canadian consultant, The Keesmaat Group, was paid $412, 801 for a “complete community study” and a “planning systems review”. These text amendments are part of Chapel Hill’s new “complete communities strategy” –
It is also important to note that Amy Ryan – with whom Jess Anderson is running – and Camille Berry with Adam Searing voted “NO” to this amendment at the last minute.
Click here for details on the amendments, but in short:
In single-family neighborhoods, developers can build:
- 3,000 sq ft duplexes – with 8 bedrooms but a maximum of 4 parking spaces
- [Jessica Anderson’s logic that they “deter student stuffers”, but 8 bedrooms with 8 unrelated individuals tells me at least 6-8 cars are likely]
- 1,000 sq ft ADUs in cheaper neighborhoods without sidewalks and near floodplains
- Tri/quadplexes in multi-family zones
These ‘mini apartment complexes’ will likely double the property value leading to:
- Increased corporate property ownership
- Reduced affordability for family homebuyers
- Widening of the class gap:
-Wealthy, politically engaged neighborhoods can ‘lawyer up” to create legal restrictions
– HOAs or restrictive covenant areas are excluded – where most town council members reside!
..NOT, mind you, in the lavish multi-million dollar HOAs / covenant-restricted neighborhoods where the majority of the town council resides.
How does the Town Council justify being excluded?
-Michael Parker (in a meeting earlier this year): “It’s a real ‘disservice’ to neighborhoods [exempt from rezoning] to not have this opportunity for diversity.”
-Jess Anderson, at the Carol Woods forum on October 17. “It’s unfortunate,” [that her neighborhood is exempt]… and knowingly misstating, “duplexes would ‘not be bigger than existing homes.’”
Is Jessica Cooper Anderson “fighting the good fight” with their HOAs toward ‘inclusionary zoning’, as part of their “complete communities” plan?
I think not.
HOAs benefit from creating safe zones for their home value while dumping the responsibility of denser living on the middle and low-income neighborhoods lowering our property values –while increasing their own. Like the evil and greedy Mr. Burns in The Simpson’s Show, the current council and their “complete community” candidate minions only care about themselves.
Do as I say, not as I do is not my style of equitable governance.
Isn’t Chapel Hill supposed to be an inclusive “complete community”? What’s good for one is good for all? SURE, AS LONG AS IT’S “NOT IN THE TOWN COUNCIL’S BACKYARD!”
Why don’t we use city property to select developers who offer the best community output? We need mixed-use housing: for sale townhomes w/ garages, rental and affordable housing, community event and local retail spaces on bottom floors of complexes, solar panels, rooftop gardens, and Energy Star-certified construction. We need single-family homes, too, especially for large families and multi-generational households.
Also, UNC owns 30% of the land and has the political and financial power to partner w/ the town and offer student housing options on or near campus and workforce housing such as at the Horace Wiliams Airport. Similar concepts worked for Glenn Lennox, the upcoming St. Paul AME Village, Durham, and comparable college towns.
“Viewpoints” on Chapelboro is a recurring series of community-submitted opinion columns. All thoughts, ideas, opinions and expressions in this series are those of the author, and do not reflect the work or reporting of 97.9 The Hill and Chapelboro.com.
