Monday night the city commission is discussing what to put on the ballot, and when, for Division St. The two options are a divided boulevard from 14th St to 8th St, which could go on the ballot in August, or a plan to remove the traffic lights from 14th St to Grandview Parkway and replace them with roundabouts. The roundabouts plan needs more modeling, and therefore is not ready for the ballot yet, but could go on a month from now for November.
Boulevard
A divided boulevard could go from 14th St to just south of 8th St. The boulevard would have a landscaped median except at the intersections, where it would have center turn lanes, similar to Woodmere (but no bike lanes). Each travel lane would be a foot wider than it is now (from 11 feet to 12 feet). Reconstruction of Division including the boulevard would cost $10 to 13 million. The boulevard would need a 30-foot strip of parkland on the west side. The boulevard would provide a more scenic corridor and would provide pedestrian refuge space in the medians. On the downside, wider lanes would mean faster speeds, and the boulevard would not address the stretch north of 8th St.
Roundabouts
The lights at 14th St, 7th St, Front St, and Grandview Parkway would be removed and roundabouts would be installed at 14th St, 11th St, a new 8½ St (or perhaps 7th St), Front St, and Grandview Parkway. The roundabouts plan would cost about $1.5 million per intersection, and could be phased in one at a time as funds allowed. (Either option would likely require federal funding, perhaps an earmark designated to implement this as part of the Grand Vision). It would require parkland at 11th St, 8½ St, and Grandview Parkway.
Advantages of roundabouts are that they allow traffic to move in a slow but consistent speed, are safer for pedestrians and bicyclists, reduce dangerous left turns, reduce noise and vibrations, and reduce traffic accidents. A roundabout could also create a more scenic corridor by eliminating overhead signals and wires. The roundabouts plan came from the steering group representing neighborhoods and businesses along the corridor and has been endorsed by Munson, the GT Commons, and the TBA ISD, among others. http://planfortc.com/2010/04/29/munson-and-the-commons-weigh-in-on-division-st-april-30/
Next steps
More modeling is needed for the roundabouts. The individual roundabouts have more than enough capacity for the traffic on Division St, but the relationship of the roundabouts to other intersections needs to be modeled (14th St and the light at Veterans Drive, for example). Therefore, the city could put the boulevard on the ballot for August, but needs the modeling before making a decision on the roundabouts – which could allow a November vote. Another option is to target one intersection for a roundabout.
Observations
It seems to me that the roundabouts plan – because it is such a dramatic change – needs to be done carefully and with all the issues worked through prior to a vote. Some points that need discussion.
1. Treat the corridor as a system. Benefits to the neighborhoods are based on this being a system, not a roundabout here or there. In addition, the US-31 corridor needs to be looked at as a whole. The South Campus entrance to the GT Commons and Munson could help take some pressure off Division. Finally settling on an E-W alternative around town would take some pressure off the US-31 corridor. (More on this in a later post).
2. The plan needs to be well thought out, meaning the various issues need to be addressed. As Central Neighborhood rep Mike Devries pointed out, current designs show a discrepancy from Lockwood’s concept. Lockwood designed traffic slowing geometry, but the current designs have some speedy on-ramp shapes.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Correcting the designs could reduce the condemnation needed at Front St. Also needed is a solution to through traffic on the residential side of 11th St. Also needed is an acceptable plan for 8½ St, or an acceptable alternative to it.
3. Bring back the steering committee. The steering committee included Munson, the GT Commons, Central, Kids Creek and Slabtown neighborhoods, and other representatives along the corridor. These people represented the stakeholdes on the corridor well. They know the needs of the neighborhoods and businesses in that area. They are best positioned to work through solutions to these issues.
4. Implement interim changes now. This includes street trees, sidewalks, and pedestrian crossing signs and paint. An example from Lockwood’s sketches is here:
If the boulevard is taken off the table (hence no widening), we could start getting these kinds of measures going now. They could help calm the feel of the street and perhaps reduce speeds while the roundabouts are worked through and implemented one step at a time.
What do you think? Let us know here, by email to the CC, or at Monday’s meeting – 7 pm in the Governmental Center.





12 comments
Comments feed for this article
May 15, 2010 at 12:05 pm
Michelle Hazard
Why is there not a back entrance to the Commons? ergo the hospital? I think that’s the tie up and danger… and There is already a bike path there near 11th but there is no sidewalk for disabled people and NO WAY to safely cross for a person of limited walking abilities.
A round about would just make it more difficult for disabled to go around if walking was the mode of transportation. Snow removal would be difficult and again would make it almost impossible for a handicapped pedestrian to maneuver. Even with the sidewalks here I often have to walk in great danger in the street with my walker, when sections disappear or the snow removal piles are iced and too high.
May 18, 2010 at 9:34 pm
Raymond
Michele- There is a back entrance to the Commons: Medical Campus Drive (off of N. Long Lake Rd. by Oleson’s West)
I encourage you to research “Modern traffic roundabouts” on Google. You will see your concerns are unnecessary. Well designed roundabouts are safer for pedestrians, even people with mobility issues. To save you some time here is a link to a good page by the Arizona DOT: and one of their video links that introduce roundabouts:
May 18, 2010 at 9:36 pm
Raymond
For some reason links did not post. You may need to copy and paste:
http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/index.asp
and one of their video links that introduce roundabouts: http://www.azdot.gov/asfroot/CCP/Modern_Roundabouts/Introduction.wmv
May 10, 2010 at 9:06 pm
Ian Connick
how would one of the proposed roundabout’s handle a semi truck?
I don’t think a semi could make a “left turn”.
May 10, 2010 at 10:32 pm
Matthew Ross
Unless communities that already have roundabouts for some reason don’t have the need for school buses, fire and semi trucks I suppose they do alright. Roundabouts are designed so that all vehicles can use them.
There is a lot of good information and studies about roundabouts on the web. You can also go to”My Wheels Are Turning” a great local blog that also has great information on roundabouts, complete streets and other issues related to transportation, and livable communities.
May 9, 2010 at 11:27 pm
Matthew Ross
A boulevard plan would not solve the problems with Division. 14 and Division would end up looking like Airport and US 31. Speeds will increase, because the lanes will be wider, and the median will give a false sense of safety. A boulevard will do nothing to address the area north of 8th St.
I disagree with Michael. Roundabouts by design would not allow for high speeds. As far as pedestrian and cyclist safety, studies show that roundabouts are safer than traditional intersections.
I do have one question for the city. We all want slower speeds on Division, so why haven’t we changed the speed limit to 25mph? Why don’t we enforce the current speed limit?
This is the first time 7th St. has been mentioned as a site for a roundabout
I was told 7th St. was not an option, because there was not enough room.
Are there plans to buy private property?
May 10, 2010 at 12:18 am
Raymond
Matthew, the 7th Street option has been a Plan B (8-1/2 Street being Plan A) from Lockwood’s first roundabouts proposal. To do so would indeed involve buying property, as would Front & Division.
Regarding speed limits, officials will tell you that Division Street speed limit is set by data that are based upon the speeds of a certain (85%?) percentile of drivers. Does not seem right. I think enforcement of the speed limits we do have is a problem throughout the city.
May 10, 2010 at 5:58 am
Matthew Ross
If Seventh St. is an option, I’m afraid I would be one of those owners. The seven years I spent restoring my home would have been for nothing. You can’t put a price on some things. I guess I’ll worry about that when the time comes. As far as the speed limit goes, I guess I don’t understand. Drivers set the speed limit? If thats the case I guess they should increase the speed to 50 mph.
May 10, 2010 at 6:56 am
Raymond
Your situation definitely puts a face on the ‘people cost’ of that option; may make 8-1/2 St a better choice because no homes would be impacted.
May 9, 2010 at 9:41 pm
Michael Anderson
Round abouts sound great until you put them in an area with a largely novice experience with them. Round abouts confuse most everyone when they come across them. Since TC is a resort community there will continually be an influx of ever more confused people. The local folks may get used to them over time, but all of the visitors like my grandparents… well good luck in keeping the flow free with all of the minor fender benders the police would have to contend with.
I’m not sure how round abouts makes more sense for pedestrians or cyclists. Has anybody been to those crazy things in europe????? How many crazy mario andretti’s whir around those things as fast as they can. Not sure how safe I would feel dodging mario and my doddling grandparents.
Why not just do something pragmatic that is cheaper and folks understand??
And why not just stuff a separated bikeway walking thru the parkland. Then everyone could be happy.
Also… wider lanes does not have to represent more speed. Just post the speed and put one of those automatic ticket machines that photographs and sends folks who are speeding a ticket. I bet the word would get around and it would be a nice source of income to pay for the improvement.
May 10, 2010 at 10:08 am
Bob Eichenlaub
Micheal:
There are roundabouts in may resort communities in Florida (Lady Lakes being one) that handle traffic very well and are used by tourists and senior citizens. Initially they are awkward to use but are easy to master. You are probably thinking about the TRAFFIC CIRCLES in Europe. They ARE fast and dangerous. Roundabouts are a totally different beast. GO to this link to learn about roundabouts, it is very helpful.
Bob
mms://205.178.146.41/493073/About-Roundabouts.wmv
May 9, 2010 at 10:12 am
Raymond
Very concise summary of the Division Street issues, Chris. Great road map for community discussion and action. Thank you for providing this very important public information forum.
For roundabouts to move forward I agree we must look closely at the current intersection designs. They do seem larger and faster compared to Ian Lockwood’s preliminary sketches.