Cut-through or Connectivity?

There is a proposal floating around in its early stages for the Goulding property.  It would significantly increase the intensity of development along a new street through the 6 acre property by adding 28 townhomes and 10 detached houses.  The initial review of this proposal was at the Oct 9th Historic Preservation Commission meeting.  

To put it lightly, it did not go well.  Representation from every home on Goulding Pl showed up to voice their opposition.  They didn't like the intensity and felt that this plan would increase traffic and endanger pedestrians who regularly walk in the streets as there are no sidewalks.  

I spoke out in favor of one thing in the plan.  I do think that townhomes are a stretch for that property but they could work if done properly.  What I was in favor of was the street connectivity.  Here are some illustrations that make my point..

There are some topography challenges but this lack of connectivity is pitiful.

The site plan presented in Oct could provide for significant connectivity that could benefit local traffic. Red lines denote potential added connections.

The key here is to develop the street in a way that would not encourage cut-through traffic.  It is absolutely possible and can be done easily.  Lane widths should be NARROW.  The same width as those in Vickery Village in Cumming or even the Webb St in Historic Roswell.  Here's an image of a streescape from Vickery Village from DPZ as well as a Google Street View of Webb St

Street widths with 9 ft lanes successfully constrain speeds and cut-through traffic. image: DPZ.comWebb St with very narrow lanes. You simply can't speed here. image: Google StreetView

Here's my take on the street piece of this development.

Benefits (assumes narrow street widths of 9' lanes)

• Added connectivity which will significantly increase walkability and bikability for residents north and west of the historic district
• Potential for excellent infill development (keyword is potential)
• Potential for much more connectivity in the future
• Ability to draw some pedestrian and car traffic off Canton St (this is a city benefit and would obviously not be viewed the same way for those living on Goulding)
• Historic home would become more accessible to the public

Drawbacks

• Traffic would undoubtedly increase on Goulding Pl & Windy Pines Tr (really only a drawback for those living on Goulding and Windy Pines)
• Some historic character would be lost around the Goulding house (but who sees it now anyway?)

In my book, this new street plan would be a huge win for the city.  It may be the only opportunity that Historic Roswell gets to add connectivity to this area.  If we get this wrong, it will be a big loss.  The next review looks to be December 10th.  More to come.

Comments

[Andy]

If it were to connect to Pine Grove/Magnolia, then I could see the concerns of it being a cut-through. This just looks like good infill development to me and the opportunity to better connect the historic district. Perhaps we could get a pedestrian path connecting the Roswell Hills subdivision as well. :-)

[Kelly Burns]

What other connectivity options have been explored? If we want to increase bike and pedestrian access, let's build a trail. If we want to increase access to a historic home, the home needs to be public, it doesn't need a through-street. If we want to draw traffic off Canton, we need to connect with a through-road, not enter neighborhoods. And trust me, people speed on Goulding (not many since there is no regular traffic, but people will speed anywhere) - when I lived there, my neighbors and I definitely had words with miscreant drivers. A through-street here will dimish the character and quality of this area - particularly given Goulding is the last street West of Canton actually inside Historic District boundaries.

I'm sad to see this land being developed. (Mike - I know you're not neccesarily pro-townhomes here.) I lived on Goulding Place - it was a unique, fabulous, small-town street. Magical. My neighbors welcomed me with home-made gingerbread and bulbs. There was no regular traffic, our kids played in the street, we had bonfires in the road, and we didn't lock our doors (that was then). We'd sit on each others' front porches and nominate someone to go get pie from Greenwoods. I'd watch birds out my shower window - I didn't even need a window curtain.

I also I remember when the area by the Cat Clinic was razed for townhomes. You can't imagine the sounds and sights. Bulldozers aside, we could barely hear ourselves speak over the screeching animals (not kidding) - running, flying, and hopping for life. Well - I finally got that shower window curtain and took shorter showers because there were no birds to watch. Then I moved, because I began to see buildings and strangers in my backyard instead of nature, friends, or animals.

We benefit greatly from many changes - Canton Street restaurant selection (!), Alive > 5, economic development, Riverside Park, the Mill Bridge, people re-connecting and getting engaged in their community. AND we know growth comes at a cost - traffic, crowds, paid parking (in Roswell?!), and more, more, and more people. How do we balance the benefit and cost?

The last thing we need is to destroy land for expensive housing or a cut-through road. We need to protect our land and culture, and develop/re-develop wisely. There are plenty of spaces in or very near Historic Roswell that actually NEED attention, and wouldn't impact our green space. Look at the Historic Gateway Master Plan. Shoot - how about the old Krispy Kreme, Dekalb Tire, the complex with Chaplin's, property further down Atlanta St?? Where are our priorities? I love Roswell - it's my pedestrian-friendly home. I just hope I'll love it in 5 or 10 years when there are no animals, fewer trees, and we'll need hovercrafts to get around (irrespective of any new cut-throughs or streets for connectivity).

[SMcKenzie]

Because of the the coming "connectivity", we the residents of Goulding Place are now strategizing on how we can strategically place or cars on our extra narrow street so as to mitigate speeding cars and make things safer for bikers and walkers. The city is actually listening to us- can you believe it? They want to know what ideas we come up with- possibly strategically parking our cars on the street-- or whatever, that will help the coming dangerous traffic situation. Our little street is not designed to be a cut through. Nor is it made to be the drive way for a 42 home development.
I am all for connectivity as well. The answer would have been to connect via Webb St. However, this would have required an expensive bridge. Nope. The city wouldn't do it and the developer would do it, so here we are. Literally trying to figure out where we are going to park our cars on Goulding Place to slow things down and make things safe. Parking on the street is illegal, BTW.

[SMcKenzie]

Because of the the coming "connectivity", we the residents of Goulding Place are now strategizing on how we can strategically place or cars on our extra narrow street so as to mitigate speeding cars and make things safer for bikers and walkers. The city is actually listening to us- can you believe it? They want to know what ideas we come up with- possibly strategically parking our cars on the street-- or whatever, that will help the coming dangerous traffic situation. Our little street is not designed to be a cut through. Nor is it made to be the drive way for a 42 home development.
I am all for connectivity as well. The answer would have been to connect via Webb St. However, this would have required an expensive bridge. Nope. The city wouldn't do it and the developer wouldn't do it, so here we are. Literally trying to figure out where we are going to park our cars on Goulding Place to slow things down and make things safe. Parking on the street is currently illegal, BTW.

And, Kelly Burns, your comments are GREAT.