INC NEWS - Input from community members & city staff on Duke's Pedestrian Plan

[John Schelp]

Dear neighbor, 

Below is a sample of seven letters from the community
on Duke's Pedestrian Plan. You may find the 8-point
memo from City transportation staff of particular
interest.

I'm posting these materials to provide more
information and perspective -- to broaden the
discussion. 

Word is that today's Joint City-County Planning
meeting involved "extensive conversation" on the
pedestrian plan submitted by Duke. :)

Still haven't heard back from Michael Palmer about my
request that Duke re-submit its pedestrian plan with
more sidewalks and connectivity... will let you know.

have a great day,
John Schelp

****

Hello, folks,

It's come to my attention that Duke has submitted its
pedestrian plan for campus with a large number of the
most important pedestrian improvements excluded from
it.  I don't want to make a big fuss about this, but
given the horrific accidents we've been seeing this
year around Duke, most notably the hit-and-run on
LaSalle that's left a recent alumnae in critical
condition, this seems downright boneheaded and
insensitive.  Duke has a serious problem right now
with pedestrian connectivity to the surrounding
neighborhoods, and cutting back on its pedestrian plan
is the wrong way to go.

Please kindly request that they restore pedestrian
improvements like the Cameron sidewalk (where *I*
nearly hit someone walking in the street after 
the Rolling Stones concert last year) and the Markham
Ave. sidewalk.  If they refuse, please repeat the
kindly request with more vigor.

Thank you,
Michael

****

My question is this, who does our Planning Director
work for, Duke University, or Durham, which has
adopted a Unified Development Ordinance with very
explicit functional requirements for an alternative
pedestrian plan?

May our professional and highly competent DRB "staff"
not be overruled or swayed by such "leadership" .

Pete

****

Dear Durham City Council and County Commissioners,

I am writing to request that Duke University be
required to re-submit its pedestrian plan and provide
more connectivity to streets surrounding the campus
area.  The plan recently submitted by Duke officials
is unacceptable, with gaps throughout and lack of
service to too many pedestrians.

As it stands, Duke seems to ignore the pedestrian
walking for transportation purposes and assumes that
either 1) every pedestrian that the university needs
to serve will be using walkways within the campus
bubble, completely isolated from the surrounding
community or 2) pedestrian activity off-campus is
solely recreational by nature.  

This is very unfortunate for both Duke and Durham,
given that so many students and staff live within a
walkable 1-3 mile vicinity of campus and strongly
desire a better pedestrian environment.  Duke's recent
pedestrian plan will be inadequate to serve the many
pedestrians walking to/from and around campus,
especially with the sidewalk gaps on Anderson, Duke
University Rd and Cameron Blvd.  

I believe that Duke University, as it expands its 
built environment, should be simultaneously enhancing
the walking environment on and adjacent to its
property, as other developers in Durham are required
to do per City ordinance.

Since Duke officials have said in public meetings that
connectivity is important, they will likely embrace an
opportunity to improve what they've submitted.  Please
help them re-evaluate local pedestrian needs.

Thanks for your attention to this matter,
Alison

****

Neighbors:

This may be a good time for the City to consider
creating sidewalks by extending the curb and narrowing
the streets.  In additon to preserving trees, this
will also help calm traffic.

Lorisa

****

For those interested in this issue, the Development
Review Board for Durham will be reviewing Duke's
Pedestrian Plan at their meeting on Friday morning @
8:30am in Planning Rm A of Durham City Hall. To get an
idea of what is included, you can view the Plan at 

http://www.dchcmpo.org/index.php?optionfiltered=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=17&Itemid=34

It's a bit hard to discern, when looking at the Plan,
which lines on the map(s) are sidewalks and which are
"alternative walkways", but it is an important
distinction.

Personally, I watch many wheelchair-bound citizens
using the streets because of a lack of accessible
sidewalks in Durham - both around Duke's campus and in
many other locations. I think that as Duke develops
their built environment, it is critical that they (as
any other developer would be required to do) provide
accessible sidewalks that allow for connectivity to,
from and between campus locations. Relying on
"alternative walkways" (such as around East Campus, or
along Cameron Rd) would be a great disservice to many
folks because they do not provide a flat, paved
surface and access (i.e. curb ramps) at intersections,
not to mention well-lit, visible sidewalks that people
feel safe using. 

In my former position as Bike/Pedestrian Coordinator
with the City of Durham, I received many emails and
phone calls from Duke students/staff who wanted safer,
more accessible walking/biking routes to the
University. It would be great if Duke and Durham could
partner in productive ways to make this happen.

Alison

****

>From the Dept of Transportation, City of Durham...
          
"Many required walkways are not illustrated on the
plan... Alternate walkways outside the right-of-way
must provide appropriate connectivity to existing
sidewalks in and outside the campus boundaries.  For
example, the existing walkway shown within the Duke
East campus is not accessible to existing sidewalks
along Markham Ave.   The two are separated by a stone
wall.  Worn footpaths along these public streets
clearly indicate that the existing jogging path does
not provide the same functionality as a conventional
sidewalk." 
--Wesley Parham, PE, Assistant Transportation Manager


Duke University Campus Pedestrian Plan
(Rev.9/13/06)(2nd review) (UDO)  D06-650

1. As of September 28, 2006, Transportation has not
received written responses from the applicant to its
first set of comments.   The comments provided below
are to ensure that the plan is in compliance with UDO
Sections 6.11.4.L.2, which incorporates by reference
UDO Sec. 12.4.3, which incorporates by reference UDO
Sec. 12.4.2.   This set of comments may be considered
as an update and replacement to the earlier set of
comments.   

2. Many required walkways are not illustrated on the
plan. Proposed walkways are required along both sides
of all major and minor thoroughfares and collectors.  
They are also required or both sides of all other
non-residential streets and cul-de-sacs as required in
the table shown in UDO Sec. 12.4.2.  Note that the
requirements for certain streets vary within the
urban, suburban, and compact neighborhood tiers of the
UC district as shown in the aforementioned table.  For
example, the proposed plan does not illustrate
walkways on both sides of Erwin Rd., Cameron Blvd.,
Campus Dr.,  Alexander Ave., Duke University Road,
Swift Avenue, Oregon Ave., Towerview Dr., W. Circuit
Dr., Lasalle St., etc.

3. The approved Washington Duke Inn site plan requires
the construction of a sidewalk along the south curb
line of Cameron Blvd.   This future sidewalk is not
illustrated on the Plan.        

4. In order to determine whether alternate walkways
outside the right-of-way “have the same functionality
as conventional sidewalks” (UDO Sec. 12.4.3.A), the
plan must note the width and surface type (e.g.,
concrete, asphalt, brick pavers, etc.) or typical
section for such walkways.  Mulched or graveled
jogging trails do not have the same functionality or
purpose as conventional sidewalks.  A paved surface
ensures use for a broad range of users, including the
handicapped and disabled.  It also ensures use during
inclement weather.      

5. Alternate walkways outside the right-of-way must
provide appropriate connectivity to existing sidewalks
in and outside the campus boundaries.  For example,
the existing walkway shown within the Duke East campus
is not accessible to existing sidewalks along Markham
Ave.   The two are separated by a stone wall.  Worn
footpaths along these public streets clearly indicate
that the existing jogging path does not provide the
same functionality as a conventional sidewalk.        
   

6. Add the following note: “Subsequent modifications
to the campus may require amendments to this plan to
reflect those changes.  This Plan will be amended from
time-to-time to reflect these changes.”

7. A pedestrian walkway may be approved with a reduced
level of functionality only when the DRB determines
that the construction of a conventional sidewalk
within the right-of-way is impractical due to
impending road widening or other physical limitations.
  If the applicant requests the approval of pathways
with a reduced level of functionality, each of these
locations must be identified by the applicant for a
field review by the City’s Public Works Department.   

8. Plan corrections and revisions will require
additional review.

H. Wesley Parham, PE
Assistant Transportation Manager
City of Durham

****

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

****