| Author | Post |
|---|
Baseball Buddy
Member
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 12:59 pm |
|
The Friddle property is the best choice. Everyone I spoke to feels the same. Only 1 person that came out to the site I was stationed at favored the 220 property. I feel that person had other motives than choosing the best site just from limited conversation. Safety should come first in this decision. There are more car crashes at this location (according to EMS) than anywhere else in our area. Now, add more traffic get the picture. I noted this in an earlier post of how when visiting this site I got passed from behind on the left by someone on a double yellow line. Not just by one car but two! For this property to work it would need it's own traffic light. Also Summerfield Rd meets 220 within a few 100 feet of this location. That would need a light also for the extra traffic coming to the area for safety.
I am in favor of safety first. The 220 property is last on my list in safety.
____________________
The views/opinions expressed in this post are personal and belong to Baseball Buddy. Please do not duplicate, distribute, BCC, or mass mail my comments without my written consent.
|
Jim Flynt
Member
| Joined: | Jul 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Bermuda Triangle |
| Posts: | 1375 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 01:53 pm |
|
Baseball Buddy wrote: There are more car crashes at this location (according to EMS) than anywhere else in our area.
I must have driven by this site certainly hundreds if not thousands of times, and for the life of me, I have never seen an accident there nor have I ever heard of a serious accident there. I'm not saying that it hasn't happened or couldn't happen, but from simple observation, it would not seem nearly as dangerous as other locations around the Northwest area.
If in fact, this location is so dangerous, it would seem that the Town of Summerfield should in conjunction with the NC Department of Transportation reduce the speed limit down to a safe acceptable limit, request or provide warning or stop lights, and request additional monitoring of this stretch of highway by both the NC Highway Patrol and Guilford County Sheriff's Department. And if things truly are as dangerous as you suggest, these actions should be taken regardless of whether or not a ballfield is ever located on this property.
I generallly monitor a radio scanner for the local fire departments and EMS and while there are several locations which do seem to have an increased frequency of severe motor vehicle accidents, this just simply isn't one of them.
You wouldn't by any chance be stretching the truth or exaggerating the safety threat for other purposes would you?Last edited on Apr 22nd, 2007 01:55 pm by Jim Flynt
____________________
I Did It My Way (Frank Sinatra)
|
GRITS
Member
| Joined: | Mar 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 247 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 02:27 pm |
|
Jim, accidents may not particularly occur right in front of Gas Town but I will comment that only living 1/2 mile within this area I can honestly account for the amount of calls the fire/sheriff department has to take this route just to accomodate for the amount of calls that are placed. I agree DOT should make changes such as stop lights and reducing the speed limit but having lived here for 40+ years I can attest to the number of times I have witnessed drivers passing on the double yellow just to get around the blue hair Sunday driver or a tractor using 220. I can honestly say I am to blame also for doing such a crime when I was younger and very inconsiderate of other drivers on the road. Thirty five years ago, traffic was not so horrendous on this particular stretch. The traffic is far to heavy right now, very inconsiderate drivers (young and old), and I for one are not in favor of increasing more for a ball field--safety does come first. I also asked if entrance to the field could be accessed from another road, but it seems as though you would still have to use 220 to get to Winfree Road. Even if that happened the owner on Winfree Road would need to sell his property or grant access.
I too have listened or monitored emergency calls via scanner, have a former sheriff and EMS in the immediate family.
|
Baseball Buddy
Member
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 02:35 pm |
|
Jim I quote a Guilford County EMS dispatcher. "This area (Gas Town/220/Summerfield Rd Intersection) has more calls than any other in the Summerfield area."
This was quoted by Patrick Lee to me. Also you must not have seen the dump truck hit a Camaro there a couple of weeks ago.
I have no reason to lie or streach the truth or tell half the story.
Last edited on Apr 22nd, 2007 02:39 pm by Baseball Buddy
____________________
The views/opinions expressed in this post are personal and belong to Baseball Buddy. Please do not duplicate, distribute, BCC, or mass mail my comments without my written consent.
|
Jim Flynt
Member
| Joined: | Jul 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Bermuda Triangle |
| Posts: | 1375 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 02:44 pm |
|
Jim Flynt wrote: Baseball Buddy wrote: There are more car crashes at this location (according to EMS) than anywhere else in our area.
If in fact, this location is so dangerous, it would seem that the Town of Summerfield should in conjunction with the NC Department of Transportation reduce the speed limit down to a safe acceptable limit, request or provide warning or stop lights, and request additional monitoring of this stretch of highway by both the NC Highway Patrol and Guilford County Sheriff's Department. And if things truly are as dangerous as you suggest, these actions should be taken regardless of whether or not a ballfield is ever located on this property.
This was the larger point I was trying to make.
Shouldn't steps be taken to make this area more safe?
Where are the drumbeats for community safety from citizens?
____________________
I Did It My Way (Frank Sinatra)
|
Jim Flynt
Member
| Joined: | Jul 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Bermuda Triangle |
| Posts: | 1375 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 02:46 pm |
|
Jim Flynt wrote: And if things truly are as dangerous as you suggest, these actions should be taken regardless of whether or not a ballfield is ever located on this property.
____________________
I Did It My Way (Frank Sinatra)
|
FatPappy
Member
| Joined: | Oct 25th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 3245 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 02:55 pm |
|
Baseball Buddy wrote:
The Friddle property is the best choice. Everyone I spoke to feels the same.
I am in favor of safety first. The 220 property is last on my list in safety.
Certainly in the context of ballfield location, you make a good point, BB.
____________________
How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four; calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
--Abraham Lincoln
|
GRITS
Member
| Joined: | Mar 20th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 247 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 02:59 pm |
|
I do believe this issue has been addressed by the safety committee, no changes will occur until the potential for the widening of 220 takes place. A map from the DOT was available at Site B (gas town) and it reflected Laughlin Road to be made into 90 degree angle (the nursery will be removed) and then a light will be put right there.
This is several years down the road, what really needs to be considered is the I-74 that is going to come through.
I just think that it very important for emergency vehicles to get through when need be without the headache of traffic congestion. By putting a community park here only henders such vehicles, and you and I both know that not all drivers respect emergency vehicles eventhough it is the law.
|
DOGGETTJA
Member
| Joined: | Oct 24th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield |
| Posts: | 1198 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 03:10 pm |
|
And just whatwould you suggest Jim? The widening of 220 has been put off to 2012 due to no money to widen. Probably we have heard about the widening for at least 12 years and it keeps being moved up. That is the single most effective way that safety will be improved on 220. The highway is so over used that slowing down to look across the street can back traffic up for miles. With this widening will come the improvement of the old Summerfield road entrance onto 220 which is an issue right there in front of Gas Town. I doubt very seriously that DOT would put a light in there as the traffic is not heavy enough off the Old Summerfield Rd. The issue is to cross over 220 is so dangerous and people drive very agressively.
The Town has attended all the meetings with DOT and anybody else involved but the fact is there is no money. People don't seem very interested in paying more taxes to widen roads. Look at the grief Summerfield gets with a 3.9% tax.
Now I don't necessarily agree with Baseball Buddy about the property and its appropriatness for ball fields. Friddles is I still think the best choice but I think this piece is a close second with the road access being the issue. I know at some point DOT will widen the road and incidently but in solid medians which means that everyone may very likely have to turn right and make a uturn to get back to Summerfield. Ulitmately when the interchange for 73/74 (not sure which) is put in 220 is slated to become a local road. The heavy traffic trying to get to the airport and Greensboro are anticipated to go off on the loop around. Unfortunately I think that will not happen in my life time.
|
Cracker Jax
Member
| Joined: | Oct 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 4722 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 03:12 pm |
|
I've seen all three sites now and I visited them with an open mind because I don't care where we build the ballfields if we can just get them built! 
The Hudson James Property
- It will cost 200,000 more to grade this property than the other two sites
- It is the least expensive, ($425,000) but with grading costs, it brings the price up close to the cost of the Friddle property
- 24 acres with a pond on the property
- 5 ballfields/1 soccer field (according to plans that were handed out at sites)
- Ample parking for the ballfields available
- Proximity to Summerfield should be considered and this site is the furthest away.
- Total estimated cost of project for this site: $1,865,000
The Gastown Property
- By far the most expensive. 29 acres at a cost of 1,015,000.
- I believe the hosts said that there was a natural stream that ran along the back of the property but I didn't walk back there to look.
- 5 ballfields/1 soccer field and the way it's layed out, there is room for 3 more soccer fields if the baseball outfields are used as soccer fields.
- The 220 expansion project, while it is years down the road will cause problems for this site. People leaving the ball fields will be forced to turn right toward Stokesdale and go down to the next cut through to go back toward Summerfield. I have heard that the DOT has said that they will not put a cut thru here because of it's proximity to other cut throughs.
- Ample parking for proposed fields
- Total estimated cost for this site: $2,210,000
The Friddle Property
- 28 acres - $700,000
- 6 ballfields/ 2 soccer fields
- ample parking for all fields
- equipment (tractors and such) can be easily shared between the two ballfields (this site and the Summerfield Elementary site)
- Talked with a neighbor who's home was in sight of the ballfields and asked her if she would be ok with the ballfields being located here. She was fine with it.
- Total cost of project for this site: $1,835,000
Like I said, I don't care where they are built.... as long as they are built. If we're going on cost alone, the Friddle property is the least expensive. I think the pros outweigh the cons on this piece of property as well. Just my opinion.
And for the record, I do NOT pass thru the Gas Town area daily and about a month ago, I sat in a traffic jam, because of a very bad accident in that area on 220. They had to divert all traffic up Summerfield Rd. Accidents do happen there whether you're seein' them or not. And one accident is enough for me.
____________________
Opinions in this post are mine. Do not copy, distribute, mass mail or quote out of context without my consent.
|
Baseball Buddy
Member
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 03:33 pm |
|
CJ thanks for the info.
The traffic jam you spoke of happened from a 2 car crash at the area. I was visiting the 220 site along with Tom Valent and my son when this happened. My son said "Guess that sums up how safe this site is!" 12 years old and smarter than most.
You see Jim, We spend a lot of our own free time trying to make this a better place. Safety first. Save money second. But it looks from the estimated costs we can do both. Plus have more ball fields.
____________________
The views/opinions expressed in this post are personal and belong to Baseball Buddy. Please do not duplicate, distribute, BCC, or mass mail my comments without my written consent.
|
S. Smith
Moderator
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 07:20 pm |
|
DOGGETTJA wrote: We got a lot of filled out questionnaires in our suggestion box.
What kind of questionnaires?
|
DOGGETTJA
Member
| Joined: | Oct 24th, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield |
| Posts: | 1198 |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 22nd, 2007 07:38 pm |
|
| Sandra- Opinions on which ballfiedl people preferred or why they didn't think a specific site was good.
|
Shamu
Member
| Joined: | Feb 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 52 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 23rd, 2007 12:39 am |
|
We should be looking at ways to make the 220 site work, as the only drawback appears to be access from 220. There are several things to look at including access from Winfree Road, turn lanes from the north and south and possibly a traffic light. I am not sure the NCDOT is as inaccessible as some say. For example, they did a study and held meetings for the 150 re-alignment based on a request from Summerfield.
People turn on and off of 220 every day, seven days a week. I am not making light of things people have witnessed on the road, but we can’t base our decisions on anecdotes.
Summerfield Road is not exactly perfect either, given curves, speeders, and the possibility that the 150 re-alignment will come right through the site. At least at the 220 site there is a good line of site in either direction.
By the way, I don’t think the rough numbers thrown out on the cost sheets that were given out at the sites were intended to become an argument point for the decision. Grading numbers are obviously a wild guess. I would suggest that we contact. Michael Brandt before anyone starts to hang their hats on these numbers. Also, Mr. Marshall, a very nice man and completely supportive of the ballfields on his property, mentioned that when DOT takes his road-frontage and house, there will be a substantial amount of money coming back to the Town.
BB, you seem focused on the Friddle-Holland-whoever else needs to be involved site. I would think you would be a supporter of ballfield sites in general. Are you willing to consider any of the other sites? Do you have a hidden agenda?
|
Cracker Jax
Member
| Joined: | Oct 23rd, 2005 |
| Location: | Summerfield, USA |
| Posts: | 4722 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Apr 23rd, 2007 01:42 am |
|
Shamu wrote: We should be looking at ways to make the 220 site work, as the only drawback appears to be access from 220. And property cost. Why NOT the Friddle Property Shamu? Just curious. Also, Mr. Marshall, a very nice man and completely supportive of the ballfields on his property, mentioned that when DOT takes his road-frontage and house, there will be a substantial amount of money coming back to the Town. Will the DOT pay $315,000 for that house and the road frontage? That's the difference in the property cost. (Not including any construction or grading) And isn't this "speculating" or something like that? Seems like I heard that term being thrown around at some point. Maybe Jane can speak to that. Isn't it illegal or frowned upon for the town to purchase property with intent to resell? BB, you seem focused on the Friddle-Holland-whoever else needs to be involved site. I would think you would be a supporter of ballfield sites in general. Are you willing to consider any of the other sites? Do you have a hidden agenda?
Shamu, I'm sorry and I do not in anyway mean to flame or accuse with this statement, but you seem focused on anything OTHER than the Friddle property. It appears that you have more of a hidden agenda than Baseball Buddy does. I just don't know what it is.
If any of you have hidden agendas, just put them out here on the table and we can stop playing these silly games. We need ballfields!!!!
____________________
Opinions in this post are mine. Do not copy, distribute, mass mail or quote out of context without my consent.
|
|
|
