The greater good

The success of Carolina North will undoubtedly play a major role in the future of UNC-Chapel Hill and the state of North Carolina - town residents shouldn't stifle the University's flexibility in ensuring the development's effectiveness.

Although the town certainly has a vested interest in the form and impact of the development, it should be careful about zoning restrictions that could potentially undermine the University's ability to serve the state.

A recent Town Council discussion about proposed changes to the Office/Institutional-4 zoning district give some cause for concern. Two proposals that would require Carolina North plans to conform to the town's Comprehensive Plan are particularly worrisome.

Under the current zoning district, development plans submitted by the builders in OI-4 zones are not necessarily required to conform to all town ordinances, such as those on height and intensity of use, and they undergo independent examination by the council.

That flexibility should stay in place to ensure that UNC-Chapel Hill officials don't compromise research capabilities to stay under a building height limit.

Politicians at the state and national levels have demonstrated the need for North Carolina to move into the economy of the future.

The language used by both parties to push the federal tobacco buyout recently passed by both houses of Congress, for instance, emphasized how tobacco farmers and their children need a chance to get out of a failing system that's been collapsing in recent years.

It's projects like Carolina North that will lead the way by facilitating innovation and stimulating growth that will help the state move into that high-tech future. Quite simply, North Carolina's is an economy in transition - it needs its research institutions to be given the flexibility to accomplish their goals.

The Triangle Business Journal reported earlier this month that Robert McMahan, the governor's senior advisor on science and technology, recommended that the UNC system's technological transfer goals should be measured in terms of jobs - not in terms of the number of patents, as has been done in the past.

That says a great deal about how much this means to the future of all North Carolinians, not just the ones that live in and around system schools.

Handing down restrictions on Carolina North projects - restrictions that won't apply to the main campus for projects in progress or those included in approved plans - has the potential to discourage innovations that would most directly affect the state's interests.

To be fair, town efforts to make the University explain its decision-making process are admirable and they're often successful in bringing about compromises.

Residents' ability to find potential flaws in the planning of projects benefits everyone involved.

Extending the amount of time that the council has to examine proposals and establishing regular meetings between town and University planners are good ideas that should help foster that communication.

But the University shouldn't be cramped in its ability to make decisions about buildings - and town officials certainly shouldn't seek to restrict UNC-Chapel Hill administrators' powers to plan developments at a time when they face a project as pivotal to the University and the state as Carolina North.

Town officials have expressed an interest in working with the University to work on how to zone the projects. Council member Jim Ward told The Daily Tar Heel that "OI-4 was a collaborative process, and the University and town need to go into mutual discussion."

Town officials would do well to meet with University officials about extending the amount of time the town has to consider proposals before acting on them and about other possibilities for ensuring that everyone has his input.

But University planners should be allowed to develop Carolina North in accordance with its research needs as much as possible.

That flexibility is necessary for the state's economic future.