Comments on: Letters to the Editor: 10/4/07 http://www.carrborocitizen.com/main/2007/10/04/letters-to-the-editor-10407/ Serving Carrboro and Surrounding Communities Fri, 21 Nov 2008 08:43:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Katrina http://www.carrborocitizen.com/main/2007/10/04/letters-to-the-editor-10407/#comment-10248 Katrina Fri, 12 Oct 2007 03:24:13 +0000 http://www.carrborocitizen.com/main/2007/10/04/letters-to-the-editor-10407/#comment-10248 Okay, I'll bite. I don't really think that the spirit of connectivity is enhanced by having two connectors that essentially feed exactly the same point on Rogers Rd, furthermore, the planning board voted last Thursday to ask UNC to connect Carolina Commons to Camden, against UNC's desire for a cul de sac at the end of Caymore. Camden is better in terms of diversifying connectivity ( because it adds a north south connector to compliment Tally Ho's east west connector from Colleton Crossing), but somewhat undesirable because it requires building a road in Carrboro's designated conservation areas, and well inside the 100 year flood plain. The real issue at hand is the fact that Colleton Crossing is just to much density to put at the end of a minor, state-owned road. I would not support a Colleton Crossing CUP which had more than 20 homes, since currently there is no 2nd connector. The Carolina Commons project is behind Colleton in progress, so the most prudent course of action would be to limit the number of residences at Colleton Crossing and include a provision that the developer will be liable for a minimum of 5 years if any Tally Ho residents septic system fails. Like Pacifica, the developer should be required to upgrade the roads to include sidewalks etc. bringing Tally Ho up to connector rd status, likewise UNC should be required to upgrade Claymore if they desire to connect with more density than the surrounding neighorhood roads are equipped to handle. For the record, traffic calming is not an option in the annexed neighborhoods, as DOT owns our roads, and does not provide traffic calming measures. There are no plans for Carrboro to annex the roads until at least 2012 per Chuck Edwards at NCDOT. Okay, I’ll bite. I don’t really think that the spirit of connectivity is enhanced by having two connectors that essentially feed exactly the same point on Rogers Rd, furthermore, the planning board voted last Thursday to ask UNC to connect Carolina Commons to Camden, against UNC’s desire for a cul de sac at the end of Caymore. Camden is better in terms of diversifying connectivity ( because it adds a north south connector to compliment Tally Ho’s east west connector from Colleton Crossing), but somewhat undesirable because it requires building a road in Carrboro’s designated conservation areas, and well inside the 100 year flood plain.

The real issue at hand is the fact that Colleton Crossing is just to much density to put at the end of a minor, state-owned road.

I would not support a Colleton Crossing CUP which had more than 20 homes, since currently there is no 2nd connector. The Carolina Commons project is behind Colleton in progress, so the most prudent course of action would be to limit the number of residences at Colleton Crossing and include a provision that the developer will be liable for a minimum of 5 years if any Tally Ho residents septic system fails.

Like Pacifica, the developer should be required to upgrade the roads to include sidewalks etc. bringing Tally Ho up to connector rd status, likewise UNC should be required to upgrade Claymore if they desire to connect with more density than the surrounding neighorhood roads are equipped to handle.

For the record, traffic calming is not an option in the annexed neighborhoods, as DOT owns our roads, and does not provide traffic calming measures. There are no plans for Carrboro to annex the roads until at least 2012 per Chuck Edwards at NCDOT.

]]> By: Charles Hileman http://www.carrborocitizen.com/main/2007/10/04/letters-to-the-editor-10407/#comment-9339 Charles Hileman Fri, 05 Oct 2007 13:37:34 +0000 http://www.carrborocitizen.com/main/2007/10/04/letters-to-the-editor-10407/#comment-9339 Updated version - ignore previous message: How do we know if the Carrboro alderman candidates will represent the interests of the town and not just their neighborhoods? There is an excellent test case for the candidates from the Highlands neighborhood, Brian Voyce, Katrina Ryan and Sharon Cook. Claymore Road runs directly through the Highlands, and two developments are planned adjacent to the Highland where Claymore ends. To provide access and connectivity, it has been proposed that Claymore be continued to connect with Reynard and Tallyho Roads to the north. Voyce and Ryan have publicly expressed their strong opposition to opening up Claymore to vehicular traffic, citing the narrow roadway, lack of sidewalks and safety of children. Claymore is essentially a cul-de-sac now, so opening it up to traffic could adversely affect their neighborhood. But if Claymore stays closed where would all the new traffic go? The only other option is Reynard and Tallyho. These roads are also narrow and new residents would travel much further than the route through Claymore (for a video comparison see http://millboro.com/roads). As a member of the Transportation Advisory Board, I have heard from Tallyho residents who would like to open up both Claymore and Reynard/Tallyho, so that the traffic burden is shared between both neighborhoods. If these developments go forward, would Voyce, Ryan or Cook support opening up Claymore Road to avoiding pushing all the burden on to their neighbors to the north? Would they consider traffic calming measures on Claymore to mitigate the impact? How would they balance their own interests with the town as a whole? Updated version - ignore previous message:

How do we know if the Carrboro alderman candidates will represent the interests of the town and not just their neighborhoods? There is an excellent test case for the candidates from the Highlands neighborhood, Brian Voyce, Katrina Ryan and Sharon Cook. Claymore Road runs directly through the Highlands, and two developments are planned adjacent to the Highland where Claymore ends. To provide access and connectivity, it has been proposed that Claymore be continued to connect with Reynard and Tallyho Roads to the north. Voyce and Ryan have publicly expressed their strong opposition to opening up Claymore to vehicular traffic, citing the narrow roadway, lack of sidewalks and safety of children.

Claymore is essentially a cul-de-sac now, so opening it up to traffic could adversely affect their neighborhood. But if Claymore stays closed where would all the new traffic go? The only other option is Reynard and Tallyho. These roads are also narrow and new residents would travel much further than the route through Claymore (for a video comparison see http://millboro.com/roads).

As a member of the Transportation Advisory Board, I have heard from Tallyho residents who would like to open up both Claymore and Reynard/Tallyho, so that the traffic burden is shared between both neighborhoods. If these developments go forward, would Voyce, Ryan or Cook support opening up Claymore Road to avoiding pushing all the burden on to their neighbors to the north? Would they consider traffic calming measures on Claymore to mitigate the impact? How would they balance their own interests with the town as a whole?

]]>