U-3306 WEAVER DAIRY ROAD WIDENING

Attached for the Council’s consideration are alternative resolutions regarding conceptual designs for the improvement project proposed for Weaver Dairy Road between NC 86 and Erwin Road.

The Manager recommends that the Council adopt the attached Resolution A endorsing the conceptual design for the Weaver Dairy Road Improvement Project between NC 86 and Erwin Road to include a four lane median divided cross section consisting of two travel lanes in each direction, wide outside lanes to accommodate bicycle use, a narrowed raised center median with exclusive turn lanes and refuge for pedestrians, sidewalks along both sides of the road, and bus pull-offs as necessary (Alternative 1A Revised in Table Two).

BACKGROUND

In April 1999, the Town and the State hosted a Citizens Informational Workshop to present information on proposed Weaver Dairy Road improvements. Four alternatives were presented at the workshop, two with 5-lane cross-sections and two with 4-lane raided median cross-sections (alternatives 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B on Table One). Following the workshop presentation, the Council requested that the State study two additional alternatives and the State agreed to study the two 4-lane and two 3-lane cross-sections (alternatives 3A, 3B, 4A, and 4B on Table One). Sketches of the alternative cross sections are attached for reference.

A fifth alternative is the “No Build” scenario, under which the State would not undertake a comprehensive improvement project on Weaver Dairy Road at this time.

On November 14, 2000, the Council sponsored a Citizens’ Informational Workshop to provide an opportunity for interested citizens to review drawings and information about the proposed improvement alternatives and to discuss this information with Town and State staff. The workshop was publicized via direct mail and newspaper display ads in the Chapel Hill News, Chapel Hill Herald, and the News and Observer. We also had public service announcements broadcast on radio station WCHL. Approximately 50 people attended the workshop over the three-hour period from 3:30 pm to 6:30 p.m.

On November 20, 2000, the Council held a Public Forum to discuss proposed improvement alternatives and to receive citizens’ comments about the project. The forum was announced and advertised concurrently with the workshop, as noted above. Nineteen citizens spoke at the forum. Attachment 1 includes the comments made at the forum and staff responses. A copy of the November 20 memorandum is provided on the attachment 2.

DISCUSSION

The State performed a preliminary evaluation of nine alternatives, including the no-build scenario. These alternatives are described below, along with advantages and disadvantages of both. All alternatives considered include curb and gutter. All alternatives would need bus pull-offs to accommodate transit service. Travel lanes are 12 feet wide, except where otherwise noted. Table One, prepared by the State, summarizes this discussion and provides cost estimates and information on the impacts on adjoining land and buildings of each alternative. Table One is found on pages 3 and 4.

Five lane cross-sections: Alternatives 1A and 1B:

These alternatives would include two travel lanes in each direction and a continuous center turn lane. Alternative 1A would have wide (14feet) outside lanes, in order to accommodate bicycles and vehicular traffic together. In Alternative 1B, all travel and turn lanes would be 12 feet, and there would be 5 foot striped bike lanes on each side. Costs for these alternatives are lower than for the 4-lane median divided and higher than for the four lane cross sections.

The primary advantage is the unlimited access to and from all properties. Disadvantages include the lack of pedestrian refuge in the center, limited landscaping opportunities, and the appearance of the wide expanse of asphalt.

Four lane, median divided cross-sections: Alternatives 2A and 2B:

These alternatives include two travel lanes in each direction and a raised median lined with curb and gutter. The median would be 16 feet wide, except where turn lanes are needed, in which case, the median would shrink to 4 feet to make room for a 12 foot turn lane. Alternative 2A would have wide (14 feet) outside lanes, in order to accommodate bicycles and vehicular traffic together. In Alternative 2B, all travel and turn lanes would be 12 feet, and there would be 5 feet striped bike lanes on each side. The newly improved segment of NC 86 north of Homestead Road is identical to this alternative. Costs for these alternatives are the highest two of the nine alternatives evaluated.

Advantages of these cross sections include the pedestrian refuge throughout the entire length; median landscaping opportunities; and the improved safety of the substantial separation of directional travel lanes.

Disadvantages include limited access to some properties; the greatest impact on adjoining properties; and, the highest costs.

Four lane undivided cross-sections: Alternatives 3A and 3B:

These alternatives include two travel lanes in each direction. Alternative 3A would have wide

(14 feet) outside lanes, in order to accommodate bicycles and vehicular traffic together. In Alternative 3B, all travel and turn lanes would be 12 feet, and there would be 5 feet striped bike lanes on each side. Costs for these alternatives are lower than those described above, but still above the three lane cross-section.

The primary advantage is the reduced cross-section and the concomitant reduction in impacts to adjoining properties. The disadvantages include the lack of a center turn lane makes the roadway less safe, as cars are forced to either stop or to go around vehicles stopped in the travel lane waiting to turn left. This lack of a turn lane also reduces the traffic carrying capacity. The lack of a median means the lack of a pedestrian refuge.

Three lane cross-sections: Alternatives 4A and 4B:

These alternatives have one travel lane in each direction and a center turn lane. Alternative 4A would have wide (14 feet) travel lanes to accommodate bicycles and vehicular traffic together. This cross-section would be similar to that of Merritt Mill Road. In Alternative 4B, the travel lanes would be 12 feet wide, and there would be 5 feet striped bike lanes on each side. These alternatives have the lowest costs.

The advantages include the least cost and the lowest impacts on adjoining properties. The disadvantage is the significantly limited traffic carrying capacity and requirement for additional lanes to maintain the capacity for coming traffic volumes.

TABLE ONE

TABLE ONE (CONTINUED)

Currently, the average daily traffic (ADT) volume on Weaver Dairy Road is between 10,000 and 13,000 vehicles per day. The projected ADT volumes for the year 2025 are between 17,000 and 20,000 vehicles per day.

We have attached information tables which show existing and projected traffic volumes on Weaver Dairy Road, and the traffic contributions we expect from new and existing developments such as VilCom, Timberlyne Shopping Center, Parkside, The Homestead, and the extension of Weaver Dairy Road to Homestead Road.

We think that all of the design alternatives could adequately handle current traffic volumes now. However, we believe that widening for turning lanes at several locations would be necessary in the design of the 4-lane undivided cross-sections (alternatives 3A & 3B) and additional lanes would be necessary in the design of the 3-lane cross-sections (alternatives 4A & 4B) to adequately accommodate projected growth in traffic volumes on Weaver Dairy Road. The 5-lane cross-sections (alternatives 1A & 1B) and the 4-lane median divided cross-sections (alternatives 2A & 2B) could handle expected future traffic volumes as proposed.

Several segments of Weaver Dairy Road have been widened to all or part of a 5-lane cross section as a result of Town requirements for adjacent private developments. Also, Weaver Dairy Road is planned to connect to Sage Road, which is an existing 5-lane roadway. The existing 5-lane improvements do not include designated bike lanes or wide outer lanes except across the Silvercreek development frontage.

If it is the Council’s desire that Weaver Dairy Road be improved to other than a 5-lane or 4-lane median divided cross section, careful design work would be necessary to create acceptable transitions between the new and existing cross sections in order to preserve as much as possible of the existing improvements.

The extension of Weaver Dairy Road west of NC 86 includes two different cross-sections. The segment associated with the Northwoods development includes a thirteen-feet wide raised center median, two 11-feet wide travel lanes in each direction, and a 5-feet wide sidewalk along one side only. The segment associated with the Parkside and Homestead developments is planned to include a 16-feet wide raised center median, two 12-foot wide travel lanes in each direction, a 4-feet wide striped bike lane in each direction, and a 5-feet wide sidewalk along both sides. The developers will be building half of the ultimate roadway cross-section improvements as part of the Parkside and The Homestead developments.

NEXT STEPS

The State is now awaiting the Council’s selection of its desired improvement alternative for Weaver Dairy Road. Once the Council decides on the desired scope of improvements, we would forward the Council’s resolution of endorsement to the State for review and approval.

If agreement is reached, the State would begin preliminary design work and environmental impact studies, and would schedule a Public Hearing on the project. Based on the hearing comments and environmental assessment findings, the State would prepare a Municipal Agreement outlining the understandings and responsibilities of the Town and State for mutual agreement to proceed with final design and construction of the project.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

We think that Weaver Dairy Road should be improved to safely and effectively serve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic now and in the future. To best accomplish this over the long-term, we believe that improvements would need to include the following:

· Two travel lanes in each direction with exclusive turn lanes to accommodate growing traffic volume

· Raised center median areas to provide refuge for pedestrians and landscaping opportunities

We believe the key is to balance the needs for traffic carrying capacity and safety with the need to minimize the total cross section. Alternatives 1A and B, and 2A and B are the only ones with the required traffic carrying capacity. Their widths range from 68 feet from face of curb to face of curb, to 82 feet. Alternative 1A, the five-lane cross-section with wide outside lanes has the narrowest width of 68 feet.

We want to come close to this width, but still be able to provide a raised median instead of a continuous center turn lane for increased pedestrian and vehicular safety. In consultation with DOT staff, we have developed a revised cross-section that would add only 18 inches, but would still provide a raised center median and would be acceptable to DOT.

Alternative 1A Revised would include four travel lanes, the outside lanes being 14 feet wide to accommodate bicycles and the inside being 11 feet. (Please see the sketch on page 25.) Instead of a continuous 12 foot wide center turn lane, there would be a median of 11.5 feet (narrower than the 16 foot medians in Alternatives 2A and 2B), plus four feet of curb and gutter. The total width from face of curb to face of curb would total 69.5 feet.

The advantages of this alternative include the pedestrian refuge as well as turn lanes where needed; median landscaping opportunities; improved safety of substantial separation of directional travel lanes; and, limiting the right of way needed and impacts to adjoining properties to those of Alternative 1A. The disadvantages include limited access to some properties, and greater costs than the alternatives with no median

TABLE TWO

U-3306 WEAVER DAIRY ROAD WIDENING

Alternatives	Revised 1A	1A
Description	Four lane, Narrow Median Divided	Five lane, Curb and Gutter
Bike Accommodation	Wide outside lanes	Wide outside lanes
Width from face of Curb to face of Curb	69.5 feet	68 feet
Construction Cost	$8,250,000	$7,300,000
Right of Way Cost	$2,655,500	$2,655,500
Estimated Project Cost	$10,905,500	$9,955,500
IMPACTS
Relocations	5 Residences	5 Residences
Close Proximity	3 Residences	3 Residences
Wetland Impacts
Stream Impacts	370 feet	370 feet
Historic Architecture	None	None
Archeology	None	None
UST’s*	None expected	None expected
Park Land	Avoided	Avoided
Country Road	Removes Road	Removes Road
ADVANTAGES	®Median landscaping opportunities ®Substantial separation of directional travel lanes ®Same impacts/relocations as 5 Ln.	®Unlimited access to and from all properties
DISADVANTAGES	®Limited access to some properties	®Limited landscaping opportunities ®Wide “runaway” appearance

This recommended cross-section would readily tie into the existing improved portions of Weaver Dairy Road discussed previously, and would also most closely match the existing segment of Weaver Dairy Road which has been constructed west of NC 86. We believe that the wide outer travel lanes, instead of marked bikeways, would not only be consistent with past recommendations of the Bicycle-Pedestrian Advisory Board, but would also save 6 feet in the final cross-section.

Manager’s Recommendation: That the Council adopt the attached Resolution “A” endorsing the conceptual design for the Weaver Dairy Road Improvement Project between NC 86 and Erwin Road to include a four lane median divided cross section consisting of two travel lanes in each direction, wide outside lanes to accommodate bicycle use, narrowed raised center median with exclusive turn lanes and refuge for pedestrians, sidewalks along both sides of the road, and bus pull-offs as necessary.

If the Council wishes to choose other options, Resolution B provides a framework which can be completed by the Council to reflect its preferences.

ATTACHMENTS

RESOLUTION A

A RESOLUTION ENDORSING A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO WEAVER DAIRY ROAD BETWEEN NC 86 AND ERWIN ROAD TO INCLUDE A FOUR LANE MEDIAN DIVIDED CROSS SECTION CONSISTING OF TWO TRAVEL LANES IN EACH DIRECTION, WIDE OUTSIDE LANES TO ACCOMMODATE BICYCLE USE, NARROWED RAISED CENTER MEDIAN WITH EXCLUSIVE TURN LANES AND REFUGE FOR PEDESTRIANS, SIDEWALKS ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD, AND BUS PULL-OFFS AS NECESSARY (2001-01-22/R-10a)

WHEREAS, it is the Town’s desire to improve Weaver Dairy Road to the extent that it can safely and effectively accommodate existing and future pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic; and

WHEREAS, necessary improvements should be designed and constructed so as to minimize disturbance of adjacent properties; and

WHEREAS, representatives of the Town and the State, and interested citizens, have met and discussed the proposed Weaver Dairy Road Improvement Project needs, scope, costs, and impacts; and

WHEREAS, project information and input has been evaluated and considered in conjunction with preliminary studies of several alternative project designs; and

WHEREAS, the Council endorsed-design best meets the project objectives with the least negative impact;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council endorses a conceptual Weaver Dairy Road Improvement Project between NC 86 and Erwin Road to include a four lane median divided cross section consisting of two travel lanes in each direction, wide outside lanes to accommodate bicycle use, raised center median with exclusive turn lanes and refuge for pedestrians, sidewalks along both sides of the road, and bus pull-offs as necessary.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests that the State concur with the project improvements endorsed by the Town and proceed with preparations for a Public Hearing on the proposed Weaver Dairy Road Improvement Project.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests the Town be involved to the extent possible in all stages of the project development.

A RESOLUTION ENDORSING A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO WEAVER DAIRY ROAD BETWEEN NC 86 AND ERWIN ROAD TO INCLUDE

WHEREAS, it is the Town’s desire to improve Weaver Dairy Road to the extent that it can safely and effectively accommodate existing and future pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic; and

WHEREAS, necessary improvements should be designed and constructed so as to minimize disturbance of adjacent properties; and

WHEREAS, representatives of the Town and the State, and interested citizens, have met and discussed the proposed Weaver Dairy Road Improvement Project needs, scope, costs, and impacts; and

WHEREAS, project information and input has been evaluated and considered in conjunction with preliminary studies of several alternative project designs; and

WHEREAS, the Council endorsed design best meets the project objectives with the least negative impact;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council endorses a conceptual Weaver Dairy Road Improvement Project between NC 86 and Erwin Road to include

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests the Town be involved to the extent possible in all stages of the project development.

A variety of comments and questions were brought up at the Public Forum on November 20. A large majority of the citizens who commented on the proposed Weaver Dairy Road improvements live and/or work in the vicinity of the project corridor, and many had similar concerns and questions. The issues discussed at the forum are summarized below, along with our responses. Written correspondence and citizen comment sheets which we received following the project workshop and forum are available for review in the Town Engineering Department.

1. Several citizens noted that speeding is more of a concern now than traffic congestion, and they expressed concerns that widening the road would exacerbate speeding problems in the future.

Response: We agree that speeding is an existing problem on Weaver Dairy Road, and it is a focus area for our Police traffic enforcement division. It has generally proven to be true that, after roads are widened, vehicle speeds increase. We think this is a valid concern regarding Weaver Dairy Road if it is widened.

The Town would need to continue to enforce traffic regulations on Weaver Dairy Road, with emphasis on speed limit and school zone enforcement efforts. As the only cross-connector road on the northern side of the Town, much of the Weaver Dairy Road traffic is and will continue to be local in nature, involving repetitive users traveling to and from residences, workplaces, and businesses. We would expect our enforcement efforts to be most effective in educating these local, daily users about the importance we place on compliance with traffic regulations, because this major user group would be affected by such enforcement on a regular basis.

2. Many citizens expressed concerns about bicycle and pedestrian safety if the road is widened, particularly regarding pedestrians trying to cross the road from one side to the other.

Response: Pedestrian crossings would be provided at all signalized intersections. Currently, signals are installed at NC 86, and at the entrance to East Chapel Hill High School. As part of the Weaver Dairy Road improvements we would expect additional traffic signals to be installed at the VilCom campus entrance, at Sunrise Road near Cedar Falls Park, at Erwin Road, and at other locations along the project corridor where signals are warranted based on traffic studies which would be completed as part of the project development process. We do not know at this time where or how many additional signals may be warranted.

If the Council approves a project alternative with raised center medians, these areas could function as refuge islands midway across the road, allowing pedestrians to cross only half of the road at a time. We think this is a significant benefit of median-divided roadways.

All of the proposed improvement alternatives would include accommodations for bicyclists. These would include either striped, designated on-street bike lanes in both directions, or wide outside travel lanes for shared use by motorized vehicles and bicycles.

3. Concerns were expressed that widening Weaver Dairy Road could encourage more traffic to use it than if it were not widened. In conjunction with these comments, some citizens noted that I-40 is nearby and could be used for cross-town trips in lieu of Weaver Dairy Road, thereby mitigating the need to widen it.

Response: While we believe that improved roads may attract additional traffic, we also believe that traffic volumes will increase on Weaver Dairy Road regardless of whether or not it is widened. Traffic volumes on major streets in Chapel Hill have typically increased at a rate of 2-3% per year, independent of additional traffic increases which result from development activity that affects specific corridors such as Weaver Dairy Road.

We believe that the existing two-lane roadway will be unable to accommodate the traffic safely and effectively. Weaver Dairy Road is presently handling 10 – 13,000 vehicle trips per day, with some peak hour congestion. At around 15,000 trips per day, two-lane roadway functions typically exhibit significant deterioration and public safety problems increase.

We are concerned that, unless we begin developing improvement plans now, traffic problems on Weaver Dairy Road will increase and this important connector/collector roadway will eventually be unable to provide safe and effective service to our community.

Interstate 40 is intended to serve regional traffic entering and leaving Chapel Hill, or bypassing the community; it was not built to serve the needs of local traffic. Current traffic congestion on I-40 during the peak hours encourages local traffic to use Weaver Dairy Road. Elderly and inexperienced drivers, many of whom live in Carol Woods or attend East Chapel Hill High School on Weaver Dairy Road, might be uncomfortable using the interstate for routine local travel.

We believe that Weaver Dairy Road should be improved as necessary to provide effective long-term service as the Town’s only northern cross-town connector road. We acknowledge that such improvements will make travel easier on Weaver Dairy Road, which could attract more drivers to use it. However, the proposed facility improvements for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians would be designed to safely accommodate expected increases in use.

4. Concerns were expressed about the proximity of proposed roadway-related improvements to existing private property and structures, and inquiries were made about plans for visual/sound buffers and realignment of the road away from existing features such as buildings, ponds, parks, walls, and trees.

Response: There are some locations along the project corridor where the existing roadway is close to private property features and any widening would create conflicts. As was noted by NCDOT staff at the forum, every reasonable effort would be made to adjust the project location within the right-of-way to minimize impacts on adjacent properties and associated features such as natural vegetation/trees, landscaping, ponds, structures, recreational facilities, etc. Examples of this are evident on the NC 86 project where the improvements were shifted away from the Northwoods neighborhood and adjusted to preserve the large oak trees near the Westminster Drive intersection.

Because of the number of driveways and street intersections penetrating this corridor, installation of sound barriers would be ineffective, and they are not being proposed for this project.

Although clearing of the project right-of-way would be minimized to the extent possible, some natural vegetation and landscaping improvements near the road would need to be removed. Only a small portion of State funded projects are dedicated to revegetation, and this involves primarily stabilization of disturbed areas with groundcover and selective reforestation with pine seedlings. On past projects such as NC 86 and Fordham Boulevard, the Town has arranged for supplemental funding to install beautification and visual buffer landscaping at the edges of the project corridor and in median areas. This could be the case with Weaver Dairy Road as well.

5. Concerns were expressed associated with preserving reasonable livability and ingress/egress for adjacent properties. The issue of properties fronting on Country Road was highlighted.

Response: As noted previously, it would be the intent of both the Town and State to minimize project related impacts on adjacent properties. In all cases, reasonable ingress to and egress from properties would be maintained or provided.

The most difficult problem we would expect to deal with in this regard involves the houses fronting on Country Road, which closely parallels Weaver Dairy Road for a short distance. All of the proposed improvement alternatives would significantly affect the Country Road frontage, ranging from removal of the visual buffer trees to removal of Country Road itself. Country Road would be one of the primary focus areas during project design, regardless on which alternative the Council selects. Town and State staff would work closely with Country Road residents to achieve the best possible outcome.

Other locations and features we are aware of that would require special design attention due to their proximity to the project corridor include two or three townhouses at Coventry, two ponds adjacent to the project corridor, the Sunrise Road service station fuel tanks, the large oaks at Carol Woods, and the Cedar Falls Park ball fields. The previous tables provide further information on some of the expected impacts of different improvement alternatives.

6. Concerns about adequate storm water management were expressed, both with and without the proposed road widening project.

Response: We are aware of existing storm water problems at some locations along the proposed project corridor, and we will continue to address those to the extent possible with available resources. Any proposed Weaver Dairy Road improvement project would include a comprehensive hydrologic study to identify existing and potential storm water problem areas and the expected impacts of proposed improvements. The project design would include appropriate measures to mitigate project storm water runoff impacts.

7. Some citizens questioned the need for any improvements, noting that the road seems to be functioning fine as it is.

Response: The existing two-lane section of Weaver Dairy Road has limited capacity for accommodating vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic. We believe that improvements are necessary to adequately serve current and future users of this important community roadway. Please refer to our responses to issues two and three above.

8. Several citizens requested clarification as to whether or not the existing widened areas of Weaver Dairy Road would be disturbed by proposed improvements. This was of particular concern regarding the existing 5-lane section between the Chesley and Silvercreek neighborhoods.

Response: It would be the intent of any proposed improvement project to preserve the existing widened sections of Weaver Dairy Road to the extent possible. This would include segments near NC 86, the Timberlyne Shopping Center, the VilCom campus, the high school, and the Chesley/Silvercreek neighborhoods which have been widened to a 5-lane cross section.

Depending on the improvement alternative selected by the Council, design of the necessary transitions to and from the existing widened sections of Weaver Dairy Road may be challenging. We believe the State would leave existing improvements undisturbed and would create transitions with paint striping if necessary. We would not expect to disturb the existing roadway, sidewalks, landscaping, or walls adjacent to Chesley or Silvercreek.

9. One new issue raised by a Council Member requested consideration of a variation on the proposed three-lane alternative to include a raised center median rather than a continuous center turn lane.

Response: We discussed this with State staff and they determined that additional study would not be necessary, because this variation would not change the width of the overall cross-section studied for the three lane alternatives with a striped center turn lane.

A raised center median could not be continuous, since openings would be needed to accommodate turning traffic at selected locations and intersections. A median replacing the center turn lane could be only 12 feet wide, which is less that the 16 feet minimum width typically permitted by the State. A 16 feet wide median (20 feet including curb and gutter) would allow a future 12 feet lane and also a refuge island for pedestrians. State staff indicated that they are not interested in a 3-lane section, although the Council could still request this additional study.

ALTERNATIVES	3A	3B	4A	4B	5

Description	Four lane, Curb and Gutter		Three lane, Curb and Gutter		No Build
Width from face of Curb to face of Curb	56 feet	62 feet	44 feet	50 feet	26 feet
Bike Accommodation	Wide outside lanes	5’ bike lanes	Wide outside lanes	5’ bike lanes	None
Construction Cost	$6,100,000	$6,900,000	$5,100,000	$5,965,000	None
Right of Way Cost	$2,189,500	$2,189,500	$1,704,500	$1,704,500	None
Estimated Project Cost	$8,289,500	$9,089,500	$6,804,500	$7,669,500	None
IMPACTS					None
Relocations	3 Residences	3 Residences	3 Residences	3 Residences	None
Close Proximity	3 Residences	5 Residences	2 Residences	2 Residences	None
Wetland Impacts	None		None		None
Stream Impacts	315 feet	335 feet	275 feet	305 feet	None
Historic Architecture	None		None		None
Archeology	None		None		None
UST’s*	None expected		None expected		None
Park Land	Avoided		Avoided		None
Country Road	Removes road		May save road/not trees		None

ADVANTAGES	®Reduced cross section		®Least impacts/relocations ®Least Cost
DISADVANTAGES	®No center turn lane ®Statistically less safe than other alternatives ®Limited traffic capacity ®Requires extra turn lanes to maintain capacity		®Limited traffic capacity ®Requires additional lanes to maintain capacity

INTRODUCTION