By Kirk Ross, Staff Writer
CARRBORO — After a public hearing Tuesday night at Town Hall in which more than a dozen residents along the Smith Level Road corridor expressed their strong opposition to a new widening plan for the road, Carrboro Mayor Mark Chilton recognized himself and gave a sometimes-passionate plea for the plan along with several testy retorts to some of the charges residents made about the project.
Chilton, who bounded to the podium in support of the project after it was pointed out no one had spoken in support of it, said he believes the compromise for a two-lane road with bike lanes and sidewalks is likely a now-or-never deal for the town to improve the road.
Chilton acknowledged his willingness to compromise last year on a possible four-lane design – he was the lone “yes†vote for the plan, which was defeated 6 to 1 – but said he has been adamant with state Department of Transportation officials since then that the town would not accept a four-lane road.
The latest plan, Chilton said, came after he had a tense exchange last year with DOT Chief Operating Officer Jim Trogdon at a conference in Charlotte. Trogdon had been explaining to a group of mayors how the DOT was trying to be more responsive to communities’ priorities and Chilton cited the stalled Smith Level plan and the DOT’s unwillingness to compromise in response.
Chilton said a few months after the exchange, he was invited to a meeting in Raleigh where he was shown three more four-lane plans and a two-lane plan similar to the one before the board.
In making his case Tuesday night, Chilton explained the process for allocating various types of transportation funding and said if the town rejected the plan it would likely never be able to afford to build the sidewalks and bike lanes on its own.
“[DOT officials] have come a hell of a long way,†Chilton said. “It would be a tremendous mistake to throw the baby out with the bathwater.†The town, he said, has been waiting on the bike lanes and sidewalks for more than two decades.
Prior to Chilton’s comments, several residents said they believed the DOT really wants to build a four-lane road, citing DOT planners who contend that they believe a wider road will one day be needed. Part of the compromise between the town and DOT allows for the state to acquire enough right-of-way to eventually widen the road to four lanes. DOT officials have said they would not add lanes unless the town asked it to do so.
Gregg Dito, who said he had lived in the area around Smith Level Road for 17 years, said because of that he did not believe the road would stay two lanes.
“This is a wolf in sheep’s clothing,†he said.
Pierre Monnet said it doesn’t make sense for the road’s right-of-way to be wide enough for four lanes.
“Who needs a four-lane road for a quarter-mile length,†he said.
Much of the opposition expressed on the new design came from residents in the Berryhill neighborhood. The road’s design calls for a median that would prevent a left turn onto Smith Level Road out of the neighborhood at Willow Oak Lane. Berryhill residents said they believe the added number of cars traveling through the neighborhood to BPW Club Road would be unsafe.
Linda Levitch said the change doesn’t make sense.
“Almost everybody, when they leave the neighborhood, heads north toward Carrboro,†she said.
After Chilton’s testimony, the board took up next steps on the plan. Alderman Jacquie Gist, who has long opposed the various widening plans, said she was swayed by the mayor’s appeal.
She said since much of the traffic on Smith Level Road is local traffic, the community should take some responsibility for the DOT’s insistence that it be wider. “We have to take some responsibility,†she said. “Most of the traffic congestion is people driving their kids to school.â€
The board continued the public hearing until June 1 and asked for a review of the project by the town’s Transportation Advisory Board, as well as accident-report and traffic information on the Berryhill neighborhood. Board members also asked for a review of how many trees along the route would need to be removed.
Some points of omission in this report:
1. The new design, for 2-lanes vs 4-lanes, makes up for the missing lanes with a median, making the “new” footprint the same size as the previous design. There were several people speaking who addressed the safety issue associated with the median, specifically the tendency of drivers to speed up when medians are present.
2. The mayor claimed that if we don’t have sidewalks, people in the Berryhill neighborhood will not be able to walk their children to FPG. Based on the current design for the Morgan Creek Greenway, residents of Berryhill would be accessing the greenway farther back on the trail rather than walking out to Smith Level Road to make the connection. The Greenway will go under the road so that pedestrians and bicyclists do not need to negotiate traffic on SLR.
3. The only destination points on the section of SLR under consideration are schools. In order for the sidewalks and/0r bike lanes to reduce the use of cars to take and pick up kids from schools, the school board will need to declare the area from Culbreth Road to Rock Haven Road as a walk zone. With the last design, the school board said they would not make that declaration due to the 1) excessive width of the proposed road design, and 2) their belief that the traffic roundabout privileges vehicular movement over pedestrian movement. Does we really want to invest $5.5 million dollars to add sidewalks and bike lanes when the only destination won’t be walkable for the targeted population? We need to know what the school board is going to do before providing any feedback to DOT on that section of the design.
4. After the public comments were made, Dan Coleman correctly pointed out that the concerns with the section of the design from Culbreth Road to the bridge are based on the amount of land that will need to be taken in order to add the median along with those features desired by local residents (sidewalks and bike lanes). He suggested that DOT could acquire the right away for future use without expanding the footprint of the road by building the median. It’s my understanding that if this compromise approach was pursued–acquiring the right of way but not building on it–there might be more local support by neighbhors.
There are a number of elements of the new SLR plan that may not be to our liking. I think we must weigh the significant improvements against the liabilities. But we must also understand that the current situation is simply terrible for pedestrians and cyclists. Many people have given up on SLR and consider it too dangerous without a car (have you tried walking this stretch recently, Terri?). The new plan places the sidewalks a good distance from the roadway, which would make it much safer for pedestrians (currently there is nothing but broken pavement and weeds).
I don’t know if it’s possible, but it would be great to maintain the tree cover and still keep the sidewalks removed from the roadway.
Designated walk zones may end up causing people to drive more not less, because there is no school bus service in walk zones (no bus so parents drive instead of walking or riding bikes). Regardless of the designation, convenience and perceived safety are some of the biggest issues to confront when getting parents to not drive their kids to school. And I believe the SLR project would be a huge boost in terms of pedestrian and cyclist safety. Interested in more? Come join the Safe Routes to School meeting, 7pm, May 3rd, Carrboro Elementary cafeteria.
Thank you, Charlie Hileman (Carrboro Transportation Board Chair)
Bike lanes are inappropriate for Smith Level Road.
The North Carolina Bicycle Facilities Planning And Design Guidelines say:
“Bike lanes are not advisable on long, downgrades of 4 percent or more…â€
The grade on Smith Level Road is about double that at nearly 8 percent. On that grade, bicycle speed can be 35 miles per hour, so operating in a space as wide as a sidewalk is contraindicated. A slightly wider bike lane is no help. On steep descents bicyclists should use the full width of a normal traffic lane.
The NCDOT Driver’s Manual says,
“Bicyclists usually ride on the right side of the lane, but are entitled to the use of a full lane.â€
Compounding the problem of high speed descending is the inescapable fact of ubiquitous debris in bike lanes. Debris collects in areas motor vehicles avoid. Examination of any bike lane or shoulder shows this to be the case.
The conflicts bike lanes create at intersections is acknowledged by ending them before the proposed roundabout and the Bypass in the proposed cross section. Normal travel lanes do not create such difficulties.
There are also unintended legal and social problems associated with bike lanes. For example, normal roads do not add liability to governments, unlike bike lanes that violate published design standards.
Rather than pursuing a paradigm of separating bicycle drivers on Smith Level Road (and elsewhere, for that matter) and actually reducing their space with a bike lane, a paradigm of integration should be instituted. Four narrow, 10’ wide lanes would ease motor traffic density while being just 10’ wider overall than the proposed bike lane cross section. Motorists using the right lane would change lanes to pass bicyclists. In essence, the few bicyclists willing to tackle the steep hill would have a debris free 10’ wide “bike lane.â€
Signs would be instructive. The new R4-11 BIKES MAY USE FULL LANE regulatory sign would visibly codify bicyclists’ inherent equal rights. On I-40 there are warning signs saying SLOW MOVING SCHOOL BUSES USE THIS HIGHWAY NEXT 15 MILES. A similar yellow sign saying BICYCLES AND BUSES USE THIS ROADWAY would provide a useful message. Either sign could have a supplemental white regulatory plaque CHANGE LANES TO PASS to signal proper expected behavior. The Shared Lane Marking could be placed in the center of the outside lanes.
hi guys this is as far back as i can remember what you all have been asking for i was on the transportation advisory when it finally got to the point the first time it was a 4 lane highwy i would like you all to consider how people with disabilities get around. a sidewalks and a bike lanes would make them feel safer. think not about your selves but think about the bigger picture.please ellen