INC NEWS - INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 6
Deb Christie
dchristie1 at nc.rr.com
Mon Oct 2 22:45:37 EDT 2006
Frank, you convince me. It would be nice if Duke would agree to breaks in
the walls to permit public access to the path.
Deb Christie
----- Original Message -----
From: "Duke, Frank" <Frank.Duke at durhamnc.gov>
To: <inc-list at rtpnet.org>
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: INC NEWS - INC-list Digest, Vol 22, Issue 6
> 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
> ***************************************
> _______________________________________________
> INC-list mailing list
> INC-list at rtpnet.org
> http://lists.deltaforce.net/mailman/listinfo/inc-list
More information about the INC-list
mailing list