Facebook Post (David Simonton, 6/25/2017)

COUNTERPOINT

Currie Mixon is my across-the-street neighbor, and the petitioner’s brother-in-law. He recently commented on my continuing effort to shine a light on what transpired on Lorimer Road in a post on the Nextdoor Avent West website.

Mixon began his assessment by referring to resident Jeff Essic’s post on the site. Here is Jeff’s concluding paragraph:

“[Those] are some of the reasons why there are folks along the street against the project and why you will probably continue to hear about it until there is at least some acknowledgement that yes, the petition process was flawed, and some meaningful assurance from the city on a lower-impact design.”

Currie’s comment:

“Regarding Jeff Essic’s last paragraph, I’d say it’s impossible to say how much less raving Mr. Simonton would do with any acknowledgement or change. He’s been raving mad about the prospect of a sidewalk from the beginning, and I am of the opinion (you can see for yourself if he ever posts about anything else, he has a hobby website dedicated to opposition to this project, and now FB page…) that his opposition to this project is one that defines him in his eyes.”

I wish that a fraction of the energy spent dividing and conquering this once united neighborhood had been spent for the good of all who live here.

It didn’t have to end up this way. There could have been/should have been a positive, less fraught outcome. That choice was available to the petitioner, her sister and her sister’s husband, but they decided to take another route; with, sadly, the City’s approval.

.  .  .

Comment

Edward F Gehringer:  I generally like sidewalks and have no personal stake in this project, but I would like to commend Mr. Simonton for taking the time to gather evidence and bring it to the attention of the community. That is exactly what citizens should be doing … adducing more evidence so that better decisions can be made. Calling someone “raving mad” and saying that the issue is his “hobby” does nothing to advance harmony or improve decision-making. This issue, like all others, should be settled on its merits, not by trying to shout down minority views.

.  .  .  .  .  .

Donna Burford: The Voice of the People?

“I have been door to door since November of last year talking to almost everyone on this street to see how they felt about a project like this and got a overwhelming positive response. I don’t think you understand that this [is] NOT MY project. This is a Lorimer Rd. project, I was just asked to speak on behalf of the people on Lorimer that obviously didn’t want to be bullied by people like yourself. I don’t know where these people get the idea that I am making them do anything with their property.”

—from Donna Burford’s Facebook post, 9/3/2015

The 1200 Block of Lorimer Rd (North)

 

n-lorimer-II.jpg

On December 1, 2015, a second citizen’s petition was submitted to the Raleigh City Council requesting that the 1200 block of Lorimer Road (above) be removed from the original petition/project.

This petition read:

We, the undersigned property owners of the 1200 block of Lorimer Road, petition the City of Raleigh to remove our block from Resolution (2015) 141, as our block was included in a Property Owner Initiative Petition begun in May 2014 for road construction without our knowledge and without our consent by someone who is not a property owner. We request the opportunity to educate ourselves and learn more about improvement options included in the City of Raleigh Street and Sidewalk Improvement Policy [PDF] as well as the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, so that we may submit our own petition which more accurately reflects the true will of the property owners.

The petition was signed by 10 of the 14 property owners who live on this block. And yet, despite a request by 71% of residents, City Council members rejected the request although the petition document itself states that parts of streets (as opposed to whole streets, as the original petition called for) can be improved:

 

Screen Shot 2016-04-17 at 1.31.10 PM.png

.  .  .  .  .  .

from Facebook:

Shannon BellezzaBut the vocal minority is the majority on your block. Why wasn’t the petition redrawn to exempt the 1200 block?

Like · 1 · September 9, 2015 at 3:30pm · Edited

 

Sharon Moll MixonWhy wasn’t the petition withdrawn to exempt the 1200 block of Lorimer Road? Because no one asked us to do that*. I never received one phone call, text message, or knock on my door. The only correspondence that Donna got was from Jan that CC’d her on a letter. I was taking her concerns to heart by asking the City Council to consider putting the sidewalk on the east side instead of the west side.

Like · September 10, 2015 at 2:44am

 

Sharon Moll MixonWe had the petition in hand until the deadline that it needed to be submitted**. Even after we submitted it there may have been a chance of talking to Kay Crowder with whatever compromise the 1200 block would come up with***. Standing in front of the City Council as a United neighborhood would have gone a lot further in my opinion.

Like · September 10, 2015 at 2:52am

When 1200-block residents did ask, formally, by submitting their own petition to the City Council, the request was rejected.
** In fact, the petition was turned in to the Public Works Department on May 4, 2015, two weeks before it was due.
*** When Kay Crowder was asked directly by a resident at an October 2015 Neighborhood Meeting, “Why didn’t the Council consider splitting out the north end of Lorimer from the petition?” Mrs. Crowder’s (non-)answer was: “The City wants to do whole streets, whole sections at once. Microgaps, where sidewalks stop in the middle of the block, are only trouble to fix later. The City is trying to fix existing ones, and not create any more.” —A microgap is “a missing section of sidewalk anywhere from 25 feet to 300 feet long and often involves a single property owner not wanting a sidewalk crossing in front of his or her property.”

.  .  .  .  .  .

Resident Concerns

Sharon Moll Mixon created a poll, September 12, 2015:

Resident Concerns.png

Comments:

Don Munn Thank you for asking. I actually started a document in the files area, but I’ll gladly transfer my info to the question provided… Perhaps we should not leave it to chance, I’ll add a “None” to make sure everyone gets counted if possible….

Like · September 12, 2015 at 12:29am · Edited

Erin Salmon Thank you, Sharon for doing this.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:01am

Erin Salmon In my list of bullet points, I also had: 1)increase in crime with increased foot traffic; 2)pedestrian AND cyclist safety; 3) pros/cons of minor residential road vs. residential road designation, 4) bus stop location

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:21am

Sam Bellezza I am not sure that sidewalks will bring in increase in foot traffic or crime.

Like · 1 · September 12, 2015 at 7:47am

Erin Salmon I don’t know either. I have been in touch with two of our local police officers, Officer Hathaway and Officer Clarke, to find out more about the level of crime in our neighborhood in order to have some assessments.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:38pm

Facebook Posts – September 17-18, 2015

Currie Mixon

September 17, 2015

We have looked into it and have again been told by the City that the only way the sidewalk petition, as passed by the City Council, can be retracted is if 100% of those owners that signed it retract their signature. Does anyone else have a different understanding of the state of this petition?

I think it is great that we have had so much communication about the specific concerns that our neighbors have. Many of them we share. I also hope that we feel more unified by these communications than we are made divided. However, the way it seems to me, there is not really any feasible way to dramatically change what was passed other than design details at this point. I think it’s absolutely worthwhile for us to continue to voice our opinions to the City, unified where we can be, but I also want everyone to have realistic expectations and the information that I have about this project.

Comments

Barbara ScottThank you for conveying what you have learned so clearly.

Like · 1 · September 17, 2015 at 11:04am
Erin SalmonI have been trying to find all the possibilities around a rehearing from calling and emailing the city, as well as using the city’s website. You have been able to get more information than I. Could you tell me who you communicated with directly?
Like · September 17, 2015 at 11:27am · Edited
Currie MixonSharon talked to Donetta Powell.
Like · September 17, 2015 at 1:28pm

Erin SalmonI have also called the Transporation Planning Manager of the city to find out the real process and specific policies around how much input residents have during the design phase and how we make sure our concerns are heard. I echo another sentiment you voiced in a previous post, Currie. My trust in the political process, as well as the city holding to its word of concern for the environment and for protecting established neighborhoods is shaken from this petition specifically.

Like · September 17, 2015 at 11:30am · Edited

Currie MixonI really do find it funny that it seems like you are saying that the petition caused the hard feelings. The petition was the process by which the City sees what kind of support there is for a project. It is not directed at making you upset, David. And should you choose to get upset about it after it was decided, that is unfortunate. But if you feel you are justified in seeking blame, I would challenge you to seek a different perspective.
 Like · September 17, 2015 at 1:37pm
Ryan BarnumSo is going door to door asking all of the people that signed the petition to retract their signatures, and explain that we are all going to work together to come up with a better plan that appeases everybody, out of the question? I think people, given the opportunity to understand the situation and the turmoil this has caused, and knowing it’s not just going to be tossed away completely, would be willing to consider it. I think trying that instead of relying on the speculation that the designers MIGHT work with the homeowners is a better plan.
 Like · 3 · September 17, 2015 at 7:03pm
Erin SalmonThat is exactly what I have been working on, and so far I have spoken directly with 11 out of the 28 signers of the petition to consider just what you have proposed, Ryan. That is also why I organized the meeting for Monday. To fully inform the street and the Kentwood – Bushy Branch Creek neighborhood what our collective options are to address the many needs and concerns that we have.
 Like · 2 · September 17, 2015 at 9:54pm
Currie MixonI can’t help but be skeptical here. It seems like the implication is that the neighborhood is being asked to trust that a new petition for a sidewalk will be developed and spearheaded by someone who does not think a sidewalk is right for the neighborhood. Am I misunderstanding?
 Like · September 18, 2015 at 11:11am
Barbara ScottI think where the city’s petition process breaks down is that it allows anyone with a vested interest in the outcome, one way or another, to present a petition and ask people to sign it. The process would be unbiased if a specialist with no interest in the outcome presented the petition. Someone knowledgeable about the petitioning and design processes and relevant city code. And someone who can answer each person’s questions about the project without personal bias.
 Like · 1 · September 19, 2015 at 9:07am · Edited
 Barbara Scott – So one constructive piece of action for me is to write the city council and tell them that in a city this big with this many competing interests, their investment in hiring a petition specialist might save them a lot of headaches. I imagine that most sidewalk petitions end up with some people feeling disenfranchised and others feeling blamed for getting involved.
Like · September 19, 2015 at 9:14am
Ryan BarnumI understand your skepticism here Currie. I do believe however that there is very little trust in the city doing what’s best for this neighborhood. I have way more trust in the people living here coming together on this matter to compromise and put together a comprehensive plan that is best for the neighborhood and all of us living here. This is something that could be spearheaded not by one anti-sidewalk person, but the collective community as a whole. I think that’s a much better approach than leaving it all to chance and speculation. We have an opportunity now to reverse this and make it right, but that window is closing and I would rather work together with everybody here, than feel like we are all butting heads and harboring resentment towards one another.
 Like · 3 · September 18, 2015 at 11:50am

Shannon BellezzaI agree, Ryan. Currie Mixon, I would say that it is a good indication that you should trust the neighbors that a good deal of the discussion here has focused on alternative sidewalk plans, maybe more so than alternative-to-sidewalk plans. Those who may not have wanted a sidewalk have entertained the possibility of alternative sidewalk plans and have shown that they are open to compromise. I feel that there have been many alternatives suggested (sidewalk and non-sidewalk alternatives) that would be in keeping with the character and aesthetic of the neighborhood.

Like · 2 · September 18, 2015 at 12:17pm · Edited

 

Continue reading

Facebook Posts – September 15, 2015

Currie Mixon

September 15, 2015

For those opposed to the sidewalk petition that passed with ~70% of the property owners on Lorimer Rd., what would a sidewalk petition look like that you would sign?

Comments

Currie Mixon – The answer to this would look like, “I would sign a petition for a sidewalk if…”

Like · 1 · September 15, 2015 at 2:49pm

Erin Salmon – I would start with a petition for an asphalt sidewalk on the east side of the road. I would also petition for two stop signs on Lorimer. One when heading north at Merwin, and one when heading south at Onslow. i would also petition for the bus stop to exist at this old location, so that the crosswalk would get repainted and signage added. I kniw you did not ask, but to address the curb and gutter aspect, I would sign a petition to address the ditches directly as a stormwater concern. I can’t remember if I posted a link to the city’s stormwater management page, but the city actually grants funding specifically to help neighborhoods address stormwater and erosion issues.

Like · 2 · September 15, 2015 at 5:34pm

Erin Salmon – I would also sign a petition for No Thru Trucks signs.

Like · 3 · September 15, 2015 at 5:35pm · Edited

Erin Salmon – I have a question also: does safe walkability on our road have to look like a sidewalk?

Like · 1 · September 15, 2015 at 5:59pm

Shannon Bellezza – Though I would not be signing anything, I would suggest minimum setbacks or anything else to minimize property encroachment. Also, not widening the road. Something that has not been brought up is that it is uncertain whether the Melbourne Rd. ramps will remain open when the 440 widening takes place. Should these ramps close, many more people will be using the Western Blvd ramps. This will contribute to more cut-through traffic. A wider road would not only make Lorimer more desirable as the cut-through route of choice, but I suspect it would cause these people to drive faster than they would on a small neighborhood road.

Like · 2 · September 15, 2015 at 6:22pm · Edited

Shannon Bellezza – Also, I would love a 4-way stop at the intersection of Onslow and Lorimer. Turning from my side of Onslow onto Lorimer is tricky due to the curve and hill. You really can’t see the cars on Lorimer until they’re right up on you (and many of them tend to drive down the center of the road rather than on either side).

Like · September 15, 2015 at 6:08pm

Jeff Essic – An asphalt trail on the east side, or whichever side we could mutually agree on, would be fine with me. Even better, though, in my opinion, would be a natural trail that we as neighbors work to construct and maintain. Where it runs, whether east side or west, whether along our front yards or perhaps in the back, we would have to discuss. I would be open to consider any routing on my lot. And I would be very willing to help with buying materials and doing work anywhere needed. I think it would give our neighborhood a uniqueness and distinction that others would envy. Now, someone might say, “but what about the stormwater”… well as it is, the city wants to spend $1.7million with the blink of an eye on a project that does nothing to improve stormwater, but instead only hides it from our view and makes it worse further downstream. What if instead we work with the city to spend such money on some infrastructure that will actually decrease the amount of water running into Bushy Creek? Folks, we are in the backyard of NCSU where there are a plethora of faculty and students who would love to have the opportunity to use our neighborhood as a proving ground for studying and demonstrating how older development can be retrofit for water quality protection.

Like · 6 · September 16, 2015 at 9:57am

Currie Mixon – Just curious, why is an asphalt trail preferred to concrete?

Like · September 16, 2015 at 10:02am

Jeff Essic – not speaking for Erin Salmon but I think, asphalt can be laid in a less disruptive manner. You don’t see concrete trails in parks, for example.

Like · 1 · September 16, 2015 at 10:11am

Erin Salmon – Greenway trails appeal to me more than sidewalks. When I currently walk down our street, it feels like a double wide greenway. I would sign a petition to have the road resurfaced, definitely.

Like · September 16, 2015 at 9:58pm

Currie Mixon – I try to bike to work as much as is feasible, so I traverse several paths often. This sidewalk/path is one that I travel on most days when I bike home. The ~1 inch mounds come from roots and those come from the nearby pine trees. Our driveway is another dramatic example of the frailty of an asphalt pathway.

Currie Mixon's photo.
Like · September 18, 2015 at 1:59pm

Ryan Barnum – In all fairness, this happens to concrete sidewalks too. It doesn’t show up like a series of 1″ bumps like this shows, but it pushes the square section of concrete upward, or just cracks the concrete. If you walk down Gorman towards Avent Ferry from Kaplan you see a lot of it.

Like · 1 · September 18, 2015 at 3:32pm

Erin Salmon – The sidewalk near the gas station on the corner of Kent and Western is another example of tree root damage to concrete sidewalks, FYI.

Like · September 18, 2015 at 4:46pm

Currie Mixon – It’s worth thinking about that if the Melbourne ramps do close and that leads to more cut-trough traffic, that’s all the more reason to have a way to get pedestrians off the road.

Like · September 16, 2015 at 10:04am

Jeff Essic – I bet stop signs at Onslow would reduce a lot of the cut-thrus. Kent/Method Roads have always had a lot of traffic because at one time, they were the only way to get to Hillsborough St. from points south before Gorman and Blue Ridge were finished in the late 80’s. I’ve been told that quite a bit of that traffic spilled over onto Lorimer and Chaney, since at one time, you could take Chaney straight across Western Blvd and avoid the stoplight altogether as long as you were willing to play frogger (this was the case up until 2002 according to google earth). I would like to hear from longer-term residents if safety was a problem during that time and if sidewalks were considered then.

Like · 1 · September 16, 2015 at 11:04am

Shannon Bellezza – But wouldn’t it make more sense to make the road less attractive for cut throughs with stop signs and keeping the road narrow?

Like · 1 · September 16, 2015 at 11:52am

 

Barbara Scott – Jeff Essic, I moved to Chaney in 1989 when you could still take Chaney straight across Western Boulevard. The traffic from Western was not quite as intense then as now, but one still had a hard time getting across Western from Chaney during any time ofSee More

Like · September 18, 2015 at 4:49pm

Barbara Scott – I don’t live on Lorimer and I appreciate the opportunity to contribute. These are some ideals. I know I’m dreaming, but thank you for the opportunity to do that. Permeable pavement for the sidewalk, such as permeable interlocking concrete pavers. Putting some kind of creative groundcover (instead of grass) in the strip that separates sidewalk from street. The plants would not require mowing and would absorb surface runoff and provide wildlife habitat. Maybe this is veering over into the stormwater design aspect of it too much, but some kind of holding pond near the creek that would filter water from any curb and gutter or water channel structures before it reaches the creek could become a focal point. The pond could be planted with native plants that tolerate wet and dry periods. The area would provide food and habitat for birds and other wildlife, and serve as a teaching tool for public schools and home schools. It could be a place for children to learn about creek habitats, water flow, water management, and all kinds of things.

Like · 3 · September 16, 2015 at 2:04pm

Barbara Scott – As I said, I’m dreaming of the ideal. But when making a $1.5 million change, why not hold an ideal in mind that inspires the practical decisions of such a project? People are going to live with what happens here for a long time after it’s done.

Like · 2 · September 16, 2015 at 2:19pm · Edited
Don Munn – I’ve often wondered if we could get folks on board for a path under the power lines and up to the church parking lot? I’d happily work on a section in my easement… might have to check I with the power company on materials, but seems like it would be doable….
Or if we want to ce together as a community and build a walkway in our yards, we would have a lot more flexibility in the elevation adjustments if we didn’t have to follow the road? I know it might not be cheap, but cheaper by the foot than $32…..

Like · 2 · September 16, 2015 at 10:17pm

Facebook Posts – September 12, 2015

Don Munn uploaded a file.

September 12, 2015
LorimerRdStreetImpPetition.pdf

Portable Document Format

Comments

Ryan Barnum – Two things I want to point out about this petition are that our house was never included on the map. The garage and the neighbors house tucked in behind it are there, but our house is missing. Also, I’m not sure if the petition I signed had my name on it or still listed Adrianne Jorgensen as the owner. I don’t recall, and I’m not sure it matters all that much anyway. I bought the house in April after the meeting so we weren’t at that and missed a lot of the initial discussion about this project.
Like · September 12, 2015 at 4:41pm
.  .  .  .  .  .

Erin Salmon

September 12, 2015

I took these pictures yesterday of the Kaplan sidewalk construction. There are a few in particular of a sloped yard. I tried to hold the camera at eye level. It seemed to be of similar height to the slope in my yard, but not sure of the exact height and grade. I did have a chance to meet and talk with the owners of the house. They are very unhappy because they had no choice in this project because of Kaplan’s residential road status. The city has said they will not get a retaining wall. Just grading. The last shot is with a house that seems closest to the project.

Erin Salmon's photo.
Erin Salmon's photo.
Erin Salmon's photo.
Erin Salmon's photo.
Erin Salmon's photo.
+5

 

Comments

Carol Apperson – That’s ridiculous and very unsightly!!! There is going to be erosion. They put retaining walls on Merwin when they put in the sidewalk. Why not here?
Like · September 12, 2015 at 5:12pm
Sharon Moll Mixon – I wonder if there is erosion and if that is the cities easement, do you tell the city to come take care of the problem?
Like · September 13, 2015 at 10:37am
Sharon Moll Mixon – Did they put that construction fence at people’s property line?
Like · September 13, 2015 at 1:51pm · Edited
Erin Salmon – For the yard with the slope, yes. I did not look at every yard along the length of this sidewalk project to see if that was the case.
Like · September 13, 2015 at 6:28pm
Ryan Barnum – I’m pretty sure the fence runs the whole length of the sidewalk. It appears to be at the very edge of the right of way, but I could be wrong. Everything from the fence to the road was scraped clean down to the dirt.
Like · September 13, 2015 at 6:31pm
.  .  .  .  .

Facebook Posts – September 10-11, 2015

Erin Salmon

September 10, 2015

I am finding it very difficult to keep up with all of the posts because they are embedded as responses to previous posts. Perhaps the discussions could continue as new posts that begin, “In response to so-and-so’s previous post.”

I too am disappointed by the removal of Kay Crowder. Having her voice in this matter could provide a lot of clarity. Particularly since I am missing so much information from the April meeting, and that seems to be where the misinformation began. It is also disappointing that Donna, the legal petitioner to this proposal has also left the conversation, and that we are left dealing with the fallout.

I appreciate Sam Bellezza’a comments around the positive benefits of this forum. Obviously this is a deeply emotional experience because we are talking about our homes. We live in an intimate neighborhood, and we will all live with one another after this is history.

Comments

Sharon Moll Mixon

September 10, 2015 · Raleigh, NC, United States

As the administrator of this page I removed Kay Crowder from this secret group. If you would like to talk to her in person PM me and I will give you her assistant’s number. I was surprised how easy it was to get in touch with her.

Comments

Barbara Scott Thanks for telling us.

Like · 1 · September 10, 2015 at 11:22am

Don Munn – Why was she removed? I would think she could do a lot to answer a many of our questions……..

Like · 2 · September 10, 2015 at 11:41am

Jane Fenn – That has not been my experience at all. I have her assistant’s phone number and have spoken to him many times since mid-August. Not once have I ever been allowed to speak to her. I have emailed her — not one reply. I have written a letter — no reply. Every way there is of reaching her goes through the assistant — nothing goes to her directly. I was told recently by the assistant that she would call me. So far, nothing. He did say she might receive a hundred emails a day and did I expect she responded to all? My thought there is what working person does NOT receive many many emails a day, and we all have to respond as part of our jobs. Did she think when she took this office that she could choose to respond only when it was convenient for her or matched her own goals? I have not found her responsive nor helpful. She would know, I would think, that a council member is going to hear from constituents and I would further think she would know that part of her job responsibilities is responding. I do say emphatically that her assistant Nick Sadler is unfailingly courteous and helpful but his job is clearly to shield her and he does it well. If you have been successful at speaking with her, Sharon, I can’t help but wonder if the difference is that you are supporting something she wants and I am advocating changes in something she wants. My correspondence with her has been respectful and has offered positive suggestions, but it does not agree with what she clearly is pushing. I did speak very assertively to the assistant once about not ever being able to reach her directly in my frustration, and still he remained helpful and friendly, but no way was he going to get me through to her directly at all. His job responsibilities are clear and he fulfills them very well. He does his best to answer any question I ask but he is making sure I don’t get through directly to her. I don’t doubt that she has seen what I have sent — I am certain he does that effectively. I personally have not had any reason to think at this point that she is fulfilling her responsibility of being responsive to those she represents — a key art of the job she was elected to do. Please do call the council offices at 919-996-3050 and I sincerely hope each of you has better luck at getting through to her than I have had.

Like · September 10, 2015 at 1:18pm

Karen Flowers Essic – Oh, that’s too bad, Sharon. It was disappointing to me she didn’t receive a better welcome to the group–improving communication with the council could have been helpful.

Like · 4 · September 10, 2015 at 1:54pm

Erin Salmon – I am curious, like Don, as to why she was removed. Did she ask to be removed?

Like · 1 · September 11, 2015 at 3:03pm

Sharon Moll Mixon – I sent a friends request to Kay Crowder’s personal FB page and a PM to ask her if she would like to be added to this group. I noticed that she is not much of a FB person (she doesn’t post anything on her own page). I pictured Kay spending her valuable time sorting through this increasingly negative page. After the “Kay Where are you?” comment I thought, “wow – this was a bad idea I had.” I felt embarrassed by what she saw, so I got in touch with her and offered to remove her from the group. She said “that is fine”.

Like · September 11, 2015 at 10:44pm

Steve Grothmann – I wrote her an email, very objectively conveying some of the concerns of the 1/3 opposed and pointing out the emotional debate on this page, and asking for her input about those concerns. She did respond, but it was very rote and didn’t really say anything more than, “the petition passed and the rules were followed.”

Like · 3 · September 13, 2015 at 3:41pm

.  .  .  .  .  .

Don Munn 

September 11, 2015
Minority Concerns.
    1. Watershead issues.  Additional impervious surface will exacerbate existing issues on Bushy Creek
    2. Encroachment issues.  Full width set back and sidewalk takes the perimieter a full 14.5′ from the existing road edge on the West side of Lorimer.  Main concern is this will have sidewalks in close proximity to some residences
    3. Driveway/elevation issues.  The full width setback of 14.5 feet will create some very alkward driveway and yard alterations.
  • Loss of Trees.  Aesthetic charator of neighborhood.
  • Additional width of road may lead to higher speeds on roadway, esp with Western Blvd/Kent inersection being possible only connection to I-440.  (Lorimer will be road of choice for anyone West of Kent…)
  • Undo cost burden on some property owners.  (Would the Church have signed if they had to pay?
  • ??? List more here….

Comments

Sharon Moll Mixon – 7. Concern that peoples are making assumptions and upsetting their neighbors.

Like · September 13, 2015 at 4:32am · Edited

Don Munn – Lets try to stick with the concerns… if there are facts that are wrong, lets correct them.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 12:38am

Sharon Moll Mixon – If I can trust that you will not slap me with a lawsuit for stating something incorrectly….

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:18am · Edited

Sharon Moll Mixon – 1. The road is going to stay the same 22ft then they are adding 2.5ft curb and gutter on each side. please read Curries post —I would like to bring a little real-world clarity to an issue— from Sept 9th

Like · September 13, 2015 at 4:34am · Edited

Don Munn – The drawing posted is straight from the petition. I am in the process of making the “modified” 5′ sidewalk version.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:05am

Sharon Moll Mixon – Don did you watch the video from September 1st council meeting? Jimmy Upchurch said a 3.5 foot setback would not be a problem. But no one proposed that at the meeting. The talking point was not about the size of the footprint. Instead it was about leaving the 1200 block off petition. The petitioner and the 28 homes that made this happen, had no idea 7 households were being represented by a lawyer to oppose the petition.

Like · September 13, 2015 at 4:25am

Sharon Moll Mixon – there will be a 5ft sidewalk but it will have grass (or something) on both sides of it

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:06am

Don Munn – Yes, as the drawing shows… 6′ between the curb and the sidewalk

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:07am

Sharon Moll Mixon – 2.encroachment=intrusion on a person’s territory. The city has 60ft easement they will only be using 50ft. So they will not be on your property. I don’t think anyone really knows the width of the set back at this point.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:16am

Don Munn – On the west side they are using all but 3′ per the current design. (was 2′ but the reduction of the sidewalk made it 3..) And yes, I understand that the city has the right to use their right of way, but when most of these houses were built, that ROW was not in effect. so houses were built closer to the property lines than would be allowed today.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:22am · Edited

Sharon Moll Mixon – ? have you noticed the placement of the last home built in this neighborhood. I would guess it is the closest to the property line.

Like · September 13, 2015 at 4:30am

Sharon Moll Mixon – 3. Have you seen the sidewalk project on Kaplen? they are doing a great good on driveways/elevation issues in my opinion.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:22am

Sharon Moll Mixon – 6. The church does have to pay for the area that does not have curb and gutter already.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:33am

Erin Salmon – All of the measurements I have done on our road equal 20′. I could be wrong, but I have measured many times in many places. The city has us listed on the project report as 22′. Not sure why. They list Garland as 20′.

Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:48am

Erin Salmon – Perhaps we need this corrected in the city records.

Erin Salmon's photo.
Like · September 12, 2015 at 1:49am