[Neighbors] CABQ Land Use Facilitated Meeting Re 4501

[imides-46686--- via Neighbors_nobhill-nm]

Susan's analysis below highlights CABQ's failure to take a "systems approach" to growth in general and traffic in particular. Each individual project might not contribute significant negative impact to our surface transportation but combined they obviously do. The Middle Rio Grande Council of Governments has proven incapable of offering a "big picture" analysis, instead they go on record saying that each project will have no significant impact on our transportation systems. Anyone believe that after Lead/Coal Beautification or Zuni Safety Corridor or ART? Ref: https://www.mrcog-nm.gov/149/Transportation

I've met some very competent and sympathetic CABQ traffic engineers at our community meetings but they all reveal privately that the politicians override the engineering recommendations that are based on science and actual data.

Wes



>Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2019 10:02:42 -0600
>From: Susan Beard via Neighbors_nobhill-nm
	<neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com>
>To: neighbors_nobhill-nm at mailman.swcp.com
>Subject: Re: [Neighbors] CABQ Land Use Facilitated Meeting Re 4501
>	Central Ave NE
>Message-ID: <0985079a-7b39-beed-ff44-3a632aaab881 at swcp.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

>I spoke at the meeting about the impact on traffic from cars originating 
>from the Santana Apartments and the already approved apartments at 
>Central and Montclaire/Morningside. I anticipate at least 350 or more 
>cars needing to travel north from Central on a daily basis.? The only 
>way to go to Smiths, Whole Foods, Trader Joes, stores on Menaul etc is 
>to go north. The closest north/ south arterials are Carlisle and 
>Washington. Both streets are narrow with only one lane going each 
>direction. Already there are huge backups on Carlisle at rush hour. 
>Already it is difficult to make a left turn from Washington onto Lomas. 
>Copper is also one lane going in each direction and is used by bicycle 
>riders. To exit the Santana project it is not possible to turn east on 
>Central. The only choice is to turn west on Central and then go north on 
>either Washington or Carlisle. Cars can to east on Copper to San Mateo 
>but again Copper is a narrow road. Even if residents do not own a car, 
>they will most likely use Uber or Lyft of Taxi's to get to stores that 
>are north of Central.? I also fear that if there are traffic backups on 
>Washington, Carlisle and Copper, drivers will start cutting through 
>residential neighborhoods.
>
>Any argument about good bus service is hollow. Yes, it is easy to travel 
>by bus going east and west on Central. However, it is time consuming and 
>difficult to travel north on a bus from Central in the area of 
>Washington or Carlisle. I have an 82 year old playwright friend who 
>lives near San Pedro and Lomas. She has to take 3 buses to travel from 
>her house to the corner of Central and Girard and spends about an hour 
>in travel time each way. The buses she relies on also stop running a 
>little before 8:00 pm. She has had to walk home at night? from a 
>playwright meeting near Washington and Lomas which is far from safe. In 
>my opinion a 111 apartment building belongs on a major arterial like San 
>Mateo. There are large vacant lots on south San Mateo. Of course the 
>project as designed would not be economically viable without the allure 
>of Nob Hill. I doubt if it is possible to attract tenants who will pay 
>$1300/month to live on south San Mateo.
>
>If the neighborhood wants to stop the project, I feel that objecting on 
>the basis of traffic congestion and streets not designed to handle 
>approximately 230 extra households using the existing streets. My? 230? 
>number includes the new apartments at Montclaire and Central. Of course 
>the DeAnza apartments will also add to this traffic problem. The 
>apartment is zoning compliant under the new IDO. The only valid argument 
>is to object on the basis of traffic. Thank you, Susan Beard
>