On September 17th, the Carrboro Connects committee and planning staff released its preliminary draft of the Carrboro Comprehensive plan. At 196 pages, it is a lot of material to absorb. I hope to take a closer look in the days and weeks to come and share more thoughts on detailed sections.
But there are two key things that I hope the Carrboro Connects committee, town and consultant staff, and elected officials will work to address before the final draft is released for a public hearing in November.
Must-Do #1: Describe Goals in Clear Language That Avoid The Need for Interpretation, and Confront Tradeoffs
What do I mean? On page 151, here is the Vision for the Land Use Chapter:
“Promote equitable and sustainable use of land and natural resources that promote the diversity, values, and character of the Town.”
Let’s unpack this. “Promote equitable and sustainable use of land and natural resources.” So far so good.
Next: “that promote the diversity, values…[of the town]” Good. Diversity’s meaning is clear.
Values? This could be open for lots of conflicting interpretations, but at the beginning of the document, the Plan makes itself abundantly clear about its values: “The plan is built on a foundation of race and equity and climate action.” (page 2, top left)
Finally: “…character of the town.” And now we have a problem.
What constitutes “the character of the town” may vary widely, depending upon who you talk to. The phrase is frequently used in public comments opposing the development of new buildings in town at public hearings, by asserting that the character of the town is best expressed in the heights of existing buildings. Others may find that the character of the town is found in the ability to live a life on foot here, a relative rarity in the United States, and particularly in North Carolina. Others may find the town’s character in its live music venues, or in the lively conversations that happen among groups of friends on the Weaver Street lawn/patio.
What if the working definition of “character of the town” assumed in the plan actually prevents the promotion of equitable and sustainable use of land and natural resources? Does that mean we commit to inequitable and unsustainable use of land if we can’t satisfy this elusive “character” requirement?
This plan says it’s about climate action. Here’s Greta Thunberg at Davos:
“We must change almost everything in our current societies”
It’s not “…we must change almost everything in our current societies that promotes many elements of the status quo that we are used to…”
The Carrboro Comprehensive Plan will only live up to its full potential if it finds ways to evaluate tradeoffs in its Vision statements. Here’s a slightly different version of the land use vision that does more to affirm the plan’s foundational values at the top of the hierarchy of values:
“Promote equitable and sustainable use of land and natural resources that promote the diversity and values of the town, valuing outcomes that are informed by the character of the community, but not constrained by it.”
Must-Do #2: Practice Yoda Planning: Do Or Do Not. There Is No “Consider.”
On page 154, you can find strategy 2.2 : Preserve and promote the availability of affordable housing along key corridors and
nodes that are transit-accessible, walkable and bikeable.
Good! Very clear. But then move down to the action step (a):
“Consider proactive rezoning for greater density near transit nodes and Park & Rides,
consider the reduction of parking requirements and consider priority growth and
redevelopment areas in accessible locations.”
This text is a recipe for not taking action. The Town is years, even decades- behind other progressive jurisdictions with less robust transit than Carrboro on reducing parking requirements. Most thriving places have simply eliminated them; this is a basic best practice at this point. The plan should say things like: “reduce and/or eliminate parking requirements within 1/2 mile of downtown Carrboro by 6 months from plan adoption.”
On “considering” priority growth areas in accessible locations, not affirmatively doing so is almost missing the point of doing a comprehensive plan. The Chapel Hill 2020 plan designated Future Focus areas. The Durham Planning department identified Compact Neighborhoods for development. We certainly should come out of this planning process with priority growth areas. In this case, the plan should make a statement like: “Identify priority areas for growth and update the Future Land Use Map upon adoption of the plan.”
Conclusion
Comprehensive Plans are for setting direction and priorities. The more tradeoffs we address and resolve in the plan, the more clearly decisions will be made later. The more equivocation and planning for future study we do, the slower we move towards the foundation of race equity and climate action that we claim is so important. Wherever possible, we should specify actions over considerations. I hope that when the next draft is almost ready, one of the final things the Carrboro Connects team will do is screen each strategy and sub-strategy to get these two things right.