|
|
|
|
Upper Meadowlark Speed Hump Removal Considered Feb.23 |
|
|
Written by Jeff Radford
Corrales Comment
|
|
Wednesday, 24 February 2010 |
Should the speed humps on upper West Meadowlark be removed, to be
replaced by speed monitoring digital display signs that tell drivers to
“Slow Down?”
That plan will be discussed at the February 23 Village Council meeting.
Corrales has applied for a $100,000 federal grant through the
Mid-Region Council of Governments to remove the controversial speed
humps (more accurately referred to as “speed tables”) and instead set
up solar-powered speed monitoring units that flash a motorist’s speed
with the warning to “slow down.”
Other speed displaying signs would be installed on Loma Larga and Corrales Road, Mayor Phil Gasteyer said.
He asked for the project to be discussed at the February 23 council
meeting so it could be debated locally before the grant request is
considered later this month at the N.M. Department of Transportation’s
Safety Board which will apparently rule on grant requests.
Gasteyer pointed out the speed hump removal project is linked to the already approved bike path for upper West Meadowlark.
Last year, the Village Council approved plans to construct bike paths
along both sides of upper West Meadowlark that would tie into future
bike paths along Rio Rancho’s portion of West Meadowlark.
Funding for that would also come through the Council of Governments,
although a local match would be required. Corrales obtained approval to
use about $45,000 left over from producing the Corrales Trails Master
Plan to pay its share of the Meadowlark bike path cost.
However, that funding is in jeopardy due to state government re-allocations.
Gasteyer explained the bike path project would likely require removal
of the existing speed humps on upper West Meadowlark to avoid motorists
swerving around the speed humps and into bike riders on the proposed
paths.
Such swerving to get at least two tires off the speed humps occurs often on West Meadowlark.
“Preliminary engineering assessments have indicated that cyclist safety
would be a concern in the to-be-constructed bike lanes if the speed
humps remain,” Gasteyer said. “Drivers might be tempted to evade the
bumps by swinging out into the bike lanes. Curbing or other separations
have been discussed although these present vehicular and cyclist safety
issues.”
He said even with the speed humps, West Meadowlark has a significant
number of traffic accidents: eight reported from November 1, 2008 to
November 1, 2009.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, homeowners along West Meadowlark,
especially between Loma Larga and Rio Rancho, mounted a major political
initiative to have speed humps —or some other measures— installed to
curtail what they considered to be excessive traffic and speeding.
The issue played heavily in the outcome of some elections to the Village Council back then.
When residents were not satisfied with improvements from increased
police patrolling, they demanded and got stop signs installed
just inside the Corrales-Rio Rancho boundary. There was no intersection
there; just a stop sign, intended to slow down, if not deter, motorists
who wanted to use upper West Meadowlark as a bypass to avoid
heavy traffic on Highway 528.
The strange stop sign infuriated some drivers and amused others. It
also became a long-running causa belica in soured inter-municipal
relations with Rio Rancho.
Shortly the “stop sign to nowhere” was determined to have been a bad
idea. The Village Council decided speed humps would be a better
solution, so Village Engineer Steve Grollman was directed to research
what might be best.
He came up with the speed table configuration spaced as they are now.
That decision, too, angered some villagers and did little to soothe Rio Ranchoans’ sense of rejection.
Merchants and restauranteurs in Corrales warned the unfriendly speed
humps would deter people from Rio Rancho coming down into Corrales to
shop and dine.
Folks from Intel, they pointed out, might find it hard to get down here
for lunch and back if they had to slow down for the speed humps every
few yards.
But since the speed tables went in in 2004, the issue of speeding and
excess traffic on West Meadowlark has receded. Homeowners there are
either satisfied with results achieved by the speed humps… or they have
tired of seeking alternative solutions.
The pros and cons of adding eight more speed humps to Meadowlark
between Loma Larga and the Rio Rancho boundary were debated at the
October 26, 2004 council meeting. (See Corrales Comment Vol. XXIII, No.
18, November 6, 2004 “10 Speed Humps Planned to Cut Upper West
Meadowlark Traffic”)
At the vote, councillors were unanimous in approving installation of
speed humps every 300 feet so that drivers won’t have much chance
to speed up faster than 25 miles an hour.
Proponents insisted that if drivers maintain that 25 mph speed, they
can go over those ten speed humps without banging their heads or
dropping a drive shaft.
But councillors were told that the humps will definitely slow down
emergency response vehicles, not only Corrales fire-rescue personnel,
but those called in from Rio Rancho as well.
And Public Works Director Tony Tafoya reminded councillors that nearby
homeowners may experience more roadway noise (cars and trucks
accelerating and loose loads clanking around) and more auto exhaust
pollution from start-stop driving.
“I agree that something has to be done, but I don’t think speed humps are the answer,” Tafoya advised.
Fire Chief Anthony Martinez agreed with assessments that it would take
longer for fire-rescue drivers to arrive at emergency scenes. But, he
noted, “If the citizens on Meadowlark are willing to accept the fact
that it could slow down police and fire and rescue responders, then I
guess it’s okay.
“All I ask is that the humps, not just on Meadowlark, but throughout
the village, be standard so our drivers know what to expect.”
Police Chief Ray Vigil offered similar advice. “It will cut some time
off our response time.” The bumps will also increase wear-and-tear on
police cars, he added.
But clearly a lot of people wanted the speed humps. A petition with at
least 24 signatures urged the council to install them, as they had
earlier indicated they would do.
Roger Finzel, a lower Meadowlark resident, insisted that the council
has a duty to preserve “community values,” including restrictions on
traffic to maintain rural lifestyles.
“People come here, and visit here, they shop here, not because there
are bargains, but for the ambiance, the serenity. They come here for
the beauty of our village,” Finzel said. “I have friends in Rio Rancho
who don’t want to come here any more because this issue has not been
addressed and they see conflict in our village.
“So businesses are being hurt because we won’t deal with implementing
reasonable measures to implement our master plan. Our master plan talks
about what we’re supposed to be doing: calming traffic, respecting
residential neighborhood…”
That view was not shared by many of Corrales’ business owners. Over the
years that Village officials have talked about impediments to traffic
on Meadowlark, business owners have pleaded for the council not to make
it more difficult for Rio Rancho shoppers and quick-lunch Intel
employees to reach their shops.
But no one from Corrales’ business community spoke up at the October 26, 2004 council meeting.
Finzel went on to suggest that “people from Rio Rancho are afraid to go
down Meadowlark because there’s going to be a tail-gater after them…
there’s going to be someone passing them… there’s going to be someone
blaring their horn at them because they’re doing the speed limit.”
Finzel concluded by pleading, “This is a simple proposal; let’s just do
it. Let’s move on so that our businesses can benefit. This is a good
proposal; it works elsewhere and it will work here.”
Speaking in opposition was Michelle Anderson, who quoted from federal
traffic management guidelines and recommendations from the Institute of
Traffic Engineering. She said it would be a serious mistake to place
speed humps on a collector road such as Meadowlark.
“Speed humps on collector roads is totally taboo,” Anderson warned.
She summarized the nationally recognized policy that “speed humps are
not to be used on major roads.” She also referred to guidelines that
emergency vehicles will be slowed down three to five seconds per hump
for a fire truck, and “up to ten seconds for an ambulance with a
patient per hump.”
Anderson cited policies for the City of Albuquerque and Rio Rancho
which preclude speed humps on collector roads. One of the reasons, she
said, is that municipalities face liability from lawsuits based on lack
of adequate emergency response.
“You’re looking at a liability issue for the Village of Corrales if
someone anywhere in Corrales perceives there has been a delay in
emergency services —ambulance, police and fire protection— due to the
speed humps.”
Anderson had similarly advised the council not to proceed with its
plans some 18 months earlier to install stop signs on upper Meadowlark
at the Rio Rancho boundary. At that time, too, she cited federal
transportation guidelines and traffic engineering principles which
stated it would not be proper to install stop signs in such situations.
Councillors went ahead anyway, but eventually pulled the stop signs
down after the Village was sued for causing auto collisions there.
Anderson was later appointed to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Danny Cox, a Meadowlark resident, lambasted Mayor Gary Kanin for
blocking traffic relief for his street. “Once again the mayor is
parading everybody he can find to stop anything from happening on
Meadowlark. The people in this village who don’t live on Meadowlark
have no thoughts about anybody else. You just keep finding ways to
punish us.
“I lived on Meadowlark when it was turned into a ‘collector road.’ Not
one single person —not the administrator or anybody— came to a single
house and said ‘we’re about to change your way of life.’”
The fact that Meadowlark was designated a collector road, he said, has
been responsible for residents’ trouble trying to get relief from
increasing traffic. |
|
|
|
|
