I don't consider 15 feet to be a gigantic radius size, based on the distance between curbs at the crosswalks and the Cameron/Main/Mathew B. Reconciliation Way Brady lane widths.
15 feet is the
maximum that NACTO would recommend. They say (and rightly so) that smaller is better.
2' radii at corners can and do work where there are parking lanes (which includes many streets downtown), but in those locations with parking lanes, small radii don't help much for slowing down vehicles turning right on green lights. Take a look at the tire marks at
the southeast corner of 2nd & Boulder, for example. The corner radius there appears to be about 10 feet, but it could be reduced to around 5 feet without impacting the effective "right turn" lane.
That's one reason they're adding curb extensions/bump-outs/neckdowns. One of many reasons, which include reducing the crossing distance for pedestrians and slowing the cars.
The intersection of Cameron and Main has four-way stop signs. So does Mathew B. Reconciliation Way Brady and Main intersection. Vehicles should be coming to full stops at stop signs and not speeding around corners.
Fixed it for you.
Moving curbs and drainage structures is expensive.
They're already doing work on the street. Which costs more? Adding some neckdowns (for people); or tearing up, re-paving, and re-striping 300+ feet of a street and parking (for cars).
Neck-downs and bump-outs can be beneficial for working out curb ramps, but there are relatively new (less than six years old) curb ramps at the southeast corner of Cameron and Main. The curb ramps appear to be ADA compliant. The concrete is new and in good condition. I think the City should leave that corner as it is. The curb line was moved less than six years ago.
So we shouldn't make it better for pedestrians because some of the corners at the intersection have new concrete? Reducing crossing times, slowing down turning cars, improving safety for people walking aren't important? We should just leave them there because more than half a decade ago, somebody made a bad decision and re-built a couple corners of a cars-first intersection, instead of doing the right thing? I don't think so.
There are some rough spots in the sidewalks along Main, but the area is already vibrant. I don't see how ripping out curbs/sidewalks that are less than six years old and in good condition will increase vibrancy in the district.
Again, that's not true even of the corners of the intersection, let alone the entire sidewalk on the west side of Main. Also - though no one has claimed that this project will increase the area's vibrancy, improving pedestrian safety is kind of an important part of whether people will want to walk in an area.
Instead, why not replace some sidewalks that are in poor condition? Or why not build new sidewalks for pedestrians along streets where there aren't any sidewalks or where segments of old sidewalks are missing? Priorities...
Replacing sidewalks in poor condition and completing our sidewalk system are also important. No one has argued otherwise. But this design change is also important, and signals a shift in the mindset behind our street design in pedestrian-oriented areas.