Gravel Safety vs. Equity: a Durham Paving Decision on one Low-Volume Street

The council approved a paving contract 6–1 after debating whether gravel roads provide safer, slower streets in sidewalk‑sparse Lakewood. Members weighed opt‑outs, Vision Zero input, and traffic calming—ultimately directing staff to consult safety staff before implementation. 9mins

Was this helpful?

Original Meeting

Monday, November 3rd, 2025
7611.0
Full Meeting on YouTube
Video Notes

Welcome to the City Council Meeting for November 3, 2025.

Agenda: https://www.durhamnc.gov/AgendaCenter/City-Council-4

How to participate: https://www.durhamnc.gov/1345

Contact the City Council: https://www.durhamnc.gov/1323

NOTE: Comments left on this livestream will not be read or entered into the meeting record.

avatar
Bike Durham Advocacy, Old West Durham, Duke
View full bio
In This Video
  • A resident from Lakewood urged council to reject the unpaved roads Phase One paving contract, arguing that gravel roads provided traffic calming and pedestrian safety in an area lacking sidewalks and that the bond did not require every street to be paved.
  • Council Member Baker stated that any opt-out approach would only be reasonable if supported by 100% of affected residents.
  • Council Member Freeman asked whether the Vision Zero coordinator had been involved in discussions about the bond’s street package and suggested the city manager consider further review of safety aspects related to children in the area.
  • The City Manager explained that a council-driven policy predating the bond required paving all city streets to address equity concerns between neighborhoods with paved streets and those without.
  • Council Member Freeman sought more thorough consideration of pedestrian safety, and the City Manager agreed to consult the transportation director and Vision Zero coordinator for advice on the project.
  • Mayor Pro Tem Middleton emphasized that the voter-approved bond aimed to address historic disinvestment by paving unpaved roads and stated support for the contract without allowing neighborhood opt-outs.
  • Council Member Freeman emphasized that equity should reflect neighborhood-specific needs and suggested considering delays or opt-outs if the Vision Zero coordinator finds pedestrian safety could be better without paving.
  • Council Member Caballero noted that the city manager planned to establish a process to avoid delaying one paving item in a way that would affect multiple streets and residents with various needs.
  • Council Member Baker asked whether traffic calming would be included on neighborhood streets in the project, and staff confirmed that no traffic calming measures would be incorporated.
  • Mayor Williams supported engaging the community, while the City Manager committed to consult the Vision Zero coordinator on pedestrian safety concerns before implementing the paving directive.
  • Council Member Cook questioned the lack of traffic calming in the paving plan, and staff explained that narrow, low-volume roads and an existing speed hump request program were the reasons for not including such measures.
  • The City Manager noted that most streets in the program were short, non-through connectors and were unlikely to meet the city’s criteria for traffic calming.
  • The Deputy City Attorney clarified that council’s decision was limited to approving or rejecting the manager’s authority to execute the paving contract.
  • The Deputy City Attorney advised that an amended motion could be withdrawn, Council Member Baker withdrew the motion, the City Manager cautioned against an opt-out limited to one street without offering it broadly, and Council Member Freeman expressed reluctance to proceed without a directing vote.
  • The council approved the motion on a 6–1 vote, with Council Member Freeman voting no.
Your Governments
Your governments list is empty.
Manage Your List
More from this government
Rail Trail Transportation, Crosswalk Accessibility, and a Bonds Update on Streets, Sidewalks, and Parks
Oct 23, 2025
Durham Backs Strong Renters’ Rights Ordinance
Oct 20, 2025
Cliff Street Closure with New Greenway Connections
Oct 20, 2025
Durham City Council
Nearby governments
Durham Public Schools Board of Education
Durham County Board of Commissioners
Wake County Public School System Board of Education
Graham City Council
Alamance-Burlington School System Board of Education
Alamance County Board of Commissioners
Mebane City Council
Greensboro City Council
Guilford County Schools Board of Education
Guilford County Board of Commissioners
High Point City Council
Moore County Board of Commissioners
Pinehurst Village Council
Hope Mills Board of Commissioners
Fayetteville City Council
Spring Lake Board of Commissioners
Winston-Salem City Council
Forsyth County Board of Commissioners
Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Schools Board of Education
Bladen County Board of Commissioners