On ice

62 Comments

1. 

   Bonnie Hauser

    /  January 25, 2016

   In the county I was pleased to see many roads plowed – but not Dodsons Crossroads and and I’m sure not other important “tertiary roads”. I did see a couple of neighbors out with their own tractors (yes we have them out here) plowing dangerous hills and tunrs. I love Orange County – cause that’s what we do.

   I keep looking for ways to contract with local services to get some of these things done – especially the things like road plowing
   that happen so infrequently, its not practical to hire staff.

2. 

   DOM

    /  January 25, 2016

   Yet another downside of living in one of Chapel Hill’s many isolated single-family cul-de-sac developments. These neighborhoods were originally designed to make it difficult for non-residents to venture within, thus creating a sense of privacy and exclusivity.

   Creating connectivity by linking these remote neighborhoods to the outside world will do a lot to make them more accessible for snow plows as well as everyday emergencies.

3. 

   Nancy

    /  January 25, 2016

   DOM, It’s not lack of cut-throughs keeping residents isolated in our annual winter storm. It’s the steep hills. Please tell me you’re not advocating to raze all the hills in residential neighborhoods. The neighborhoods I’m talking about weren’t designed for creating exclusivity. They were built affordably on land no one else wanted to build on. Now we have a zoning ordinance that prevents building on steep slopes, which the Planning Commission may or may not pay attention to.

4. 

   anon

    /  January 25, 2016

   is there anyone asking the Schools which roads are bus routes, cause they are not driveable and I’d hope there was some coordination between the towns and schools that AFTER main arteries and chapel hill transit routes are plowed school bus routes are next?

5. 

   Nancy

    /  January 25, 2016

   Getting students to school is one thing; getting teachers to school is another. So many teachers live outside of Chapel Hill because our town is too expensive for someone on a teacher’s salary. We need to get serious about workforce housing if we want our town to function optimally.

6. 

   anon

    /  January 25, 2016

   @ nancy – the school officials inspect the bus routes on making the call of having school or not. In fact today is an optional teacher workday.

   My question is since secondary roads in my neighborhood are not cleared and are school bus routes; does that mean the Town doesn’t know/care which roads are school bus routes?

7. 

   Minerva

    /  January 25, 2016

   Nancy,

   Just imagine how easy it would be for you to get to MLK if your Mendel Dr were connected with the Mendel Dr near Timber Hollow Apartments. It’s too bad you and your neighbors were so opposed to sensible connectivity of two roads barely disconnected with the same name!

8. 

   Laurin

    /  January 25, 2016

   As a former council member I worked hard to encourage the Town and the staff at CHCSS “talk” to each other about the school routes and that these be a priority in addition to the main arteries in town. I recall there always seemed to be one or two problem streets in town, completely hilly and shady, that were holding up timely snow/ice removal. Perhaps taking these one or two problem streets and concentrating efforts on them would keep all of the kids in school, whichever school bus route they are on. Perhaps there should be a coordinated “Chapel Hill Carrboro Schools/Town of Chapel Hill/Carrboro” master snow removal plan for the timely return of our kids back to their schools! Identify the problem streets, coordinate and concentrate efforts there, in addition to other Town/State priorities. We are known state-wide and nationally for the quality of our school system and the great town in which that system resides. Hopefully they are working closely together on matters such as these…

9. 

   Nancy

    /  January 25, 2016

   After major snowstorms when my kids were young, the school system asked families in our tertiary neighborhood to bring their children out to the main road, and the school bus picked them up there. None of the parents complained. Has that policy changed?

10. 

    anon

     /  January 26, 2016

    @Nancy – wrong. the school board does not have a policy of moving bus stops. They are assigned once a year at the beginning of each school year. They assume there may be some elementary/middle school kids that do not have parents in the house at the time they leave or return from school and do not change them.

    So, if the Town does not clear a bus route even if it clears some of them = no school that day.

11. 

    Nancy

     /  January 26, 2016

    So much for my “back in the day” story. Good point about latchkey kids. That probably is more common now than 20 years ago. I checked with town staff and learned that street-clearing priorities are city bus routes first, school bus routes second.

12. 

    plurimus

     /  January 26, 2016

    When I was a boy, we had to walk to school through the snow, uphill both ways, bare foot.

13. 

    Bruce Springsteen

     /  January 27, 2016

    And we LIKED it!

14. 

    Linda Convissor

     /  January 27, 2016

    Nancy,
    Buy Don (and yourself) a set of Stabilicers (LL Bean) or similar from the other outdoor sports stores. I can vouch that with them on, you can walk, even jog, on ice and clamber over those frozen piles of snow. And walk on wood floors without damage to the floor. Best $20 I ever spent given these past few winters.
    Linda

15. 

    BikeBelongInCH

     /  January 28, 2016

    Tertiary? Seems like walkers are quaternary (okay, I had to look that up). Walk a few feet North of Rosemary St from downtown on MLK and take your life in your hands. Prius’s are Prioritized over Pedestrians here in Chapel Hill, NAS CARolina (witness every ice mountain created by the plows blocking the sidewalks). (Hyperbole segue ahead alert) Talk about attracting wet-labs and non-retail/restaurant businesses is meaningless without creating a community where the people that will work in those businesses want to live… which is an affordable, walkable, bikeable, public transit connected community (okay, well that’s at least where I want to live).

16. 

    BoyNamedSue

     /  January 28, 2016

    Wait a minute, are we saying solar power isn’t enough? No snow chains for that bike?

    Technology to the rescue!
    http://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/2016/0126/Throw-away-the-shovel-Electric-concrete-melts-snow

    The tax money to pay for that affordable, walkable, bikeable, public transit connected community you want needs to come from commercial development and innovation. Always has, always will.

17. 

    BIkesBelongInCH

     /  January 28, 2016

    Amen Sue, I would happily give up the bike a few days post snowmageddon… although my old stomping-the-snow-off-my-feet ground The People’s Republic of Boulder prided itself on clearing the extensive creek-centric greenway system of snow before the streets were cleared. Thank goodness CH has no extensive greenway system to clear.

    Fair enough to say that such snow events are unusual in our Southern Ice of Heaven. I am innovating as fast as I can, and today perfected a method of napping in my office chair. Unfortunately, I have seen no associated increase in tax revenue.

18. 

    BoyNamedSue

     /  January 28, 2016

    PRoB Older is more experienced w/Snow. PRoCH has much thicker air. Around here when it snows people stay home, when in Rome…..napping and patience is a good idea.

    I think a county wide linked greenway system was proposed once upon a time and rejected (no idea, I thought it was a good idea). Perhaps the time is now.

    In this town I think if people cleared the sidewalk first the bike and bus people would complain. The only eternal truism is that some constituency will complain, The complaining is unusually loud and early this time from the recently unseated group that claims to be “progressive”. Who would have thunk it?

19. 

    BIkesBelongInCH

     /  January 29, 2016

    Upon arriving in CH, I was surprised to find such divisiveness… I am disappointed that those you call progressives lately seem at times to be having knee-jerk reactions to non-issues, I would hope they will give the new council some time to settle in and then choose their battles wisely. Or yet even crazier, figure out a way to work together.

    On the other hand, CHALK seems mostly representative of single family home owners who want to preserve the status quo. I fear CHALK’s blanket opposition to paving greenways (you might say CHALK is only against paving creekside greenways, but really, greenways are almost by definition entirely built parallel to creek beds for reasons of practicality).

20. 

    David

     /  January 29, 2016

    If one goes back and reads the public positions that CHALT and people associated with CHALT took on the major development proposals of the past two years, you will find that in no instance did they advocate for the status quo. You will find instead that in every instance they advocated for a greater emphasis on new commercial development and less emphasis on residential, for maintaining high environmental protection and energy efficiency standards, for greater production of moderately-priced housing and less production of new “luxury” housing, for comprehensive traffic and stormwater analysis rather than piecemeal planning, and so on.

21. 

    BikesBelongInCH

     /  January 29, 2016

    Mea Culpea David… then I would amend the statement to simply say “CHALK seems mostly representative of single family home owners”. Fair statement?

    It does seem to represent a demographic division of sorts in CH… I don’t think the “progressives” are particularly interested in raping the environment into a post-apocalyptic Mad-Max landscape of Prius drivers. The question remains, who is gonna work in all this new commercial development if CH does not foster a hipster-friendly environment?

    I also assumed a CHALK position on greenways (you might detect here a single mindedness on my part). Every other CHALK sister website (Friends of Bolin Creek, Save Bolin Creek, Save the Friends of Bolin Creek, etc) seem adamantly opposed to greenways (again, see previous comment equating “greenway” to “creekside greenway”). It seems sort of like being against “puppies”.

    I beg the moderator’s forgiveness for venturing from the icy discussion.

22. 

    anon

     /  January 29, 2016

    bikesbelongs must live in an alternative universe;
    the last council approved a lot of high end condos/apartments with little public space, which is why CHALT was effective.

    no one I know of running or ran was opposed to greenspace

23. 

    BikesBelongInCH

     /  January 29, 2016

    Anon, thanks for your assurances. RE: the alternate universe thing, I think many would agree. Now if I could just stop their voices in my head…

24. 

    plurimus

     /  January 29, 2016

    Indeed. The preponderance of construction approved in Chapel Hill in the past years and in the pipeline are high rent apartment or expensive condo developments, so the question really is where are all of these hipster-progressives going to work?

    I have not heard any anti-greenway sentiment either, although somewhere in the past I remember a county plan for such linkage being dismissed.

    Public space is another sticky issue I think for example the imposing sculpture in front of 140 West disappointed people who hoped for a public gathering spot.

    Demographic division……hmmm not sure about that one. Based on the occupancy rates, it seems as if all demographics do not see the value in high rent 800 square foot condos with no parking and no commercial nearby…..

25. 

    David

     /  January 30, 2016

    Bikes,

    It’s a fair statement to say that the people who are most active in CHALT own the homes in which they live and that the homes in which they live tend to be single-family detached (SFD) homes. Your statement, however, seems to suggest that the issues that concern CHALT members are *only* of concern to owners of SFD homes, and I don’t think that’s true. Renters and people who live in apartments or duplexes also care about housing affordability, support for locally-owned small business, protection of the natural environment, climate change, the quality of public schools, government transparency and accountability, being able to shop locally, provision of safe well-connected bike routes and so on.

    As for the issue of whether or not creekside greenways should be paved, we know that paved trails built too close to a stream adversely effect the stream ecology and the wildlife that inhabit the water and the riparian buffer. So those who care about the health of local streams and of the wildlife that depend on them understandably oppose paving trails that run close alongside streams. The policy question we are wrestling with is whether the benefits of paved greenways, such as making them more accessible to bicyclists or to people in wheelchairs, outweigh the cost they impose on the landscape. There is also the question of balance; we have lots of paved greenway in town; is it necessary to pave all the trails, or can we leave some unpaved for those who prefer to recreate in more naturalistic surroundings?

    And then there are some complexities having to do with financing. As I understand it, if a trail or greenway is built with state or federal funds it needs to meet certain design standards such as being ten feet wide, which is pretty devastating to the steep slopes along the upper reaches of our local creeks. In the lower, flatter portions of the watershed it’s not such a problem. If we were to build our paved greenways with our own money or with donations we could perhaps make them them narrower and design them to have a lighter impact on the landscape.

    So, the bottom line is that the CHALT people I know—and the Friends of Bolin Creek members for that matter— do not oppose greenways per se and do not even oppose paved greenways that are built in appropriate locations in ways that minimize adverse environmental impact. They do oppose allowing the abstract goals of “connectivity” or “accessibility” to trump all other considerations and they believe that in the upper portion of Bolin Creek, where the slopes are steep and sensitive to disturbance, the environmental costs of building a ten-foot wide paved surface outweigh the benefits.

    Here’s an op-ed that makes the ecological case for eschewing paved trails. http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/community/chapel-hill-news/chn-opinion/article45341853.html

26. 

    Terri

     /  January 31, 2016

    I agree with Bikes statement: “Talk about attracting wet-labs and non-retail/restaurant businesses is meaningless without creating a community where the people that will work in those businesses want to live… which is an affordable, walkable, bikeable, public transit connected community.”

    Back to the snow removal issue, the point many of us have made repeatedly over the past 10+ years is that development needs to pay for itself. Building sidewalks as an expression of commitment to walkability without building in the mechanism to keep them free and clear of snow/ice/dog poop/broken glass etc. or without the funding to pay for repairing broken pavement downline the line is just poor planning. We expect to clear and repair roads. We need to do the same for sidewalks.

    BTW, on the issue of paved greenways public funds (funds collected from all individuals) have to comply with state and federal accessibility guidelines. If you’re going to take tax money from handicapped individuals, you must make the services available to them.

27. 

    plurimus

     /  January 31, 2016

    Terri,

    It seems to me there is a dissonance in not valuing discussing and planning commercial development in the context of what Chapel Hill is now and then on the other, lament the lack of funding and poor planning for maintaining and expanding infrastructure.

    What is the solution to pay for the affordable, walkable, bikeable, public transit connected community? More residential real estate taxes? More high rent rentals? More expensive condos? Doesn’t that thinking result in exacerbating other issues like affordability?

    Couldn’t attracting and enabling those non-retail/restaurant businesses provide a preferable path top solving both problems?

    Paving greenways is not the only accessibility solution and while the link below may or may not be a workable, practicable solution, it should remind us that the level of thought that created the problem is not sufficient to solve it: http://www.discovermymobility.com/store/personaltransportationvehicle/summit/hummerextreem/index.html

28. 

    Terri

     /  January 31, 2016

    Plurimus

    I’m saying that if the residential developers aren’t willing to pay an assessment to cover sidewalk maintenance or if the going tax rate isn’t sufficient to cover sidewalk maintenance, then we shouldn’t be building sidewalks. I feel the same about the schools. If we can’t afford to be maintaining them, then we shouldn’t be building them.

    Since growth can’t (or won’t) pay for itself, then what we’ve done is transferred wealth to the developers in exchange for building an unaffordable community.

    The question is how we get out of this vicious cycle. One of the first steps is to decide what we want to be when we grow up and take responsibility for remaking this community into one that fits the vision that so many of us have–one that is affordable to a range of income levels, one that is gentle on the environment, and one that still has enough services to keep us cared for even if they aren’t everything we’ve ever wanted. If we don’t have the vision and the commitment, we can’t really plot a course forward.

29. 

    plurimus

     /  January 31, 2016

    Terri,

    … an assessment is not long term infrastructure maintenance. That gap is why the subject came up in the first place.

    We agree about the transfer of wealth, what should be done about that? How can we keep the local economy fluid and it’s wealth focused on making the local conditions better for everyone?

    I still do not see the agreement that commercial and local employment are a critical part of the equation and must be in focus a lot more than in the past eight years.

    I do not see a willingness to compromise or even discuss how to fix things with the new council, only opportunistic complaints about what is not working.

    The viscous cycle of empty development is not only occurring, but the frequency is increasing at roughly the same rate as the income gap. We agree that a new course needs to be plotted, documented and executed; is everyone willing to participate and pull in sort of the same direction? Is Chapel Hill to become a failed community in this regard?

30. 

    David

     /  February 1, 2016

    “The question is how we get out of this vicious cycle.”

    Indeed, that is exactly the question. A good first step would be for a working majority of our elected officials to recognize that it is, in fact, a vicious cycle, what Charles Marohn calls the “growth Ponzi scheme.” (http://www.strongtowns.org/the-growth-ponzi-scheme/).

    Until there is greater consensus about the long-term costs associated with the kind of growth and development the town has embraced in recent years, I fear we will keep digging ourselves deeper in the hole. I’m hoping that the new mayor and council members will be able to put the town on a new and better trajectory.

31. 

    Terri

     /  February 1, 2016

    Assessments to manage future costs have worked well for OWASA, Pluribus. But however the future costs are handled they shouldn’t be ignored like is being done with sidewalk (and school) maintenance.

32. 

    BikesBelongInCH

     /  February 1, 2016

    Re: paved greenways… Thanks for that summary David. I agree it’s a trade-off of juggling priorities and the greater good. What seems to get left out of the discussion is that we all have self-interests. I selfishly would like to live in a community where one can easily get around without a car. In that same vein, I appreciate when you mentioned “can we leave some unpaved for those who prefer to recreate in more naturalistic surroundings?”. Isn’t it possible that some folks (in addition to ecological concerns) simply do not want their little naturalistic corner in their neighborhood to change? How refreshing it would be to hear such candor.

    You write about the “abstract goals” of connectivity and accessibility. Is it possible you do not commute daily by bicycle? I assure you that connectivity is not an “abstract goal” for folks that do not want to depend on a car. Likewise such folks would probably disagree with your assertion that CH already has “lots of paved greenway in town”. I don’t think connectivity is an abstract goal for automobile drivers, and as a tax-paying citizen you certainly expect safe and convenient road access to/from your home… shouldn’t other forms of transit be given the same consideration?

    I also suspect that accessibility is not an “abstract” goal for the elderly, disabled or handicapped, or families that want safe and car-free places for their children to ride and walk. (Okay, to be fair, that was a bit of a cheap shot… I am sure that you harbor no grudge against the aforementioned groups… and likewise I think you agree that proponents of paved greenways do not somehow care less about ecology).

    I do like the notion of compromise, and I hope there is room for that, trading off routes that will bolster an off street, safe and connected network against places that could be left as you say, naturalistic I realize such an effort has been made, namely the proposed campus-to-campus connector route along the railroad tracks.

33. 

    plurimus

     /  February 1, 2016

    Terri,

    Sidewalks and water/sewer pipes are different from a maintenance and capacity perspective. I do not think the comparison to schools and sidewalks for the purposes of planning is necessarily a good one, and here is why:

    I agree that the school maintenance issue is a problem, but I see that as mostly an example of poor management. There isn’t even a line item for routine facilities maintenance in the school budgets. Schools take 49% of the entire county budget. It seems to me that something other than under-funding is wrong for things to have festered this long.

    Sidewalks may be under-funded, but how many events like this past ice storm do we really have? How long do they last? It seems like there is a relatively benign solution to this problem.

34. 

    plurimus

     /  February 1, 2016

    I thought people might get a kick out of this new video. Test track in Ann Arbor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vShi-xx6ze8

35. 

    David

     /  February 1, 2016

    Bikes wrote, “Likewise such folks would probably disagree with your assertion that CH already has ‘lots of paved greenway in town.’”

    Some data: In 2013 there were 8.1 miles of natural trail maintained by the town and 9.5 miles of paved greenway. Since then another ~4 miles of trail have been paved. Assuming that the 4 miles of newly paved trail was previously part of the 8.1 miles of natural trail, ~75% of the total amount of town-maintained greenway is now paved. If the 4 miles of newly paved greenway is new trail, then the percentage of paved trail is 62%. So it’s safe to say that paved greenway accounts for 62%-75% of the town-maintained trail network.

    I agree that the win-win scenario is for UNC to stop using coal in its power-generating plant so that the rail line can be converted to a paved bike/ped corridor, thus providing connectivity while sparing the upper Bolin Creek riparian buffer.

    Some of the stretches of Bolin Creek that folks are particularly concerned about protecting, however, are in Carrboro, and I don’t know what their ratio of paved to natural trail is. You can download a map of the entire trail network here: http://www.townofchapelhill.org/town-hall/departments-services/parks-recreation/facilities-greenways-parks/greenways

36. 

    Terri

     /  February 2, 2016

    Pluribus, some of us use the sidewalks everyday, multiple times throughout the day. We contend with trash, broken glass, dog poop, etc. In places they are broken and unpassable/challenging for those in wheelchairs or walkers. In the winter there is snow and ice. In the fall there are leaves. In the summer there are weeds. The biggest and most consistent hazard is driveways, although that isn’t a maintenance issue.

    Maintaining infrastructure, whether it’s sidewalks, roadways, or schools, is good management. Making sure we can pay for that good management comes from planning. if there is no commitment to pay for good management of our infrastructure, especially proposed infrastructure, then we shouldn’t build it. Ignoring maintenance is an incredibly expensive habit.

37. 

    BIkesBelongInCH

     /  February 2, 2016

    David, you may have $8, I may have $2. You clearly have more than I do, but I don’t think many folks would suggest that you “have lots”.

    I think you understand the value of a connected greenway network. While there may be bits and pieces of paved greenway scattered around town, unconnected they do not completely fulfill their intended purpose to serve the Whole of Chapel Hill (not just the parts) until integrated into a network.

38. 

    Nancy

     /  February 2, 2016

    Terri and Plurimus — I differentiate between maintenance and repair. In my view, the town should be responsible for repair, so that it is done in a timely manner, up to standards and of uniform quality. I would not ask the developer to take on that expense, lest we disincentivize developers from building sidewalks. As for maintenance — picking up dog poop, shoveling walks, sweeping off leaves — why shouldn’t that be the responsibility of the property owners?

39. 

    Terri

     /  February 2, 2016

    Nancy,

    If you aren’t (or can’t) put maintenance in the town ordinance and enforce it, then sidewalks or schools are risks to those who need to use them. At OWASA we charge an assessment fee that covers long term maintenance/repair. That money goes into a fund for that purpose.

40. 

    BikesBelongInCH

     /  February 2, 2016

    Nancy, as your pedestrian constituency was sliding down the ice rink formerly known as the MLK sidewalk… which neighbor’s door of which massive apartment complex should our walking citizenry knock on?

    Just as there are primary and secondary and (so sorry) tertiary roads, perhaps there are primary pedestrian thoroughfares where the said snow/ice clearing by owners would be prioritized for policing/enforcement?

41. 

    plurimus

     /  February 2, 2016

    Nancy & Terri, Yep I agree on both counts. However lack of maintenance soon grows into repair issues (as we see with he schools). Relying on individual property owners leads to a patchwork of quality, unless there is some standard and enforcement as well as a definition of maintenance vs. repair.

    I wonder exactly how big the problem actually is. What if the town put up a map of the sidewalks and asked for citizen experience and had a place to report problems on their web site? At least then there would be an inventory and indication how widespread the problem actually is and if there are areas that need attention due to the number of complaints?

    Curious, is it true the Sidewalks are in the DoT right of way?

42. 

    Nancy

     /  February 2, 2016

    Terri, it pains me to think that Donald Trump’s Narcissist Nation (What have you done for me today?) has become a reality. If you have a dog, clean up after it. If you have a sidewalk in front of your house, clear off the leaves and snow, if you are able. If you have a neighbor who can’t clear the sidewalk, clear it for them once in a while. That’s the “community” part of “walkable community.”

43. 

    BikesBelongInCH

     /  February 2, 2016

    Oh my, that seems extreme… Equating TrumpThink with folks that want safe sidewalks seems a little like equating CHALT to the NC Tea Party Controlled General Assembly because they both are against DOLRT.

    Please remember your original blog post showed sympathy for your automobile driving constituents in low priority, cul-de-sac neighborhoods for ice removal. The Whole of Chapel Hill (not just the parts) includes all sorts of people… not just automobile drivers.

44. 

    Nancy

     /  February 2, 2016

    I would hope some of those people are able-bodied and willing to contribute to the community.

45. 

    BikesBelongInCH

     /  February 2, 2016

    Agreed, we should all help our neighbors. I try, and I will re-double my efforts. But I don’t think you seriously want someone to hop off a bus armed with a snow shovel?

    I don’t personally think a few days of icy sidewalks merits much more from my council than something like “hey.. we just had a big snow event… thank you all the folks that helped dig us out… what can we do better next time? And what about sidewalks along major thoroughfares?”

46. 

    David

     /  February 2, 2016

    Bikes wrote: “David, you may have $8, I may have $2. You clearly have more than I do, but I don’t think many folks would suggest that you “’have lots’.”

    We were discussing whether or not to pave some of the Town’s existing segments of natural trail. To continue your analogy, if I feel deprived because I have only $8, is it right for me to increase my wealth by taking one of your two dollars?

47. 

    Terri

     /  February 2, 2016

    If you don’t think the town should be responsible for cleaning off the sidewalks, Nancy, why is it acceptable to spend so much to remove snow from roads or pick up trash? Why do we need a downtown commission or a community design advisory board? Or why spend tax money on public art or invest in business incubators? Why collect taxes at all?

    Where do you draw the line on what government does and what is left to individuals? If citizens should just be doing everything themselves, why do we need elected officials?

    That’s the Trump argument; government is just a waste of money except for national defense. Businesses will regulate themselves so we don’t need environmental laws. Charter schools will educate those who really want to learn. And wealth will trickle down.

48. 

    plurimus

     /  February 2, 2016

    Terri, I think hyperbole has gotten the better of you.

49. 

    Nancy

     /  February 2, 2016

    Terri, individuals can’t plow the streets. But many can clear their sidewalks during the one snowstorm a year Chapel Hill has on average. Every town has people who don’t have the time, inclination or ability to clean up after themselves or contribute to the greater community. So that’s what I use as my gauge. If people don’t properly dispose of their trash, it becomes a health hazard, so the taxpayers need to hire people to do that for the whole town. Some developers design projects for their own good, not the good of the community, so we need a CDC to make sure the taxpayers have a voice. Businesses don’t regulate themselves. (After you’ve seen The Martian, go see The Big Short.) I wish everyone were so responsible and community-minded there would be no need for oversight, but humans being humans, we need government, and that costs money, and we elect people we think will make good decisions about how to spend our money to serve the good of the whole gamut of residents.

50. 

    Bruce Springsteen

     /  February 3, 2016

    I spilled a little water on my kitchen floor last week and I’m still waiting for the Town of Chapel Hill to send a crew out to clean it up.

    Seriously, considering it only snows about once a year around here and it typically melts in a few days anyway, does the Town of CH have to treat every sidewalk? This last big snow came on a Friday and on Sunday my HOA had a team out there chipping away at the sidewalks and I was watching it and thinking how it’s a waste of my HOA money since even without a team chipping away it will be gone before long. The Sun charges a monthly HOA due of $0 (although the assessment when the Sun goes supernova is pretty steep).

    With every item that comes up people say “The town should take care of it.” But everything the town takes care off costs money. And everyone that lives here has to pay for it (including renters, albeit indirectly). And yet people say we’re for affordability.

    People should have to say either “The town should take care of it and also the town stop paying for this other thing to balance it out” or else “The town should take care of it even though doing so makes it less affordable.” it seems to me that one of the two is always applicable.