The Chapel Hill News editorial of May 19 laid out very well, starkly, the potentially destructive impact of UNC's planned Carolina North development on the town of Chapel Hill, and criticized the "silence" of our citizens in response to the traffic impact analysis for this project.

Silence is much too strong (see very good and thorough response at the Neighbors For Responsible Growth website (www.nrg-nc.net.) But it is true that, often, "you don't miss your water until the well runs dry," and a certain amount of avoidance and denial is in play, enabled by our over-extended lives. There are also other factors: the level of technical detail involved; the ambivalence, at best, on the part of UNC and the town about responding to citizens' questions and recommendations; the fact that we are asked to comment on a draft contract that is still undergoing changes; and the strained resources of Town Council and town staff to respond to and regulate UNC's forward momentum.

All that said, a development agreement for Carolina North is slated to be signed by town and gown June 22. A draft is now available on the town's Web site (Carolina North Documents and Reports). It is not too late for the town to hold further meetings at which questions and critiques could be responded to either on the spot or in follow-up meetings. I hope such meetings are held before the final agreement is signed.

I'd like to add a few comments. The number of parking spaces proposed is truly staggering and will gridlock roads, according to the town's own traffic study. The only alternative is for people to use transit and park in lots on the fringe of town, and for the agreement to require transit links. It is scary to think that the agreement will soon be signed but no transit infrastructure has yet been specified or planned.

Another way to help avoid serious congestion is to plan a much bigger residential component so individuals working at Carolina North do not have to commute. It should be mandated that parking decks, expensive to construct and dismantle, are prohibited. And it is critical that the Development Agreement include an alternatives analysis of extending light rail from UNC Hospitals to downtown Chapel Hill, downtown Carrboro, and up the University Rail Corridor to the back of the Carolina North campus.

As regards the ecological impact of the development (storm water management, sedimentation issues, and stream buffers), I am very concerned that there is inadequate provision for inspection and oversight. UNC needs to provide funds for a person to monitor construction on site each day to oversee the management of storm water during the massive earthmoving phases. The Council of State of North Carolina is legally responsible for overseeing state construction jobs, but has few inspectors. The point here is not to catch and punish infractions, but to identify problems quickly in time to prevent serious environmental damage.

In fact, this kind of focus on "preventive maintenance" is a good guiding principle for all aspects of this agreement. More attention by all concerned to spelling out the requirements for a good outcome before the agreement is signed should have a big pay-off for all parties down the road.

Amey Miller lives in Chapel Hill.