The concept plan for Obey Creek presented to the CDC on Aug. 15 (CHN, Aug. 29, bit.ly/Srhl3S) doesn’t even come close to the criteria developed by the S15-501 Discussion group and implemented into the Town’s Comprehensive plan.

The proposed retail and commercial/office space is about twice the size of University Mall. Condos and apartments are five times what is allowed by present zoning, impacting traffic and schools.

Building heights are much taller than anything in the Market Street core of Southern Village. Many are five-plus plus stories above ground level. The developer still hopes for a big box store, which certainly does not mirror the human scale look and feel of Southern Village.

Specifically, the map in the new Vision 2020 comprehensive plan shows a compact area that should be like the Southern Village core. The comprehensive plan also calls for it to recognize the spirit of the earlier Southern area plan. The proposed development fails that test too. I know, because I was a member of the Southern area planning and S15-501 Discussion groups.

When the council meets on Sept. 19, the developer’s concept plan should be sent back for rework and broader discussion and input from Southern area residents before council comments.

John E. Schmidt

Chapel Hill

Visit, but don’t drive

My daughter visited from New York recently. Getting her morning coffee in Carrboro, she told us she saw a man hiding at a pedestrian crosswalk.

When a car approached the man jumped into the crosswalk so that approaching cars would have to stop. Turns out he was a policeman in plain clothes who had set up a sting operation at the crosswalk.

Along with predatory car-towing from Franklin Street parking lots and the speed traps I have seen on Raleigh Road and 15-501 and the message to out-of-town visitors is clear: Come visit and spend your money; just don’t drive while you’re here!

Don Heineman

Chapel Hill

No freebies in care

The writer of the letter “AHCA a good thing” (CHN, Aug. 26, http://bit.ly/OgeB3M) seems to think at Obamacare is a good thing because of all the “freebies.”

I hate to disillusion him, but there is no free lunch. All of these freebies will be paid for by us the taxpayers (the 49 percent who do pay taxes).

If, God forbid, Obamacare is not repealed, the bill will start coming due next year. The Democrats cleverly hid all the costs and tax increases until after the election.

Obamacare was sold as costing less than $1 trillion, but the latest estimates are that it will cost $3 trillion. There are 23 new taxes in Obamacare just waiting to be sprung on us.

As far as Obamacare strengthening Medicare, it instead guts it, by taking $716 billion out of it to pay for Obamacare. So Obama is taking money that seniors paid in and using it to finance a program for people who paid in nothing.

The campaign ads touting AARP support for Obamacare really anger me. AARP is supposed to be looking out for seniors’ best interests, but it is not doing that by supporting a program that guts Medicare.

The idea that AARP is non-partisan is a joke. It is a left-wing pressure group (in the tank for Obama) that got stimulus money and stands to sell lots of its Medicare supplement insurance if Obamacare stands.

The writer obviously knows nothing about what Congressman Ryan is proposing. His proposals would change nothing for anyone 55 and over and would save Medicare for those younger. Under Obama’s do-nothing approach Medicare will be bankrupt in a few short years.

Vincent M. DiSandro Sr.

Hillsborough

The simple answer

In response to “Do political/religious ads belong on buses?” (CHN, Sept. 2, bit.ly/O08nmM), the simple answer is “No!”

Just saying “No!” is based on principles, not personalities. The political aspect should be crystal clear as politics are divisive by nature and would offend many.

The religious aspect may be dicey for some, but allowing one religious advertisement would open the floodgate for other religious viewpoints, such as anti-abortion and anti-gay positions.

The city would be obligated to post them or face a lawsuit for discrimination and violation of First Amendment rights.

The city needs to fire whoever allowed this ad to be accepted. The individual appears to lack the common sense necessary to safeguard Chapel Hill’s integrity.

Greg McDonald

Chapel Hill

Ads serve purpose

The controversy about “bus ads” has sparked a much-needed dialogue. Many people in town do not realize that – besides The Church of Reconciliation (a Presbyterian congregation in Chapel Hill) – the diverse coalition sponsoring the ad includes Jews for a Just Peace NC, the Coalition for Peace with Justice, and NC Veterans for Peace.

People need to become more educated about what is really going on in Palestine.

Viewing the website twopeoplesonefuture.org – which also gives background about the two grandfathers (one Israeli, one Palestinian) featured in the ad – would be a good start for exploring the facts about how U.S. military aid (as opposed to other aid to Israel) has not brought peace or security for either parties in the conflict nor an end to the violence.

Instead, it has enabled the Israeli government to displace and oppress the Palestinian people, expand illegal settlements, and violate human rights.

We need a just peace and reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians –and some are already living it. For us, it begins when we become aware of what is being done in our name, demand that it stop, and insist on a policy that contributes to freedom, justice, and dignity for both Israelis and Palestinians.

I hope that the bus ads in our community will continue to be a catalyst for conversation, reflection, and action.

Lisa Anthony

Chapel Hill

Not on buses

Calling the Holocaust a myth, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declares Jews “the most detested people in all humanity,” claiming Israel “must be wiped off the map.”

Many embrace his maniacal views. To that end, the likes of Iran, Syria, Russia, Al-Qaeda and others have poured dollars and arms into Palestine to support their goal of Israeli harm. Almost daily, Palestinian Hamas fires Qassam rockets into Israel.

Despite millions pouring into Palestine to support Israeli destruction, the local Church of Reconciliation funded an advertising campaign on Chapel Hill buses to end U.S. military aid to Israel, suggesting this will bring peace. They omit a call to end similar lethal military aid to Palestinians from Iran and others.

Sure to generate more town debate, their campaign has become the latest “free speech” battle.

Few dispute the church’s right to take a position calling for an end to Israeli military aid. That’s the essence of free speech, even if those views are misguided or unsupported by fact.

But no individual or organization has the constitutional “right” to use public transport to “advocate” their political views upon an unwanting and captive ridership.

In the world of “political correctness” so prevalent here, it’s hard to imagine any expression of opinion or thought that will not find some person aggrieved or with damaged “feelings.”

The town council should do the wise thing – don’t use public buses as yet another forum for the advocacy, even kooky expression of more political views. Let us ride in peace.

David R. Lee

Chapel Hill

Embarrassing

Recently friends from Indiana came to visit me and my family. After a pleasant dinner, we decided to take them for a walk down historic Franklin Street. What an embarrassing experience that turned out to be.

First, we encountered a young woman being assisted down the street by several males. Appearing to be drunk, she soon began vomiting on the sidewalk.

Not impressed, we walked further down Franklin Street. We soon heard loud male voices. As we got to the area, we observed a young male urinating down a storm drain, while simultaneously shouting obscenities at his equally drunk friends.

Disgusted by the Franklin Street experience, we departed to a place where we could be in the company of adults, rather than grossly irresponsible children.

At first, I was angered by the experience, angered by the immature behaviors of these young people. After all, happy to have visiting friends, we wanted to give them a grand tour of this special place we now call home, unspoiled by such bad behavior.

I assume the youths are UNC students – both appeared to be less than 21. My anger was soon replaced by concern for the obviously unhealthy choices they made. But they didn’t act alone – they had plenty of help from other town adults.

Now I’m wondering what, if anything, the university and Chapel Hill town leaders are doing to prevent this sort of dangerous drinking? I suppose that’s where my anger should be directed.

Suki Harrington

Chapel Hill