Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 12/09/1999CITY COUNCIL 9 DECEMBER 1999 The South Burlington City Council held a special meeting on Thursday, 9 December 1999, at 7:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Members present: Jim Condos, Chair; Joan Britt, David Austin, Terrance Sheahan, Chris Smith Also present: Charles Hafter, City Manager; Joe Weith, Director of Planning & Zoning; Bruce Hoar, Public Works Dept; Joe Segale, MPO Transportation Planner; Don Delphia, Robert Fisher, Joyce Richland, Craig Peck, George Holcomb, Carolyn Ormsbee, Claudia Berger, Sheldon Katz, Pauline & Frank McCaffrey, John Paul Bettencourt, Dan Morrissey, Bob Payson, Ken Mauren, Bob Schultz, Art Balfe, Geoffrey Macdonald, Eva Simon, Ray Unsworth, Marcel Beaudin, Eleanor Reddington, Nathaniel Merrill, Kathleen Gorman, Kristi & Ethan Johnson, Carol MacKenzie, Pierre Blouin, Joanne & John Varricchione, Jim Rock, Marcel Lapierre, Peter Jeffery, Eric Farrell, Susan Izumi, John Briggs, Mike Henry, David Shiman, Maja Smith, M.K. Provost, Daryl Campbell, Alice Boyd, Anne Brown, Cara Worthley, Joanne Herdkamp, Paul Demers, Allison Merrill, Flo & Don Calarco, Richard Holcomb, Tim Barritt, Lisa Beaulieu, Dana Roberts, Bill DesJardins, Kathy Rose, Dave Hibma, Lou Bresee, Susan Wheeler, Karen Steward Nolan, Kurt Schaefer, Dana Houlihan, Jake Tran, Patricia & Karen Boudreau 1. Discuss petition to close Farrell Street to motor vehicle traffic; consider action by City Council: Mr. Condos reviewed the history of the East Woods traffic concerns. He noted that the Council had received a petition with over 100 signatures asking for the closing of Farrell Street. Then, in the last few days, a petition was received with over 100 signatures opposing the closing of Farrell Street. Mr. Condos then introduced Joe Segale, traffic engineer and Transportation Planner for the MPO, who was asked to do a study of the area. Mr. Segale said the purpose of the study was to compare alternatives: dead-ending Farrell St; making Farrell St. one way southbound, opening O'Dell Parkway with Farrell St. open and closed. The study was also to assess the impact of those alternatives on nearby intersections: Route 7 and Flynn, Rt. 7 and Proctor, Rt. 7 and Hadley, Rt. 7 and Home Ave, Rt. 7 and Shelburne Plaza, Rt. 7 and I-89, Swift and Farrell, Swift and Spear. Mr. Segale said the study looked at 11 scenarios for the years 2000 and 2005, including the Shelburne Rd. project and the Southern Connector. There were also several assumptions made: "background growth" of 1% a year in the year 2000; for the year 2005, "background growth" of 1% plus 2,000 IDX employees, Gateway Mall expansion, O'Dell Parkway PUD, and other known development; and in 2005, the additions of the Southern Connector and a reconstructed Shelburne Rd. The methodology used was to develop design hour volumes, then plug these into the Regional Transportation Model (just updated), and also to do a level of service analysis. The findings of the study were: there will always be a certain amount of neighborhood traffic, but about 80-85% of the traffic in the neighborhood is "cut through" traffic. If Farrell Street were to be dead-ended, through traffic would be reduced 85%, total traffic would be reduced 65%. If Farrell St. were made one-way, through traffic would be reduced 45% and total traffic 33%. O'Dell Parkway doesn't seem to have any effect on neighborhood traffic. The Southern Connector will help reduce neighborhood traffic. Mr. Segale then showed what would happen at other intersections. Home Avenue would have the greatest increase. Diverted neighborhood traffic could be accommodated by adjusting traffic signal timing, but there would be a problem with lane blocking, particularly at Rt. 7 & Home Avenue, Shelburne Plaza and Swift Street. Home Avenue will be over capacity in 2005 with O'Dell Parkway. The Southern Connector will be needed by 2005 or none of this will work. Ms. Britt asked if the study included keeping Farrell St. open and using other traffic calming measures. Mr. Segale said that would be hard to predict. Ms. Britt asked if dips and bumps are effective. She noted that the neckdowns haven't worked. Mr. Segale said they haven't worked because they are only on one place. They need not be continuous. Mr. Austin noted the study was for the P.M. peak hour and asked if the A.M. peak was looked at. Mr. Segale said it was not. Mr. Smith asked if Farrell could be switched to one way in either direction, depending on the time of day. Mr. Segale said the City of Burlington did this, but it is an informational challenge. He felt it would cause other problems. He noted that IBM does this at the Park St. intersection, but he had reservations about doing it on a local street. Mr. Sheahan said he is more concerned with having more left turns onto Shelburne Rd. Mr. Macdonald said he felt O'Dell was crucial and asked why it was left out. Mr. Condos said it was considered but what was not looked at was opening O'Dell and leaving everything else the same. Mr. Macdonald said he felt it would be easy to put that road in with two lanes and see what happens. Ms. Simon said it seems the study is oriented toward movement toward Shelburne Rd. She asked if the study looked at traffic patterns through the neighborhood. People might go on Hadley Rd. and still be in the neighborhood. Mr. Segale said he thought traffic would tend to go to Proctor Ave. Ms. Simon asked how much more traffic there would be on Proctor. Mr. Segale said that was not specifically analyzed. Mr. Smith asked how easy/hard it is to "tweak" the traffic lights. Mr. Segale said it is physically easy. Mr. Austin said it has been done in the past. Mr. Maren said his experience is that Shelburne Rd./Swift St.backs up four blocks in the A.M. and P.M. and Swift is backed up to Farrell St. He wouldn't want to close Farrell and put hundreds more cars into those intersections. Mr. Segale said it was his opinion that the purpose of U.S. 7 is to carry traffic, and that's where traffic should be. George Holcomb said he was opposed to closing Farrell St. Mr. Rock suggested the IBM type of "do not enter" signs that could be flipped up at certain times of day. This would allow emergency traffic to enter and the road to be kept open on weekends. He said it works at IBM. Mr. Gordon asked if there would be any problem for school bus drivers. Mr. Condos said the Council got a letter from Marilyn Frederick at the school that said the impact would not be enough to create a problem for the school. A member of the audience suggested moving the light at Sherwin Williams Plaza to Proctor Ave and closing that access. Mr. Condos did not think that was possible as they have a right to that curb cut, and it is in the City of Burlington. He also noted there used to be a traffic light at Proctor but it was removed because traffic backed up. Mr. Katz noted that the developers of the O'Dell Parkway project did a study that said the impact of the development would not cause any of the intersections to fail. He said it seems strange that if that development doesn't cause intersection failure, a few hundred cars from the closing of Farrell St. would cause such failure. Mr. Segale said he hasn't finished reviewing the developers' study, but there are different traffic movements involved, and the study assumes that O'Dell Parkway is in place. Mr. Farrell questioned the failure of the Home Ave. intersection with every scenario except with O'Dell. Mr. Segale said the results on this are based on an added lane to the O'Dell approach (two right turns out and a left turn lane). Mr. Hafter then reviewed a study done on emergency vehicle response times. The study was done by running a truck from the stations to the neighborhood, but not with lights and sirens. From station 1, there would be an added 2 minutes response time, but the intersection would be redesigned to reduce that time. From station 2, Hadley Rd. would be used. Making Farrell St. one way would not increase response time because emergency vehicles could go either way. Mr. Hafter then reviewed accident reports in the last 3 years. There have been 16 accidents on Proctor Ave., most at the Shelburne Rd. intersection. There have been 3 accidents on Hadley Rd., 2 on White Place (at Shelburne Rd.) and 4 on Meadow (2 at intersections, 2 in the middle of the street). The meeting was then opened for public comment and the following comments were made: Mr. Unsworth: Most city streets are built to serve the needs of people. Why close a street because it serves too many people. He didn't feel the Southern Connector would help because it will dump into Pine St. which is too narrow. Mr. Rock: Large increase in traffic in the last 5 years. He no longer uses Farrell Rd. to commute to work because the intersection is too dangerous. Once the Grand Union complex is done, it will add more traffic to the neighborhood. Neighborhood streets are bogged down, and he felt the situation will reduce property values. He felt that if Farrell is closed, people will find alternate ways to go. They won't sit in a long line to wait. Mr. Balfe: Emergency response time to their area has been excellent. They don't want to jeopardize that. Also, children will have to walk further to get to the bus. Ms. McCaffrey: Surveys and studies don't mean much to her. She felt sorry for people on Hadley Rd. and Proctor Ave. She wondered what would happen to people on Swift St. if Farrell is closed. Ms. Abusten opposed the blockage of Hadley because it would just divert traffic to another street. Mr. Maren: O'Dell might be a solution. He doesn't go to Farrell in the morning because it is blocked. He felt closing Farrell would create worse traffic jams. Mr. Bettencourt: He is an EMT and if he ever heard a call to the neighborhood, he would respond. Closing Farrell could prevent him from reaching someone. He also noted the third response company is from Shelburne. Ms. Kinna: Is a driver for Charlotte Rescue. Shelburne Rd. is so congested it is next to impossible for a rescue vehicle to get through. She felt making Farrell one-way is better than closing it. Mr. Henry: Concerned that traffic on Proctor will be doubled. He felt there was not enough traffic enforcement. Mr. Fisher: Very opposed to closing Farrell. Would block them in. Mr. Schultz: Problem is the speed of vehicles through the area. A light is needed at Farrell/Swift. Speed bumps should be considered. Ms. Brown: Problem is many years old. Whatever is best for the neighborhood is OK for her. Can Farrell be closed on a trial basis? Ms. Nolan: Agreed it should be tried on a trial basis. More cars on Shelburne Rd. is not a neighborhood problem. Ms. Richland: Was happy when Farrell was opened. Uses it at least 4 times a week. Feels closing it would isolate East Woods. Ms. Highcamp: Meadow Rd. is one block long and has 25 homes with hundreds of cars going by. Why should they be the "safety valve" for Shelburne Rd. This needs to be a residential neighborhood. The cars should be back on main roads where they belong. Ms. Worthley: Safety is an issue now. Have to do what is best. Mr. Lapierre: Main problem is speeding. Need more patrols, speed bumps. Ms. Quinn: Favors closing the street. Slowing traffic hasn't worked. The neighborhood has become very dangerous. Realizes it will be inconvenient but for her the balance is in favor of taking a few extra minutes to go somewhere. Ms. Reddington: There are many kinds of streets. Shelburne Rd. and Swift St. are collector streets. Neighborhood streets are where people live. Cars go by her house at all hours, running stop signs at 50 mph. She noted there are people living on Hoover and Clymer St. who are very happy. No one there is selling homes. They don't have neighborhood traffic problems. Neckdowns don't work, and no town has enough police to control traffic on a neighborhood street that looks like a drag strip. The streets should be narrowed not widened. Ms. Johnson: Never knew how bad traffic was till she was home on maternity leave. Happy with the thought that closing Farrell would decrease traffic in the whole neighborhood. That 85% of people don't care about their neighborhood. She has no confidence in speed bumps, and traffic enforcement is only effective when police are there, and they can't be there all the time. Mr. Payson: Opposed dead-ending the road. Concerned with danger of left turns onto Shelburne Rd. Nothing should be done till O'Dell is built, then make Farrell one-way out of the neighborhood. Ms. Berger: Supports closing Farrell. Need to deal with the problem regardless of O'Dell. She noted that nobody is complaining that the O'Dell development will add hundreds more cars onto Shelburne Rd. and will slow down emergency vehicles. A great neighborhood is being ruined. Noted the city plan states that local roads are for use of people who live in the neighborhood. Ms. Simon: Lives on a dead-end street, so her children are safe. In favor of seeing the road closed on a trial basis, but is not convinced it will work. Encouraged to think it might reduce traffic 85%. Shelburne Rd. is a disaster. The city should look at how to change those traffic patterns. Neckdowns and speed bumps don't work. People don't stop at Stop signs. Mr. Barritt: Neighborhood is blessed with a convenient location but cursed because it's the "Price Chopper by-pass." 90% of PM traffic is cut-through. The traffic expert said there would be no major problems from closing Farrell. Wants to break the bad habits of people using neighborhood roads to save a few minutes time. Favors any measure to reduce traffic 65% in the neighborhood. Ms. Boyd: Safety of children, quality of life are very important. Do what is right. Try closing Farrell for 6 months and evaluate the results. Make a positive stand for quality of life in the neighborhood. Ms. Greenfield: Problem has gone on long enough. Try dosing Farrell and see what happens. Would Meadowbrook accept 200-300 more cars every day in their neighborhood? Mr. Shaefer: Moved in when neckdowns were put in. They don't work. Try something else. If 45% of problem is fixed, good; 85% would be great. Mr. Tran: Favored closing Farrell. Agreed that cars speed, but need to reduce the number of cars. Mr. Demers: Hates having neighbors with different opinions. All have the same problem. Residential communities should be residential. Farrell St. is wider than Shelburne Rd. People use it for drag racing. Mr. Katz: Thanked the city for providing notice of the meeting to the whole community. Asked for the same notification for the meetings on the O'Dell development. Mr. Condos explained the city is only obligated to notify abutters for development hearings. Mr. Katz felt people can use the traffic signal at Prospect Parkway to get onto Shelburne Rd. Didn't think making Farrell one way is viable and only solves half the problem. Ms. Greenfield: Asked if anything has been done regarding a Rice H.S. driveway to Joy Drive. Mr. Condos noted Rice doesn't own the land and would have to get a donation of land to put in the road. Ms. Greenfield said Rice has indicated they would like to be "part of the solution." Mr. Macdonald: Asked if there will be a study on the impact of just opening O'Dell. Mr. Condos said it would be a good idea. Mr. Henry: If closing Farrell doesn't work, people will be back to the Council. Shelburne Rd. keeps growing. Can't beat the traffic. Mr. Greer: There is a monster in our neighborhood. It should be put on Shelburne Rd. so it can be dealt with. Mr. Condos said the Council realizes there is a problem in the neighborhood and has tried to address it over the years. He noted the widening of Shelburne Rd. is scheduled to begin at the end of 2001. The project will begin in S. Burlington and move south. He felt the start date was optimistic. Mr. Condos stressed that the Council doesn't want to solve one problem and create another. The easy answer is to dead end Farrell, but the question is whether that is the right answer. Mr. Sheahan said he wants a chance to look through the report. He agreed something has to be tried. Mr. Smith agreed. Felt there has to be a way to measure whatever is done. Ms. Britt and Mr. Austin agreed. Mr. Austin said he would like to see the impact of just opening O'Dell. Ms. Britt said she would like to know about other mitigating options. Mr. Katz read from the city plan: "The sole function of local roads is for access to adjacent properties." He said that should be the way it is. Mr. Austin moved that the issue be included on the 3 January City Council agenda. Mr. Sheahan seconded. Motion passed unanimously. As there was no further business to come before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Clerk Published by ClerkBase ©2019 by Clerkbase. No Claim to Original Government Works.