Last year, Los Alamos County’s Geographical Informational System staff maneuver a drone at 36th Street and Trinity Drive to map Trinity Drive as staff looked into the potential option of a ‘road diet’. Photo by John McHale/ladailypost.com
By KIRSTEN LASKEY
Los Alamos Daily Post
kirsten@ladailypost.com
In 2019 the Transportation Board suggested investigating a road diet for a section of Trinity Drive in response to the proposed Hill Apartment Complex project on the former Los Alamos Site Office property near Los Alamos Medical Center.
On May 26, the Los Alamos County Council decided to scrap the idea.
This decision might be reversed, however. On the agenda for Tuesday’s council meeting is reconsideration of a resolution to support the New Mexico Department of Transportation recommendation to implement the road diet.
According to a County news release, after subsequent discussions it was requested that the resolution be brought back for council’s consideration.
During the May 26 meeting, council voted 3-4 to not approve the resolution. Vice Chair Randall Ryti and Councilors James Robinson, Antonio Maggiore and Katrina Martin opposed the resolution while Councilor Chair Sara Scott, Councilor Pete Sheehey and Councilor David Izraelevitz supported it.
A road diet in this case, as explained in previous council meetings, is basically reducing the number of vehicle lanes from four to three. It would modify the street’s striping; the road wouldn’t be narrowed or widened but rather there would be three vehicle lanes, one lane in each direction and a center turn lane, and the addition of two bike lanes.
Additionally, it would realign 35th Street with 36th Street and provide an eastbound bus pullout lane. A short median with pedestrian crossing marked with signs also were proposed.
The concept was being investigated to accommodate the increase of traffic that the new apartment complex is expected to generate.
The May 26 staff report listed several benefits to the road diet:
- Provides a pedestrian crossing and median refuge;
- Provides pedestrians a buffer from vehicular traffic;
- Provides dedicated bicycle lane;
- Provides a bus pullout lane for Transit Service;
- Provides left turn storage including at the hospital entrance;
- Provides adequate capacity for build-out of the site in 2022 and supports growth through a 10-year horizon in 2032. However, growth beyond horizon year and Los Alamos National Laboratory growth impact is uncertain; and
- Can be economically returned to a four-lane configuration (restriping effort).
The council’s response to this resolution was a mixed bag.
Izraelevitz said he felt a road diet was worth pursuing although he admitted he felt there would be some discomfort and transition to the road diet project.
“I am very concerned with the crossing of Trinity, especially with the increase amounts of residences,” he said. “Children and young adults try to do that and we see that further east on 20th Street … which is why I am looking forward to having a traffic light.”
Izraelevitz added that if the road diet doesn’t work, the road can be restriped. He said there would be a cost to that and would require a lot of work.
Martin said, “I think this is a difficult decision because on the one hand I want to support the increase use of bicycles as a means of transportation throughout our town as well as pedestrians.”
She added that even with the road diet giving the greater accessibility for pedestrians, she personally wouldn’t feel comfortable crossing Trinity without a traffic light.
“Ultimately I feel that while I appreciate the modeling that has been done, I do feel it would cause a lot of traffic backups and finally I am sure there is a large percentage in the community that supports it but I am sure there is a decent that doesn’t support it …,” Martin said.
Robinson said he was concerned about emergency vehicles having to deal with a limited number of lanes.
“I am still concerned about this road going down to one lane and our emergency vehicles having to choose between slowing down to try to get to an emergency or going to left lane that could have car waiting to turn left or cars going in either direction and having to go into a bike lane with a biker in it,” he said.
Sheehey said he felt the road diet might improve safety.
“It will slow down traffic on Trinity; that is not necessarily a bad thing for pedestrians, for bicyclists … the reason I lean toward supporting it is that third center left turn lane and that does increase safety,” he said. “You’re not as likely to get rear ended by someone who is rushing along while you’re stopped waiting to make a left turn and when you’re turning onto Trinity from 36th, you don’t have to look both ways if you got the first lane clear, you can make your turn into the left turn lane and wait for the traffic to clear on the other side. I think on balance the safety is improved.”
Ryti said he was concerned about the project’s scope as well as how it addressed the intersection at Oppenheimer.
“It seems mostly the project is enhancing safety but I am concerned about that part of it (the intersection at Oppenheimer) not enhancing safety and therefore not being used as much as you expect it,” he said.
Ryti added he was unconvinced the project was as reversable as council thought it was and he felt the road diet should have a bigger scope and more safety features.
Maggiore said he felt that the timing was wrong. With the roundabout being constructed on N.M. 502, he felt drivers should be given time to adjust to that before implementing a road diet.
“I think the timing of it is wrong and we need to have an actual assessment of how the roundabout will work…,” he said.
Scott said she did support it.
“I think for the safety reasons this would absolutely be worth trying so I support it … I really feel that it is worth it to do something that would help promote walking, biking and most importantly safety of all the above as well as vehicles,” she said.
