[Durham INC] Email City Council- Ask for a better Alston Ave

Tue Oct 18 17:35:34 EDT 2011

All-

As I understand it, the Durham Transportation Department is meeting with NCDOT on Wed Oct 19th to get updated traffic projections that include modeling the East End Connector. So, now is a good time to send City Council and others involved in the project any concerns you have about the Alston Ave design. Below is my email to the City Council. I suggest sending the email:
To: council at durhamnc.gov
CC: cwatts at ncdot.gov, mark.ahrendsen at durhamnc.gov, jhunkins at ncdot.gov

I would suggest you consider incorporating the following points:
-- How does the current road design the neighborhood's current mulit-modal use of the road?
-- Would a 3 lane, "Complete Street" be a better road for this space?
-- Please consider reducing road width by making lanes narrower and removing turning lanes to keep the neighborhood better connected, and traffic moving more quickly since pedestrians will be able to cross the street more quickly.
-- Speeds higher than 30 miles per hour are inappropriate for urban contexts, and the road design should reflect that. (tighten curb radii, reduce travel lane width)
-- NECD leadership council and PAC1 have endorsed this project, but Uplift East Durham, Goldenbelt Neighborhood Association, Scientific Properties, and many other individuals in the neighborhoods impacted by this road do not support the current Alston Ave design.

Here are some good background articles on this issue:
-- http://heraldsun.com/view/full_story_news_durham/12228045/article-Council-to-ponder-Alston-widening
-- http://endangereddurham.blogspot.com/2006/11/alston-ave-widening.html.
 Sadly, pretty much every design issue that he mentions (in 2006) is still present
 in the most recent plan given by NCDOT, which you can find here: 
http://www.durhamnc.gov/departments/transportation/alston_ave.cfm.

thank you,

chloe

From: cpalenchar at hotmail.com
To: council at durhamnc.gov
CC: cwatts at ncdot.gov; mark.ahrendsen at durhamnc.gov; jhunkins at ncdot.gov
Subject: Please fight for a better Alston Ave.
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 21:17:50 +0000

Dear City Council:

I know how much time, money, energy, and hope you've invested in East Durham. I know you want to see all of East Durham turn into a healthy, vibrant community- saving the city policing costs and increasing the tax base as the property values rise above their current depressed values, and most importantly, allowing all the citizens of Durham to be safe and happy at home. NCDOT is ready to help improve one of the gateways into East Durham, Alston Ave., and we need to make sure that they design a road that will improve East Durham, not destroy it.

DOTs have learned in the past 30 years that for roads to really work, they need to use "context sensitive designs" and what is known as a "complete streets" approach. Using the same design for Alston Ave in East Durham, a dense, small business and residential community, that is used further south on Highway 55 as it moves through suburban Apex/Cary/Morrisville and RTP, is not "context sensitive design". We should heed NC Central's experience with Alston widening on it's eastern edge. The Herald Sun quoted Chuck Watts as saying: the highway is now too wide for pedestrians to cross comfortably. The "road between them might as well be a river," for all the difficulties it creates.

When you meet with NCDOT on Wednesday to get the information on the updated traffic projections, I thought you may want to ask them some tough questions:

How is this road really going to help traffic move better? If two travel lanes are required to carry the through traffic, and the road necks back down to one through lane at Gilbert St, how are they planning to manage the merging issue between Holloway and Gilbert? Wouldn't traffic flow better if we didn't have these merging issues?

Why can NCDOT design beautiful  3 lane, high capacity "Complete Streets," for Charlotte, while they are pushing a suburban highway design for downtown Durham? Dewitt Lane and East Boulevard are being used as national examples of good urban road design (http://toolkit.valleyblueprint.org/sites/default/files/01_charlottenc__.pdf_0.pdf). There are many examples of new 3 lane "Complete Streets" with good signal coordination that are handling 20,000 and higher ADT, which is higher than what Alston Ave is currently carrying. Why isn't a 3 lane, "Complete Street" a good option for this road? Why doesn't saving $10 million and improving vehicular travel time sound like the right answer for Alston Ave? ($10 million savings based on DOT estimates given to City Council in March 2011.) 

Why are they are breaking so many of the known best practices for context sensitive design and complete streets? Complete Streets are important everywhere, but they are vital in East Durham where there is already a mixed use of the roads. Due to the high cost of owning and operating a car, NECD sees some of the highest levels of pedestrian and bike use in Durham. Additionally, there are multiple facilities for elderly people on and near Alston Ave; motorized wheelchairs are a common sight. Complete Streets isn't an option in East Durham, it's a reality. The only question is whether or not the pedestrian traffic,  especially our elderly and our children, will be safe sharing the road. 

Please read this summary paper on current known best practices for Complete Streets designs: (attached and available at http://www.sacog.org/complete-streets/toolkit/file/docs /LaPlante_McCann_Complete%20Streets%20in%20the%20United%20States.pdf). I was disappointed to see how many of the best practices this road design is breaking.

For instance:

1) "It should be recognized by now that a D Level of Service (LOS) is a reasonable peak period LOS in an urban area, provided the above- mentioned signal progression can be maintained." What level of service is being planned for Alston Ave? I cannot find the information on the DOT road plans.

2) "A pedestrian being hit by a car traveling at [20mph] has an 85% survivability rate, whereas that same collision with a car going twice as fast, [40 mph], will lower the survivability likelihood to only 5%."
"It appears that speeds over [30 mph] in urban areas are incompatible with pedestrians (including transit patrons) and bicyclists."-- According to DOT plan for Alston, the design speed is 35 mph. The survivability of car crashes is so much more important when you consider the students crossing Alston Ave to go to Eastway Elementary.

3) "Elimination of any free-flow right turn lanes – This specifically includes freeway entry and exit ramp connections."-- There is a free-flow right turn lane onto 147 North, going both North and South on Alston Ave.

4) "Narrower travel lanes … even 3.0 m (10-foot) lanes in urban areas are just as safe as 3.6 m (12- foot)"-- according to DOT plan for Alston, the lanes are 11 and 14 ft, with no striped bike lane on the 14 ft lane.

5) Curb parking-- not truly represented, only talked about in terms of a compromise plan by striping additional traffic lanes, but not truly integrated into the design.

6) Curb bulb-outs-- not represented

7) "Tighter corner curb radii"-- Appear to be missing at Holloway, Taylor, Morning Glory, Main, Angier, and Gann.

8) "In urbanized areas, there should be some provision for pedestrians to cross the street at almost every unsignalized intersection." Right now there are signals planned for: Gann, Angier, Main, Taylor, Liberty, Holloway. Unaddressed are: Morning Glory, Worth, Franklin, Wall, Hopkins, Eva. and Gilbert

9) "Requiring pedestrians to travel just 360 m (1,200 feet) or more out of their way to cross a street will add 5 minutes to the travel time…. If we were to suggest a 5-minute detour for all automobile traffic, this would be the equivalent of adding a distance of [2.5 miles] for a car traveling at [30 mph]".-- By not addressing pedestrian crossing at Morning Glory, Worth, Franklin, or Wall St, we are asking pedestrians who want to cross those intersections to pay this 5 minute penalty, since the distance between Main St and Taylor is about 350m. Two alternatives are suggested for pedestrian only crossings:
--Pedestrian-actuated crosswalk warning signs – For more heavy traffic flows.
--Pedestrian-actuated HAWK-style signals – Now in the new Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).

10) "Road diets – Reduce the number of lanes to be crossed."-- The current design is greatly increasing the width of the road, 82 feet wide in many places, 5 lanes wide at most intersections, and up to 6 lanes wide at the corner of Alston and Main. That means the lights are going to have to stay red longer to allow pedestrians to cross safely. From personal experience, red lights are the major thing backing up traffic on Alston Ave; far more of an issue than turning vehicles. Current design standards call for a minimum of 3sec/ft for pedestrian clearance time, and recommends even more than that when there there are "pedestrians who walk slower than normal or pedestrians who use wheelchairs routinely" which, applies to the mobility of the elderly population in the neighborhood. The narrower the street, the fewer dedicated turning lanes, the faster people can cross the street. Durham has recently been implementing road diets, and I think so far the results have been positive; let's not go on a "road binge" here.

Finally, is NCDOT really considering giving mitigation money for the grocery store to the new Bull City Urban Market? I am extremely hopeful that this market will succeed; it sounds like it may be a vibrant and exciting place to shop. However, running an independent grocery store is an extremely difficult business. I can't see how it is wise to close a functioning grocery store, and replace it with a new business, run by a group that doesn't have retail grocery experience. The Cordoba Building at Goldenbelt is a wonderful space, but with a leaking roof, and without heat or air conditioning, it's renovation is a significant hurdle. Starting a new business is always risky. If we give mitigation money to Bull City Urban Market and remove Los Primos then a failure will not just be disappointing; we will be left without a grocery store- a vital community asset. Let's let the free-market, not eminent domain, decide which grocery store serves East Durham the best.

Thank you for doing everything you can to ensure DOT designs a road that will welcome people into a continuing revitalizing East Durham. Please don't let them build a sea of asphalt that will cut East Durham off from the energy of downtown, leaving my neighborhood permanently separated from the rest of Durham.

I would be more than happy to speak with any of you in person about these ideas.  Feel free to call me at (919) 833-5953 or email me at cpalenchar at hotmail.com

Thank you for all that you do and thank you for taking the time to consider these points. 

Sincerely, 

Chloe Palenchar
2111 E Main St

CC:
Mark Ahrendsen, Director of Durham Department of Transportation
Chuck Watts, District 5 NC Board of Transportation
Julie Hunkins, NCDOT Director, Office of Environmental Quality and member NECD Transportation Scheme

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rtpnet.org/pipermail/inc-list/attachments/20111018/971c6da7/attachment.html>