The Rolling Hills and Thousand Oaks Neighborhood Association recently invited the candidates who are running for Alderman, Ward 2 to their regular scheduled meeting. Log Cabin reporter Jessica Bauer also received an invitation and wrote this story, [link]
At this meeting the would-be alderman discussed topics that ranged from the much debated sign ordinance to how much work and research there is involved in being an alderman to making public information more readily available, yawn…
While these are all good topics it seems to us that these pale in comparison to the real challenges that face the city. Challenges like the increasing population that brings with it increased criminal activity, increased traffic, and decreased green space with new construction.
Over the next 10 years Ward 2 will see some dramatic changes in the construction Hendrix’s Village project. This project, for example, will be another of the many challenges the city will face. It will be up to these potential aldermen to guide the city through this time of transition while ensuring that the city’s police, fire, and infrastructure departments have enough money and manpower to accommodate ventures such as these. It is this project that has already caused controversy when Mayor Tab Townsell’s vote approved the inevitable destruction of traffic flow on Harkrider by allowing Hendrix College to pursue the planned roundabout construction. This approval was given with very little research and without a finalized plan.
It would appear that these candidates have failed thus far to consider these challenges and are destined to repeat the mistakes of the current city council. Let us all hope that these candidates step up to the plate and talk about the more important issues facing the future of Conway in their next little soiree.
On a side note: Score one for Candidate Mark Vaught, he drew first blood so to speak. You see Mark Vaught was the president of the RHTO Neighborhood Association until this year when he stepped down. However he remains involved with the group serving as secretary for the association. Way to go Candidate Vaught that was a good move getting your opponents on your turf and essentially agreeing with their views. That should win you some votes from your neighbors. After all who wouldn’t want an alderman as a neighbor.
14 comments:
QUOTE
"...the planned roundabout construction. This approval was given with very little research and without a finalized plan...."
What, exactly, do you mean by "very little?"
Please provide specific, quantifiable evidence to valdiate this statement.
No he doesn't have evidence. He's the great Neo. he doesn't need any.
Give me a minute, I'll find that information and post it. Now where did I put that email from Mayor Townsell ...
You asked and you shall receive. On December 13, 2005 Mayor Tab Townsell cast the deciding vote approving a request from Hendrix College for a roundabout along Harkrider Street at Winfield and Siebenmorgen Road. At the time of this vote a preliminary proposal was all the council had to go on.
This is confirmed in an email sent on January, 4th, 2005 by Mayor Tab Townsell when we requested a copy of the plan submitted by DPZ, the Miami based planning and architectural firm creating the design.
Townsell wrote,
Troy,
None of the Village has been formally submitted yet. The Miami planning
and architectural firm of DPZ is still drawing the documents and they
will have to be formally submitted for me to have copies available. As
I understand it there are still water and sewer infrastructure issues to
be resolved as to final location before a formal submittal is likely. I
have seen various drawn plans but they have not been submitted to us. I
think some of the drawings have been printed either in the LCD or in the
Hendrix Profile but again they will not be the final document. The
schematic showing the roundabouts on Harkrider shows a corner of the
conceptual idea but again is very early stage stuff and does not show
final plan drawings. My understanding they will come to the city when
the plans are ready asking for special zoning either through PUD or
Design Overlay District ordinances to legislate the much, much stricter
planning, zoning, subdivision, and architectural codes than currently
exists anywhere in the city.
Really, all I have at this time is the lap over portion shown on the
Roundabout schematics. Would you like that document?
Tab
Therefore if the final plan was not yet submitted then only a limited amount of research could have been done. This research, as we understand it, was about roundabouts in general and did not include a study for this particular application, two 2-lane roundabouts placed this close together.
There is also a school of thought made by professional roundabout designers that says that roundabouts are not warranted for this application. Do a search for the ‘roundabout’ on this blog to find the other posts about this subject.
Thanks…
Troy Moseley
a.k.a. Neo
REF.
http://www.cityofconway.org/pdfs/city_council/
actions/2005/actions_12_13_05.pdf
http://www.fcso.info/conway/RE_%20Hendrix%20College%20Plan.txt
Neo,
As I understand the issue it is going to be a 80/20 split. By that I mean the state pays 80% and Conway is paying the rest. The question that is left on the table is if Hendrix is going to foot the bill for the rest of that 20% since they are driving the project. Further, the City of Conway is paying an engineer full time salary to draw up the plan for this round about. That is 3 years of a engineers salary, and whatever time Ronnie Hall spends on it. The city of Conway will have well over 100 grand in salaries once this project is submitted to the state. The question again is should we the citizens of Conway be paying for this, or those that are spearheading the project? Once again, Tab is devalueing our city once decision at a time,and expecting the citizens of Conway to pay for a private development.
In a recent report by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, drivers in Kansas, Maryland and Nevada were polled before the construction of roundabouts in their areas and 41% of those surveyed strongly opposed their construction. Following the completion of the roundabouts that number dropped to only 15%. Likewise, while only 31% favored roundabouts prior to their construction, that number grew to 63% once they were in use for several months.
Thank you for your study. Can you please site it via url?
BTW 98.23443234388883434324234% of all statistics are made up on the spot. :)
Once again, this isn't simply the addition of a typical roundabout. It is 2 roundabouts used in such a way to restrict the flow of traffic to allow for parallel parking on either side of the street between the roundabouts.
Most, if not all, roundabouts are used to manage an overly crowded intersection or one that has misaligned connections, such as with the one on Washington Ave.
Overall I think that roundabouts do work when their use is applied correctly as well as being constructed correctly. In the proposed application that is not the case.
QUOTE
Anonymous said...
"Thank you for your study. Can you please site it via url?
BTW 98.23443234388883434324234% of all statistics are made up on the spot. :) "
A 2001 Institute study of 23 intersections in the United States reported that converting intersections from traffic signals or stop signs to roundabouts reduced injury crashes by 80 percent and all crashes by 40 percent.(1) Similar results were reported by Eisenman et al.: a 75 percent decrease in injury crashes and a 37 percent decrease in total crashes at 35 intersections that were converted from traffic signals to roundabouts.(2) Studies of intersections in Europe and Australia that were converted to roundabouts have reported 41-61 percent reductions in injury crashes and 45-75 percent reductions in severe injury crashes.(3)
References
(1)Persaud, B.N.; Retting, R.A.; Garder, P.E.; and Lord, D. 2001. Safety effect of roundabout conversions in the United States: empirical Bayes observational before-after study. Transportation Research Record 1751:1-8.
(2)Eisenman, S.; Josselyn, J.; List, G.; Persaud, B.; Lyon, C.; Robinson, B.; Blogg, M.; Waltman, E.; and Troutbeck, R. 2004. Operational and safety performance of modern roundabouts and other intersection types. Final Report, SPR Project C-01-47. Albany, NY: New York State Department of Transportation.
(3) Federal Highway Administration. 2000. Roundabouts: an informational guide. Report no. RD-00-067. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation.
Here's a report on accident stats from NY State:
http://www.dot.state.ny.us/roundabouts/files/insurance_report.pdf
You can visit here for more of the same:
http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/roundabouts.html#cite1
Y'all need to quit whining about the roundabout and do your own research. They work, people. Time after time after time...all over the PLANET. I mean, hell, England, Sweden, and Ireland are each currently considering banning conventional intersections altogether due to their danger. Roundabouts are difficult to accept because they're new to us...they're unknown. They're scary. Just be patient and give something new a chance.
* knock, knock, knock *
* Hello, is anyone in there? *
We know that roundabouts work, that is not the issue. The issues are the disruption of traffic flow in the major north-south traffic artery for the city and use of local and state tax dollars to fund this private venture. Bottom line is why should the citizens of this city and state pay for these roundabouts that are being proposed by a private institution to make their project more pedestrian friendly? Can you cite a rational reason why the average citizen should want this project? Can you cite how it will benefit the average citizen?
The benefits for this project solely belong to Hendrix College while the down side for this project will fall on the taxpayer. We think Hendrix is more than welcome to build their Village as long as it doesn’t disrupt the lives of those who live, work, or travel through the area.
The roundabouts are not a necessity for the successful completion of the Village. We say stick to the original plan to make Harkrider a divided highway in that area with synchronized traffic signals at the intersections in question. The college then could use the extra space left over for parking.
If it is true "that roundabouts work," then why would we have a "disruption of traffic flow?"
BTW: how much money did Conway actually put into this roundabout? Are you SURE? Where did you get your facts?
If it is true "that roundabouts work," then why would we have a "disruption of traffic flow?"
BTW: how much money did Conway actually put into this roundabout? Are you SURE? Where did you get your facts?
First what you need to realize is that it’s the whole package that’s the problem not simply the roundabouts. But to answer the question:
1. The speed limit will be dropped from 35 MPH to 25 MPH, this in itself will cause a bottleneck effect. Especially when you consider the people in the area drive.
2. The roundabouts will be 2 lane circles not the one lane type on Washington. Traffic will have to yield more often while drivers scan both lanes for traffic. This will add to the backup.
3. Now add parallel parking on the right side of the road with drivers stopping to park and drivers pulling in from a dead stop, again adding to the backup.
Sure a simple roundabout may be safer than a standard intersection but this isn’t a simple roundabout or even a typical application for a roundabout.
As we understand it tax dollars are already earmarked for making Harkrider a divided highway and the addition of the roundabouts will not cost the city very much, sorry I don’t have the exact dollar amount right now, but what ever it is, its still tax dollars spent the benefit a private venture.
Then there is this comment by another anonymous poster,
Further, the City of Conway is paying an engineer full time salary to draw up the plan for this round about. That is 3 years of a engineers salary, and whatever time Ronnie Hall spends on it. The city of Conway will have well over 100 grand in salaries once this project is submitted to the state.
I would tend to believe that this is true but I will verify this info and post it for you at a later time.
Again, how will the roundabouts benefit the citizens of Conway? This is a very bad idea and it should be rejected by the state as such.
In response to your 1,2,3:
1. The beautiful thing about roundabouts is how they manage to decrease vehicle speed while increasing traffic volume (and, yes, they do. Do your own research...I don't feel like digging up cite after cite right now. But the research is there. Just look). This is why they, although not CRUCIAL, are so very complimentary to the New-Urban/TND way of building. They are pedestrian-friendly. As for how the people in this area drive, well, the City should offer adequate instruction (say a tutorial which runs on Channel 81 and the City website), signage, and (most of all) time for adjustment, then allow drivers to do the right thing. Like a rising tide of traffic awareness, those drivers using the roundabout correctly will slowly bring the others up to full operational awareness. Regardless, it's not the job of the City or the State to design roads for the lowest common denominator of driver. That's insulting.
2. 1 lane, 2 lane. It matters not. Again, study after study all over the nation, as well as Europe, show that they work. Since 1990, hundreds of roundabouts (2-laners included) have been installed nationwide. And you know what? Not a single one has ever been removed! NOT ONE! Why, you ask? Because they work. If they didn't, then they would have begun failing a decade or more ago and cities across the world would balk at the thought. But they don't. More and more they are being encouraged and even required. This is because governments know once they're in, the fear resides, resentment fades, and the benefits shine like a dying star. Ours will be great, too, just be patient.
3.Parallel parking is there to offer additional security, a physical and psychological barrier, to those pedestrians walking along Harkrider. I'm still waiting to see if it truly happens, though. Trees, planter boxes, light poles, benches, trashcans, bollards, newspaper machines, etc, etc, etc together all offer the same barrier. Wait-and see on this one.
I think I'm done on this forum. I'm just spinning my wheels. I don't feel like anyone here is receptive to anything regarded by other, more progressive cities, as beneficial. Y'all just want more of the same - it's safe, comfortable and easy....
So good luck in your fight and good day to all.
3.Parallel parking is there to offer additional security, a physical and psychological barrier, to those pedestrians walking along Harkrider...
There in lies the difference in our views, you want to make Harkrider, a State Highway, more pedestrian friendly at the taxpayer’s expense without any regard for traffic in other parts of Conway. We however see the big picture and realize the full effect of this private venture.
… Trees, planter boxes, light poles, benches, trashcans, bollards, newspaper machines, etc, etc, etc together all offer the same barrier. Wait-and see on this one.
Metal fencing would also offer the same barrier such as has been done in other area’s like ULAR at University Ave. for example. This option with the addition of another pedestrian bridge would not limit traffic.
Don’t you think that Hendrix’s plan is rather selfish? Let’s make our school a focal point, a new vision of urban living, who cares about the other unimportant citizens of Conway. Is that what you and they are saying?
Post a Comment