Chapel Hill and Carrboro officials are concerned about the effects a possible new Wal-Mart store might have on their communities and are seeking a thorough review before planning approval is granted. The store, however, would not be built in Orange County, where the two towns are situated, but rather in neighboring Chatham County.
While nothing has been established, Wal-Mart officials have contacted Chatham County planning officials about appropriately zoned sites near the Orange County border. The mere suggestion that a Wal-Mart store might be coming has Chapel Hill and Carrboro officials alarmed.
Carrboro passed a resolution calling on Chatham County to examine the effects of the proposed store. Chapel Hill went further, and requested a courtesy review of Wal-Mart’s permit applications, should they be submitted. The town is particularly worried about traffic the store might generate.
“This is the first I’ve heard about that,” Chatham County Commission Chairman Bunkey Morgan said to The News & Observer of Raleigh about the courtesy review. “I didn’t know they did that type of stuff.”
The two Orange County towns’ concerns are in part based upon local shopping patterns. Existing zoning regulations largely prohibit “big box” retailers within Orange County. As a result, a high percentage of county residents go elsewhere to shop. A 2002 market research study by the N&O showed that 72 percent of Orange County adults had shopped in Durham County, and 27 percent had shopped in Wake County in the previous 30 days.
Wal-Mart yes, incentives no
While Chapel Hill officials might object to Wal-Mart, Greensboro has no such qualms. In fact, a least one city councilman was pushing to use city tax dollars to make sure a Wal-Mart got built. Happily for the city, the project will proceed without city incentives.
Developer Don Linder was working to redevelop the abandoned Carolina Circle Mall. At the core of the project would be a Wal-Mart store and a large home-improvement store. Things were going according to plan until several property owners near the mall unexpectedly asked for compensation for reduced road access brought on by the project. Linder, with the support of Councilman Robbie Perkins, asked city officials in May for incentive money to ensure the project proceeded.
“Either the city comes to the table or this deal falls apart,” Perkins said June 2.
Linder withdrew his request June 7 after it became apparent city council would not give him the money.
The deal didn’t fall apart, though. The News & Record of Greensboro found that less than three weeks later, Wal-Mart’s development division bought the property.
At least one councilman wasn’t surprised by the turn of events. “They make their decision about what they want to do and they see what they can get from us,” Tom Phillips said to the newspaper.
Charlotte cab age limits
Charlotte is likely to alter its age limits on taxicabs. The move comes in response to taxicab operator concerns about the costs of the requirement.
In 2000, the city adopted a comprehensive ordinance regulating cabs. It included a seven-year age limit for cabs, which would take effect in July 2006. With the new regulation soon to take effect, taxicab operators asked city council this spring to reconsider the limit. A council committee in June voted to increase the age limit to 10 years.
“It gets the jalopies off the streets, assures customer satisfaction, and allows small businesses to continue to operate,” Mayor Pro Tem Patrick Cannon said to The Charlotte Observer.
Even the higher age limit will force the retirement of more than half of the more than 500 cabs that operate in Charlotte. Cab operators are expected to buy used vehicles as replacements and run them for a few years until they hit the higher age limit.
As a tradeoff for the higher age limit, Charlotte would require more frequent and stricter taxicab inspections. The city mandates an inspection once a year; under the proposal inspections would be required every six months. Inspections cost $40.
Michael Lowrey is an associate editor of Carolina Journal.