ATTACHMENT 3
Citizen Comments on Northside Pedestrian Mobility Plan
Sent in since November 6, Public Forum
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 9:24 PM
To: planning
Cc: Town Council; Northside Units-Police
Subject: sidewalks
To the Planning Department of the Town of Chapel Hill:
I am writing concerning the sidewalks proposed in the Northside neighborhood as
a resident of this neighborhood living at 214 North Graham St. I was
unable to attend the town council meeting last night but was dismayed to read
in the paper today that there was an objection to the proposed addition of
sidewalks in this area.
My husband and I are frequently concerned about the safety of walking our 11
month old son in his stroller down our street where there are no sidewalks and
cars regularly weave around parked cars and other pedestrians forced to walk in
the street. I am certainly aware of the drug problem in our neighborhood
but it seems ridiculous to me to suggest that the addition of sidewalks would
encourage drug dealing. While people do regularly hang out on the corner
of Rosemary and North Graham St., they are also regularly hanging around in the
middle of our street and are often slow to move to allow cars to pass
them. The addition of sidewalks would increase safety for both
pedestrians and motorists on our street.
One of the great advantages to living in a neighborhood such as Northside is
it's close proximity to the downtown area and the University. Being
within walking distance of shops, restaurants and the school gives Northside
some of it's great potential. Adding sidewalks to allow pedestrians a
safe means to walk to local areas would enhance this particular asset for the Northside
neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and please contact me with any updates on this issue.
Sincerely,
Katie Wright
214 N. Graham St.
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
(919) 260-2510
From: Adam Brown
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 2:42 PM
To: Town Council
Subject: Northside Mobility Plan
Council Members and Mayor,
I would like to reiterate my STRONG SUPPORT of each and every aspect of the proposed Northside Mobility Plan. I speak as a resident of the Northside District (225 N. Roberson), as well as an investor in the Northside District with a rental property on N. Graham St. Further, I speak from the perspective of an owner of Louise Beck Properties, Inc., a property management company with hundreds of residential properties under management in Chapel Hill, many of which lie in the Northside District.
I am impressed with the Town’s initiative to address the long overdue improvements needed to revitalize our neighborhood. I appreciate your efforts to secure a Police substation in the Northside District. I look forward to witnessing the positive effects of the increased Police presence! The proposed Northside Mobility Plan, with its call for sidewalks on each street, speed bumps on high trafficked roads, and improved lighting, is another move in the right direction. As a father of a 2 year old daughter, I look forward to the day when I can walk safely through my neighborhood without worrying about each and every car that approaches. The installation of sidewalks, as proposed, will provide me and my family this opportunity. The installation of speed bumps will serve to slow the seemingly endless stream of vehicles that race along N. Roberson as well as N. Graham streets. I suspect the same activity occurs on Sunset and Nunn streets as well. The speed deterrent provided by installing speed bumps will make this neighborhood a more child and family friendly environment!
Some Northside residents have expressed a concern that the sidewalks will ‘bring drug activity 3 yards closer’ to resident’s homes. While, from a literal standpoint, individuals who are engaging in drug trade may be more likely to stand a few feet closer to ones home, this short-sighted perspective fails to recognize the sidewalk’s contribution to the cure for the underlying illegal activity. It is a well researched and documented fact that neighborhoods constructed with improvements facilitating outdoor activity/interaction, and dominated by residents (more specifically, families) who engage in outdoor activities, are statistically less likely to suffer from the problems which currently plague the Northside District. I encourage you as well as my fellow residents of Northside District to review just a few examples of relevant research: “Systematic Social Observation of Public Spaces: A New Look at Disorder in Urban Neighborhoods”, Robert J. Sampson, University of Chicago and American Bar Foundation, Stephen W. Raudenbush, University of Michigan. “Comparative Analysis of Urban Design and Criminal Behavior: A Study of New Urbanism and Defensible Space as They Pertain to Crime”, Afton Enger, Urban and Regional Studies, Dr. Anthony Filipovitch, Faculty Mentor, Urban and Regional Studies. and “Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design”, Timothy D. Crowe (2000). )
I implore you to approve each and every aspect of the Northside Mobility Plan as it is another feasible tool at your disposal to help restore and revitalize the Northside District. Please do not let this opportunity pass us by!!!
Thank you!
-----------------------------------------------------
Adam Brown
Louise Beck Properties, Inc.
203 Providence Road
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
(919) 401-9300 x 104 (Voice)
(919) 401-9330 (Fax)
www.LBPrentinfo.com
From: Steve Wright [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 3:16 PM
To: David Bonk
Subject: re: Northside Ped. Mobility Plan feedback
Dear Mr. Bonk,
At your convenience, would you please forward this message to the Active Living by Design Advisory Committee? I could not find any other contact informartion for this body.
Thank you,
Steve Wright
Dear Mayor Foy, Council Members, and the Planning Department,
Thank you for hearing last night’s concerns on the Northside Pedestrian Mobility Plan. Regarding the need for a sidewalk on North Graham Street, I’m sure the concerns of residents are appreciated; those in favor worry about people and moving vehicles having to share the same avenue of transit, and those opposed are concerned with bringing the unwanted noise of “loiterers” closer to their homes and losing part of their front yards, both assumed results of a proposed sidewalk
While the loss of a few feet of one’s front yard is a legitimate concern, the argument that installing a sidewalk will bring the noise and crime occurring in the middle of the street “closer” to homes by a few feet is not accurate. As a resident of the street myself, I can tell you that the difference between yelling that occurs in the middle of the street vs. yelling that occurs 10 feet closer to my house or in my yard is negligible; it’s all disruptive and it is all properly responded to by calling the police. Residents are not powerless against such noise – it is illegal and can be remedied with a quick phone call. Following this logic, should we remove the streetlights to discourage “loitering” also? As for the drug dealing, dealers prefer to work in the middle of the street, as they can approach buyers' cars and lean in their windows, thus making the transactions that much easier. If anything, sidewalks will make it more apparent who is doing what.
It occurred to me last night that if the 3 of the 4 folks in favor of sidewalks live on the east side of North Graham, and at least 2 of the 3 folks opposed live on the west side of North Graham, why not schedule a sidewalk on the east side of the street only? The neighborhood would gain a safe path for pedestrians, and those concerned about losing front yard footage and bringing noise closer to their homes would be appeased.
Regardless of what is decided, North Graham Street is not safe for pedestrians and traffic to mingle; the street is too narrow for parked cars and 2-way traffic as it is, and it is a busy route for cars to get in and out of the neighborhood. Traffic calming measures would not address the fact that cars still have to swerve to avoid pedestrians, and vice-versa. As a pedestrian, bike-rider, driver, dog-walker, and parent, I can say it is risky for all involved. There have been too many pedestrian tragedies in Chapel Hill this year already, and with these deaths in mind it seems incredible that sidewalks for one or two streets would be removed from this plan against the Planning Department's best judgement for the reasons mentioned above. Pedestrian mobility and crime are separate issues. Downtown will only see more foot and vehicle traffic.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Steve, Katie, and Spencer Wright
214 North Graham St.
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.