Neighborhood Comments

This page is for people to express their views.  Please send your comments to me () so I can post them.  Please remember that these comments are the opinions of their respective authors.

Traffic Calming Resources

Patrick Siegman former Executive Director, Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
This was part of a discussion on Dan Burden's mail list & thought you might find it interesting - Harrison

One of the best resources that I know of on [traffic calming and bicycling] is the 1994 book "Traffic Calming in Practice" with authors listed as the County Surveyors Society, Department of Transport, Association of Metropolitan District Engineers, Association of London Borough Engineers and Surveyors, and Association of Chief Technical Officers (Landor Publishing, London), 1994. It can be ordered from the ITE website at www.ite.org.

The book includes 85 case studies, each illustrated with color photos, and detailed before-and-after statistics on accident rates and motor vehicle speeds and volumes. Quite a few of these case studies occur on high volume roadways, and quite a few of them include well-designed bike bypasses. Since each study includes before and after accident data, one can get at least some idea of whether the traffic calming design is a benefit, or (as a few prominent cyclists, like John Forester, still claim) always bad for cyclists.

Some folks will undoubtedly say that anything written in a foreign book "isn't proven in the United States". But in an era when software programmers routinely design software in multiple countries at once, we have fewer and fewer people who think that traffic engineers shouldn't adopt the best practices they can find from anywhere in the world.

Finally, Reid Ewing's "Traffic Calming: State of the Practice" (also available from ITE) cites numerous cases where traffic calming resulted in much higher levels of bicyclists on the roadway -- clear evidence that well-designed traffic calming results in more bicycling, not less.

- Patrick Siegman former Executive Director, Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition

From: Harrison Marshall
    4/28/2000

Train Noise Level Information

Typical freight train noise levels are about 87 dBA @ 50'. Typical "hybrid" commuter train noise levels are about 83 dBA @ 50'.

For the average person, a difference of 3 dBA is a just noticeable difference in noise levels. Thus, on a per train basis commuter trains will be slightly less noisy than a freight, but over a 24 hour period total noise levels would increase.

While I don't know what the ambient noise levels are for Boylan Heights, NCDOT noise policy for roads permits installation of noise barriers when noise levels are projected at or above 67 dBA. A 10 dBA increase is generally perceived as a doubling of noise levels, so freight trains can be considered about twice as loud and and commuter rail about 1 1/2 times as loud as a roadway at the same distance.

Mitigation is possible but this consists of "the use of continuous welded rail, which helps to lower train operation sound levels. At locations where the rail operates adjacent to homes or other sensitive land uses, noise barriers or berms may be used along the track to shield the noise from the wheels." [Please note that the Western Blvd wall is not a noise barrier but a visual screen - noise barriers are not effective when broken by a street or bridge]

The neighborhood seems to have raised all the appropriate issues with TTA. It was noted that "the introduction of commuter rail onto existing rail tracks or right-of-way will generally bring with it issues involving exhaust, noise, vibration, visual impacts, and potential safety concerns. In addition, the existing rail lines pass close to schools, residential development, parks, and other sensitive land uses. Potential impacts (both beneficial and adverse) to neighborhoods, community cohesion, low-income and minority families, and other socio-economic factors will need to be considered".

From: Harrison Marshall
    4/28/2000

Transit Oriented Development

At several neighborhood meetings, residents have questioned why the downtown Raleigh station is a suburban park & ride design, which does not meet TTA's own stated criteria that downtown locations would be a walk to design.

TTA has essentially designed a suburban cul-de-sac at the end of Martin Street that is otherwise completely isolated along the rest of its perimeter. Attempts to reach the station by any means other than Martin or by "walking the plank" from the Boylan bridge would require trespassing on freight tracks. Further, security needs will probably require the entire site to be sealed with fencing. The future Amtrak location has been referred to as the "prison station" but that is probably what the Wye will look like after the chain link and razor wire goes up around it.

As was mentioned at the last meeting, studies of why San Francisco's BART system has failed to support transit oriented development around stations indicate it is due to isolated stations within park and ride lots. This is Wye A as well. It is accessible by vehicle only from Martin and by pedestrians and cyclists only from Martin and the Boylan plank. The Morgan station, by contrast, is open from all directions except straight through the wye.

My understanding is that substantial and very positive changes have occurred since apartments in Cameron Park went condo and Bishops Park was built. I believe a Morgan station has the potential to make the same positive changes occur with the new townhouses and older apartments along Hargett and Morgan/Hillsborough, as well as encouraging even more Park Devereaus. I don't think the Wye would have the same effects, simply because it doesn't have the same openness and proximity to pedestrians. It is clearly auto-oriented and not designed to foster transit oriented development.

Sections of the Madison/Dane Co., WI transit plan are quoted below. It can be read at http://www.co.dane.wi.us/rail/crfs/html/chap3.htm.

3.4.1 Development Potential Give special consideration to the transit-oriented development potential of lands within 2000 feet (a ten-minute walk) of stations.

Station Location: Destinations that support high transit ridership should be targeted, as well as existing urban centers where high intensities exist or will be fostered. Where intensities that support transit ridership do not already exist, it is important that future stations abut lands that can be developed or redeveloped. Parcels should be large enough or should be capable of being combined into transit-oriented districts that are a minimum of 40 acres - inclusive of complementary existing uses - to create a coherent and walkable district capable of meeting regional goals.

Urban Design: Haphazard or disconnected development is rarely transit-supportive. It is crucial that street improvements for a pedestrian-friendly environment can feasibly be completed within a reasonable time frame, and that commercial conveniences adjacent to the transit station be supported.

3.4.2 Transit-Supportive Intensities Station Location: Placing higher intensity uses within walking distance of most stations is essential for high transit ridership and to enhance the region's livability. For the full benefit of a commuter rail system to be realized, multi-modal commutes should be minimized as much as is possible. Transit use can be encouraged by bringing together moderate- and higher-density the residential types that are commonly dispersed throughout a community in an auto-reliant pattern.

Providing direct pedestrian connections between housing, transit, and employment is the best method of achieving this goal. Adequate concentrations of housing and employment should be in place, or there should be adequate land and appropriate policies, to encourage transit-supportive intensities in the future . . . If residents and employees are to be encouraged to walk to transit, then the walking environment must consist of attractive landscaping and buildings with entries and windows overlooking the street. Parking lots and blank walls should be avoided on routes leading to transit.

Urban Design: The diversity of uses and bustle of activity found at the core of a vibrant and healthy station area requires the coming and going of pedestrians throughout the day. Higher intensity uses will contribute to this sense of vitality. Where feasible, mixed-use buildings with either office or residential above ground floor retail should be used as a way to establish a greater nucleus of activity and provide the physical building height that creates a "main street" or "boulevard" character.

3.4.4 Street Connectivity & Design Station Location: Transit-oriented neighborhoods should have an interconnected street network that makes it easy to [access] any destination within the neighborhood on foot. Direct routes should generally radiate from the station area core to minimize pedestrian distances and maximize pedestrian accessibility. Pedestrian routes should not rely on roads with high traffic speeds or on roads that are lined by blank walls or parking lots. Where direct street connections do not exist, the potential for such street connections should be secured.

Urban Design: The paths to transit stations should [provide] safe, attractive and comfortable access for cars, pedestrians and bicyclists. Streets should be emphasized as primary routes by providing sidewalks, street trees, and lining streets with windows and entries. Pedestrian and bicycle trails connections should also be explored to offer direct routes free from vehicles. Blank walls or parking lots should not dominate a pedestrian route to a rail station. Building entries should face streets and parking should be located mid-block. Figure 3-8 illustrates that local streets should offer relatively direct routes to transit. Overly circuitous routes should be avoided.

3.4.9 Park and Ride Avoid locating large park and ride lots within pedestrian-oriented station areas.

Station Location: Large surface parking lots are best suited adjacent to stations where pedestrian activity cannot be supported, such as stations surrounded by major highways or auto-dominated uses. These station areas are also ideal for large maintenance facilities.

Urban Design: To better accommodate park & ride, station areas may follow a pattern where one side of the tracks is auto-oriented while the other is pedestrian-oriented. Where park & ride must occur within pedestrian-oriented districts, it should be structured, and shared parking alternatives should be explored (e.g. cinemas make excellent evening use of park and ride parking without conflict).

3.5.1 "Urban Neighborhood" Station Area This study of a typical urban neighborhood demonstrates how underutilized (primarily vacant industrial) sites can be redeveloped incrementally with uses that are transit-supportive and pedestrian-friendly. Urban neighborhoods can capitalize on their location close proximity to the State capitol with a mix of office, housing, shopping, and entertainment.

Redevelopment can also be used to transform existing strip commercial avenues into boulevards flanked by mixed-use buildings. New, higher intensity employment such as research and development are encouraged to fit in with remaining industries and take advantage of proximity to the commuter rail station. New multi-family structures with ground-floor storefronts can reinforce the traditional "main street" retail character that now exists south of the station.

From: Glen Plott  
Ozone Alert Information
4/28/2000

The purpose of this email is to explain what ozone is, why the forecasts are issued, and why you are receiving these alerts.

Ground-level ozone is a man-made air pollutant with potentially serious health consequences.  It is not the same thing as the “ozone layer” that occurs naturally in the upper atmosphere.  Because ozone causes health problems at high concentrations, it is regulated as a criteria pollutant by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  The EPA sets standards based on human health studies, and designates metropolitan areas as being in “attainment” or “non-attainment” of these standards.  The Triangle is at risk of a non-attainment designation, which could impede economic development and federal funding in the Triangle (including federal highway funding).  The good news is that everyone can help to reduce ozone levels by voluntarily modifying their personal actions.

The North Carolina Division of Air Quality issues ozone forecasts from May 1 through September 30.  Because weather conditions must generally be hot and sunny for high ozone concentrations to develop, “ozone season” is late spring and summer.  Forecasts are issued by color code.  Green is “good” air quality, yellow is “moderate” air quality, orange is unhealthy for sensitive groups (particularly children , as well as adults with respiratory problems), and red is unhealthy for everyone.  Forecasts for the next day’s ozone level are issued at 3:00 in the afternoon, and released to the media and all interested organizations and individuals.  You have probably seen ozone forecasts during the summer on the local television weather forecasts.

Orange and red levels are above EPA’s health standard.  Forecasts for these two levels are “Ozone Alerts”.  When you receive an orange or red Ozone Alert, you can take the following voluntary measures:

1) PROTECT YOUR HEALTH by avoiding prolonged and/or strenuous outdoor activity during the mid to late afternoon, when ozone levels are the highest.  The effects of ozone depend on the length of exposure, as well as the level of activity (because the more you exert, the more air you draw into your lungs).  Try exercising or working outside in the morning when ozone levels are lower.  Ozone levels begin to drop in late afternoon, so the early evening is also a safer time to exercise.  If you have children, and especially if they have asthma or another respiratory condition, try to ensure that they moderate their outdoor activity in the afternoons on high ozone days.  Because children’s lungs are still developing, even healthy children can sustain long-term damage to their lungs from repeated exposure to high ozone levels.

2) PROTECT EVERYONE’S HEALTH by taking steps to reduce ozone pollution.  In urban areas, the biggest sources of ozone pollution are cars, trucks, and other fuel-burning vehicles.  Other sources are lawnmowers, construction equipment, and other fuel-burning sources such as boats, power plants, and industry.  Ozone pollution is also caused by the volatile compounds found in gasoline vapors, oil-based paints, cleaners, dry cleaning solvents, and other sources.  YOU can help reduce ozone pollution (on ozone action days and every day) by trying some or all of the following steps:


For more information on ground-level ozone and the Division of Air Quality’s Air Awareness Program, please visit the following website: http://daq.state.nc.us/.  If you have questions or would like more information, you can email the Air Awareness program at air_awareness@ncair.net, or you can call the hotline at 1-888-RU4NCAIR (1-888-784-6224)

Thank you in advance for your help in keeping the Triangle’s air clean and safe to breathe.