Post on 05-Jan-2016
A Portrait of a Changing Chapel Hill, 1990-Today
Presentation to the Chapel Hill Alliance for a Livable Town
(CHALT)
October 12, 2015Chapel Hill, North Carolina
John QuinternoSouth by North Strategies, Ltd.
This presentation is copyright © 2015 by South by North Strategies, Ltd. All rights reserved.
Exercise: A Growing Community
How many people did Chapel Hill net from 1990 to 2010? The town’s population grew by 18,514 individuals, rising
to 57,233 from 38,719; this translates into a population gain of 47.8 percent.
How many housing units did the town net over this span? The number of housing units rose by 7,388, rising to
22,254 from 14,866; this translates into a gain of 49.7 percent.
The owner-occupied share rose to 47.6 percent from 40.6 percent.
How many employer business establishments
(private sector) did Chapel Hill net from 1998 to 2013? The number rose by 413, going to 2,307 from 1,894 (21.8
percent). 76.2 percent of establishments in 2013 had no more than
nine employees.
2
Presentation Objectives
Clarify economic growth and economic development. Imprecise terminology is a regular cause of confusion in
public life.
Explore selected local growth trends (1990-present). Despite “slow growth” policies, the town has grown a great
deal.
Identify ways in which the social traits of town residents and elements of the town’s housing stock have changed. Two distinct but overlapping towns: university town &
family town.
Identify certain future challenges. “Back to the Future” as a source of ideas going forward?
3
Defining Economic Growth
Economic growth is “simple quantitative increase” in a variable like total output, income, or employment. The basic idea is to maximize the aggregate level of a
variable.
Since the 1930s, state and local governments actively have encouraged economic growth for two stated reasons: To boost the number of jobs in a community, directly and
indirectly To expand the tax base needed to finance area
improvements
Economic growth often is depicted in zero-sum terms. A community can have economic growth OR
environmental sustainability but not both; similarly, a community can have economic growth OR high labor standards, but not both.
Equity often is portrayed as antithetical to economic growth.
4
Defining Economic Development
Economic development looks beyond quantitative increases to “a qualitative increase in collective well-being.” Economic growth aims to increase economic output by
mobilizing resources and using them more efficiently. Economic development focuses on changing the output
mix by using local resources to perform different kinds of work.
Regional progress may be conceptualized as the
result of interactions among local resources (land, labor, capital) and local capacities (social, political, organizational).
Most state and local “economic development” agencies are misnamed; they really are “economic growth” agencies. A rule of thumb is the view that “any job is a good job.”
5
The Practice of Economic “Growth”
Economic development is a “practice seeking a theory.” Modern practice began as an applied reply to Southern
poverty. The practice has had three waves: “Buffalo Hunt”
(‘40s-’70s), deindustrialization (‘70s-’90s), industrial incubation (‘90s-present).
The lack of theory has caused a bias for “deal making.” The goal is to promote economic growth rather than
development.
The focus on deals has shaped contemporary practice. Common features include the idea of regional competition
for economic activity; a belief that competition is won on the basis of low production costs; a negotiating stance that favors firms over communities; an acceptance of the “buying” of economic activities; and a willingness to subsidize private enterprise.
6
Growth and Development: Land & Real Estate
Exchange Value (Growth)
Land is a commodity to be used “efficiently” and “maximally.”
Goal is to maximize market values for vested actors.
Subsidy is needed, yet the public should not ask “what, where, and how.”
Problem: Land is not a true market commodity, so normal forces don’t apply; more like a monopoly with “rent-seeking” behavior.
Use Value (Development)
Land’s value comes chiefly from the daily community uses it makes possible.
Goal is to maximize use values for residents.
Use value prompts value-based questions about “what, where, and how.”
Problem: It is harder to organize actors to pursue use values due to voluntary nature; hard to recognize certain trade-offs.
7
So, Does This Resonate with You?
Have You Seen Examples of These Growth and Development Dynamics in
Chapel Hill?
How Might Public Life Move from Arguments over Growth toward Ones
about Development?
8
Chapel Hill’s Growing Population
From 1990-2010, the number of persons rose by 18,514, or 926 people/year; that brought the population to 57,233. Net migration (domestic & international) was a key driver.
Chapel Hill accounted for 46.3 percent of Orange County’s growth and 2.9 percent of the Triangle’s growth. Despite prominent name, the town is a small part of the
region.
On an annualized basis, the town grew at 2 percent/year. The county rate was 1.8 percent; the region’s rate was 3.1
percent.
The number of households grew by 6,695 to 20,564. The annual gain was 335 households, or 2 percent per
year.
9
Population Growth in the Triangle
10
Population Growth in Triangle Cities
11
Population Growth in Statewide Context
In 1990, some 17 municipalities in the state—including Chapel Hill—had between 20,000 and 60,000 residents. Chapel Hill was the 9th-most populous of these places.
From 1990 to 2010, these 17 municipalities added, on net 390,000 people; that was a gain of 60 percent. Chapel Hill had the 6th-largest gain in absolute numbers
(+18,514), and the 7th-largest gain in relative terms (+47.8 percent).
As a group, these 17 municipalities grew, on average, at a rate of 2.4 percent per year. Chapel Hill’s rate was 2 percent per year, which was the
6th-fastest annualized rate of growth in the group. 12
Projected Growth, 2010-2030
For the Triangle:
Projected net gain of 563,000 people (41 percent in total)
Wake County as the growth magnet: 71 percent of the projected growth
Orange County projection: 1.2 percent/year, for a gain of 34,493 persons
6.1 percent of regional growth in Orange County
For Chapel Hill:
No “official” published state projections for municipalities
If town has half of county growth, a gain of 17,247 people, or 30.1 percent
Assuming even growth, a gain of 862 people per year
Assuming a household size of 2.4, a gain of 359 households per year, or 7,187 over 20 years. 13
So, Does This Fit Your Experience?
What Is Significant about These Trends?
What Might This Suggest about Past Choices?
What Might This Indicate for Future Directions?
14
Housing Unit Trends, 1990-Present
Trends, 1990-2010:
Number of housing units grew by 49.7 percent, up to 22,254 from 14,866.
Occupancy rate held steady at 92 percent.
Of occupied units, share of owner-occupied units rose to 47.6 percent; renter share is 52.4 percent.
Of housing units, 41.2 percent were single-family detached, up from 37.9 percent.
1 Uni
t (Det.), 43.0%
1 Unit (Att.), 10.4% 2-9
Units; 19.6%
10-49 Units; 23.0%
50+ Units; 3.5%
Misc., 0.5%
Housing Stock: All Units by Structure,
2009-2013
15
Price Trends: 1990 to 2009-13
Owner-Occupied Units:
Real median home value went to $368k from $242k, a rise of 51.5 percent.
Of units with a mortgage, 26.3 percent were cost burdened in 2009-13.
Of units without a mortgage, 16.4 percent were cost burdened.
Of the people in owner-occupied units, 70 percent have moved in since 1999.
Rental Units:
Real median gross rent went to $915 from $845, an increase of 8.3 percent.
Median gross rent was 35.9 percent of household income in 2009-13.
Some 52 percent of renters were cost burdened in 2009-13.
The newer the unit, the higher median gross rent: $2,001/month (2010+ unit) vs. $884 (1980-89 unit).
16
Future Housing Growth: Illustrative Estimates
Orange County is projected to gain 34,494 people by 2030. If Chapel Hill gets half the gain, the town will add 17,247
people. At a size of 2.4 persons, the town will add 7,187
households.
If all new units are needed to meet these households, Chapel Hill will need to add 7,187 housing units (359/year). Demographic and economic factors can influence this. Of course, the town has vacant units and existing housing
units that can satisfy at least some of the demand.
Since 2007, the town has approved 6,059 housing units, of which 2,171 have been built or are under construction. Building all the remaining 3,888 approved units alone
would increase the town’s housing stock by 17.5 percent over 2010.
17
So, Does This Resonate with You?
Does Anything Here Surprise You?
How Might This Fit with the Development of Chapel Hill?
18
Changes in Population Traits, 1990-2010
Increasing diversity, especially in child population Non-Hispanic White share fell to 70 percent from 81
percent; Hispanics account for 6 percent of population, up from 2 percent.
Persons of color account for 45 percent of the child population (<age 18), but 14 percent of the older population (age 65+).
Highly educated, though racial and ethnic gaps exist 74 percent of adults (ages 25+) have a bachelor’s degree
or more.
More family households, though nonfamily share is high Family households account for 51 percent of the total.
Greater density, even though town limits expanded Density is 2,710 persons/sq. mile, up from 2,342
persons/sq. mile
19
A High-Income Community ….
20
… Especially for Working-Age Households.
Under Age 25 Ages 25-44 Ages 45-64 Ages 65+$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
$13,833
$53,865
$103,262
$80,663
Median Household Income by Age of Householder, Chapel Hill, 2009-2013
(Source: ACS)
21
Stark Racial/Ethnic Differences in Income Exist
22
More Economic Hardship Than Assumed
23
Housing Affordability Is a Concern
24
Housing Affordability In Context Issue is not limited to young, college-age renters.
In 2013, two-thirds of all rent-burdened households in Orange County were headed by someone over the age of 24.
The issue is relevant across the Triangle. In 2013, the shares of rent-burdened households in
Orange, Durham, and Wake counties were statistically no different.
Challenge is disconnect between incomes and costs. Median gross rent for a post-2010 apartment in Chapel Hill
equals 44.6 percent of the median income of household ages 25-44.
The “market” alone is unlikely to lessen the problem. Such an approach actually can lead entire price structure
higher.
25
Observations for Discussion
Chapel Hill has grown, but not like the rest of the Triangle. That is, at least in part, a reflection of conscious policy
choices.
Chapel Hill is projected to keep growing at a modest
pace. Policy choices can influence the pace; pace is not
inevitable.
Although Chapel Hill is known as a college town, family households account for a majority of households. The town arguably is not as transitory as other college
towns.
The town is affluent and well-educated, which gives it the resources—and luxury—to address change purposefully. Don’t ignore demographic change, economic hardship, and
equity.
26
Contact Information
John QuinternoSouth by North Strategies, Ltd.
179 East Franklin Street, #294 *Chapel Hill, NC 27514(919) 622-2392 * johnq@sbnstrategies.com
More Information Available Online: www.sbnstrategies.com
www.runningthenumbersbook.com
This presentation is copyright © 2015 by South by North Strategies, Ltd. All rights reserved. 27