Mike on Traffic

Turn on Green Arrow Only, but we never switch on the green arrow?

There is an article in today’s Star & Tribune (Minnesota’s largest newspaper) about a traffic signal in my fair city.  The signal at Excelsior Boulevard and 38th Street has a “Right Turn on Green Arrow Only” sign on it for the northeast bound exclusive right turn lane.  To discourage people from using this as a cut through route, the city times the signal so the green right turn arrow won’t come up in the evenings.  It forces motorists to either make an illegal right turn or pull back onto the mainline (which could get you a ticket for careless driving) and turn at a different intersection.  This strikes me as bad design on several levels - discouraging the use of a public street, violating motorist expectation, forcing people to merge back onto a mainline, etc. 

Elk Run Update

I wrote about Elk Run a year and a half ago.  It is a large bio-science park (with related uses) proposed for southeastern Minnesota.  I did the traffic study for the 5,000 acre area studied in the environmental documents.  The project cleared the approval process and ground was broken this summer. 

Here is a Star & Tribune article from today that describes the funding that is coming together.  I have a meeting next week with MnDOT to discuss my traffic study.  They are starting on the Highway 52 improvement designs (new interchange and frontage roads).

Congratulations to Tower Investments for their bold vision.  This project is tremendous for Minnesota.

Mitigation Responsibilities

Matt asked (paraphrased):

I have a 100 +/- unit residential development that is proposed on a roadway that is in bad condition due to a public waterline failing under it.  This road is 2 miles from a State Highway and is a major collector servicing the south side of a community of about 3000.  In twenty years, about 20% of the road's traffic will be generated by the residential development.  The County is requesting mitigation, with no specifics.  They do not have impact fees, and the subdivision is in a City (annexed), so it is the developer’s position that the County has no grounds for demanding mitigation, but he wants to do what is right without “selling the farm”.   The County’s stated concerns are based on “impacts” and Levels of Service.  

 

What are your thoughts? I want my recommendations to be consistent with ITE standards of practice, but can find little on how to suggest equitable and reasonable mitigation for a few hundred cars a day on a road that will have maybe 3000 ADT (vehicles per day) in 20 years!  Obviously, congestion is NOT an issue!

 

(WARNING – THIS SECTION IS FURTHER BACKGROUND FOR US GEEKY TRAFFIC ENGINEERS AND CONTAINS A LOT OF JARGON - The impacts include: The projected Level of Service (LOS) for all impacted intersections is at or above LOS C in the 20-year projection.  This impact lowers the 20-year projected LOS from B to C (barely) for one movement at one intersection (left turns onto a minor road from the State facility), Increasing the Traffic volume by 20%, and addition of the 100+/- homes.  The County Capital Improvements Plan is not available (Not sure it exists) and this roadway is a concern to them regardless of this development.  At the 20-year projection, the State facility will meet guidelines for the addition of a left turn lane at this location based on volumes with or without this development.

 

Considering 18-kip ESAL loading and a 20-year projection, the subdivision will account for about 10% of the ESALs experienced by this roadway.  This calculation was done to obtain some basis for a possible strategy for working with the county on this issue.  It is looking like the County wants the developer to contribute to the improvement of the roadway, but will not state the amount of participation at this point.  It is also becoming clear the “LOS” means the estimation of how many phone calls the Road Department is going to receive, not operations/calculations based.  This is difficult to analyze or address to say the least.)

 

Here is my response:

I have not seen any ITE (Institute of Transportation Engineers) recommendations on mitigation.  I am sure ITE steers clear from this area because it is so situational.  What is considered acceptable is very local – standards in Los Angeles are different than Minneapolis which are different than Boise.

 

I was involved in a case where a city was trying to assess a 150 lot subdivision for improvements to a highway/county road intersection two miles away.  The developer and the local builders association fought it in court.  The case was quickly dismissed.  The judge ruled the assessments were unreasonable based on Minnesota law.  There is always a pain threshold where lawyers should be brought in if a jurisdiction pushes too hard.  I personally don't take hard line positions on these types of issues, since they are more politics than engineering.

 

I don’t have any silver bullets for you on this one.  It would seem prudent to me that the county put the road improvement in their capital improvement plan (which should have a category of improvements based on road conditions) and then assess the adjacent properties accordingly based on abutting linear footage.  That way the adjacent property owners pay proportionally for the benefit.  I am not sure if counties have assessment capabilities in your part of the country or not.  Based on your description, it sounds like the road should be a city street not a county road.

 

Any other advice out there?

 

 

Designing for All Modes of Travel

I attended the North Central Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers section meeting this morning.  It was a panel discussion on "Complete Streets."  The general idea is to balance service to private vehicles, transit users, bicycles, and pedestrians through the design of our transportation systems. Traditionally, vehicles have been the focus of our design with the other three modes treated as after thoughts.  FHWA has a website and the Institute of Transportation Engineers has a report on the topic. 

The most important tidbit I took away relates to the speed we are designing a road for.  Engineers typically design for a specific speed.  Often that is treated as a minimum.  So we'll design a 30 mph street that can actually be used safely at 45 mph.  The Complete Street method has us target the real design at 30 mph instead of overdesigning it.  That makes it more accessible for all users.

A good example of this concept in the Twin Cities is Excelsior Boulevard in St. Louis Park, MN.   It has on street parking bays, median islands, bus stops, and narrower than standard traffic lanes. 

I worked with Bill Weber at MFRA on a Guiding Plan for the B-2 District in Arden Hills, MN this past fall.  This is the area of the suburban city that would be considered downtown.  County Road E runs through the area and would be considered "Main Street."  County Road E is currently five lanes wide of black asphalt.  It isn't exactly pedestrian or bicycle friendly.  Bill and I worked on the re-design below for the County Road E corridor (which was adopted by the City).  I guess we were designing a "Complete Street" without using the jargon.

Traffic Engineers Have No Taste (Most of the Time)

The stuff we put on the side of the road is ugly.  Sometimes there is a reason for the ugliness (yellow is more visible), but often there isn't.  Here is a photo from New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada (thank you Margaret Gibbs of Opus International Consultants). 

Here is a You Tube Video of the Signal Art Program in North Richland Hills, TX (thanks Scott Booker of Campbell Technology Corporation).  I applaud the folks in New Westminster and North Richland Hills for turning an ugly silver traffic signal cabinet into a work of art.  What other traffic engineering structures could be beautified? 

Google Streetview - Breaking the Law

I love google's streetview.  It helps get me oriented in an area I am studying before I even go to the site.  Unfortunately, the google drivers have broken the law.  Check out this view where the recording car runs through railroad crossing arms that were down.

Less is More When it Comes to Road Networks & Traffic Control?

Thanks to Tom Vanderbilt who did some follow-up on an interesting project in Montgomery, AL.  Check out his post for the full story.  Montgomery removed all of their traffic control devices in the city's plaza as part of a downtown, urban renewal project.  So far, so good.  No crash problems, just a drunk Hummer driver who drove into a fountain in the middle of the night.  My favorite piece in the article - "As Monderman once told me, similarly about a drunken driver, “there’s not a street that can cope with that problem.”

Here is a picture from Tom's blog of the town square with an "under-designed" roundabout (or is that a traffic circle?).