|
|
Comments on Traffic Circles Made by
September 19, 2006 Today, Mr. Zelin Canchola, Program Coordinator for the City of Tucson's Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, reported that there were no active traffic management projects in the Peter Howell Neighborhood. Don Ijams July 14, 2006 Today, Mr. Zelin Canchola, Program Coordinator for the City of Tucson's Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, reported that there were no active traffic management projects in the Peter Howell Neighborhood. Don Ijams April 28, 2006 Thank you for your concerns for our neighbors', and my, project. Currently, I have way too many irons in the fire and have stepped away from this project for awhile. Others in the group would much better answer your query. Scott Scott, How are plans coming along on your traffic management project? I haven't heard about your efforts in a while. Thanks, Don Ijams April 18, 2006 Hi Donald. There have been no further petitions, or plans submitted to this office. Zelin >>> "Donald Ijams" Would you please give me an update on the Peter Howell traffic control plan (2nd & Bryant and 3rd & Irving)? Thank you, Donald Ijams February 27, 2006 >>>Date sent: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 15:27:13 -0700 From: "Zelin Canchola" To: [email protected] Yes, temp markers will be installed if petition is complete. Yes both intersections. Zelin >>> "Donald Ijams" Zelin, Thank you for your update. Do you plan to place termporary markers in the street for the proposed median islands? As you've noted, we have a number of residents who use the intersection quite frequently but who do not live within one block of the intersection. With the temporary markers, they could navigate the turns and would be able to see what is planned. Is the civil engineer just working with the 2nd & Bryant intersection, or is he also working with the people near 3rd & Irving? Thanks for your willingness to work with our neighbors' concerns. Don Ijams >>>Date sent: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 08:12:31 -0700 From: "Zelin Canchola" To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Traffic Circle Donald, good to hear from you. We have issued a work order to remove the two temporary traffic circles at the request of the traffic group leading the process. I met with a Civil Engineer representing the group. He is working on an alternative design which consist of narrow median islands on the T-portion of the intersection. As soon as the City approves the design the traffic group will attach it to a petition for 60% approval and again follow our Neighborhood Traffic management process. Zelin Program Coordinator TDOT February 26, 2006 After receiving the mailing piece from phna I went online and found all the comments about the traffic circles. Looks like everyone feels strongly for or against. I live on Hawthorne and I have to tell you I find it to be a dangerous problem to come off Columbus and turn left on Bryant to get to Hawthorne. It's a very tight left turn which certainly slows a car down but I think the idea was to slow traffic going the other way. I also find that when I stop at the stop sign going north on Bryant that I have to ease out quite a way to see around the fence and if a car did come east on 2nd St. I would be in the way as it swings right to get around the circle. I would far prefer speed bumps to the traffic circle, at least at this particular corner. I may not live near the traffic circle but I certainly have to deal with it in order to get to Hawthorne. I hope the test period shows it causes too many problems for too many people - how would a fire truck make that turn? Carolyn Robinson January 29, 2006 Today, I had a conversation with Scott Duerstock, who is leading the effort to install traffic circles and other calming devices in the northern part of Peter Howell neighborhood. He and his Peter Howell Safe and Beautiful group have been working for a number of years to get changes made to several roadways in the area. Their main concern, according to Scott, is speeding and cut-through traffic. The group has secured a grant from PRO Neighborhoods to support the cost of installation and has raised over $1500 in additional money through garage sales. Money will be the limiting factor in how much of the total plan gets built. Scott says that the plans are evolving as portions of the installation are mocked up on the street. He showed me the outlines for a chicane on the north side of 2nd St. at Bryant, near the traffic circle. This addition is designed to get west-bound people to slow down, more than is now occurring with just the traffic circle. Scott is working to get the circle moved several feet to the north and is not sure whether stop signs will be part of the final picture. He and his neighbors do not like the idea of traffic humps. Scott said that a neighbor who is a civil engineer prepared drawings that were approved by City Transportation and were used as the basis for the signs now at the intersections. He does not now have detailed plans (showing landscaping or other details) for any of the intersections. He knows of no formal traffic studies done on the areas of concern. Scott, and a number of his neighbors right at the intersection, seemed determined to make the project look good and to maintain it after installation. He is thinking of desert-like plantings, in keeping with landscaping already in the area. I asked about involvement with the Development Center for Appropriate Technology (as mentioned in the PRO Neighborhoods piece) and he said that after the cut is made in the pavement, the design process will pick up, not necessarily involving the Center. He says that he fully intends to involve nearby neighbors in the design process. He also stated that he wants to work to satisfy residents on 2nd St. who have mobility issues and safety concerns. Don Ijams January 27, 2006 Tom Robira pointed me to the following, which provides more information on the current discussion: "Northern Peter Howell Traffic Calming Project - Award: $2750 Peter Howell Safe and Beautiful (PHSB) was formed to reduce traffic and speed and to create a sense of security along the streets of the northern part of Peter Howell neighborhood. The project will consist of up to seven traffic calming centers which will reduce traffic speeds in an area that is subject to cut-through traffic from cars at the intersections of Alvernon/Speedway and Columbus/Speedway. PHSB has collected over 120 signatures (over 60% of all residents in the affected area) in support of the project. With the help of the Development Center for Appropriate Technology (DCAT), volunteers will conduct "design days" at each of the traffic calming locations. All residents of the area will be encouraged to attend to help design the traffic circles and/or bump-outs and also the landscaping there. Funds for construction and landscaping will be solicited from residents and area businesses." Source: PRO Neighborhoods project descriptions I spoke with PRO Neighborhoods this morning who said that the project is ongoing, that the original application came after the City Transportation people had OKed it (including petitions), and that the contact people for the project were Scott Duerstock and Danny Chandler. Don Ijams January 15, 2006 Thanks for all of your work in getting comments on the web site. We live on 2nd Street, midway between Bryant and Longfellow and just wanted you to know that cars going from West to East are ignoring the "keep right" sign, and are driving left of the traffic circle. This is an accident waiting to happen. We don't object to an effort to slow traffic down as we have many speeders on 2nd St, but do not feel that this particular off-center traffic circle is the answer. Bernice Greenberg and Kay Thomson 4144 E. 2nd St. January 11, 2006 Following my conversation with Mr. Canchola earlier today (below), he sent me the following: "Attached is the original map with the total mitigation plan of (6 traffic circles and 1 chicane) for Peter Howell Neighborhood. This mitigation has been approved by the City of Tucson Neighborhood Traffic Management Program." Here is the plan (29k pdf). After looking the plan over, I asked Mr. Canchola some questions (with his answers):
I spoke with Mr. Zelin Canchola of the City of Tucson's Neighborhood Traffic Management Program and asked him the following numbered questions about the two circles now on the ground. His answers follow the questions: 1. How does what we now see compare with the total plan? Is the total plan available on paper somewhere that we can see? Mr. Canchola does not have the detailed design plans for either traffic circle. He says that the contact person, Mr. Scott Duerstock, has them and might share them with us. A 'bump-out' (also called a chicane) will be added to 2nd St., east of the intersection. The Neighborhood Traffic Management Section will work with Mr. Duerstock on the final plan once approval for each particular traffic circle is obtained. 2. Will there be stop signs or speed humps or ? added at either site? Will the tall stakes with the yellow signs and the circular traffic arrows stay in the final plan? Mr. Canchola expects that there will be stop signs in all three directions for each traffic circle. He does not expect that there will be speed humps or other traffic management devices installed. The tall stakes are likely to come out, to be replaced with shorter posts with reflective signs to warn approaching drivers at night. Mr. Canchola agrees that the circular 'stay right' signs may or may not be effective in directing turns at the intersections. The fire department is reviewing or has reviewed the placement of the traffic circles, and will be involved if the plans move toward implementation. 3. Tell us again the reasons for these additions to our streescape. a. Are the circles really meant to slow speeding traffic? b. Or are the circles mainly meant to landscape the street? Mr. Canchola says that is some of both reasons. He said again that the Department of Transportation has done no traffic safety studies at either intersection. 4. When and how will you want neighborhood input on the prospective traffic circles? Mr. Canchola says that near the end of the 90 day trial period (early April), Mr. Duerstock will need to redo the standard process of getting signed petitions from the affected street segments. If he does not get 60% or more of the residents along the one block street segments forming either intersection to sign, then that traffic circle and related plans will be abandoned. Donald Ijams PHNA President January 10, 2006 Lonnie Henning is circulating a Petition in Protest of Traffic Quieting Measures. Lonnie can be reached at [email protected]. Janet, I agree with your evaluation and would add: Instead of The Safe and Beautiful people spending $$ on a dangerous ineffective eyesores that are divisive to our community, how about:
Lonnie Henning I am concerned about the temporary Traffic Circle at 2nd & Bryant. It is too far south in the intersection. Large Emergency vehicles can not travel east through the intersection. A SUV would have to go onto Bryant to go east around the traffic circle. This is not a safe situation - it is an accident waiting to happen. The intersection is unsafe for us walkers and wheelchair travelers, as well as cars stopping going north on Bryant. A 3 way stop would be much safer option at this intersection and serve the purpose of slowing the traffic on 2nd St. Janet Munson - Resident of Hawthorne St. December 16, 2005 We have issued a work order to install object markers at the proposed traffic circle locations, including a bump-out at the Bryant and 2nd location. These markers will give a physical idea of how the they will work. The markers will be in place for a period of 90 days. At the end of this test period, a second petition (60%) will be required to install permanent circles. We usually require petitions from each leg of the intersection to the next block. If this project is not approved, it will be discontinued and the project terminated or revised for a new demonstration and test period, if the residents wish to pursue alternate plans. Zelin Canchola City of Tucson Dept. of Transportation November 17, 2005 I have been on vacation for a month so am just catching up on the traffic circles discussion. After walking the neighborhood this week and intentionally going by the "traffic circle" intersections, I am struck with the question: Wouldn't stop signs be more effective, less expensive, take less care and ultimately slow drivers down? Janet Munson I have just spoken to Mr. Zelin Canchola. My name, Maria Segawa, was to have been removed (from the 3rd/Irving petition) several weeks ago. I just spoke to Mr. Canchola and have confirmed this with an e-mail. Maria Segawa Before the speed humps in your area (near Burns and Irving) were installed, did you get a chance to consider what sort of remediation options (incl. traffic circles) were appropriate for the traffic problems you were facing? Don No, I did not know anything about the speed humps until they were installed. This was interesting to me as Beth and I had worked very hard 10-15 years ago to try to get stop signs installed on Irving--without success. So I was impressed that someone had been successful with the speed humps (which, by the way, work very well). Les Hunter November 15, 2005 On November 15, 2005, I went to the City's Traffic Engineering office and requested a copy of the signed petition for the traffic circle proposed for 3rd St. and Irving Circle. The names of people signing, their addresses and dates of signature are attached. So is a map. Later, I spoke with Mr. Zelin Canchola, Program Coordinator for the City of Tucson's Neighborhood Traffic Management Program. I told him that I was new to the Peter Howell Neighborhood Association's board of directors and wanted to get up to speed on traffic management issues. He told me that he is awaiting a revised plan for the traffic circle design at Irving and 3rd before they move ahead with anything on the ground. Given the amount of interest this issue has generated lately, they plan to install temporary "markers" showing where permanent features will be placed. The neighborhood will have some time (probably 90 days) to live with the changes and to be able to form an opinion of the total effect. Canchola said that they would be happy to receive comments or petitions for or against permanent installation that might be offered no later than the end of the test period. After reading the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Policy and Procedures document, I asked Mr. Canchola if the standard procedures had been followed in this case and whether any written description of the problem existed, with subsequent verification and consideration of alternate methods for problem resolution. He said there was no such written documentation and that they only had the signed petition for installation of traffic circles (he mentioned that three circles are now being worked on, 3rd and Irving, 2nd and Bryant, and 2nd and Longfellow?). Mr. Canchola mentioned that a Mr. Scott Duerstock was the contact person for all three proposed traffic circles. Don Ijams |
|
November 10, 2005
Julie, Thanks for the pictures. They are a telling depiction of the maintenance issues with these sort of neighborhood projects. Lonnie Hello everybody, I took the time to check out Bellevue Street, between Alvernon & Columbus. I wanted to see for myself what "chicanes" looked like. I've attached some pictures of the "Chicanes" that are on that street. I also interviewed a couple of people that live on that street. I was told the traffic circles, ovals & chicanes were put in to control speeding and detour large trucks from going down their street. (Example picture) 
Other Pictures: 1 2 3 4 5 6 Bellevue is a straight street similar to 2nd street in our neighborhood. Bellevue has two 4-way stops and a couple of three way stops. I was told by people living in the neighborhood (As you'll be able to see in the attached pictures) the traffic circles, ovals & chicanes are no longer taken care of because the people that wanted them have moved out of the neighborhood. I was also told by people living there they "don't like them". At first most of them didn't care one way or the other if they were installed. Now, they have determined that the installation of them hasn't slowed down the drivers and they're a eye sore. I also noticed that when a vehicle passed by one of the chicanes, the vehicle ends up driving down the middle of the remainder of the street. If another car was coming the other way they would slow down to pass the other car and chicane. Otherwise, the speed of the vehicle passing a chicane with no other vehicle coming at them didn't seem to slow down much. If a street with no sidewalks had chicanes install, it would also appear to be hazardous to pedestrian traffic. There's no place to walk. I met one lady who lives at the southeast corner of Bellevue & Bryant with a 4 way stop intersection. She shared with me that she really "hates" them and wished they had never been installed. She said the circle in front of her house collects trash and has weeds. She further stated the person that started the whole traffic circle petition had lived next door to her at one time. That person moved out of the neighborhood about a year later. I'll be sending a copy of her intersection picture in another e-mail. Her circle has a manhole in the middle of it. I'll also be sending other pictures of the Oval (not circle) that was installed on the three way intersections (see below). Circles were used for only the four way intersections. The oval is "off set" in the intersection, not in the middle of the three way stop. A example will follow in another e-mail (below). People living by that one seem to take care of their oval. It also appeared to me that the oval off set installation was a better choice for the three way stop. It didn't impede the third leg of the three way stop. You could also move it to either side of the "T" part of the intersection. 
I also drove through the "Frontier Village" subdivision. Frontier Village is north of Pima, between Alvernon & Columbus. They have larger intersections where traffic circles are installed. They also have one street with chicanes. I stopped to take pictures and a elderly lady talked to me about the circles. She has lived in that neighborhood for 15 years. She told me she fought the installation of the circles & chicanes. Someone that didn't even live in her neighborhood started the petition. She told me the lady that petitioned for the traffic circles is named Mary Jane Patti. When the circles first got installed someone took care of them and they looked fine for a while. The people that agreed to have them installed in the first place and took care of them moved. Now, the city takes care of them. Other Pictures: 1 2 3 4 5 6 The city doesn't clean them as often as the home owners used to. I ended up talking to her so long I ran out of time to take pictures. I only saw her circle in front of her house. This circle seemed to be taken care of better then the ones on Bellevue. She didn't know who was paying for the up keep of the circle. She also mentioned that the city had just cleaned up the circle but it has looked pretty bad at times. I wondered if the neighborhood property taxes would go up to maintain the circles & chicanes. Signed "Just being informative", Julie Pupkoff Hi, As a relatively new member of the neighborhood (three years on the block of 4th street between Longfellow & Irving) and newer still to the PHNA (I attended my first meeting this past September) reading the posts concerning traffic circles has been both invigorating and dismaying. Invigorating because the debate has been substantive, full of important issues (who gets to decide what, how); even better, the posts have been clear and sharp but without discernable rancor. Tip O'Neill certainly was right! But it's been a bit dismaying that so much has been written and the situation seems to be the same as it was two weeks ago. Email is great for disseminating information, but less effective for making decisions. If there is value in a neighborhood association, then it must surely be for a situation like this. Not as a way to make the decision (whether this is a PHNA decision or an even more local one is itself under dispute) but as way to clarify the situation, bring interested parties together, and find a way to help reach a decision. So I suggest a PHNA meeting to discuss this issue, with the following suggested goals for the meeting:
Michael Mulcahy |
|
November 9, 2005
Well said Lee, Lonnie I have a few questions for Tres English based on his comments that are attached to this reply. 1. You state that these traffic measures will make the neighborhood a much friendlier place. I beg to differ. When you go into a neighborhood that has nothing but traffic blocking devices, you send the clear message that you are not wanted here. 2. You state that these traffic measures will turn the neighborhood into a healthy and pedestrian place. I assume that means that you are physically able to walk. What about those of us who no longer can? What are we supposed to do? Moving is not an option for my mother or myself - we've lived here 34 years and are not going anywhere. She's 87 and she can't make herself any younger, even if she wanted to. I'm physically disabled, and cannot walk, even though I would love to be able to once again. So, what about us??? How do you propose we get to and from our house to the other places we need to go, especially after you put roadblocks in a large percentage of the intersections (assuming that all 7 of your proposed roadblocks are eventually built)? What of our other neighbors who are not pedestrian due to age or physical limitations? There are several of them here in our neighborhood. 3. They (Maria & Tom) will be directly impacted by whatever is done. Yes, they will and it needs to be settled, not just addressed. But how can you (and others) say that the rest of us are not affected? Of course we are. We all live in this neighborhood and we all use these streets on a daily basis. When a street is blocked, that affects all traffic, not just traffic that comes from "outside" of our boundaries. 4. I am very concerned by your closing comments. It seems that you are suggesting that a stop needs to be placed on the 2 circles that have been marked, substitute some of the other 7 sites, and just keep plowing through with this, whether or not. Now, I may be totally mis-reading your comment, and if so, I apologize. But, I think that a whole lot of compromising needs to be happening here. Both sides of this issue have valid concerns that need to be addressed and settled, because most of us in this neighborhood would like to keep it the nice place it has been, at least for the 34 years that I have lived here. Lee Jaeger For the record I am pretty much neutral on individual traffic circles, if the majority of residents near a certain intersection want one it is not my business to fight them. That said, I do have some serious concerns about the proliferation of traffic controls and whether there is currently a majority supporting the planned circles. While there are studies that show that traffic calming devices decrease speeds on residential streets, there are also studies that show that even small delays to emergency response costs lives. It is my understanding that several cities have moratoriums on traffic devices due to compounded problems for emergency response. It is also common sense to note that impediments may just divert traffic. A traffic circle on 3rd St. may just increase traffic on 4th St., at which point I may be forced to support a traffic device for 4th St to divert the traffic over to 5th. In the south section of the neighborhood the increased traffic on Burns St and Longfellow is a direct result of the speed humps on neighboring streets. I lived in Seattle for several years, and let me say that by far most intersections had traffic circles with 4 way stops on the remaining intersections. If this is the way the neighborhood want to go it seems the neighborhood association should be involved. My concerns:
Tucson and Arizona are very behind the curve. There have been numerous studies of the effectiveness and safety of traffic circles, chicanes, and other measures that will make our neighborhood a much friendlier place for people and safer for us all. Here is a quote from the Seattle Transportation Dept. to make the point: "Based on a high demand and identified need, the Neighborhood Traffic Control Program (NTCP) was established in 1978 as part of the City's annual Capital Improvement Program. Since then, Seattle's residents, in partnership with the City, have been involved in the installation of over 800 traffic circles on neighborhood streets. The purpose of the NTCP has been to reduce accidents and speeds on residential streets, thereby creating safer, more pleasant neighborhoods. To date, traffic circles have resulted in a substantial reduction in accidents and speeds in neighborhoods." There are real concerns that must be address. People like Maria Segawa and Tom Robira deserve answers to their concerns. They will be directly impacted by whatever is done, and we must not ignore them. However, we must not scrap the opportunity to make real improvements in our neighborhood, because of either fears of the unknown or specific problems that we do not address. There is a real opportunity to turn Peter Howell into a real showcase for being a healthy and pedestrian place (some call these efforts "Home zones") that will really benefit all of us. It is important that we address Maria's and Tom's concerns before we proceed with anything at their intersection. But that doesn't mean we can't proceed with other sites. The important point is that we keep moving. Tres English November 8, 2005 Tom, I agree with you. The two traffic circles would be placed on T intersections where there is a stop sign (Third Street & Irving Circle and 2nd and Bryant) Further as the name implies, "Irving Circle" is not a straight street, it is a semi circle. Therefore cars do not race down Irving Circle. The cars must make a full stop on both of these T-intersections - otherwise they would be running into yards and houses. Since the cost of the traffic circles is $3,000 perhaps they could be placed in front of those intersections where the neighbors are willing to share in the cost of $3,000 and feel they are essential in slowing down traffic at a four way intersection. The two traffic circles have been marked where they are least needed and it would be an unnecessary expenditure. Maria Segawa November 7, 2005 Looking at the proposed layout of the circles, the only 2 that are funded, it looks as if they are of little or no value to slowing traffic on the through streets they are located on. They will slow traffic on the intersecting street but since there is already a stop sign there I do not see the value in the circle. It seems to me that since only enough monies that were raised for two circles, perhaps the monies would be better spent to place several traffic humps. If the circles are 3,000.00 and the humps are $500.00 that would equal 12 humps to slow the traffic vs 2 traffic circles. The humps would be more of a deterrent to speeding than the circles if by nothing else but sheer volume. Again I don't see, as laid out, how the traffic will be slowed on the through streets. Tom Robira I agree with Nancy. We weren't asked whether we support the traffic circles the first time around. I'm assuming that's because the 60% agreement was already secured. We are in support of them. Deborah Roller Don, Thanks for your efforts on the web site. Could you make these comments available as you have with the city information on circles? * Arguments Against Traffic Obstruction Devices* Traffic obstruction devices: A. Can increase response time for emergency vehicles. When seconds matter, having to slow to pass over speed bumps and humps or navigate narrow roadways can mean the difference between life and death, or the loss of one's home. The fact that some of these devices can seriously damage emergency vehicles and other vehicles along the roadway is also a concern. B. Can increase congestion on other streets and create problems in other neighborhoods. If traffic obstruction devices divert traffic to other streets, they may compound congestion problems that already exist in those areas. If not successful in diverting traffic to other streets, traffic obstruction devices will compound congestion problems on the streets on which they are installed. C. Will increase vehicle wear and tear, air pollution, and noise. Braking and accelerating in response to traffic calming measures increases fuel consumption and emissions. This can contradict other efforts to reduce emissions and contribute to a community becoming or remaining a "non-attainment" air quality zone, thereby being subjected to federal mandates and restrictions. D. Increase a community's liability for accidents attributed to such devices. E. Create neighborhood friction. Not all persons (not even most persons) on a given street will appreciate having to run an obstacle course every time they drive to or from home. Some traffic obstruction opponents blow their horns or yell verbal insults when having to slow or stop for speed bumps or humps. Frequently, the response to unnecessary stop signs is to ignore them. Lonnie Henning If this is the case, I think we need to take a look at how all residents feel. Many of us do not respond to all these emails, but are in favor of the traffic circles. Thanks! Nancy Turman Peter Howell Neighborhood Association I received a telephone message from Monique in Councilman Ronstadt's office on Friday at 4:30 PM. Monique has been working the traffic circle problem since I called her on Oct. 28. She has been in contact with several residents in our neighborhood and believes that there are some people who wish to pull their signatures from the original traffic circle petition. She states that if this is the case it would drop the approval below 60%. She has been in contact with Zelin Conchola at Traffic Mitigation and has requested that the traffic circles be put on hold until Councilman Ronstadt's office can sort out the facts. If you lived near one of the traffic circles and originally signed the petition in support and now wish to withdraw your support, please contact Monique at Councilman Ronstadts�s office 791-4601. If you are in the area of a traffic circle and know that your neighbor signed the petition and does not have e-mail, please contact them and ask them if they still support the traffic circle and if they do not have them call Monique at the above mentioned number. I will have additional conversations with Monique today. Lonnie Henning November 4, 2005 Donald, I know nothing. I'm guessing the petition map is old, since these things take time. And my understanding is that approval requires 60% of the property owners in the one-block area, which means killing the traffic circle would require 41% signing in opposition. Although it is said to be a democratic process, the house most affected - Maria Segawa - is at the mercy of the rest of the neighbors within the one-block area. You'd think people would take her wishes into consideration, but, apparently, that's not going to happen. Thanks, Duncan November 3, 2005 I just spoke to Eddy again and he corrected his previous statement. He was incorrect in stating that the Association was involved. I pass his apologies on to all. His records show that a Scott Dewerstock was the person who was named on the petitions. (Webmaster's note: recent property records show that a Scott Duerstock owns two parcels in the neighborhood, one at 951 N. Bryant and another at 4218 E. 2nd St. Both of these properties are near the southwest corner of Bryant and 2nd.) Lee Does anybody know about the studies that have looked at the effectiveness (speed reduction, safety, etc) of traffic circles versus other methods? I remember when we were discussing this issue a while back somebody posted something (???) Maybe science can help us along here, hopefully objective science. Lisa Smith Obviously number 8 has to be checked. If the paperwork says that the association is involved in some way, that's not right. Though he may be using "association" in the generic sense and the paperwork says that it will be handled by the neighborhood, which would mean the people involved. (My favorite quote on communications is that "the most dangerous part of communication is the illusion that it actually happened.") AS to not using a city approved contractor, it's not that they are approved or not, but that they are the "nominal" city contractor. The contractor should be legitimate (licensed, bonded, insured). My memory of those discussions is that if we used their contractor that you had to do a certain design that was cost prohibitive. Note that our discussions with Police over the years is that when they set up speed traps and give out tickets, more than 80% of all tickets go to those in the neighborhood. In other words, it's usually those irresponsible people within the neighborhood that drive in an unsafe manner. Note also that I was a board member during the early part of this. While the traffic circles were not voted upon by the PHNA, if citizens within the neighborhood follow a legitimate process and get the necessary signatures, there is nothing wrong with the board of the PHNA providing assistance to that group in dealing with the city. That's within the charter of the board and does not require a neighborhood wide vote. Just like the PHNA can help someone with an issue with noisy neighbors, an unsafe tree, trash in a neighbor's yard, etc. Just providing info. Grant Note that there is a painted circle at Bryant and 2nd street. I'm assuming that is one going in.. I frankly have lost track of where the actual circles were approved via the valid process followed by the "traffic circle group", but Rondstadt's office might have all that info. Note also that Sharon Foltz' email made is sound like a mandatory payment was required. My memory was that between grants and those that wanted the circles, the money was raised and no one is forced to pay for anything that they do not want to pay for. Whether agreeable or not, the city has set down a process for approving these circles, and they feel that only those within a certain distance of the intersection have a legitimate right to have a say, and have decided that a petitioned approval process with a set percentage of approval does constitute a valid desire. That's democracy, I guess. I'm sure there is also a valid way to attempt redress which should be followed. I would not personally attack anyone for following a valid process, even though the outcome is not to my liking... Grant Anderson It is 11/3/2005, 2:30pm. I just got off of the phone with Eddy at City of Tucson Engineering Dept. 791-4259. I had a few questions and the following is the information he gave me. 1. This project IS NOT on hold as of today. It is to proceed. 2. Only the 2nd & Bryant intersections will have chicanes. The other intersection is just too small to accommodate any. 3. Although the original 7 traffic circles were approved, only 2 have been funded. 4. The only way he knows to stop this process is to do another petition and see which side has the numbers, for or against. (I am wondering how many of those who signed still live here? Also, can renters sign or does it have to be property owners?). Eddy told me to contact Paula, same office & number, to get the exact boundaries to circulate a STOP petition. She will not be in the office until Wednesday. 5. I asked the cost to remove the circles & chicanes, if after they go in we want to remove them. His ballpark figure is $5,000.00 per circle. 6. The next step will be that Eddy & his supervisor will come back to the intersections and re-mark and install a temporary pole at the center of each circle. He has stated many times that he is very concerned about the safety of all with these circles at these intersections. He stated that they will have to make 1 a half-moon shape and possibly the 2nd, too. They will do their best to make driveways as accessible as possible, but that there just is not enough room. 7. I asked him the timeline on this and he told me his office was waiting for the plans with the chicanes to come from the architect. He said his office would take no action until they had a corrected plan. 8. He stated that his office and their approved contractor were NOT going to be constructing these circles. That our Association had hired private architects and contractors. I questioned him several times on this, as I have read in all of the neighborhood comments that our Association was not involved officially. He checked papers that he had and he said that his information said our Association. (My personal feeling here is one of high concern. Not using the City's preferred contractors is a very, very, very bad decision.) In my few comments, I have tried to keep my personal opinions to myself, but I feel that the time has come for me to say a few words. I understand wanting to keep the speeding down, I'm all for that. However, I do not understand why we are so intent on using the traffic circles, which have been proven time and again to not work at all. I would like to know why we are not using a resource that all of us already "own" and the only one that has ever proven to be effective. Why are we not having the police handle this? We have several other problems in this neighborhood as serious as speeding; gun fights, drug dealing, prostitution, theft, unknown adult males near the park and school where the children are, maybe other issues I'm not aware of. Surely, we as a neighborhood/association can talk to our police contact officer and arrange to have stepped up patrols, 24 hours a day, for a few weeks. That is the only way that I know of to stop these activities. Speeders who have to pay a fine have a tendency to obey the law afterwards. I realize the argument can be made that "they" will just do it again, and that's right, "they" will do it again. That's when we call the police again and arrange for more stepped-up patrols. My thoughts, for what they are worth. Lee Jaeger On the attached map, I only see one traffic circle. I thought the discussion was about two. Where is the second one or is there only one? If the representation on this map is true, the most affected properties look like they want it. I drive through that intersection multiple times daily and will have to find another route to avoid the circle. Maybe that is what you all are trying to accomplish, eliminate traffic from your neighbors through their own neighborhood. Paul Larmour Subject: Proposed Traffic Circle Here is the map sent to me by Ronstadt's offfice, with the properties in favor of the traffic circle indicated. It becomes legible if you print it out, which probably won't help you on your website. (The map is in pdf format and is 84k in size.) Thanks for taking an interest in our great neighborhood. Duncan ---------------------- Dear Sir, Here is the map of the proposed traffic circle and petition requirements for approval of installation. Jessica Baker Ward VI Intern Ward VI Council Office Phone (520) 791-4601 Fax (520) 791-3211 November 2, 2005 A prime example of traffic circles and "chicanes" can be found on Bellevue (1 block North of Speedway) between Columbus and Alvernon. Cheryl Lumley *Square Deal* /*"Let the watchwords of all our people be the old familiar watchwords of honesty, decency, fair-dealing, and commonsense."... "We must treat each man on his worth and merits as a man. We must see that each is given a square deal, because he is entitled to no more and should receive no less."..."The welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the welfare of all of us."*/ New York State Fair, Syracuse, September 7, 1903 Mr Erbe, Theodore Roosevelt had many noteworthy quotes. This one is one of my favorites. Our neighborhood has not gotten a square deal; It has not been dealt with honestly, decently, or with commonsense. There was no transparency from the group that has forced the circles on the neighborhood. Clearly The Safe and Beautiful people are concerned for their welfare alone. Your open letter to the Peter Howell Neighborhood Association states the facts as you see them...surely you are not suggesting that those of us who are opposed to the Circles not state our concerns, views, and feelings. Why is it ok for you to state yours? We who oppose are not critics; we are concerned neighbors who care about our entire neighborhood. You forgot to reveal that your Roosevelt quote was from his speech on "Citizenship in a Republic." One would hope that those who serve our Association do so with an open mind to the Neighborhood as a whole; representing the majority view. I maintain that our representation over the last two years was not representative of the Neighborhood. When the association was first started I was its 1st VP. We wrote/adopted the bylaws. I went on the board to protect the our neighborhood from the activist 2% of the population that is over represented in these forms of Associations. I am disappointed that you view my past service as siting silently by. I believe we all have the right to express our views and expect representation. If a volunteer does so to promote his/her own agenda the welfare of us all is not served.. And yes the Association should weigh in on the Traffic Circle discussion; it is no different than zoning, crime, and other issues that we have already taken positions on. Perhaps the people should speak by referendum. Lonnie Henning FYI - As I recall some neighbors north of 5th wanted up to 7 traffic circles, but they only raised enough $$ for 2. The City has some requirements & the cost was higher than anticipated. Probably w/ inflation they cost even more now. The cost was to be "shared" by the neighbors closest to the intersection & this was not popular with those who were not keen on the traffic circles to start with. Sharon Foltz I live 50 feet from the proposed traffic circle on Irving Circle and 3rd, and I am opposed to the installation of this traffic hazard. Although traffic calming devices are a great 'feel good' measure, they will do nothing to alleviate the number of cars trying to get from one side of Tucson to the other. Growth is the reason we're dealing with this incessant overflow traffic, and as long as we continue to allow the pro-growth lobby to run our town, we may as well be putting sandbags in front of a flood. As a proponent of local control, I see the proposed traffic circle at Irving Circle and 3rd as a huge inconvenience for Maria Segawa, since it will be situated directly in front of her driveway. Perhaps someone who signed the secret petition in support of these traffic circles could volunteer to have it installed directly in front of their driveway instead. Is it too much to ask that we exercise common courtesy when we deal with issues that affect us all, instead of sneaking around passing a secret petition to get these traffic circles installed? Granted, the traffic circle crowd might end up having the numbers on their secret petition, but does that mean they'll have the right to impose on their neighbors, the ones who will be most affected by the traffic noise and the inconvenience? Rude drivers don't drive slower through a neighborhood because of traffic calming devices. They just slow down when they see one, and then gun the engine again when they get around it. I wonder what it's going to be like living next to a race track? I guess if the traffic circle crowd get their way I'll find out. In the name of common courtesy and common sense, all of you well-meaning people who signed the secret traffic circle petition, please reconsider your decision. All you have to do is call Ronstadt's office at 791-4601 and tell him you've changed your mind. This is a great neighborhood. Do you really think turning it into a dragstrip is going to make it better? Thank you, Duncan Stitt Lee, It is my understanding, from 2 years ago in conversations with Tres, that the "chicanes" are bulges in the curbing causing the traffic flow to move in a wandering path. Very rough sketch attached (below). Regards Tom Robira 
Vera Jaeger was on the original group that wrote the by-laws of the neighborhood association and she has notes and other historical info. Let her know if you would like to have copies. While sorting through these papers she found an PHNA newsletter dated February 2004, stating that there will be 7 intersections with the traffic circles blocking them. On Monday, 10/31, when I spoke to Eddy, at the City of Tucson's Engineering Dept, he spoke of only the 2 circles that have been marked. Can someone clarify this? Are we to expect that a total of 7 intersections are to be blocked? Also, in the same February 2004 newsletter, it states in part "...If you would like to join us when we get together to design the landscaping of these traffic circles and chicanes, let us know." I would appreciate a clarification of the term "chicanes". This sounds to me as though it's referring to a second entity, if so, what is that entity?? Thanks, Lee Jaeger October 31, 2005 To All, (I sent this last night but evidently hit Reply instead of Reply All) I don't think that everyone in the immediate neighborhood of the intersection, 3rd and Irving Circle, is in favor of a traffic circle at that intersection. I have already seen 2 e-mails from residents who's homes are located right at that intersection. As far as safety is concerned, what about the bicyclists who use the bike path. None of them ever stop now when they come up 3rd and enter Irving Circle. I'm sure they won't go around the circle, they'll just cut the corner as they do now, and the drivers going up or down Irving Circle will have their vision blocked by something in the circle. I have already witnessed a few close calls because of the cyclist running the stop sign and cutting across the intersection. The drivers who almost hit them were not speeding or driving un-safely, if the drivers vision had been blocked by a tree or shrub in a circle the outcome could have been tragic. Who chose what intersections would have the circles? Was a traffic study done? I remember 2 years ago when Tres was trying to get the neighborhood interested in the circles, he had a map that he had drawn up with locations already pinpointed at that time. Tom Robira |
|
I called the city's engineering office today to see what information they
could give me on our situation. The info follows, in case you haven't had
time to contact them.
Eddy (no last name available), the man who drew the circles, had had many calls from our neighbors today. The Fred Rondstadt office has been involved and the project is now officially on hold until we can get this all sorted out. According to Eddy, any neighborhood that has an association, the association and the officers must be involved. There needs to be a neighborhood-wide petition, too. Eddy said that our assoc. and president were now fully involved. He also stated that he had some very serious safety issues with the circles, the t-intersections specifically, when he saw that was where our neighbors were proposing to put them. He also said, that in his experience, traffic circles only worked in very rare instances. Lee Jaeger 4026 E. Alhambra Open Letter to the Peter Howell Neighborhood Association To all, I think it is important to state the facts about the Neighborhood Association meeting (especially for those who were unable to attend). After the heated debate about traffic circles, it was made crystal clear that this was not a Peter Howell Neighborhood Association project but a group of concerned residents who got together and decided that traffic circles may be a good idea in their residential area. Mr. Paul Bates gave an excellent informative briefing on what he and others were proactively doing in their areas to combat speeding. I feel as though Mr. Bates was unfairly treated and attacked for his presentation. I commend Mr. Bates, Mr. Munns and others who have worked hard to try to do something positive for their area. As someone in the meeting said, there is a process by which a group of neighbors can get together and petition the city for traffic circles. They simply need signatures from people who live in that area, not the entire Peter Howell Neighborhood Association. If you disagree with the process, then your fight is with the City--not the people who are obtaining signatures and following the requirements of the City. I believe there was a lack of communication about the purpose of Mr. Bates' presentation. It was purely an informative presentation about what he and his fellow neighbors were doing to make their areas a better place to live. Residents should have walked away from the meeting with that impression. Maybe Mr. English should have placed a disclaimer on Mr. Bates' presentation and said up front that "this is not a Peter Howell Neighborhood Association issue, but an informative briefing on what some citizens of the Peter Howell Neighborhood Association are doing in their areas." Although this was not done, it was made clear at the end that this was not a Peter Howell Neighborhood Association issue. People who walked away from the meeting with another impression, were still caught up in the heated debate about traffic circles and were not listening very closely. It is obvious (from the meeting and previous e-mails) that Mr. Henning, Ms. Foltz, and others are against traffic circles. However, unless they are being placed near your house, you really have no right to complain. If they are being placed in your area and you happen to fall within the minority, then you must go to the City and change the rules regarding the petition process. From Mr. Henning's e-mail and investigative work, he simply states the the petitions said "We the resident of Peter Howell. . ." Did it say Peter Howell Neighborhood Association? They are residents of the Peter Howell area so unless it said Neighborhood Association I don't really see a problem with it. Further, even it did say Neighborhood Association then I'm sure there is a process to determine whether the petitions are valid or not. Let the process work. Finally, if you are unhappy with the direction of the Neighborhood Association then you could have volunteered to get on the Board and run for President or any other office. If you sat silently while volunteers were being sought, then again, you have no right to complain. "It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly; so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat." THEODORE ROOSEVELT (Paris Sorbonne,1910) Bob Erbe Holmes Street October 30, 2005 Thank you!! Well said. This has always been the point of view of the group that raised funds for and made contributions to this effort, apart from the neighborhood association. While this has been a lively debate, bringing the PHNA into this has always been inappropriate, and why once this became evident, it was quickly separated from it. Maureen Kelly Don, It is time we find out if there is substantial agreement and little opposition to opposing the traffic circle. The question cuts both ways. Lonnie Of the comments offered so far, I think the thoughts of Bill Hoffmann best match my own: "However, this is not something that you, I, or the Peter Howell Neighborhood Association should determine. People in the immediate neighborhood of the intersection under consideration should decide. The rest of us should not try to impose on them." Who should have standing on this issue? Who should be allowed to vote, if a vote is taken? Somehow, I don�t think every resident�s stake in this issue is, or should be, the same as that of everyone else. Shouldn�t a resident who lives next to an intersection in question have a greater voice than a resident living on the other side of the neighborhood? Shouldn�t the views of a person who drives through the intersection every day be given greater weight than those of a person who never drives through? Can a sense of ownership of the whole neighborhood be taken too far? I think so. I also think the appearance of a traffic circle is important to a larger group of neighbors than those who have a direct traffic control interest. The obligation is great on those who bring a traffic circle into being to keep its appearance an asset to the neighborhood rather than a detriment. As to the role of the Peter Howell Neighborhood Association in an issue such as this, I agree with Clague and others who think the Association should be neutral. The weight of formal PHNA support for an issue should only be brought to bear when there is substantial agreement and little opposition, given widespread knowledge of the issue by residents. Don Ijams I would like to echo the comments of Lonnie Henning and some of the questions of Julie's. I am strongly opposed to the traffic circles. They are an eyesore in the adjacent neighborhoods that have installed them and they certainly impede emergency vehicle and any other large vehicular movement. My thanks also to Don Ijams for the nice work that he has done on the website. I would love to see a poll section also for an unofficial count of yeas and nays on this issue. Paul Larmour Don, I just had a thought...is it possible to have a section on your Web page for a informal vote for the "Traffic Circles"? I realize not everyone has a e-mail address, but it would give some kind of idea of public opinion of the traffic circles. Or do you think we should just go around with a petition? It looks like someone is going to have to do it or we will never get to the bottom of this?? I personally could of gone either way on the vote prior to your Web page information. After reading that the neighborhood would have to take care of them and that the ones that have been put up seemed to be unsuccessful, I tend to think....what's the point in putting them in??? Yet, I'm still open minded and would listen to someone else's ideas. In the mean time...I got to thinking about many aspects of the traffic circles and want to run them by the rest of the PHNA. There's a subdivision called Richland Heights in Tucson. There's two different sections to Richland Heights. One section is west of Campbell, north of Ft Lowell, south of Prince. It's a unusual subdivision because it's one of the last areas "in town" that's horse property. They currently have blocked intersections and traffic circles. It's nothing fancy...in fact it's barrels and fat chains draped over one section of the intersection and maybe a few desert plants here and there. Richland Heights has dirt roads because they chose to leave it unpaved for horses. Mind you, some of the houses are up into the million $ mark. You literally have to go into the subdivision a certain way to get to any given property ...it's one way on most of the streets in there. I always forget when I need to go into that subdivision. It's a pain in the neck. So, I end up driving the wrong way to get where I have to go. Otherwise, I'd have to drive all the way around to the opposite end to get where I want to be. No one's out there directing traffic....so I figure what the heck?? My thought is....the Richland Heights circles and road blocks were a waste of time & money. Maybe it would keep most people from driving into the subdivision because the normal person would find it to be intimidating. Now, a bold person like me or a burglar isn't going to care...hahahaha. There's no way a fire truck could get around those road blocks either. Just like any other road block or impediment into a subdivision...the fire department has the authority to run down or break through a road block of any kind. Planned communities have the understanding that any fence that is around their community can be driven through or chopped down by the fire department. The subdivision has to replace or fix any damage done by the fire department. The other thing to think about is...who is going to be responsible for the damage in our neighborhood from the traffic circles? And....who's going to cover liability for damage to vehicles or personal injury or even death to human lives? All it takes is some speeding car that wasn't aware of the traffic circle. Sure...the person was speeding...but as you all know...someone can sue for anything. Are we (PHNA) going to be responsible? In my experience...planned communities with associations that have privately owned streets have to carry insurance on their streets. Insurance is paid for through their association dues. As a planned community they can be sued if someone gets hurt on their streets. Our subdivision has no coverage for such problems. We don't have association dues. We pay city assessments to repair and maintain PHNA city owned streets. If we supposedly voted on the construction of these traffic circles that aren't the normal protocol for city streets...are we responsible for injury or death due to the traffic circles? Does anyone know the answer to this??? Just having the inconvenience of having the traffic circles is not the only thing to think about. I could put up with that little problem if it makes the majority of the people happy. Personally, I'd like the responsibility question to be answered first:
4034 E. Alhambra Pl. Clague, Your account of the traffic circle discussion left out a few points.
Lonnie Henning Peter Howell Neighborhood, I am very much in favor of either speed bumps or traffic circles. Traffic circles require a greater input by neighbors for maintenance? Silke Hoffmann By the way - When the traffic circles were first proposed 2 years ago PHNA did not take a position pro or con. Under City of Tucson policies any individual can petition for traffic circles and the City has a percentage requirement for approval by affected properties within a certain distance from the circle. Plans need to be submitted to the City for approval. Once approved the traffic circles are paid for by voluntary contributions. I believe all those processes were followed and the money that has been raised has been voluntarily contributed. This was not an official project of the Peter Howell Neighborhood Association - just an effort by some of our neighbors to improve their part of the neighborhood. Clague Van Slyke, III October 29, 2005 I just want folks to know that there are many of us that are in support of the traffic circles. Christopher Corman Larry, I have friends who live on Whittier just south of Broadway; they have traffic circles. My friends live on a traffic circle corner and on two occasions have had speeding cars damage their property as well as hit one of their guests cars. The speeders were avoiding the circles by swerving up onto their property. Speeders will always speed. Traffic circles or no, the circle just provides one challenge wherein they can lose control of their cars and damage property or lives. Lonnie Tom & Carol Robira Perhaps we can still stop the circles by getting a petition now opposing them. I understand that a petition with signatures representing 41% of people in opposition on the same street as the circle would stop them. I do not know if we are too late for this process but I think if we did gather these signatures we may have a chance. Can we get people to circulate the petitions? Additionally I think all I opposition should sign. Lonnie The traffic circle is already chalk-marked where Third Street dead ends in front of my home and is next to a fire hydrant. In case of a fire the traffic circle would be an impediment to a fire truck to my home and at least three others. Also should an ambulance be needed it would not be able to enter smoothly from Alvernon, Columbus, (then 2nd & Bryant) or Speedway. The traffic circle is about 18 inches from a manhole. When the city opens the manhole, usually in the middle of summer, there is an infestation of cockroaches. The traffic circle would also be extremely attractive to the roaches. Most importantly, the traffic circle would be right in front of an easement that runs along my home. This easement is used by school children. A car trying to circle around the traffic circle may not see them. The easement also needs to be accessible to Tucson Electric, Southwest Gas as well as the phone and cable companies. I had to forfeit a 3 by 6 ft portion on the corner of my own property for this reason. This is a full 10 ft easement that is now fully accessible. This easement is important because some easements have been narrowed or encroached upon. Will the city object to having this easement cut off? A neighbor and I maintain the easement by picking up trash, cutting weeds, (some years an extreme fire hazard) and raking although this is a responsibility of the City of Tucson. Will the City of Tucson be willing to maintain the Traffic Circle? Will the City of Tucson take responsibility if a fatality occurs because an ambulance or fire truck has been diverted or delayed? In the years when there is a drought will they become patches of brown dirt? I appreciate the thought of traffic circles, and in some environments they work extremely well, but could we please rethink before we implement this plan. Maria Segawa My wife and I have been opposed to the traffic circles from the very beginning. We do live in the immediate neighborhood, 50 feet from the intersection of 3rd and Irving Circle. We would like to see the petitions that the majority of the neighborhood residents signed stating that they wanted traffic circles. They are to be constructed without curbing which, in the rainy season, could cause erosion of the asphalt and possible undermining of the street. Someone will probably put some god awful sculpture in them and they will soon be weed filled and full of trash. There are two of them slated to be placed at T intersections, with existing stop signs on the streets entering the through streets. This will only slow the traffic on one side of the through street. We agree, let's call and put a stop to this un-thought through project before the streets are torn up. Tom & Carol Robira This is a good discussion. I think that the underlying purpose of traffic circles is good, but I have a problem with the resulting lack of visibility, lack of care of existing traffic circles and also the problem that traffic circles present to Emergency Vehicles. I live on Lisa Smith's block and do not like the speeding parents in the morning and afternoon going to and from Peter Howell, but I think there needs to be a better solution. Larry Pagel Thank you Bill and Walter. What you've written speaks for me as well. I only wish we could have one at the corner nearest my house (Kilmer and Irving) but we already have a four-way stop. We still get some cars and motorcycles speeding past our house, and now that I have a small child it worries me. Lisa Smith To Lonnie Henning, I don't think that you should attempt to speak for the neighborhood with regard to traffic circles in this area. I and many others think that they help reduce traffic speed and make the neighborhood more attractive. However, this is not something that you, I, or the Peter Howell Neighborhood Association should determine. People in the immediate neighborhood of the intersection under consideration should decide. The rest of us should not try to impose on them. Bill Hoffmann Finally we are getting the circles we need to put a stop to the high speed cut through traffic, it was my understanding that the group followed all the city regulations required to get this wonderful project off the ground. It would be great if we could have them at every intersection in the neighborhood. Lets not forget that the city plans to expand Alvernon to 3 lanes in each direction in the next 5 years, what do you think cut through traffic will be like once this gets underway. I commend the individuals taking the initiative to make our neighborhood safer. LONG LIVE THE TRAFFIC CIRCLES Walter Munns October 28, 2005 If you would like to try and stop the traffic circles now being marked out on our neighborhood streets you may want to do the following: 1. Call Ward 6 offices of Fred Ronstadt and tell Fred and/or Monica to stop the construction. Tell them that our Neighborhoods Association has never approved the circles and in fact there is substantial opposition to them. 791-4601 2. Call pro Neighborhoods and ask them why they would fund a project that is not (we haven't voted on this) supported my the majority of the PHNA.882-5885. (I thought Pro Neighborhoods were pro neighborhood associations) 3 Call City of Tucson Engineering Department and ask Vince Catalano how traffic Circles can be approved for engineering and development without formal support of the Neighborhood Association.791-4259 4. E-mail Tres English [email protected] and ask him why he continues to push the Traffic Circles without the support of the PHNA. Traffic Circles continue to be divisive. Please Stop them once and for all Lonnie L Henning 326-3900 [email protected] 4118 E. Hawthorne Links to more information on Traffic Circles
|
| Home | School | Last Meeting |
| About | Traffic Circles | Neighborhood Crime |
