INC NEWS - Re: INC NEWS

[pat carstensen]

Quite a lot of the creek near the TTA route is already protected (corps 
land, land we purchased near Githens, land dedicated by the Patterson Place 
developers near Githens).  I think the Patterson Place developers are, in 
fact, pretty sympathetic to idea of making open space accessible from that 
side.  One access to the trails at Githens is through the apartment complex 
on Watkins Road.

I know that there has been a lot of work by various public lands groups on 
how far we are behind on being about to protect the million acres objective 
we have set for the state.  I sort of thought there is an open space 
strategic plan for Durham, but we need to understand more about whether we 
have right tools and objectives to have recreational open space, attractive 
entrances, etc.

Regards, pat



>From: Richard Mullinax <rcmj at nc.rr.com>
>To: inc-list at rtpnet.org
>Subject: Re: INC NEWS -  Re: INC NEWS
>Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 13:37:16 +0000
>
>I attended the meeting yesterday of all municipalities. I am impressed with 
>the Penny offer. I hope it is still valid when the City and County buy does 
>not go through. I seems odd for them to offer this as a carrot now when 
>they have had it available for years to these governments.
>
>Secondly I think a good issue for INC to take on is what is our position to 
>stand and ask Duke to provide some % of its forest land as open space as it 
>sells it off for development. If we had an agreement from Duke all this 
>energy for this land could be used enjoying it. We could map all the open 
>space now and sleep that the protection is there. John Schelp has done 
>ground breaking work in partnering with Duke. We do not have to reinvent 
>the wheel.
>
>If this land is developed, from the plan I saw about a third to half is 
>left open space after houses are built. This open space will be a part of 
>the creek trail. I think the community at large will win without buying 
>this land to move it into tax generating status from its Duke Forrest 
>designation. There are other large sections of the upland creek near this 
>site. I am not advocating for not spending taxes alone. We have a chance to 
>have more open space and get a new tax source. The same is true of the 
>Penny plot. A large section is protected creek and will always be open for 
>trails.
>
>
>One new item. This trail is in the TTA corridor to Chapel Hill from Durham. 
>If we want to slow sprawl we will need to build closer to each other and 
>much denser near the spine of the train. If there were no open space on 
>this section of creek I would be all for some open space, but these 
>residents have open space. I would like to ensure that we all have open 
>space to bike or walk to without using our cars. This creek will be a great 
>resource from bike or foot as it is for the hubs of development that will 
>continue at South Square and Mt Moriah Road. These will likely be train 
>stops.
>
>Richard Mullinax
>921 N Mangum
>
>
>
>>
>>Yes, Bill, it is a conservation issue, that is why the Penney family is
>>willing to place an easement on its contiguous land.
>>
>>Also, many may not be aware (I was not until EANG's efforts) but Duke
>>University will not pledge that all current Duke Forest property will 
>>remain
>>Duke Forest property--it reserves the right to develop it as it wishes. 
>>Durham can't rely on Duke for its conservation efforts.
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>INC-list mailing list
>INC-list at rtpnet.org
>http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list