[Durham INC] DRAFT February minutes

Mon Mar 3 17:45:31 EST 2014

Please let me know about additions or corrections.  Thanks, pat

February Delegate Meeting of the InterNeighborhood Council
of Durham

NIS Conference Room, Golden Belt

February 25, 2013

Attending
the meeting were:

Neighborhoods

Cross Counties – Pat Carstensen

Duke Park – Bill Anderson, Loren
Hart

Eagles’ Pointe – Donna Rudolph

Falconbridge – Rosemarie Kitchin,
Conni Rivers

Golden Belt – DeDreana Freeman

Long Meadow – Shawn Sendlinger

Morehead Hill – Bruce Mitchell,
Susan Callaghan

Northgate Park – Debra Hawkins,
Mike Shiflett

Old Farm – David Harris

Old North Durham – John Martin

Stage Stop – Dolly Fehrenbacher

Trinity Park – Philip Azar,
Megan Alise Carroll, Mathew Palmer

Tuscaloosa-Lakewood – Susan
Sewell 

Watts Hospital Hillandale – Tom
Miller

Woodcroft – Scott Carter, Jose
Sandoval

Woodlake – Katrina Portwood

Visitors 

John Killeen – City of Durham,
NIS

Lynwood D. Best – City of
Durham, NIS

Will Wilson – DOST

Brian Aus – Candidate for
District Attorney

Jim Wise – N & O

Laura Drey 

President Scott Carter called the
meeting to order; those present introduced themselves.  Scott Carter asked folks to print and bring their own agendas and copies of the minutes to
the meeting, if they want a hard-copy; resolution authors or sponsors will also
be responsible for bringing copies for the meeting.  He also asked whether we need to improve the inclement weather process, but the only
suggestion was that NIS does have a phone that can be used instead of the
carrying around a cell phone to whoever was speaking.  Finally the Executive Committee is looking for a volunteer
to manage and update the INC website.

Tom Miller moved that we approve
the January minutes, John Martin
seconded the motion, and it carried. 
In the treasurer’s report,
Susan Sewell said that she sent out dues notices this week; she thanked
neighborhoods that had already paid their dues.

There was a moment of celebration
and applause for the opening of the bridge on the American Tobacco Trail.

Mathew Palmer gave a summary of
the results of the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC)’s Neighborhood Survey.   He thanked NIS and others for support.  He emphasized that the committee’s role
is to “advise,” not to “advocate.” 
They did a lot to publicize the survey and received 908 responses (up
from 37 on the last one); about ½ the respondents were between 25 and 44 in
age.  A final report on the survey
will be available once further analysis is completed.  There were 18 questions in 5 areas:

·       “Is biking and walking important?” got a resounding “yes” (98%
agreement).

·       On why do respondents walk or bike, folks said they did it for fun,
exercise, shopping, connecting with others, and getting to work.

·       On where respondents walk or bike, there was the variety you would
expect, but also about ¾ said they do bike around the neighborhood at least
once a month, 97% walk around the neighborhood at least once a month, so being
in the community is important.

·       Barriers identified included dangerous drivers, lack of traffic lights
/ cross-walks, lack of bike lanes, lack of bike racks, lack of sidewalks, and
distance.

·       There were also questions on awareness of events.

Laura Drey gave a presentation
showing all the earth-moving and tree-cutting that has happened with the Sandy Creek stream and wetland restoration.  This project will slow down run-off and
make water cleaner and less likely to scour the banks.  However, making the stream meander to
reverse the “channeling” done in the 1940’s is pretty messy, and seems to be
taking some trial and error.

Committee Reports: 

•       Zoning and Land Use: The proposal on rules for wireless towers was taken to the Planning
Department and Joint City-County Planning Commission (JCCPC).  The Planning Department wasn’t
indicating much enthusiasm for our proposals, but thanks to Don Moffitt, the
Planning Department will be reporting back in April.  It would help if others besides the “usual suspects” came to
the JCCPC meeting in April, or at least contacted members of the JCCPC about
this issue.  There have recently
been two developer-initiated changes to the development code, volunteering to
write “improvements” to the code, and a third change is said to be in the
works.  We will have to “bird dog”
this trend since “fixing” the code because of difficulties on a few properties
can open the way for major problems in many other places. 

•       Membership and Outreach:  The committee is still
doing outreach to PACs.  They are
also considering doing a neighborhood heroes or block party event for
2014.  Dick and Don would be
willing to train someone else to do candidate forum if we want to do one this
year.

•       Nuisance Abatement: There will be a report in March.

•       Traffic Enforcement
Committee: Tom Miller moved to amend the traffic enforcement resolution (Appendix A) with the updates from the
committee; Bill Anderson seconded the motion and the amendment passed
unanimously.  Tom Miller said that
Watts Hillandale discussed the resolution, noticed that some neighbors who
speed in the neighborhood might get a ticket, and then decided such people
deserve to get a ticket.  The
motion then passed unanimously.  As
a first next step, folks are asked to bring up the issue at Coffee with
Council.

•       Bike, Pedestrian and
Transit:  Mike
Shiflett volunteers to talk to Scott Carter about taking over leadership of
this committee.  Scott mentioned a
number of events: The ATT bridge opened, what will probably be the last New
Belgium Tour de Fat will be June 21, and Bike Month, which will be in May, will
include a Bike to School Day on May 9.

•       Public Spaces and
Environmental Issues:  They will report on what they found out in May.

Durham Mardi Gras has already had kick-off
events, but the main event is March 4 – Laissez
les Bull temps rouler (http://www.durhammardigras.com).
Durham Mardi Gras started informally four years ago as a community-oriented and
people-powered celebration, has been adding events for kids, and is now big
enough to need a parade permit for the event.  For Fat Tuesday on March 4, gather at the Bull, CCB Plaza,
at 6:30 PM, to parade to the Motorco area, where there will be 10 bands on 5
stages.  They have tried to keep
the events free, but have only 25% of the money they need, so please help them
out. http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/durham-mardi-gras

Mike Shiflett gave an update on
transportation projects.  Most
projects are on hold as the state looks at the structure of funding, but the
Triangle Connector (formerly East End) is looking at breaking ground this fall
and the Alston Avenue widening is just pushed back.  The very good news is that Durham Orange Light Rail now has
permission to do the next step of planning: http://www.triangletransit.org/news/headlines/durham-orange-light-rail-transit-project-gets-federal-go-ahead-project-development

Neighborhood Reports and Other Announcements: 

·       Old North Durham and Duke Park have long talked about expanding the
historic district.  The state has a
grant program that would pay 60% of the costs the process for doing so, and Old
North Durham was willing to pay the rest. 
The problem is that such a grant would have to go through the City of
Durham, and the Planning Department says they don’t have the staff to
administer a grant.  It was
suggested maybe NIS could be the entity to do the administration.  Applications were due February 28, so
the opportunity may be gone for this year.

·       We may want to do a resolution in support of having Google Fiber come to
Durham.

·       In Trinity Park, 505 North Gregson (http://www.opendurham.org/buildings/505-north-gregson)
is an older commercial building that was built long before our current zoning
code, so has no yard and no off-street parking.  There is interest in rehab-ing it as a commercial
space.  However, Durham might have
to change the development code to make the proposed rehab work – and any code
change would affect the whole county (or at least all of central Durham).  Phil Azar also brought extra copies of
the Trinity Park newsletter.

·       Northgate Park’s food truck rodeo season kicks off on March 27.  You can like them on facebook to get
the latest news.

Appendix A

 DURHAM INTERNEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF TRAFFIC ENFORCMENT ON NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS 

DEFINITIONS 

“Enforcement
of traffic laws” and “traffic enforcement” refer primarily to
enforcement of speed limits, and failure-to-yield-to-pedestrian laws, and
similar measures designed to promote pedestrian and vehicle safety.
“Enforcement of traffic laws” and “traffic enforcement” as they are used herein
do not refer to the enforcement of laws regarding illegal arms, controlled
substances or driving while under the influence. 

“Neighborhood
streets” are streets
going through residential neighborhoods for which the speed limit typically is
35 miles per hour or less. The maps of pedestrian crash locations provided in
the Durham Transportation Department’s Draft Preliminary Action Plan (2010) and
in the in the UNC Highway Safety Research Center’s Durham Pedestrian Crash
Trends (August 29, 2012) attached collectively as Appendix A assist in the
identification of important neighborhood streets. 

PREAMBLE 

Whereas
the Durham
InterNeighborhood Council (“INC”) has identified the enforcement of traffic
laws as an achievable way to improve the quality of life in Durham
neighborhoods, has noted that other citizen forums were not focused on traffic
enforcement, and has formed a Traffic Enforcement Committee charged with
improving the safety of Durham neighborhood streets by encouraging increased
traffic enforcement on those streets; and 

Whereas
statistics compiled by
the North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of Motor Vehicles
Crash Database, 2005-2009, as cited by Durham Transportation and Police
Departments shows that Durham has the 3rd highest incidence of pedestrian
crashes in North Carolina even though it has only the 5th largest population in
the State and that, over the 5 years studied, Durham's pedestrian crash trends
increased even though they have decreased in other North Carolina cities; and 

Whereas
unsafe driving was the
most commonly cited barrier to increased walking and biking by respondents to
the Durham Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission’s 2013 Neighborhood
Survey; and 

Whereas
Durham pedestrian
accident statistics were of such concern that Durham was chosen by the North
Carolina Department of Transportation (“NC DOT”) for a pilot jurisdiction of
the 

Page 1 of 5 

Watch4MeNC campaign and recent data (Appendix B)
continues to highlight pedestrian and bike crashes as areas of concern; and 

Whereas a number of City of Durham Strategic Plan priorities
speak directly to the need to seek improvement in traffic safety (Safe &
Secure Community; Thriving, Livable Neighborhoods; Well-Managed City;
Stewardship of Physical Resources); and 

Whereas a number of Durham County Strategic Plan priorities
speak directly to the need to seek improvement in traffic safety (Health and
Well-being for All; Secure Community; Environment); and 

Whereas INC recognizes that there have been and will continue
to be great things happening in Durham and that through the efforts of elected
officials in the city and county, the Durham Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Commission (“BPAC”), and public employees of the city and the county , Durham
is the regional leader in walkability and bike-ability, especially in terms of
engineered infrastructure and education and encouragement of residents to
exercise outdoors and to engage in alternative forms of transportation; and 

Whereas scarce traffic enforcement resources are currently
divided between the county and the city and, with regard to the city, divided
among multiple DPD divisions and districts with no police captain or assistant
or deputy police chief responsible for coordinating traffic enforcement on a jurisdiction-wide
basis or for reporting the results thereof; and 

Whereas BPAC regularly receives reports from engineering,
transportation and other departmental experts employed by the city and county
staff on matters relevant to the Commission's obligation to advise elected
officials on matters of importance to community members who bike and walk or
wish to do so; and 

Whereas INC is fully aware that among the offenders against
traffic and pedestrian safety laws are neighbors residing in the neighborhoods
where traffic enforcement should be improved; and 

Whereas many of our neighborhood streets are also
state-maintained roads and require coordination and negotiation with NC DOT and
other state agencies and bodies; and 

Whereas INC is aware of allegations of
racial profiling in Durham, especially with regard to drug enforcement at
traffic stops as well as the responses to
those allegations and recognizes that these concerns are currently being
addressed in the Durham
Human Relations Commission;

Page 2 of 5 

NOW
THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE DURHAM INTERNEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL BY ITS
DELEGATES DULY ASSEMBLED: 

1. That the Durham
Police Department (“DPD”) and Sheriff's Office are profusely thanked for their
dedication, service and sacrifices to the City and County of Durham; and 

2. That City Council
by is urged to direct DPD by and through the City Manager to make traffic
enforcement on neighborhood streets a significantly higher priority than has
historically been the case; and 

3. That City Council
by is urged to direct DPD by and through the City Manager to prepare a Traffic
Enforcement plan within three months of such direction that includes, among
other things, the following elements: 

(i) an inventory of the number and
organizational location of officers, cars, bikes and motorcycles and speed
detection equipment having primary responsibility for traffic enforcement on
neighborhood streets; 

(ii) an estimate of the percentage of time
those human and physical assets will be devoted to traffic enforcement on neighborhood
streets as opposed to other duties; 

(iii) a clear identification of the
hierarchy/ies within DPD responsible for the deployment, coordination and
efficient use of those assets including the name, title and contact information
of the DPD officer having city-wide responsibly for deployment and coordination
of those assets and reporting on the usage of the same; 

(iv) a statement explaining DPD's policies
as to how those assets are regularly, systematically and effectively used on
the enforcement of traffic laws on neighborhood streets as opposed to accident
investigation, motorized escort, community outreach, traditional law
enforcement, or other priority absent exigent circumstance beyond the type of
emergencies that law enforcement faces on a regular basis; 

(v) publication of an easier means by
which Durham residents can request additional traffic enforcement in an area
they live in or regularly transit (e.g. DurhamOneCall); and 

(vi) metrics on the numbers of traffic
enforcement operations undertaken on neighborhood streets, the numbers of cars
stopped, warned and ticketed, etc., such metrics to be publicly available and
sortable at precinct, district, and city-wide levels; and 

Page 3 of 5 

4. That the City Council is urged to direct the DPD by
and through its Manager to open dialogue with the Durham County Sheriff for the
purpose of improving coordination with the Sheriff's Office; and 

5. That the City
Council is urged to draw the DPD's attention by and through its Manager to the
following INC recommendations in designing the department's Traffic Enforcement
Plan: 

(i) The DPD shall publicly report to BPAC
and the Crime Cabinet on the amount of time and other resources devoted to
traffic enforcement on neighborhood streets and the results of those efforts.
Such reports shall be of comparable specificity as what BPAC already receives
from the engineering, transportation and other departments; 

(ii) The DPD shall weigh crashes involving
bicycles and pedestrians more heavily than car crashes when deciding where to
stage enforcement actions so that enforcement efforts focus on human safety for
those who are most vulnerable; and 

(iii) The work of Officer David E. Kub as
shown in the Neighborhood Portfolio Exercise Presentation, Spring 2013
(Appendix C) contains the type of traffic enforcement action and reporting that
might be included in the Traffic Enforcement Plan; and 

(iv) The DPD shall create a specifically
trained and led traffic enforcement squad deployed throughout the city on a
roving, periodic, unannounced basis to neighborhoods where traffic enforcement
is most needed; and 

6. That the City
Council and the Board of County Commissioners are urged to encourage Durham's
delegation to the General Assembly to request statutory authority for Durham
and other local jurisdictions to install speed cameras on a limited or pilot
basis on neighborhood streets, especially near schools, hospitals and parks,
and to clarify to the General Assembly that speed cameras are not like red
light cameras in several important respects: there is no possibility of
altering the timing of yellow lights so as to trap motorists and there is no
safe time to speed by schools, hospitals and parks on neighborhood streets; and

7. That the City
Council and the Board of County Commissioners are urged to encourage Durham's
delegation to the General Assembly to determine the most feasible means of
changing the state driver's license tests to emphasize pedestrian and bike
safety and to reflect the state's increasing urbanization; and 

Page 4 of 5 

8. That the Executive Committee of INC remain seized
of this issue, taking appropriate steps to follow up on this resolution and
report progress to its delegates. 

This ____ day of
_______________, 2014 

THE INTERNEIGHBORHOOD
COUNCIL OF DURHAM 

By:
________________________________________ 

Scott Carter,
President 

Appendix A – 

Durham Preliminary Action
Plan 

http://bit.ly/18jmK5l

https://www.dropbox.com/s/w7jlr2gqhrclw6t/Sept%202010%20-%20Durham_Action_Plan_MB_LT_Finalized.pdf

Powerpoint: Durham
Pedestrian Crash Trends 

UNC Highway
Safety Research Center 

August 29, 2012

Shortened: http://bit.ly/MgTrGd 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/whhud3pe0gux3k6/120829-DurhamCrashAnalysisTrends.pdf

Appendix B
– Spreadsheet of Durham statistics 

Shortened: http://bit.ly/18kN1Ai 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/j7n1dmrh718tovd/Summaries
of Durham Co Bike-Pedestrian Crashes (2008-2012).pdf 

Appendix C –
Document: An Internationally Accredited Law Enforcement Agency Neighborhood
Portfolio Exercise By: David E. Kub Spring 2013 

Shortened: http://bit.ly/18jmFP7 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/nutgh7h31saez41/DPD%20Powerpoint%20Template%20With%20Different%20Subpage_12-06-12.pdf 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20140303/d146a3f0/attachment-0001.html>