Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 08-17-1993 - VII-B kt,,,odri / '8 " Midway AID IDeveicment n 6 ,,, in in i s s i c n Inc. 705 W. Rosemary Street• Carrboro,North Carolina 27510• (919)933-9091 Date: July 27, 1993 To: Moses Carey, County Commissioners Chair County of Orange From: Harvey R. Reid,President Midway Development Commission Subject: Final Report Please find transmitted herewith for your approval and acceptance the final report of the Midway Development Commission(MDC). This final report serves as completion of all services provided under the executed performance agreement between the Town of Chapel Hill and the Oran - hatham Commu- nity Development Corporation. Our extensive process of community involvement to ensure participation in the development process as identified in our 3/31/93 Interim Status Report(attached) culminated into a very successful community meeting (attached flyer and agenda)held Tuesday, June 8, 1993, at 6:30 p.m. at the First Baptist Church. Our flourishing meeting of more than 50 persons represented a diverse group of the community at-large that included residents,local businesses, civic organizations, churches,lenders, local governments and others interested in strengthening the Midway community. Our success cannot be shared without recognizing the invaluable assistance received from local government officials: Ms. Flo Miller, Chapel Hill; and Mr. Ted Abernethy, Orange County. Their continued technical assistance, support and advice are appreciated and cherished. All of the attending elected officials (i.e. Chairman of Orange County Commissioners, Mayor of Carrboro and Town Council Members of Chapel Hill) expressed their support to the current mission of MDC to develop and expand our capacity to undertake economic development activities that revitalize the Midway community, and to provide the residents opportunities for employment and self-sufficiency. All of our subsequent dialogues with the various representatives of the community have indicated how pleased and encouraged they are with our intentions, work and progress. The meeting resulted with some very positive, concrete decisions, discussions, actions and observa- tions that included: 1) Our proposed boundaries of the Midway area to be the focus of economic development efforts (business district)was adopted with suggested modifications. The specific boundary(see attached map)include east-railroad tracks in Carrboro; north-Main and Rosemary streets; south-Brewer Lane and W. Franklin Street; and, west-Mitchell Lane. 2) A survey(attached)was distributed to basically ascertain the needs of the area. Our preliminary findings indicate a great concern for crime in the area. It may well behoove all of us if the Town of Chapel Hill considers placing a police sub-station in the Midway vicinity. Other prevalent desires/needs included parking, more community activities and job training. 3) MDC's efforts were worthwhile and needed, and could not be completed by volunteers only. 4) A concerted and committed effort from the various entities of the community was a must. 5) MDC must establish a paid administrative staff to work out tasks as assigned by the board of directors and maintain office information. 6) The three local governments have played a crucial role They must continue,increasing their resources and support. While great strides have been accomplished, our extensive process of community involvement also _ revealed: 1) MDC must increase its membership to included active committed members, or "pillars," of the community. 2) The pursuit of projects and programs by MDC is imminent and a strategic plan of action should be immediately developed for implementation. 3) More permanent and stable sources of funding are necessary and paramount to augment local financial investments. 4) The banking community must and should take a more active role. 5) MDC must reach more to the effective residents of the Midway community,perhaps through a community paper. ._ 6) The internal structure of MDC must be more developed and secured. 501(c)(3)tax exemption status must be acquired. 7) A permanent Board of Directors needs to be put in place. 8) The need for both municipalities of Carrboro and Chapel Hill to make a more concerted effort to work beyond city boundaries that effect the Midway area. 2 • Concept Proposal for an Economic Development Project I. Parking Lot The Midway commercial district of Chapel Hill-Carrboro was once thriving with some 90 success- ful black-owned businesses. Decay and decline set forth its adverse impact and reduced that number to approximately 17, and almost totally eliminated parking in the area. The congregation of three anchor churches, a funeral home,the Masonic building,the Midway building and other traffic activities has promoted the drastic need for parking in the general vicinity of Rosemary Street and Merritt Mill Road. Two adjoining vacant lots, one in Carrboro and the other in Chapel Hill, located at the corner of Rosemary Street and Sunset Drive(map attached)have unofficially been used as a parking lot. The lot in Carrboro is zoned commercial and has an out-of-town owner(New York). The lot in Chapel Hill is zoned residential and is the property of the Town of Chapel Hill. Both lots would require extensive groundwork that may include acquisition(lease/purchase/gift), zone change, site descriptions, annexation,landscaping,insurance and taxes. On the Carrboro lot the owner may be willing to sell or lease to the non-profit at a very nominal cost. The Town of Carrboro would therefore be requested to level, gravel, insure and pay the taxes. The ideal situation would be ownership by MDC in one jurisdiction which will require annexing to Chapel Hill with plans for mul- tiple purposes both short and long term. The Chapel Hill portion would necessitate a zone change whereas MDC would facilitate. Again, transfer of ownership would be ideal whether free or from innovative financing that may include CDBG. Similar funding may be used for site improvement. This entire process should not exceed eighteen months, depending on the magnitude of intricacies involving the governmental processes and procedures. The project would not only offer a great service to present businesses and institutions, but would also serve as an attraction and stabilizing ingredient for other businesses and ventures. Moreover,imme- diate success would be bestowed upon the corporate image of MDC, and a track record for positive development would be put in place. II. Revitalization of the Graham Street Area The Graham Street Area including Merritt Mill Road, North Graham and Roberson streets between Franklin and Rosemary streets, would be the perfect blacks to effectuate and commence a revitalization project for MDC. It would serve as a pilot to implement present, new and innovative community eco- i' 3 nomic development programs of the Town of Chapel Hill for residential and commercial development. The block consist of small businesses,both black-and white-owned, and a few houses that are vacant and/or abandoned. Crime is relatively high because of nighttime social attractions and gatherings. Infrastructure improvement needs would be at a nominal cost but would greatly serve as an enhancement to the physical attributes of the block. The proposed revolving loan fund allocation set-aside in CDBG should be earmarked and fashioned to accommodate the needs and demands of the block's occupants. The conventional standards and requirements should not and can not be applied for suffice. flexible terms and rates, alternate credit barometers, non-collateral, etc. must entail the mechanics for an effective program. The non-profit, depending an proven, acceptable staff capabilities, should be the administrator of the fund. Related policies and procedures should be tailored to local needs subject to the grantor's approval. Vacant housing and commercial buildings should be targeted for acquisition/ownership of MDC. Multiple resources would be targeted to place such properties on market that best suit the community needs. The Midway Development Corporation would make every concerted effort to headquarter its office within the block. All strategic plans should be developed and implemented within a l8-to-24-month period. Beautification programs of the surrounding area(s)would be instituted to enhance the image of entrance into the area. Civic pride and appreciation will be instilled and serve as a domino effect to spread rampant throughout the Midway community. The local population would begin to shed an unwill- ingness to shop in the area and, therefore, begin to spread its wealth to present and future retail. The non- profit would again gain a "feather-in-hat" and further its track record as a developer, thereby, increasing its capability to partner in other larger,involved ventures. III. Community Resource Center (CRC) The purpose of the CRC is to provide and inform Midway businesses and residents of prevalent economic development resources, materials, activities and programs that effect their well-being. The CRC would endeavor to build a network for these businesses through the publication of a directory on all ventures, business and services. There are also plans to locate all state-run utilities and help Midway area businesses to bid for those contracts. After acquiring and soliciting pertinent information, MDC will disseminate the same by direct mail or handouts, newsletters, community meetings and business gathering affairs. Some counseling and 4 advice will be available to concerned businesses and residents. Direct referrals and appointments will be coordinated with the appropriate resources. By no means would this be a duplication of services because presently no such mechanism exist and for the most part MDC would not be the provider of the services. Moreover, MDC strongly contends that everybody will be helped when the Midway community is successful and prospering. The attached community economic development strategy analysis chart reflects documentation of the economics, demographics and physical conditions of the Midway area. The attached census data offers a detail comparative of the surrounding at-large areas of Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Orange County to census tract 113 (map also attached). The Orange County Economic Development Commission has agreed to run census block data for MDC that will reveal a more accurate picture of the Midway commu- nity. They also will conduct within the next month business surveys using the Small Business and Technology Center and UNC and MBA students. We readily realize Cal Horton's insistence of comprehensive community involvement. We also have gathered a better appreciation of his initial advice that this process is consuming and lengthy that requires stamina,patience and both short and long range planning. His lasting advice that project devel- opment that necessitate bricks and mortar would not be realized in a short period of time has tremen- dously helped MDC during trying times. We truly appreciate his understanding, encouragement and support of investment during our very infant stages. MDC will also forever be indebted to the Orange Count y Commissioners. In conclusion, the Midway Development Commission is requesting$25,000 from the Orange county Commissioners for a "planning grant" that would set forth,implementation of the aforementioned economic development projects for the Midway area. 5 Midway ID eveloument Ciirrirriissacra Inc. Community Economic Development Strategy Analysis Chart Commercial/Business District Physical Description Location: Midway between Carrboro and Chapel Hill at a seven-block radius within C.T. 113. Transportation: City buses, local cab companies. Public Facilities: Recreational facilities are adequate. Parking facilities are needed. Physical Environment:Facade and cosmetic beautification needed. Curbs and sidewalks needed. Major Institutions: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and University of North Carolina Hospitals. Industry: None other than those associated with college town. Scheduled Improvements: Several in planning stages. Retail/Commercial Services: At least 75 mixed small businesses exist in targeted area. Quality 'of Life . Environmental Quality: Economy generally good. Disparity in black and white populations. Targeted area surrounded by black residents. Safety/Crime: Uprise, violent drug-related crime increasing. Access to Educational Services: 35% of black popula- tion do not have high school diploma. UNC does not properly serve community ndr does it offer technical assistance to targeted area businesses. Investment Climate Business Trends: Blacks being displaced. Black-owned businesses declining whereas they were once thriving. Retail: 25% Resident Consumer Spending: Leakage Business Expansion: Non-Americans moving in. Blacks handicapped. Retail and commercial space to be premium. Real Estate: Limited large tracts of land exist, greatly limited development possibilities. Small groups own most of the real estate. Employment -- Types of Jobs: Professional/Specialty occupations 26% Administration Support 12% Service: 17% Levels: Employment in Labor Force 56% Unemployment11.6% Housing Type: 1058 single-family housing units. 48% two- and one-bedroom rental units. Development Trends: Cost is too high due to student de- nand. Availability/Affordability: Lack of affordable housing. Vacancy Rate: Low. Energy Availability: Good Water - Public Heating Gas -51% Electric - 28% Sewage - Public Analysis Student population gives distorted view of community economy. Blacks are disproportionately undereducated and unem- ployed. Money is not being spent in the targeted area. Black business ownership is declining. Self-Image: Unfair access to opportunities. Discrimination is prevalent. Trends and Intentions:Declining black commercial district. Social Organization Family: Increasing single heads-of-household. Politics: Lack of political astuteness, awareness and influence, through improvement is promising. Institutions (Social): No networking. Community Organizations: Only in public housing. Religious Institutions: Not as active or involved as should be. Seven black churches exist in targeted area. Volunteer Organizations: United Way and similar agencies not truly reaching black community. Government At-Large: Form of government with mayors, town council and county commissioners. • Three municipality governments involved with and supportive of economic development work in the targeted area. Planning Policies: No present economic development policy is in place though one is in planning stage. Power/Position of Targeted Area: Rapidly improving to be positive. Population (based on figures for C.T. 113) Age: Male Female White 20-24 years 38.97% 45.34% 65-74 years 34.74 19.16 Black 25-34 years 22.55 17.70 65-74 years 15.20 16.80 Health: Generally good. Income Level: Household yearly mean was $19,199. Education: White No diploma 0% Bachelor's degree 36.16 Black No diploma 49.08 Bachelor's degree 8.1 Conclusions Student population causes cost-of-living to rise beyond affordability of permanent residents. Job training and skills development should be put in place for black residents. Establish spending opportunities for area residents within targeted area. Need mechanism for black business expansion and start-ups. Responses Local Establish revolving loan fund (high risk) for black businesses. Develop incubator for black businesses. Establish micro-enterprise program. Organize businesses for networking and commonalities. Develop and administer on-the-job training program. Create more black business ownership opportunities. Inspire and promote church and commercial lender involve- ment. Encourage local usage of federal Community Development Block Grant. Broader Solicit congressional, federal and state support. Join N.C. Association of Community Development Corpora- tions, N.C. Institute of Minority Enterprise Development, and N.C. Commission of. Community Development Corpora- tions. Support Community Reinvestment Act and invite review of local lending practices. • o lz o - ao • < a . U _ 3 0 #1, 41 0 W -N -J in J W Z O �N. WI g I kl 1111 llitat: .. u a < 3 Z O w 2.t ' X oN a a . Yd •• d►- �N S� ...j i 11�H011 �• ♦ Y F. I J r I .�- '1 0 •N 0 I - rs O d> R d..::::::„.5:•i::::::::::::::::::,,,:•.. - 0::::.;ii*::!:::::,. -1- . ,iiiiir.-...p:,,::::-..::.:,:::::: •:::::i:. -‘ • ite% u! ....„„„„:„.„„:„„„::::::::::,::: ::::::::,. ..,......,, a. -"".............. .N. ROBERSON ST, 1..:i~• S• u�\ ,:.:.,... iiir 1:;:;$ .. '1 %.. . lk :;. :. *\\..\- i*Mi;:ili■Mg ti.ii0 N. GRAHAM ST. ''' } kyR I ' \*.,:i::::...:,....:....... .:.. • .• __1111!".1ii ,,00000.., 10H*4, ::::::::i:::. - ....... , . 411..- tr .::::::::::::i:-..::i, CC 4'4 ::.. *Oil cc 4 aL Lii co � * u m• ez E--- cL NSE7 DR• L f M I 1 ":>:'•:>; :::is:i'i ?::zz: .< i:cS•. U LL U Sv : :• O TOWN W N Cr) at W J Illiiiiiiiii ----- >:;; J MEM �, Z : . Q STARL1TE DR• u a is::cg :::: I I r o BROAD ST. _ ... CO Q Q U W o / 0 11111- t, ', ..i....:.:;::-.f!::::.:!:::.'..:..:.iii 10 O i O CC 11111 Q 1 LLOYD ST. s:•:•:: ::.? v 1 . 1 . F \ . / VI • $61_ MIMI. A all- ATTACHMENT tr:ri, am NNE sin VI 1111 rn AI' .., 41 flit/ F W • � __ z 70 Fu- iiiiiiii ii . . mew as 531 / .Kil,'; 10 R-7..5 EMI ttl! 11111111.00.0 ?..14 . ' - .::C.•• •' :C..:.;'f' .""... ‘,.b, ,k), D im BUS%NE55 1 r v,. '' i,::i.1.1. . .4 04,;. .0,..4rii:.;::.;.;,:.:......,.:....:.:.::•;•..::::'.'.'.'.'... S c.9..0\k\ h\... -.4. si ilh.".viia: ,,,,.. .:,:.101r Iterj,..0650°`, . . S� all /� R: Nom.WM ::]:::TO SJ ill ..„,, To .3 ...., . is ♦ y . . "-.------7.1 -. CARR. p¢ .+ ' C.H., . 1,c,„f■&,.6,4.`' BUg�N 55 r, R-3 R-2 r • 1. / ------\____i CARRBORO pa \A 'CHAPEL HILL • • \� . ,1/4..-/- 1 `C /� APPDXIMATE BOUNDARIES FOR A H GRAHAM STREET REVITALIZATION CHAPEL HILL - CARRBORO . CHAPEL HILL/CARRBORO NW 11 • NNW TOWN LIMITS • R-3 • *-- • ^•• ZONING TC PROPOSED GRAHAM STREET AREA 33 Q h s _ '�.i /., ' 1O I]15 13 I2 ► ' 1 N I ^ _ i ` t W I /6 17 e o e / % _ 1 _ 6349 -7 1•- 16 0208 —1 d. S4 / ♦? 333E.- Q 33 1256 - D7.1S — o NUNN_5� ! '.--=,7,6t �I ,{ I \ i°45 1001 1 0. ---J In L- 0212 • (B 4) 47.1 SG -.--- - f z..' 32 -- ; a A ®3215 J 33 —" 6219 1 1 s Q �e 1261 32 ,n_____44__52.18 45 -� 2 • 1 19 ;� .9,329;2 42230 _* -��3 _o° •°,' 31 6297 a 119' 0126 w 92.3 - . = �.f r 14j • -- Q n J 1166 W h 3129 *7. 125 J ® Js 3 ' _ -- -- g v~i s !- © o T 30 ' 281 2 0120 4 37.4 n _ .110 P 1171 Y 17 . : dg - - -- PO 20 O -- --x5144-e _ 140.7 e`- 138.6 „ U o 29 3170 50 • 4 1W -- 29 .- 40 7 9084 80 80 0 1076 X o L o �O 5110 �� o .4 , �� n 2I ,Q ,9 _ 5 O f�I.z /- �. 1 1 sf,a --______1 21 0 h 1082 is z. IT/3939Th,,0979 Pk,�i.' • ci) ,°„ n O 3073 --50 L4 1 41,E le�.e > 28 -ir 6 0 9985 - Be 16r e O 0_ 27 _ 6085 __tr ' b � '� 1946 2916 O I53.3 '6i ■ o f v.. 2. '' 23 27 3997 Io _ 28 —I 5 (F____:)( 11) rl C) 2913 f4e,e --- /`O- _O___sses--- 30 / .1E /170 .0. 24 0 is - 7 8.B'- •��' Y f 41.8 v STARL.ITE DRIVE e, In 2 3T N 25 -6994-• t"--5 /4.4-A11.7 PJ - 14 2 2'_________. 8 n ' 2O • • MIDWAY PARKING LOT e- --_6'399-,_9 'n.0748 n 149.,4 977 'm • o 0798 a a +r, _ — - ' - 1LS\�,\y! CARRBORO 4 4 J B 1M I54_8 /7 CHAPEL HILL - j i 1Q n o 0 6891 J6 - - -- � - - ti _ 61.2 !2 3 ,o, q, _• \........" O---6 796 J4 62 5 ep 11 s0 74. I ^. 1s,s � pcj _ Js t r •47006, 5TI0 — , e J28 021A 114607 3 67816 J t C 22 .1.5. s 1 n �1 .0621. �' 26721 �? •4604 f 562 I7� 11■ 1507 n 1558 j ►oe,33 -�°, r.---... 4 55. 4r h n 2518 4611 Ita ' 0 ci) 1 Eft r r- I /off N N IOSd r f 7S l 1 I, •14'1 0561 1 N1 014:00. , I 1 1 68 a // ; o # 73 1 T 1 3 9 IJO I O '� 4 e a 1 t y ' 54 7518 • M M 2571 I ZI m :::.`i. ':' X584 n e I 1 0 - 1 } - - a .1 Jn3 e o 1 to 1554 v ' 1 1 N = 1 X7.3 y • : A:m.. O..,I i I I D . ,,;,,.,.. 274 - _ 130 I:. 1 L.. O' 2�}6 2 0 3 0 ;; . 1 670.1 Qr O.e O fa l I 4 :A#{ ; ti0 TS I I 1 7S ' 6f8 . MASONIC LODGE • J ` J \---, - -• ";.,• ':1 ROSE MAR k' — —STREE 1- ' ';';?..,..:.,1.•,1::.:':,';:-; ••••■:.\'.:;;;.-.1/4.1-,,.;;;,1:::'--:' :.. . ..:. " ::;.4.:,' : , -.., .. i ,'• \\ AT :. ,‘. .: ..; . \\ . (v_______ , i i 1 I., 1 q 4.1; ' 't Please came i The MIDWAY DEVELOPM4NT COMN'.ISSION INC. invifes ALL COMMU N IT Y residenfs, business owners, churches, organization members, lenders 9 and invesfors, and anybody else inferesfed in fhe economic developmenf of fhe Midway Area fo the firsf ii chvav IDeveicpment 1cmrnissj1in CCAMUNI-11Y • MICEII-INC Inc. iuesdir , June 1 13:30 8� J�3 P.1111. ' Fir 131i st baptist ur Chi turner of Roberson and Rosemary streets •[ATUR[D SPEAI([RS: Andrea Harris, president, N,C. Institute of Minority Economic Development Abdul Rasheed, co-director, N.C. Client and Community Development Center president and CEO, N.C. Association of Community Development Corp. SP[CIAL INVITED GUSTS: Ken Broun, mayor, Town of Chapel Hill Eleanor Kinnaird, mayor, Town of Carrboro Moses Carey, chairman, Orange County Commissioners Come learn what role communify economic development is playing in Y our fufure! rreffs Build Together! iellwa tI eveIr, ain eent s C c Ill m ® ss ® cIll Inc.. Midway Area Survey IMPORTANT:Please return survey to your pastor or to The Midway Agency,705 W.Rosemary St., Carrboro,NC 27510 no later than June 21, 1993. 1. Do you currently live in the Midway Area? yes no 2. Do you currently work in the Midway Area? yes no 3. Do you currently own a business in the Midway Area? yes no 4. Do you own you home? yes no 5. Are you unemployed? yes no 6. Are you a single head of household? yes no 7. How many children under age 18 live with you? 8. How long have you lived and/or worked in Midway? Lived Worked 9. What do you consider the greatest benefits of living and/or working in the Midway Area? a. b. c. 10. What are Midway's biggest problems? a. -_ b. C. is 11. Do you shop in the Midway Area? yes no 12. What businesses do you visit most frequently? a. b. c. 13. What types of businesses would you most like to see in the area? a. b. c. 14. What services, if any, are needed in the area? a. b. c. 15. If you own or want to own a business, which of the following would help you be more successful? Assistance with business planning Additional parking Financing Networking opportunities Marketing assistance Employee training Government contracting Regulatory assistance Space Other (please list) Secretarial services Bookkeeping/Audit 16, Which of the following activities are needed to improve the Midway Area? Child care Tutoring Summer youth camp Drug counseling Senior citizen home care Job training Cultural events Other(please list) Boy/Girl Scouts • 17. If you were going to work to improve the Midway Area what would be the first things you would do? a. b. c. ___ 18. Do you have other comments or suggestions? 19. What would you be willing to do to help improve the Midway Area? 20. (Optional) Name: Address: Phone #: 1990 Census of Population and Housing CT 113 Can-boro Chapel Hill Orange County Total 2,153 11,553 38,762 93,851 WHITE 1,001 46.49% 9,066 78.47% 31,903 82.30% 75,806 80.77% BLACK 1,086 50.44% 1,933 16.73% 4,854 12.52% 14,900 15.88% AMERICAN INDIAN, E, 8 0.37% 46 0.40% 140 0.36% 404 0.43% ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLAN 58 2.69% 376 3.25% 1,677 4.33% 2,311 2.46% OTHER 0 0.00% 132 1.14% 188 0.49% 430 0.46% 1990 Census of Population and Housing V 1 `Race by Sex by Age :CT 1 i:3 CarrbAro Ghapel Hill Orange County WHITE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE Under 5 0 0.00% 13 2.28% 211 4.92% 186 3.89% 583 3.99% 526 3.04% 2205 6.11% 1885 4.74% 5-9 0 0.00% 13 2.28% 159 3.71% 156 3.26% 634 4.34% 589 3.41% 1864 5.17% 2007 5.05% 10-14 0 0.00% 9 1.58% 123 2.87% 127 2.66% 511 3.50% 565 3.27% 1841 5.10% 1680 4.23% 15-19 22 5.16% 36 6.33% 186 4.34% 121 2.53% 1965 13.45% 2694 15.58% 3212 8.90% 3725 9.37% 20-24 ..1.6.6____31 97% 258 45.34%, 1255 292i 1683 35.21% 3546 24.27% 43,1,3 2494% 5856 16.23% 7021 17.67% 25-34 148 34.74% 109 19.16% ,1328 30.98% 1309 27.38% 2580 17.66%, 2588- 14.97% 7158 19.84% 7317 18.41% 35-44 50 11.74% 44 7.73% 589 13.74% 582 12.18% 1775 12.15% 1931 11.17% 5866 16.26% 6023 15.16% 45-54 12 2.82% 31 5.45% 204 4.76% 229 4.79% 1160 7.94% 1375 7.95% 3159 8.76% 3500 8.81% 55-64 23 5.40% 20 3.51% 83 1.94% 172 3.60% 757 5.18% 906 5.24% 2310 6.40% 2583 6.50% is 65-74 5 1.17% 28 4.92% 99 2.31% 161 3.37% ' 657 4:50% 904 5.23% 1690 4.69% 2259 5.69% 75-84 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 45 1.05% 41 0.86% 330 2.26% 634 3.67% 736 2.04% 1214 3.06% 85 and over 0 0.00% 8 1.41% 4 0.09% 13 0.27% 114 0.78% 266 1.54% 174 0.48% 521 1.31% TOTAL 426 100.00% 569 100.00% 4286 100.00% 4780 100.00% 14612 100.00% 17291 100.00% 36071 100.00% 39735 100.00% BLACK MALE FEMALE MALE . FEMALE MALE FEMALE MALE FEMALE Under 5 33 8.09% 77 11.36% 66 6.69% 44 4.65% 144 7.26% 173 6.03% 459 6.73% 463 5.73% 5-9 29 7.11% 53 7.82% 69 7.00% 27 2.85% 130 6.56% 163 5.68% 626 9.18% 481 5.95% 10-14 78 `6.86% 8,5___12_541%, 76 7.71% 45 4.75% 129 6.51% 155 5.40% 518 7.59% 478 5.92% 15-19 21 5.15% 50 7.37% , 107 10.85% 43 4.54% 281 14.17% 482 16.79% 634 9.29% 899 11.13% 20-24 35 8.58% 21 3.10% 103 10.45% 173 18.27% 350 17.65% 652 22.71% 693 10.16% 1107 13.70% 25-34 _22.. 22..55% 120 17.70 0 312 31.64% 331 34.95% 391 19.72% 522 18.18% 1376 20.17% 1570 19.445 35-44 21 5.15% 45 6.64% 135 13.69% 97 10.24% 229 11.55% 167 5.82% 970 14.22% 923 11.43% 45-54 37 9.07% 66 9.73% 45 4.56% 111 11.72% 96 4.84% 162 5.64% 542 7.94% 759 9.40% t 55-64 50 12.25% 49 7.23% 25 2.54% 31 3.27% 76 3.83% 123 4.28% 394 5.78% 573 7.0951 65-74 62 15.20% 80 11.80% 40 4.06% 40 4.22% 109 5.50% 196 6.83% 379 5.56% 534 6.61% 75-84 0 0.00% 0.00% 8 0.81% 5 0.53% 37 1.87% 24 0.84% 175 2.57% 209 2.59% 85 and over 0 0.00% 32 4.72% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 11 0.55% 52 1.81% 56 0.82% 82 1.02% TOTAL 408 100.00% 678 100.00% 986 100.00% 947 100.00% 1983 100.00% 2871 100.00% 6822 100.00% 8078 100.00% , 1990 Census of Population and Housing Ter Capita Income In 7989 by'Race )i S k CT 113 Carrboro Chapel Hill Orange County WHITE $11,516 $13,305 $17,797 $17,072 BLACK $6,406 $9,891 $8,440 $10,072 AMERICAN INDIAN, E, $7,500 $3,972' $9,828 $9,790 ASIAN/PACIFIC ISLAN $9,316 $11,261 $11,902 $12,411 OTHER n/a $11,014 $6,910 $8,611 in l- Iry to • 1990 Census of Population and Housing Race of Householder by Household Type and Presence and Age of Children Universe: Persons 16 years and over 1 , CT 113 Carrboro Chapel Hill Orange County Family Households: 98 1500 5403 17260 Married Couple family: W/own children <18 12 547 1,960 6,821 No children<18 61 683 2,857 8,042 Other Family: Male hh, no wife: W/own children <1$ 0 28 88 272 No children <18 11 47 88 317 Female hh, no husband: W/own children <re) 6 6.12% 121 8.07% 385 7.13% 979 5.67% No children <18 8 74 25 829 Non-Family Households: 431 2,973 6,059 12,776 BLACK Family Households: 241 479 821 3450 Married Couple.family: W/own children <18 31 113 210 915 No children <18 72 122 229 1,109 Other Family: Male hh,no wife: W/own children <1$ 10 36 10 82 No children <18 17 24 39 136 Female hh, no husband: W/own children <10 81 33.61% 106 22.13% 219 26.67% 659 19.10% No children <18 30 78 114 549 Family Households: 174 470 702 1,724 LW OW-t-w(C 1990 Census of Population and Housing CT 113 Carrboro Chapel Hill Orange County LABOR FORCE STATUS Persons 16 years and over 1804 10158 33864 77892 In labor force 1145 7665 20205 52739 Percent in labor force 63.5 75.5 59.7 67.7 Civilian labor force 1133 7656 20163 52675 Employed 1002 7283 19269 50671 Unemployed 131 373 894 2004 Percent unemployed 11.6 4.9 4.4 3.8 Armed Forces 12 9 42 64 Not In labor force 659 2493 13659 25153 Males 16 years and over 786 4845 15184 36249 In labor force 507 3748 9802 26345 Percent in labor force , 64.5 77.4 64.6 72.7 Civilian labor force 495 3739 9760 26281 Employed 427 3577 9367 25358 Unemployed 68 162 393 923 Percent unemployed -- 13.7 4.3 4 3.5 Armed Forces 12 9 42 64 Not in labor force 279 1097 5382 9904 Females 16 years and over 1018 5313 18680 41643 In labor force 638 3917 10403 26394 Percent in labor force 62.7 73.7 55.7 63.4 Civilian labor force 638 3917 10403 26394 Employed 575 3706 9902 25313 Unemployed 63 211 501 1081 ' Percent unemployed 9.9 5.4 4.8 4.1 Armed Forces 0 0 0 0 Not in labor force 380 1396 8277 15249 Females 16 years and over 1018 5313 18680 41643 With own children under 6 years 100 . 553 1454 4585 Percent in labor force 82 67.8 59.8 69.3 With own children 6 to 17 years only 65 396 1574 5272 Percent in labor force 84.6 71.7 78.5 81.8 i Own children under 6 years in families and subfamilies.. 130 611 1803 6062 All parents present in household in labor force 117 399 949 3916 Own children 6 to 17 years in families and subfamilies 221 870 3510 11169 All parents present in household in labor force 184 607 2498 8528 Persons 16 to 19 years 129 440 5434 7958 Not enrolled in school and not high school graduate 15 42 72 357 Employed or in Armed Forces 15 14 49 167 Unemployed 0 0 9 43 Not in labor force 0 28 14 147 OCCUPATION Employed persons 16 years and over 1002 7283 19269 50671 Executive, administrative, and managerial occupations 116 618 2325 5859 Professional specialty occupations `1 2175 6580 12952 Technicians and related support occupations 66 819 1630 3703 Sales occupations 71 713 2029 5019 Administrative support occupations, including clerical 116 916 2944 7497 Private household occupations 10 70 140 371 Protective service occupations 11 121 162 655 Service occupations, except protective and household 174 1021 1943 4841 Farming, forestry, and fishing occupations 3�y 50 183 971 Precision production, craft, and repair occupations 32 437 595 4539 Machine operators, assemblers, and inspectors 57 108 255 2033 Transportation and material moving occupations 26 94 206 1071 Handlers, equipment cleaners,helpers, and laborers 49 141 227 1160 INDUSTRY Employed person 16 years and over 1002 7283 19269 50671 Agriculture, forestry, and fisheries 7 62 211 1047 Mining 0 0. 0 53 Construction 62 378 498 2980 Manufacturing, nondurable goods 23 162 762 3022 Manufacturing, durable goods 0 298 406 2535 I Transportation 30 121 285 1052 Communications and other public utilities 0 125 249 1119 Wholesale trade 0 1 • 280 1165 Retail trade 246 I�,�� 3311 7991 Finance, insurance, and real estate 55 , 852 2224 Business and repair services 80 a 642 1839 Personal services 48 \ C6`1 611 1415 Entertainment, and recreation services 7 'r') 374 787 Health services 107 L-1.7) 2345 6201 Educational services 274 CA}Lt 6131 11630 Other professional and related services 45 \6k11f 1786 4076 Public administration 18 �� 526 1535 CLASS OF WORKER `(., 7/ Employed persons 16 years and over 1002 7283 19269 50671 Private wage and salary k B ry worers 596 4263 10668' 31395 Government workers 337 • 2763 7625 15975 Local government workers 47 305 778 2602 State government workers 283 2407 6488 12495 Federal government workers 7 ' 51 359 878 Self-employed workers 69 257 941 3166 Unpaid family workers _ __O____ ) 35 135 r----Siate-government workers 283 2407 12495 Federal government workers 7 51 878 Self-employed workers 69 257 3166 Unpaid family workers 0 0 135 V 1990 Census of Population and Housing -Race by Sex by Employment Status Universe: Persons 16 years and over CT 113 Carrboro Chapel Hill Orange County MALE In labor force: 292 2,876 8,152 21,829 In armed forces 12 0 42 45 Civilian: Employed 230 2,745 7,787 21,047 Unemployed 50 17.12% 131 4.55% 323 3.96% 737 3.38% Not in labor force 140 894 4,590 7,941 FEMALE , In labor force: 386 3,105 8,578 21,326 In armed forces 0 0 0 0 Civilian: Employed 374 2,988 8,281 20,706 Unemployed 12 3.11% 117 3.77% 297 3.46% 620 2.91% Not in labor force 148 1,199 6,945 12,548 BLAC�C MALE In labor force: 350 609 1,072 3,561 In armed forces 0 9 0 19 Civilian: Employed 170 582 1,014 3,393 Unemployed 180 51.43% 18 2.96% 58 5.41% 149 4.18% Not in labor force 130 166 492 1,596 FEMALE In labor force: 1 231 707 1,397 4,347 In armed forces 0 0 0 0 Civilian: Employed 180 619 1,230 3,937 Unemployed 51 22.08% 88 12.45% 167 11.95% 410 9.43% Not in labor force 232 124 971 2,175 I E 1990 Census of Population and Housing 'Race of Householder by Household Income in 1989 CT 113 Carrboro Chapel Hill Orange County WHITE Less than$5,000 106 20.04% 488 10.91% 791 6.77% 1779 5.92% $5,000 to$9,999 95 17.96% 590 13.19% 866 7.41% 2349 7.82% $10,000 to S14,999 72 13.61% 621 13.88% 950 8.13% 2355 7.84% S15,000 to$24,999 83 15.69% 910 20.34% 1965 16.81% 5279 17.58% $25,000 to$34,999 39 7.37% 600 13.41% 1679 14.37% 4410 14.68% $35,000 to$49,999 98 18.53% 645 14.42% 1510 12.92% 5150 17.15% $50,000 to$74,999 21 3.97% 446 9.97% 1724 14.75% 4698 15.64% $75,000 to$99,999 8 1.51% 136 3.04% 944 8.08% 1935 6.44% $100,000 or more 7 1.32% 37 0.83% 1258 10.76% 2081 6.93% Total 529 4473 11687 30036 BLACK Less than $5,000 116 27.95% 138 14.54% 215 14.12% 600 11.60% $5,000 to$9,999 62 14.94% 177 18.65% 210 13.79% 734 14.19% $10,000 to$14,999 75 18.07% 118 12,43% 177 11.62% 655 12.66% $15,000 to$24,999 58 13.98% 165 17.39% , 320 21.01% 1116 21.57% $25,000 to$34,999 50 12:05% 192 20.23% 248 16.28% 832 16.08% $35,000 to$49,999 49 11.81% 82 8.64% 183 12.02% 771 14,90% $50,000 to$74,999 5 1.20% 71 7.48% 138• 9.06% 377 7.29% $75,000 to$99,999 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 10 0.66% 30 0.58% $100,000 or more 0 0.00% 6 0.63% 22 1.44% 59 1.14% Total 415 949 1523 5174 ' 1990 Census of Population and Housing Race by Educational Attainment Universe: Persons 25 years and over CT 113 Carrboro Chapel Hill Orange County WHITE • Less than 9th Grade 0 . 0.00% 87 1.79% 263 1.65% 2337 5.25% 9th to 12th grade, no diploma 0 0.00% 225 4.63% 218 1.36% 3238 7.27% High school graduate/equivalency 37-_x.64% 425 8.75% 921 5.76% 7606 17.09% Some college, no degree 78 16.12% 571 11.75% 1802 11.28% 5634 12.66% Associate degree 25 5.17% 407 8.38% 542 3.39% 2822 6.34% Bachelor's degree 175 36.16% 1791 36.86% 5567 34.84% 11147 25.04% Graduate or professional degree 169 34.92% 1353 27.85% 6664 41.71% 11726 26.34% TOTAL 484 4859 15977 44510 BLACK • .: Less than 9th Grade 117 17.89% 77 6.53% 364 16.58% 1330 15.57% 9th to 12th grade, no diploma • 204 31.19% 255 21.61% 396 18.04% 1873 21.93% High school graduate/equivalency 145 22.17% 343 29.07% 403 18.36% 2343 27.43% Some college, no degree 131 20.03% 144 12.20% 314 14.31% 1213 14.20% Associate degree 4 0.61% 112 9.49% 97 4.42% 557 6.52% Bachelor's degree 53 8.10% 140 11.86% 343 15.63% 730 8.55% 1990 Census of Population and Housing CT113 Carrboro Chapel Hill Orange County Total housing units 1058 6108 14866 38683 YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT 1989 to March 1990 6 102 305 855 1985 to 1988 56 1477 2633 7233 1980 to 1984 101 971 1797 5574 1970 to 1979 265 1707 3752 10111 1960 to 1969 229 1019 3159 6970 1950 to 1959 145 389 1563 3578 1940 to 1949 138 200 837 1610 1939 or earlier 118 243 820 2752 BEDROOMS No bedroom 7 132 147 335 1 bedroom 249 1307 2764 4889 2 bedrooms 508 3200 6003 14797 3 bedrooms 203 1271 3330 13409 4 bedrooms 82 151 1986 4123 5 or more bedrooms 9 47 636 1130 SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS Lacking complete plumbing facilities 0 15 0 279 - Lacking complete kitchen facilities 8 40 23 276 Condominium housing units 101 853 2079 2921 SOURCE OF WATER Public system or private company 1058 6085 14655 27344 Individual drilled well 0 14 199 10106 Individual dug well 0 9 12 1012 Some other source 0 0 0 221 SEWAGE DISPOSAL Public sewer 1033 5889 14077 23767 • Septic tank or cesspool 25 204 789 14552 Other means 0 15 0 364 Occupied housing units 967 5637 13792 36104 HOUSE HEATING FUEL Utility gas 542 1185 6362 9826 Bottled, tank, or LP gas 35 79 214 3310 Electricity 292 4066 6510 17400 Fuel oil, kerosene, etc 73 241 524 3667 Coal or coke 0 0 29 29 Wood 25 47 62 1669 Solar energy 0 12 0 59 Other fuel 0 7 59 112 No fuel used 0 0 32 32 YEAR HOUSEHOLDER MOVED INTO UNIT 1989 to March 1990 358 2623 4887 10289 1985 to 1988 243 2145 4840 12249 1980 to 1984 101 356 1379 4530 1970 to 1979 126 204 1571 4803 1960 to 1969 66 151 675 1980 1959 or earlier 73 158 440 •253 TELEPHONE No telephone in unit 101 180 278 1316 VEHICLES AVAILABLE Occupied housing units 967 5637 13792 36104 None 234 407 1046 2433 1 357 2476 5595 12480 2 285 1920 5439 14035 3 or more 91 834 1712 7156 MORTGAGE STATUS AND SELECTED MONTHLY OWNER COSTS Specified owner—occupied housing units 204 1197 4757 13514 With a mortgage 115 805 3519 9719 Less than $300 21 16 53 300 $300 to$499 18 85 209 1 165 $500 to$699 27 108 562 1863 $700 to$999 49 306 930 2775 $1,000 to$1,499 0 271 939 2229 $1,500 to$1,999 0 19 402 764 $2,000 or more 0 0 424 623 Median(dollars) 635 857 1002 846 Not mortgaged 89 392 1238 3795 Less than$100 0 0 0 45 $100 to$199 39 82 133 1162 $200 to$299 29 246 338 1464 $300 to$399 7 54 432 719 $400 or more 14 10 ' 335 405 Median(dollars) 227 253 334 243 SELECTED MONTHLY OWNER COSTS AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN 1989 Specified owner—occupied housing units 204 y"`U. 1197 ,' L 4757 ° ' 13514 `-\ Less than 20 percent 90 515 2569 7169 20 to 24 percent 5 189 670 1873 25 to 29 percent 28 175 435 1507 30 to 34 percent 12 74 459 989 35 percent or more 69 230 591 1890 Not computed 0 14' 33 86 GROSS RENT Specified renter—occupied housing units 720 4255 '8161 15702 Less than$200 138 30 176 379 $200 to$299 79 122 432 812 $300 to$499 295 2500 3697 7639 $500 to$749 140 1372 2912 5181 $750 to$999 41 79 378 584 $1,000 or more 11 73 446 551 No cash rent 16 79 120 556 Median(dollars) 413 463 489 472 GROSS RENT AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN 1989 Specified renter—occupied housing units 720 4255 8161 15702 Less than 20 percent 168 943 2192 4115 20 to 24 percent 90 461 1092 2041 25 to 29 percent 91 372 885 1671 30 to 34 percent 54 330 711 1262 35 percent or more 301 1990 3039 5829 Not computed 16 159 242 784 1990 Census of Population and Housing CT 113 Carrboro Chapel Hill Orange County INCOME IN 1989 Households 964 5657 13864 36278 Less than$5,000 222• 637 1088 2472 $5,000 to$9,999 157 816 1121 3184 $10,000 to$14,999 147 793 1205 3153 $15,000 to$24,999 161 1123' 2459• 6666• $25,000 to$34,999 89 819 2009 5387 $35,000 to$49,999 147 733 1770 6033 $50,000 to$74,999 26 557 1946 5208 $75,000 to$99,999 8 136 974 2011 $100,000 to$149,999 7 23 953 1548 $150,000 or more 0 . 20 339 616 Median household income(dollars) 12755 19799 30489 29968 Families 348 2076 6879 21395 Less than$5,000 52 115 210 511 $5,000 to$9,999 26 126 228 920 $10,000 to$14,999 30 161 266 1151 $15,000 to$24,999 90 325 681 3040 $25,000 to$34,999 47 287 875 3159 $35,000 to$49,999 83 467 1163 4672 $50,000 to$74,999 5 465 1447 4252 $75,000 to$99,999 8 100 816 1685 $100,000 to$149,999 7 21 899 1451 $150,000 or more 0 9 294 554 Median family income(dollars) 21714 35632 50217 40685 Nonfamily households 616 3581 6985 14883 Less than $5,000 170 539 878 1978 $5,000 to$9,999 131 715 893 2313 $10,000 to$14,999 117 645 948 2052 $15,000 to$24,999 89 784 1804 3651 $25,000 to$34,999 32 498 1 1 15 2142 $35,000 to$49,999 56 267 618 1397 $50,000 to$74,999 21 92 479 916 $75,000 to$99,999 0 28 164 288 $100,000 to$149,999 0 2 51 94 $150,000 or more 0 11 35 52 Median nonfamily household income(dollars) 10222 13940 19383 17722 Per capita income(dollars) 8864 12604 16288 15776 i INCOME TYPE IN 1989 Households 964 5657 13864 36278 With wage and salary income 722 5274 11626 31079 Mean wage and salary income(dollars) 19199 23385 36886 34739 With nonfarm self-employment income 148 568 2075 5310 Mean nonfarm self-employment income(dollars) 6982 10381 17648 16815 With farm self-employment income 13 67 181 725 Mean farm self-employment income(dollars) -423 1925 4149 10642 With Social Security income 208 422 2442 6430 Mean Social Security income (dollars) 6589 6324 8859 7648 With public assistance income 101 167 353 1255