My Wheels are Turning

NOTE: Broke out the public meeting scorecard last night. The score: 20 points. Uh-oh, we may need a revolution.

__

After last night’s 2nd (or 3rd) study session on Division St., it’s not clear whether or not all of our city commissioners have done their homework. The packet for last night’s meeting does an adequate job of placing the options on the table. To address the issues of safety, access, context and quality of the corridor the CC has been given two choices 1) a boulevard concept or 2) a roundabout concept. The packet gives the details, as well as a post by the mayor on Plan for TC, so I won’t duplicate.

Needless to say, because parkland is needed, the city needs to choose between asking residents to choose between all of the concepts or to give an up or down on the solution they feel is the best fit. Alternatively, they possibly could push that decision into the future and focus on 1 or 2 intersections that would not require a vote of the people.

A handful, commissioners Ralph Soffredine, Mike Gillman and Barbra Budros have hemmed-and-hawed through the entire 2-3 month process; each meeting saying pretty much the same thing as the last. They remain supportive of the boulevard idea for different reasons. Or, perhaps the same reasons. I’m not sure. There was a lot of “I agree with what he said” type language that does little in the way to indicate leadership or that they’ve done their homework. They’ve yet to prove otherwise.

Creating a suburban cross-section like this, with sidewalks, lights and tightly placed trees should be begun ASAP. The commission agrees on this. (via URS presentation)

These three seem willing to hide behind the public vote on parkland as they indicate they support the ‘put all the options on the table‘ approach recommended by city manager Ben Bifoss. It can only be assumed that commissioner Jody Bergman is in agreement with them from a few head nods she made; otherwise, she gave no indication that she was in the room.

Boulevard Problems

Mayor Chris Bzdok and commissioner Jim Carruthers are the only ones (cmmn. Mary Ann Moore was absent) that indicated they are ready to suggest and support a ‘total’ solution. Both question the boulevard option as a real solution to anything. For starters, it covers half of the corridor. The BLVD plan also completely blows up the 14th St. intersection by expanding its footprint to accommodate double left-hand turn lanes a la South Airport and US-31 intersection.

The left hand turn is the most dangerous maneuver while driving; does it make sense to increase them? In addition, for all the new clamor from unlikely sources claiming that roundies are dangerous for pedestrians, where are they on this? Walkable communities do not ask citizens to cross anymore than 3 lanes. Traverse City consistently asks them to cross 5 to 6.

During public comment the analogy was made to Grandview Parkway, our busiest boulevard. What are the issues along that corridor: high/inconsistent speeds, dangerous and infrequent pedestrian crossings and high noise and pollution concerns, to name a few. Grandview divides the city and the bayfront. It sounds like the same conversation, yet now it’s proposed as a solution.

If we have to live with current motorized traffic volumes (road diet is off the table) then the roundies solution is currently the only game in town to address the community’s concerns.

A question to ask the city:

• What if there was no parkland? Where would they stand?

To be fair (something I’m not always good at) everyone on the commission says they want to see the roundabout modeling that URS will conduct in the next few weeks. Point taken and I’m in complete agreement. That will determine what location roundies could be first implemented and to some degree the unintended consequences. That is not an excuse for the commission to not do their preliminary homework.

In particularly, Mayor Pro Tem Soffredine needs to step it up and research the plethora of data available regarding roundabouts and safety issues. During the 8th Street Kerfuffle he pounded his fist on the table in defense of the turning lane in the name of safety, safety, safety. Well, he has now been presented with a solution that promises to ameliorate one of our worst corridors and several of our most crash prone intersections. His response, “I’m more comfortable with the boulevard solution because I know them.” (I quoted the IIHS below regarding safety).

I’m all for citizen led implementation of something bold for Division St., but apart from a complete DIY endeavor where we shut it down and bring in our own jack hammers, bulldozers and plenty of lawyers strategically placed on both ends, we’re going to need some leadership from the commission. As stated before, they have had an open, public process that sought input from a diverse set of stakeholders, including MDOT. The result was a concept that surprised many, but promises to reach the elegant compromise and rubber to the pavement win that the residents need.

We, as concerned citizens, need to help them lead. You can also help me remain optimistic by writing, calling or having coffee with a city commissioner to be certain that they understand the urgency and wide public support for bold action.

Also, please share those comments and/or letters with the public. I invite you to post your complete letter/email into MyWHaT’s comment section, or send me an email. If you have a conversation with one of the commissioners, ask them if you can share their comments. Then, let us know how it went.

Good luck.

_______

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety on Roundabout safety:

“A 2001 Institute study of 23 intersections in the United States reported that converting intersections from traffic signals or stop signs to roundabouts reduced injury crashes by 80 percent and all crashes by 40 percent. Similar results were reported by Eisenman et al.: a 75 percent decrease in injury crashes and a 37 percent decrease in total crashes at 35 intersections that were converted from traffic signals to roundabouts. A study of 17 higher speed rural intersections (40 mph and higher speed limits) found that the average injury crash rate per million entering vehicles was reduced by 84 percent and fatal crashes were eliminated when the intersections were converted to roundabouts. Studies of intersections in Europe and Australia that were converted to roundabouts have reported 41-61 percent reductions in injury crashes and 45-75 percent reductions in severe injury crashes.”