Another pedestrian fatality

No.  Absolutely no way could a pedestrian overpass cost 2.5 million. That's the sort of figure that could be inflated nineteen different ways if somebody really wanted to ... but even so I can't imagine where 2.5 came from.  Some NC-DOT numbers cruncher simply doesn't want to encumber one.  This has me wondering how much the two pedestrian bridges from the UNC Hospitals parking deck cost.  They're quite elaborate, much more elaborate than a "simple" pedestrian overpass but not built by DOT. The painted ped crossings with warning cones have made a big difference in Carrboro.  The danger zones cited above are all heavy jay-walker territory in the vicinity of apartment complexes and bus stops.  it's very hard to measure scampering speed vs. automotive speed on a four-lane thorofare with no light.  (Rush hour on Manning Drive has practically zero visibility due to sun glare.  I'm surprised there haven't been more accidents at 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.)     

The woman who was killed had a Carolina Apts address as her residence. I did not know her, but I do know and visit some  people who live in the Carolina Apts on Hwy 54W. There is no stop light by these apts, so to get to the other side, any person must cross the divided highway with cars streaming by.  The first time I saw the layout, it was clear there was an accident waiting to happen. Many residents in these apts walk everywhere, even to the Food Lion off the Jones Ferry exit.  I have  seen mothers holding the hands of their small children while hauling bags from Food Lion and walking up the entrance ramp to 54E. Then they walk along the edge of the Bypass itself,  then run across 54 when they think the coast is clear. For this particular area, a stop light would be a step in the right direction and a  way (not perfect) to make this crossing safer.   

To illustrate the cost and its consequences:Linda, what is the latest on the two planned pedestrian overpasses over South Road, one at Fetzer Gym and one at Kenan Chemistry tower?  Are they going to be built? 

Choosing a "fix" for a place where pedestrians routinely cross the road can depend on the site - an overpass isn't necessarily the best option.  Some places might indeed warrant a light and crosswalk; some might warrant an overpass (some of the campus sites, perhaps) but awareness of accessibility has to be part of the equation; and in some cases, there might be no better alternative than a fence, unsightly as it might be. Others with a little more creativity than I have can probably come up with other alternatives - perhaps more driver-oriented than pedestrian-oriented - but, again, it depends on where the problem site is. Otherwise, is there a place where we can register chronically hazardous areas - where we repeatedly see pedestrians crossing where there's no crosswalk or the nearest one is unacceptably distant from an obvious destination such as a bus stop or a strip mall?   Two areas I'd nominate are: on MLK opposite the Shadowood apartments - there's a bus stop for campus-bound buses but it's halfway between the Estes and Piney Mtn. lights, which are a pretty good hike from each other; and -as Tom observed above -  across the beginning of East Franklin, between the split with 15-501 and the Eastgate light     

As long as DOT controls all decisions about roadways, I don't see how anything is going to change. Their mission is to facilitate the smooth flow of traffic. While Installing traffic signals, lowering the speed limits are great for pedestrians but they are at odds with the DOT mission, as well as anything that takes funding away from more and bigger lanes such as additional bus stops, pedestrian bridges, etc. It's always about money. Is $2.5 million for a bridge more important than the lives it could save?  Joe--as far as I know the only pedestrian bridge planned for campus that has any funding behind it connects the area from Thurston Bowles to Dental Sciences. It's part of the Dental Sciences building renovation that is currently underway.

Here's a typical example of NCDOT's perspective on these issues.  This happens to be just the first example that Google turned up for me, but it is one of many such exchanges between area local governments and NCDOT.This is part of a letter (4/19/2006) to the Chapel Hill Town Manager from the NCDOT Regional Traffic Safety Engineer:"Regarding the January 23, 2006 crash on US 15-501 at Bennett Road, low visibility also appears to be one of the contributing factors. The pedestrian was attempting to cross US 15-501 against the traffic signal from west to east. The crash occurred after nightfall and the pedestrian was wearing dark clothing. "Our on-site investigation revealed US 15-501 is a four-lane divided facility with a posted speed limit of 45 mile per hour. Bennett Road, a two-lane, two-way secondary road, and Arlen Park Drive, a local street, intersect US 15-501 from the east and west, respectively, to form a four-leg at-grade intersection. The intersection is signalized and provides left turn lanes on all approaches. The pavement and pavement markings were noted to be in good condition. Sidewalks are available for pedestrian use on the west side of the US 15-501 and on both sides of Arlen Park Drive. No overhead intersection lighting was observed. No marked crosswalks or pedestrian signals were observed."During the period October 1, 1995 through September 30, 2005, the North Carolina Crash Database revealed no bicycle or pedestrian related crashes at or within 150 feet of the intersection."We concur with the Town’s decision to install street lighting in the area. Roadway lighting should positively affect the safety of all road users. The lack of crash history in the 10 years prior to this crash suggests pedestrians are able to safely cross at this intersection. Pedestrian volumes currently do not meet the warrants established in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for pedestrian signals. Pedestrian signals and marked crosswalks are not recommended at this time."entire letter: http://townhall.townofchapelhill.org/agendas/2006/05/22/5c/5c-2_04-19-2006_state_ltr_re_3_crash_sites.pdf

(not really outrage) is that this problem has been going on for so long. Governments seem to be incapable of working together to solve this obvious issue. In fact they seem to purposely circumvent and frustrate each other with territorial imperative and path of least resistance decisions.Let us not forget that the university is a state institution and has a stake in this as well, because its employees and students are put at risk.Predictably, the CHP are out there and the only ones that do *anything* by enforcing the speed limit. I am not criticizing them, but we all know that speed enforcement is not the long term solution. I think there are only one or two possible long term solutions that make sense. A fence as some have suggested, a crosswalk (which to me is the minimum) or an overpass/underpass, which to some is a gold plated Cadillac.

As someone who has worked professionally in transportation in the Triangle for some time now, I can tell you that George and Mark are correct in their assessments.  I can also tell you that there are plenty of thoughtful people at NCDOT who are looking for more creative solutions for our roads, streets, and bridges that are friendlier to bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit users.  Unfortunately, they are still quite the minority, and too few of these bright individuals are in key decisionmaking roles at this time.  To TBlake and others who feel strongly motivated about this topic, I encourage you to attend the next MPO meeting in Durham.  The meeting will be at 9 AM on January 14th in Durham City Hall.  There is a parking deck across the street and you can catch a bus to within a pleasant 5-6 block walk from Morgan Street.  You may also wish to take a look at the latest draft of the Long Range Transportation Plan, the governing document for all transportation improvements made within the MPO that are not locally funded (like the Carrboro sidewalk bonds).  You can find the latest LRTP on this webpage, under the December 10 agenda-- it is items 6 and 6B.  It will be voted on for final approval in January at the meeting on the 14th.  

Durham able to get a bridge over I-40? (see my comment above)I may attend. Thank you Patrick.

One can only hope that the upcoming economic stimulus package, inasumuch as it targets public works, goes toward public transportation projects instead of new roads.  The local light rail system is ready to go, for example.  That would be far preferable to funding finishing I-540, for example.  This will help in the usual areas (reducing dependency on foreign oil, etc.) while also helping save pedestrians and drivers as well, while improving our quality of life.

..........Raleigh is being proactive......http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4149936/

Let me offer some clarifications.  The rail system is not "ready to go" at this time.  WeaverGuy is correct that as a region, we do have a lot of work completed on a rail system that can be re-used.  However, there are a few reasons why it is not something that be immediately be put out for construction.  The first is that the environmental work along the line would need to be updated in accordance with federal law.  The second (and perhaps most compelling reason) is that some key pieces still need important and carefully considered design work.  The best example of this is the area where three rail lines meet in downtown Raleigh, known as the Boylan Wye.  This is an area of exceptional engineering complexity with different owners and operators of existing track, including both freight and passenger rail.  Design in this area (and some others) is not 100% complete.  The third reason is that the MPOs are now leaning towards using electric-powered light rail as the rail technology of choice in the region.  The previous project was designed around the use of a different vehicle, the diesel multiple unit train.  Assuming the MPOs affirmatively choose light rail, there will need to be several legal and regulatory discussions with Norfolk Southern and the North Carolina Railroad, as well as the Federal Railroad Administration, to approve the use of light rail.Several of the transit agencies, including those in the Triangle, at the request of NCDOT, have provided lists of potential projects that are "ready to go" that Congress could fund, including expanding bus and vanpool fleets, extending weekend and holiday services, etc.   Finally, Streetsblog cites a Washington Post article that provides a flavor of the general nature of the stimulus requests heading to Washington right now.

Terrific article on Streetsblog today about the differences in providing stimulus money to states versus providing it to cities, towns, and MPOs. While some of the commenters rightly point out that other states do not line up with the article's general thesis, NC fits it to a tee.  

Several of the transit agencies, including those in the Triangle, at
the request of NCDOT, have provided lists of potential projects that
are "ready to go" that Congress could fund...

Bloomberg News reports that Bracken Hendricks, an adviser to the presidential-transition team says "Clean energy is going to be a foundation for rebuilding the American economy."  Generating jobs in concert with cutting pollution will be "a major component" of any economic-recovery plan.  Meanwhile, Governor Easley, today, sent a letter to NC's congressional delegation urging them to get started and noting that, "North Carolina is ready to go and start work right away on more than $5 billion in transportation projects alone."See what was not mentioned in the Governor's letter?  Yep, the word "Clean"!
So, how do we see NC-DOT's list--to make sure that alternative transportation is properly and adequately represented?

......a certain amount of tension between differing views about what is "clean" vs. "energy efficient" vs. "economic stimulus". An good example pointed out already, being that "shovel ready" is not in-and-of-itself a good criteria for the first two, but may be critical for the latter view. Another discussed here is WTE (incineration).Another interesting question (at least to me) is the politics of the situation; will block grants be given to the states, or will the money go directly to municipalities (similar to FEMA grants), or both? The former being bigger in scale, slower, and less efficient, the latter being smaller, faster and harder to manage.I agree with you, a little light on the subject is a good thing. You can probably get a view of what DoT considerers "Shovel Ready" here:http://www.ncdot.gov/construction/projectsstudies/counties.html?Counties=*I also think that the divisive politics of environment vs. economy will likely make things very lively. IMO the winners will be those that can make their case in both courts.

The state and local authorities have struggled with this street for years:http://www.dailytarheel.com/news/city/death_renews_traffic_concernMax 

That road and those apartment buildings and bus stops on either side of it didn't magically appear out of nowhere one day.  I don't know the order in which those things were built but isn't the idea that before buildings or bus stops are built someone somewhere considers what the consequences will be? It's really just simple common sense that crossing the road there and many other places in town is dangerous.  It's too bad that it takes something bad happening to spur change but that seems to be human nature.  The bottom line though is that we're basically forcing people to drive on that road and forcing other people to walk across it and the same goes for lots of other roads around town. One person I feel bad for that few people are talking about is the 17 year old driver who was going 41 MPH, which is slower than mosdt cars go on that road, who is going to have to live with this for the rest of his life even though he did nothing wrong. And a more general lesson, taught again and again in various contexts, is that nature does not care about human ideas of what the world ought to be like.  Nature doesn't care whether there are enough bus stops.  It simply follows its laws.  It's up to people to be aware of that and then plan their world accordingly.

How about a local ordinance banning hand-held cell phone use while driving?   Even if symbolic, this could set a trend.

WeaverGuy, this is not merely symbolic.  It's a lot easier to spot drivers holding cell phones than check for most other infractions (seat belts, lapsed inspections, etc.).  Cell phone use undoubtedly interferes with concentration, even when not hand-held.  The most mind-blowing statistic has to do with texting while driving!  Do go ahead and propose a local ordinance to your town council; it should apply to all drivers regardless of age.  

I have received vital family and medical info via cell phone while driving......you can't outlaw cell phone use without destroying it's role in emergency communications.....how will the enforcement ordinance deal with emergencies? I think everyone would agree that texting is a no no. 

Was cellphone use implicated in any of the local pedestrian fatalities?  I don't remember reading that. Nonetheless, think cellphone use while driving probably does need to be restricted -- at the very least no up-to-ear or hand-held use.  The probability of getting emergency info that's too urgent for you to pull over and return a call is miniscule compared to the frequency of carnage created by distracted cellphone users who are just chatting.  I would think that such an urgent, emergent call could be considered mitigating circumstance if you were pulled over; and even if not, it would be worth paying the ticket that one time. If you cause an accident, obviously, it would NOT be justified.I have seen one too many drivers wobbling around in the lane in front of me while they jabber, one too many drivers come close to mowing me - as a pedestrian - down because they are chatting rather than watching lights and crosswalks,  and one too many yakking drivers tying up traffic because they aren't paying attention to the flow in or out of a central turning lane. It's time. Meanwhile, I'd love to know if there's a universal hand signal for "hang up, already!"