Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/18/2011 06 Barge-Chestnut Neighborhood Traffic Calming Recommendations and Petition Comments - Public Hearing • BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT - REVISION Item No. For Meeting of: January 18, 2011 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing to consider traffic calming recommendations and public comments in response to the petition from the Barge- Chestnut Neighborhood SUBMITTED BY: Chris Waarvick, Director of Public Works CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: Joe Rosenlund, Street and Traffic Manager, 576 -6430 Joan Davenport, Acting Director of Community and Economic Development, 576 -6417 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: City Council policy regarding traffic calming petitions requires that the Council conduct a public hearing to review the final recommendations from the Street and Traffic Division of Public Works. The Petition from the Barge Chestnut Neighborhood was submitted in 2008 and has been functionally related to the expansion plans of Memorial Hospital. Resolution Ordinance Contract Other (Specify) Staff report, recommendation for Phase One traffic calming plan Funding Source $50,000 reserved from Arterial Street Fund (142) Approval for Submittal: �`� IC 72WS City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Conduct the public hearing and direct staff to implement the project BOARD RECOMMENDATION: The Council Transportation & Transit Committee has reviewed this project and process and recommends installation of the first phase of traffic calming devices. COUNCIL ACTION: • • City of Yakima Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program and the BCNA Petition Background The City of Yakima adopted guidelines for a Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program in May of 1995 after a very lengthy debate regarding a request for speed humps on Scenic Drive. The citizen petition on Scenic Drive resulted in the installation of 5 speed humps, of which three of the speed humps were removed a year later due to additional citizen protests. Other speed humps have been installed on Viola Avenue, Prasch Avenue and in an alley near the 1 l Avenue Medical Center using these procedures. Speed Tables were added as a mitigation measure by Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital on 30 and 31 Avenues. The Program was a petition driven citizen request process but there was no funding to support the program. The lack of available city funding and the lengthy petition procedure proved very discouraging to citizens concerned about speeding and cut - through traffic on neighborhood streets. • Between 2000 and 2007, the City of Yakima received over 100 complaints regarding p g g numerous streets with neighborhood speeding and cut through traffic. Effective traffic calming programs do not rely solely on the installation of speed humps and other physical devices on public streets. A combination of enforcement of speed limits and public education must also be incorporated into a program to modify driver behavior. As staff resources have become constrained, the ability of Yakima Police Department to respond to neighborhood speeding complaints through their targeted enforcement program has diminished. Program Status and the Pilot Project The Yakima City Council approved a $50,000 Budget Policy Issue for 2007 to revise the Traffic Calming Program and implement a pilot project. To support the Yakima Police Department efforts and assist in the public education component, the pilot project funds were used to purchase equipment that would benefit the entire community. With $42,422 of the 2007 demonstration funds, the following items were purchased and installed or distributed. SPEED ' I 1. Four stationary radar operated "YOUR SPEED IS" LD.11T signs were purchased. These signs 2 . 5 g p gns are placed on YOUR PEED neighborhood streets during Phase One of the - •- . program and supported by a targeted enforcement ia7 t r effort of the Yakima Police Department. The signs � `� 1 Yakima Traffic Calming Program and the BCNA Petition History Page 1 of 4 have remained on the neighborhood street for up to one year. Public Works Street • Department staff installs the radar signs. Installation of these signs is labor intensive, as the computerized sign component requires calibration and programming. The availability of the sign crew to implement this program has become increasingly constrained. Cost of the four signs: $22,900 1. One portable trailer equipped with a radar - operated "YOUR IS" was purchased for the Yakima Police Department. a4 • YPD operates the sign and locate it on streets where citizen ' :: 7 . - • concerns have been expressed. Cost: $7,800 _.. 2. High contrast thermoplastic crosswalk material was installed on `'ti. �.: r 8 Street at the Convention Center to add visibility to the pedestrian crossing from the parking lot to the Center. Although this material has now been removed with the remodel in 2010, the pilot project proved beneficial to safety. Cost of the enhanced crosswalk material: $7,472. 3. Purchase of 5,000 "KEEP KIDS ALIVE Drive 25" stickers for =- refuse containers. These stickers were attached to new refuse a; bins by the refuse department. Also, they were distributed at no OAVOACC charge to citizens requesting information about the traffic r ,K5 _. calming program as part of the education component of the •r.�; -;. ��, :, program. Cost of the stickers: $4,250 , Current Traffic Calming Program In 2007, staff reviewed the current procedures used by other cities in Washington State to address Traffic Calming on neighborhood streets and determined our 1995 Program needed to be modified. Most cities had implemented a two - phased approach for responding to Traffic Calming requests. (1) Phase One concentrates on enforcement, education and data collection. During Phase One, some signage, pavement marking or other low cost approaches compliment an enforcement effort and education process. Phase One usually lasts at least one year. Based on review of the success of Phase One approach and the data collected, some streets may require additional or more permanent improvements. (2) Phase Two of the Program may lead to installation of physical traffic calming devices, such as speed humps, traffic circles or other measures. Citizen involvement and support of the physical devices is important and must be demonstrated by a vote of the residents prior to City Council approval of the devices. The two -phase approach Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program was presented to Fire Department, Police Department, Code Enforcement, Planning and Engineering in May of 2007. On May 10, 2007, the revised Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program was presented to the City of Yakima Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee. On August 21', 2007 the program was presented to the City Council Transportation Committee and in April 2008 the program was presented to the full City Council at a study session. Yakima Traffic Calming Program and the BCNA Petition History Page2of4 The Barge- Chestnut Neighborhood Area Traffic Calming Petition The petition from the Barge- Chestnut Neighborhood Association, filed in May of 2007 posed significant staff resource challenge due to the scale of the proposal, the complexity of the planned devices and public participation process. There is no dedicated staff for the Traffic Calming program. As previously described, the process for evaluating traffic calming petitions was under revision. The BCNA petition suggested installing 19 speed humps, 7 traffic circles and 8 diagonal diverters. The study area is over one -half square mile in size, over 1,000 properties and includes 12 different public streets. The BCNA organization had significant contact with city staff (Public Works and Planning) prior to submitting the petition. Additionally, the BCNA had made several presentations of their intended Traffic Calming Plan to the City Council and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee. One stated objective of the BCNA Traffic Calming Plan was to be prepared when. Memorial Hospital files for their campus expansion plan. Once the BCNA Traffic Calming petition was final and submitted to the City Public Works Department, staff solicited proposals for a professional transportation engineering firm to review the petition and make recommendations to the City. Two proposals were received, one from Transpo for $51,000 and another proposal from Kittelson Associates for $9,000. City Council authorized a contract to hire Kittelson Associates to analyze the petition and make specific recommendations, with cost estimates of the proposed devices. • City Traffic Engineering staff collected traffic speed and volume counts for all public streets within the BCNA area. Staff also supplied traffic accident records to Kittelson. Several interim meetings were held with the BCNA Traffic Committee as the Kittelson report was drafted. In summary, the analysis of the petition concluded: 1. Some traffic calming measures would be warranted when Memorial Hospital implements their closed campus arrangement. 2. Diagonal diverters inside the neighborhood are not recommended 3. The total traffic calming proposal should be phased in as traffic patterns grow and change. The number of devices proposed in the BCNA petition was more than necessary for the first closed campus phase and perhaps into the first few phases of the Memorial Hospital Campus expansion project. The need for additional devices should be studied at a later time. In a good faith effort to support the BCNA proposal, in 2009 the City pledged the availability of $50,000 toward construction of the first phase of the Traffic Calming Plan. Public Input The City of Yakima Street Manager recommended a few modifications to the Phase One plan included in the Kittelson report, at the suggestion of the neighborhood and labeled as "Option 1" on the ballot. A mailed ballot was sent to all the properties within the . neighborhood area in December of 2009. A total of 1004 ballots were sent out; 22 ballots • were returned as undeliverable. Of the 982 remaining ballots, 508 were returned (51.7 %). Yakima Traffic Calming Program and the BCNA Petition History Page 3 of 4 The tally was 161 votes for No Traffic Calming; 256 votes for Option 1 (proposed Phase • One plan) and 89 votes for Option 2 (have neighborhood fund additional devices. A clear majority (69 %) of those who returned the ballots favored installing traffic calming devices. Based on the City of Yakima Traffic Calming Policy, the next step was for the City Council to conduct a public hearing and provide staff final directions towards the installation of any traffic calming devices. This public hearing has been scheduled to coincide with the development approval process for the Memorial Hospital Campus Expansion. This hearing also gives those residents that live outside the neighborhood to provide input to the Council. This is important in this situation because 32 Avenue is one of the streets proposed to have traffic calming devices. 32 Avenue was recently downgraded from a minor arterial functional classification to a collector roadway. As a collector, 32n Avenue is still intended to serve traffic that is generated outside of the Barge Chestnut neighborhood. We have received several comments regarding the traffic calming plan via written letters, phone calls and email. Copies of written correspondence are attached. The comments received fall in to three general categories; those in favor of traffic calming, those against traffic calming, and questions regarding process or features of the traffic calming plan. The comments were divided evenly among the three. The closure of the Memorial Hospital campus is integral with the proposed traffic- calming plan. The campus plan calls for closing 28th 291h and 30 Avenues at the hospital boundary. Installation of the traffic calming devices is to coincide with the hospital's closure or diversion of those streets. The traffic calming plan within the Barge Chestnut neighborhood calls for a combination of speed humps, speed cushions and stop controls. Funding of up to $50,000 has been earmarked for this project out of the Arterial Street Fund. Streets and Traffic Operations personnel will do the installations in order to accomplish the entire Phase 1 traffic calming plan within the allotted budget. A follow -up study will be done after Phase 1 traffic calming devices are installed and traffic has had an opportunity to stabilize. A determination will be made if additional traffic calming or modification to the existing traffic calming devices is needed (Phase 2). No funding has been identified for Phase 2 traffic calming. Requested Action The three options before the City Council are: 1. Approve Phase 1 of the Barge Chestnut Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan as presented. 2. Approve Phase 1 of the Barge Chestnut Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan with modifications. Additional funding may be required if more traffic calming devices are required. 3. Deny the request for traffic calming in the Barge Chestnut neighborhood. Yakima Traffic Calming Program and the BCNA Petition History Page 4 of 4 Speed Hump if -q . a1 Roadway 3.7m(12It) 375 mm 2.9 m I' Typical Center of (15 in) (9.5 tt) - ' Travel Lane r Center tii l Voill _ - 1 0,1 . Speed Humph I E I, ti I i ! a --304 mm (12 in While Markings ir 200 mm (10.4 in) a i m 0III S Speed Cushion CURB .w. r tar - ` � r . . 3 t 1•4- 12't 1 SEE NOTE 1 :c > 2 , : t___ © NOTES: 8 1. WIDTH VARIES DEPENDING ON CURB iar TO CURB DISTANCE. 2' FROM FACE OF CURB AND 1'•6 FROM CENTER CUSHION (CRITICAL DIMENSIONS). Speed Cushions 2. DIMENSIONS ARE FINISH DIMENSIONS Typical - Not to Scale , � i . • ~' M — CI • I ., + r i 1 r 1 1 i+' • !I ' !, r r - 1 � f I fiff ' 1 _ ' ; -V hie . . - ". ) ANN ; ____. I ....:: IPIE 1 • • 4 January 2011 Yakima City Council 129 North Second Street Yakima, Washington Dear Council: • • I am writing with my comments on the proposal for traffic calming projects in the Barge- Chestnut Neighborhood. • I continue to be opposed to the project as proposed, for the following reasons: 1 In the past I have suggested that this proposal is premature until a study of the expected impact of the project on traffic in this and adjoining neighborhoods has been completed and distributed to•those who would be impacted — this has not happened. Thus we do not know what the impacts on neighboring . areas will be. 2 Without a formal assessment of the impact, I will rely on my personal experience and note that previous traffic management activities (e.g., adding stop signs to Chestnut and Yakima Avenues) caused me to first switch from using Chestnut Avenue for my bicycle commute to work to using Yakima Avenue and then finally switching to driving. In addition to switching from bicycling to driving, I also shifted from using Yakima Avenue (the most direct route to get downtown for me) to Summitview Avenue. I presume that many other drivers will do the same, if they haven't 'already. ® 3 Efforts to reduce the impact of vehicular traffic on a neighborhood are zero sum games (that is one neighborhood's gain is another's loss) unless there is a decrease in the total amount of traffic. Before this proposal goes forward, the proponents should be required to demonstrate that they have reduced their driving, before they are allowed to shift traffic from their neighborhood to another. One way to do this would be for ALL adults in the area to purchase annual bus passes and use them or pass them along to someone else who would use them instead of driving. • 4 Traffic has increased on the arterials in the area (notably Summitview and Fortieth Avenues) and this • proposal can only be expected to contribute to the problem. For all of the above reasons I am requesting that City Council turn the proposal to obstruct traffic (aka traffic calming) in the Barge- Chestnut neighborhood down at this time unless the proponents adopt measures which will reduce the impact of their driving on others (for example the suggestion that they either use the bus or facilitate others' use of the bus). • Sincerely, • 4 45- Phelps Fre-born 3409 Taylor Way Yakima, Washington . • 1,"du,2 g / ,„6/,a, ea)(96 I ,4 i(17 /6 72, XJ-z,z6 amct L - (ab 4,d41 z(2,01 id: 414-L-0 dri,/ 6 10 A 6,c04- 1/i4 ttjAzic6 • 0 ' • , -0 1- 44/) Y dfl9A4-/,:cin 624/2_, • y et - I 6-z-L-g • ist, d,14. 4i /6 -302iyidda, . . • RECEIVED CITY OF YAKIMA JAN0 4 2011 OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL • 4 :14V - i - 1 • • ritor • • igtAlcx • -5$ - A9 s ( - avo4D10 - 1 1 1 19 - 1 9 ) -1- Trudo-nio "iv,TiRn411 . r pi,} crov-tro rt\ O 4-•^-eluvr),1, (11-9 --orvvo 1-7-1- t --0 s -+ ! - >rdtl'.5 n -- 1 - \+# 1 4 .„-. - el L - L.C) 11 -1.4) K i twA4' 1 5 /c.4-\A-+ `V' (,cd kA ! cam, , 4 tp_ lug t Go / `•v, -cam af -y)--proh.sc? )11-vnti- 01-160 --01/49 \ivt.rd -77144 yrk -ThA- • f-?- re' ii-wr 1 rvi.74-01 Lvvvr ob0 'P 1)Q S €9 r a �� ^ / gim, 4, +44 s 0 ,4 . 4 yfev, ANI.,A.A. oNvt,oti (to . ir\ . .,21 . A. . ._ l riel 0 A I \'i?A ' °I)6/ cote...01 LA,4) 4■ Ctj0 4÷14- I � , _ ' " `� 4,44-A L ( 4'- L c el ) (At- I A A 6 ki- ____ jz ,,,,A,; tvg, CLIA-e 1 "- iN3 , eLe _i__ I - nil (2r.'-'1\-0,,E 0J-49 • °IA- -t41 CA a c a1 1Ja. rte s rvitlt, r‘_...... i 076 2c .J ' . ki'trvo if/ Lyi,„..6_,K....,________t ____ \A- \ ? - t 5v1-2.- ' 1 " S o S a t, -� ti-- ql i p _e„ v\ _ --+0 fet--- . • RECEIVED CITY OF YAKIMA ® JAN 0 4 2011 OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL 1 -3 -11 YAKIMA CITY COUNCIL 129 N 2nd ST YAKINA WA 98901 • SUBJECT: CHESTNUT TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN • SIR: PLEASE BE ADVISED AS A RESIDENT IN PLAN UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR TRAFFIC CALMING EFFORTS TO PLEASE INCLUDE SPEED HUMPS FOR • STANLEY BLVD, CURRENT LIMIT OF 20 MPH ARE HELPFULL BUT TRAFFIC • USUALLY FAR EXCEED THOSE LIMITS. BACKING WITH TREPIDATION FROM DRIVEWAY IS NORMAL EXPDERIENCE ON THE BLVD WITH EXCESSIVE SPEEDING. THANKS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION WALLACE BUDKE9 312 STANLEY'BLVD YAKIMA WA 98902 • r • Pagel of l Rosentund, Joseph • From: Davenport, Joan Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 4:07 PM To: Rosentund, •Joseph Cc: Ibarra, Rosalinda Subject: FW: Barge- Chestnut traffic calming plan Joe - FYI- Any citizen comments like this should be included in the Council package for January 18 Please let Rosalinda and myself know if you would like help in compiling the Council package for the Traffic Calming Plan. • Joan Davenport, AICP, Planning Manager Department of Community and Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 576-6417 jdavenpoCDci. Yakima. wa. us From: Price, Cally Sent: Monday, January 03, 2011 2:58 PM To: Davenport, Joan Subject: FW: Barge - Chestnut traffic calming plan • • The message below was sent to the City Council. • • Lally Price • Executive Assistant • City of Yakima - City Manager's Office • From: Scott Goranson [ mailto:goransonscott ©gmail.com] • Sent: Friday, December 31, 2010 3:44 PM To: City Council Subject: Barge- Chestnut traffic calming plan I am writing in support of the traffic calming project as submitted. This has been studied for sometime, with initial hopes of implementation this past spring. As a family with two young children, we often find it unsafe to have the kids in the front yard, even with supervision (and a fence) due to the speeds that people drive down the residential Yakima Avenue area, with cars often "passing" other cars and speeding off and rates well over the speed limit (of at least 15 -20 mph over). I am well aware that the city has limited resources in its traffic /street budgets but the city of Yakima has been fortunate to have streets in our area that have lasted many decades longer than most neighborhoods (though it shows) but it is time the city step in make the modest improvements the study has suggested for the safety of its citizens. This neighborhood has been recognized nationally as a great place to live, and we're proud to be part of that, but hope the city will help make this area's streets as safe • as the homes in the area are beautiful and well kept. Thank you for your consideration. Scott Goranson 2702 W Yakima Avenue • Yakima, WA 98902 1/11/2011 • Pate 1 of 2 • Roseniund, Joseph From: Davenport, Joan Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 10:18 AM To: , Rosenlund, Joseph Subject: FW: Barge - Chestnut traffic calming plan fyl Joan Davenport, AICP, Planning Manager Department of Community and Economic Development 129 North 2nd Street - Yakima, WA 98901 (509) 576 -6417 jdavenpoe.ci.vakima.wa.us From: Price, Cally • Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 9:40 AM To: Davenport, Joan Subject: FW: Barge - Chestnut traffic calming plan • CaIIy Price • Executive Assistant City of Yakima - City Manager's Office • From: Pete Mahony [ mailto :Pete.Mahony @johnihaas.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 6:35 PM To: City Council Subject: Barge - Chestnut traffic calming plan Dear City Council, • I've received notice in the mail regarding the public hearing on Jan 18 pertaining to the B -C neighborhood traffic calming plan. I am unable to attend the hearing, thus providing my comments by email. I live at 102 N. 26th Ave, thus in the B -C neighborhood. I've received only limited information on this traffic calming plan, and in general I feel the communication on the proposal has been very poor (similar to the Historic District guidelines proposal). I met Walt Ranta this summer at a neighborhood block watch party and received a 10 minute. "cliff- notes" version of the proposal. I told him I feel the cart is being put before the horse, that they're trying to fix something that's not broken. I do not feel we have a traffic problem in the neighborhood. I suggested to Mr. Ranta that some traffic counts be established to determine actual volumes and patterns, as I suspect the proposed plan is based on the "notion" that we have a problem, rather than actual data or metrics. Mr. Ranta seemed open to consider my suggestion, but I've since seen no traffic counters or other measuring devices placed in the streets. I strongly believe decisions such as these ® need to be supported by actual data, as decisions based heavily on subjective opinions and emotions can be the wrong ones. 1/11/2011 Page 2 of 2 The map on back of the hearing notice shows the neighborhood splattered with new stop signs and • other speed restriction devices. 1 question how the proposal was designed. Was it professionally analyzed and engineered, or was it drawn up by a small group of interested residents? The map also does not show the existing stop signs, so you don't get the true picture of how many stop signs there would. be in total, and how close in proximity many would be. I'm aware of many of the existing signs, and the proposal would result in stop signs at nearly every block on several of the streets. This seems excessive and unnecessary. And again, I'm not aware of any actual data to support the need for such quantity of signs and speed bumps. I live on the corner of Barge and 26 which already has stop signs on Barge. I can tell you from experience that stop signs are "noisy ". When trucks, pickups, loud cars accelerate away from a stop sign, it is much noisier than if the vehicle just passed by. So a double -edged sword due to increased noise pollution, especially on corner lots like mine. I also don't understand how this proposal was developed with limited input from the residents. When proposing to install two more stop signs at 26th and Barge, I would think someone would've asked for my thoughts on this...since I live on the corner of this block. In summary, 1 don't think we have a problem, the quantity of calming devices is unnecessary and excessive, the communication (two -way) to the residents has been poor, and to my knowledge no formal study or data collection has been implemented to support the proposed expense and inconvenience this plan represents. Pete Mahony 102 N. 26th Ave Yakima, WA 98902 • Pete Mahony Director of Operations John 1. Haas, Inc. P.O. Box 1441 Yakima, WA 98907 Ph: 509 - 469 -4199 Fx: 509- 469 -4299 Email: pete.mahonvftiohnihaas.com • • 1/1 1/2011 ih: ? Page 1 of 1 Rosenlund,.Joseph • From: Price, Cally Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 12:16 PM To: Rosenlund, Joseph • Subject: FW: Barge - Chestnut traffic calming plan • • CaIIy Price Executive Assistant City of Yakima - City Manager's Office • From: Jonathan Lang [mailto:mariajc15928 @msn,com] Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 9:10 PM To: City Council Subject: Barge- Chestnut traffic calming plan Good evening members of the city council: It is with much honor that I am able to communicate with you regarding the traffic calming plan. • My wife and I are very much in favor of it. We live on Barge between 28th and 30th. Many drivers come • tearing by our block heading south on 28th going towards the hospital. • A lot of people walk through the neighborhood and these cars that reach high velocity especially go west • on Chestnut. At their high speeds, they could kill or seriously injure a pedestrian. Obviously with the expansion of the hospital there needs to be some kind of plan to handle the new amount of traffic trying to get there. This is a good plan and maintains the historic, cared for nature of our neighborhood. Thank you for reading my e -mail. I hope the council would decide to render a decision in favor of the. Barge Chestnut traffic calming plan. Sincerely - Jonathan and Maria del Carmen Lang • 2904 Barge Street Yakima, WA. 98902 • • • • • 1/11/2011 • • Page l of 2 Rosenlund, Joseph • From: Price, Cally Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 2:00 PM To: Rosenlund, Joseph Subject: FW: Barge - Chestnut traffic calming plan FYI Catty Price Executive Assistant City of Yakima - City Manager's Office From: Ed Stover Emailto:stovered @gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 12:55 PM To: City Council Cc: Ed Stover Subject: Barge- Chestnut traffic calming plan Dear Councilors: • I would like to comment on the proposed traffic -- calming plan for the Barge- Chestnut area that you will consider on Jan. 18. We now live in Portland, Oregon, but still own our home at 3506 W. Chestnut Ave. with the idea that we may return in the future. Meanwhile, our daughter and 5 —year -old grandson are living there 411 and we visit frequently. I was part of the signature -gathering drive for the original proposal, which I see has since been altered. While most of the calming devices, i.e. the speed bumps and humps, in this current proposal will help, I note one change from the original proposal that causes me concern. The original proposal included an island diverter at the intersection of W. Chestnut and S. 36th, an idea which I embraced. The current situation is terrible. West Chestnut between S. 40th and S. 16th is a popular shortcut for motorists, who often speed down this street, particularly between S. 40th and S. 32nd, where they are forced to stop for the stop sign there. That problem also existed east of S. 32nd until a series of stop signs were installed about 10 years ago after neighbors in that area made enough noise to get the city to act. Unfortunately, we who live west of S. 32nd have continued to watch the speeders have their way. I think you must be aware that W. Chestnut is a very popular street, not just for speeding motorists, but also for walkers and bikers. There are many families with small children who live along and use this street. In our 25 years there, I have witnessed high -speed chases along this street, officers chasing down speeding motorists. The speeders are common during the morning and evening commute to and from work, and after school when the high school students are out and about. One day, some child, or some walker or biker, is going to he killed by one of these speeders. Many times, I have witnessed walkers and joggers who have had to leap out of the path of speeding traffic. I have had the experience. myself. I don't want this potential fatality to be my grandson, Jake, or my daughter, Ryan, who loves to jog along Chestnut. • I believe "there needs to be an island diverter at the intersection of S. 36th and W. Chestnut. They have these devices both in Seattle and Portland and they work very well to slow traffic down. 1 see in the current proposal you have speed humps on W. Chestnut on either side of N. 34th: Speed humps are a good device. They have them on the residential streets all over Portland and they work very well, but you don't have • enough of them along Chestnut west of S. 32nd, particularly if you are not going to install a diverter at the intersection. of Chestnut and S. 36th. If the diverter is not going to be installed, I would urge you to install more speed humps along this portion of W. Chestnut. Those two at S. 34th are not enough to do the job, not when the speeders have a chance to build up their momentum after they exit S. 40th at Chestnut and come roaring east. • These are my main concerns. I hope you will take these thoughts under consideration. 1/11/2011 Page 2 of 2 1 fa Sincerely, Ed and Lynn Stover 3506 W. Chestnut Ave. Yakima, WA 98902 • 6615 N. Wilbur Ave. Portland, OR 97217 Phone 503 - 274 -4701 (Home) email: stovered(d?.gmail.com • • 1/11/2011 Page l of l Rosenlund, Joseph • From: Gary and Sandy Forrest [gsforre @msn.com] Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 3:33 PM To: Rosenlund, Joseph Cc: Davenport, Joan; Waarvick, Chris Subject: Re: Barge- Chestnut Traffic Calming PLan Thank you for such a quick response Joe. We will be prepared. I would also like to thank You, Joan and Chris for patience and guidance throughout this process. I got a little testy at times. I just hope I didn't get out of line. Gary Original Message From: Rosenlund, Joseph To: Gary and Sandy Forrest Cc: Davenport, Joan ; Waarvick, Chris Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 3:15 PM Subject: RE: Barge- Chestnut Traffic Calming PLan I will give a brief presentation to the city council to review the history of the plan, explain some of the plan features, and give an overview of the questions and comments I have received prior to the hearing. After that, the council will take public testimony. They may ask a representative from the BCNA to provide testimony. I would assume they would ask people to be brief and to defer their comments if it would repeat comments already received. After they take testimony, the council will close the hearing. I don't know if the council will choose to make a decision that night or defer to a • later meeting. Joe Rosenlund From: Gary and Sandy Forrest [mailto:gsforre @msn.com] Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 2:51 PM To: Rosenlund, Joseph Cc: Davenport, Joan; Waarvick, Chris Subject: Barge- Chestnut Traffic Calming PLan Good afternoon Joe, We are getting ever closer to implementation. I have a question on protocol for the City Council meeting on the 18th of this month. Who will present the Plan to Council? I any assuming that through the Neighborhood Traffic Management program, your department has taken ownership as the plan moves forward and will take the lead. The BCNA needs to have a strong presence at the meeting and speak favorably in support of the plan. If my assumptions are incorrect please advise on how I should proceed. Looking forward to your reply Gary Forrest BCNA Traffic Committee Chair 1/11/2011 Barge-Chestnut Neighborhood Traffic Calming Recommendations • Yakima, Washington Prepared For: City of Yakima 2301 Fruitvale Road Yakima, WA 98902 Prepared By: • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205 (503) 228-5230 Project No. 8952.0 October, 2009 ,V 44,40 /4 "ee 4i NW3 \; Nto 4111 ---- ; � „r; , K ITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. a . T R A N S P O R T A T I O N ENGI N EERI NG / PLAN N I NG 0 �, ' \ 610 SW Alder Street, Suite 700, Portland, OR 97205 P 503.228.5230 F 503.273.8169 October 12, 2009 Project #: 8952 Joan Davenport and Joe Rosenlund City of Yakima 2301 Fruitvale Road Yakima, WA 98902 RE: BCNA Traffic Calming Recommendations Dear Joan and Joe, Attached is the final Barge - Chestnut Neighborhood Traffic Calming Recommendations report. This report consists of two documents. The first document is the actual traffic calming recommendations report complete with figures, recommendation tables, and monitoring plan. The second document is a recommendations response letter that was prepared following review of the recommendations report: While the recommendations report has been updated, the response letter is included as it contains some additional traffic safety analysis. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact us. • Sincerely, KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ("TN.:s I li,Lc-IZA..A.--4A.....„_. 6i13411-------- Julia Kuhn, P.E. Matt Hughart, AICP 'Principal Engineer Senior Planner • FILENAME: H :: IPROJFILE189S2 - TRAFFIC CALMING Pt uu iION REVIEf4E REPORT FINAL ICOVERLETTER.DOC +!` ` ``'' K iTTELSON & ASSOCIATES, ONC. ° T R A N S P O R T A T I O N E N G I N E E R I N G / P L A N N I N G N "r z�"6.k.4 610 SW Alder Street, Suite 700, Portland, OR 97205 P 503.228.5230 503.273.8169 0 MEMORANDUM - Date: August 28, 2009 Project #: 8952 To: Joan Davenport City of Yakima 2301 Fruitvale Road Yakima, WA 98902 From:. Matt Hughart, AICP & Julia Kuhn, P.E. Project: BCNA Traffic Calming Subject: Traffic Calming Recommendations INTRODUCTION The Barge - Chestnut Neighborhood Association (BCNA) have submitted a Citizen Petition asking for traffic calming measures for their neighborhood. The stated rationale behind the request is that there is a sizeable amount of non - neighborhood traffic using the neighborhood streets as a 410 cut - through route to /from the larger regional arterial network and the adjacent Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital. Furthermore, the BCNA believes that this cut - through traffic and Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital (YVMH) traffic is adversely impacting the safety and livability of their neighborhood. To address these concerns, the Citizen Petition contains an identified list of traffic calming projects along the neighborhood streets. These projects include the provision of .speed humps, traffic calming circles, and traffic diverters that are designed to significantly alter traffic patterns within and through the neighborhood. Subsequent to the receipt of the BCNA petition, there have been a number of meetings held between the BCNA, City of Yakima and YVMH representatives. In addition, the BCNA has presented an alternative traffic calming plan to the City for review. The City has requested that Kittelson &Associates, Inc. perform an independent assessment of the traffic conditions within the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood and develop a list of potential traffic calming recommendations. This memorandum summarizes the evaluation and development of these recommendations, including a response to the BCNA's alternative proposal. EXISTING CONDITIONS The Barge - Chestnut neighborhood is a large (15 city blocks by 6 city blocks) single - family neighborhood roughly bordered by Summitview Avenue to the north, Tieton Drive to the south, 36th Avenue to the west, and Gilbert Drive /Stanley Boulevard to the east. The east -west streets of • ® Barge Street, Yakima Avenue, and Chestnut Avenue are a series of continuous parallel travel corridors that traverse the entire neighborhood. The north -south streets of 36th Avenue, 32 FILENAME: H:\PROJFILE\8952 - TRAFFIC CALMING PETITION REVIEW \REPORT\DRAFT\BCNAPRELIMREC REVISED (2).DOC - BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 2 • Avenue, 30th Avenue, 28th Avenue, 26th Avenue, and 24th Avenue traverse the neighborhood from Summitview Avenue to Tieton Drive. Collectively, all of these streets form a street grid pattern that provides access to /from the neighborhood and the larger arterial street network. As shown in Figure 1, all streets within the BCNA are classified as Local Streets with the exception of 32 Avenue and the border roadways of Summitview Avenue and Tieton Drive. Table 1 below summarizes the existing functional classification and identifies the basic characteristics of the neighborhood streets and border roadways. • Table 1 Neighborhood Streets Characteristics Table Roadway Functional Classification Speed Limit Sidewalks? Bicycle Lanes? Summitview Avenue Primary Arterial 30 mph Yes No Tieton Drive Minor Arterial 30 mph Yes • No 32 " Avenue Neighborhood Collector 25 mph No Signed Bike Route All other streets within Local Street 25 h No No the BCNA P m 1 Chestnut Avenue and Stanley Boulevard have posted speed limits of 20 mph. 2 In addition to 32n Avenue, Chestnut Avenue, 24 Avenue, Stanley Boulevard, and portions of 36 Avenue are signed Bike Routes. Existing Traffic Volumes /Travel Speeds In 2008, the City of Yakima performed a comprehensive series of traffic volume and vehicle speed counts along the majority of streets within the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood. The traffic volume counts illustrate the number of vehicles traveled on each of the neighborhood streets over the course of a typical weekday. This is known as an average daily traffic volume (ADT). For the same neighborhood streets, the speed counts illustrate the maximum speed at which 85% of the surveyed vehicles are traveling. This is known as the 85th percentile speed. A graphical summary of the volume and speed counts are provided in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. Traffic Volume Observations As shown in Figure 2, there is variation in traffic volumes amongst the neighborhood streets. The following observations can be drawn from this graphical summary: • With an ADT of approximately 4,000 vehicles, 32nd Avenue from Summitview to Tieton is the most heavily traveled corridor within the neighborhood. These traffic volumes can be attributed to the continuous north -south alignment of the 32 ❑d Avenue corridor and the connections that it makes to the larger regional street network. As a classified Neighborhood Collector, 32nd Avenue has an ADT that is appropriate for its classification, size, and role within the larger street network. • • 1 The City of Yakima Transportation System Plan has identified a Targeted ADT of 3,000 -5,000 vehicles for a Neighborhood Collector. • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon S, BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 3 • Traffic volumes , on 28th Avenue and 30th Avenue are higher than other adjacent � t north- south local streets. These higher volumes are likely the result of employee and visitor traffic traveling to /from the Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital. • With ADT volumes ranging from 1,400 to 2,300 vehicles, Yakima Avenue is the second most heavily traveled corridor within the neighborhood. This volume of traffic can be attributed to . the direct connections that the Yakima Avenue corridor makes with downtown Yakima to the east. • Per industry standards and the Yakima Transportation System Plan, a targeted range of ADT for Local Streets is 3,000 vehicles per day or less. All Local Streets within the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood have ADTs that fall within this range. Travel Speed Observations As shown in Figure 3, all of the neighborhood streets tend to have 85th percentile speeds in excess of the posted speed limit although the speeds are not atypical of neighborhood travel speeds. The following observations can be drawn from this graphical summary: • All of the continuous north -south and east -west neighborhood streets have 85th percentile speeds between 6 and 8 mph in excess of the posted speed limit. • With a lower posted speed limit, Chestnut Avenue had an 85th percentile speed of approximately 11 mph in excess of the speed limit. However, in comparison to all the 11/ other major neighborhood streets, vehicles traveling on Chestnut Avenue are traveling at essentially the same speed: • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon Hlprojfile18952 - Traffic Calming Petition Rewewlgia N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1, I I I 37SHAVE ., 1 I I I I I I I ►�'� � .� Q m �.II iii, I AVE n i 8 = ELMAR TE- „■.,y Y I U I IPL •■• Z I I . r � Z Il E• L4 _ - f� N "i mill r N TH AVE m- - = m _= mi gm D M 1� .1� �� AVE 0 1 -I • .■. ''_ = 1111.11 ` �! 1 . 1, 1a �A A . atr 7:7 IIM Lii 1 11� 11, No m 1 It 1� . 1E ■ i H IIIII1l111I! i 1= ; C I1H 0 0 = IN 111111111 TAKE ICI 111111 31ST AVE m 1■� X11111 -- .•IIIt_ ,III 1 { 0 m 1..i' � � 11111 1.1.=1 Minus !!!,.,AVE m = p) .THAVE Cn O 24 II 1111' '!'! ,- L'EMAN AVE AIM • =I III am wri -yi � 29 'AVE �� : � ii ;11E1 :111 � d � -•�. 28TH.AVE 111111 � N287N.i4 Er II= _ i � „ AVE NE E xa m EN 1 1 79 11.1. 11. � 1 1 1 &WW1 Wm _ _ N A i Alt. • • 111111H .1 � � �i�.� :11111,� X 11 1111111.1 .11 �— 11 I A . MI II rIn 1111111 - - 1 r. 1� I11IA H S y IIIIIIII: 11- _ t11n11 1111111111111 1 1 ' — F�illll 1 1 24TRAl • S2 T AVE` _$'r4TF1AVE_ I _ H M`. 4TH - E I�11I� I.I R I I ! 6- 11 �" : E NRYAV_ 11 II 1 . u I 1 r ' " 23�_ r 1 am I -AVE ni 111111 III � IIIA ;' 3 . s • M = i ti 11 1 .' . m , �'�L L � �. Ste,- 1: N .22ND.AVE ■ • 1 N22N3 AVE to ., _ 7-T:VE, - -- � 111 IN Mil -- N 7 ND W = -i3TA Z.1 ,�� ,. fr_._G AERT DR m O A`E 1 =- f7 ���.I z sllllllllllll 1 rm. t1m ip 1 1 Z mown ' ■ m r - 19THAVE ■ � Fr] • nTN I I I - = 11111111 4 �in ■r I N 18TH AVE `� N 1 _ TM_. _� N > 11 11 I 1� A 1 a _ aoz ' I I I I I z > 1111 a — 4110 I I'll 1 1 1 = N l • • • BCNA Traffic Calming Study May 2009 W < a a' a < a a NJ ■ = ._ a ' .1112t __ ��� �i"i—�N��� �_ 1' BBQWNE AVE NM 11.41111.1111 ! i ui ! z ! ! !FP ' Ii d M - MR - VI a, PM mg /In 1 Ii i _ i i !_ •�� 1 1 ....-.F........:.4.16. _ ■ -- __1 X11 1 ■ - II PE ■111■111.1u ■1■ 1111 1 Imo 1.2 N I um �, 1�1 0. L! I i u t IiI 1 j !1k1 � ■I■� r!A!� — � RS ! TA YIOR vow a � ■111111 ■ 11 ■11 ■1. 11 oolII���I ,!■111 111111111 11 j :., k _ Y 111 1 111 — 1 ■IIII�IJ�111 ■I�i ■11���11.1 ■ ■1 111 ■i ��� _ _ _ _ _ = — HILI6REST T !! flhI 1IIuI ■1■111 f thimil �llll 1111. 1111�■i■■ ■11 w_ on 560 ■ ■IK" .111 ■ .1111■Ill 11 F I ME ■r■■ W'CHESTNUT AVE I 930 111 980 i N SEM/ IIW IIIE III I I w L. Ai m = - Mill Ill m. Ali i fl ■■ 111111■■ 7 g 1. L J R ) ■ NOME OR MIN. MIN. NI am= / — �,V WALN ■■ " �.. MAN 1 — ■ . uo m• 11►t� B LLAV= MI . : ..." I il-- MIN i IIIII lilt On HMI isi IL 11 1 * 5 ■ 7 7 — I - - -- I 1 I ..�— - - L E — ,� LEGEND "sic f c 9 W=...-1, A Average Daily Traffic (ADT) I I BARGE CHESTNUT iiii Lr AN� gi == _ — g �� <500 Ism .1 - I NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARY _ = =o 1.1111V w t o _ _ _ _ STREETS NOT COUNTED _ — 500-1000 \ � - — — _ 1 . ## ADT BARGE-CHESTNUT CHEST UTT N IGHBORHOOD -MI! >1000 YAKIMA, WA I KrTTELSON & ASSOCIATE INC. TRANlPORTATON ENGNEER /PLANN • . . BCNA Traffic Calming Study May 2009 N Q I ii/ W < a a s 1 a x 1 -; . — = =Q Me = MO lu —�_.. .. .. � 1' --, =e ow -EROJA E_AVE N. % is IIPl _L�l� 5N IRF -P M i.. ligil * APP PPR !LAP! --- . .r,-- L,.: -.- SPA IIPP 2 �1 - - Ill ME �� SUM M E -- _ - 1 1111 T _ VBIE �w =A111 i 0 4 111 — = '__ = iillll NMI 1 ��� g � No K £ , ^_ CANTER URY L L - . AR.S. r ■. ! EL _ S I_ 7 TAYLOR. _ Z PARK.LN II 11 11.111111 P ' _ e 1 o Il.i _ 111 IIa IIr� Z P T ■.■ mrlllll I 1 I H 1 1111 Pm IN - - -- z WYA KIMAAVE _ _ s yu 2 - - -- T � 111�■�0 1 I 1 I o N I 1�11111�1��1' Hi 0 11 111 U II�� l ( e -1 _ - W'CHE TN' 71 : ® m 1 '"' .1111,., 1 � '1 -i a _ W W m ail i MEv IM = "_r- F � � - y -, �4 � !1I H N I W WALNUT ST I W WNUi -.i � --I- 1 .M .. o IP--- IIIV I F NI NI - Milli EMI y fi 2 O I Ell -• .. EMI ' J __� `_ a — NW 11 ► rii TfETON DR 't'= -- i 1 L 71.....,.. LEGEND 85% S eed In Exces j BARGE C EH STNUT lie .4T� ' 4 - a �� A _. _ • p � - - NEIGHBORHOOD BOUNDARY AI A � — — — .� r, MI �' .., e of Posted Speed , i — —y IM �� <5 MPH STREETS NOT COUNTED ' , - i Ili _ -- IN : ,, _ — _ _ — s 5 - MPH ® SPEED IN EXCESS OF NTH PERCENTILE SPEED IN EXCESS OF POSTED SPEED LIMIT POSTED SPEED BARGE- CHESTNUT NEIGHBORHOOD >10 MPH YAKIMA, WA KIT TELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. K TRANSPORTATION ENGMEERNG /PLANNNG BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 7 • Neighborhood Safety The fundamental premise behind any neighborhood traffic calming assessment is ensuring that traffic volumes and travel speeds are appropriate for the context of the travel way and adjacent land use. An imbalance in either of these two areas can contribute to the potential for neighborhood safety issues. A summary of historical neighborhood crash patterns is outlined in the following paragraphs. Intersection Crash History The City of Yakima keeps vehicle collision records at all intersections within the city. Historical • crash records were reviewed at all intersections within the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood dating back to January 1, 2003. A summary of the intersection crash history is provided in Table 2 for the past six and a half years. Based on a thorough review of the crash records, the following key points can be reasonably concluded: - With a few exceptions, there were a minimal number of crashes (4 out of 32 total) that involved injuries. While the data is limited in terms of the detail provided, a lack of injuries can most often be attributed to collisions that occurred at slower travel speeds. This is important to keep in mind when thinking about the context of travel speeds along neighborhood streets. - There were no reported collisions that involved pedestrians at any of the neighborhood intersections. - There was one reported collision that involved a bicyclist at the 24th Avenue/Yakima Street intersection. - There were five crashes that involved DUIs. - Yakima Avenue east of 32 Avenue has experienced a higher number of crashes (13) than similar segments of Barge Street (3) or Chestnut Avenue (3). The higher number of crashes is likely the result of higher average daily traffic volumes than any specific geometric or roadway deficiency. - While Chestnut Avenue experiences the greatest differential in speeds above the posted speed limit, there were no vehicle collision patterns that suggest safety issues associated with higher travel speeds relative to the posted travel speed. - Some intersections, have experienced a proportionally higher number of crashes than other locations such as 32 Avenue /Chestnut Avenue where the data suggests a possible sight distance deficiency. Based on a review of all of the data, there is no evidence to suggest that neighborhood speeding or cut - through traffic is attributing to these collisions. While a review of the historical crash patterns can be a useful tool in deciphering the presence of existing safety issues, the data for the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood intersections does not appear to have a direct link to the perceived speeding and cut - through traffic concerns expressed by the BCNA. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 8 Table 2 Intersection Crash Summary (1/03 — 5/09) Collision Type Severity # of Rear Broad- Side- Fixed Bike / Property Intersection Crashes i End side Turning swipe Object Ped Injury Damage Comments --i 22 " Avenue / 0 Barge Street - - - - 22 " Avenue / 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 - One crash involved one vehicle Yakima Avenue striking a fixed object. 22n Avenue / 0 - Chestnut Avenue - - - - - 23` Avenue / Barge Street 0 23` Avenue / - There were no injuries with the crash, Yakima Avenue 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 suggesting relatively low travel speeds. 23` Avenue / 0 Chestnut Avenue - 24 Avenue/ There were no injuries with the crash, Barge Street 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 suggesting relatively low travel 99 9 y a el • speeds.' • 24 Avenue / - One crash involved a DUI Yakima Avenue 3 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 - One crash involved a bicyclist. There were no injuries reported. 24 Avenue / 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 - Crash involved one vehicle striking a Chestnut Avenue fixed object. 25 Avenue / 0 Barge Street - 25` Avenue / Chestnut Avenue 0 - - - - - - 26` Avenue / 0 Barge Street • 26` Avenue / • - Two crashes involved DUIs Yakima Avenue 4 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 - One of the broadside collisions involved an injury. 26` Avenue / - There were no injuries with the crash, Chestnut Avenue 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 suggesting relatively low travel speeds. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon II ill ID • BCNIITi arc • I° Calming August 28, 2009 Project #: 8952 • Page 9 Collision Type Severity T # of Rear Broad- Side- Fixed Bike / ; Property Intersection Crashes End side Turning swipe Object Ped Injury Damage Comments • 26 Avenue / 0 — — — . Walnut Street - • 27 Avenue / 0 Walnut Street - - 28 Avenue / 0 - Barge Street - _ • ' 28 Avenue / 2 0 - There were no injuries with either Yakima Avenue 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 crash, suggesting relatively low travel 28th speeds. 28 Avenue / 1 1 p 0 p - Crash involved a vehicle rear -endin ' Chestnut Ave 0 0 0 1 9 a parked car along Chestnut Avenue. 28` Avenue / 0 Walnut Street - - - - _ 30 Avenue / 0 Barge Street • 30 Avenue / Yakima Avenue 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 30 Avenue / 0 Chestnut Avenue - 31 Avenue / 0 Barge Street _ 31 Avenue / 0 Chestnut Avenue - - 32 " Avenue / There were no injuries with either Barge Street 3 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 3 crash, suggesting relatively low travel speeds. 32n Avenue / 0 Yakima Avenue - • • 32 " Avenue / Five crashes involved broadside Chestnut Avenue 6 1 5 0 0 0 0 3 3 collisions suggesting a possible intersection sight distance issue. 34 Avenue / Barge Street 0 - - - _ - - - _ • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon BCNA 7 I arc Calming August 28, 2009 Project #: 8952 Page 10 Collision Type Severity # of Rear Broad- Side- Fixed Bike / Propert L y p Y Intersection Crashes End side Turning swipe Object Ped Injury Damage Comments 34 Avenue / - Crash involved a DUI. Yakima Avenue 1 1 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 1 - 34 Avenue / Chestnut Avenue 0 • 35 Avenue / Chestnut Avenue - Crash involved one vehicle striking a 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 fixed object. 36" Avenue / Crash involved a DUI and a vehicle Barge Street 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 striking a fixed object. I 36 Avenue / 1 0 0 0 0 - Crash involved one vehicle striking a Yakima Avenue 1 0 0 1 fixed object. 36 Avenue / I Crashed involved one vehicle Chestnut Avenue 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 sideswiping a fixed object. 36 Avenue / 1 1 0 0 0 - Crash involved one vehicle rear - Walnut Street 0 0 0 0 ending a parked vehicle. • • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • II II II BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 11 Volume, Speed, and Crash History Summary Overall, the observed traffic volumes on Barge - Chestnut neighborhood streets are not atypical or excessive when compared against the range of traffic volumes typically deemed appropriate for that street type. However, it is likely that traffic volumes on some neighborhood streets are . artificially high as a result of the adjacent Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital. As such, it could be concluded that a series of traffic calming measures aimed at significantly altering travel patterns throughout the entire neighborhood is not an appropriate first step. Instead, a phased approach of targeted traffic calming measures focused on reducing employee /visitor hospital traffic and minimizing the convenience of cut - through routes is a more appropriate response. Furthermore, there are no documented safety problems that indicate the need for traffic volume or speed mitigation measures. With regards to travel speeds, the more significant neighborhood streets all have 85th percentile speeds in excess of the posted speed limit by 5 -10 mph. As a result, a targeted response of speed reduction devices appears to be an appropriate level of response. The following sections outline the assessment of different traffic calming devices and the traffic calming recommendations for the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood. • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 12 TRAFFIC CALMING ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS As previously stated, a phased approach to traffic calming in the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood is an appropriate method for addressing traffic volume and travel speed concerns. The following sections outline an assessment of potential traffic calming measures for use within the neighborhood. Based on this assessment, a phased set of recommendations has been developed. Potential Traffic Calming Measures Several potential traffic calming measures were considered as a result of this investigation. A short description of these measures is outlined below. Traffic Diverter A traffic diverter is a raised channelization island that is most often used at intersections. Traffic diverters are designed to eliminate through trips or other forms of intersection turning movements and divert them to other streets, thereby changing travel patterns and altering traffic volumes. The cost of diverters vary with size and design. Traffic Calming Circle A traffic calming circle is an elevated circular island that can be placed in the middle of intersections. Traffic calming circles force traffic to slowly navigate in a counterclockwise manner • around the island as they pass through the intersection. Depending on the design, traffic calming circles can cost anywhere from $5,000 - $15,000 per intersection. When evaluating the ability to install a traffic calming circle, the design guidelines outlined in Table 3 were used. These design guidelines provide dimensional standards for ensuring a properly sized circle according to existing roadway widths and curb return radii. Modification of Intersection Traffic Control Devices Modification of traffic control devices include the conversion of uncontrolled movements to controlled movements or the replacement of yield signs with stop signs. The cost of the measures is typically very minimal - $500. Speed Humps and Speed Cushions A speed hump is a raised hump (approximately 3.5 inches high) in the roadway with a parabolic shape that extends across the street at right angles to traffic. Typically placed in groups along a roadway, speed humps are primarily used to slow traffic down. Sometimes they can result in a reduction of traffic volumes on streets where they are employed by diverting traffic to other nearby streets that don't have speed reduction devices. Depending on the design, speed humps can cost anywhere from $2,000 - $2,500 per location. Speed cushions are typically asphalt or rubber mounds that are 3 -4 inches in height and 10 feet in length. Spaces between the cushions allow emergency vehicles to straddle or partially straddle Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 13 III the devices, thus resulting in minimal impact to emergency response times. Depending g. Y p p g on the manufacturer, speed cushions can cost anywhere from $3,000- $5,000 per Iocation. Table 3 Traffic Calming Circle Design Guidelines A B C D E Street Width Curb Return Radius Off - Street Distance Circle Diameter Opening Width . <14' Reconstruct Curbs 22' 15' 5.5' 11' 16' 20' 4.5' 13' 18' 25' 4.0' 15' 19' <12' Reconstruct Curbs 12' 5.5' 13' 16' 24' 15' 5.0' 14' 17' 20' 4.5' 15' 18' 25' 3.5' 17' 20' 10' 5.5' 19' 16' 12 ' 5.0' 20' 17' 30 , 15' 5.0 20' 17' 18' • 4.5' 21' 18' 20 4.0' 22' 19' 25' 3.0' 24' 20' 10' 5.5' 21' 16' • 12' 5.0' 22' 17' 32' 15' 4.5' 23' 18' 18' 4.0' 24' 19' 20' 4.0' 24' 19 25' 2.5' 27' 20' __.2____2 • E — 1 A —C D B A • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 14 411 Traffic Diverter Assessment and Recommendation Traffic diverters change travel patterns in neighborhoods by regulating or precluding certain movements. Within the context of the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood, the use of traffic diverters was given considerable consideration. However, with its traditional street grid pattern, a sizeable and complex implementation of traffic diverters would be needed to adequately minimize cut - through traffic to the level desired by the BCNA. Although cut - through traffic would be minimized, a series of diverters would also minimize the response times for emergency service vehicles, force neighborhood residents to alter desired travel patterns, complicate wayfinding for residents and visitors, and artificially increase traffic volumes on some street segments that are relatively quiet today. Faced with these potential outcomes, it was felt that a more targeted use of traffic diverters /roadway closures that are aimed at minimizing hospital cut - through traffic was a more realistic and appropriate response. The use of diverters can be an appropriate treatment to address the Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital's direct traffic impacts on the neighborhood. As such, the identified traffic mitigation treatments outlined in the hospital's campus master plan appear to be appropriate and feasible. Table 4 outlines specific recommendations from that master plan as they relate to traffic volume reductions in the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood. Table 4 Traffic Diverter /Street Closure Assessment and Recommendation 28 Avenue / Walnut Street Intersection 411 - 28 Avenue provides direct access to /from the Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital. As a Observations result, 28 Avenue tends to have higher traffic volumes than other parallel north -south streets in the neighborhood as a result of the employee and visitor traffic. Recommendations - 'It is recommended that a traffic diverter be installed at the 28 Avenue /Walnut Street intersection per the YVMH master plan. Phasing - As this is an existing condition, the traffic diverter installation should occur in the near - term prior to any additional hospital expansion. 29 and 30 Avenues - 29 and 30 Avenue provide direct access to /from the Yakima Valley Memorial Observations Hospital. As a result, these streets tend to have higher traffic volumes than other parallel north -south streets in the neighborhood. - It is recommended that 29 and 30 Avenue be modified such that they become closed Recommendations to through traffic between Tieton Drive and Chestnut Avenue per the YVMH master plan. - - As this is an existing condition, the street closure should occur in the near -term prior to Phasing any additional hospital expansion and at the same time as the 28 Avenue /Walnut Street intersection diverter. • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • BCNA Traffic Calming • Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 15 • • Traffic.Calming Circle Assessment and Recommendation • The most significant form of traffic calming considered as part of this assessment is the use of traffic calming circles. As mentioned previously, traffic calming circles are an effective speed • reduction device. Based on those neighborhood streets that have 85th percentile speeds of. 5 -10 mph over the posted speed limit, the potential use of traffic calming circles was investigated at a number of intersections. These intersections include the following: • 32 Avenue/Barge Street • 26th Avenue/Yakima Avenue • 32 ^d Avenue /Chestnut Avenue . • 26th Avenue /Chestnut Avenue • 30th Avenue/Yakima Avenue . • The following table provides a summary of the observations, assessments, and recommendations at each of these intersections for the use of traffic calming circles. • Table 5 Traffic Calming Circle Assessment and Recommendation 32nd Avenue /Barge Street • - 85 percentile speeds along 32 " Avenue are approximately 6 mph over the posted • • speed limit of 25 mph. - • Observations - Traffic on 32 " Avenue is uncontrolled at Barge Street, creating an opportunity for . vehicle speeds to increase along this portion of the corridor. - As illustrated in Appendix A, all four existing curb returns are small and each would need to be reconstructed to a minimum 12' radius. Challenges) - The curb return reconstruction would likely necessitate the relocation of two existing utility poles located in the northwest and northeast quadrants. - The differences in street widths between 32 " and Barge Street would necessitate a custom form elliptical circle that would be difficult to manufacture and, navigate. - Due to roadway geometry constraints, a traffic calming circle would be difficult to • construct at this intersection without a significant amount of curb reconstruction and Recommendations utility pole relocations. For these reasons, a traffic calming circle is not recommended - at this location. Instead, speed reduction devices in the form of speed cushions appear to be a less intrusive and cost effective option for reducing speeds along 32 " Avenue. 32nd Avenue /Chestnut Avenue • - 85 percentile speeds along 32" Avenue are approximately 6 mph over the posted speed limit of 25 mph. Observations • - Traffic on 32 " Avenue is uncontrolled at Chestnut Avenue, creating an opportunity for vehicle speeds to increase along this portion of the corridor. • - As illustrated in Appendix A, a major utility pole. located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection is located directly behind the existing curb return. This utility pole Challenges' would be located in the "clear zone ", a buffer zone that should be free of obstructions. - The differences in street widths between 32 " and Chestnut Avenue would necessitate a custom form elliptical circle that would be difficult to manufacture and navigate. Due to roadway geometry constraints and utility pole conflicts, a traffic calming circle would be difficult to construct at this intersection. For these reasons, a traffic calming circle is not recommended at this location. Instead,.speed reduction devices in the form Recommendations of speed cushions appear to be a less intrusive and cost effective option for reducing speeds along 32 " Avenue. • • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • BCNA Traffic Calming . Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 16 30 Avenue /Yakima Avenue - 85 percentile speeds along Yakima Avenue are approximately 6 mph over the posted speed limit of 25 mph. Observations - Traffic on Yakima Avenue is uncontrolled at 30 Avenue, creating an opportunity for vehicle speeds to increase along this portion of the corridor. - The existing intersection has poor pavement conditions. The entire intersection would likely need to be resurfaced prior to implementing any form traffic calming measure. - As illustrated in Appendix A, all four existing curb returns are too small and each would need to be reconstructed to a minimum 12' radius. Challenges' - The curb return reconstruction would likely necessitate the relocation of an existing utility pole located in the northwest quadrant and storm inlets located in the northeast and southwest quadrants. - The differences in street widths between 30 Ave and Yakima Ave would necessitate a custom form elliptical circle that would be difficult to manufacture and navigate. - Due to roadway geometry constraints, a traffic calming circle would be difficult to construct at this intersection without a significant amount of resurfacing, curb Recommendations reconstruction and utility pole relocations. For these reasons, a traffic calming circle is not recommended at this location. Instead, speed reduction devices in the form of speed humps appear to be a less intrusive and cost effective option for reducing speeds along Yakima Avenue. 26 Avenue /Yakima Avenue • - 85 percentile speeds along Yakima Avenue are approximately 6 mph over the posted speed limit of 25 mph. Observations - Traffic on Yakima Avenue is uncontrolled at 26 Avenue, creating an opportunity for • vehicle speeds to increase along this portion of the corridor. - As illustrated in Appendix A, all four existing curb returns are too small and each would need to be reconstructed to a minimum 12' radius. Challenges' - The curb return reconstruction would likely necessitate the relocation of an existing utility pole located in the northwest quadrant. - The differences in street widths between 26 Ave and Yakima Ave would necessitate a custom form elliptical circle that would be difficult to manufacture and navigate. - Due to roadway geometry constraints, a traffic calming circle would be difficult to construct at this intersection without a significant amount of resurfacing, curb Recommendations reconstruction and utility pole relocations. For these reasons, a traffic calming circle is not recommended. Instead, speed reduction devices in the form of speed humps would be a less intrusive option for reducing speeds along Yakima Avenue. 26 Avenue /Chestnut Avenue - 85 percentile speeds along Chestnut Avenue are approximately 11 mph over the posted speed limit of 20 mph. Observations • - Traffic on Chestnut Avenue are uncontrolled at 26 Avenue, creating an opportunity for vehicle speeds to increase along this portion of the corridor. - As illustrated in Appendix A, all four existing curb returns are too small and each would • need to be reconstructed to a minimum 15' radius. Challenges' - The curb return reconstruction would likely necessitate the relocation of an existing utility pole located in the northwest quadrant and storm inlets located in the northeast and northwest quadrants. - Could be potential underground utility line conflicts along Chestnut Avenue. - A traffic calming circle would help keep travel speeds along Chestnut Avenue appropriate for a residential street. Despite the potential need for curb reconstruction Recommendations and utility pole relocations, cross street uniformity makes this a potential candidate for the installation of a traffic calming circle. It is recommended that the City perform a more in depth review of the potential utility conflicts. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 17 ' See Appendix A for a detailed intersection geometry assessment. As outlined in Table 5, all of the potential locations for traffic calming circles are faced with significant safety ,and design challenges that will lead to fairly intrusive and expensive . construction efforts. With the exception of the 26th Avenue /Chestnut Avenue intersection, it is recommended that other traffic calming measures be considered in lieu of traffic circles. Speed Hump /Speed Cushion Assessment and Recommendation As a relatively low cost speed reduction measure, the comprehensive use of speed humps and /or speed cushions throughout the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood can be an appropriate traffic • calming device. The following table provides a summary of the observations, assessments, and recommendations for the use of speed humps /speed cushions. • • Table 6 Speed Hump /Cushion Assessment and Recommendations 24 Avenue - 24 Avenue provides a continuous travel route between Tieton Drive and Summitview Avenue, resulting in moderate, but not unreasonable traffic volumes for a local neighborhood street. Observations - The steep grade along 24th Avenue (south of Chestnut Avenue) needs to be accounted for when considering appropriate traffic calming measures. - The 1 /4 mile segment of S. 24 Ave between Tieton and Chestnut has an 85 percentile speed that is approximately 8 mph in excess of the posted speed limit of 25 mph. • - To mitigate speeds along 24 Avenue and help deter the attractiveness of this route as a quick north -south route, it is recommended that two speed humps (3.5" high, 12' wide) be installed between Tieton Drive and Chestnut Avenue. The first speed hump • should be placed approximately 250' north of Tieton Drive and the second speed hump Recommendations should be placed approximately •300' south of Chestnut Avenue. Additional speed humps are not recommended between these two points due to the roadway grade. - Per the BCNA's request, two additional speed humps can be considered north of Yakima Avenue and south of Summitview Avenue as a second phase, if deemed appropriate at that time. - The two identified speed humps on 24 Avenue between Chestnut Avenue and Tieton Drive should be installed as part of Phase 1. Phasing - The two speed humps on 24 Avenue between Yakima Avenue and Summitview Avenue should be considered a Phase 2 project following a review of change in traffic patterns from Phase 1. • 32 " Avenue - As a classified Neighborhood •Collector street, 32n Avenue is a natural north -south travel way between Tieton Drive and Summitview Avenue. - Of all the roadways within the BCNA (excluding Tieton and Summitview), 32 " Avenue Observations is the highest traveled roadway with an ADT of approximately 4,000 vehicles per day. • - With the Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital potentially becoming a closed campus, it is . likely that 32n Avenue will become a diversionary route and experience higher traffic volumes in the future. • • • . - To ensure travel speeds remain appropriate for a Neighborhood Collector, 'three speed cushions (3.5 ".high, 12' wide). spaced approximately 300 feet apart are recommended along 32n Avenue between Tieton and Chestnut Avenue. • Recommendations Install a speed cushion (3.5" high, 12' wide) mid -block between Yakima Avenue and • • 4110 Barge Street. - Install a speed cushion (3.5" high, 12' wide) mid -block between Barge Street and • Summitview Avenue. Kittelson &Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • BCNA Traffic Calming • Project #: 8952 • August 28, 2009 Page 18 41 Phasing - All 5 identified speed cushions should be installed on 32n Avenue as part of Phase 1. 26 Avenue - With the Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital potentially becoming a closed campus, it is likely that 26 Avenue will become a diversionary route and experience higher traffic Observations volumes and travel speeds in the future. - The use of all -way stop control at the Walnut Street intersection is a more appropriate • treatment than additional speed humps on the south section of 26 Avenue. - Install a speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) mid -block between Yakima Avenue and Barge Street. Recommendations - Install a speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) mid -block between Barge Street and Summitview Avenue. • Phasing - The two identified speed humps on 26 Avenue should be installed as part of Phase 1. W Yakima Avenue - . Yakima Avenue has an 85 percentile speed that is approximately 6 mph over the posted speed limit of 25 mph. Observations - The Yakima Avenue corridor is a natural east -west corridor that provides direct access with downtown Yakima to the east. - Install speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) between 32" Avenue and 30 Avenue. - Install speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) between 30 Avenue and 28 Avenue. Recommendations - Install speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) between 28 Avenue and 26 Avenue. - Install speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) between 26 Avenue and 24 Avenue. Phasing - The four identified speed humps on 26 Avenue should be installed as part of Phase 1. W Chestnut Avenue - Although the travel speeds are similar to other roadways in the neighborhood, they are Observations higher relative to the posted speed of the street. This posted speed is reflective of the Chestnut Avenue corridor serving as a strategic walking and bicycle route. - Install speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) between 36 Avenue and 35 Avenue. Recommendations - Install speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) between 35 Avenue and 34 Avenue. - Install speed hump (3.5" high, 12' wide) between 34 Avenue and 33 Avenue. Phasing - The three identified speed humps on Chestnut Avenue should be installed as part of Phase 1. 36 Avenue Travel speeds on 36th Avenue were slightly lower than other parallel north -south streets. - The average daily traffic volume (ADT) was approximately 560 vehicles per day. For a neighborhood street, this volume is far below other parallel streets in the neighborhood Observations that provide a continuous connection between Summitview Avenue and Tieton Drive. - For a street that directly serves upwards of 55 homes, it is likely that a large majority of this traffic volume is being generated by the residents that live along the street . This is not to say that 36th Avenue is devoid of cut - through traffic. However, a review of speed and volume data does not suggest that 36th Avenue is experiencing the same level of perceived speeding and cut - through traffic concerns. - While there is no evidence to suggest consistent excessive speeding along 36th Avenue, there is also no real reason why the speed humps could not be installed. If it is Recommendations the neighborhood's desire to implement these traffic calming measures as a speed reduction measure, it is suggested that they be considered following a review of change in traffic patterns after implementation of traffic calming measures along 32nd Avenue. 411 - Speed humps on 36 Avenue should be reviewed as part of Phase 2. Phasing • Kitte /son & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • • • BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 • August 28, 2009 Page 19 • • • 28 Avenue • - The recommended traffic diverter at 28th Avenue /Walnut Street will significantly • decrease traffic volumes on 28th Avenue and likely mitigate cut - through traffic. While Observations there will likely be some residual traffic demand on 28th Avenue after the diverter is initially installed, the inconvenience and out of direction travel it will cause will likely lead drivers to eventually seek alternate travel routes in the long run. - If it is the neighborhood's desire to implement speed humps as a speed reduction Recommendations device, it is suggested that speed humps on 28th Avenue be part of a phased • • implementation that follows a review of traffic patterns after the installation of a traffic diverter at the 28th Avenue /Walnut Street intersection. Phasing - Speed humps on 28 Avenue should be reviewed as part of Phase 2. 31st Avenue • • - The BCNA proposal recommends three speed humps between Chestnut Avenue and Tieton Drive to deter drivers from using 31 as an alternative to 32n • Observations - Although no traffic volume or speed information was conducted as part of this study effort, field observations do not suggest that this type of cut - through is occurring in significant numbers today. • • - The potential use of speed humps should be considered following a review of changes Recommendations in travel patterns associated with the construction of speed cushions on 32 " Avenue. Prior to then, the city should collect traffic volume and speed data to provide a perspective on conditions today. • Phasing - . Speed humps on 31 Avenue should be reviewed as part of Phase 2. 411 Intersection Traffic Control Assessment & Recommendation The following table provides a summary of the observations, assessments, and recommendations for the use of new intersection traffic control. Table 7 Intersection Traffic Control Assessment and Recommendation 26 Avenue / Walnut Street Intersection - 26 Avenue as it crosses Walnut Street is slightly offset and uncontrolled. Observations • - Traffic volumes are currently low and at an appropriate volume ( <500 ADT) for a local residential street. With the future installation of a traffic diverter at the 28 Avenue /Walnut Street intersection, traffic volumes may increase at this intersection. - The slightly offset and uncontrolled intersection is a concern. To mitigate this condition Recommendations and account for a potential increase in traffic volumes, it is recommended that the intersection be converted to an all -way stop - controlled intersection. Phasing - Stop signs on 26 Avenue should be installed as part of Phase 1. • 23r Avenue / Chestnut Avenue Intersection Observations - The southbound approach along 23 Avenue is yield controlled. - Install a stop sign at the southbound 23r Avenue approach to match typical driver Recommendations expectations at intersections and ensure a consistent form of intersection traffic control throughout the BCNA. Phasing - The stop sign on 23r Avenue should be installed as part of Phase 1. • 22 " Avenue / Chestnut Avenue Intersection Observations - The southbound approach along 22 " Avenue is yield controlled. Recommendations - Install a stop sign at the southbound 22" Avenue approach to match driver • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • • BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952, August 28, 2009 Page 20 • expectations and ensure a consistent form of intersection traffic control. • • - The stop sign on 22 Avenue should be installed as part of Phase 1. Phasing 34 Avenue / Chestnut Avenue Intersection Observations - - - The northbound approach along 34 Avenue is yield controlled. - Install a stop sign at the northbound 34 Avenue approach to match typical driver Recommendations expectations at intersections and ensure a consistent form of intersection traffic control throughout the BCNA. • Phasing - The stop sign on 34 Avenue should be installed as part of Phase 1. 35 Avenue / Chestnut Avenue Intersection Observations - The northbound approach along 35 Avenue is yield controlled. - Install a stop sign at the northbound 35 Avenue approach to match typical driver Recommendations expectations at intersections and ensure a consistent form of intersection traffic control • throughout the BCNA. Phasing - The stop sign on 35 Avenue should be installed as part of Phase 1. Curb Bulbouts The BCNA proposal suggests the inclusion of curb bulbouts that that would eliminate turning movements from Walnut Street onto 27th Avenue southbound. As stated above, it is believed that the 28th Avenue/Walnut Street traffic diverter will significantly reduce traffic volumes on 28th Avenue by creating enough out -of- direction travel such that it becomes an undesirable travel route. It is subsequently felt that there will only be a small increase in traffic volumes along 27th Avenue in the short term as drivers adjust and find new alternate routes. As such, the recommended curb bulbouts and turning movement restrictions are likely unnecessary. • • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • • ID III BCNA Traffic Calming Study August 2009 rte" , a F a a_a . .1 a L ' r � fn , - y_ _a_ < < 2 = _OWN AVE o .� =ma' = MOIN INN = _ _ � ; _�' ������ 1111 1 11111-i 1111 ■1P .Z.1 .111 ■ ■1P 11 1111 N1111 , .11 ■111111111 1■1� 1111111 . • -- ■� 011111 �� =� < • r � ' ' <j. 1 1 1 i—i �u iII■I�® i S o L r 1 11■ o �— _ - - „N u Li' i I H � MES 17. TI. z llllll �' � x R --mom . ���� � � R,; S.1._ �IIIIII� � .1. T i i � . It ; ■��1o�, r■. z • I. . 1�1ol1� X11 1 W_YAKIMAAVE . X 111 ri lP .r 1 11 �� 4 11LtieRE$7 C_ 1 1 1 • 1 ( ) 1 i ) 1 � anima miaow ' el f ' N p ��f{ -■ I( m < i fi W'CHESTNUT M - - � ` .■ .� 41111111111 ■ ll .-. .... • IN C NN <� ■�■■i Ss �i - 0.. . ,�� �� „'lll ill .li . R m , , i _ �: II �� . z r S7 I} .■� W yG ■I� �. f y P�LA I NEA � -� . � � _. 1� - - _ - • H.OMEAR �M M = I IT • s , ... . mum •� mil _ -- L - � S - W_WALNUZST _ W WALNUTS • �. L7 U 7 ■ ■ R� ■■ m = ��4 �= 111 -�� mr: NE i - . LE GEND 2.1 MN NM it �� INSTALL SPEED HUMP (PHASE 1) MI • • 111.' ,i • I . 1'! in E 111 ill E Iwo 5 I aeo IN STALL SPEED HUMP (PHASE 2) • �— �1 �-- .-- - _ _ i ---,_ — 1 , 110111 7 B 1 1r ___ s _ r- I NSTALL SPEED CUSHION • INSTALL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE NF(. Ave _ � - -- K e INSTALL STOP SIGN --r — � IN Mr ■ INSTALL TRAFFIC DIVERTER AI AM • = ,11 _ — — — X IMPLEMENT STREET CLOSURE I — EXISTING STOP SIGNS RECOMMENDED TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICES YAKIMA, WA 4 K KrrTELSON & ASSOC IATES, INC. TRAMPO ENG E PLA NNWAG • 8CNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 411 August 28, 2009 Page 21 • SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS - • Based on the information summarized above, Table 8 presents a summary recommendation of traffic calming measures for Phase 1 as well as an estimated cost of construction. The preliminary cost estimates have been requested by both City of Yakima staff and YVMH representatives. BCNA representatives noted that our initial recommendation report either focused solely on or placed too much of an emphasis on cost as a determining factor for the inclusion of traffic calming measures. While cost was one of the evaluation criteria, other factors were evaluated with equal or more weight such as safety (previously outlined), roadway geometrics, and the general appropriateness of various forms of traffic calming devices. As with all improvement projects, the issue of cost must be considered given the current state of available funding sources. • Table 8 Recommended Traffic Calming Plan Calming Measure Approximate Construction Cost YVMH Campus Plan • .Mitigation Measures . • Traffic diverter at 28 /Walnut to close campus • Depends on extent of landscaping, etc. Closure of 29 and 30 between Tieton and Chestnut Depends on extent of landscaping, etc. • • • ® Phase.1 Fo Speed Humps o Closure VMH llowing of ?Y Campus p n 24 between Tieton and Chestnut $4,000 • 5 Speed Cushions on 32nd $17,500 - $25,000 2 Speed Humps on 26 north of Yakima Avenue $4,000 • All -way stop control at 26 /Walnut Street $1,000 4 Speed Humps on Yakima Avenue $8,000 • 3 Speed Humps on Chestnut Avenue $6,000 Stop sign on southbound 22n at Chestnut Avenue $500 Stop sign on southbound 23r at Chestnut Avenue $500 • Stop sign on northbound 34t at Chestnut Avenue $500 Stop sign on northbound 35 at Chestnut Avenue $500 Total Estimated Phased Costs $42,500 - $50,000 Note: Estimated Cost of a Speed Hump = $2,000 Estimated Cost of a Speed Cushion = $3,500 • Estimated Cost of a Stop Sigh Installation = $500 In addition to the Phase 1 improvements, the following measures can be considered after a comprehensive monitoring study following implementation of the hospital street closures and 110 Phase 1 devices: • Traffic Circle at 26th /Chestnut • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 22 • Speed humps on 24th north of Chestnut • Speed humps on 28th north of Yakima • Speed humps on 36th • Speed humps on 31" Depending on the results of the monitoring studies, other measures may also be investigated in the future. Kittelson & Associates, Inc, Portland, Oregon BCNA Traffic Calming Project #: 8952 August 28, 2009 Page 23 MONITORING PLAN A follow up evaluation should be performed to ensure that the recommended traffic calming measures remain effective. Traffic patterns can be expected to change over time, due to factors such as general city growth, driver response to increasing roadway congestion along the arterial street network, and new development such as the Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital expansion. As such, periodic monitoring of traffic conditions should be conducted within the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood, including the following: • Traffic volume counts and speed survey data at one or more locations on each through street. • An ongoing review of intersection and roadway crash data. • A review of traffic data prior to and after implementation of traffic calming devices to identify the potential for further refinements. We look forward to working with the City, Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital, and BCNA representatives to finalize the traffic calming plan. Please let us know if you have any questions in the meantime. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • Appendix A Traffic Calming Circle Dimensions Yakima Traffic Calming April 2009 (1"=40') 5.0' 22.0' 5.0' — EXISTING UTILITY POLE \� EXISTING CURB FACE 5.5' BARGE — — TRAFFIC CALMING 5.5' 16.7' 16.7' CIRCLE ik RECONSTRUCT CURBS TO ACCOMMODATE 12' RADIUS EXISTING UTILITY POLE 0 z N 3 M NOTES: m • ALL DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE , CHALLENGES: a • ALL FOUR CURB RETURNS ARE TOO SMALL AND 3 WOULD NEED TO BE RECONSTRUCTED TO A 12' MINIMUM RADIUS. o • TWO EXISTING UTILITY POLES ARE LOCATED IN THE CLEAR ZONE AND WOULD NEED TO BE RELOCATED. • DIFFERENCE IN CROSS STREET WIDTHS WOULD NECESSITATE A CUSTOM FORM ELLIPTICAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE. 0 CONCEPTUAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE LAYOUT FIGURE 32ND & BARGE YAKIMA, WA 1 K KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / PLANNING Yakima Traffic Calming April 2009. fi (1".40.) 4.5'- 23.0' 4.5' -- 1 • EXISTING CURB FACE 5.0' CHESTNUT .:.� TRAFFIC CALMING 5.0' CIRCLE 17.4' 17.4' EXISTING UTILITY 1 POLE E z 3 M t NOTES: Lrl rn • ALL DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE c y CHALLENGES: a • EXISTING UTILITY POLE IS LOCATED IN THE CLEAR ZONE AND WOULD NEED TO BE RELOCATED. cc • DIFFERENCE IN CROSS STREET WIDTHS WOULD NECESSITATE A CUSTOM FORM ELLIPTICAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE. a 01 m I CONCEPTUAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE LAYOUT FIGURE 32ND & CHESTNUT 2 YAKIMA, WA KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. L,N TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / PLANNING Yakima Traffic Calming April 2009 (1". 5.5 13.0' 5.5' EXISTING UTILITY POLE STORM INLET EXISTING CURB FACE 5.0' 16.2' YAKIMA — — 20:0' — =j- ; — — - AIL TRAFFIC CALMING 5.0' 16.2' CIRCLE 40 STORM INLET / K 7 - RECONSTRUCT CURBS TO ACCOMMODATE 12' RADIUS t E E LL 1� Cr) NOTES: Z.1 • ALL DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE. m CHALLENGES: . a • INTERSECTION HAS POOR PAVEMENT SURFACE CONDITIONS. m • ALL FOUR CURB RETURNS ARE TOO SMALL AND WOULD NEED TO BE RECONSTRUCTED TO A 12' MINIMUM RADIUS. o • EXISTING UTILITY POLE IN THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT IS m LOCATED IN THE CLEAR ZONE AND WOULD NEED TO BE a RELOCATED. • EXISTING STORM DRAINS WOULD NEED TO BE RELOCATED WITH THE RECONSTRUCTED CURB RETURNS. • DIFFERENCE IN CROSS STREET WIDTHS WOULD NECESSITATE A CUSTOM FORM ELLIPTICAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE. CONCEPTUAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE LAYOUT ,9• FIGURE 30TH & YAKIMA 3 YAKIMA, WA ,N` K KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / PLANNING Yakima Traffic Calming April 2009 19 411/ (1".40') -- 5.5' jo 5.5' 1 EXISTING UTILITY POLE \ / EXISTING CURB FACE 5.0' 16.2' YAKIMA ') -20 .0' — — -- - = i A'I ' TRAFFIC CALMING 5.0' 1 6.2 ' CIRCLE m ID I` 1 o r RECONSTRUCT C URBS TO ', ACCOMMODATE 12' RADIUS r F g 0 N O 2 CD 3 N lz NOTES: m • ALL DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE m IS, CHALLENGES: . • ALL FOUR CURB RETURNS ARE TOO SMALL AND s WOULD NEED TO BE RECONSTRUCTED TO A 12' 2 MINIMUM RADIUS. • o • DIFFERENCE IN CROSS STREET WIDTHS WOULD m NECESSITATE A CUSTOM FORM ELLIPTICAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE. •E • THE EXISTING UTILITY POLE IN THE NORTHWEST U QUADRANT IS IN THE CLEAR ZONE AND WOULD NEED m TO BE RELOCATED. ,, to III 0, .3 i.,_ s CONCEPTUAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE LAYOUT FIGURE 26TH & YAKIMA A YAKIMA, WA K KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / PLANNING Yakima Traffic Calming April 2009 El • (1"=40') EXISTING UTILITY 5.5 13.0 5.5' POLE STORM INLET / \ STORM INLET IIIIII MI EXISTING CURB FACE 5.5' 16.7' CHESTNUT „ HESTNUT '-`: =;� - 13:0 — — — - — s , TRAFFIC CALMING i 5.5' 16.7' CIRCLE 411k, \''. \ 013.0' RECONSTRUCT CURBS TO //\_. / ACCOMMODATE 15 RADIUS. E E . rn 0 N O CID 3 N a NOTES: m • ALL DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE m . f,- CHALLENGES: a • ALL FOUR CURB RETURNS ARE TOO SMALL AND m WOULD NEED TO BE RECONSTRUCTED TO A 12 MINIMUM RADIUS. . cqe o • EXISTING UTILITY POLE IN THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT IS IN THE CLEAR ZONE AND WOULD NEED TO BE RELOCATED. - F • EXISTING STORM DRAINS WOULD NEED TO BE ci RELOCATED WITH THE RECONSTRUCTED CURB t RETURNS. • POTENTIAL UNDERGROUND WATER UTILITY LINE Am i CONFLICTS ALONG CHESTNUT. IIIF 2 CONCEPTUAL TRAFFIC CALMING CIRCLE LAYOUT FIGURE 26TH & CHESTNUT 5 YAKIMA, WA J K N KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING / PLANNING F l:07 1KVTTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. { I T R A N S P O R T A T I O N E N G I N E E R I N G / P L A N N I N G 610 SW Alder Street, Suite 700, Portland, OR 97205 503.228.5230 !° 503.273.8169 July 20, 2009 Project #: 8952 Joan Davenport & Joe Rosenlund City of Yakima, 2301 Fruitvale Boulevard Yakima, WA 98902 RE: BCNA Traffic Recommendations Response Dear Joan, We have reviewed the Barge Chestnut Neighborhood Association's (BCNA) correspondence regarding our May 2009 BCNA Traffic Calming Recommendations report. To assist the City and BCNA as they work towards a resolution on future traffic calming plans, this letter provides additional detail behind the initial set of recommendations and addresses the specific comments, questions, and counterproposals offered by the BCNA. BCNA QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS An initial draft of the BCNA Traffic Calming Recommendations report was submitted to the City of Yakima in early May and subsequently distributed to the BCNA for review and comment. Upon receipt of this initial recommendation, several letters and e -mails have been submitted from members of the BCNA. These letters contained a number of questions /comments regarding the supporting data, the need for certain traffic calming measures, and counterproposals for additional traffic calming recommendations. In an attempt to directly address some of the more fundamental questions and comments from the BCNA, the first part of this letter provides additional insight and background behind the rationale of the initial recommendation report. The second part contains a response to the additional traffic calming measures outlined in the BCNA counterproposal. Neighborhood Safety The fundamental premise behind any neighborhood traffic calming assessment is ensuring that traffic volumes and travel speeds are appropriate for the context of the travel way and adjacent land use. An imbalance in either of these two areas can contribute to the potential for neighborhood safety issues. While not included in the original recommendation report, a summary of the neighborhood intersection crash patterns has been provided in this letter and is outlined in the following paragraphs. FILENAME: H :1PROJFILEt8952 - TRAFFIC CALMING Pt IIIION REVIEWIREPOR71FINAL {RESPONSE TO BCNA COMMENTS SAFETY.DOC BCNA Traffic Calming Response Project #: 8952 July 20, 2009 Page: 2 • Intersection Crash History The City of Yakima keeps vehicle collision records at all intersections within the city. Historical crash records were reviewed at all intersections within the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood dating back to January 1, 2003. A summary of the intersection crash history is provided in Table 1. Based on a thorough review of the crash records, the following key points can be reasonably concluded: • With a few exceptions, there were a minimal number of crashes (4 out of 32 total) that - involved injuries. While the data is limited in terms of the detail provided, a lack of injuries can most often be attributed to collisions that occurred at slower travel speeds. This is important to keep in mind when thinking about the context of travel speeds along neighborhood streets. • There were no reported collisions that involved pedestrians at any of the neighborhood intersections. • There was one reported collision that involved a bicyclist at the 24th Avenue/Yakima Street intersection. • There were five crashes that involved DUIs. • Yakima Avenue east of 32 Avenue has experienced a higher number of crashes (13) than similar segments of Barge Street (3) or Chestnut Avenue (3). The, higher number of crashes are likely the result of higher average daily traffic volumes than any specific geometric or roadway deficiency. • While Chestnut Avenue experiences the greatest differential in speeds above the posted . speed limit, there were no vehicle collision patterns that suggest safety issues associated with higher travel speeds relative to the posted travel speed. • Some intersections have experienced a proportionally higher number of crashes than other locations such as 32nd Avenue /Chestnut Avenue. Based on a review of this data, there is no evidence to suggest that neighborhood speeding or cut - through traffic is attributing to these collisions. While a review of the historical crash patterns can be a useful tool in deciphering the presence of existing safety issues, the data for the Barge- Chestnut neighborhood intersections does not appear to have a direct link to the perceived speeding and cut - through traffic concerns expressed by the BCNA. • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon BCNA Traffic Calming Response Project #: 8952 July 20, 2009 Page: 3 TABLE 1 INTERSECTION CRASH SUMMARY (1/03 - 5/09) I I i Collision Type Severity • # of Rear Broad- Side- Fixed Bike / Property Intersection Crashes End side Turning swipe Object Ped Injury Damage Comments 22 " Avenue / 0 - Barge Street - - 22 " Avenue / 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 - One crash involved one vehicle striking Yakima Avenue a fixed object. 22 " Avenue / 0 Chestnut Avenue - - - - I 23 Avenue / 0 - Barge Street - - 23r Avenue / 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 - There were no injuries with the crash, Yakima Avenue suggesting relatively low travel speeds. 23' Avenue / 0 Chestnut Avenue 24 Avenue / 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 - There were no injuries with the crash, Barge Street suggesting relatively low travel speeds. 24 Avenue / - One crash involved a DUI Yakima Avenue 3 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 - One crash involved a bicyclist. There were no injuries reported. 24 Avenue / 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 - Crash involved one vehicle striking a Chestnut Avenue fixed object. 25` Avenue / 0 Barge Street - - - 25 Avenue / 0 - Chestnut Avenue 1 - - - I I 26 Avenue / 0 - Barge Street - - 26 Avenue / - Two crashes involved DUIs Yakima Avenue 4 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 3 - One of the broadside collisions involved an injury. 26 Avenue / 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 - There were no injuries with the crash, Chestnut Avenue suggesting relatively low travel speeds. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon III 0 III BCNA Tra(fic Response Res onse • . . .. July 20, 2009 Project #: 8952 Page: 4 Collision Type J Severity # of Rear Broad- Side- Fixed Bike / Property Intersection Crashes i End side Turning swipe Object Ped Injury Damage Comments 26 Avenue / 0 Walnut Street - - 27 Avenue / 0 Walnut Street - - - - - - 28 Avenue / 0 B • arge Street - 28 Avenue / 2 0 1 1 - There were no injuries with either crash, Yakima Avenue 0 0 0 0 2 suggesting relatively low travel speeds. 28 Avenue / Crash involved a vehicle rear - ending a Chestnut Ave 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 parked car along Chestnut Avenue. 28 Avenue / 0 Walnut Street - - - - 30 Avenue / 0 Barge Street - - - 30 Avenue / Yakima Avenue 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 30 Avenue / 0 . Chestnut Avenue - - - - • 31 Avenue / 0 Barge Street - - - - - 31s Avenue / 0 - Chestnut Avenue - - - - 32 " Avenue / - There were no injuries with either crash, Barge Street 3 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 suggesting relatively low travel speeds. 32n Avenue / 0 _ Yakima Avenue - - - - 32n Avenue / - Five crashes involved broadside Chestnut Avenue 6 1 5 0 0 0 0 3 3 collisions suggesting .a possible • - intersection sight distance issue. • 34 Avenue / 0 I _ Barge Street - - I - - Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon • BCNA Traffic Calming Response Project #: 8952 July 20, 2009 Page: 5 Collision Type Severity # of Rear Broad- Side- Fixed Bike / Property Intersection Crashes End side Turning swipe Object Ped Injury Damage Comments 34 Avenue / - Crash involved a DUI. Yakima Avenue 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 34 Avenue / 0 - Chestnut Avenue - - 35 Avenue / 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 - Crash involved one vehicle striking a Chestnut Avenue fixed object. 36 Avenue / - Crash involved a DUI and a vehicle Barge Street 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 striking a fixed object. 36 Avenue / 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 - Crash involved one vehicle striking a • Yakima Avenue fixed object. 36 Avenue / • - Crashed involved one vehicle • Chestnut Avenue 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 sideswiping a fixed object. ' 36 Avenue / 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W - Crash involved one vehicle rear - ending Walnut Street a parked vehicle. . . Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon IP • ID ill BCNA Traffic Calming Response Project #: 8952 October 12, 2009 Page: 6 • Diverters The following comments were provided in a letter from Jeffrey Feen: Reducing the volume of traffic in the neighborhood is important from a variety of safety aspects. Fewer vehicles /trips should correspond with a smaller likelihood of vehicle and vehicle/ pedestrian accidents. Additionally, a reduction in the ease and speed at which the neighborhood can be navigated should result in a reduction of opportunistic criminal activities. Reduced traffic volume should also assist in making people /vehicles/ activities that are out -of- -place become more noticeable. Thus, traffic calming devices that discourage cut - through traffic should be more fully investigated. Interestingly, the KA recommendations discount the need for diverters, and recognize (pg. 9) that diverters can force traffic to adjacent streets. The KA recommendations then support closure/ diversion of traffic on 28th & 30th, without any consideration for adjacent streets that will experience an increased volume of traffic. This recommendation is contradictory to the comprehensive approach advocated by the BCNA for decreasing the volume of traffic and sets the stage for making one neighbor's relief, another neighbor's new headache. For example, a quick glance of KA's recommendation (pg. 15) suggests that those drivers currently using 28th & 30th Aves. to gain access to Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital (Memorial), from the north will just move to 24th.Ave. and 31st Ave. /Chestnut Ave/ 30th Ave. because there is little to nothing to discourage them from doing so. So, while diverters in the traditional sense have apparently been dismissed, more must be done to discourage cut - through traffic from finding a new path of least resistance. The addition of speed cushions on the north -south streets may be a viable alternative. Traffic diverters change travel patterns in neighborhoods by regulating or precluding certain movements. Within the context of the Barge - Chestnut neighborhood, the use of traffic diverters was given considerable consideration. However, with its traditional street grid pattern, a sizeable and complex implementation of traffic diverters would be needed to adequately minimize cut - through traffic to the level desired by the BCNA. Although cut - through traffic would be minimized, a series of diverters would also minimize the response times for emergency service vehicles, force neighborhood residents to alter desired travel patterns, complicate wayfinding for residents and visitors, and artificially increase traffic volumes on some street segments that are relatively quiet today. Faced with these potential outcomes, it was felt that a more targeted use of traffic diverters /roadway closures that are aimed at minimizing hospital cut - through traffic was a more realistic and appropriate response. • Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon BCNA Traffic Calming Response Project #: 8952 July 20, 2009 Page: 7 411 REVIEW OF BCNA TRAFFIC CALMING COUNTER PROPOSAL In response to our initial recommendation report, the BCNA submitted a counterproposal of modifications and additional traffic calming recommendations. A review of these recommendations are outlined in the sections below. Speeds on Chestnut Avenue As mentioned in the initial recommendation report, Chestnut Avenue is a signed bicycle route. As such, it has a lower posted speed limit (20 mph) when compared to the parallel Yakima Avenue (25 mph) and Barge Street (25 mph) corridors. With the lower posted speed limit, Chestnut Avenue had an 85th percentile speed of approximately 11 mph in excess of the speed limit. However, when compared to all the other major neighborhood streets, the actual 85th percentile speeds on Chestnut Avenue are not much different. In other words, vehicle speeds on Chestnut Avenue are not traveling any faster than vehicles on Barge Street or Yakima Avenue. While this is an important distinction to point out, comments from the BCNA have reiterated the importance of the Chestnut Avenue corridor as a strategic walking and bicycle route. As such, some additional consideration of traffic calming measures west of 32nd Street has been investigated. While there is no safety evidence to suggest a need for additional speed humps, there is also no evidence to suggest additional speed humps would be inappropriate or detrimental. As such, recommendations for additional speed humps are included in the revised traffic calming recommendations. 28 Avenue As part of the BCNA 'counter proposal, it is felt that additional speed humps are needed on 28th Avenue north of Yakima Avenue citing a belief that cut - through traffic will continue to try and use 28th Avenue even after a traffic diverter is installed at the 28th Avenue/Walnut Street intersection. Speed humps are primarily a speed reduction device and are not an effective deterrent for managing cut- through traffic. This issue aside, it is felt that the traffic diverter at 28th Avenue/Walnut Street will significantly decrease traffic volumes on 28th Avenue as a whole. While there will likely be some residual traffic demand on 28th Avenue after the diverter is initially installed, the inconvenience and out of direction travel it will cause will likely lead drivers to eventually seek alternate travel routes in the long run. As such, the BCNA counter proposal for additional speed humps on 28th Avenue is likely unnecessary. However, if it is the neighborhood's desire to implement these traffic calming measures as a speed reduction device, it is suggested that speed humps on 28th Avenue be part of a phased implementation that follows a review of traffic patterns after the installation of a traffic diverter at the 28th Avenue/Walnut Street intersection. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. BCNA Traffic Calming Response Project #: 8952 July 20, 2009 Page: 8 27 Avenue The BCNA counter proposal suggests the inclusion of curb bulbouts that that would eliminate turning movements from Walnut Street onto 27th Avenue southbound. As stated above, it is believed that the 28th Avenue/Walnut Street traffic diverter will significantly reduce traffic volumes on 28th Avenue by creating enough out -of- direction travel such that it becomes an undesirable travel route. It is subsequently felt that there will only be a small increase in traffic volumes along 27th Avenue in the short term as drivers adjust and find new alternate routes. As such, the recommended curb bulbouts and turning movement restrictions are likely unnecessary. 26 Avenue As noted in the initial recommendation report, 26th Avenue as it crosses Walnut Street, is slightly offset and currently devoid of traffic control. To mitigate the potential for safety issues, it was recommended that the 26th Avenue/Walnut Street intersection be converted to an all -way stop controlled intersection. In lieu of the BCNA's recommended additional speed humps, it is felt that the all -way stop control will have a traffic calming affect on existing and future travel speeds along the southern portion of the 26th Avenue corridor. 24 Avenue As noted in the initial recommendation report, two speed humps were recommended for 24th Avenue between Chestnut Avenue and Tieton Road. The placement of these speed humps took into consideration the existing steep grade along the middle portion of this segment of 24th Avenue. Given the grade, the BCNA's counter proposal for a third speed hump is not recommended as speed humps can safety concerns when placed on steeper roadway segments. If it is the neighborhood's desire to implement additional speed humps along the northern half of 24th Avenue as a speed reduction device, it is suggested that they be considered following a review of change in traffic patterns after implementation of the recommended speed humps for the southern portion of 24th Avenue. 31 Avenue The BCNA counter proposal recommended the inclusion of three speed humps along 31St Avenue between Chestnut Avenue and Tieton Drive to deter drivers from using 31St Avenue as an alternate parallel route to 32 Avenue. Given that traffic volumes were not obtained along 31st Avenue as part of the data collection effort, it can not be determined if this is in response to an existing problem or a prediction of probable events. Regardless, speed humps are primarily a speed reduction device and should not be used solely as a deterrent for cut- through traffic. 32 Avenue 41) Several comments were made regarding the use of speed cushions along 32nd Avenue as opposed to the initial recommendation for speed humps. Although speed cushions are slightly less Kittelson & Associates, Inc. BCNA Traffic Calming Response Project #: 8952 July 20, 2009 Page: 9 411 effective at reducing travel speeds, they are often preferred by emergency service providers for their ability to better accommodate emergency vehicles. Given the significance of 32 Avenue, speed cushions can be an appropriate traffic calming device. 36 Avenue Like all other streets within the BCNA, traffic volumes and travel speeds were reviewed along 36th Avenue. Based on this review, several important observations were noted. First, travel speeds on 36th Avenue were slightly lower than other parallel north -south streets. Second, the average daily traffic volume (ADT) was approximately 560 vehicles per day. For a neighborhood street, this volume is far below other parallel streets in the neighborhood that provide a continuous connection between Summitview Avenue and Tieton Drive. Furthermore, for a street that directly serves upwards of 55 homes, it is likely that a large majority of this traffic volume is being generated by the residents that live along the street'. This is not to say that 36th Avenue is devoid of cut - through traffic. However, a review of speed and volume data does not suggest that 36th Avenue is experiencing the same level of perceived speeding and cut- through traffic concerns. As such, the initial report did not recommend any traffic calming measures on 36th Avenue. As part of the BCNA counter proposal, it was recommended that two speed humps be installed between Tieton Drive and Chestnut Avenue and two additional speed humps be installed between Yakima Avenue and Summitview Avenue. While there is no evidence to suggest consistent excessive speeding along 36th Avenue, there is also no real reason why the speed humps could not be installed. If it is the neighborhood's desire to implement these traffic calming measures as a speed reduction measure, it is suggested that they be considered following a review of change in traffic patterns after implementation of traffic calming measures along 32nd Avenue. Cost On a number of comments, it was noted that our initial recommendation report either focused solely on or placed too much of an emphasis on cost as a determining factor for the inclusion of traffic calming measures. While cost was one of the evaluation criteria, other factors were evaluated with equal or more weight such as safety (previously outlined), roadway geometries, and the general appropriateness . of various forms of traffic calming devices. As with all improvement projects, the issue of cost must be considered given the current state of available funding sources. 1 Studies conducted by the Institute of Transportation Engineers and documented in Trip Generation, 8th Edition, have found that on average, a single family detached home generates approximately. 9.57 vehide trips per day. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. BCNA Traffic Calming Response Project #: 8952 July 20, 2009 Page: 10 CONCLUSION We appreciate the opportunity to respond to the comments, questions, and counterproposals as submitted by the BCNA. We hope the additional safety information and assessment of .traffic calming recommendations is adequate and helpful as the City works with the BCNA to develop a final set of recommendations. As always, we are happy to continue to provide additional information and assessment on this important subject. Sincerely, KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Julia kuhn P.E. Matt Hughart, AICP Principal Engineer Senior Planner • 61 W P.5,. 46 I t 1,4 4e1 t 3 In 11 s � Kitte/son & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon January 18th, 2011 City of Yakima, Council Chambers 129 N 2 St. Yakima, WA 98901 Re: Public Hearing on the Barge- Chestnut Area Traffic Calming Mayor Cawley, Council Members, City Staff, Good evening, My name is Gary Forrest and I live at 3011 Barge St. in Yakima. I am a Board member of the Barge- Chestnut Neighborhood Association and chairman of the BCNA Traffic Committee. Tonight finds us approaching the final steps of a project that had its beginnings in 2005; a project to address the traffic problems in our neighborhood, namely excessive cut - through traffic and speeding. As residents, we had a growing concern that the problems we were experiencing were only going to get worse, what with the recently announced 30 year expansion plan by Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital and the normal growth of our City. The intent was to reclaim the livability of our streets for the safety of our children, ourselves and all who visit our neighborhood. We formed a committee, started on our homework and sought out information and advice from the Public Works Dept. Chris Waarvick, then head of the Dept, plus, Shelley Willson and especially Joan Davenport from the Streets and Traffic Division made themselves available to us. We made sure we were on the right page as we moved through the City's Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, even through the program's total revision in 2008. We sought out suggestions from our neighbors and read up on the latest thinking in neighborhood traffic control from some of the Nations experts. We formulated a plan and petitioned with 634 signatures favorable to our intent. We also found a very influential supporter of our plan- Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital. The petition plan was reviewed by the Streets and Traffic Division now led by Joe Rosenlund. Outside traffic engineers were hired to do further review. The original BCNA plan was deemed overkill. We went back and forth on a revision and Joe Rosenlund created a compromise plan that was put to the vote of the Neighborhood property owners. The plan passed with a 68% majority. This plan is now our starting point and I emphasize starting point. We don't know for sure how things will go but all of us together have done our best to make an educated plan and we have left room for further review and additional calming devices if necessary plus adjustments to cover for the unintended consequences. Our last step before implementation is formal approval by this Council. This is your opportunity to step up to the plate and support the policies and goals outlined in the Yakima Urban Area Comp Plan that protect the neighborhoods from such things as cut - through traffic and building stuff next to each other in ways that address compatibility. I urge you to give this project a passing vote. Thank you for your time.