Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-14-2003 Study SessionDublin City Council Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 -Council Chambers Present: Absent: Mayor McCash Mr. Kranstuber Vice Mayor Boring Mr. Reiner Mr. Lecklider Ms. Salay Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher (arrived 8:10 p.m.) Ms. Brautigam Mr. Hammersmith Mr. Gunderman Mayor McCash called the study session to order at 7:15 p.m Historic Dublin Riverwalk Mr. Gunderman presented background on the subject. In the City's Community Plan, there is an area known as "Old Dublin," in which it is suggested that the City pursue a system of pathways that would give both access to the river and connectivity to other portions of the City. At the time the Community Plan was written, however, it was understood that no one had looked at the practical aspects of such a connection; a future study would be necessary. That is the subject of this discussion. Mr. Gunderman introduced Mark Kline, of Kinzelman and Kline, who began work on this study approximately a year ago. They began their study by initially meeting with members of the Chamber of Commerce and individual business owners. Others were, Dublin School Board members, members of the City's Natural Resources Advisory Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, Architectural Review Board, a library representative, and individual homeowners. Mark Kline, Kinzelman and Kline, stated that they started the process by dividing the river or greenway into three study areas: the Scioto River corridor, the Historic District corridor, the Shawan Falls/Indian Run corridor. Although they are interconnected, they are also distinctly different with separate issues, which must be addressed in the design process. The Scioto River Corridor This area runs from the I-270/Emerald Parkway bridge south to the Historic District. Aerial photographs were taken of this area, and the entire river corridor was traveled and photographed by boat from the water. There is much that can be seen from the water that cannot be seen from the land. GIS maps identified City-owned property, public lands, the existing bikeway, and the proposed bikeway. He noted that the "staging area" for the Emerald Parkway bridge construction is public land. As such, could be a parkland access point to the river for fishing, canoeing, kayaking, or viewing purposes. The City has right-of-way along Emerald Parkway, and there is Federal property in the 1- 270 bridge overpass. In that location, there would be a means to access the river from the opposite side. There are also the possibility of the City acquiring additional greenspace along the river, which would provide additional linkage to the river. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 2 There is a topography issue. From Dublin Road, dropping to the Scioto River, the grade js steep; however, at the river, the land is fairly flat. There are flood zones, and they re well-documented on all the plans. The Community Plan suggested that there be a river access trail system along the Scioto River. However, there are existing residential lots with existing structures in relatively close proximity to the edge of the river shoreline. This presents achallenge -how can a trail easement be acquired without impacting the homeowners in that particular area. The issues have been outlined Mr. Kline stated that there are also problems with the existing structures, which are situated close to the river. This could be better addressed by using a boardwalk system along the river's edge. There are questions as to how the boardwalk could be constructed and maintained. If the boardwalk were raised above the water, from a safety standpoint, it would be desirable to have a railing. Railing is not functional, though, with an undulating stream, which carries a lot of debris. It would destroy a boardwalk. In addition, this is a navigable stream, so there are restrictions as to what is permitted in and near the water in the flood zone. This is an area that identified for potential, later development. In reality, due to the financial and physical impacts, the feasibility of developing this area is minimal. Indian Run Corridor Mr. Kline noted that even if the section between the currently-owned City property down to Indian Run is not feasible for connection today, there are other options for access to the river. That could occur from the Dublin Road bikeway or from public properties that are adjacent to Dublin Road. Perhaps such access could be designated as weekend access, when the businesses are closed and the parking lots are empty. At Indian Run, with the streamflowthat Domes out and underneath Dublin Road, a pedestrian bridge would be necessary to access the other side. In the "staging area" north of Emerald Parkway Bridge, northeast of the Scioto River, it would be possible to construct a small parking lot with a trail switchback down to the river, which could be connected to the existing sidewalk on the bridge. This could also provide access to the bikeway. The bikeway runs along the road, but there are currently no staging areas. This area could also provide schoolbus parking andlor a picnic table or two. In the area from the I-270 bridge to Indian Run, the slope and conditions are precarious. Shawan Fallsllndian Run Corridor Mr. Kline noted that five years ago, the City purchased two parcels of land near Shawan Falls. The plan was for a passive park areas, trail access, and viewing opportunities for Shawan Falls in a controlled, environmentally sensitive area. They designed a small parking lot with safe pedestrian and handicapped accessibility to an amazing area. Shawan Falls is a controlled trail access. Presently, there are severe rock cliff drop-off areas. Walking along the edge is a safety hazard; however, the public is entering the area. They suggest a rim trail be constructed, pulled back and away from the top of the edge, with an occasional overlook created at select safe paints, perhaps deck overlooks. The City can choose where the overlooks are to eliminate risk, maintain the beauty, and provide accessibility. There is presently a crossing, but it does not have the capacity for Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 3 two-way traffic. Another site could be chosen, which would be more safe and yet not diminish the visual impact of the waterfalls. There is a bikeway along S.R. 161, and the bridge at Shawan Falls and S.R. 161 will be replaced. It is very narrow, and presently there is no pedestrian access. They have suggested to Engineering that if the bridge is replaced that it accommodate one pedestrian lane. Mr. Kline indicated that they have met with school officials and they have shared their concerns regarding potential impact to school property. He suggested to the school that the trail would be created on the backside of the fence. There are options for either a higher or lower trail with site-specific observation areas. There is a historic cemetery behind the Library. The bikepath comes down and breaks away before entering the Library property, thus avoiding adding traffic congestion to the Library circulation area. It is desirable to keep the pedestrian traffic separate from Library vehicular traffic. The parking lot recently developed on school properly is located adjacent to this area. The path would be on the opposite side from the Library. A minimum-width sidewalk could connect the trail to the downtown Historic Dublin business district. There will also be a pedestrian-activated warning signal, which will provide a safe crossing where there is presently not a traffic signal. He noted that they had considered bringing the pedestrian traffic down on N. Riverview Street in the area where a wood staircase leads to the S. R. 161 bikepath which leads under Dublin Road bridge. However, this is a vehicle- dominatedarea, and it is not practical to consider emphasizing pedestrian traffic without making significant changes. Because those changes did not appear feasible, they did not pursue that direction. The property lines are very tight in the Riverview Street area, and it includes an historic stone wall. Although there is significant pedestrian traffic, the sidewalk system works very well. Historic Downtown District Most of the properties are low-lying. There is the possibility far a trail system to link the area to the river. North Riverview goes down to the bridge at 161. After going down a staircase, and crossing under the bridge, another flight of stairs leads up to South Riverview. Or, it is possible to go down another flight of stairs and back under the bridge to Kiwanis Park. The park can also be accessed by a drive lane. At the river level, Kiwanis park and the City-owned land are connected. Consideration was given to connecting the various islands in the river. After learning from the residents, that the islands are occasionally submerged during the year, the idea was abandoned. He noted that the nature of a river is to leave behind debris along the banks as it rises and falls, therefore, the parkland along the river is not meant to be pristine park space. The riverbank environment cannot be mowed and manicured. There is an existing staircase to South Riverview. As this is City-owned land, it is possible to make a connection between the business district and the river. The comp plan shows a pedestrian trail system south from South Riverview down to Short Street. However, the setback of the homes on South Riverview is minimal. Putting in a sidewalk system would significantly impact those properties. They now believe that putting a walkway down South Riverview is not feasible. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 4 One suggestion in the comp plan may have some potential, depending on Council's prioritization of a river access from the business district to the riverl. An access from Blacksmith Lane is not feasible. Because of its narrowness and steepness, if Spring Hill were used by pedestrians, it could not be used by vehicular traffic. A pedestrian re- circulation to Blacksmith Lane was also determined to be unfeasible. They propose that South Riverview and Blacksmith Lane remain the same two-way circulation, and that the circulation be made pedestrian-only. Another issue was a home on Spring Hill that has such a small setback, that it is impossible to squeeze in a four-foot sidewalk. One section of the house may extend into the right-of-way or under the road. Because there are only three lots on that section of the road, it would not be a problem to make the connection pedestrian only. There is no through traffic. There is some through traffic on Blacksmith Lane, used by those looking for a shortcut to bypass the traffic light. Some citizens have also informed them that the S.R. 161 bridge is unsafe for pedestrians. It is too narrow with high curbs. The suggestion has been made for a pedestrian bridge over the river to connect with the trail system on the other side. However, that is not practical. It could be feasible, if there is a way of suspending a pedestrian bridge off the existing superstructure of the bridge, and it was not necessary to erect piles into the riverbed, or piles could be lined up with the existing support structure, it would have less impact on the river and construction costs. Dayton is constructing two similar bridges to provide a pedestrian connection from a large park area to the downtown area. Mayor McCash inquired if Kiwanis has a master plan far this park area. Staff response is that there is such a plan. Ms. Salay inquired if the feasibility of a pedestrian suspension from an existing bridge has been studied at all. Mr. Kline indicated it has nat. Yet, his previous experience indicates to him that it is a viable option. Ms. Boring inquired how adding that element would aesthetically impact the bridge. Mr. Kline stated that it would be necessary to set the elevation of the bridge. This was included in the study undertaken during the planning of the Emerald Parkway bridge. The hydraulic information related to this stream is available in that report. This is an attractive bridge, and it would be desirable not to add something that would detract from its appearance. Presently, he is unaware of the elevation that may be required. Additional research would be necessary before it could be presented as a feasible project. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 5 Mr. Kline stated that coming down South Riverview, there is a stairway that leads down under the bridge, then back up. The original bridge contained a stairway on both sides. A later bridge replaced them with a single wood staircase, which serves only one side. The suggestion is to add a vertical elevation staircase on one side. That, along with an additional sidewalk should meet the citizens' needs. This would eliminate the necessity of going down into a neighborhood that is not part of the intended destination before going back up to the business district. He showed a concept for Spring Hill of a pedestrian circulation. The parking lot would have access on a good slope. It would be loaded from Blacksmith Lane. There would still be good two-way circulation, leading down one street then back up to High Street. He noted that the original comp plan called for a second pedestrian conncection with an overlook on Pinney Hill. However, because of the dense vegetation, a view of the river is not possible from that location. Therefore, they have removed that component from their plan. Finally, their plan calls for a sidewalk along the north side of Short Street. They recommend that the City also purchase a couple of vacant parcels. Although linear access up and down the river may not be feasible, the suggestion is to provide overlooks or access at key points along the river. The justification for this location is that it is at the terminus of a large residential area, and could provide the community great long views of the river. The study covers construction details for trails, path systems and a boardwalk. This includes a bikeway boardwalk at Shawan Falls along S. R. 161. He also shared information on a floating system, which can be done in a very wet area. It has been done at a couple of private Dublin residences. It is a minimal impact construction. Piles are run into the river, support beams are added, and the boardwalk is run on top of the structure. It does not disturb anything except the area the foundation is in. There is a similar boardwalk system in the Quarry area. Mr. Gunderman stated a good portion of the comp plan attempts to make connections all along the river. In the northern section, that is not practical. In Old Dublin, South Riverview was originally thought to be an obvious location, but due to the configuration of South Riverview, that is also not practical. That leaves a lack of pedestrian access from High Street to the river. At this point, it has become important to evaluate the priority of a pedestrian connection in this area. This could work in the Spring Hill area better, next to the Kiwanis Park. They had this project on hold for awhile, pending the stormwater project, thinking it better to consolidate efforts that would disrupt the ground. However, that project did not occur, but vital surveys were performed. Ms. Salay inquired if the City were to make Spring Hill pedestrian only, what impact would that have on the area traffic? Are two-way alleys an option? The one-way signs in that area are often not respected. Mr. Gunderman stated that one of the reasons a sidewalk on South Riverview was not practical was that it almost demanded acne-way street system. Converting Spring Hill Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 6 to pedestrian traffic would not demand any changes in the adjoining streets. They can retain atwo-way system. There may be a segment of a street or two that would need to be changed to one-way, but this would have less impact than a pedestrian connection on South Riverview. Ms. Salay inquired if this would be up from South Riverview to High Street. Ms. Gunderman responded that was the most practical solution. Mrs. Boring inquired if the proposal would also redo the street to make it more inviting. Mr. Gunderman stated that it would. Sketches in the plan suggest how the street would look. These designs have been shared with the public in the meetings on this topic. Mrs. Boring stated that she is concerned with the degree of difficulty for senior citizens to use it. It should be made attractive and inviting. It could be a positive addition to the community, if done right. Mr. Gunderman stated that the issue which has been discussed thoroughly is what is the priority or goal. Is it to provide access to the river for this community, which is primarily residential? Or is it to retain the character of the residential area as it is and not add pathways that would bring in outside elements, thereby changing the community. This is a policy issue. If the priority is to provide pedestrian access into that area, staff's recommendation is that Spring Hill is the best option. The priority has not yet been clearly defined. Mrs. Boring inquired how the Community Plan defined it. Mr. Gunderman responded that the Community Plan suggested pathways in this location as well as others that staff has determined impractical. Mrs. Boring stated that the Community Plan stated that the river is the drawing) point of the community, and should be emphasized accordingly, so is staff wanting this Council's confirmation of that policy? Mr. Gunderman responded that staff would like that confirmation, ar other direction, in view of the type of constraints presented here, for instance, the fact that, although it is the best choice, Spring Hill is a very steep hill. Ms. Salay stated that she has attended many of the public meetings during which the residents have discussed the feasibility of the rivennralk. While everyone agrees with the Community Plan -they want access to the river. However, studies show that at certain points along the river, it is impractical to try to achieve that access. On South Riverview Street, the river cannot be seen due to the neighbors' backyards. If the riverwalk is made on Riverview Street, the street is so narrow and the setbacks so small that it would be necessary for the City to take one homeowner's front yard entirely to put in the necessary sidewalk. That is not really necessary. It is not that the residents do not want people to walk on their streets, but that they do not want to lose their yards to the Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 7 sidewalks. In that case, it makes mare sense to take the formal rivenivalk up the street to the business district on South High Street, to benefit those businesses. She envisions that the river walk would be where there is a river access. This report will relieve the concerns of the residents of South Riverview. The traffic on that street is slow and light. It is possible far pedestrians to walk down the street without a formal sidewalk. Mrs. Boring stated that this does not address the policy question raised by Mr. Gunderman. Ms. Salay stated that he has pointed out that the Community Plan states that the river is one of the City's primary assets, and access to the community should be provided wherever possible. Mr. Kline and staff agree with that direction and have indicated that in many locations, it is possible to do that. However, they have also pointed out that an S. Riverview Street it is not impractical. On the backside, the walk along the riverwalk is too steep. The next option is having the riverwalk on South Spring Street. Mrs. Boring inquired if that was the question. Mr. Kline stated, as a community, is a physical connection in the Historic Business District essential? There are other connections possible within the community, for instance, the Emerald Parkway connection at the I-270 bridge. There are other points of access to the river, outside the historic business district. There is more flexibility in the unbuilt environments along the river. The built environment of the historic business and neighboring residential area are less flexible. It is feasible, but requires the elimination of vehicular traffic. Also, n the business district there is no other starting point for this connection than the Kiwanis Park area. Mr. Lecklider referred to page 20 of the plan. He asked if the path along the riverbank has been concluded impractical due to its close proximity to the river. There is no possibility for a boardwalk? Ms. Salay responded that it disappears in bad weather. Mr. Gunderman stated that a boardwalk would be too wet/slick, and a railing would not be sufficiently effective on a boardwalk right next to the river. Mr. Kline stated that the hillside from the backs of the homes to the river is extremely steep. Something would have to be done further north. Mrs. Boring stated that making Spring Hill a pedestrian walkway would give a connection to the City-owned land on the river. Mr. Gunderman stated that after it became obvious that a connection was not possible from South Riverview that we really departing from the Community Plan spirit. Spring Hill was at least in the Plan, and the best option available. Mr. Lecklider inquired if feedback has been received from residents regarding the suggestion to close Spring Hill to vehicular traffic. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 8 Mr. Gunderman responded that although discussions with the residents included the probability of pedestrian traffic on Spring Hill, it was only recently that it was concluded that the street would not accommodate both vehicular and pedestrian - it had to be one or the other.. Ms. Salay stated that there are many property owners along the river who cannot be heard tonight in this forum. It is important that Council not came to any decisions without having their input. Mrs. Boring stated that it is important to provide public access to the city only and to provide it from some other area than 161, which has heavy vehicular traffic. Mayor McCash inquired, if Spring Hill is closed, how would the traffic flow for Blacksmith Alley be handled? Mr. Kline stated that it would be necessary to study the traffic patterns as they exist before making a recommendation. Ms. Salay noted that Blacksmith Alley is an escape route when High Street backs up, so it will be important to take traffic counts and determine vehicle designations. Mayor McCash stated that he believes the option of closing Spring Hill as an alleyway and turning it into a pedestrian connection makes sense. The vision of the Community Plan was to connect North and South Riverview and north and south business district and provide different connections other than the Bridge/High Street intersection. The stairway connection at S.R. 161 and providing something at Spring Hill ties the two sides of the district together. It gives a more pedestrian environment and provides access to the City-owned property an the river. The residents and the Historic Dublin Association had requested the City to purchase river-front property, preserve it, not develop it. It is a scenic amenity which makes sense to share with the community. In addition, eliminating that alley should help the traffic flow in the business district. He believes the Spring Hill proposal is a good approach to the situation. Mrs. Boring inquired if there would be parking designated areas available for visitors to the Kiwanis park? Mr. Kline stated that according to their observations, there is a significant amount of pedestrian traffic on S. Riverview and na real vehicular conflict on S. Riverview. The residents indicated that there are people who park down on that block. That likely will be an enforcement problem far a limited time. It could also be controlled by changing the road environment. For instance, the flat pavement, could be replaced with a curb sections. Ms. Salay inquired about ADA requirements. Is it sufficient for the City to make the trail or sidewalk accessible except where the topography prohibits. Mr. Kline indicated that the City is required only to make the best effort possible to provide handicap accessibility. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 9 Mayor McCash inquired about the "reasonable access" presently provided for the City- owned property south of Bridge Street. The majority of visitors park up at the City- owned lot by Dublin Village Tavern. What if the City provided two parallel parking places on S. Riverview for this purpose? Could a handicapped individual gain access to the City-owned property. Mr. Kline stated that there is a small plateau area. They could research the possibility of providing handicapped parking there. An overlook could be provide an opportunity for some type of overlook, similar to those considered for Shawan Fallls and Indian Run. The same thing could occur on the south end at Short Street. Those opportunities are limited. Mrs. Boring inquired if there was a timeline involved for getting this finalized and then for scheduling it in the CIP. Mr. Kline stated that part of their task is to test those elements that are part of the Community Plan and determine those that are feasible. Once those are identified for a modified plan, the next step will be to develop an estimate of costs for the CIP. Mrs. Boring suggested that if there is a block of the project that is prepared in advance of the rest of the plan, that it be submitted for CIP approval on its own. Ms. Salay agreed and expressed her opinion that the Shawan Falls project should be fast-tracked ahead of the remainder of the project. Mr. Lecklider referred to page four. He stated that access makes sens from a vehicular perspective. However, at some point it would be necessary to cross Dublin Road or Emerald Parkway. That is a dangerous crossing. Mr. Kline stated that it is a signalized crossing. Ms. Salay inquired if it is possible to cross under the bridge. Mr. Kline stated that there with the sidewalk along the bridge, the tunnels, and the bikeway along Dublin Road, there shouldn't be a problem. On the east side, however, there could be difficult. There is a signal, so perhaps a modification could be made, if the Columbus permits. Columbus has property along Riverside Drive, and they have planned a bikeway interface with the City of Dublin's bikeway. Mr. Hammersmith stated that when the next phase of Emerald Parkway, which will run to the east, this project will be considered. Although it will be a large section of highway, it will continue the present configuration, which includes a bikepath and sidewalk. Mr. Kline stated that would present the opportunity for a tunnel under Riverside Drive. He inquired if it is Council's desire for staff to evaluate the traffic patterns in Historic Dublin. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 10 Council consensus was that Mr. Kline proceed with the evaluation. Mrs. Boring inquired about maintenance of Kiwanis Park. Mr. Gunderman stated that he has spoken with Mr. Hahn several times. Mr. Hahn has indicated that the maintenance is satisfactory. As indicated earlier, this park is not and will not be kept in pristine condition. The change in river elevation makes it difficult to keep in perfect condition. Meeting recess at 8:35 p.m. Brand Road/Dublin Road Roundabout Meeting resumes at 8:45 p.m. Mr. Hammersmith stated that in December 2002, Council authorized staff to evaluate the Dublin and Brand Road intersection. Initially, staff had suggested the consideration of a roundabout for this intersection in the CIP hearings last year. Some of the reasons were - the scenic characteristics of both Dublin and Brand Roads. There was concern regarding the impact of signalization on the aesthetic qualities of the intersection. -the overall function of a signalized intersection. The staff of DLZ of Ohio was engaged to conduct the study, which is now complete. They evaluated the intersection in terms of a no-build alternative, an evaluation of the signal that was programmed to be constructed this year, a signal to accommodate 2025 traffic, and lastly, evaluated that signal against the roundabout alternative. He introduced Steve Metzer, DLZ of Ohio, Manager of Planning and Ecological Services. Mr. Metzer stated that the Powerpoint presentation covers: - background/need for the study - intersection alternatives evaluated - results of evaluation - aesthetic enhancements - DLZ recommendation Problem: The existing intersection of Dublin and Brand roads particularly during the peak hour exhibits congestion and delays. DLZ was to study that problem and develop a recommendation to address those problems. The existing intersection is stop controlled on Brand Road; Dublin Road is free-flow traffic. That introduces a problem far traffic turning left (north) from Brand Road onto Dublin Road. It is difficult to find an adequate gap in traffic to turn. Methodology: Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 11 They looked at existing traffic counts and turning movements and projected those numbers up to year 2025. They used an annual growth rate of two percent, consistent with what the City's traffic engineer presented. All the traffic information presented will be for 20 years worth of growth in the corridor. For the different alternatives, they used two different modeling softwares. For the traffic signal alternative, the highway capacity software, and far the modern roundabout alternative, the united kingdom model RODEL. They developed conceptual alternatives, cost estimates, comparative evaluation matrix comparing the recommended signal to the roundabout, prepared a final report for Council. Traffic Signal: The City has programmed and originally anticipated constructing a signalized intersection, adding left-turn lanes, at a cost of $500,000. During the analysis, however, it was determined that method would only give about five years of adequate traffic operation at that intersection. The large southbound movement in the AM peak period is mare than a single through lane can provide. Two through lanes are needed on southbound Dublin Road to accommodate the projected AM peak hour volume. Dedicated left-turn lanes will be required on all three legs. Because we will then drop from those two lanes to one on the southbound Dublin Road, there is an extensive taper to achieve the merge. It is anticipated that with that configuration, however, this traffic light will yield a level C. With level D being the goal, that is acceptable for year 2025 traffic. This is the only alternative for that light that will achieve that level of service. Without two through lanes, the intersection will fail in year 2009. Modern Roundabout Alternative This utilizes the United Kingdom methodologies for design with the Rodel model. There are significant differences between modern roundabouts and traffic circles. Roundabouts can have significant benefits to City residents, including: - improved traffic capacity (no loss of "green time,"} - improved safety compared to signals (eliminate high-impact and both head-on and front-to-side crashes, -traffic calming benefits (for this reason, used in residential neighborhoods), greater - aesthetic opportunities, perhaps as gateway to City, -and lower maintenance costs than signals. Mr. Kline stated that the analysis looked at two different roundabouts: one, asingle-lane entry roundabout and two, adual-lane roundabout. The single lane roundabout would work for approximately ten years. There is the option of initially constructing the roundabout as a single lane, and later easily converted to a two-lane roundabout when the service level begins to suffer. Two-lane Modern Roundabout With the two-lane model, two lanes exit the roundabout and taper to one lane. The primary reason for the difference in taper lengths in the signal and the roundabout is that the vehicles in the roundabout are going much slower, approximately 18 mileslhour. The geometry of the roundabout is such that with the curve and the flare, it cannot be driven faster. The roundabout is a one-way counterclockwise circle. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 12 The curbs are six-inch and there is a deflector island. Vehicles approaching the roundabout have to yield. Mr. Kline noted that because of the proximity of adjacent properties, they have been asked to look at the extreme opposite - a west rounabout. No encroachment in the right-of-way occurs on the east side, but the tapers for the roadway and the pedestrian safety path do begin to encroach on both properties. Mrs. Boring inquired where the existing bikepath is. Mr. Kline stated that it is just outside the existing roadway. Mrs. Boring inquired if it would be possible to leave the roadway as it is and the roundabout where it is. Mr. Kline responded that it creates am unsafe condition called "see through." Approaching traffic can see straight thorugh and will go through the one-way on the wrong side. Drivers approaching the roundabout need visual indicators of what is ahead. They can, however, construct the roundabout withjn the two options shown. It is either right-of-way on one side or the other. Discussion continued regarding proximity to the house. Ms. Boring stated that she likes the roundabout, but she does not like the negative impact on the neighborhood. Ms. Salay inquired if the signalized intersection would have substantially longer tapers than the roundabout. Mr. Hammersmith responded that they would be triple the length. Mr. Kline responded that the area of pavement required for the roundabout is only about one-half that needed for the signalization. Summary The consultants recommend construction of the roundabout versus the signalization, although both are acceptable. The roundabout would be much safer, its oust is slightly over half the cost of the signalization, the aesthetics of the roundabout are better, pedestrians and bicycles are accommodated equally well by either choice. He noted that a couple of issues would need to be addressed with either alternative. The most critical issue is the vertical stopping point distance on the north leg of the road. Coming down the hill on Dublin Road, there is a view problem. There are ways to alleviate the problem, such as by lowering the posted speed. The impact could be reduced slightly by shifting the alignment east or west. It is important to maintain the access of the residence to the east. Finally, the decision would have to be made whether to construct the roundabout as one-lane or two-lane. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 13 Mr. Kline showed a video of a pedestrian interaction with a roundabout on the campus of Michigan State. It is an example of high volume pedestrian exchange. In response to Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher's inquiry, Mr. Hammersmith noted that the roundabout would greatly improve the existing conditions. There would be safe pedestrian passage over Dublin Road. Mr. Kline showed slides depicting examples of other roundabouts. He discussed the psychological aspect of driving, which roundabouts accommodate in their structure. Discussion continued regarding the amount and types of signage that would be needed for the roundabout. Mr. Hammersmith stated that when the project progressed to detail design, that the residents would be involved in the discussion of aesthetics and landscaping. Ms. Chinnici-Zuercher stated that the primary issue for her is the location in relationship to the houses. Staff has indicated that "something in between" would be the actual design -she would need to see that. The neighbors want to be, and should be, involved in the final design. They are not unrealistic; they realize the traffic issue must be addressed. However, many of those homes have shallow setbacks, and the design of the roundabout placement must accommodate that situation. When the final design is ready for Council's review, she would like Council to visit the actual site as a group in order to envision the project on-site. Ms. Salay requested comparative studies on the noise levels for adjacent residents from roundabouts. Ms. Salay inquired if there is are roundabouts on Rings Road and Ballantrae Mr. Hammersmith responded that those are traffic circle. There are no roundabouts in Dublin, nor in the State of Ohio. Ms. Salay inquired if the traffic circle in Ballantrae would be of a comparative size to the one suggested in this study. Mr. Kline responded that the roundabout would be much smaller, approximately one-half the size. Ms. Salay expressed concern regarding the use of flashing lights at night at signalized intersections. Mr. Hammersmith stated that the it has been acity-wide policy. Many of the traffic signals are programmed to begin flashing at 11:00 a.m. It has been done city-wide, and he has had concerns about those intersections. Ms. Salay inquired if staff/the consultant had studied the posssible impact of a bridge across Memorial Drive. Study Session Monday, April 14, 2003 Page 14 Mr. Hammersmith stated that Mr. Kline has indicated that asingle-lane roundabout at the location would work for 10 years. Actually, it should work for 20-25 years. Mr. Kline stated that they have conducted noise level analyses for similar projects. He will fonnrard copies to Council Ms. Salay inquired about the possibility of shifting the roundabout Mr. Hammersmith