| Cherrywood Neighborhood Assn. Home Austin TX 78722 GOOGLE Advanced Search | |
| [ 07Mar11] | [Transportation & Traffic ] |
Chronology Contacts Links More
Chronology
| We should use “managed lane” to discuss plans for IH35. “Toll road” is street language for several different designs. I still sense that the Chamber wants to promote tolling as a much faster way to pay for more road capacity. Genuine regional transportation planning is still off-stage. But the jargon term “managed lane” embraces other ideas too:
* Raising the toll rate on a priced facility to maintain a speed of 60 mph “Managed lanes” distinguishes several strategies: PRICING. Vary tolls by: VEHICLE ELIGIBILITY. Reserve lanes for: ACCESS CONTROL Feb 20 at the Thompson Center, essentially this presentation was made by TTI (the Texas Transportation Institute at A&M) |
| Traffic Calming Project page |
|
| TxDOT charrette on IH-35 and the UT area |
| 18 July, 2001
MEETING NOTES (FINAL) DESIGN CHARRETTE (re: I35 @ Manor/26th Street) Date/time of meeting: Saturday, 14 July 2001, 8 a.m. - 12:00 noon Location: Blackland Community Center Attendees (alphabetical order) / affiliation Gordon Bennett CNA (Member IH35 Subcommittee & Webmaster) MEETING NOTES: (Note; these meeting notes are organized around the meeting agenda in general, although some minor deviations occurred) Pre-meeting (7:30-8:20) Introduction (8:20-8:30) Brief Overview (8:30-9:00) Review of Current TxDot Plans (9:00- 9:30) He also pointed out that there were no street connections from the east to west frontage roads between 38th½ and Airport Blvd. The neighborhood representatives expressed concern about impact into the neighborhoods both from UT bound traffic and RMMA bound traffic, due to the lack of north and southbound exits at Airport Blvd and about the lack of pedestrian connections across IH35 in the vicinity of 4oth/41st. They repeated their concern about IH35 being elevated over the RR and Airport Blvd and the lack of an eastbound exit at Airport Blvd. Design Session Part 1 (9:30- 10:15) [Note; among the comments offered after the charrette, but pertinent to include here, was the point that Southbound EMS vehicles whose destination is St. Davids' Hospital would also benefit from an exi from I35 at 26th/Dean Keeton.] Break (10:15-10:30) Design Session Part 2 (10:30- 11:15) The subjects of the CNA objection to a northbound exit between 32nd and 38th½, and their suggestion that there be an entrance there instead were discussed. Mr. Gamble pointed out that an entrance ramp had been added there since we had last seen the plan, to co-exist with the proposed exit ramp. He explained that this is defined as a "braided" ramp configuration. This satisfied the concern for an entrance, and members present expressed acceptance of the idea of an exit south of 38th½, provided that this entrance ramp is also included, and that the proposed northbound exits at both 26th/Dean Keeton and Airport Blvd prove feasible. TxDot Reiteration of Ideas for Further Study (11:15-11:30) Additional Ideas explored (11:30-11:50) Concern was expressed that IH35 is still being shown going up and over the RR and Airport Blvd., rather than depressed as it is to the south. Concern was also expressed about how close the frontage road is to the Church, and a suggestion was made to tuck a portion of the northbound feeder road under the exiting ramp, in order to allow it to infringe less into the neighborhood. TxDot Reiteration of Additional Ideas for Further Study (11:50- 12:00) Final Sum Up and Adjourn 11:55-12:00 Noon Meeting Notes were recorded by Girard Kinney, circulated to all attendees, and comments from all submitted by the morning of 18 July have been included in this FINAL version. |
| Notes on meeting with IH-35 designers (from G. Bennett) |
| June 19 (Tue) Girard, Mark, Jules (for awhile), and I met for an hour with Roland Gamble of Earth Tech and Robert Carrillo of Carter-Burgess. These are the engineers contracted by TxDOT to design IH-35 through central Austin.
Summarizing what we learned about progress on the MIS: - DEPRESSED LANES. The main lanes are now showing as depressed from the CBD north past 51st St EXCEPT for bridging the RR and Airport Blvd. They are no longer considering tunneling under the RR. - EXIT to Airport Blvd. They are no longer considering one. To various ways we have floated to get a freeway connection to Airport, they continue to cite old objections: - EXIT to UT. No imaginative thinking here either, in part because "UT seems happy. We haven't heard from them." They expect northbound trips to UT to do one of the following: - MODELS. Every design choice was justified with a computer model. Old models might have been inadequate (witness the congested off-ramp flying over to W-bound 183), but they have great confidence in their present model. - ACCESS ROAD (East Avenue) and BRIDGES. We didn't have time for questions about access lanes being widened and made to serve capacity needs possibly conflicting with convenient, safe E-W crossing (including for bike/ped). Maybe at the July 14 charette.... |
| Council leaves 38½ St. in the 2025 AMATP (from G. Bennett) |
| Council voted not to remove a segment of E38½ Stt, as recommended by its Planning Commission and its Urban Transportation Commission, from the 2025 Transportation Plan.
After lengthy debate over how to handle 100 specific road plan issues collectively (there was great reluctance to spend hours going through them 1 by 1), Council muddled its way forward by voting simply to write "remarks" next to controversial streets in the Plan. 1. 2. 3. I suppose our best hope now is to keep up the drum beat, on the slim chance of a more favorable combination of circumstances in the near future. Meanwhile we should pray that TxDOT moves forward at a snail's pace with its IH35 upgrade plans. |
| I left another message at CapMetro, this one pretty terse. Bill LeJeune called me back within 20 minutes and I was nearly civil 'til I caught him in a couple if er, umm, misstatements. I lost it and he got a new one installed. [][] About an hour later, he called back (choking, really) and said trains would no longer run through the residential part of the line between 10p.m. and 7a.m..I told him that approval of his policies isn't up to me so we all might want to discuss this further. [][] Any input, ideas or suggestions welcomed. Y'all are the greatest, Thanks..[][] Love, Mont |
| 1. F rom: "montec@texas.net" <montec@texas.net> Hi Folks Normally I'd just reply to those who responded to my last missive, but, it's 4 a.m. and another train just rumbled through; Even as I wait on a call back from Capital Metro (Railroad Operations for any like minded quality-of-lifers). If you give them a call I promise not to send any Custom Sounds' customers to your driveway. I live behind Fiesta and am used to industrial sound in the middle of the night, but nothing like this. [] Last time I remember it happening was when the recycling plant caught fire a few years back. Any help appreciated. CapMetro administration office 389-7400. 'Night... Love, Mont' 2. The contact at CapMetro is Sue (strange last name that sound maybe like "Mugno?") in the Railroad department and her number is 389-7437. [Katie Johnsonius] |
| For More Information Contact: Ted Burton, Public Relations Manager 389-7550 Web site: www.capmetro.org MEDIA ADVISORY: February 26, 2001 THOUSANDS OF TRUCKS REMOVED FROM AUSTIN ROADS Capital Metro approves new contract moving freight by rail vs. roads Capital Metro finalized a five-year contract Monday to run rail freight on the Giddings to Llano line. The agreement will eventually remove nearly 9,000 trucks a month from Austin roads and earn the agency a projected $4.2 million in profits. Capital Metro awarded the $26.7 million contract to Austin Area Terminal Railroad, a subsidiary of Trans Global Solutions Inc., after a competitive procurement process. AUAR will run the rail freight operation and maintain the 163-line, which is owned by Capital Metro. Freight includes rock used for concrete and asphalt, chemical lime for agriculture and construction, lumber and recycled materials. Moving freight by rail instead of roads means easier, safer commutes for Austin drivers. One rail car carries the equivalent of four trucks. This year Capital Metro's rail freight operations will remove 45,000 trucks from Austin roads, or nearly 4,000 a month. By the fifth year of the contract, rail freight operations will remove the equivalent of nearly 9,000 trucks a month from Austin roadways. Over the next five years, nearly 450,000 fewer trucks will rumble down our roads and highways due to Capital Metro's rail freight operation. Capital Metro is the only transit agency in the state that maintains a rail freight operation. |
| At first 20-25 attendees from Cherrywood, Wilshire Wood, and Delwood were irritated ~ Creola, a PR type with an Al Roker smile and Nurse Rachet approach to rules ~ was almost tarred and feathered for insisting (with 6 or 7 hands in the air), "let's move along on our agenda ... if we answer all your questions we'll be here all night!"
Our TXDoT guests were not prepared for the cascade of probing, thoughtful questions fired at them, and had to shift gears ~ but once they did, things got downright informative... ~~~~~~~ <2> Dangerously short 1950s on-ramps will be replaced with single N-bound (opposite Concordia) and S-bound (next to St. David's) ones with modern 1000-foot acceleration lanes ~ these will be safer but will have some neighborhood impacts: (a) More N-bound traffic on the access road will back up at 32nd (by the Days Inn), and some destined for 38½ may cut through the French Place / Concordia area... (b) More S-bound traffic on the access road also will back up at 32nd (by Concordia) ~ the dedicated left turn there will change to left + straight and carry traffic headed for the new freeway entrance by St. David's ~ the easy left turn into Cherrywood will disappear... (c) Exiting N-bound traffic between 38½ and Airport (by Fiesta), once denied the off-ramp before 38½ that will close, may loop around Wilshire Blvd and Maplewood to get back to Fiesta... <3> We need to think about leverging these new pressures into some traffic calming in our area... ~~~~~~~ <5> Collaboration among TXDoT, CAMPO, City transportation planners, and the City's traffic calming program is minimal ~ neighborhood associations and coalitions are likely to be the lead entities that fit their separate tasks into consolidated solutions for our area... <6> Plans will be final in two years, and after federal approval, funding, additional right-of-way purchase, contracting, etc., construction should begin in 6-10 years... <7> SH130 should open before IH35 upgrade construction begins... <8> The substance of the evolving TXDoT plan and of local perspectives on it are as reported at the beginning of the summer ~ see < CAMPO Memo>... |
| IH-35 FUTURE COMES INTO FOCUS (JUN 2000)
Today Mark, Girard, and I were able to have a meeting at TXDoT / Austin District with: ~~~~~~~ They have scaled back since last February -- gone now (you'll be happy to hear) are bridge closures between 15th and Airport, and grander ideas of discouraging freeway use for local trips -- the focus now is safer on- and off-ramps... NORTHBOUND (our side) SOUTHBOUND ~~~~~~~ The summary posted on the CNA We site, Traffic page CAMPO Memo remains accurate but now there is more... Of the two options described there, we learned today that Option-1 is shrinking in TXDoT's eyes. We seem destined to get some version of Option-2, though there's still room for change... Briefly, " Option-2 (HOV lanes elevated) uses the existing southbound overhead structure for HOV, removes the northbound overhead structure, and puts other through lanes partly below grade; new R.O.W. would take eastside businesses but no residences." This fall TXDoT will be ready to offer their favored design for neighborhood review and public comment -- certainly CNA will participate -- the vehicle for accumulating neighborhood feelings is the Traffic Committee ~~~~~~~ On Monday, June 12, 2000, the CAMPO Policy Advisory Committee adopted the CAMPO 2025 Transportation Plan. Staff is currently in the process of making all revisions approved by the PAC. The Plan will be available for the public and will be put on the CAMPO web site at the end of June. CAMPO deserves to be take at least half-seriously -- it's role is to certify local approval of transportation priorities before federal funds can be released locally -- it is mandated to revisit its 25-year plan every 5 years -- so we have some time to convince them 38½ should not be a wide boulevard -- I figure their staff has been concentrating on other issues... |
| For the freeway curious, TXDoT has a site devoted to the Austin portion of I-35 (updated April 18) - since CNA and adjacent neighborhood reps are about to make specific requests to state and local traffic planners, there might be some interest in this site's "Frequently Asked Questions"... |
In the near term, scheduled to begin construction in central Austin in August 2000, is a "Bottleneck: or "Congestion Management" project to "reconfigure entrance and exit ramps and add auxiliary lanes between ramps"... Still at least 6 years away is a more serious "Upgrade" involving right-of-way (ROW) widening, high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, coordination with SH-130 and/or light rail, etc.... /gb ~~~~ TXDoT I-35 Improvement FAQs (April 2000) ~~~~ > 1. Do alternatives #2 and #3 provide a solution to current traffic conditions only, or do they allow for future anticipated growth as well? The "build alternatives," being analyzed for IH 35, will improve the current traffic conditions by providing a safer, more efficient facility. In addition, the goal is to add capacity to the extent that is determined to be feasible. The number of lanes on IH 35 that are feasible in the central downtown area, will reflect upon the capacity of IH 35 as it radiates from the downtown area to the cities north and south of Austin. Therefore, IH 35 will not completely allow for future anticipated growth. We must remember that the Austin metropolitan area will double in size by the year 2020 and the travel demand for the IH 35 corridor will be greater than that which can be provided within the corridor. The travel demand for the IH 35 corridor that exceeds its capacity will use other facilities or other modes of travel. 2. When can rebuild construction actually begin (bottleneck projects excluded)? The IH 35 rebuild construction, excluding the bottleneck projects and current interchange construction, can feasibly begin in about 5 years. Isolated projects, however, such as the interchange of SH 45 with IH 35 in the Round Rock area, will begin sooner. The construction in the immediate central Austin area will be at least six years away. 3. What solution is proposed for existing traffic while rebuilding IH 35 is taking place? Existing traffic will be carried through the construction project; however, as congestion continues to escalate, traffic will divert to alternate facilities in an effort to improve travel through the corridor. 4. Approximately how long a period of time will it take from start to finish? The plan, which is being developed by the MIS, will be a long-range plan to build a better IH 35 for Central Texas. The actual time to complete the rebuild could be 15-20 years depending upon the availability of funds. 5. How soon can SH 130 be built? The construction of SH 130 potentially can begin within 2-3 years and traffic can be using portions of it within about 5 years. 6. Can truck traffic be forced to travel SH 130 upon completion? The forcing of truck traffic to SH 130 is not a part of current planning. SH 130, however, is an important and integral part of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization's plan and truck traffic will use the facility. 7. Can designated lanes of IH 35 be used for truck traffic until SH 130 can be completed? We all adjust our travel patterns to arrive at our destinations using the most convenient route to save as much time as possible. For truckers, time is money, and they will use SH 130 if it saves them travel time. Obviously, during the congested peak periods on IH 35, a greater percentage of trucks will divert to SH 130 to save time. By current law, lanes are not designated on IH 35 for truck traffic. However, for facilities having 3 or more lanes in each direction, the inside lane is designated for vehicles passing other vehicles. 8. Can Austin area drivers slow down, drive the speed limit, and be courteous to other drivers? Whatever happened to "drive friendly"? Can Austin area drivers slow down? Yes, but few do. The enforcement agencies are doing their part to slow down the drivers, but there is just so much that they can do. "Being courteous to other drivers" is something that cannot be legislated; however, it is contagious. "Drive friendly" is still an ideal that we should all strive to obtain. 9. How does the IH 35 rebuild fit into the overall transportation plan for all of Central Texas (SH 130, SH 45, US 183 & MoPac extension, light rail, Capital Metro)? IH 35 rebuild is included in the transportation plan developed by the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO). This plan also includes new facilities such as SH 130 and SH 45 and includes improvement to existing facilities needed to provide for the transportation needs for Central Texas which is anticipated to double in population by the year 2025. In addition, CAMPO's plan takes into consideration light rail, Capital Metro, and measures to reduce the future travel demand. |
| ~~~~~~~ To find out how local transportation planning might affect Cherrywood, and what voice we might have... I attended a public hearing on Apr10 of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planniing Organization (CAMPO) Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) on the draft "Transportation Plan to the Year 2025." CAMPO is regional, embracing Williamson, Travis, and Hays Counties. Its PAC is 90% political, including (among others) State Sen. Barrientos (Chair); State Reps. Maxey (VC), Dukes, Greenberg, Keel,& Naishtat; Travis Co. Commissioners Baxter, Davis, & Sonleitner; and Austin City Council members Garcia, Lewis, Spelman, and Watson. The "Transportation Plan to the Year 2025" will be considered for adoption on June 12. /gb JARGON & RHETORIC 2. "Major Undivided Arterial" (MAU) = Similar to MAD - no center median 3. "Minor Arterial" (MNR) = Meet local access and circulation requirements in addition to providing through movement - full movement access (left and right turns) permitted along the route - low priority at significant intersections. 4. Federal Highway Adm. (FHWA) bicycle design groups: 5. Impacts to Neighborhoods = "The CAMPO Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) in 1994 stated its intent to not damage inner city neighborhoods by widening roadways... Therefore the proposed roadway system attempts to minimize the expansion of arterials within existing urbanized areas, especially residential areas. A CAMPO 2025 Transportation Plan goal is to increase person carrying capacity rather than motor vehicle capacity." CHERRYWOOD ROADWAY SYSTEM 2. 38½ St (MNR 2/4) = "need" MAD 6 with Bike B, budget may allow Existing 3. Manor Rd (MNR 2) = "need" [blank, I suppose because of Mueller uncertainties], budget may allow MAU 4 with Bike B 4. 26th St from I35-Manor (MAD 4) = "need" MAD 6 with Bike B, budget may allow Existing NEIGHBORHOODS' VOICE IN THE PROCESS |
| SUMMARY (complete version below) [Vote here] |
| Eight neighbors met and talked about Cherrywood’s interest in passenger rail (Gordon Bennett, Peter Ketter, Girard Kinney, Trudie Redding, Stefan Schuster, Emily Schwartz, Dorothy Wade, Jim Walker). Others have e-mailed. We were able to give the forum good publicity. Among this group, at least, there appears to be substantial agreement on several basics.
- Rail should be part of Austin’s public transit system. Other related issues were not discussed -- regional commuter rail from Georgetown to San Marcos and San Antonio, service to ABIA, downtown streetcars, the AART proposal, etc. Sooo, finally, we came to the question of what to do next? Capital Metro’s Board will vote on its referendum language Aug 30. Staff work will have been competed some time before then. Realistically we have maybe 2 weeks to weigh in. Suggested options are: (1) Take a NeighborNet poll to see how much support/dissent is evident among CNA members generally for the above points. If response via e-mail is high and favorable, ask the Steering Committee (at its next regular meeting Aug 11) to report this evident level of support to the CapMetro Board. This may be the only feasible option given the tight deadline. (2) Call a special CNA membership to discuss and vote on how many of the above points should be represented as the CNA official position. This would entail printing a notice and mobilizing the FLEA route delivery folk to distribute it. Our Bylaws (Art. V) require notice of special meeting go out at least 7 days before. Getting all this done in 2 weeks is improbable. (3) Form a separate “Cherrywooders for Rail” independent of CNA. This might entail a formiddable organizational effort. But some advocates point out, no one need know how many participants there are, just its message. Also, anyone feeling differently could respond with their own “Friends of [Something Different].” |
| COMPLETE [[Vote here]] << |
Eight of us talked about Cherrywood’s position (Gordon Bennett, Peter Ketter, Girard Kinney, Trudie Redding, Stefan Schuster, Emily Schwartz, Dorothy Wade, Jim Walker). Others have e-mailed. We were able to give the forum good publicity. Among this group, at least, there appears to be substantial agreement on several basics:
Other related issues were not discussed -- regional commuter rail from Georgetown to San Marcos and San Antonio, service to ABIA, downtown streetcars, the AART proposal, etc. Sooo, finally, we havethe question of what to do next? Capital Metro’s Board will vote on its referendum language Aug 30. Staff work will have been competed some time before then. Realistically we have maybe 2 weeks to weigh in. Suggested options are: (1) Take a NeighborNet poll to see how much support/dissent is evident among CNA members generally for the above points. If response via e-mail is high and favorable, ask the Steering Committee (at its next regular meeting Aug 11) to report this evident level of support to the CapMetro Board. This may be the only feasible option given the tight deadline. (2) Call a special CNA membership to discuss and vote on how many of the above points should be represented as the CNA official position. This would entail printing a notice and mobilizing the FLEA route delivery folk to distribute it. Our Bylaws (Art. V) require notice of special meeting go out at least 7 days before. Getting all this done in 2 weeks is improbable. (3) Form a separate “Cherrywooders for Rail” independent of CNA. This might entail a formiddable organizational effort. But some advocates point out, no one need know how many participants there are, just its message. Also, anyone feeling differently could respond with their own “Friends of [Something Different].” [Vote here] |
| July 31 (Sat) 11:00a Taqueria Los Altos (Edgewood & frontage road) Meeting room in back, behind the TV. . Coffee or breakfast available. |
All, CapMetro’s Board currently is looking at 2 key decisions:
The Board will decide August 30 on what proposition to put on the November ballot. Staff are still soliciting neighborhood comment. Our question is whether Cherrywood should weigh in. It certainly would be desirable for us to voice an opinion IF we are mostly in agreement. What CapMetro does for our area and Mueller may have a very big impact.CapMetro’s planners favor a visionary multi-modal regional system. They are studying several alternatives. And they’ve looked Paul Parma’s “Stairs” proposal inspired by J.H. Crawford, and at Paul Crews and a few other architects’ different proposal combining commuter service with local service as in Munich. But they are acutely aware that highway supporters would stoutly resist any proposal on this large a scale. They are wary of asking for too much.A “trojan train” strategy (my term) for Cap Metro would be to propose something modest and inexpensive, to win voter approval for it alone Nov 2, hope the demo line proves successful, then hold another referendum to approve the larger concept. Opponents might ignore the “trojan,” which would use existing track that now carries freight and a few passengers on the romantic Austin Steam Train from downtown (Convention Center) to Burnet A “modified trojan” strategy would be propose something more appealing to skeptical central city residents.
(1) Simple “trojan” line from Leander stopping at Plaza Saltillo (4th & IH35)? (2) Modified “trojan” to also: (a) Serve Mueller? - Cross IH35 at 51st St. Rejoin existing track at Manor Rd or MLK? - Cross IH35 at Airport Blvd. Rejoin existing track at Manor Rd or MLK? (b) Extend the line to downtown (Seaholm)? (3) Locate a station near Cherrywood (a “trojan” line may not stop here)? Some implications of the “modified trojan” are that they would probably: The short-term “trojan” emphasizes political opposition -- trying NOT to activate interests that don’t want dollars to be diverted from highways. The short-term “modified trojan” emphasizes central neighborhoods -- trying to mobilize inner-city folk who could benefit. The purpose of our brunch Saturday will to be see if there might emerge “a Cherrywood position” we could submit to CapMetro, in hopes we might nudge the referendum in that direction. If we’re all over the place, we’ll just have to comment as individuals. Come by if you’re at all interested. If the group approaches consensus, I’ll conduct a NeighborNet poll for the Steering Committee to ponder... //g |
March 2, 2000 Dear Council Members: The Cherrywood Neighborhood Association (CNA) needs your help to achieve one of our neighborhood's highest priorities -- safe, walkable streets. Attached you will find over 500 signatures of CNA residents petitioning you and the city staff to immediately implement traffic calming through and around our neighborhood - our homes. CNA has made great strides in the last year to include and involve its residents in developing and implementing a vision for the kind of neighborhood we want. To address our primary concern -- reducing and slowing traffic throughout our neighborhood - the CNA traffic committee organized a petition and canvassed the neighborhood, listening to and documenting the concerns of residents about their daily traffic problems. The overwhelming response of the residents was to work with the city to initiate traffic calming strategies now. Over the past eleven years, our neighborhood has consistently identified traffic as the primary problem for our residents. Simply put, our streets are not safe. As a neighborhood that is situated between several major arterials and a highway, we have a large number of trucks, buses, and emergency vehicles that travel neighborhood streets. Cars routinely travel at excessive speeds down residential streets that have no stop signs or signals to get their attention, a situation that makes it dangerous for pedestrians, especially children and elderly residents. In cases where stop signs do exist, they are frequently ignored. Speeds well in excess of the posted 30-mph have been recorded on residential streets. Parents frequently refuse to allow their children to ride bikes on neighborhood streets. The situation has gotten so bad that some residents have moved out of the neighborhood. Residents who prefer to cycle are afraid to because the risks are too great. Those residents who have no choice but to bike find themselves cycling on streets identified as dangerous by the cycling association newsletters, that is, streets with documented, excessive incidents of cycling accidents. Many of our residents are UT students who must take to the sidewalks on their bikes or take their lives in their hands and trust that trucks and other vehicles will miss them for one more day. And since very few streets have sidewalks, pedestrians find themselves sharing the narrow streets with parked cars, cyclists, and oncoming traffic. We are especially concerned about 38th 1/2 Street, where there is an elementary school located on one of our busiest roads. With the impending redevelopment of Robert Mueller Airport, the upcoming construction on IH35, and possible widenings of both Manor and 38th Street, residents of this neighborhood are concerned that traffic problems will go from bad to worse. Therefore, we feel that it is essential that CNA be included in the city's year 2000 traffic calming program. We are an organized and active group of residents ready to assist in the planning and implementation of traffic management strategies. The signatures we collected represent a third of households within our neighborhood and clearly show an eagerness to address this worsening situation. We need your help to bring available city resources to bear on the problems residents are having with traffic. Thank you for your prompt attention to our concerns. We look forward to working with you and the city transportation staff to address our traffic concerns. Sincerely, Jim Walker cc: The Honorable Dawnna Dukes |
Found a broken link? Having trouble with the site? Want to provide updated content? Contact your friendly, neighborhood System Administrator.