About a roundabout
July 15, 2008
By Emily Keller
City planners have revised a roundabout plan for 244th Avenue and East Main Drive that could use eminent domain. However, some residents say they still oppose the idea of a roundabout altogether.
John Cunningham, the city’s director of public works, said a consultant has re-designed the project, which is intended to calm traffic on the avenue, and the new plan impacts fewer property owners. He said the city plans to start construction in September.
This follows a May 20 City Council meeting where Cunningham proposed that the city take portions of seven property owners’ yards for the roundabout. The new plan calls for taking portions of three properties, and only one is a single-family home, as opposed to three in the original plan.
Ten homeowners in that area attended the meeting, saying they were not well informed of the plan and oppose the proposal to use eminent domain to take the property if owners refuse to sell. The council then agreed to postpone the discussion pending further study.
The revised roundabout plan still includes the possibility of using eminent domain - the purchase of private land for public benefit - if the property owners decline to sell. The new plan reduces the size of the roundabout from 115 to 95 feet in diameter and shifts it to the east and north, Cunningham said. It calls for using a portion of one private yard, as well as land owned by a homeowners’ association and a country club.
Saleel Sathe, who lives with his family on East Main Drive, west of the intersection, is the remaining homeowner with land that the city wants to use in the roundabout. Cunningham said the new plan reduces the portion of the land needed by 50 percent. Sathe said he opposes the new plan and that the city still hasn’t explained why a roundabout is needed.
“We don’t see roundabouts at every place where traffic calming is needed,” he said at a July 1 City Council meeting.
Manoj Gupta, who lives near the intersection and spoke against the plan at the May 20 meeting, returned to the council to say he is worried about the new plan, even though his property is no longer affected.
Councilman Mark Cross echoed some of the residents’ comments, saying planners should do a better job explaining why a roundabout is needed.
“There doesn’t seem to be much understanding of why we’re doing a roundabout and it seems like what’s missing in the conversation with residents is what the options are or aren’t,” he said.
City Manager Ben Yazici said planners were following consultants’ advice when they made that choice.
“We were told and we believe this would be a good location to install one,” he said.
Yazici also added that city officials will continue discussing the issue with residents.
“We’ve clearly and loudly heard them and we want to talk with them. It’s not that we’re ignoring you it’s just that John [Cunningham] is gathering the information,” Yazici said.
Cunningham said the city is preparing responses to residents’ questions but explained the city’s rationale for a roundabout. He said roundabouts are more effective at slowing drivers gradually than stop signs or speed bumps, which only slow vehicles momentarily.
“Roundabout are definitely much safer than a signalized intersection and much safer than an intersection that just has stop controls,” Cunningham said. “It’s really the only one that, sort of, guarantees that the speed will be reduced.”
However, he added that roundabouts are difficult for blind people and that children who are using them for the first time will need to educated about how to do so safely.
Reporter Emily Keller can be reached at 392-6434, ext. 242, or ekeller@isspress.com.
Comments
2 Responses to “About a roundabout”
Got something to say?
If the City wants to please its people, why not pursue an alternative to the roundabout that will not require the use of eminent domain? How about a chicane? Or raised crosswalks? There are many options available to slow traffic that do not depend on the City’s wielding the big stick of eminent domain.
The other important questions are: who are these “consultants”? Will they directly benefit from the building of the roundabout, in the form of subsidies or favored building contracts? Why did the planners follow these consultants’ advice above any other?
This appears to be a sticky situation for the folks at this intersection. I hope they can get all of the information before the City imposes its plan.
I do not see any issue with the roundabout. Whatever deceision the city takes, they should move fast. 8th SE can not be the only access route to such a huge community.
thanks