Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutODOT re Lafayette Aveo /' `'�iC Board of Count Commissioners March 8, 2010 Mr. Robert Bryant Region Manager ODOT Region 4 63055 N. Highway 97 Bend, OR 97701 Dear Bob: 1300 NW Wall St, Suite 200 • Bend, OR 97701.1960 [541) 388-6570 • Fax (541) 385-3202 www.co.deschute:,.or.us board@co,deschuteE,.or.us Tammy Baney Dennis F. Luke Alan Unger We are asking ODOT to address a long-standing traffic safety issue at NW Lafayette Ave. and the Parkway. The large sign north of Lafayette Ave. ("Lafayette Ave, State/County Offices" exit sign on the west side of the Parkway) restricts sight distance for vehicles entering the Parkway from Lafayette Ave. The marginal sight -distance at this intersection has become more of an issue as the traffic volume and vehicle speed on the Parkway has increased. To accelerate from a stop at Lafayette Ave. onto the Parkway, one must be able to judge the gaps in the flow of traffic. The large sign which obstructs the driver's sight -distance makes it much more difficult to anticipate these ever smaller gaps. Members of the public have mentioned this lack of sight distance in conversations with at least one of the Board members. The Lafayette Ave. access to the Parkway is one of the major accesses to Deschutes County and State services. This issue is of critical importance to the County — we ask that you please look into this issue. We look forward to meeting with you to discuss possible solutions to this public safety concern. Sincerely, The Dese rtes County Board of Commissioners De nis R. Luke, a Alan Unger, Vice Chair ki/VA 7 Tarnrriy Baxley, Commissioner Enhancing the Lives of Citizens by Delivering Quality Services in a Cost -Effective Manner •Oigon April 7, 2010 Board of County Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St, Suite 200 Bend, OR 97701-1960 Dear Commissioners: Department of Transportation Robert W. Bryant Region 4 Manager 63055 N. Hwy 97 Bend, OR 97701 (541)388-6180 FAX: (541) 388-6231 FILE CODE: This is in response to your letter of March 8, 2010, regarding the safety concern and sight distance at the intersection of US 97 (Bend Parkway) and Lafayette Avenue. My Region Traffic Manager has reviewed this location and in the last five years, found that there have been nine crashes in the area of the intersection. None of the crashes were angle crashes which would typically be attributable to a lack of sight distance at the intersection. Several of the crashes were rear -end crashes on Lafayette Avenue itself. This type of crash could be attributed to motorists believing that the driver in front was going to accept a gap when in fact they did not and the second vehicle in line moves forward striking the leading vehicle. There were also some rear -end crashes on the main line of the Parkway itself. This may be caused by turning vehicles slowing down before entering the deceleration lane, or vehicles slowing down in the travel lane because a vehicle from the side street selected too small of a gap in traffic which impeded the flow. Of the nine crashes, eight were property damage only and one crash resulted in a minor injury. We also reviewed the sight distance at the intersection. In a passenger car, the driver actually can look beneath the sign and have limited sight distance. A driver in a Tight truck, SUV or larger truck looks into the sign and for a short time loses sight of the vehicles southbound on the Parkway. In order to gain adequate sight distance, the driver must pull forward into the crosswalk. This is a common maneuver in urban areas. At many intersections buildings, landscaping, parked cars or many other obstacles block sight distance. In these situations, the driver stops at the crosswalk and yields tc any pedestrians and then pulls forward so that he/she has adequate sight distance. I believe the sight distance concern is exacerbated by the lack of available gaps on the Parkway, particularly at peak periods. As you note the speeds and volumes on the Parkway are relatively high. It is becoming more difficult to find a safe gap in traffic. Some potential solutions that we would like to explore with City and County staff are: • Encouraging County staff and customers to use an alternate route to access US 9-J'. Entering US 97 at the Revere or Colorado Interchanges would likely be safer than Board of County Commissioners April 7, 2010 Page 2 of 2 attempting to turn at a 'T' intersection. This could be accomplished through education and outreach or more infrastructure that could be put in place to discourage lefts from the County driveway. • Removing the sign and replacing it with a smaller one. Originally the signing at the intersection only directed motorists to Lafayette Avenue. The County asked us to install a new sign for the County building when it opened. This new sign is significantly larger than the old one. We would have more flexibility in locating a smaller sign. However, we believe that the lack of gaps at the intersection is of larger concern than the available sight distance. • Relocating the existing sign. Relocating the existing sign would be expensive and somewhat limited due to significant utility conflicts in the area. The footings on this size of sign are very Targe and the steel supports are costly. The costs of new supports and footings could easily exceed $10,000 and as mentioned above, we don't believe this will solve the underlying problem. • Restricting turning movements at the intersection of US 97 and Lafayette. The Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) regarding the construction and operation of the Bend Parkway section of US 97 between ODOT and the City of Bend calls for the closure of at -grade intersections on US 97 if a safety problem develops. The IGA doesn't define what a safety problem is. It is up to the City and ODOT to come to agree on when the safety concerns at these intersections warrants further restrictions or closure. As volumes grow, finding gaps on US 97 becomes more difficult. If the alternate routes are viable for the primary user, perhaps we are at that point where we should explore closing some or all of the movements at the intersection. My recommendation will be that we consider the option of restricting the turning movement from Lafayette onto the Parkway southbound. I will schedule a time we can meet at your convenience to discuss this and other options to improve safety for this section of the Bend Parkway. erely, Robert. W. Bry: nt, PE Region Manage • $ ♦ • • ; i • • • 1 • I .0.• • . • 6 11 • •; • • •6 • Proposed Amendment to Bend Area General Plan Draft - June 30, 1992 STREETS AFFECTING PARKWAY Several City streets segments will be critical to the efficient functioning of the Parkway. Careful review of development proposals and regulation of access along these streets is essential to ensuring that traffic does not adversely impact the Parkway. In general, direct access to these streets should not be allowed where alternative access exists or can be provided. These streets are identified in Table 1, below: :?;:*•'•• . r•. .•:. .{ : .r) .: - K.R. .. •., ii. :..+ •.\., .•.;, •Cr :. `7s• '.�?"4 �"e'L:;; 1. }i.'^YS i. rhiG.'•'`'.C:..^:: }: +i`r\i<.+rays. .t•••+A. :: :. s. :s t:i M1i' • ':t�.G •. :"ti (.4ysV'lr:.tiy:. ': {4 :i •:.•i:''• Table:a`;T.-StreetS.egments.{ v£critica` eff is :ent ' inctioning of zthe.:-Parkwa M1; ii ..(;`..::, a'•r�.,-x.'::i `•: �.:r. r:' :.:.ti>:; ::.;4`'•;3.`: •�: :..ii •�2i•:. "i ,•''t.%;1` Ys ...y : ..r�`•;yx... }?L..... it '�'` .•., ..%;.. - y:•y.:;�, 10111. Empire Blvd. between 3rd Street and Anderson Road Hill Street between Revere and Wall Wilson Ave between Pelton Road and 3rd Reed Road between the Parkway and 3rd Butler Market Rd. from 3rd Street east to the Parkway Irving Ave* between the Parkway and Hill Greeley Ave* between the Parkway and Hill Hill St* between Kearney and Irving Pinebrook Blvd between the Parkway and 3rd Colorado between Harriman and Hill ._. Arthur Avenue between the Parkway anct 3rd Powers Rd between Blakeley and 3rd Badger Rd. between the Parkway and 3rd Hawthorne Ave* between the Parkway and Hill Lafayette Ave* between the Parkway and Hill St. Kearney Ave* between the Parkway and Hill * Street segment. of special concern. See discussion following list -1- EXHIBIT D 1 4 t1 1'• 1 1• 1+`` 1 ' AREA OF SPECIAL CONCERN The street segments highlighted with an asterisk in Table 1 constitute an area of special concern. This area is bounded by Lafayette Avenue on the north, the Parkway to the east, Hill Street on the west, and Greeley to the south. (See Figure 2).. This area is currently predominately residential, but the majority of the area is zoned commercial. Given this zoning, the proximity to the Parkway, and the existence of several local streets with direct access to the Parkway, there will be strong redevelopment pressures on the parcels in this area. As commercial redevelopment occurs in this area, direct access to the streets highlighted in Table 1 should not be allowed. For parcels abutting Lafayette, Kearney, Irving, Hawthorne, and Greeley, access should be taken from •the "alley". If it is not feasible for the development to take access off of the alley, any direct access onto the street segments should be conditional on dedicating right of way for the future development of a street along the existing alley alignment. At such time as this street is built, the development would close their access onto the street of special concern and take their exclusive access from the former alley alignment. If traffic on any of these streets adversely affects the safety or function of the Parkway, the connection of these streets with the Parkway may be restricted or eliminated by the Oregon Department of Transportation. emend.bgp i -2- 1 1� + 1', ••sJ +c 1 o v� Bonnie Baker For the record for next Monday. Please include in the agenda packet. , 71- M 4) rz4 N H oZ H "F/j) � a) O C/1 czta c7 4-1 y �Q ci H O O czt O O 1.4 0 U a) czt w czt 11 4-1 U -451 G) FYI Dennis Luke NV N cn ci 0 - 0 i--- at cncn 0 cct 7454 E0 O 'rte., Ucs c s_ U ci 0 4) v1 'd v)O 1) 'd O = O N co $., N 0 71. - 0- G) 'F Z �� o `r CiA 0 Ua () U 4-4 Ute° w0 , w au 0 1 �1) Eiu o � '4-'.4_) (1.) N N '� 0 c) .Q" 0 cg b � r—.1 c:Ii $,.. o 1) C> 0 a >, a) V O N C/) 0 o U E . au N bA N Q O RI N cd 4) b1) U .0 a°���0 oob 'd •.19 Z r�-1.--; UC> O H 1)H d E E IL) O 1 y cd 2O a) Pocx .� .-4 pcto-.cu1) 0 cd ON �,b .- a 3 a)4~^. vi cn P U vO � O . o .. U °?EE O 00 .O C4 'ILI O.� cn cd e' cl a) O to VI c ca0 78 75 b0 O b 0, O c 3 0 r,3 b c - ° Oa1)+JoC� r0 ( oA ,4 C7 Cd 2 E a) ui c•o � cid o �"P� ` �r4 vl '[ Q Q tO 0 0 3 0 °0 r,;ti 0 0 00 cu 0 cu > o g U �, 0 •ti �'(4 0 0 0 ; °�°,5 ° °' s- 1�r o ' •vl›. 4.a) v) ' cd vv a)CN U bU .. cu i cd OO -0. 0 C V) o 0a v/E-+Z Page 1 of 1 Bonnie Baker From: Kevin Keillor [kevin@keillorhill.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 9:34 AM To: Board Subject: Parkway and Lafayette Commissioners: The main obstacle to turning right onto the Parkway from Lafayette is that the majority of vehicles use the right Ian a. ODOT should considered signs along the Parkway that advise through traffic to use the left lane and local traffic tc use the right lane. This could have the added benefit of slowing speeders in the left lane. Respectfully, Kevin J. Keillor 4/28/2010