I do not support another big road construction project for Los Alamos County. I feel that the proposals discussed as part of the Trinity Drive corridor study would improve the roadway, provide for greater pedestrian and bicycle access, and make the area more attractive. It is not for these reasons that I oppose making major changes to Trinity Drive. Given our recent history with the ongoing Diamond Drive road project I am extremely concerned about how a similar project on Trinity Drive would be executed and how prolonged construction in this area would adversely effect small businesses. We should think more carefully about the negative aspects associated with road construction before embarking on another multi-year, expansive road project.
The MIG consultants who are performing the corridor study for the County have presented several scenarios indicating that adding up to 9 roundabouts and reducing the number of driving lanes would actually improve the traffic flow. In a perfect world this may be true, but I find it hard to imagine given that the MIG proposals call for numerous new pedestrian crossings without crossing signals. Traffic yields to pedestrians and in these plans pedestrian crossings are an unpredictable element. Central Avenue is a good example of how traffic can be impacted by unpredictable pedestrian crossings. I feel that both traffic stop lights and pedestrian crossing signals are essential for pedestrian safety and to ensure a smooth traffic flow. Option A2 in the corridor study omits pedestrian crossing signals at the new roundabouts and A1 omits both traffic stop lights and pedestrian signals entirely.
No computer program or traffic analysis can adequately account for driver perception. If drivers perceive more delays because of construction or unpredictable pedestrian crossings they may choose to bypass Trinity Drive entirely, and bypass the businesses in this area. The robust flow of traffic is vital to our local economy. Trinity Drive is a major arterial road for our community with a peak daily traffic count of more than 18,000 vehicles, with 8,000 vehicles coming from outside the County for the work day. Local government shouldn't do anything to discourage these drivers from using Trinity Drive to go downtown for lunch or to shop before work. Diamond Drive is now a five year project. We did not correctly predict how long it would take to complete the Diamond Drive work; originally the County said the project would be completed in 3 years. There will be utility work associated with a new road project on Trinity Drive as well, adding further complexity and delays.
We did not adequately account for the negative effects the Diamond Drive work would have on businesses in the area, especially those businesses near the Conoco gas station. There is no doubt that several businesses suffered greatly during the construction period because traffic volume during lunch time was drastically reduced. Having learned from this experience why would the County want to cause similar hardships for the businesses on Trinity Drive? Local government should not be an obstacle for small businesses who depend on traffic for their existence.
Another factor influencing my decision not to support a Trinity Drive road construction project is that the County should be not waste public money. The NM State Department of Transportation recently resurfaced Trinity Drive with new asphalt and did an outstanding job. What justification is there now for the County to replace this new road surface that is barely two years old? If we discard this new road surface, then in my opinion we shouldn't expect the NM DOT to do any more road work in our community. There are many other communities in NM where State road money could be spent, rather than addressing priority projects in our community such as a sound barrier for the eastern area and the widening of State Road 4 between White Rock and NM 502.
Finally I can not ignore the many citizens who have contacted me and expressed their strong opposition to a big road construction project for Trinity Drive. My constituents have waited in traffic for up to forty minutes on numerous occasions during recent road construction on Diamond Drive. By moving forward with the Trinity Drive corridor study we are making it more likely that this experience will be repeated in the future. In my view we shouldn't make the community endure more delays during another 5 year road project, especially since a new road surface was recently installed on Trinity Drive. I pledge to the community that I will vote against any major road construction project for Trinity Drive. I ask the Council to put first and foremost the concerns of small businesses along Trinity Drive and motorists who have to travel this vital corridor every day when deciding whether to make major changes to Trinity Drive. We may inadvertently create a traffic nightmare for our citizens.
