Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 06/26/1991SHELBURNE ROAD WORKSHOP 26 JUNE 1991 The State Agency of Transportation sponsored a meeting on 26 June 1991, at 7:30 p.m., in a Conference Room at Howard Johnson (Shelburne Rd.) to present plans for the Route 7 widening project. Those in Attendance: Gordon MacArthur, Larry Wood, Tom Leakey, John Perkins, Vt. Agency of Transportation; John Dinklage, Bob Chittenden, Bill Cimonetti, South Burlington City Council; Charles Hafter, S. Burlington City Manager; Joe Weith, S. Burlington Planner; Dick Ward, S. Burlington Zoning Administrator; Ken Albert, Sally Martel, Shelburne Selectboard; Hilda White, Shelburne Planning Commission; Craig Leiner, Regional Planning Commission; Lisa Scagliotti, Burlington Free Press; Howard Stark, Lake Champlain Regional Chamber of Commerce; Chris & Brenda Bissonette, Gloria & Norm Secord, Jeff Savoie, Bruce Thibaud, Kenneth & Jeanette Mann; Alice Winn, Jon Soter, Doug Hoar, Bill Savoie, Bill Rust, Brian Waxlor, Jack & Bill Shearer, Skip Farrell, David & Janice Duchaine, Rite & Al Reyes, Ernest & Janet Marcelino, Hazel Prindle, Michael Griffin, David Melincoff, Paul Bernier, Robert Larson, Mary Evslin, Charles Bissonette, Butch, Gene, & Ken Cartulano, Bertha & Jules Chartrand, Rick Poirier, C. Connors, Alexander & David Lewis, William Andrus, Robert Kelly, Frederica Edelman, David Eads, Betty Laroche, Frank Pichon, Peter Coleman, Thomas Nold, Soug & Gail Wyand, Ellen Johnson, Shelly Myers, Lot Cheng, Frankie King, Janice Jackson, Ann Dutton, Tom Glaser, James Pratt, Ed Koehler, Elaine Park, Dorothy & Allen Cole, Brian Precoort, Teresa Hadd, Joyce Ahlson, Stephen Knight, Jay Austin, Robert & Barbara Schumacher, Richard Hampton, Mark Blanchette, Gary Nevers, Harry Clayton, Nat Lash, Dave Bailey, John Ondorchik Mr. Albert stated the purpose of the meeting as an opportunity for the public, especially the business community, to discuss the Shelburne Rd. project with state officials and officials of South Burlington and Shelburne. He noted the Shelburne Rd. widening is the number one project of the MPO for the Chittenden County area. He said he personally wants the project to be a success for users of the road and for the business owners. Mr. Albert noted that many people don't ever go to Shelburne Rd. or don't turn into businesses because of the fear of traffic. He said the road has to serve all interests: through traffic, trucks, shoppers, business owners, etc., and it does not do this now. There is a need, he said, to give the area a good, positive identification. Mr. Dinklage said there is no need to debate whether Shelburne Rd. needs to be widened; the issue is how. The area is a growth center, and it is the desire of both communities to plan for residential and business success. Mr. Dinklage stressed that both governing boards support the concept that is planned. He said this meeting is very important in moving the project along as it is very important to have community support. Mr. Dinklage said there have been citizens groups participating in two road projects, and this has helped move the projects along. Gordon MacArthur reviewed the history of the project. Shelburne Rd. is under state jurisdiction and needs to provide access to all land uses. The state began looking at the road in the early '70's because of growing congestion. They felt something would have to be done within 20 years. Once the decision to move ahead had been made, the firm of Erdman-Anthony was hired as project designers. The first public hearing was held in Shelburne in October, 1986. Since that time, there have been many meetings, many revisions. Traffic studies for the project began in 1988. In 1990, the decision was made to try to incorporate the LaPlatte River Bridge into the project, if possible. If it can't be incorporated, the bridge will still need to be done, and the state is hoping not to have to tear up the road twice. In August, 1990, a joint meeting of the Shelburne and S. Burlington governing boards was held on the project. In November, 1990, Shelburne went on record as supporting the LaPlatte River Bridge. The project is now in the conceptual plan stage. Plans will undergo revision, but there is now an idea of what the project will look like. From this point, there are several steps in design to go. All plans will be reviewed by the Agency and by the two communities. It is hoped the project will be put to bid in late 1994 and construction will begin in 1995. Mr. MacArthur noted it takes a long time to respond to all concerns including those of federal and state agencies, local governments, and citizens, and he stressed that every effort will be made to satisfy all concerns. Larry Wood noted that responses from Shelburne and S. Burlington have been pretty much the same. In 1986 both communities said that Shelburne Rd. was a major concern. Since that time, there has been a good working relationship between the communities and the Agency of Transportation. Mr. Wood noted the project was originally a 5-lane proposal, but Shelburne was very concerned about this. The concept now is for a median. A major concern is safety. In one year, there were 8 deaths on Shelburne's portion of Rt. 7. There are many accidents involving vehicles and pedestrians. A major concern is to deal with access management in an attempt to make the road "friendly" for all users. A landscape architect has looked at the design in terms of function and aesthetics. Craig Leiner discussed the access management theory. He showed a series of overheads depicting conflict points of a typical 4-way intersection and a T-intersection, and noted that every driveway is an intersection. He also showed graphs on the effect of access control on accidents. Then he showed slides of Shelburne Rd. where there is now uncontrolled access with many driveways per mile. He indicated turning maneuver problems and travel demand on side streets. David Raphael then showed slides depicting the use of medians. He noted there are some fine aesthetic places on Shelburne Rd. and showed some concept slides of what the road could possibly look like. Mr. Dinklage then hosted a question/answer session: Ms. Prindle asked about traffic counts on Rt. 7 for various times of day. Mr. MacArthur said the projection for 1993 is that traffic will range from 1550 cars per hour at the north end to 677 per hour at the south end in ONE direction. The Agency anticipates this will be increased by 50% by the year 2013. Selectman Martel asked how "set in concrete" the plan is. Mr. MacArthur said there are many variations and modifications that can happen all the way to construction. At the time, the Agency, the MPO, Regional Planning and the governing bodies of the two communities feel this will provide the best and safest traffic service on the road. He said there is just too much traffic to handle with a 5-lane scenario. The need is to eliminate the uncontrolled left turn potential that exists now in order to reduce traffic conflict points. He felt a 5-lane road would be much worse than what exists now. A citizen asked what will trigger changes and how citizens will know about these changes. Mr. MacArthur said that there will be meetings with all property owners. When individual concerns can be accommodated, this will be done. Property owners will be informed of all changes. Plans will be available at all stages at municipal offices of both towns, at the MPO, Regional Planning, and at the Agency offices in Montpelier. The question of funding was then raised. Mr. MacArthur said funding will be shared between the federal and state governments. Under the present funding scenario, 95% would be federally funded and 5% state. Congress is, however, now considering changes in this formula. He anticipated that a 75%-25% split would be a "worst case." Doug Wyand asked why a 5-lane concept was originally proposed and has now been scrapped. Mr. MacArthur said the situation has been re-evaluated from the points of view of accidents, traffic volumes, etc. For safety and public convenience, the median provides the best situation. Traffic growth in Chittenden County surprises officials every eyar. Growth is phenomenal, and the 5-lane concept can't address this growth. Tom Nold asked if anyone has looked at the impact on business during and after construction. Mr. MacArthur said they have to rely on information as to what happens in other states as Vermont doesn't have this kind of experience. He said construction will make it difficult to get in and out of businesses. The state will try to mitigate this and will require the contractor to make available an access to each business during construction. There may possibly be a few minutes in a day what that is not possible, and in that case access will be maintained via an abutting property. Mr. MacArthur said that from what they have seen in other areas of the northeast with this kind of road, the net effect on business will be positive, possibly even an improvement. He cited the Amherst/Northampton area of Massachusetts where this concept has worked very well. Mr. Leiner read from the Highway Research Report which noted the construction phase is the most severe; however, in one area after the new road was in place, business recovered and in one year was above the pre-construction level. He said the new road was a stimulus to new growth which began immediately after construction. This observation is supported by the index of sales, sales volumes, etc. for different kinds of businesses. David Eads asked if there can be assurance that after the road is built traffic will run at least as smoothly as now. He felt more traffic lights could make things worse. Mr. MacArthur said no one can assure that with absolute certainty, but by reducing the number of conflict points which now create a "free-for-all" situation, there can be an improvement in service both to main line traffic and to those trying to get onto Shelburne Rd. The traffic light system will be coordinated to let cars go through several lights without being stopped. It will be modified according to need. He felt he could say there will be an improvement. Mr. Dinklage noted that S. Burlington has wrestled with the concept of a Southern Connector. There are 30,000 cars a day where the road intersects I-189. At the Shelburne town line there are 10,000 cars a day. This means 20,000 cars a day are generated in S. Burlington. He felt there had to be sensitivity to residents of the towns, people who want go get on and off Shelburne Rd. It is very dangerous today. He stressed that the road cannot address only the needs of those who pass through the two communities. Mr. Eads asked what will be done about signage for businesses. He said he understands the road has to be improved but it has to serve both residents and tourists. He noted that drivers will have to go through two lights to double back to his business. Mr. Dinklage responded that S. Burlington is encountering the same concerns on Dorset St. He noted these projects are breaking new ground on the issue of signage. A committee is working on this for Dorset St. and he hoped that what they come up with will also be applicable for Shelburne Rd. Mr. Clayton said he hates jug handles. He said if there is going to be a median, he felt there should be a left turn every block that gives access to businesses on either side. Mr. MacArthur said a road of this width doesn't provide enough room to turn a vehicle around. He did note there are some left turns that will exist from a left turn center lane. Mr. Hampton was concerned with a median that is an "eyesore." He also noted potential drainage problems. He said he hoped the concept worked but doubted it would. He couldn't envision people turning around and coming back to a business. Mr. Dinklage said that the question of maintenance is a good one and has already been discussed. There is, he said, a will on the part of both communities to work with the state to provide a greater level of maintenance than the State usually provides. It is the intention to keep the road looking good. Ms. Edelman asked about snow removal on the medial and about the speed limit on the road. Mr. MacArthur said generally snow will be plowed to the right hand of the road and if that interferes with a business, the snow will be trucked away. He said the road will be configures so that it will be safe to operate a vehicle at 50 miles per hour, but that doesn't mean this will be the speed limit. He couldn't imagine any part of the road would be more than 40 mph, and felt it could be even less. Mr. Wyand said that he had been told there would be mountable curbs for emergency vehicles and asked what would happen when the medians are covered with snow. Mr. MacArthur acknowledged there may be a time when it will be difficult to get a vehicle across a median but stressed that no snow will be added to medians. He also noted that situation exists today and there has been no indication from emergency vehicle operators that this is a problem. He stressed that the situation on the road today is such that more people are injured because of the fifth lane. Mr. Nold asked why Shelburne needs the same kind of road as S. Burlington if there are only 1/3 the number of cars. Mr. MacArthur said the best answer is that 20 years ago S. Burlington had only 10,000 cars per day. He said they are trying to build a road that will serve for 20 years. Growth in the past 20 years has been off the scale, totally unpredicted. There is still undeveloped land in Shelburne, and it is anticipated that growth will go out from the hub of Burlington. There is every indication that Shelburne is the next area for development and the aim is to build a road to serve that growth for 20 years. Mr. Soter asked what the level of service is at Shelburne Rd. near Nordic Ford and also if there are any stop-gap improvements planned before the major construction. Mr. MacArthur said the level of service varies from F (the lowest) to B, depending on the time of day, the day of the week, and the season. Generally, it is between D and F over a major portion of the day. He said the operator of a vehicle has little control over his/her destiny. As to stop-gaps, the only thing of substance planned is to take constant rechecking of signals and timing modifications as well as on-going maintenance (potholes, painting lines, etc.). Mr. Hampton questioned the distance between the two jughandles and felt there should be another one between the Jelly Mill and Modern Design as that is a long distance. Mr. MacArthur said they are continuing to pursue this option but haven't yet found space for it. If a place can be found, there will be another jug handle. He said they now have a couple of leads. Mr. Precoourt asked if it wouldn't work to eliminate curb cuts and have a 5 lane road. Mr. MacArthur said it is the opinion of those in the agency and those in engineering in general throughout the country that a physical barrier will provide better and safer service. He stressed they are not going to do something foolish. Mr. Wood added that Shelburne wants growth along that corridor and they can't have it now because of the road. He also noted the increase in traffic on Spear and Dorset Streets because of people who refuse to use Shelburne Rd. He said it is their intention to channel traffic to the road that is designed for it. Those present were then invited to look at plans and drawings of the proposed road and to offer specific suggestions and express their concerns. The formal portion of the meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.