|
Citizen response - petitions and process |
| << Previous |
Keep in mind that the MIG NM502 Corridor Study proposed reducing Trinity to 2 thru-traffic lanes and installing 9 single-lane roundabouts. This plan had significant support during the latter part of the Study, including several of the County Councilors. At the same time, questions and opposition were growing. During the petitioning process summarized below, it became increasingly recognized that a two-lane Trinity with single-lane roundabouts would not provide adequate capacity for current and future levels of traffic on Trinity Drive and East Road. However, later events appear to have lost track of this "conclusion". Below is a listing of key events, most recent first. you may jump to particular steps or continue a "chrono-logical" path by following the Next >> links. |
||
| February 7, 2012. County Council met to consider options. No formal recommendation was made by the Transportation Board. Council chose "Zimmerman Option with single-lane roundabout plus slip lanes" as "Preferred Option". | ||
| February 7th. Mead Letter to The Los Alamos Monitor published. | ||
| February 1st. Unofficial online petition set up by Victor Gavron with 105 "signers" and many comments sent to Councilors. | ||
| January 12th and 19th, 2012. Transportation Board met to consider the options and pros and cons forwarded by the TAC. No official action taken. After adjournment on the 12th, T-Board discussed the "Zimmerman Options" sketches, developed by County Staff, with single-lane roundabout or signalized intersection on Trinity at Central. See details. | ||
| October, 2011 through January, 2012. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) met five times and consider various Council-recommended options in the light of conceptual designs developed by Ourston Roundabout Engineering and Parsons-Brinckerhoff. Pros and cons were developed for presentation to the Transportation Board. | ||
| September 6, 2011. County Council met to consider the MIG "Final Draft Report", presentations by the NM502 petitioners, and results of the Ourston peer review. | ||
| August 30. Ourston Roundabout Engineering submitted a "Peer Review" of the MIG Study. | ||
| August 16, 2011. MIG submitted their (Second) "Final Draft Report". | ||
| July 11. William Mead submitted written assessment of MIG responses to County Council. | ||
| July 7, 2011. A public "Technical Q&A" meeting was held in which MIG met with citizens who posed the technical questions, to ensure accurate communication. | ||
| June 24. MIG provided written answers to questions submitted. MIG also submitted their (First) "Draft Final Report". | ||
June 2. Our technical questions for MIG, Inc. have been posted and submitted. Several other citizens participated with their own submitted questions. Responses are expected at a public meeting currently scheduled for July 11, and in the final report for the Study. Other citizens may submit technical questions, as well, and some have already done so. Contact Anne Laurent, Acting Assistant County Administrator. Deadline for submission of questions is June 15. |
||
May 24, 2011. The following petition was presented to the Council, signed by 20 people.
The County Council heard brief presentations from Joyce and Howard Cady (who, with help, had collected about 500 signers on a related petition requesting that Trinity be kept at four lanes of through traffic), from myself, and from about 50 people who were present to express their views. Back in January, a Council Meeting heard mainly from supporters. At the May 24 meeting, most contributions were from opponents of the plan. Joel Williams presented results from SIDRA calculations showing long queues would be expected for the proposed roundabouts on NM502. Some of his results can be found here. |
| << Previous |