INC NEWS - INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 6
Duke, Frank
Frank.Duke at durhamnc.gov
Mon Oct 2 18:43:40 EDT 2006
The statement that you can have both a conventional paved sidewalk
around Duke's East Campus and preserve the trees is, quite simply,
inaccurate. The trees come within one foot of the wall that is preserved
by Duke's development plan. The minimum width sidewalk that the City can
permit in its right-of-way is five feet. Those numbers simply mean that
the choice is an alternative (which Duke is permitted to choose and they
have chosen the existing trail system) or a conventional sidewalk
without the trees.
If Duke elects to propose a different alternative, we can get that, but
only if Duke agrees to that alternative. If Duke says no, we will do the
conventional sidewalk, the trees that provide the canopy over Broad,
Markham, and Buchanan are gone.
Speaking factually, I already dealt with the issue on East Campus when
the field house site plan (the last construction to be permitted on East
Campus pursuant to the development plan) was approved. Duke proposed to
use the trail inside the wall; City Transportation wanted a conventional
sidewalk. I decided the issue based on saving the trees. I went to broad
Street and measured the separation from the root system to the trees,
and realized it was less than one foot. I also evaluated the tree canopy
(which is your best gauge of the need for no disturbance of the trees
root zone if you want to save the tree) and came to the realization that
any sidewalk within the right-of-way was likely to kill the trees. Given
the choices that Duke had put on the table, a conventional sidewalk that
would require removal of the trees or the trail inside the wall, I chose
the trail. I would do it again.
Frank Duke, AICP
City-County Planning Director
-----Original Message-----
From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org]
On Behalf Of inc-list-request at rtpnet.org
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 6:22 PM
To: inc-list at rtpnet.org
Subject: INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 6
Send INC-list mailing list submissions to
inc-list at rtpnet.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
inc-list-request at rtpnet.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
inc-list-owner at rtpnet.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of INC-list digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. INC NEWS - follow-up: Duke needs to resubmit its pedestrian
plan (letter in today's Duke Chronicle) (John Schelp)
2. INC NEWS - Fw: INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 1 (American LAbor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 14:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Schelp <bwatu at yahoo.com>
Subject: INC NEWS - follow-up: Duke needs to resubmit its pedestrian
plan (letter in today's Duke Chronicle)
To: inc-list at DurhamINC.org
Message-ID: <20061002215320.95739.qmail at web34315.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
folks,
We don't have to choose between the trees and a
sidewalk on East Campus.
I understand from staff that we can have both.
We can have a paved pedestrian walkway around East
Campus (inside the wall) with 5 foot-wide pedestrian
entrances at each corner.
This solution saves the trees and provides the
sidewalk (since the ordinance says alternative
walkways outside the Right-of-Way shall have the same
functionality as a conventional sidewalk).
Duke keeps talking about building bridges with Durham
so I'm sure they wouldn't object. It would also be
safer for students.
I've just sent a request for a paved walkway and four
pedestrian entrances (along the East Campus jogging
trail) to Michael Palmer, head of community relations
in Duke's PR office.
When I receive his reply, I will share with the
listserv.
take care,
John
****
follow-up note sent this afternoon...
Dear Council and Commissioners,
I raised several issues in my message about Duke's
pedestrian plan -- reflecting the input and concerns
of many.
My main point is that Duke University needs to
re-submit its pedestrian plan and provide more
connectivity.
The plan that was submitted is unacceptable. There are
gaps throughout.
The details can certainly be worked out. For instance,
no one is suggesting that we cut down all the trees
outside the East Campus wall tomorrow. Duke has
already started planting replacement trees on the
inside of the wall (look at the Broad St section,
between Perry and West Main).
Surely there is a mechanism we can establish to have
both trees and future sidewalks.
As it stands now, the plan is woefully inadequate.
Gaps exist on Anderson, Duke University Rd and Cameron
Blvd.
Since Duke officials have said in public meetings that
connectivity is important, they will likely embrace an
opportunity to improve what they've submitted.
FYI, below is my letter from today's Duke Chronicle.
have a good day,
John Schelp
****
Letter: Duke's sidewalk plan inadequate
Duke Chronicle, 2 October 2006
The Pedestrian Plan that Duke recently submitted to
Durham's Development Review Board for approval is
woefully inadequate. Duke's plan leaves off a
significant number of future sidewalks-which gives the
University a pass on sidewalk requirements outlined in
Durham's ordinance.
In public hearings, Duke has repeatedly affirmed the
importance of sidewalks and pedestrian connectivity. A
review of its pedestrian plan suggests that talk is
cheap.
According to local officials, Duke seems to be working
behind the scenes to avoid building sidewalks near its
projects. Here are three examples:
1. Although a sidewalk is required in Duke's current
site plan for the new Center for Integrative Medicine,
the University is trying to eliminate a sidewalk along
Cameron Boulevard, undermining an important
integrative characteristic of the new center. Local
officials have indicated that Duke wants to re-submit
a site plan that will omit the sidewalk (based on the
new, weaker requirements in Duke's proposed pedestrian
plan). One negative effect of this change is that it
would be more dangerous for the many people who walk
along Cameron Boulevard to football games and other
events at Wallace Wade stadium.
2. Duke was also supposed to build a sidewalk in front
recently expanded and renovated Washington Duke Inn on
Cameron Boulevard, a big money maker for the
non-profit University. While the local planning
ordinance states that Duke's new sidewalks must have
the same functionality as conventional sidewalks, Duke
is trying to argue that the jogging trail fulfills
this requirement. Some must wonder how a dirt trail
covered with mulch that goes back into the woods is
the same thing as a paved, all-weather,
pedestrian-friendly sidewalk along Cameron Boulevard.
3. Duke is trying to argue that the gravel trail
around the inside of the East Campus wall serves the
same function as a sidewalk and that therefore, Duke
shouldn't have to build sidewalks around East Campus.
While the gravel trail inside the East Campus wall
might be suitable for joggers and dog walkers, it is
not the same as a sidewalk designed to facilitate
pedestrian traffic. Does Duke seriously expect a
pedestrian-a parent pushing a baby stroller-to climb
over the wall at the corner in order to walk along
Buchanan, Markham, Broad, or Swift?
Finally, with regards to the Central Campus
redevelopment, concerned neighbors have asked Duke
several times to pay special attention to the northern
pedestrian portals at Anderson Street and at Ninth
Street. Duke officials have assured us they will
attend to these matters-assurances that are called
into question as Duke's recent efforts to avoid
including adequate, appropriate sidewalks in their
site plans come to light. Instead of trying to save
money, Duke should create a safer environment for
students, visitors, fans and neighbors. Instead of
scaling back their commitments to sidewalks, Duke
should be working even harder to build better,
pedestrian-friendly bridges with Durham.
John Schelp
Resident, Old West Durham Neighborhood
****
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 18:21:41 -0400
From: "American LAbor" <americanlabor at nc.rr.com>
Subject: INC NEWS - Fw: INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 1
To: <inc-list at durhaminc.org>, "Duke TownGown listserve"
<towngown at yahoogroups.com>, "DukeDurham TownGown listserve"
<DukeDurhamTownGown at yahoogroups.com>, "Williams, Tammy E
\(Middletown\)" <tammy.e.williams at fishersci.com>
Cc: TrinityParkl listservejune03 <TrinityPark at yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <011401c6e671$233de670$6701a8c0 at PRESIDENT>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Forwarded with permission.
>
> Susan Kauffman
> Director of Special Projects
> Office of Public Affairs & Govt. Relations
> Box 90028
> Duke University
> (919) 681-8975
> ----- Forwarded by Susan Kauffman/Allen/Admin/Univ/Duke on 10/02/2006
> 05:40
> PM -----
>
> "Duke, Frank"
> <Frank.Duke at durha
> mnc.gov>
To
> Sent by: <inc-list at rtpnet.org>
> inc-list-bounces@
cc
> rtpnet.org
>
Subject
> Re: INC NEWS - INC-list Digest,
Vol
> 10/02/2006 08:37 22, Issue 1
> AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I read the message regarding Duke's pedestrian plan with some
interest.
> I approved consideration of the jogging trail around East Campus as an
> alternative to a sidewalk. I did so because I thought preservation of
> the tree canopy on Broad Street was important -- to Durham and to Old
> West Durham. I visited the site before I made the determination and
saw
> that along Broad Street there was less than one foot of clearance
> between the trees and the wall (which is protected by Duke's
development
> plan). The alternatives that I had were removal of the trees to permit
> installation of a conventional sidewalk or approval of the alternative
> pathway. I chose in favor of the trees. From your email, I realize you
> think I made the wrong decision and that the trees should have been
> sacrificed.
>
> There is nothing in the UDO requiring that alternate pedestrian
systems
> by all- weather. Merely that they provide a connection between two
> places that pedestrians could use. I reviewed the entire document and
> met with attorneys before I made the decision that I did.
>
> Given the options available to me, I would make the same decision
again
> and sacrifice a conventional sidewalk (one exists on the west side of
> Broad Street and the trail on the interior of the wall provides a
> pedestrian connection along the east side of Broad to Markham Street).
> The engineers who would prefer no trees in the right-of-way whatsoever
> argued that I should have required elimination of the tree cover, but
it
> is that tree cover that defines the character of Broad Street -- that
> establishes it as a special street in a special place in Durham.
>
> Frank Duke, AICP
> City-County Planning Director
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org [mailto:inc-list-bounces at rtpnet.org]
> On Behalf Of inc-list-request at rtpnet.org
> Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2006 12:00 PM
> To: inc-list at rtpnet.org
> Subject: INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 1
>
> Send INC-list mailing list submissions to
> inc-list at rtpnet.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> inc-list-request at rtpnet.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> inc-list-owner at rtpnet.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of INC-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. INC NEWS - Elected officials fail at oversight, basic city
> functions (Caleb Southern)
> 2. INC NEWS - Two more pedestrians hit (one on LaSalle, one
at
> Broad & Perry) (John Schelp)
> 3. INC NEWS - Duke's pedestrian plan lacks sidewalks,
> connectivity (John Schelp)
> 4. Re: INC NEWS - [durhambikeandped] Two more pedestrians hit
> (one on LaSalle, one at Broad & Perry) (Barry Ragin)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 14:22:15 -0400
> From: "Caleb Southern" <southernc at mindspring.com>
> Subject: INC NEWS - Elected officials fail at oversight, basic city
> functions
> To: <inc-list at durhaminc.org>
> Message-ID: <016f01c6e4bd$5b6845f0$2f01a8c0 at funkpad5>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> "Bell said that anyone who read the reports should have known about
the
> problems and should have told the City Council. 'My issue is with
> Patrick at
> this point,' he said." (N&O)
>
> My issue is with you, Mayor Bell.
>
> Certainly there is plenty of blame to spread around for the dump fire.
> But
> this happened under Mayor Bell's watch. And it was predictable and
> preventable.
>
> In the four years I have been involved with civic issues in Durham,
the
> poor
> state of maintenance and basic city services has been a constant
theme.
> I
> can only imagine what other 'invisible' functions we take for granted
> (water
> & sewer, stormwater, etc.) are on the verge of catastrophic failure.
We
> all
> see the sorry state of our pothole-ridden roads and other visible
> infrastructure.
>
> We just passed a massive bond for what is euphemistically called
> "deferred
> maintenance" -- effectively using our credit card to buy groceries.
>
> HOW DEEP DOES THIS PROBLEM GO?
>
> I, for one, am not willing to give Mayor Bell and Council a pass on
> this. We
> elect them to provide oversight on our behalf. It is unsatisfactory to
> let
> them get away with finger pointing AFTER THE FACT. The catastrophic
> failure
> of basic city services is not a surprise. Mayor Bell and our elected
> officials must get ahead of this problem and ensure that our city
> functions
> properly -- rather than squandering our tax dollars on boondoggle
> theaters
> and grants to inept or corrupt organizations.
>
> Instead of ordering a report about "who knew what when and how far up
> the
> chain it went," the Mayor should order an audit of the state of all
city
> infrastructure and systems, and what we need to do now to prevent the
> next
> imminent failure. That would be . . . leadership.
>
> Mr. Mayor, Harry Truman said, "The buck stops here."
>
> Caleb Southern
>
>
> ***
>
> Officials briefed on dump's risk
> Durham leaders got updates on the status of a waste center that later
> caught
> fire
>
> By Michael Biesecker, Staff Writer: News & Observer
>
> As the city's yard waste composting facility burned, top
administrators
> denied they were told the dump had been operating for more than two
> years
> without a state permit.
>
> But internal reports show that City Manager Patrick Baker and Deputy
> City
> Manager Ted Voorhees got weekly updates that outlined the problem.
Solid
> waste managers also warned their superiors that equipment shortages
and
> a
> contractor's poor performance could lead to a fire.
>
> In interviews Friday, Baker and Voorhees acknowledged they received
and
> read
> the "City Manager Executive Updates," the contents of which were
> routinely
> discussed at weekly meetings of senior city administrators. Both said,
> however, they had no knowledge of the permit lapse, the severity of
the
> problems at the dump or the likelihood of fire.
>
> The reports cover the period from May 29, 2005, until days before the
> acres
> of accumulated leaves and limbs at the dump spontaneously burst into
> flame
> Sept. 10. The fire took 14 days and more than $100,000 in taxpayer
money
> to
> extinguish, while smoke blanketed nearby homes and forced some
residents
> to
> flee to hotels.
>
> "Time is crucial as material is arriving without being processed, thus
> increasing the potential for compost fires," reads the report for the
> week
> of July 15. That statement was bulleted under the heading "Management
> Issues," defined on the form as issues "the city manager needs to know
> about."
>
> The Yard Waste Compost Facility's permit expired in July 2004, five
> months
> after a large mulch fire burned for nine days. When the city applied
for
> a
> new permit, officials at the state Department of Environment and
Natural
> Resources refused.
>
> As of Friday, the yard waste dump still did not have a valid operating
> permit. Meanwhile, state regulators are considering fines of $5,000
per
> day.
>
> Baker, who became acting city manager in August 2004, said he had
never
> visited the yard waste dump until after the most recent fire. By his
> reading, the warnings in the executive updates about a potential fire
> were
> referring to piles of mulch and compost, not adjacent the mounds of
yard
> waste that spontaneously combusted.
>
> "All I can remember being told, and I can't remember exactly by whom,
is
> that they had some permitting issues with the state they were working
> out,"
> Baker said. "Hindsight is 20/20. But this happened on my watch, and it
> is my
> responsibility."
>
> Council members blasted the city's handling of the recent fire at a
> Sept. 18
> public meeting and expressed outrage that they were never informed
that
> the
> facility had been operating illegally. Baker apologized, telling
council
> members that they were not told about the problems because he had
never
> been
> informed.
>
> On Sept. 21, as the piles smoldered, Mayor Bill Bell instructed Baker
to
> prepare a report about "who knew what when and how far up the chain it
> went."
>
> Interviewed moments later in the hall outside the council's conference
> room,
> Voorhees said he had vague knowledge that his subordinates were
working
> to
> renew the permit. He was adamant, however, that he never knew or had
> been
> told the permit had expired.
>
> But the internal updates make repeated references to the department's
> efforts to get a new one. Under the heading "Future Hot Items
(Potential
> negative press or controversial issues)," the one dated May 29, 2005,
> has
> the bulleted entry: "Yard Waste Composting facility Permit from DENR
--
> all
> required documentation has been submitted for approval."
>
> The reports describe a facility struggling with insufficient resources
> to
> handle the yard waste. Without room to spread out the materials, the
> piles
> grew bigger, increasing fire potential.
>
> The executive report for the week of Dec. 31, 2005, reads, "The
facility
> is
> inundated with existing compost, newly ground mulch, and newly
arriving
> yard
> debris -- primarily leases. ... Our only operational equipment, a
rubber
> tire loader, is not well suited to moving large loads over uneven,
> non-paved
> terrain due to its rollover potential. As mentioned in the previous
> report,
> we really need a tracked loader to help push and efficiently store
> material."
>
> Though another city department eventually loaned the yard a tracked
> loader,
> the requested new equipment is still on order. It is expected to
arrive
> in
> 30 to 90 days.
>
> Context cited
>
> Voorhees said Friday that the internal updates should be considered in
> the
> context of all the priorities of city government. Responsibility for
the
> failures at the yard waste facility lies at the feet of its on-site
> manager,
> Roosevelt Carter, Voorhees said.
>
> "It's sort of out-of-sight, out-of-mind until it catches on fire --
and
> then
> everyone knows about it," Voorhees said.
>
> Efforts to reach Carter on Friday were unsuccessful.
>
> Bell said that anyone who read the reports should have known about the
> problems and should have told the City Council. "My issue is with
> Patrick at
> this point," he said.
>
> Two other council members who reviewed the reports questioned the
> performance of Baker and Voorhees. Thomas Stith said the documents
> indicated
> "negligence." Eugene Brown questioned whether the pair were worth
their
> salaries -- a combined $271,649 per year, not including benefits and
> perks.
>
> "We pay the manager and his team big bucks to resolve these issues,"
> Brown
> said. "In this case, I don't think the taxpayers got their money's
> worth."
> Staff writer Michael Biesecker can be reached at 956-2421 or
> mbieseck at newsobserver.com.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 05:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
> From: John Schelp <bwatu at yahoo.com>
> Subject: INC NEWS - Two more pedestrians hit (one on LaSalle,
> one at
> Broad & Perry)
> To: inc-list at DurhamINC.org
> Message-ID: <20061001125635.26597.qmail at web34308.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hit-and-run driver leaves woman with critical
> injuries: Recent Duke grad one of two to be hit in
> under 24 hours
> Herald-Sun, 1 October 2006
>
> A recent Duke University graduate was critically
> injured when she was hit by a car late Friday on South
> LaSalle Street near McQueen Drive, according to
> police.
>
> The vehicle left the scene without stopping, police
> said.
>
> According to police, the accident happened at 11:53
> p.m. in front of the Belmont Apartments. Caitlin
> Donnelly, 22, from Towaco, N.J., who graduated from
> Duke in May, was waiting for a taxi cab and crossed
> the street to check on a taxi that had just pulled up.
> After Donnelly learned that it was not the cab she had
> called, she turned to go back across LaSalle Street.
>
> As she was crossing the street, Donnelly was struck by
> a northbound car that had its headlights off,
> according to police. The driver made no attempt to
> brake and did not stop after the collision, according
> to investigators. The vehicle was described as a
> dark-colored sedan, possibly a Honda or Nissan. The
> vehicle had damage to the front windshield and was
> missing the left side mirror. Witnesses could provide
> no description of the driver.
>
> Donnelly was taken to Duke University Hospital for
> treatment of severe head injuries, police said.
>
> Anyone with information about the accident is asked to
> call Durham Police Investigator M.H. Goodwin at (919)
> 560-4314 or CrimeStoppers at (919) 683-1200.
> CrimeStoppers pays cash rewards for information
> leading to arrests in felony cases, and callers do not
> have to identify themselves.
>
> Friday's incident was not the only time a pedestrian
> was struck in Durham in a 24-hour period.
>
> Around 3 p.m. on Saturday, a pedestrian was struck in
> the crosswalk at Broad and Perry streets, the same
> place 28-year-old Erin Kuhns was struck, dragged and
> partially run over by a Cadillac Escalade on Aug. 11.
> In that incident, the vehicle's rear wheel ran over
> Kuhns' arm and shoulder and grazed her neck, leaving a
> scar.
>
> The young woman struck Saturday did not appear to be
> seriously injured.
>
> City officials plan to ask the state Department of
> Transportation for a signal at the Broad and Perry
> street intersection.
>
> Donnelly remained in critical condition Saturday
> evening.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 06:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
> From: John Schelp <bwatu at yahoo.com>
> Subject: INC NEWS - Duke's pedestrian plan lacks sidewalks,
> connectivity
> To: inc-list at DurhamINC.org
> Message-ID: <20061001135148.41337.qmail at web34310.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> folks,
>
> The Pedestrian Plan that Duke recently submitted to
> Durham's Development Review Board for approval is
> woefully inadequate. Duke's plan leaves off a
> significant number of future sidewalks -- which gives
> the university a pass on sidewalk requirements
> outlined in Durham's ordinance.
>
> In public hearings, Duke has repeatedly affirmed the
> importance of sidewalks and pedestrian connectivity. A
> review of their pedestrian plan suggests that talk is
> cheap. According to local officials, Duke seems to be
> working behind the scenes to avoid building sidewalks
> near their projects. Here are three examples:
>
> 1) Although a sidewalk is required in Duke's current
> site plan for the new Center for Integrative Medicine,
> the university is trying to eliminate a sidewalk along
> Cameron Blvd., undermining an important *integrative*
> characteristic of the new center.
>
> Local officials have indicated that Duke wants to
> re-submit a site plan that will omit the sidewalk
> (based on the new, weaker requirements in Duke's
> proposed pedestrian plan). One negative effect of this
> change is that it would be more dangerous for the many
> people who walk along Cameron Blvd. to football games
> and other events at Wallace Wade stadium.
>
> 2) Duke was also supposed to build a sidewalk in front
> recently expanded and renovated Washington-Duke Hotel
> on Cameron Blvd., a big money-maker for the non-profit
> university.
>
> While the local planning ordinance states that Duke's
> new sidewalks must have the same functionality as
> conventional sidewalks, Duke is trying to argue that
> the jogging trail fulfills this requirement.
>
> Some must wonder how a dirt trail covered with mulch
> that goes back into the woods is the same thing as a
> paved, all-weather, pedestrian-friendly sidewalk along
> Cameron Blvd.
>
> 3) Duke is trying to argue that the gravel trail
> around the inside of the East Campus wall serves the
> same function as a sidewalk and that therefore, Duke
> shouldn't have to build sidewalks around East Campus.
>
>
> While the gravel trail inside the East Campus wall
> might be suitable for joggers and dog walkers, it is
> not the same as a sidewalk designed to facilitate
> pedestrian traffic. Does Duke seriously expect a
> pedestrian -- a parent pushing a baby stroller -- to
> climb over the wall at the corner in order to walk
> along Buchanan, Markham, Broad, or Swift?
>
> Finally, with regards to the Central Campus
> redevelopment, concerned neighbors have asked Duke
> several times to pay special attention to the northern
> pedestrian portals at Anderson St and at Ninth Street.
> Duke officials have assured us they will attend to
> these matters -- assurances that are called into
> question as Duke's recent efforts to avoid including
> adequate, appropriate sidewalks in their site plans
> come to light.
>
> Instead of trying to save money, Duke should create a
> safer environment for students, visitors, fans and
> neighbors. Instead of scaling back their commitments
> to sidewalks, Duke should be working even harder to
> build better, pedestrian-friendly bridges with Durham.
>
>
> thank you so much,
> John Schelp
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 11:46:02 -0400
> From: Barry Ragin <bragin at nc.rr.com>
> Subject: Re: INC NEWS - [durhambikeandped] Two more pedestrians hit
> (one on LaSalle, one at Broad & Perry)
> To: durhambikeandped at yahoogroups.com, pac2 at yahoogroups.com,
> inc-list at DurhamINC.org
> Message-ID: <451FE2BA.1000908 at nc.rr.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> John, that's the most horrific story i've heard this year.
>
> unfortunately, all of the traffic calming/pedestrian safety measures
in
> the world will not be able to protect people from someone whose
respect
> for the lives of their fellow humans has sunk to such criminal levels.
>
> i wish Caitlin a complete recovery.
>
> i hope the law enforcement/criminal justice system is able to catch
the
> person who did this and prosecute them fully. and anyone who knows
> anything about this (and i'm sure that there's at least one other
person
>
> beside the driver who knows) needs to step forward.
>
> Barry Ragin
>
> John Schelp wrote:
>
>>Hit-and-run driver leaves woman with critical
>>injuries: Recent Duke grad one of two to be hit in
>>under 24 hours
>>Herald-Sun, 1 October 2006
>>
>>A recent Duke University graduate was critically
>>injured when she was hit by a car late Friday on South
>>LaSalle Street near McQueen Drive, according to
>>police.
>>
>>The vehicle left the scene without stopping, police
>>said.
>>
>>According to police, the accident happened at 11:53
>>p.m. in front of the Belmont Apartments. Caitlin
>>Donnelly, 22, from Towaco, N.J., who graduated from
>>Duke in May, was waiting for a taxi cab and crossed
>>the street to check on a taxi that had just pulled up.
>>After Donnelly learned that it was not the cab she had
>>called, she turned to go back across LaSalle Street.
>>
>>As she was crossing the street, Donnelly was struck by
>>a northbound car that had its headlights off,
>>according to police. The driver made no attempt to
>>brake and did not stop after the collision, according
>>to investigators. The vehicle was described as a
>>dark-colored sedan, possibly a Honda or Nissan. The
>>vehicle had damage to the front windshield and was
>>missing the left side mirror. Witnesses could provide
>>no description of the driver.
>>
>>Donnelly was taken to Duke University Hospital for
>>treatment of severe head injuries, police said.
>>
>>Anyone with information about the accident is asked to
>>call Durham Police Investigator M.H. Goodwin at (919)
>>560-4314 or CrimeStoppers at (919) 683-1200.
>>CrimeStoppers pays cash rewards for information
>>leading to arrests in felony cases, and callers do not
>>have to identify themselves.
>>
>>Friday's incident was not the only time a pedestrian
>>was struck in Durham in a 24-hour period.
>>
>>Around 3 p.m. on Saturday, a pedestrian was struck in
>>the crosswalk at Broad and Perry streets, the same
>>place 28-year-old Erin Kuhns was struck, dragged and
>>partially run over by a Cadillac Escalade on Aug. 11.
>>In that incident, the vehicle's rear wheel ran over
>>Kuhns' arm and shoulder and grazed her neck, leaving a
>>scar.
>>
>>The young woman struck Saturday did not appear to be
>>seriously injured.
>>
>>City officials plan to ask the state Department of
>>Transportation for a signal at the Broad and Perry
>>street intersection.
>>
>>Donnelly remained in critical condition Saturday
>>evening.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> INC-list mailing list
> INC-list at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
>
> End of INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 1
> ***************************************
> _______________________________________________
> INC-list mailing list
> INC-list at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
>
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
INC-list mailing list
INC-list at rtpnet.org
http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
End of INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 6
***************************************
More information about the INC-list
mailing list