Kim Huband worked for Durham Parks and Recreation; as a NC grants analyst reviewing state agency and local government outdoor recreation grant applications for funding by Land & Water Conservation Fund; as a planner for the N.C. State Parks System 25 years, responsible for developing plans for individual state park units (acquisition, facility development & management), for the Systemwide Plan, for the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP), and for special studies (rivers, wetlands, economics, etc). Head of General Management Planning Program. Retired.
Kim spoke to City Council in opposition to the proposed streamside route for the Big Branch Greenway Connector on March 17, 2026:
I have been asked why we continue to speak to oppose Council’s decision to approve greenway routing through Anderson Forest backyards.
I’m reminded of Proverbs 18 verse 17. “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.”
City staff had numerous opportunities to influence Council and the public with written materials, glossy presentations and surveys. We have been largely restricted to three-minute comments like this to make our case to you and the public.
I therefore ask:
-
- Did city staff fail to conduct due diligence and proceed with its first survey unaware that the scenic easement through Anderson Forest prohibited trail development? YES
- Did the city spend thousands on the survey, consultants and public meetings prior to being informed of easement restrictions? YES
- Did the first public survey describe our grassed backyards and children’s play areas as “wooded,“ state that the greenway would follow the easement, and fail to mention the taking of private property? YES
- Did only 24% of first survey respondents favor the route Council has approved while 49% favored a streetside route? YES
- Did city staff then discard the first survey results? YES
- Did city staff place 10 street signs and hang door notices about the start of the second survey in an adjoining neighborhood while days later informing Anderson Forest homeowners via postcards? YES
- Did the city then change voting procedures when voting totals began to narrow? YES
- Did the survey use a photoshopped image that removed a large, raised sewer manhole plus riparian trees and vegetation from our backyard so that the trail could be shown closer to the creek and further from residences? YES
- Did the survey image fail to show proposed safety railing, privacy fencing and screening? YES
- Did the survey fail to inform the public of flooding dangers and higher maintenance costs. YES
- Did members of your Parks, Recreation & Greenway Advisory Board call out City Staff for biased images and biased surveys? YES
- Did your Advisory Board vote 9-5 not to support the staff recommended route? YES
- Did staff fail to inform you and the public that the Mid Town–St. Albans Plan recommended a different bicycle–pedestrian route? YES
- Did the survey fail to mention that a scenic/conservation easement would be violated. YES
- Was the public also unaware of the extensive violation of riparian water quality rules? YES
- Does your approved route violate the city’s own greenway guidelines? YES
So many points, so little time.
In short, did city staff present the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? NO
If you appreciate the kind of reporting we bring to you
|
Please donate $10 or $20, Thanks for supporting |
 |