affordable housing

Local governments tackle affordable housing

During last week's Sierra Club forum in Carrboro, candidates were asked what they felt needed to be done to increase the stock of affordable housing in town. Each of the 4 candidates who addressed this question agreed that it is the most complex problem before the BOA.

Both Carrboro and Chapel Hill work from a version of inclusionary zoning that requires new developers to include affordable units along with their market priced units. In Carrboro developers who comply with the "small house ordinance" are given a density bonus to help them recover some of their lost opportunity. In Chapel Hill, developers can provide payment in lieu of compliance. New units developed through the Carrboro plan are deeded over to the Orange Community Housing and Land Trust as a means of ensuring they stay affordable. Buyers own the dwelling but not the land upon which the dwelling sits. Chapel Hill is currently clarifying the legal the language around their affordable housing options.

Whether to do Payment-in-Lieu

The Herald reports that the Carrboro Board of Alermen discussed whether to allow a payment option for developers to meet their affordable housing obligation. We have debated this issue on the Chapel Hill Planning Board as well. So far we have come out against it every time, but there are also some compelling arguments for it.

Developers in Chapel Hill and Carrboro are currently required to include either a certain number of small (< 1,350 & 1,100 square feet) or affordable (<80% of area median income) homes in all residential developments over a certain size. Payment-in-lieu of housing would allow developers to make a financial contribution instead.

What do you all think? Are we missing a chance to support municipal housing efforts, or would we be letting them off the hook too easily and allowing further economic segregation of housing?