I read with interest your recent article about last week’s Town Council meeting on Obey Creek (CHN, Sept. 23, bit.ly/QHdCdi). Along with many other concerned residents of southern Chapel Hill, I attended this meeting in person. I was pleased with the article’s objectivity, with one exception: the way it treated the expected traffic impact from this project.

The second paragraph of the article quotes Roger Perry’s comments on that subject (“Do you want to manage it, how do you want to manage it and is it worth the effort?”), and says little else about it. But it’s incorrect to treat this as a fait accompli, as Mr. Perry would have us think. The Town Council can also choose only to allow low-density development, in accordance with existing zoning and the wishes of area residents. Such development is likely to have minimal impact on traffic – although I urge Mr. Perry to commission a study showing that this is the case.

Given that recent projections already show traffic in this area exceeding road capacity over the next 10 to 20 years, it would be irresponsible for the town to allow Mr. Perry to build anything on a larger scale and then leave it up to the residents to cope with the impact.

Steve Clamage

Chapel Hill

Think small

I’m a Southern Village resident and would like to express my thoughts about the Obey Creek development plan (CHN, Sept. 23, bit.ly/QHdCdi).

It’s exciting, yet at the same time very overwhelming in terms of its size and scale. It feels like we’re cramming part of New York City into a very small space.

While I believe we don’t need another plaza, I also believe Obey Creek will be developed regardless. Thus I implore the town to consider a reduced version of this new “New York City,” so we can retain the peaceful quality of life we’ve experienced for years out here in these hills.

Please think small, not big. Scale back the economy of this new “city.” Make it a village.

Sarah Shapard

Chapel H ill

Help RENA rebuild

Congratulations, Orange County commissioners, for agreeing to “move forward quickly’ to find the money to build a community center in the Rogers Road/Eubanks Road neighborhood (CHN, Sep. 9, bit.ly/RGShyZ).

We need centers where children have a place to go to make friends, to learn and to play, where parents know their children will be nurtured in a safe and healthy environment. We need community centers where children are encouraged to grow into good, productive citizen in their community, where choices are presented other than the path to jail and prison.

Let’s build more community centers and not bigger jails and more prisons. Help RENA (Rogers-Eubanks Roads Neighborhood Association) rebuild. It’s good for the families, it’s good for the children, it’s good for the community.

Maria Darlington

Chapel Hill

Johnny’s is Carrboro

I do not understand how a handful of people can be permitted to bully a family-friendly place like Johnny’s, a neighborhood establishment that embodies what makes Carrboro so special.

Johnny’s is a place where people of all ages, cultures, and socio-economic backgrounds gather to enjoy the company of each other on a daily basis. Johnny’s has Carrboro written all over it, and it’s the kind of funky place that makes other communities like Chapel Hill envy us and want to be more like us here in the Paris of the Piedmont.

These few but vocal opponents will never understand Johnny’s because they never take the time to go inside and see what is actually going on there. They do not realize that the reincarnation of Johnny’s has quickly become one of the Crown Jewels of Carrboro. Whereas a town like Chapel Hill gets a faux funky Starbucks, we get Johnny’s, which is not only something unique, but it is also a place that supports local farmers, artists, and businesses. All the money stays right here in Carrboro and Orange County, with neighbors helping neighbors, which is another Carrboro ideal. Yet those opposing Johnny’s firmly believe that it is nothing more than a bar (!) or a den of iniquity (!).

They don’t get that Johnny’s is a warm and inviting community gathering place that contributes to Carrboro being the eclectic, interesting place it has become over the years. I know the owners and the employees and they are all good and reasonable people who have tried very hard to work with this small handful of vocal opponents. Unfortunately, the ones who appear to be the most vocal cannot be reasoned with at all.

It makes me sad that such an extremely small group of people whose narrow-minded, and I believe increasingly mean-spirited tactics and sanctimonious views can pretend to speak for a neighborhood and town whose views are quite the opposite of their own. Carrboro and Johnny’s are all about acceptance, diversity, and above all, community. That’s the Carrboro I know and love, and you can easily find it on any given day at Johnny’s!

David Glass

Carrboro

Another Johnny’s fan

As a resident of Carrboro I’d like to express my support for Johnny’s. I can see no harm in wine tasting – no one is forced to taste wine if they don’t want to, and no one is forced to enter Johnny’s and spend either their time or their money there if they don’t want to.

Johnny’s has conscientious management who have worked diligently to accommodate concerns of nearby neighbors. However, a small number of vocal opponents will apparently be satisfied with nothing less than shutting Johnny’s down.

Johnny’s sells good coffee and numerous other foods and sundries. It’s a relaxing, convivial place to meet and make friends and occasionally features quite excellent, live acoustical music. Carrboro is better off for having Johnny’s. Please let’s not lose sight of this big picture!

Rory Conolly

Carrboro

Misguided missive

So, retired UNC professor Leuchtenburg chooses to attack the messenger (CHN, Sept. 23, bit.ly/UuVfsI) that for years has been practicing Pulitzer Prize-level journalism by exposing corruption in North Carolina governance. Will elitists of this ilk never learn?

Bruce C. Ladd Jr.

Chapel Hill

Disappointed alum

As a UNC alum, I was disappointed to read about the actions of the former chair of the African and Afro-American Studies Department (Julius Nyang’oro) and the actions of the Vice-Chancellor for Student Advancement (Matt Kupec).

So, will UNC put everyone in the Office of University Development through the same scrutiny undergone by all faculty in the African and Afro-American Studies department? Will there be an independent probe of the use of travel funds by all personnel in the Office of University Development overseen by Kupec? Will the State Bureau of Investigation interview personnel in the department, and have the UNC Board of Governors review the findings of the probe?

And even if all others in the department are found innocent after a thorough investigation, will there be yet another investigation, as is happening with African and Afro-American Studies? Or will UNC conclude, in the case of Kupec, that the actions of an individual should not punish everyone in a department?

The excoriation of the Department of African, African-American, and Diaspora Studies must stop.

Andrew C. Frost

Durham