A bomb threat last Thursday is the latest in a series of pranks against Greenbridge in Chapel Hill. The mayor called me to express his dismay and to commend us on a "visionary project." Neighboring merchants and residents called or stopped by to express outrage. One neighbor said to me: "Want me to go beat 'em up? Hey, they're anarchists, what are they gonna to do, call the police?"

I laughed.

The authorities take bomb threats more seriously in these times of domestic terrorism, so we taxpayers funded bomb-sniffing dogs at the site and evacuations of adjacent businesses and residences. It's nice to see that the threats and vandalism have served to galvanize the community against the criminals. Despite their attempts to thwart us, Greenbridge is proceeding on schedule and sales have never been better.

We find many incongruities in this conflict.

(1) The opposition claims that Greenbridge will lead to "gentrification" of the Northside Community. Gentrification has already occurred there. It is unfortunate, but true. A study of gentrification in Northside found that by 2001, 71 percent of housing was already rentals (Sykes Street Study, 2001). An April 9, 2009, article in the Daily Tar Heel quoted Delores Bailey of Empowerment, Inc. as saying "Northside has gone from 75 percent homeowners to 75 percent student rentals in the past decade."

(2) The few "spokespeople" who oppose Greenbridge are white students, who claim to speak for the gentrifying Northside Community. Yet, when I speak to local black leaders and residents, they tell me that these students do not speak for them.

(3) The student-led UNC-NOW group did not participate in any of the two years of public hearings and information sessions that led to a unanimous Town Council Vote in favor of Greenbridge. Yet they complain that the town process was rushed and non-inclusive.

(4) When Greenbridge answered the call to build in the West End "Opportunity Zone," both the 140 West Project and the Carrboro ArtsCenter Project were far along in the permitting process. Ignoring the decaying Rosemary/Merritt Mill block, with redevelopment happening all around us, would have been an insult to the community.

(5) Local graffiti claims that Greenbridge is elitist. The fact is that there are 15 residences priced under $100,000, but only one third as many (5) priced over $1 million. It would be more accurate to accuse us of socialism, since the expensive units help defray the $3 million cost of building "affordable workforce housing" into Greenbridge.

(6) Other graffiti accuses Greenbridge of "racism" because of the home costs. The implication is that people of color cannot afford market rate homes. Isn't that statement racist? Our buyers are black, white, and brown, from a wide variety of professions.

Chapel Hill takes pride in being a "green" community. With nearly 100 residences and 17 businesses on just 1.25 acres, Greenbridge will help preserve 50 to 150 acres in the rural buffer for farms. Through high-tech insulation, solar panels to heat water, and use of LEDs and compact fluorescent lights, Greenbridge will require half as much coal power per square foot as neighboring buildings. The project is a direct expression of our community values and those of towns like Madison, Wis., which we hope to emulate.

The irony of our antagonists is that they see themselves as the ultimate progressives, when in fact their behavior aims to maintain the status quo. Under their model, there would be no urban infill, no "smart growth," no low carbon buildings, and no change. In our view, business as usual is not an option in the face of peak oil, climate change, and the social upheaval both will cause worldwide.

We continue to seek constructive dialogue around these timely issues and thank the community for its steadfast support.

GUEST COLUMN

TIM TOBEN