Memorandum 17-095 Greatland Street Improvements

Memorandum 17-095

TO:                        Katie Koester - City Manager

FROM:                 Carey Meyer – Public Works Director

DATE:                   June 19, 2017

SUBJECT:          Greatland Street Improvement Recommendations

                                Answers to Council Questions

As the City Council discussed the alternatives to extending Greatland Street, seeking a consensus regarding  Ordinance 17-05, the Council requested answers to several questions:

What do property owners potentially affected by the project think about the idea of a SAD and the associated costs?

Whether it is the property owner most financially affected by the creation of a SAD (Valentin Caspaar - Save-U-More), or the other lot owners with frontage on the proposed project(s); none expressed interest in being assessed for their share of the cost of any road improvements (as would be the case under the HART SAD policy).

Will pedestrian access be maintained under all alternatives?

Option A (Extending Greatland Directly North) would provide sidewalks on each side of extended Greatland Street up to Pioneer Avenue (similar to what exists on the current Greatland Street improvement.

Option B and C (which vacates the northern portion of Greatland Street right-of-way) would include a sidewalk along the new road connection up to the Pioneer Avenue at Bartlett and a pedestrian access (paved or gravel trail) in an easement within the vacated Greatland Street right-of-way.

Can a traffic engineer look at the alternatives and provide recommendations?

Since all of the intersections that would be created under any of the options being considered are on State roads; I contacted the ADOT Regional Traffic Engineer – Scott Thomas to get his opinion regarding the alternatives. He had the following comments:

From email received 2/24/17:

“From a traffic perspective, each of these through connections raises the possibility of another traffic signal”. (in other words – new Greatland connection at Pioneer or at Main would in the future create possibility of the need for a signal)

“I would recommend a focus on Pioneer/Bartlett, and Pioneer/Main”.  (this traffic engineer sees advantages to Option B or C)

“Greatland/Main and Greatland/Sterling are concerns that are likely resolved through directional turn lanes”.  (under option A, to forestall need for signals or the need to limit turning movements, left and right turn lanes could be necessary on all approaches)

“Option A could force lots of doglegged turning movements and calls for conflict reduction.  This could lead to raised median and restricted movements at each end of Greatland, but not more signals – too poor at keeping Pioneer or Sterling moving”. (future increases in left turn onto and from Greatland will result in raised medians on Pioneer and Sterling Highway, which could eliminate these turning movements)  

“Greatland’s proximity to Main means it will likely be downgrades for turns by DOT/PF in the event of too much traffic or turns”.  (in the future under Option B, without a signal at Main/Greatland, left hand turns likely will be prohibited from and onto Main Street.)

“Option B does a good job of focusing and maximizing potential future signals at or near ¼ mile, a goal for minimum signal spacing.  Here we are getting down to 970 to 1000 feet on Pioneer – an option that could work but would be a last resort signal”.  (signals to close together create problems; Option B minimizes intersections and keeps the ones being created sufficiently separated)

“Option B does a very good job of making use of future signals – at Main Street soon and at Bartlett in the long term”.

“Option B also does a good job of deprioritizing “bypass” of signals and congestion at other locations, and instead creates a more likely route to emphasize non-motorized traffic connectivity.  More of a “complete street”. 

“Would evaluate All Way Stop warrants for Option B and Main.   Possibly easily installed with STOP signs.     Basically, if all 3 legs are equal demand and gaps on Main become poor, then it is a candidate”. (under Option B, current traffic would allow four-way stop at Pioneer and Greatland; three way stops at Main Street and Greatland)

“Also – ADOT does not recommend vacation in general if you see the potential for drainage or utility use of the Greatland ROW.    It does not have to be a road to be useful as a public ROW.  Especially if you are constrained elsewhere by transportation and need a new place for utilities, drainage, walking other uses”. (Under Option b or C, Greatland Avenue south of Pioneer would not be totally vacated, utility easements, pedestrian access and drainage corridor would remain)

What about right hand turns only on each side of Greatland.

Justifications for right or left turn bays would have to be evaluated during design, but preliminary indications are that based on current traffic volumes, separate turning lanes will not be needed and all turning movements can be accommodated at a reasonable level of service.