Ken Moore
I was initially against the Bolin Creek Greenway plan and now I’m an enthusiastic supporter. Having studied the plan, walked the corridor more thoughtfully and made more explorations of Chapel Hill’s Bolin Creek Greenway, I’ve changed my mind and ask others to consider the following significant benefits of the Greenway Plan.
The Bolin Creek corridor is not a pristine natural area. It is a degraded, maintenance-neglected, but much loved urban natural area. Most of what is now called Bolin Forest was an agricultural field barely 50 years ago, and the older areas of forest bordering the creek ceased being pristine decades ago, with construction of the OWASA sewer line. Subsequent additions of neighborhood creekside playgrounds and foot and mountain-bike trails have resulted in a badly fragmented forest, now extensively infested with invasive plants.
During rains, these trails become erosion channels flowing onto the sewer easement, which, itself, becomes a stream channel, washing sediment directly into the creek. For much of the winter season, the heavily traveled easement is so water logged that walkers and joggers often make pathway diversions along drier edges, creating yet more erosion courses.
A “Comprehensive Bicycle Transportation Plan†was adopted by the Carrboro Board of Aldermen on March 24, 2009. That plan states: “Off-road trails provide a more unique, comfortable experience for all levels of bicyclists and can also serve transportation and recreation purposes… Two greenway corridors are particularly important for the Town of Carrboro. These include the Bolin Creek Greenway (part of which exists in the Town of Chapel Hill), and the Morgan Creek Greenway…The Bolin Creek Greenway would serve as the major paved north/south spine of the greenway system.†Carrboro’s Bolin Creek Greenway Plan, submitted in December 2009 and now being considered, is a logical follow-up.
I was impressed with the Greenway Plan’s strategies to meet the following goals: protect and improve water quality along Bolin and Jones Creeks; protect, conserve and preserve wildlife habitat; connect surrounding land use in Carrboro by providing infrastructure for non-motorized modes of transportation; provide safe access to Bolin and Jones creeks; and enhance quality of life by providing a recreational facility for all citizens of Carrboro to enjoy.
The easement is already cleared to between 20 and 30 feet and badly degraded; greenway installation will be an improvement from the outset. The potential loss of some trees along short, narrow sections (approximately 2 percent to 5 percent of the entire easement length) is not a terrible loss when appreciating long-term benefits that a greenway will provide. A paved greenway, vegetated on both sides, similar to the Chapel Hill counterpart, is a logical strategy to protect Bolin Creek from increasing runoff and degradation. The plan is an opportunity for Carrboro to improve the existing degraded sewer easement to a “high-quality†urban natural area, accessible to all for nature observation, recreation and non-motorized transportation use.
Finally, the Greenway Plan is a conceptual master plan, not a final design. Evaluation and recommendations need to be completed soon so that, like the Bicycle Transportation and Morgan Creek Greenway Plans before it, the Bolin Creek Greenway Plan can be adopted, enabling the town to respond quickly to funding opportunities for detailed design and implementation.
The Carrboro Greenways Commission meeting on Monday at 6:30 p.m. in Town Hall will provide a good opportunity to learn why Carrboro’s Bolin Creek Greenway Plan has many supporters.
Why is pavement a good idea when these woods are delightful just as they are?
The Town is well aware of the minor erosion problems and has received funds from the state and EPA to fix them. Let’s enjoy the wildflowers and leave the Barred Owl alone. Building a 10 foot wide concrete roadway won’t leave many wildflowers and we would lose many species by opening up a large swath of woods, opening the creek to sunlight, thus changing the habitat of the species that depend on the creek.
This is not a wide flat valley like the greenways in Chapel Hill. The valley is narrow and at times steep, forcing any construction up against the creek. Go out and see the Morgan Creek construction. The width cleared there ranges from 25 – 50 feet and the greenway is located well away from the creek.
Saying “the easement is already cleared” is not a well thought out statement, as placing a 10 foot wide concrete 2 mile roadway up against the creek where the easement is located would harm water quality and contribute to storm water problems. To build in such a difficult location, another 30 feet of trees would be cleared, leaving a 60 foot swath through these woods and leaving an unrecognizable landscape as whole hillsides are cut away. Ken will weep with me if he sees this result.
Pavement is contrindicated in a riparian zone. It produces heat, and heats rainwater which then goes directly into the Creek. This kills wildlife. Pavement does not prevent runoff. Pavement is a non porous substance. This is not my opinion, it is a fact. I am highly suspicious of the phrase “respond quickly to funding opportunties”. It makes me wonder if this plan for a Greenway is being promoted to acquire DOT funds. The DOT is not interested in restoring and preserving Bolin Creek. The DOT builds roads. It is our job as citizens to protect our natural resources, not sell them off.
One cannot both “protect, conserve and preserve wildlife habitat” and “provid[e] a recreational facility for all citizens of Carrboro to enjoy”. They are CONFLICTING GOALS. The more people in the woods the less wildlife will be in those woods.
The other commenter was right, this is less about wildlife protection and more about “funding opportunities”. More faux-liberal greenwash to serve a hidden interest.
And if you feel the “potential loss of a few trees” is no big deal, would you mind if I came to your house with a chainsaw and took down a few of your trees?
I think this kind of thinking is 50 years too late.
Check this TED talk out. 20 minutes reviewing the last 50 years and thoughts on the next 100 years. Chapel Hill/Carrboro mayors and BOA members should watch this and think about getting ahead of the curve – skipping the sprawl/paving phase all together.
http://www.ted.com/talks/ellen_dunham_jones_retrofitting_suburbia.html
Mr. Moore’s thesis that the creek-side area is already so degraded that we should pave — with a 10′ wide concrete road (with up to 10 ” of grading on either side) — is alarming. The Bolin Forest Valley is a true treasure. It is a special and forward-thinking community that recognizes their natural open spaces as an asset, and preserves them. In ten years will we be happier to have a pristine natural refuge or two miles of concrete and lawn (in the proposal) through the forest ?
The word “greenway” sounds environmentally sound. Using words to promote something that is actually the opposite is prevalent in our society. People don’t have time to spend learning about all the factors involved, so they sometimes take the name on face value. But it is widely accepted by soil and creek scientists that an impervious surface next to a creek is always deleterious to the water quality and riparian zone.
The OWASA easement is actually quite narrow, and paving the creek-side would require major construction and kill hundreds of trees. Losing the tree canopy would increase the temperature of the trail and creek to the point that many organisms and animals will die. Let’s not have this as our legacy. Let’s support the groups that want to restore the riparian zone and establish a natural area in perpetuity.
There are more logical bike routes that have been identified for better city-wide connectivity (see the map on “Save Bolin Creek” website). Our community should focus on the great alternative bike routes that will get us out of our cars, decrease our carbon footprint, and leave our forest and creek natural!
Ken Moore’s 9-16 op-ed provided compelling arguments why a paved greenway along Bolin Creek between Estes Drive and Homestead Road is in the best interest of the community for environmental and transportation reasons. In response, opponents of paving repeat the same arguments that have considerable emotional appeal, but have neither logical or scientific validity. Let’s consider some of the objections.
1. McClintock argues that the Bolin Creek Corridor “offers us peace, serenity and comfort” and “solace in access to nature as we fight to recuperate from a serious disease…” None would argue with the first part about “peace and serenity”, but a paved pathway will not eliminate the opportunity to find peace and serenity. what it will do is provide access to a broader cross-section of the community–those with serious medical problems who may desperately need this solace, but who are physically unable to access the creek. Those who are fighting “to recuperate from a serious disease”, unless it is a psychological disorder, would invariably be unable to access the creek unless it was paved, particularly those who have had a heart attack or major surgery!
2. McClintock continues, “If Carrboro fails to protect the Bolin Creek valley, it will be without any natural trails.” Perhaps Ms. McClintock has never looked at a map of the myriad hiking and biking trails in Carolina North that branch off from the creekside road. The 2.5 mi greenway along the creek represents less than 10% of the trails through Carolina North, not to mention the Adams Preserve, none of which are paved or is there any suggestion that they should be paved.
3. “You can see a barred owl perched on a tree limb.” How true. I live on Bolin Creek and have seen barred owls many times in my own backyard on Pathway Drive! Barred owls are quite tolerant of the development along Bolin Creek from Estes Drive to Spring Valley. Barred owls don’t migrate, so I hear them every evening year round. A paved pathway will not drive the barred owls or beavers or deer or other wildlife found in Bolin Forest away.
If these species were averse to humans, the hikers, bikers and joggers who wander through every vestige of Bolin Forest would have driven them out decades ago! Let’s be realistic and not coat the facts in the fantasy of a “pristine wilderness” that Carolina North is not! If the “Save Bolin Creek” folk are serious about “preserving” this natural area, the sewer line should be rerouted along Seawell School Road and all hikers, bikers and joggers forbidden access!
4. “the wildflowers, the resurrection ferns and the specimen beech trees–we must save their habitat.” Noble thoughts, but (a) wildflowers don’t grow in the forest. The only reason that there is a profusion of wildflowers along the creek is that the OWASA maintains a 20-30 ft. clearing which provides the sunlight essential for them to grow! (b) No resurrection ferns grow in the OWASA easement. These are found deep in the forest, away from the sewer lines, where no-one proposes paving. (c) Specimen beech trees are common along the creek as they are a water-loving species. Yes, a few would have to be taken down to build the greenway, but the creek took down one of my favorites in December, having slowly washed away the soil around its roots. Beech trees are prolific in Bolin Forest and the construction of a greenway would have negligible impact on beech trees.
5. Will the availability of one or more all-terrain wheel chairs solve the access problem for citizens with disabilities? Granted it would be better than the current “no access at all” situation. In fact, I suggested this possibility to SBC earlier this year. However it is not a realistic solution to provide access for people with disabilities because only a tiny fraction of people with disabilities could use one or a few at a time and access would be limited to 8-5 M-F with no access on week-ends or holidays (unless reserved and picked up in advance). If you or I wake up Saturday morning and decide to go for a walk along the creek, we walk out the door and go. Not so for the disabled. To suggest that all-terrain chairs are the answer to handicapped accessibility is wishful, disingenuous thinking.
6. McCintock’s final paragraph opens with an incredible statement: “But no one will be able to enjoy the beauty and serenity of the Bolin Creek valley if it is altered beyond recognition by our human hands and damaged by an alternative transportation corridor that amounts to a highway through the forest.” (a) A paved pathway is the ONLY way that EVERYONE will be able to enjoy the Bolin Creek Valley! (b) “if it is altered beyond recognition”–has McClintock ever walked along the Bolin Creek Trail in Chapel Hill? Is it “altered beyond recognition”? HEAVENS NO!! The paved pathway called the “Bolin Creek Trail” is the most beloved and widely used recreational venue in Chapel Hill. Neighbors (who fought it the same way that folks living along the creek in Carrboro are currently doing) now love it and understand what a marvelous asset it is to the Town of Chapel Hill! (c) It is preposterous to call a 10-ft paved pathway along the creek a “highway through the forest”. No 4-wheel vehicles (except carts for the handicapped or OWASA trucks) would be permitted on the greenway. A 10-ft wide pathway is needed to provide safe two-way access to pedestrians, joggers and bikers. Let’s not spread misleading images of “highways” through the woodlands to prevent people from understanding the extensive benefits for the community of a paved pathway along Bolin Creek extending from the Community Center in Chapel Hill to the upper reaches of Lake Hogan (7 miles) in Carrboro!
I have walked the paved Bolin Creek trail in Chapel Hill, and it is just OK. It can not compare to the natural beauty of the Carrboro trail. I also worry that I will get hit by a cyclist on the paved Chapel Hill trail. They can travel rather quickly over pavement. On the Carrboro rough trail, the bicycles don’t travel as fast .
@Dave O:
Sometimes I wonder if you even listen to yourself. You certainly don’t listen to us.
You say “The paved pathway called the “Bolin Creek Trail†is the most beloved and widely used recreational venue in Chapel Hill.”
But she said: “This is not a wide flat valley like the greenways in Chapel Hill. The valley is narrow and at times steep, forcing any construction up against the creek. Go out and see the Morgan Creek construction. The width cleared there ranges from 25 – 50 feet and the greenway is located well away from the creek.”
You know how steep it is in there. You know that the Jordan Lake Rules forbid disturbing an area within 25-50 feet of a creek (depending on the type of “disturbing”). You know that means the only reason one can consider paving there at all is that OWASA easement.
Not a highway? You say tomato, I say tomata. You miss the point entirely. How a person who writes a weekly flora column (Ken Moore), a long time resident and co-founder of Friends of Bolin Creek (you), and leaders within the Botanical Gardens can actually say with a straight face that this is a good idea is beyond me.
Did you watch the Ted Talk video I posted. Did you hear the part about 1000 foot stream buffers. Yep my house shouldn’t be where it is – the sprawl thing has been tried for 50+ years and what do we have? – automobiles EVERYWHERE.
Dude, think different.
Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric. There is nothing “green” about the proposed Greenway. It is just another paved road. And who wants to run on pavement? It is mighty hard on the joints.
I would suggest that we all fact-check the responses to this excellent editorial. I have been following the controversy for a long time now and have also been “on the fence” or against paving. However, it has occurred over and over again that the simplest fact checking and common sense do not support many of the views of Save Bolin Creek. They are emotional and well-written, but don’t hold up to the simplest scrutiny. Over and over again, I have found their arguments simply and easily proved incorrect. An example is Bruce Sinclair’s excellent analysis of Mr. Birenbach’s editorial http://www.carrborocitizen.com/main/2010/07/09/paved-greenway-has-advantages/ illustrates how easily their arguments can be debunked with the simplest reading of their own citations.
First, I’ve heard the barred owl argument many times – predicting the extinction of this species if the greenway is paved. This is a debatable point, at best. A three second google search and my own eyes disproved this argument.
As Carrboro and Chapel Hill grows and Carolina North expands, the number of people on the well-worn path along the creek has, and will inevitably increase. In fact, it has been increasing dramatically over the last 15 years. I have observed this by simply looking out of my window on the creek from my home for almost 20 years. This has not, to my observation, decreased the number of owls. I still have a mating pair in my yard.
The barred owl is not by any stretch a fragile species. In fact, there is evidence that the owl actually adapts better to suburban habits. “Live Science” – http://www.livescience.com/animals/071017-urban-owls.html. This research states that “The preliminary findings suggest the urban barred owls are able to reproduce successfully[in urban settings], perhaps even better than in wild forests, as they are churning out babies faster than the adults are dying. When they do die, it is primarily due to disease or collisions with cars. ” I read this research.
Second, the statements about the width of the trail and the number of trees to be removed such as “”OWASA easement is actually quite narrow, and paving the creek-side would require major construction and kill hundreds of trees.” and “The area would have to be cleared to 30 feet” can be easily tested. Walk the section in question with a tape measure. I have. You will see for yourself how wide the easement is. Look at how much shade the tree canopy actually provides. I have. OWASA policy is to clear to 30 feet to allow access of heavy equipment, access to the lines, and keep tree roots from permeating the sewer line. To fact-check this, a 1 minute call to OWASA public information will confirm this. I have.
I urge everyone to calm down and not let raw emotion overrule our ability to evaluate the arguments. I have found almost all of Save Bolin Creek’s arguments don’t (pardon the pun) hold water.
Please take the time to evaluate the arguments as I have and you may come to a conclusion much like Mr. Moore – and me.
Ms. McClintock – “Go out and see the Morgan Creek construction. The width cleared there ranges from 25 – 50 feet and the greenway is located well away from the creek. ”
Exactly.
You have raised an interesting logincal construct, here. (A atutology, perhps?)
It is 25-50 feet wide (and I’m not exactly conceding your number) EXACTLY BECAUSE IT IS well away from the creek. They have to room and they will use it to cost effectively do the construction.
If construction were to be done on the 30 foot sewer easement, the construction methoology would change to do the construction in the space available. Also, I’m sure you would probably be out there making sure they used as little space as possible, and I’m sure that every other concerned citizen as well as the town, the EPA, other governmental and nonprofit agencies (and me) would be, also.
Logic holds that if 30 feet is enough room for OWASA to get enough heavy equipment to do construction on the sewer lines, which construction nearly approximates road construction, 30 feet would be enough to do construction on the greenway. How do you think they build tunnels or bridges? They certainly don’t make a 50 foot tunnel to build a 10 foot road! Give modern engineering and the civil servants and workers who maintain our transportation infrastructure a bit of credit.
It will be interesting to see how Chapel Hill manages to pave their section of the greenway from MLK to Estes Drive along Umstead Road , which is about 10 – 15 feet wide or less, without clearing to “50 or 60 feet.” I have a feeling they can do it. I also have a feeling a 10 foot path can be constructed through a 30 foot cleared area.
Dave, your response addressed comments that Julie did not write as a response to this editorial. Would you please footnote your work next time so I can check your sources and not have to guess if you took things out of context? That is, or course, the logical and scientific thing to do.
And you did not bother to address my statement showing Ken’s logical fault that one cannot both “protect, conserve and preserve wildlife habitat†and “provid[e] a recreational facility for all citizens of Carrboro to enjoyâ€. Because they are CONFLICTING GOALS.
So, can you explain how one can protect a wildlife habitat by laying two miles of cement through it? And while you are thinking, can you explain your scientific conclusion of how you assessed the “tolerance” of the Barred Owl to development? Have their numbers increased or decreased over the last 100 years? And are you only seeing more Barred Owls because they are crowded into an earth ghetto and are forced to search for food on humanities pesticide treated lawns?
Thanks to everyone for your comments and interest in this issue.
Please do your best to keep it about the issue and not engage in personal attacks.
Late yesterday I commented on Julie McClintock’s 9-16 post “Providing Access to Natural Areas”. This post was on the “Save Bolin Creek” website and was not her response to Ken Moore’s op-ed in the Carrboro Citizen. I had a print-out of the SBC article and mistakenly thought it was her response to Ken Moore’s op-ed. Several other respondents noted my error. Only my comments on the barred owl and wildflowers relate directly to Julie’s response to the op-ed. I apologize for the error and the confusion it caused
I have lived on Pathway Drive overlooking Bolin Creek for about 20 years and have thoroughly enjoyed the ability to walk out my back door and enter the quiet and rejuvenating woods along Bolin Creek.
I have witnessed countless trails hacked through the woods by mountain bikers who were more interested in conquering the hills than preserving the environment. I have seen Bolin Creek swell and dry up on many occasions and have enjoyed the diverse wildlife sheltered by the woods surrounding the creek. And I have seen the wildlife adapt to the encroachment of man and, in some cases, thrive.
I understand the concerns on each side of this argument and have to admit that I agree with the paving but only if we can obtain “honest†assurances that minimal damage will be inflicted during construction. I believe this is a reasonable request and one that the city would be eager to honor.
In closing, I want to say that I am deeply saddened by some of the comments concerning this matter and hope that we can put aside our emotions and approach the discussion rationally and as mature adults.
I agree with the previous posts. Let’s be civil. Please keep your comments to facts and please refrain from the personal references. Let’s keep it factual. The tenor of the comments do not help, but probably hurt any arguments you make. Those who don’t have a good argument will usually be the first to fall back to personal arguments.
Mr. Bierenback once again brings up the old refrain of Jordan Lake rules that we have heard over and over again. -“The Jordan Lake Rules forbid disturbing an area within 25-50 feet of a creek (depending on the type of “disturbingâ€).”
A two minute Google of “Jordan Lake Rules” found that Greenways along creeks are expressly allowed.
Under Jordan Lake rules – [http://reports.oah.state.nc.us/ncac/title%2015a%20-%20environment%20and%20natural%20resources/chapter%2002%20-%20environmental%20management/subchapter%20b/15a%20ncac%2002b%20.0267.pdf]
15A NCAC 02B.0267 Jordan Water Supply Nutrient Strategy: Protection of Existing Riparian Buffers Section (9),
“Greenway / hiking trails designed, constructed and
maintained to maximize nutrient removal and erosion
protection, minimize adverse effects on aquatic life and
habitat, and protect water quality to the maximum extent” are specifically allowed,
where Greenways are defined as:
‘Greenway / Hiking Trails’ means pedestrian trails constructed of pervious or IMPERVIOUS [emphasis mine] surfaces and related structures including but not limited to boardwalks, steps, rails, and
signage, and that generally run parallel to the shoreline.
My guess is that others have read these, but it seems that some that hold them up as an argument against paving have not.
Hi Diane, Well, law documents are meant to be read by lawyers, which is why I do not usually sign them, but this was a pretty easy read.
Your interpretation of the document led you to think that greenways are “allowed”, but the term they use in the document is “allowable”. Those words have two different outcomes. What is being debated is whether or not the greenway meets the exceptions and protections allowable under the Riparian Protection Rules. But that is not for us to decided, that is for the local government and the state.
Myself? I do not care what the state EPA says about the issue. Laws are manipulated by lawyers. I see one thing, a forest facing further human disturbance by development, and that is what I hope to stop.
Chris,
It’s heartening to hear that we are reaching a consensus. So, since “forbid” never has the same meaning as “allowed” or “allowable,” the statement that the Jordan Lake rules forbid the development is incorrect. The distinction between “allowable” and “allowed” is a lot close than “forbid” and either of those. That was the point I was trying to make.
This is one sign that agreement can be reached. Whether the greenway can be constructed meeting the requirements of “allowability” is another issue on which we can perhaps come to consensus in the future.
Let’s let the town officials and qualified scientists work out those items. I also agree with you that it’s not for us to decide. Let’s let the Greenway Commission and the town move forward on study, rather than killing the concept with a barrage of incorrect information. As Mr. Moore pointed out, it is only a conceptual plan. Changes will be made, other issues will be studied.
My personal opinion is that the creek is being more damaged by use as it is now and that the Greenway, if engineered properly and implemented properly will, in the long term, improve the health of the already impaired creek as well as give more people the ability to enjoy it.
It appears to be the preliminary assessment of the DWQ, also –
http://advocatesforcarrborogreenways.org/attachments/File/12_08_2009_D3A_%282%29.pdf
paragraph 2.
Yes, it is preliminary and verbal, but I tend to think they know better than us.
Finger pointing and fiddling with the facts does not eliminate the basic truth that wild, green spaces are rapidly dwindling in our community. Yes, there is a sewer easement. Yes, there are playgrounds and houses along some parts of the proposed “transit corridor.” Why degrade what remains with further construction? Can’t we step ahead of the curve, despite our differences, and lead the way towards a healthier planet? Natural spaces are necessary for everyone – disabled or not – to live well. Because the basic fact is that we all need clean water and fresh air. And preserving Bolin Forest is one way to forward this crucial agenda. I hope the BOA and the Greenway Commissioners look beyond the present myopic vision that human recreation and convenience are all that matters and do what is best for our community’s long term health and welfare.
Why would Carrboro spend so much money to construct and maintain a paved path through the woods when other more critical bike and pedestrian routes need our money and attention? Ever tried walking along Estes Road? With a stroller and a bag of groceries? Where’s the sidewalk?! Or biking along Greensboro where the bike lane suddenly disappears? Let’s get real, people. Let’s spend money on “alternative” transit where we need it most instead of creating massive projects that require ridiculous amounts of upkeep and disrupt the little nature we have left in this town.
Cara Biasucci raised some very good questions, particularly “Why can’t we step ahead of the curve, despite our differences, and lead the way towards a healthier planet?” That is precisely what the paved pathway along the creek in Chapel Hill provides and what the continuation of the paved greenway along the creek in Carrboro will provide the larger community. An extended pathway across town will encourage people to trade in 4-wheeled, gas-guzzling vehicles for healthy, emission-free two-wheeled vehicles to commute to work and campus. I would love to ride my new hybrid bicycle to University Mall, but not along Estes Drive, thank you! Would you want your 6-10 year old child to pedal a bicycle along Estes Drive, even in the bike lane? An off-road option is clearly safer for children and senior citizens like me and would provide a much stronger incentive to leave the car in the driveway!
And yes, “natural spaces are necessary for everyone–disabled or not–to live well”, so let’s make the Bolin Creek Trail in Carrboro accessible to everyone! I, too, hope that people will “look beyond the present myopic vision” that paving the greenway will further degrade the riparian area along the creek. Many experts have pointed out that the OWASA easement along the creek is badly impaired and that a paved surface would stabilize the erosion. That is one way that many of us believe will best preserve the creek corridor, as well as provide the community with many other advantages.
All of us want to preserve the Bolin Creek corridor, but we disagree on how best to do this. We have heard the recommendations of paving opponents over and over again for the past year. They recommend simply leaving the roadway in it’s present badly degraded, but “natural” state. In my view, that is not an acceptable solution.
How, then. will the roadway be remediated? McClintock (above) stated that the Town “is well aware of the minor erosion problems and has received funds..to remediate them.” 40% of the roadway is privately owned and no-one except OWASA has permission to do anything on this section. Several of us met with OWASA recently and asked them what they plan to do about the eroded “easement”. OWASA has no plans to do anything beyond assuring that their 4-wheel drive vehicles can make required inspections.
The other 60% belongs to UNC. The UNC Forest Management has carefully reviewed the problem, but has no current plans to do anything either. In fact, the Town of Carrboro has no specific plans to remediate the eroded roadway nor do they have authorization from the respective owners to do so!
Which brings us back to the proposed Bolin Creek Greenway Plan, which does include an excellent solution to the erosion problem and a splendid “way towards a healthier planet!”! Everyone is cordially invited to hear arguments in support of a paved greenway at the Greenways Commission meeting tonight.
One would think that with all this torrent of information and mis-information there would be no stones left to turn. One would be wrong.
The wildly popular Bolin Creek Greenway in Chapel Hill is not a template for what is planned in Carrboro. Most of the Chapel Greenway follows a double sewer easement. When OWASA installed the Bolin Creek Interceptor line they did not abandon the old easement. That explains why part of it looks more like a fairway than a greenway. It is a double sewer easement. The Carrboro section will be much narrower. Too wide for the Saviors, but still.
The stream side is going to be more heavily used in the future than it is now, paved or unpaved. The human population is growing and people will be walking, jogging, biking and dog walking along Bolin Creek. People are tossing the word “runoff” around as a pejorative. What does one suppose a creek is? There is ground water in a creek, true, but one can see the pitiful state of the creek now when there has been no surface runoff for weeks. Excessive sediment is the bane of stream ecology, and a paved trail for human activity will remove a major contributor of sediment to Bolin Creek. The teeming masses who visit Muir Woods would destroy the resource if there were not a paved trail winding through the majestic redwoods. As it is, the 3,000 year old trees are doing just fine.
Carrboro has long had an excellent policy regarding connectivity. It is somewhat besmirched in implementing it, having given in to annoying nimbys more than once. (I feel sure none of those opposed to the paved greenway are nimbys so hold your slings and arrows) This greenway is a poster child for connectivity. The Winmore and northernmost sections are inchoate neighborhood sidewalks without a Carrboro connection to Chapel Hill. A continuous greenway along Bolin Creek would be far, far greater than the sum of its parts. I look forward to seeing friends and neighbors, afoot and on wheels in the not too distant future.
Pavement is not the only accessible surface. The National Trails Training Partnership has pulled the rules being developed through the US Access Board for outdoor spaces into a single website: http://www.americantrails.org/resources/accessible/index.html
These rules don’t sacrifice the environment for wheel chair access, and they don’t sacrifice those with mobility restrictions for the sake of the environment. They seek balance and respect. A couple of the links from this website address different accessible surface types and provide some explanation of the maintenance costs for each.
Ken Bartholomew: a major (or to me principal) reason for this paved path is for transportation.
Upgrading Seawell School Road and / or Estes would not be the same. It is all up and down hills. Have you tried going by bicycle from Carrboro to Chapel Hill High / Smith Middle School? I cannot tell you how many times I have driven that insane route down Sewell Road to get to the high school. Let’s give our children a chance to walk or bike to school.
Bill Bracey, You noted that “Excessive sediment is the bane of stream ecology, and a paved trail for human activity will remove a major contributor of sediment to Bolin Creek.”
What miss, or purposely neglect to mention, is that we can fix issue of excessive sediment in Bolin Creek WITHOUT paving the path. The paved greenway is not needed to control sediment, it is just a convent excuse used to justify economic development of Carrboro’s natural space at the expense of our natural habitat.
And an easier path through the woods will put more people in the woods, putting more stress on non-human life. And for the record, I have always opposed bicycles in the woods.
Those who oppose putting a bicycle ready path through these woods do not realize what a huge gap in our bicycling infrastrucure this path would provide. High School kids could bicycle to school, without having to go up a major hill.
I notice that most of the same people involved in this controversy are still involved because they live in the neighborhood of the proposed Greenway. It is all about Not in My Backyard.
Back in January 2010, I asked that both sides COMPROMISE on this issue. But I was misrepresented in a headline and no one bothered to read my letter asking for a compromise and I was viciously attacked by members of Save Bolin Creek, who assume I was being “pro-paving” when I am not. Members who posted above on this thread. I was used as a pawn to rally against and I was affected deeply by the negative posts.
Why are the disabled not allowed a say so on this issue? Why??
Most of the people in the posts above live within spitting distance of the proposed greenway (with some exaggeration here but we MUST keep our sense of humor). Yet if you ride around and look at their yards, some of them do not allow leaves to be even left in their yard. They cut their grass instead of letting it grow and allow natural habitat. So let’s get real here. So please do not use this issue to protect your own backyard and not allow others to have access.
We need civility and we need compromise. Politicians, where are you??
The way that the Save Bolin Creek crowd pounces on a person who disagrees with them is a mob mentality.