Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWillson/College Intersection Improvements1 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Debbie Arkell, Director of Public Services Richard Hixson, City Engineer Chuck Winn, Assistant City Manager SUBJECT: Willson/College Intersection Improvements MEETING DATE: October 4, 2010 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action RECOMMENDATION: It has been determined that either a traffic signal or a roundabout can be installed at the intersection of Willson Avenue and College Street to reduce the number of accidents at the intersection. Both require a minor amount of additional right-of-way. The following table lists some pros and cons for each option (likely more than listed): PROS CONS SIGNAL Should reduce angle crashes Long queues can impact driveways Drivers are familiar with signals Adds delay to drivers Requires less r/w (379 sq.ft.) Can increase rear-end collisions Lower cost than roundabout Bozeman HPAB opposed to signal Can assist with pedestrian crossings Loss of parking along west side of Willson with 23 spaces remaining, include 3 new spaces for daycare Higher speeds through intersection Increase air quality emissions More noise created from vehicles starting and stopping at intersection ROUNDABOUT Traffic flows continuously Requires additional r/w (773 sq.ft.) Lower speeds makes easier for drivers to safely enter intersection and results in less severe crashes Loss of parking near intersection. 25 spaces available includes 3 new for daycare Minimal queues and traffic backup Possible impact to trees near intersection Fewer conflict points than with a signal Additional lighting needed (can use “period lighting” to match existing) Shorter pedestrian crossing distances - one lane at a time More difficult for blind pedestrians to cross roundabouts than signals Less air quality concerns Higher cost than signal Quieter for neighborhood because less starting and stopping 82 2 From a traffic safety standpoint, either option will mitigate the current accident rate, with studies showing there are fewer and less severe crashes at a roundabout compared to a signal. As explained in detail on pages 6 and 7 of this report, the Bozeman Historic Advisory Board recommended an island be installed on Willson Avenue to prohibit cross traffic or left turns from College Street and if this was not feasible, they supported a roundabout. They were “emphatically opposed” to a signal at this intersection or any other intersection within the Historic District of South Willson Avenue. MDT and the Historic Preservation Staff are also aware that one or two property owners have indicated they are not desirous to provide the right- of-way necessary for improvements, so that may be an issue of contention for either option. The City Commission should review the information and public comment, and determine whether a signal or a roundabout is the best option for improvement to this intersection, and ask the Montana Department of Transportation to proceed with installing that option at the intersection of Willson Avenue and College Street with funding from the Traffic Hazard Elimination Program. BACKGROUND: There is a considerable amount of history on this project which this memo attempts to summarize. Additional information and detail is available in the City Engineer and Public Services Director offices. Full meeting packet materials and minutes from previous City Commission meetings can be obtained from the City Clerk’s office. Each year, the Montana Department of Transportation requests cities to submit high-accident intersections that might be eligible for the Traffic Hazard Elimination Program. City staff reviews the intersection accident history reports and the Transportation Plan Update, and makes recommendations to the Department on which intersections that have a rate of high accidents that they recommend be improved. If an intersection is selected, the Department then completes a review to determine if the intersection(s) qualifies for the funding. In 2002, City Staff recommended the Willson/College intersection be improved through this program. Willson Avenue is designated as a minor arterial and at that time carried approximately 12,000 ADT south of the intersection and 11,800 ADT north of the intersection. (2005 ADT volumes as shown in the 2007 Transportation Plan Update show 11,300 ADT north and 9,200 ADT south). College Street is designated as a collector street and in 2002 carried approximately 1,400 ADT east of the intersection and 440 ADT west of the intersection. The 2005 ADT volumes east of the intersection are 3,800, an increase of over 2.5 times the 2002 volumes. Accident history from January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2001 (pre-design) included 16 accidents in a three-year period, 6 of which were injury accidents resulting in 15 injuries. From January 2005 to November 1, 2005, there were five accidents reported at this intersection. From January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2009, there were 10 crashes at the intersection. Both Willson Avenue and College Street are designated Federal Aid Urban routes, meaning they are eligible for federal funding for improvements, and that MDT must approve all improvements. In 2003, MDT review determined that 4 of the 8 warrants were met and they found that a traffic signal was warranted. 83 3 On December 2, 2004, the Montana Department of Transportation held a public meeting at the GranTree Inn regarding the proposal to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Willson and College. Danielle Bolan, MDT State Traffic Engineer, presented the project, explained the process used to determine if a signal is warranted, and noted they looked at the following ways to make the intersection safer: signal; 4-way stop, which shifts the delay over to Willson, but provides good level of service on College; and use of left turn lanes to keep through-traffic flowing on Willson. The Department reviewed the information received, both at the meeting and in writing after the meeting, and extended the public comment period The Department reviewed several different options, and presented those options at a City Commission work session on May 9, 2005. Issues raised at that meeting were the aesthetics/appearance of the light; should left turns from Willson onto College be eliminated; does all parking have to be eliminated; what other options are available, such as a flashing light. The options reviewed include a 4-way stop; the current 2-way stop; a traffic signal with turn lanes; and a traffic signal without turn lanes. Based on that evaluation, the Department determined a traffic signal with left turn lanes was the best alternative. Public comment was taken at this meeting, with concerns expressed regarding the impact to the historic character of the neighborhood, the amount of parking that would be removed; impact on driveways; traffic backup and air emissions. The revised design was presented at a special neighborhood meeting held at the Longfellow School Gymnasium on November 9, 2005, with over 60 people in attendance. The purpose of the meeting was to provide residents with information regarding the professional recommendations being made by MDT for the proposed stoplight, outline the revisions made following the May 9th City Commission meeting, and provide the public with an opportunity to ask MDT and City staff questions regarding the project. Based on comments heard at the May 9, 2005 meeting, MDT revised its initial design to retain as much on-street parking as practicable, and by reducing lane widths and shortening tapers they saved about 20 spaces. The design proposed keeping the left turn lane for southbound traffic because left turn movements would likely generate queues of vehicles that may shift vehicles wishing to make left turns to other intersection (i.e., through adjacent neighborhoods), and only one more parking space could be saved by dropping that turn lane. Black powder coated signal poles were also proposed. One of the most vocal issues expressed during the meeting was that the Historic Preservation review portion of the Environmental Assessment Document (NEPA, Categorical Exclusion, Cat X) was not yet completed, and a decision should not be made by the City Commission to proceed with the signal until that was completed. A fourth public meeting was held by the City Commission on November 14, 2005, and was facilitated by Jim Madden from the Community Mediation Center. The South Willson Improvement Association submitted a written counterproposal that included the following: · The improvement of sight distance from College Street onto Willson Avenue through the elimination of parking for only a distance of 100 feet from the intersection in all directions, but allowing for the “drop off” area on the southeast corner for the Children’s Development Center. · Enhance this intersection with landscaping, marking it as special and more visible. 84 4 · Special signage, denoting Historic District, at key entrance streets such as Willson. · The elimination of the proposed turning lanes. Maintain the current lane width for through traffic flow, safety, and parking beyond 100 feet for north and south on Willson. · The installation of “minimum cost” measures including larger stop signs and stop ahead signs along College Street, boldly alerting drivers of the upcoming intersection. · The installation of a photo-ticketing device at the intersection and the strict enforcement of the 25 mph speed limit. At this meeting, the MDT District Administrator asked the Commission to commit to whether they support the installation of a signal at this intersection, because if a signal was not supported by the commission, the Department would not continue their review and would dedicate their resources elsewhere. They stated if the Commission continues to support the possibility of a signal, they will continue the review, and added that the signal cannot be installed without resolving any adverse effects identified during the Section 106 Historic Preservation review. Comments were received both supporting and opposing a traffic signal, and several questions and new ideas were proposed that were further investigated by MDT. These included: Can the signal be designed with no left-turn lane for southbound Willson traffic to turn east onto College; enhance the intersection to make it more special and visible; add special signage for the historic district; eliminate the proposed turn lanes so current lane widths can be maintained; install “minimum cost” measures like larger stop signs and stop ahead signs along College Street to alert drivers of the intersection; and install a photo-ticketing device at the intersection and strictly enforce the posted speed limit. A summary of the November 9 neighborhood meeting was presented to the Commission on November 14, 2005. The Commission asked MDT to further research the feasibility of a signal with no left southbound turn onto College; a roundabout; the neighborhood association’s proposals; no signal with a left turn lane on Willson for north-bound traffic; and to further address driveway access issues, and to report back to them on December 5, 2005. At a public meeting on December 5, 2005, The Montana Department of Transportation Traffic Engineers provided the Commission their response to issues identified at the November 14, 2005 public meeting. In addition to the original proposal to install a signal with left turn pockets for both northbound and southbound Willson Avenue traffic, two new scenarios were presented to the Commission which will also mitigate the existing crash pattern. Those options were: 1. Install a signal with no left-turn lane for southbound Willson Avenue traffic to turn east onto College Street. This would allow the parking situation to be as it exists today, with the exception of the residence on the northwest corner, and no parking would be allowed on Willson Avenue in front of that residence. 2. Install a roundabout at the intersection, which could fit if additional right-of-way is obtained at each corner. Parking would be eliminated for approximately 80-100 feet on each corner of the intersection. The designated drop off area for the Children’s Development Center may have to be moved a little further east or reduced to allow for the proper operation of the roundabout. Curb and sidewalk would have to be removed and replaced, which would include reconstruction of ADA ramps. Any costs over the benefit/cost would be the city’s responsibility. 85 5 Public comment expressed support of the roundabout, the importance of preserving the character of the historic neighborhood, concern of noise and light pollution from a signal; concern the neighborhood’s plan would not allow west turns from the intersection; support of a traffic signal for safety; concern about the removal of parking. In addition, several letters both in support and opposing a signal were submitted. These letters are available in the Clerk’s, Public Service Director’s, and City Engineer’s office, and likely on-line with each meeting packet. At the meeting, MDT asked the Commission to take official action, noting that they have compromised as far as they can and still provide a safe intersection for the traveling public. MDT officials advised that by giving them the direction to proceed, the funds would be committed, but if the City elected to not install any improvements, the City would be responsible to reimburse them for the design costs. On December 5, 2005, the City Commission voted 4-1 to direct MDT to forward both a revised traffic signal design and roundabout design to the next step in the process, with preference given to the roundabout first, and a traffic signal with no eastbound left turn lane as the alternative option. On November 27, 2006, the Department returned to the City Commission. The completed Design Option Comparison presented found that a roundabout would have an adverse impact on the Bon Ton Historic District, and recommended that a traffic signal be installed to address crash trends and improve traffic operations at the intersection. At this point, five public meetings had already been held on this project, and there were three City Commissioners who were not on the Commission when these meetings were held and direction given. A Comparison of Intersection Design Options for the intersection was prepared for the Department by Robert Peccia & Associates and presented to the Commission at the November 27, 2006 meeting. The comparison included a thorough analysis of both the signalized intersection as well as the roundabout option, and provided a detailed comparison of the signal and roundabout for: · Operational effects (LOS, queues, travel speeds, design life, would it cause traffic to shift to side streets, access to public transportation, affect on vehicular access, construction and operating/maintenance costs, special maintenance); · Effects to on-street parking and driveways (how much parking would be lost; impact on residential driveways); · Effects to sidewalks and pedestrian crossings; · Effects on traffic safety (how each would address accident trend of broadside crashes, potential for a change in the type of crashes); · Effects on pedestrian and bike safety; · Environmental effects (need of right-of-way, relocation of housing or businesses, impact on utilities, is project consistent with land use plans and zoning, would design induce changes in land use and density or induce growth, impact on residents with special needs, emergency service facilities, response times, traffic noise, air quality impacts, visual impacts/aesthetics); · Social impacts/environmental justice; · Economic impacts; · Other environmental resources. · Effects to Cultural Resources 86 6 With regard to effects to Bon Ton Historic District, MDT had received a letter from the State Historic Preservation Officer concurring with the Study’s determinations that the signalized intersection option would have No Adverse Effect on the District, and that the roundabout design would have an Adverse Effect to the District. The factors supporting the determination of a roundabout (RAB) having an Adverse Effect on the District included: · RAB would be an entirely new form of intersection treatment in the Bon Ton Historic District. There is no precedent for the use of a RAB in an historic district in Bozeman; · Because of the design features, the RAB would be significantly different from the existing streetscape by placing a round feature within an historic grid pattern street system; · The RAB would require substantial amounts of new r/w at each of the four quadrants of the intersection. The circular configuration of the RAB would result in the reconstruction of sidewalks and boulevards at the intersection to make them conform to the new layout. This would also be a deviation from the traditional grid pattern of the historic district and result in wider boulevards and sidewalks located closer to historic properties built to conform to the RAB; · Approximately 9 to 12 mature trees located in the boulevards but associated with the historic properties would have to be removed. The mature trees in the boulevards have historically provided a screen between the historic properties and the street and, more importantly, helped define the historic character of the historic district. Their loss would significantly change the appearance of the neighborhood. · Two historic lampposts would have to be relocated, which would upset the staggered configuration and spacing between other lampposts on Willson Avenue in the historic district; · Additional street lighting would have to be added to the intersection to make the RAB safer. The RAB would also require significantly more regulatory and guidance signage on each approach. · Considered together, these impacts and the addition of modern street features would significantly diminish the historic character and appearance of the neighborhood. In summary, the report found the project is a safety improvement designed to address crash trends and improve traffic operations at the intersection. Based on the results of the study finding that the roundabout would have an Adverse Effect to the historic district, while a signal has No Adverse Effect, MDT planned to move forward with the design of a signalized intersection at this location. The Commission was advised that if a signalized intersection treatment is no longer the City’s preferred option, the City will be required to reimburse MDT’s costs to date, which are estimated at $82,000. At the November 27, 2006 meeting, a motion passed 4-1 to direct staff to work with MDT to facilitate the alternate of a roundabout and historic mitigation and authorize the use of up to $3,000 to acquire a second opinion on the adverse impact of the roundabout within an historic district. With regard to impact on the historic district, MDT staff continued to meet with the State Historic Preservation Office and local Historic Preservation Advisory Board. In November 2009 the State Historic Preservation Office concurred with the MDT’s Historian that both options – traffic signal and roundabout - would have No Adverse Effect on the historic district. MDT staff 87 7 also met with the local Historic Preservation Advisory Board, and on October 12, 2009, the Board presented MDT with the following comments and recommendations: 1. First, we recommend that MDT consider options for this intersection which are less intrusive than those currently proposed. One option would be to construct a landscaped median through the intersection on Willson, thus ending through traffic on College and all left turns at the intersection. This would have less impact on the historic streetscape, and have the added benefit of not encouraging through traffic on College, a narrow street also running through the historic district. 2. If an option similar to the one described above is found not to be feasible, the Board support the construction of a roundabout at the intersection, provided the guidelines specified in your September 1 letter to minimize visual impact are followed. We encourage MDT to further explore alternative designs for the roundabout, ones that could slightly shift the roundabout to the southwest, lessening the impact on the historic resources that are closest to the street. 3. We emphatically oppose the installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, or at any other unsignaled (sic) intersection on South Willson Avenue. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: Whether to improve the intersection with a signal or a roundabout. ALTERNATIVES: The Department has proposed two options: 1. Install a signal 2. Install a roundabout 3. As suggested by the Commission FISCAL EFFECTS: The Butte District MDT Administrator has confirmed that the entire cost of either a signal or roundabout, including the purchase of necessary right-of-way, would be entirely funded through the Traffic Safety Hazard Elimination program. Attachments: MDT PowerPoint program Report compiled on: September 23, 2010 Cc: Jeff Ebert, P.E., MDT LeRoy Wosoba, P.E., MDT 88 STPHS 1209(2) 89 Intersection of South Willson Ave and College St, currently stop control on College St Project nominated and programmed in 2003 as a safety project to signalize the intersection to address identified crash trend During the public involvement process MDT was asked to look at a Roundabout This intersection is discussed in Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (2007 Update) Is the City’s preferred option signal or roundabout?90 From Pre-Design Report •16 Crashes in 3 year period –1 Jan ‘99 to 31 Dec ‘01 •10 Right angle •3 Left-Turn opposite direction •2 Rear end •1 Pedestrian 91 Crashes from 1 Jan ‘07 to 31 Dec ‘09 •10 Crashes in 3 years •4 Right angle •4 Rear end (All on S Willson Ave) •2 Single vehicle 92 Traffic Signal Roundabout 93 94 95 Signals assign right-of –way to various conflicting traffic movements can reduce angle crashes Drivers are familiar with traffic signals Less additional right-of-way than roundabout 379 ft² Lower cost than roundabout Can assist pedestrian crossings 96 Potential for long queues with signal this can impact private accesses Adds delay as drivers are required to stop Can increase rear end collisions Considered to be an Adverse Effect to the Historic District by the Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board Loss of parking along west side of WillsonAve, 23 remaining spaces, includes 3 new for daycare Higher speeds through intersection 97 Traffic can continuously flow through a roundabout –only yield not stop Lower speeds in a roundabout •Easier for drivers to choose an acceptable gap •Results in less severe Crashes Minimal queues with roundabout Fewer conflict points in a roundabout Shorter pedestrian crossing distances, one lane at a time 98 Roundabout requires additional right-of- way 773 ft² Possible impacts to trees at intersection Loss of parking near the intersection 25 spaces available, includes 3 new for daycare by widening into boulevard Additional lighting needed for the splitter islands of the roundabout (can use period lighting to match existing) 99 What is the City’s Preferred Design Option? 100