Part one, Community meeting on crosswalks, prior posts:  removal of crosswalks, Don’t use the ‘A’ word. Next related post will be about Zegeer.

Question and answer session of the meeting:

• The city is doing a speed study on Freeport from Sutterville Rd to Meadowview Rd, and will include part of Sutterville (not clear what part)
• There are no red light cameras on Freeport; the city piggybacks on country red light program
• There are no lead pedestrian interval signals on Freeport, or even is south Sacramento (all are in the central city); Ryan Moore said these should not be used in low pedestrian areas (which is false)
• Resident commented on Fruitridge Rd, 24th to Freeport, a lot of red light running and few safe crossings
• Resident who lives on Oregon suggested changing the speed limit on Freeport
• Steve Hansen says that the city would like to change Freeport, but to do so, the community (residents, businesses, neighborhood associations) will need to come together to decide how; people will have to give up some time for better safety; he also mentioned narrow sidewalks with obstructions
• Several people asked about or commented on specific sections and intersections; Matt mentioned catching egregious speeders
• South Land Park Neighborhood Association (Ryan?) asked what public notice there was before crosswalk removal and said they were not notified; not clear if the other two were notified
• Ryan Moore said that each removal was analyzed, he says they followed the law of CA MUTCD; said most of the removals were result of complaints; said neighborhood input makes no difference; mentioned FHWA info on crosswalks, referring to Zegeer report though not by name (more info about Zegeer in a future post)
• Neighbor said that any process that removes crosswalks is flawed; mentioned no still phase on signals (time between red one direction and green the other); going out of the way is not reasonable to ask; can’t have data on people walking because people are scared to walk
• Steve Hansen and Jay Schenirer want to review pedestrian guidelines, not sure what document this is; said we need to talk about equity because the top corridors of Vision Zero concern are not necessarily located in disadvantaged communities
• Neighbor said speed display signs don’t seem to have any effect on behavior; asks for immediate action and not years out
• Ryan Moore continually says “we’d like to but we can’t” but offers no proof; continues to say that crosswalks at this volume and speed are not safe
• Neighbor said there are bus stops close to Oregon which is true and which might make removal a violation of Title 6
• Issue of sidewalk maintenance responsibility has come up several times; city continues to insist that it is the responsibility of the property owner (even though most sidewalks are part of the public right-of-way and all are part of the transportation network)
• Many people pointed out that improvements could have been made at the Freeport-Oregon intesection, such as bulb-outs, refuge median, lighting; there is a median already but it is too narrow to provide refuge
• Participant asked for a pedestrian commission, Jennifer Donlon Wyant said the the city Active Transportation Commission would be seated in April or May
• Jay Schenirer wrapped, mentioned that McClatchy students drove the changes to Freeport north of Sutterville Rd

My overall take on the community meeting is that the city council members and the public, both residents of the neighborhood and others, want proactive changes to increase pedestrian safety and walkability. They don’t want excuses. Ryan Moore, the Interim City Traffic Engineer, seem prepared only to offer excuses.

Of all the people on stage, Ryan Moore seemed the least sympathetic to the person killed, or the issues that it raises. He said much the same thing he’d said to the SacBee: “Instead, traffic engineers hope that by removing some crosswalks, pedestrians will instinctively choose to cross at a safer, nearby intersection,” Moore said. He kept referring to federal and state standards that were being followed, though a number of people in the audience who know a great deal about traffic engineering noticed that he was mis-stating and mis-using standards and research to defend his actions and opinions.