I am also concerned that roundabout design seems to be a moving target; the old one at Columbia and Santa Clara has a definite curb, signs and plants (and trash), the more recent one at San Rafael and Wellesley has a curb and several half dome bumps on it (and also still has the stop sign on Wellesley). Is there a standard in the Design Process Manual?

I don’t think removing the STOP sign on Richmond was smart. I was out there yesterday talking with the neighbor who lives on SW corner of Richmond and Garfield—we watched lots of cars in both directions not even slow down a bit. The YIELD signs were pretty much ignored. The only time anyone slowed at all was if there was another car in sight.


Patricia Willson

Victory Hills NA: President 
District 6 Coalition: Treasurer
Inter-Coalition Council Representative 





On Mar 23, 2024, at 3:05 PM, J. Smith via Neighbors_nobhill-nm <neighbors_nobhill-nm@mailman.swcp.com> wrote:

I was just about to comment that our emergency vehicles could likely pass over this mini traffic circles without slowing down much, when now I see the addition of vertical steel posts that would damage a rescue vehicle doing that. Seems to be getting worse.
Also, there is now a white striping at the sides of Garfield that seems to serve no purpose (people still park on the shoulder and bicyclists still take their chances riding in the lane of traffic).
I asked the City if they could paint a wide Stop Bar at the existing stop signs like we have on many streets without crosswalks that meet Lead &amp; Silver. I received no response. .
Does anyone know if these are compliant with the MUTCD? I read the contractor's prospectus but did not see a clear answer, given the much smaller area of these intersections compared to larger, specially-designed traffic circles..

Thanks,

JS


-----Original Message-----

Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2024 16:25:48 +0000 (UTC)
From: William Luther
To: "neighbors_nobhill-nm@mailman.swcp.com"

Subject: Re: [Neighbors] Neighbors_nobhill-nm Digest, Vol 145, Issue 9
Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I live just down the street from one of these "round-abouts". I was never notified of the installation. A couple of issues I have noticed in connection and addition to the concerns JS has brought up. The intersection being too small: I >have both almost hit pedestrians and been hit as a pedestrian crossing these intersections at Amherst and Garfield and at Richmond and Garfield. The round about is large enough that the nose of a vehicle will and does cross the >plane of the walkways between "ADA" curb-cuts accessing the side-walks.
This looks and feels to pose more of a danger to pedestrians than ever before! What are your thoughts?There apparently has been a study completed by BernCo that indicated a "negative impact of traffic safety" regarding the >installation of these round-abouts? I have not seen nor read this report however, it is not surprising since personal experience of using these intersections both in a vehicle and by foot has clearly felt far less secure than ever >before the installation of the circles.
I also am struggling to see that the city/county or community has considered, for example, the negative impact these circles and speed bumps will have on emergency service response times. Seconds, and I mean seconds, count >when your house is burning down around you, your pets and your family. A 10 -20 ton vehicle such as a fire truck will now have to navigate some of these obstacles prior to saving you, me, our families and members of our >community.
Has there been any thought to this or other concerns? Maybe there has. Maybe this is a completely acceptable side effect. After all, the good of the many outweighs the good of the few or the one (as long as I'm not part of the few >or the one). I am truly struggling to balance the "cost-benefit" here. Help me out.??
Just because we CAN do something doesn't mean we SHOULD. At least not without a proper and thorough understanding of the ENTIRE picture and sets of benefits and ramifications. This seems a half baked attempt to curb >speeding without consideration of any further or additional issues what-so-ever. This feels like triage, not a cure.
When engineering societies and cities one must not obsess on a singular step to obtain a singular goal without thought to the potential multitude of issues that will arise from the proposed "solution";? ?but should consider multiple >moves ahead, multiple combinations of those moves to obtain the best and most sustainable solutions with the least amount of ramifications associated with the proposed solutions, long and short term, for everybody.
I grow more concerned about the safety of our community every time I cross these intersections now. Is there a safety benefit that is hiding and that I cannot see? Because in the practical use of these intersections (both in >vehicles and on foot) my overwhelming feeling is "this is far more dangerous (especially for pedestrians) now".
Please tell me what I'm missing since I cannot possibly be as thoughtful as our government, civil engineers nor community at large.?
Thank you,

William Luther
Associate Broker/Realtor
Armstrong Properties Inc.
400 Washington SE
Albuquerque, NM 87108
505-553-3489 cell
505-241-3803 office
505-241-3999 fax
realtorwilliamluther@yahoo.com
www.abqhouses.com




_______________________________________________
Neighbors_nobhill-nm mailing list
Neighbors_nobhill-nm@mailman.swcp.com
https://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/neighbors_nobhill-nm
This Message Sent To: info@willsonstudio.com