AGENDA #8
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Town Council
FROM: W. Calvin Horton, Town Manager
SUBJECT: Staff Report on Recommendations for Improvements at and in the Vicinity of the NC 54/Hamilton Road Intersection
DATE: September 27, 1999
This report responds to the recommendations of the “Special Work Group to Study the NC 54/Hamilton Road Intersection Area” regarding residents’ concerns about pedestrian safety and mobility at this intersection.
The attached resolution would endorse several of the Work Group recommendations for improving pedestrian safety and mobility at and in the vicinity of the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection.
A copy of the Work Group report and recommendations has been forwarded to the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NC DOT) Division 7 Office for review and evaluation.
At the November 23, 1998 Town Council meeting, we presented a report in response to concerns expressed by several residents and Council Members regarding pedestrian safety at the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection. We proposed that the Town Transportation Board lead a Work Group of citizens to compile and evaluate improvement ideas for the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection, and to make recommendations to the Council of those improvements that would be most feasible and effective. The Work Group, comprised of 15 residents and 3 members of the Town Transportation Board, began meeting in February 1999.
At the July 7, 1999 Town Council meeting, members of the Work Group presented the attached June 28, 1999 report and recommendations, which were received and referred to the Town Manager for evaluation and comment. The following report presents our comments on the Work Group recommendations, including estimated construction and maintenance costs where applicable.
The Town Traffic Engineer was assigned to the Work Group as staff liaison to provide information and resources as needed. The Work Group was informed that any proposed modifications to the existing traffic control devices or roadway facilities serving NC 54 and the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection were subject to the review and approval of the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NC DOT).
The segment of NC 54 within the Chapel Hill Town Limits is under the jurisdiction of the NC DOT Division 7 Office. We have met with representatives from the Division 7 Office on several occasions to discuss issues associated with the Work Group recommendations, and a copy of the Work Group report and recommendations was provided to the Division 7 Office in July of 1999.
We understand that the NC DOT is presently reviewing and evaluating the Work Group recommendations which are under State jurisdiction, and will respond to the Town by the end of the year.
The following information identifies and discusses the Work Group recommendations:
1.) Create textured and colored crosswalks.
Work Group Recommendation: The Work Group recommends the placement of a textured and colored crosswalk across each approach to the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection in place of the existing striped crosswalks. This modification would provide a visual and auditory indication to motorists to anticipate pedestrians. The new crosswalks could be constructed with pavers or colored, stamped asphalt pavement.
Staff Comment: The presence of pedestrians at the intersection is a significant issue, and altering the appearance and texture of the existing crosswalks could increase motorists’ awareness of the crosswalk locations and likely pedestrian traffic.
The use of pavement treatments in crosswalks is not a State or Town standard, and the existing crosswalk pavement markings are in accordance with current State standards and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (M.U.T.C.D.). However, we agree with the work group that modifying the pavement in the crosswalks would create an esthetically pleasing appearance that also would provide visual and auditory signals to drivers approaching and travelling through the intersection. We do not think that modifying the pavement as proposed by the Work Group would decrease intersection safety or operating level of service.
Our evaluation of current construction practices indicates that colored, stamped asphalt pavement would be the most cost effective and would be the least disruptive to traffic flow during installation. (Please refer to Figure 1 for examples.) The installation of concrete pavers would require removing existing pavement within the crosswalks, which would be more costly and disruptive to traffic flow during construction.
If State approval is received, we think that the Town would be responsible for construction and maintenance costs, and that the State would not accept any responsibility for the replacement of or damage to the modified crosswalks in the future.
After consulting with a paving contractor that performs this type of work, we estimate that a project of this size would cost approximately $25,000, which is about $9.60/ square foot. Maintenance of the color-coated surface is necessary periodically, subject to the amount of traffic. We estimate that the annual maintenance cost of the color-coated surface would be $8,700. Also, the crosswalks would need to be re-stamped and coated each time the roadway is resurfaced, typically once every 10-15 years.
Staff Recommendation: Subject to State approval, we recommend proceeding with the proposed crosswalk modifications when funds are available.
2.) Landscape the NC 54 median from US 15-501 to Burning Tree Drive.
Work Group Recommendation: The Work Group recommends landscaping the median along NC 54 between US 15-501 and Burning Tree Drive. This could create an urban boulevard appearance and visual “friction” which might help to slow vehicle speeds and decrease red light running.
Staff Comment: With State approval, the Town has planted and currently maintains median plantings along some State routes in Chapel Hill, the most noteworthy being Fordham Boulevard. There are three existing median segments on NC 54 between US 15-501 and Burning Tree Drive which the Work Group is interested in having landscaped, subject to State specifications.
The median segment between U.S. 15-501 and Hamilton Road is a raised concrete monolithic island. (Please refer to Figure 2.) A portion of this island could be removed and re-constructed to accommodate landscaping. It would be necessary to install curb and gutter and suitable planting material. We estimate that the cost to reconstruct and landscape this median segment would be approximately $44,000.
The median segment between Hamilton Road and Rogerson Drive is a raised median with curb and gutter. (Please refer to Figure 3a & 3b.) The existing soil materials in this median could be utilized for plantings. We estimate that the cost to landscape this median segment would be approximately $16,000.
The median segment between Rogerson Drive and Burning Tree Drive is constructed as a ditch section or depressed median. (Please refer to Figure 4.) The landscaping of depressed medians is typically at the discretion of the NC DOT Division Engineers throughout the Sate. Division 7, which is responsible for this median segment, does not permit landscaping other than groundcover in depressed medians. Therefore, to landscape this area, it would be necessary to create a raised median by installing curb and gutter, drainage facilities, and suitable planting material. We estimate that it would cost approximately $19,000 to landscape this median segment and approximately $44,000 to construct the curb, gutter, and drainage facilities.
We estimate the annual maintenance cost of the three median sections would be $6,000 per year.
If State approval is received, we think that the reconstruction, landscaping, and maintenance of the medians would be the Town’s responsibility.
Medians typically function to separate opposing traffic flows and to control turning movements from intersecting streets and driveways. The placement of vegetation in the medians would not adversely affect these median functions on NC 54. We believe that landscaping the medians could have some impact on NC 54 vehicle speeds, however, it is unlikely that this modification alone would reduce the number of vehicles running red lights at the intersection.
Staff Recommendation: Subject to State approval, we recommend proceeding with the proposed median landscaping at such time that funds are available. We also recommend that the Council request permission to landscape the depressed NC 54 median segment between Rogerson Drive and Burning Tree Drive without having to construct a raised median with curb and gutter.
3.) Construct sidewalks and planting strips along NC 54 from
Burning Tree Drive to Hamilton Road.
Work Group Recommendation: The installation of a continuous sidewalk and planting strip along both sides of NC 54 between Hamilton Road and Burning Tree Drive would provide a safe and appropriate area for pedestrians, rather than use of the existing shoulder.
Staff Comment: The Work Group reviewed our preliminary design plans for a sidewalk project along NC 54 that included this area. The Town and the State have completed the design of this sidewalk improvement project, and we plan to release this project for bid later this fall.
The project limits begin at the Raleigh Road/Country Club Road/South Road intersection and end at the NC 54/Burning Tree Drive intersection. The project would provide continuous sidewalks along both sides of Raleigh Road/NC 54 between Country Club Road and Burning Tree Drive. The estimated project cost is $273,600 ($218,880 of federal funds and $54,720 of local matching funds).
The sidewalks would be offset from the back of curb wherever practical, to provide a grass buffer strip between the roadway and the walkway. Other than in the downtown area, bicyclists are not prohibited from sharing sidewalks with pedestrians. We think that the planned sidewalk improvements will provide a safe and functional travelway for both pedestrians and cyclists.
Staff Recommendation: We are
awaiting final State and federal approval to bid the proposed sidewalk
improvement project. We expect to bid
the project this Fall, with construction being completed by early spring of
2000.
4.) Place rumble strips in all lanes of both NC 54 approaches in
advance of the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection.
Work Group Recommendation: The placement of “rumble strips” on all NC 54 lanes approaching the intersection could provide visual and auditory signals to drivers approaching the intersection.
Staff Comment: The pavement treatments on Hillsborough Street, and on Erwin Road near the Town Limits, were placed in response to concerns regarding vehicle speeds. (Please refer to Figures 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.) We are currently evaluating these pavement treatments for effectiveness in making drivers aware of their speed. The use of similar pavement treatment on NC 54 would have to be reviewed and approved by the State. The Work Group recommends a pavement treatment for NC 54 similar to that presented in Figure 7.
We think that the pavement treatment and signage placed on Hillsborough Street are effective at making drivers aware of their speed. (Please refer to Figures 5, 6, and 7.) During our field observations, we observe drivers braking as they traveled over each location on Hillsborough Street, and the signs supplement the message to “slow down”. (Please refer to Figure 8.)
For an initial period following installation, the pavement treatment on Erwin Road appeared to be effective in reducing speeds. (Please refer to Figure 9.) However, drivers have become accustomed to the pavement treatments over time, and generally do not slow down much anymore at the Erwin Road location. Based on our field evaluations, we do not think that the pavement treatments on Erwin Road are as effective as those on Hillsborough Street. We think this may also be the case on a high volume road such as NC 54.
If State approval is received to place this type of pavement treatment on NC 54, we think that this modification would have to be installed and maintained at the Town’s expense. The State would not accept responsibility for the placement of or damage to this type of pavement treatment. We estimate that the proposed pavement treatments would cost approximately $15,000 at this intersection. We think the treatment would need to be replaced approximately every five years due to traffic wear.
Staff Recommendation:
Based on our field evaluations, we do not think that the rumble strips
would have a long term effect in reducing speeds at this location. We would expect drivers that travel this
segment of NC 54 on a routine basis to become accustomed to the pavement
treatments over time and generally not slow down much. However, we do think that the rumble strips
could make drivers aware that they are approaching an intersection. Therefore, we do not oppose their
installation and, subject to State approval, we recommend proceeding with the
proposed rumble strip installation at such time that funds become available.
5.) Re-evaluate signing
along NC 54 near and at the intersection.
Work Group Recommendation: This area of NC 54 is cluttered with information, guidance, advance warning, and regulatory signs that can confuse drivers. (Please refer to Figure 10a.)
Staff Comment: We met with NC DOT representatives to discuss possible changes in the existing signing along NC 54 following our evaluation of changes which could minimize sign clutter and confusion for motorists. We identified certain groupings of directional route signs which seemed redundant. We also noted that some sign duplication was necessary due to tree canopies obstructing drivers’ views of sign arrays at certain locations. (Please refer to Figure 10b and 10c.)
Staff Recommendation: We will continue discussions with the State in an effort to reduce sign redundancy and clutter on this segment of NC 54.
6.) Create a pedestrian refuge in the median at the intersection
by widening and extending the median into the crosswalk with proper curb cuts.
Work Group Recommendation: Create an extension of the median to provide refuge for pedestrians who find it difficult to cross NC 54 at this intersection within the time provided by the traffic signals.
Staff Comment: We agree with the Work Group that median refuges can improve safety conditions for pedestrians. Pedestrian refuges in medians are typically used in areas where the crossing distance is so long that the necessary signal timing requirements would create significant delays for traffic.
To provide adequate median pedestrian refuges at this intersection, the median would have to be widened and extended past the existing crosswalk. We are concerned that creating a pedestrian refuge in the existing, narrow NC 54 medians at this intersection could create unnecessary exposure of pedestrians to traffic. To accommodate pedestrians in wheelchairs, current standards identify 6 feet as the minimum width necessary to provide adequate pedestrian refuge in a median. On a road such as NC 54, with high traffic volumes, we think that it would be necessary to widen the median to a 10-foot width to provide for safe pedestrian storage in the median.
To widen the NC 54 medians adequately at this intersection, we would need to either narrow the adjacent travel lanes or widen the entire roadway cross-section. (Please refer to Figure 11.) The lane widths are already minimal and the NC DOT Division 7 Office informed us that they would not approve further narrowing of the travel lanes. We do not think that widening the road cross-section to accommodate the pedestrian refuge is a feasible alternative.
Extending the NC 54 medians into the existing crosswalks would restrict the turning movements of large delivery, service, and emergency vehicles. We are also concerned about how to detect a pedestrian stopped in a median refuge, which could potentially leave a pedestrian stranded. At the request of the Work Group, we evaluated current pedestrian signal timings at this intersection. Our study was conducted on April 23, 1999 (Friday) during the PM rush hour. We timed the crossings of the following types of pedestrians:
Average Crossing Time
A parent pushing a stroller 22.38 sec
A parent pushing a stroller and walking with a child 26.35 sec
A person in a wheelchair 31.67 sec
We timed the different types of pedestrian crossings in each direction, and the average crossing time is presented above. We determined that each type had adequate time to cross NC 54 at this intersection. This evaluation, and those from previous studies, indicate that current traffic signal timings provide an adequate pedestrian crossing time.
Current pedestrian signal timings provide 10 seconds of a steady “WALK” indication, 26 seconds of a “DON’T WALK” indication to clear pedestrians from the crosswalk, and 6.7 seconds for amber and red indications on the traffic signals, which may also be utilized by pedestrians. This is a maximum of 42.7 seconds of protected pedestrian crossing time per signal cycle on NC 54.
Staff Recommendation: We do not recommend creating pedestrian refuges in the NC 54 medians. However, an issue that was discussed by the Work Group, and associated with their recommendation, was clarification of the pedestrian signal indications (“WALK” and “DON’T WALK”) and their interpretation by pedestrians. We suggest placing a sign at each corner of this intersection that will explain the meaning of the indications. (Please refer to Figure 12) The State has approved the use of such signs, and we expect to install these signs within the next sixty days.
7.) Designate the segment of NC 54 at the intersection as a School Zone.
Work Group Recommendation: Designating a segment of NC 54 at the intersection as a 25 mph School Zone with overhead flashing beacons would increase driver awareness of school children crossing at the intersection.
Staff Comment: The Town does not have unilateral authority to designate a School Zone on a State road such as NC 54. The Town can only create a School Zone on a State road with the concurrence of the State. To be designated a School Zone, the State typically requires that school property abut the road and have a main point of ingress/egress located within that frontage. The Glenwood Elementary School campus does not abut NC 54 and access to the campus is via Hamilton Road, not directly from NC 54. However, the State is reviewing the work group recommendation and will provide a response in writing.
Engineering Department Recommendation: The Glenwood Elementary School campus is not adjacent to NC 54 and is not visible to drivers on NC 54. Therefore, we do not think that a School Zone would be appropriate at this location.
At our request, the Division 7 Office installed an additional School Crossing Ahead warning sign in the median on each NC 54 approach to the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection. (Please refer to Figure 13) The use of this sign is intended to advise drivers in advance of school crossings not adjacent to school grounds, as is the case at this location.
Manager’s Recommendation: Although Glenwood School is not immediately adjacent to NC 54, it is in close proximity. In this case, establishing a School Zone on NC 54 would be reasonable. Subject to State approval, I recommend that NC 54 in the vicinity of Hamilton Road be designated as a School Zone.
8.) Provide two crossing guards during school crossing periods;
Provide consistent backup for crossing guards, in case of absence; Provide
uniforms, equipment, and proper training for crossing guards.
Work Group Recommendation: Two crossing guards are necessary for a multi-lane roadway school crossing such as NC 54 to be safe and effective. Also, back-ups for absent crossing guards, must be available consistently, and all school crossing guards should be trained and provided with appropriate attire and equipment that identifies them as crossing guards.
Chapel Hill Police Department Comment: The School system is providing bus services for Glenwood Elementary School students located in the Glen Lenox and Little Creek neighborhoods. However, students are still permitted to walk to and from the school campus (crossing at the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection) if accompanied by an adult. The School requires that a student’s parents contact the school and identify that an adult will accompany the student.
We spoke with the Principal of the Glenwood Elementary School, and she advised us that she had not been contacted by the parents of any students from the Glen Lenox and Little Creek neighborhoods regarding permission for the students to walk to and from school.
If a decision is made to utilize crossing guards at this intersection, we agree with the Work Group recommendation that two crossing guards are necessary to provide proper service. We estimate that it would cost the Town $4,400 per school year to have two crossing guards stationed at this intersection.
The Police Department currently provides a reflective vest and paddle for the crossing guards, and rain gear if necessary. This equipment is uniform among all crossing guards. The Police Department will arrange to have the reflective vests and rain gear stenciled with the words “Crossing Guard” for better identification, and will provide a hat for crossing guards as well.
It is Police Department policy that a police officer will serve as a back-up crossing guard in the event the regularly assigned guard is unable to perform their duties. Providing safe school crossing is a high priority for the Police Department. However, there are circumstances that may sometimes prevent an officer from being available for guard duty, such as miscommunication, lack of notification regarding absence, limited manpower, all available officers responding to emergency calls, etc.
Regarding proper training for crossing guards, we are not aware of a formal training program for crossing guards in the State of North Carolina. Typically, such training is the responsibility of the jurisdiction responsible for hiring and supervising crossing guards, which in this case is the Police Department. When a crossing guard is hired, that person receives training from the Police Department. After completing this training, an officer is initially assigned to work with a new crossing guard to assure that the duties are performed properly, and to address any questions that the new crossing guard may have.
Chapel Hill Police Department Recommendation: Bus service is being provided for students from the Glen Lenox and Little Creek neighborhoods. We think that crossing the intersection in a school bus is safer than walking, because a student is removed from direct exposure to vehicular traffic at the intersection. As long as the School system provides bus service for students from these neighborhoods, we do not think that crossing guards are necessary at this intersection.
Manager’s Recommendation: Students should be able to walk to school whenever possible, if desired, and along the safest route. Therefore, I recommend assignment of two crossing guards at the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection.
9.) Require Adult & Child Pedestrian Education Program for all
Chapel Hill-Carrboro elementary schools.
Work Group Recommendation: It would be beneficial if the School system were required to provide an educational program that would instruct all elementary students and their parents about pedestrian safety.
Staff Comment: The Town cannot require that the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School System provide an adult and child pedestrian education program for all elementary students.
A program concerning school bus safety is provided by the School System. However, the Schools do not provide a program that is specifically focused on pedestrian education.
Staff Recommendation: That the Town Council direct the Town Manager to prepare a letter from the Council to the School system supporting this recommendation and requesting that the School system consider establishing a pedestrian education program for students and their parents.
10.) Provide commitment from the Town to enforce speeding, red light running violations, and failure to yield to pedestrians.
Work Group Recommendation: A strong commitment from the Town to enforce speeding, red light running violations, and failure to yield to pedestrians could reduce the number of these types of violations and could improve pedestrian safety.
Chapel Hill Police Department Comment: Based on Police Department records, a total of 5132 citations were issued Townwide in 1998. Of those 5132 citations, 76 speeding, four red light running, and 28 non-speeding citations were issued along this segment of NC 54. From January 1, 1999 to August 31, 1999, 3459 citations were issued Townwide. Of those 3459 citations, 34 speeding, ten red light running, and 24 non-speeding citations were issued along this segment of NC 54.
The Police Department Traffic Squad regularly schedules this segment of NC 54 for patrol and enforcement of traffic regulations. However, time spent in this area by the Traffic Squad and regular patrol officers is subject to demands in other areas of Chapel Hill. The Police Department spends as much time as possible in areas requiring exceptional enforcement. NC 54 is one of those areas.
Staff Comment: State law does not presently authorize Chapel Hill to utilize electronic surveillance devices to monitor and cite drivers for red light running violations. We are collecting information and data regarding application of this technology and procedures utilized by other municipalities. We will report to the Council this winter with our findings and recommendations. Depending on Council and State legislative actions, electronic traffic surveillance could be utilized at this and other locations in the future.
staff Recommendation: That this location continue to be a high priority for traffic enforcement, and that police resources be utilized here to the maximum extent possible in relation to Townwide needs.
11.) Provide pedestrian signal heads at all four corners.
Work Group Recommendation: The Work Group believes that pedestrian signal heads should be installed to guide pedestrians crossing Hamilton Road.
Staff Comment: The Town does not have unilateral authority to make this modification to the traffic signal located at the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection, which is part of the State road system.
We have discussed this traffic signal modification with NC DOT staff, and they think that the request is reasonable. Before this traffic signal modification can be made, a crosswalk on the Hamilton Road southbound approach should be installed to properly identify this crossing, and appropriate wheel chair ramps should also be installed. This work is already underway, and we expect the traffic signal modifications to be completed by the State within 90 days.
12.) Add pedestrian-activated all red signal
cycle with no turn on red.
(Alternatives) Institute
dedicated left turn cycle for Hamilton Road in Both Directions
Institute
no turn on red.
Institute
no U-turn.
Work Group Recommendation: Removing, or partially removing, the potential for conflict between pedestrians and vehicles would make the intersection safer for pedestrians.
Staff Comment on adding all red signal cycle: We do not think that a pedestrian-activated all red signal cycle with no turn on red is justifiable based on pedestrian counts and pedestrian/vehicle accident history at this location. During a 12 hour period (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.) on November 10, 1999, we counted the following:
11 pedestrians crossing NC 54 on the west side of the intersection
8 pedestrians crossing NC 54 on the east side of the intersection
24 pedestrians crossing Hamilton Road on the north side of the intersection
14 pedestrians crossing Hamilton Road on the south side of the intersection
Our review of the Chapel Hill Police Department records indicated that no pedestrian/vehicle collisions have occurred over the past three years in the intersection.
An exclusive pedestrian phase with no turns on red is typically used at an intersection in central business districts (such as a downtown area) with heavy pedestrian volumes that block vehicle turning movements and/or consistent occurrence of accidents involving pedestrians in the crosswalks conflicting with vehicles. Neither of these is the case at this intersection.
We have analyzed the impact of the proposed change on traffic signal operations. Creating an exclusive pedestrian phase would decrease the existing intersection operations from a level of service C to a level of service F. Level of service D is the Town’s and the State’s lowest acceptable operating level of service for a signalized intersection.
Staff Comment on no turn on red: Prohibiting right turns on red is not justified for the same reasons as noted above. There is not a high volume of right turning vehicles at the intersection to conflict with the low number of pedestrians crossing the intersection. Most of the right turns-on red occur during off-peak hours when both vehicular and pedestrian volumes are low. During peak hours, vehicles turning right at the intersection must often wait due to vehicles travelling through the intersection.
Staff Comment on no U-turn: Under current regulations, drivers on NC 54 may perform U-turns at the intersection under a green signal indication. During this period, pedestrians are shown a “DON’T WALK” indication. Pedestrians should not be in the crosswalks on NC 54 at this time. The conflicts between NC 54 vehicles performing U-turns and pedestrians crossing NC 54 would occur only when drivers run a red light or when pedestrians ignore the “DON’T WALK” indication. If U-turns were prohibited for drivers on NC 54 at this intersection, they would be forced to the next possible locations which are unsignalized intersections.
Staff Recommendation: We do not recommend a pedestrian-activated all red signal phase with no turn on red for the traffic signal operations at the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection due to the detrimental impact it would have on intersection traffic operations.
We also do not recommend instituting no turn on red and/or no U-turn restrictions at this intersection. Based on current traffic engineering practices, the intersection characteristics do not justify implementing these restrictions. These types of turning movements must be continuously enforced to be effective. If an officer is not present to enforce the regulation, drivers often perform these turning movements regardless of signing. Such a situation could actually create safety problems rather than deter them.
Subject to State approval, we recommend implementing protected/permitted left turns, which would reduce the number of pedestrian/vehicle conflicts.
13.) Dedicate outside lanes on NC 54 for the
exclusive use of bicycles and buses.
(Alternative) Create bicycle lanes in both directions.
Work Group Recommendation: Designating the outside lanes on NC 54 for the exclusive use of bicycles and buses, or creating bicycle lanes in both directions, would create a buffer between pedestrians and vehicles.
Staff Comment on bus/bike lanes: An exclusive bus/bike travel lane as recommended by the Work Group is typically created to serve an area with numerous established bus routes and stops along a corridor, and traffic flow along the corridor is so heavy that buses cannot maintain a normal schedule due to delays.
The Town currently has only one bus route, the S route, serving for this portion of NC 54. Operating hours are during weekday work hours and some early evening hours. The Transportation Department also provides Tar Heel Express services to the NC 54 lot park-and-ride during special events. The Triangle Transit Authority has a route that runs along this segment of NC 54 during weekday work hours, some early evening hours, and weekends.
During our studies of this area, we observed bus operations during peak and off-peak periods. We did not observe buses experiencing difficulty in merging into or out of traffic flow along NC 54. We noted an average of three bicyclists on NC 54 during morning and evening peak period. It is difficult to justify dedicating the outside lanes on NC 54 specifically for bicycle and buses, based on our observations.
We have analyzed the impact of the proposed change on traffic operations. Creating exclusive bus/bike travel lanes would decrease the number of through travel lanes at the signalized intersections from 3 to 2, which would decrease the intersection capacity. The existing operations at the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection would be reduced from a level of service C to a level of service F. A level of service D is the Town’s and the State’s lowest acceptable operating level of service for a signalized intersection.
Staff Comment on bicycle lanes in both directions: To create exclusive
bike lanes along this section of NC 54, one option that we considered would be
to narrow the adjacent travel lanes. (Please refer to the attached Figure
11) As previously discussed, the
existing travel lanes are already at the minimum acceptable width. The NC DOT Division 7 Office has advised us
that they will not approve narrower lanes.
We believe that the only feasible way to install bike lanes along NC 54 would be to widen the roadway. Constructing such a project would have significant impact and cost. The joint Town-State sidewalk project discussed previously will be available for use by both pedestrians and bicyclists. We think that this sidewalk project will meet the needs of both pedestrians and bicyclists in this area.
Staff Recommendation: We do not recommend dedicating the outside lanes on NC 54 specifically for the exclusive use of bicycles and buses. We think that the overall impact would be detrimental to the operations of the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection.
We do not recommend creating exclusive bike lanes along this segment of NC 54. We think that the upcoming sidewalk project for this area will address the needs of both pedestrians and bicyclists.
The following table summarizes the proposed recommendations and their estimated costs:
|
|
Estimated Cost |
Estimated Annual Maintenance Cost |
|
Create textured and colored crosswalks |
$25,000 |
$8,700 |
|
Landscape the NC 54 medians: |
|
$6,000 |
|
from US 15-501 to Hamilton Road |
$43,300 |
|
|
Hamilton Road to Rogerson Drive |
$15,500 |
|
|
Rogerson Drive to Burning Tree Drive (a) |
$19,000 |
|
|
Rogerson Drive to Burning Tree Drive (b) |
$43,400 |
|
|
Place rumble strips in all lanes of both NC 54 approaches in advance of the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection |
$15,000 |
$3,000 (c) |
|
Provide two crossing guards during school crossing periods |
|
$4,400 |
Note: (a) Landscaping only.
(b) Constructing curb and gutter with landscaping.
(c) Replacement every five years at cost of $15,000.
We think that a possible funding source for all of the Work Group recommendations directly related to NC54 improvements may be the Surface Transportation Program - Direct Allocation, under the federally funded TEA 21 program. This program requires a 20% local government cost share.
The proposed improvements would first need to be approved by the State for installation. Then they would be brought to the Transportation Advisory Committee for funding consideration. It is our understanding that these projects could not be considered for Direct Allocation funding until Fiscal Year 2000-2001 due to other projects already identified for currently available Direct Allocation funding.
Other possible funding alternatives include the Town’s Capital Improvements Program and approximately $35,000 currently available for “traffic calming” projects Townwide.
CONCLUSION
We think that the Work Group has prepared a comprehensive list of potential improvement opportunities for the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection and vicinity. Based on our analysis, several of the recommendations would require State approval for implementation because they would affect NC 54, which is a State roadway.
We generally concur with the Work Group that pedestrian safety and mobility can be improved at and around the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection.
We suggest that the Town Council formally endorse those recommendations it so desires and forward a resolution to the State requesting funding and implementation of the proposed improvements.
That the Town Council adopt the attached resolution endorsing pedestrian safety and mobility improvement recommendations at and in the vicinity of the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection.
8.) Create a pedestrian refuge in the median at the intersection by widening and extending the median into the crosswalk with proper curb cuts.
9.) Add pedestrian-activated all red signal cycle with no turn on red.
[or]
9.) Institute no turn on red.
10.) Institute no U-turn
11.) Institute dedicated left turn cycle for Hamilton Road in both directions.
12.) Dedicate outside lanes on NC 54 for exclusive use of bicycles and buses.
[or}
12). Create bicycle lanes in both directions.
1. Work Group Report (June 28, 1999) (p. 18)
2. Figure 1 (p. 39)
3. Figure 2 (p. 40)
4. Figure 3a (p. 41)
5. Figure 3b (p. 42)
6. Figure 4 (p. 43)
7. Figure 5 (p. 44)
8. Figure 6 (p. 45)
9. Figure 7 (p. 46)
10. Figure 8 (p. 47)
11. Figure 9 (p. 48)
12. Figure 10a (p. 49)
13. Figure 10b (p. 50)
14. Figure 10c (p. 51)
15. Figure 11 (p. 52)
16. Figure 12 (p. 53)
17. Figure 13 (p. 54)
A RESOLUTION ENDORSING AND DIRECTING THE TOWN MANAGER TO SEEK STATE APPROVAL OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND MOBILITY AT AND IN THE VICINITY OF THE INTERSECTION OF NC 54 AND HAMILTON ROAD IN CHAPEL HILL (99-9-27/R-11)
WHEREAS, the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill is concerned about pedestrian safety and mobility at and in the vicinity of the intersection of NC 54 and Hamilton Road; and
WHEREAS, the Council has received recommendations from the “Special Work Group to Study the NC 54/Hamilton Road Intersection Area” which propose measures to mitigate area residents’ concerns about pedestrian safety and mobility at and in the vicinity of this intersection; and
WHEREAS, the Council has received a report including Town staff comments about the Work Group recommendations; and
WHEREAS several of the Work Group recommendations would require State approval for implementation; and
WHEREAS, it is the Council’s desire to have the State review and approve implementation of improvements at and in the vicinity of the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Chapel Hill that the Council endorses the following improvement recommendations from the “Special Work Group to Study the NC 54/Hamilton Road Intersection Area” which require State approval:
1) Create textured and colored crosswalks.
2) Landscape the NC 54 median from US 15-501 to Burning Tree Drive.
3) Construct sidewalks and planting strips along NC 54 from Burning Tree Drive to Hamilton Road.
4) Place rumble strips in all lanes of both NC 54 approaches in advance of the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection.
5) Re-evaluate signing along NC 54 near and at the intersection.
6) Designate the segment of NC 54 at the intersection as a School Zone.
7) Provide pedestrian signal heads at all four corners.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to seek State approval of the above listed improvement recommendations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to proceed promptly with the following improvement recommendations which are already in progress and/or do not require State approval:
A. Construct sidewalks along both sides of NC 54.
B. Work with the State to reduce sign clutter and confusion along NC 54 in the vicinity of Hamilton Road.
C. Provide uniform clothing and equipment to clearly designate school crossing guards, and make every reasonable effort to assure that backups are available in case of crossing guard absences.
D. Submit a letter on behalf of the Town Council to the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board requesting that consideration be given to developing a pedestrian education program in the schools.
E. Provide consistent traffic enforcement efforts at and in the vicinity of the NC 54/Hamilton Road intersection to the maximum extent possible with available resources.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council directs the Manager to identify possible funding sources and to seek necessary funding to implement all improvement recommendations if and when they are approved by the State.
This is the 27th day of September, 1999.