The Crosswalk Wars: Garduño Steps In

NOB HILL--City Councilor Rey Garduño has entered the fray of what might be called The Crosswalk Wars of Nob Hill. He is about to introduce a resolution in the City Council that would establish two more traffic signals, one at Central and Wellesley. and the other at Central and Morningside. A City Council resolution would be a way to out-flank the city administration which says that any more signals in Nob Hill are not warranted.

If ever a city street needed a crosswalk more than Nob Hill's Central Ave., I would be hard pressed to name it. It is one of the busiest streets for both vehicles and pedestrians in the entire state. Yet there is but one designated crosswalk of any kind between Richmond and Washington, a distance of almost exactly one mile. That crosswalk is the stoplight at Central and Carlisle.

Jay-Walkers and Frogger
For literally years and years people have complained about the Frogger-like conditions for crossing Central Ave. A friend of mine rails against the jay-walkers that can suddenly appear anywhere in that long stretch. I tell him that only a fool would cross at the corners in Nob Hill because, not only are there no crosswalks at the corners, there is another lane of traffic--the turn lane, and there are cars turning left, cars doing u-turns, extra traffic coming out of the side streets that can't see anything until they pull way out, and narrow two-foot wide "islands of safety" that have uneven footing with cars and trucks whizzing by close enough to hit you with their mirror. No Sir! Give me the middle of the block where you at least might have a tree to hide behind if you can make it to the median!

Garduño Calls a Meeting
Anyway, last week I emailed Rey Garduño and asked him if he had any thoughts about the situation. It turned out it was already a concern of his. We met last Friday on Central and discussed the problem, and then I was able to accompany him as he sat down with representatives from the Nob Hill community and Michael Riordan, Director of Albuquerque's Municipal Development Dept. By the way, the Municipal Development Department is huge...encompassing every kind of infrastructure project from Streets & Traffic to Storm Drain Design. Even the Public Art program is a part of Riordan's department.

We sat down at Kelly's. We were just a few feet away from the location of one of the proposed signals. Others besides Garduño and Riordan included Jim Neustel from Peacecraft, Carolina Yahne and Nick Pisano of the Nob Hill Neighborhood Assoc., Julian Moya who is a Term Policy Analyst working with Councilor Garduño, and Tom Menicucci who is Senior Analyst with City Council Services.

Not everybody from the neighborhood was in agreement about what kind of signal was necessary. Most were pretty flexible, stating that either a traffic light or a pedestrian activated crosswalk signal was okay. I spoke in favor of a traffic light.

Helter-Skelter
Anyway, Michael Riordan stated that the city was not about to start putting traffic signals up helter-skelter just because the neighborhood wanted them. They have to meet certain criteria established by a professional group of traffic engineers who arrived at these 'warrants' after many years of thoughtful study. This is city policy. And these two intersections, the crossings at Wellesley and the one at Morningside, did not have the side street traffic necessary for the city to put them in. If somebody got in an accident at the signals and the city violated its own policy by putting them up, "we would be opening ourselves up to lawsuits," he explained.

He also seemed to wonder whether Nob Hill appreciated everything that was being done in the neighborhood: bump-outs, plantings, pedestrian lighting, and the $30,000,000 Lead/Coal project. Jim Neustel assured him Nob Hill was indeed grateful for those projects. But that the safety concerns were genuine.

A Young Mother

Meanwhile the whole group watched as a young mother attempted to escort her son across the street. He was walking his bicycle. They stopped at the median, but his bike hung out into the traffic lanes on both sides. It really was pretty scary.

Riordan came up with ways to increase the traffic going through the intersection enough to maybe warrant a traffic light. For instance, we could close off the left turn lanes in the adjoining blocks to push the traffic into turning here at Wellesley. Well, that didn't have too many supporters.

Catch-66

Finally Riordan had to leave for another meeting. It turned out that he wasn't going to do anything that wasn't 'warranted,' no matter what the safety issues were or explanations about why there aren't an enormous number of pedestrians willing to risk life and limb crossing right there at the present time. We needed the light to get pedestrians to cross at the corner and, according to Michael Riordan, we need the pedestrians to get the light.


Rey Garduño smiled. He had decided to introduce his resolution authorizing the two signals in the City Council meeting on September 9th. If he can convince the other Councilors to go along with his measure, it will bypass the Warrants problem. It seems a Council Resolution has the power of law. Warrants, however, are only city policy. A veto by the mayor is possible...but so is an over-ride.

What You Can Do
So something that has worried the Nob Hill neighborhood for years may be coming to a head on September 9th. The NHNA is looking to have 4 or 5 speakers in favor of the resolution. If you want to lend your support, consider doing the following:
Email your Councilor.
• Comment on this post telling about your own experiences trying to cross the street, and give your own ideas.
• Show up at the City Council meeting.

Here are a couple of points that might be additional matters for discussion:
• Lower the speed limit. Currently along Central in Nob Hill it is 35 mph. However between downtown and Old Town it is 30. It is also 30 on both Lead and Coal, major southeast arterials with a lot of traffic.
• Traffic signals at Wellesley and Morningside could be sequenced with the rest of the signals so as not to stop normal flow. What they would do is stop straggler traffic and group everything together so that pedestrians would have gaps in the traffic up and down Central Ave.

El Rey
I really appreciated that Rey Garduño has already started to work on this. He had all the major players together in one place. Nothing was resolved between the parties, but issues were clarified. This meeting had to happen before anything else could find widespread support. If Rey Garduño can untie the knot that has kept anything from happening for years, he is certainly to be congratulated.

Views: 16

Comment by andrew on August 25, 2009 at 7:57am
Great post, Johnny. While I understand that the city can't just slap up traffic signals anywhere without some consideration, I seriously doubt anyone has ever sued a city because they got in an accident at a traffic signal that "violated city policy." I do hope they consider at least lowering the speed limit.
Comment by Dave on August 25, 2009 at 8:20am
I hope another issue that could be addressed at the same time is how to cross Central on a bicycle from the Silver St. bike boulevard to Monte Vista, for example. Coming north on Girard, there is a right turn lane that I assume is just for turning onto Central...many motorists also use it as a sort-of right turn lane on to Monte Vista, making 'taking the lane' very dangerous for bicyclists. I hope there could be some way to make it clearer if the right lane is only for turning right onto Central, or if it is for either Central or Monte Vista.
Comment by ABQDWELL on August 25, 2009 at 9:45am
This is great news. It so clear that some sort of signal or roundabout is needed to slow traffic in that area. Here's what we need to do to convince Michael Riordan: Tell that we have free beer and food for him and to meet at Kelly's to claim his goods. When he arrives, give him the food but tell him the beer is across the street.
Comment by jeff on August 25, 2009 at 10:11am
what's the argument in favor of a traffic light? it seems to me that a mid-block pedestrian-activated flasher system would solve the problem simply with greater safety to pedestrians. it would also (hopefully) alert drivers that they need to pay attention to pedestrians more often than intersections, thus (hopefully) reducing speeds a bit.
Comment by once banned twice shy on August 25, 2009 at 10:13am
Dave: I don't quite understand your problem. That lane is indeed for traffic either turning right onto Central or Monte Vista. However, if you, as a cyclist, take your lane and proceed onto Monte Vista, traffic is forced to stay behind you until you've made your turn. In other words, take your lane and KEEP it as you turn onto Monte Vista.

I am glad Rey Garduno has figured out a way around the Municipal Development department. This is their mantra any time anyone asks for additional traffic signals--either just activated by pedestrians/cyclists or regular old traffic signals. Their story is that they don't want to impede traffic--they only have a car in their brain and that's all they will follow. They are not married to those damn traffic standards--plenty of cities have pedestrian/cyclist activated lights and somehow "get away" with it. It's just dumb to refuse to put in signals because there aren't enough pedestrians. Dumb.
Comment by Johnny_Mango on August 25, 2009 at 11:06am
Jeff-The nice thing about a traffic light is that it groups the traffic, allowing gaps in the traffic for all intersections. A crosswalk at Wellesley won't do anything for pedestrians at Tulane. Also, your point about alerting drivers is a good one.
Comment by Dave on August 25, 2009 at 11:10am
Once...the problem I have encountered is inconsistency...sometimes drivers in the right-turn lane go to Monte Vista, sometimes drivers in the straight-through lane go to Monte Vista. So if I am in the right-turn lane, I sometimes have to 'battle' drivers turning on to Monte Vista from the straight-through lane, and if I am in the straight-through lane, sometimes have drivers coming on to Monte Vista from the right turn lane.
Comment by jeff on August 25, 2009 at 11:31am
thinking about my efforst to cross central, grouping doesn't seem to occur on this stretch of roadway because so many vehicles enter central in nob hill via left & right turns, which happen at all times.

even so, grouping of cars is not a good thing for cars or pedestrians (assuming pedestrians have access to signalized crosswalks). staggering them them is, and that's what makes roundabouts work well.
Comment by Brendan on August 25, 2009 at 11:47am
jeff: Is there any data that shows pedestrian-activated flashers work? I ran an informal anecdotal and unreliable inquiry with some friends and family and they all think flashers are confusing and probably lead to more accidents than are prevented.
Comment by Tricross on August 25, 2009 at 12:29pm
The problem with traffic lights is that they promote traffic congestion which degrade air quality in the area. Wouldn't a couple of pedestrian cross over bridges work better?

Comment

You need to be a member of Duke City Fix to add comments!

Join Duke City Fix

© 2012   Created by chantal.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service