Name of candidate: Laurin Easthom
Address: 104 Livingston Place, Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Contact information: laurineasthom@gmail.com or 919-923-2342
1. We talk a lot about growth and where it should occur. Clearly the Town Council can influence the rate of growth through its planning and zoning powers, granted by the NC Legislature.
What are your goals and objectives for growth? Building on a question asked at the Visioning Task Force focus groups, how much growth can Chapel Hill support and still maintain our values, the things that people like about living in Chapel Hill? How would you determine growth rates that are "sustainable"?
Just as the Horace Williams Citizens Committee Report stated there may be a point at which the Town recognizes that no amount of mitigation is possible to retain its quality of life, we must realize that there will be a point in the future where we must say "no more." We need to have a defined end point to accepted development and density, where our quality of life suffers. All future growth in Chapel Hill should be balanced environmentally, economically, and socially. If we strain our water supply, allow luxury condo development after luxury condo development making Chapel Hill less affordable, approve projects that allow significant parking, continue to overemphasize residential growth in mixed use, and view every single plot of green space along major corridors as a prime development opportunity, then we are growing unsustainably.
2. New development occurs on vacant land, or developers buy properties to redevelop for a completely different purpose. Examples of the latter are East 54 and Greenbridge, and proposed projects such as Rams Plaza, University Mall and University Square. Development of any type can bring desired amenities for the Town but can also cause undesirable consequences, such as a changed Town character, environmental damage, the loss of affordable housing, increased traffic, and the migration of small scale retail from present locations.
Given that development and change are inevitable, please suggest ideas about how each of the unwanted consequences could be addressed in future development proposals.
Development and change are inevitable, but undesirable consequences do not have to occur. Since East 54 literally stares us in the face with lack of green space and trees, I would not desire to see the loss of the magnificent older trees across the street in Glen Lennox. Environmental, visual balance is absolutely key in considering redevelopment on major corridors. If Glen Lennox developed similarly to East 54, that area of Chapel Hill would be unrecognizable. We are at risk of destroying our history in Chapel Hill like at no other time. I want to approve projects that respect the history and charm without changing the face of our town. Adequate building setbacks, minimal parking, capping building heights, balance with open space, affordable units for families (not just 1 BR's), and expanding our transit system are all the ways that I would prevent those undesirable consequences.
3. Chapel Hill prides itself on an open public process with fair, consistent rules and development review process. Citizen Advisory Boards ensure that citizens are involved in decisions that affect them. A Concept Plan process helps guide developers toward a concept desired by the Town.
Please comment on whether the Town's process is working as it should, and offer specific ways it could be improved. Is the process achieving the results we want?
The Town's development review process could be improved. Citizen involvement in the iterative process is key to a better development, and I don't want to change that. However, the process itself could be more efficient. In no way do I suggest that we rush the approval of projects, but efficiency could be better achieved by having the town staff make initial comments and findings in the concept plan phase. There are things such as stream determinations and existing traffic patterns and plans that are not controversial that may be presented to give council a more informed view upfront in making its initial comments, which saves time for everyone. Additionally, having more local citizen experts (to the extent possible) serving on our advisory boards could help the council have a more informed opinion from some citizens rather than just opinion itself, of which we have plenty at many public hearings.
4. For the last few years the Council has embraced a policy of encouraging higher densities along major transit corridors through zoning changes based on certain assumptions about transit and population estimates, e.g. a planned hotel on MLK near I-40, and the 54 East project already built at the proposed transit hub. Do you support the policy of putting density on major transit corridors and why? What changes, if any, would you want to make in the policy?
I support the policy of density on major transit corridors only with balance. I do not see a future of large dense projects lined up next to each other all up and down major corridors. I think there is great value in preserving landscape and trees on parcels that have to abut denser buildings. The vista should be balanced with green at every opportunity. I am not willing to assume density for density's sake without such balance, all in the name of transit oriented development. While we most certainly want to define our vision for growth in Chapel Hill, the underlying assumption should be for every dense project approved in one location, green space or significant trees should be preserved contiguous to the parcel or nearby.
5. Chapel Hill and UNC signed a Development Agreement in June 2009. NRG worked with the Town of Chapel Hill and UNC to ensure that interests of Chapel Hill neighborhoods were taken into consideration, particularly in transportation planning. Our recommendations and neighborhood concerns are found at http://www.nrg-nc.net.
When the review of the Development Agreement comes up, name three issues that you will consider to determine whether or not the Agreement is a success, and discuss in general terms what you will be looking for as measures of success.
Important for Success:
1. Traffic mitigation measures are well in place prior to building occupancy, and traffic plans (TIA) show mitigation of traffic impact is in fact achievable and realistic.
2. The UNC/town greenway plan for connection of the two campuses is complete with an implementation schedule.
3. An agreement is reached with the Short Range Fiscal Plan for cost-sharing as indicated in the Development Agreement.
The most important adjunct to the above is that the public has the opportunity to weigh in on whether or not it thinks that the above three and other objectives are being met and that the development agreement is in fact the beginning of a successful, working document between all parties.
6. Public participation cuts across all aspects of Town Government. During the Carolina North planning process, many neighbors emphasized the importance of improving public participation. See attached NRG recommendations report. What is your view of public participation in Town Council decisions, and your ideas for updating Town strategies to reflect current]day technologies and media?
I know that it is difficult for the average citizen who works every day and takes care of their family to keep up with what is happening with development in Town. Yet the development of CN will impact all of our lives very soon. NRG's suggestion of a citizen liaison to ongoing development there is a great idea that would make it easier for citizens to stay in the loop. Additionally, I support the suggestion of improved transportation planning transparency and education. The initial TIA should include a layman's understanding of what the projections are and what mitigation is planned, but also include a professional presentation. Overall, having the public participate in a public hearing format every six months while CN is being developed is very important to ensure compliance and accountability to all citizens.