A five-year-old M-24 traffic study was adopted by the Oxford Village Council Friday in order to further its efforts to make downtown more pedestrian-friendly by obtaining additional traffic signals.
‘This study here is telling us we deserve at least one (more) traffic light downtown,? said Councilman Tony Albensi, during a special afternoon meeting with representatives from the Michigan Department of Transportation, state Rep. Jim Marleau (R-Lake Orion) and Lauren Kathawa, who came on behalf of state Sen. Mike Bishop (R-Rochester).
Council voted 4-0 to adopt a March 20, 2002 traffic study, conducted as a ‘joint venture? between the village and MDOT, ‘as a basis to move forward? in its quest to get traffic signals installed where M-24 intersects Dennison/Stanton streets and Broadway Street.
Apparently, the study has sat on a shelf for the last five years because the village council at the time didn’t agree with the results ‘for some reason,? so it never adopted it, according to Greg Johnson, Metro Region Engineer for MDOT.
‘This study does address a number of things that you (the village) were talking about,? Johnson said. ‘We think this is a very well done study by a very reputable firm.?
MDOT officials are planning to review the study and forward written recommendations to the village, which will be discussed when representatives from the two entities talk again at the Tuesday, Jan. 22 regular council meeting.
‘We’re willing to take a re-view of this and have this study be the basis of where we go in the future here in the Village of Oxford,? said Johnson, who noted MDOT has $50,000 available to update and build on this study.
Albensi quoted a number of excerpts from the study which appeared to support the village’s desire for more traffic signals along M-24 in downtown area.
Those excerpts included:
n ‘Installation of another traffic signal along M-24 within the Village of Oxford would serve numerous purposes.
n ‘A traffic signal at the M-24 intersection with Dennsion Street (to the west) and Stanton Street (to the east) would benefit both sides of M-24.?
n ‘It is a logical location from a pedestrian flow perspective since a movie theater and coffee shop is located at the intersection.?
n ‘The village envisions downtown as a pedestrian-friendly environment. However, the M-24 corridor provides a formidable barrier to pedestrian access other than at Burdick Street.?
n ‘The addition of a traffic signal at Dennison Street/Stanton Street or Broadway Street intersections would improve pedestrian mobility in or near the downtown area.?
Johnson agreed the study indicates one or more traffic signals are needed.
‘It recommends a signal to be placed somewhere in this corridor,? he said. ‘We don’t disagree with that.?
But MDOT must now take this study, update the data, and take a look at some other issues like vehicles that avoid certain intersections due to heavy traffic in order to determine whether or not signals need to be placed where the village is lobbying for them.
‘We’re not saying no,? Johnson said. ‘What we’re saying is we want to take what was done and . . .build from that and take a look at where a signal should appropriately be placed (if one is needed).?
‘You’ve made it clear where you want it, but is that the most efficient and effective place for a traffic control to be placed?,? Johnson asked. ‘We cannot make every cross street a pedestrian designated crossing. We cannot put signals at every location that’s in this study.?
A total of six intersections were identified as potential locations for a new traffic signal along M-24. Those spots included First Street, Church Street, Davison/Center Street, Dennison/Stanton Street, Broadway Street and at the entrance to the Oxford Marketplace shopping center.
Although the study stated a traffic signal at Dennison/M-24/Stanton ‘would benefit pedestrians more than any other new signal location,? it was noted that given the intersection is only 600 feet from the light at Burdick Street, it would also ‘negatively impact M-24 traffic flow.?
‘There is insufficient stacking space (for vehicles) between the Burdick and Dennison/Stanton intersection, and the traffic signals would be difficult to coordinate,? according to the study.
These sentiments were echoed by MDOT officials.
‘Our fear is that if we put a fully-activated signal there, (traffic’s) going to back up even further,? said Paul Ajegba, MDOT’s Oakland Transportation Service Center Manager, who noted the state tries to put signals at least a quarter or half-mile apart.
‘We’re not saying we would not put a signal there (at Dennison/Stanton),? Johnson said. ‘What we’re saying is it’s difficult to manage.?
Councilman Tom Benner inquired about the feasibility of building an overhead walkway for pedestrians at the Dennison/Stanton intersection.
‘One of the things that we find is people are adverse to using those type of crosswalks unless you’re going over a major, major roadway and there is no other way to get around,? Johnson said. ‘Those things are very costly and we would be buying right-of-way because of ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements. We’d be wiping out a large swath of buildings (to construct wheelchair-accessible ramps).?
It was noted that MDOT will contact the Road Commission for Oakland County to get the pedestrian crosswalk striping at Dennison/Stanton removed and erect signs telling people to cross at the Burdick Street light.
‘We are hoping (that can be done) in the next two weeks or so, before the Christmas holiday,? Johnson told this reporter following the meeting. The timing will largely depend on the road commission’s current priorities and weather conditions, he noted.