Access Umstead has worked diligently to address the Umstead access issues by initiating a petition; sharing it with elected state, city and county officials; and communicating with various individuals within various government entities to raise awareness, explore alternatives and to arrive at solutions. While we must say that our preference is for the access to Graylyn to revert back to parking allowed alongside the road either informally or with some type of signage designating where to park, we accept that these are not under consideration and are focused on the alternatives proposed by NC Parks for access at the Bike and Bridle Trailhead/Graylyn area.
Of the alternatives proposed, we support Alternative C as it is the only one that restores access from Graylyln as requested by over 1460 petitioners who wanted safe and convenient access to Umstead State Park. This will allow many time-pressed individuals and families to resume enjoying the park for that quick run, walk or ride. We also appreciate that this alternative will have minimal (if any) environmental impact.
We strongly oppose Alternative B and do not view this as an improvement to the park. The paving of these additional roads inside the park will only create more safety hazards for bikers, hikers, runners, and horseback riders using these roads as it will encourage increased vehicular speed within the park. We think this is an expensive alternative that will also have a greater adverse environmental impact.
We oppose Alternative A as it does not address the public's concerns about the impact the loss of Graylyn access has had on their ability to enjoy their park.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Clearly, the only alternative that addresses the concerns raised by the hundreds (1450+) of people who signed the petition, including myself, is Alternative C. Anything else is simply to ignore that large group of Umstead Park patrons who took the time to express their concerns and frustration with Park planning.
Alternative C addresses the issues of providing both "legal" parking and alternative access to the park and is a reasonable compromise to
reopening parking along Graylyn drive. It also facilitates an entry exit point with a stoplight (Ebenezer/US70, Ebenezer/Edwards Mill) that requires no additional DOT expense.
I suspect the only real opposition will come from the 4 homes who suddenly enjoy a private, newly paved road access to their homes.
Alternative A is "do nothing"--except that damage has already been done. Now that Graylyn is paved, I'm sure the 4 homes served by this otherwise dead end street would love this one.
If saving money were the object, Graylyn should never have been shutdown/paved in the first place. (Glenwood Ave is a wreck, yet it goes unrepaired while the County paves a dead-end road.)
Alternative B does nothing to facilitate alternative/convenient access to Umstead park. It continues to route all traffic in/out of the US 70 side of the park through a very busy intersection with US 70 with no traffic light. Paving the access road (and it's considerable expense) accomplishes virtually nothing to alleviate the concerns that have been raised and even increases safety concerns along adjacent trails.
--Clark E. Cramer
6008 Canadero Dr
Raleigh, NC 27612
919-782-6375
Thank you Clark! We totally agree.
I disagree with the stretch of logic that the 1460 people who signed the petition would all necessarily favor Alternative C that opens another part of Umstead to vehicles as a shortcut to an existing parking area. To make that claim would be a misrepresentation of those signatures that were in support of “restoring parking at the Graylyn Drive and Reedy Creek Road entrances”. I was also infuriated by the closing of Graylyn Rd over a year ago, and I would have gladly signed your petition had I known that it was later created, but I do not believe that the solution to this is to create another gated entrance and lose more of the tranquility of the park to traffic. I absolutely do not support Alternative C.
I had used the Graylyn entrance for over 13 years or more. I love Umstead Park. It was the main reason for selecting a more expensive house a few years ago that is within running and biking distance of it. The people who parked at Graylyn were like me – park lovers respectfully enjoying access to the running and biking paths. Being such a regular at the park, so many of these familiar faces that parked there felt like an extended set of neighbors to me. Even though I can now visit the park without having to park at Graylyn Rd myself, I am angry it was closed and believe it was unfair to do so. I had never seen anything that indicated inappropriate activity other than joggers enjoying the running trail before the park officially opened or at dusk when the park might close before returning. If anything, then perhaps some markers could have been created to allow space for a limited number of cars to control those few times on perfect weekends when it did become a bit crowded.
I think it’s terrible that the Reedy Creek entrance was “improved” and left with no parking years ago, but I would not have advocated creating an entrance there to have cars come through the park from that direction. I’m concerned about the day when they decide to shut off parking at the Old Reedy Creek Rd entrance near Crabtree lake where so many runners and bikers go, but similarly I would not support opening the park gate there and losing more of the park to traffic. Making Graylyn the third official entrance to Umstead, an entrance where all runners, bikers, and horse trailers would have to go since the current access to that parking would be cut off, is not the answer to this. I believe we should continue to push for a reasonable number of parking spaces outside of Reedy Creek, and now the Umstead Park side of Graylyn, and likely someday at Old Reedy Creek. Opening the park to vehicular traffic at all these points is not the solution and only shrinks and degrades the park that we all love. All three options on the table are losing propositions, but I would choose to do nothing (A) than to lose more of our park to provide a shortcut to the limited horse trailer parking that will have all the time and space limitations as it does now from the current access from Glenwood.
Jay Spadie
Jay, Please read the prior blog postings for information about the journey our lobbying has taken us and it should increase your understanding of our position. The goal of the petitioners was restored access at Reedy Creek and Graylyn and preserved access at Old Reedy Creek. Our preference would be for parking at Reedy Creek and Graylyn to revert to its original form. We presented this and several other options to NC Parks and the Umstead PAC. We also learned in this process that there were prior plans for parking at Graylyn and that this was removed from further discussion at the November 2007 PAC meeting (minutes are posted below.) NC Parks came up with different options on their own which they deemed feasible based on their needs (staffing, budget, preservation). As you know in any negotiation, there is rarely a win-win for all parties. We accept that these are the options NC Parks finds feasible. Of these options, we wholly support Alternative C as that is the only one that restores access at Graylyn. (BTW, Alternative B includes long range improvement plans for the day camp at the bike and bridal trailhead and the paving was thought to improve access to it.) We're sorry if you cannot appreciate the logic but do not believe this is misrepresenting the petitioners in any way. We all love the park. Elimination of these access points has prevented many (including those who live off of Ebenezer Church) from being able to hike with their family, walk the dog, run or bike after work due to the extra driving time required. We do not believe that an access at Graylyn will dramatically alter traffic or the tranquility of the park since Alternative C provides for eliminating through traffic from Hwy 70. Everyone should recognize that there certainly will be increased traffic due to the continued development of the areas surrounding the park-and not blame park users. NC Parks has provided a public comment period and we continue to encourage everyone to take advantage of the opportunity. We will continue to wholly support Alternative C as that is the only one that restores access at Graylyn for the public and we will continue to work on the other areas.
Post a Comment