Editor's note: Last Sunday's guest column by developer Carol Ann Zinn generated several responses. Zinn recently sold property off N.C. 54 to the UNC Foundation after failing to win approval for her Aydan Court condominium project. (See our story at bit.ly/sjac5Q.) She said Chapel Hill's development process is broken, influenced by no-growth activists, and forces developers to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars modifying plans in a lengthy review process that has no guaranteed outcome and increases housing costs.

Rules for a reason

I found Ms. Zinn's guest column interesting in one respect - she assumes that Chapel Hill citizens would not question the "facts" she presents.

Carol Ann Zinn is, in fact, an experienced developer with many projects that have been approved in Chapel Hill. Before purchasing the proposed Aydan Court property, she, more than most, should have been clearly aware of all the constraints of the state-designated Significant Natural Heritage Area and the three major ordinances that would have had to be overturned for any development to occur. At every point in the process, these issues were pointed out in staff reports.

Our town ordinances are in place to protect our environment, our future, and us. Why did she decide to keep pouring money into a losing proposition in order to force an approval?

The Planning Board is charged with determining whether specific proposed developments conform to the principles and requirements of the Comprehensive Plan for the growth and development of the town. Ultimately, though, the final decision lies with our mayor and council. You and I, and the majority of Chapel Hill citizens, have re-elected people who take care of our resources by making careful decisions.

The council digs deep into relevant issues and votes to make sure that projects that get their approval meet with the standards that Chapel Hill residents want. And that, truly, is the real point: the citizens of Chapel Hill, voting for the council on an "at-large" basis, have consistently voted for, and returned, members who reflect how they feel about how they want to town to grow. Ms. Zinn, therefore, is attacking the council AND the citizens who voted for them.

Contrary to Ms. Zinn's dire and baseless predictions about the consequences of the Aydan Court denial, I am proud of our council for having the wisdom and courage to continue to advocate for the highest standards for development in our Town.

Del Snow

Chapel Hill

The wrong place

Ms. Carol Ann Zinn's Dec. 18 column criticized the denial of her Aydan Court project and even more strongly those who supported this council decision. Zinn says that her site was a "perfect location" for her proposed project.

In fact, it was an extremely bad location. The site is entirely within a state-designated Significant Natural Heritage Area with high wildlife values and immediately adjacent to federal Jordan Lake wetlands managed for public hunting, fishing, and nature appreciation by the NC Wildlife Resources Commission. Our town had righty zoned this tract for low-density development based on these characteristics.

Ms. Zinn's proposal would have required a drastic zoning change inconsistent with the current land use map, and would have violated the steep slope standards and Resource Conservation District standards protecting creeks. The site plan ignored the state's recommendation of 450-foot hunting safety buffers between residential buildings and the discharge of firearms for hunting, with the result a serious safety problem would have been created. One Zinn condo building would have been just 25 feet from state hunting lands.

All these facts were known to Ms. Zinn when she purchased this property in 2007. Therefore, she knowingly took a huge risk in believing the Town Council would ignore the site's natural constraints and would revise its comprehensive plan and ordinance standards to fit her proposal.

There is nothing wrong with developers and development. Local developers, including Ms Zinn, have helped to build the Chapel Hill we cherish. But there are some bad development proposals, and there are those planned for the wrong place. That's why we have zoning and development standards. In this case, the Town Council was wise to refuse to change existing zoning and throw its development standards out the window, as the Aydan Court project would have required.

Chapel Hill is now engaged in writing a new comprehensive plan. Chapel Hill 2020 has offered all citizens a chance to be involved in the creation of a new plan that would specify more clearly the town's vision for the future, and what we want to see in each section of town. Such a plan, supported by new land use ordinances, would give developers and residents alike a clearer signal for what kinds of development projects merit approval. We all need to work together toward this goal.

Julie McClintock

Chapel Hill

Zinn

gambled, lost

When I read the guest column by Carol Ann Zinn regarding the denial of her proposal for the development of the parcel of land she called Aydan Court on 54 in Chapel Hill I was sad.

Ms. Zinn has designed and built many wonderful residential communities around Chapel Hill; but, in my opinion, she made a poor choice when she purchased this property - not a very buildable parcel - and then proceeded to hammer the town with request after request to modify the topography - until it lost all it's uniqueness, needed fancy and costly mechanics to control run-off when completed. That parcel is uniquely beautiful and valuable to our wildlife and our watershed. Why should the town give her permission to make it just another lot with condos on it?

There is no right as far as I know to do whatever you want to the natural terrain when you purchase a piece of property. She gambled she could convince the council otherwise and she lost. Somehow, as is obvious by the tone of her written piece, she doesn't see this as a business deal that didn't go as she'd hoped, but as some sort of personal issue.

I was not involved in the effort by citizens to keep this piece of property from a zoning change, but I totally supported in spirit their efforts. They were paid nothing, had nothing personally to gain - unlike the developer. It was just love for community and nature that prompted them to work so hard for the rest of us who agreed with their values but didn't have the time to spend fighting someone who wanted something different that we did for Chapel Hill.

Why she sunk more and more money into this property is beyond me. She had no explicit right, just because she bought the property, to be assured that she would get it rezoned. She could have built on it without anyone's permission by staying within the existing zoning. I'm confused why she thought she had a right to play by different rules.

So sad for her and for the citizens of Chapel Hill to have their elected officials and themselves raked over the coals for having the process work as it should work.

I encourage her to look for flat terrain without a waterfowl compound as the next door neighbor.

And if there is no more such land in Chapel Hill, so be it. There is lots of land in North Carolina - most of it not so unique and special. Folks in Chapel Hill will come out again and again to protect the watersheds, the virgin trees, the wildlife compounds - the unique lands that are left within our boundaries. Please don't waste your time, money and emotional effort on such lands, dear developers. We hope to hold those lands sacred for the next generation.

Suzanne Haff

Chapel Hill

Fairly good process

Local developer Carol Ann Zinn complains bitterly that the review process for her proposed Aydan Court development was unfair and costly. I am always sorry to see the kind of hostility that Ms Zinn brought to this particular cause.

We have a fairly good process in Chapel Hill for giving citizens an opportunity to have a role in decisions about the future of our community. Developments like the proposed Aydan Court can have large impacts on our quality of life, and we deserve a fair chance to consider them.

Ms. Zinn should get past this long temper tantrum she's been having. The development review process does not need to be made easier for flawed development proposals. I am grateful for all the citizen groups and their leaders who give their time freely and generously to support our interests. What would Chapel Hill look like if we hadn't had heroes like them throughout the years?

Kristina Peterson

Chapel Hill