Loading...
TRAFFIC CALMING - NORTHWOOD ESTATES/NORTHWOOD WEST/CYPRESS BEND/WINDING WOOD COUNTRYSIDE AREA July 16, 1998 l , *1 The City of Clearwater Commission P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, Florida 33758 - 4748 'l'14~.q? Re: TRAFFIC CALMING Northwood Estates / Northwood West / Cypress Bend /Winding Wood Countryside Area Dear Commission: This letter and attached information has been put together by input of over 100 concerned and supporting residents who live within the referenced areas. The reason for such involvement by so many people and the reasoning behind why this letter and attached documents are so detailed is to clearly explain to you the importance of creating a safe and liveable community within our neighborhoods. We have so much to lose if our views, detailed plans and relative thoughts are not portrayed to you. THE VISION OF OUR COMMUNITY, OUR CHILDREN'S FUTURE AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE THAT THE CITY PORTRAYS EVERYDAY WILL DEPEND UPON YOUR POSITIVE DECISION FOR TRAFFIC CALMING IN OUR COMMUNITIES. We have actively pursued traffic calming devices in this area for the last 10 years. We have written letters to you, met with your staff on several occasions, exhaustively called the police for help, attended meetings, developed detailed reports, and finally, we have received proper attention by the City, by your investing in a traffic calming program. We are so excited about the level of effort that your staffhas played in the traffic calming plan, but, we must share with you the level of our effort it took to get here. In the late 1980's, the entire area of Countryside became a thriving community with the U.S. 19 project starting, the countryside mall being completely successful, new residents moving in by the hundreds and the quality of life improving by the addition of parks and recreation areas in Countryside. Well, with progress came the traffic. Because of the overcapacity conditions of the roads in the Countryside area, neighborhoods such as Northwood Estates, Northwood West and Winding Wood became the centerpiece for cut-thru and high speed traffic. Page 2 of 5 Clearwater Commission July 16, 1998 We tried everything to slow this traffic down. The city police helped as much as they could and neighbors tried every trick in the book until finally, enough was enough. We first contacted you mayor asking for help in early 1992, and by the way your longevity has served the city well. This wasn't a cry for help, this was a demand as the children who use the community everyday were in jeopardy due to life threatening speeds by uncontrolled drivers. The City conducted studies, we conducted studies, and the conclusion was evident. 1,892 to 2,000 cars per day were using Frisco Drive, a local neighborhood street in Northwood West, with recorded speeds as high as 48 MPH. These speeds are appalling. Your traffic department and the Mayors office decided that further investigations and actions were needed. In late 1992, accurate traffic studies were completed that proved 92% ofthe vehicles using Deer Run North. a local street in Northwood Estates, were exceeding the speed limit. 32% were over 35 MPH. Of the traffic that was recorded, by a very detailed computer analyzed origin - destination study, it was found that 16% of the vehicles using Frisco and Deer Run North was cut-thru traffic. To further examine the problems, a stop sign violation study was done by recording devices and proved that only 10% of the vehicles come to a complete stop at the stop signs. 58% were rolling stops while 32% were blatant violations. 32% means that 600 cars a day do not stop. Throughout 1993 - 94, the problem was so severe and evident that the community looked at closing one or several streets if it would stop the problem. Enclosed with this letter you will find a full report developed by a professional licensed engineer that pinpoints the problems and recommends several solutions. After several meetings with your staff, and as a recommendation by your staff to add more stop signs, the residents opted for 5 additional locations to have stop signs for the safety of the children. Well, the idea had a lot of value, but the problem was escalated by stop sign violations and still high speeds. The City now had to hire 2 school crossing guards within the subdivision to control the drivers at these stop sign locations. Again, several complaints were called into the police office and citations were once again, handed out. In late 1994, we contacted the mayors office again. We were frustrated. Now the solution was that there is no solution. Enforcement and monitoring the situation was their answer. <. Page 3 of 5 Clearwater Commission July 16, 1998 In, 1995, a driver lost control of his vehicle, hit several trees on Deer Run North and tried to escape until the car came to rest 3 blocks away in a front yard. It took a tow truck and a police report before the vehicle could be moved. In 1995 and 96, the neighbors were starting to take matters into their own hands. Several police reports were filed and at one point, a neighbor was severely beaten by a team of motorists because he tried to slow them down. They returned to the point of confrontation and severely hurt the neighbor and he was taken to the hospital in serious condition. Road rage once again took place but this time the driver was not so lucky. A neighbor took matters into his own hands and practiced with a nine iron on a speeding car. A report was filed, the car suffered damage and the police again had to appear. The driver and neighbor still look at one another to this day, but the driver now drives at 20 MPH. More police and more activity took place in 1997 when two neighbors were heckled into the street by speeders who continually raced through the neighborhood. This time. 4 families ended up in the brawl with the teen drivers having serious lacerations. The police had to be called in again. In early 1998, speeders decided again to get even with the neighborhood and smashed several mail boxes to the point that one vehicle completely destroyed a box that had purposely been built for an atomic war. The car lost and had to be towed away. The police were called again. As you can tell by these documented examples, we have a serious problem. Fortunately, there is a solution. The city staffhas come up with a very reasonable and safe plan that will solve the safety and speeding concern in the area. That plan is to install raised islands and paver bricks at the crosswalks which will slow traffic down as they enter the neighborhood and also make it safe for the children when crossing these streets. Your staff has been working very hard and close with the residents of these areas. Meetings after meetings have taken place and everyone has had the chance to comment or speak. As you well know, not everyone is in favor of every proposal, and we would like you to remember a couple of points. Page 4 of 5 Clearwater Commission July 16, 1998 Those that are against the cities plan hardly attended the hearings. Cypress Bend and Winding Wood did an independent survey of which the city had no part in the questions and the statistics showed: * 83% of those commenting did not attend the cities presentation. Most citizens have relied on errant newspaper reporting and misquotes. * 50% are in favor of the cities plan and did not attend. If they had, we are sure the statistic would have been more positive as the cities survey showed. * Those that are against the plan don't even live on the impacted streets. * 53% said there is a speeding problem and they didn't even hear the statistics. The information that was shared for the above survey was from months of old information. A lot has happened within the last month and the city has now developed a great plan that should satisfy all. Let us tell you the latest. STATISTICS AS OF JUNE 25, 1998 HAVE PROVEN THE FOLLOWING: * 90 area residents attended a meeting sponsored by the city to discuss traffic calming ideas. * 95% of the respondents from that meeting are in favor of the plan for raised landscaped islands with other devices. * 36% want the plan even further expanded if possible. * The biggest concern, SPEEDING - 92% AGREE * The second biggest concern, CHILDREN AT RISK - 82% AGREE * The third, CUT - THRU TRAFFIC - 78% AGREE * On July 6,1998, the Northwood Estates homeowners association approves of the cities plan. * On July 14, 1998, The Northwood West homeowners association approves ofthe cities plan. Page 5 of 5 Clearwater Commission July 16, 1998 As you can tell, support is growing by leaps and bounds and the plan will work!!!. The subdivisions within this area are very grateful to the City for all of your efforts. We are so excited about this plan that some residents have already banned together and have signed" adopt an island agreements " . We have enclosed these commitments for you to now support. As our last comment, we want to personally thank the Commission for listening to our issues for the past ten years. We want to thank you for attending our meetings as town meetings and for your attendance at our traffic calming meetings. We want to thank all of your departments for their caring and a special thanks needs to go to Rich Baier, Tom Miller, Ken Sides and Tim the landscape guy. They have been very instrumental in answering our questions and always keeping there cool. In closing, the attached signed letters are from concerned homeowners and they are the ones that are dedicated to this city. COMMISSIONERS, WE SUPPORT YOU, PLEASE SUPPORT US !!!! Sincerely, 1..l ,1; tIll. /\ Walter Sei For: The Concerned Residents as attached Enc: To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates From: Concerned Residents within Northwood Estates Date: July 6, 1998 Re: Traffic Calming along Deer Run North / Redwood Way " ISLAND MAINTENANCE" The following are homeowners that live within Northwood Estates that will volunteer and donate there time and talents to maintain the proposed landscaped islands along Deer Run North and Redwood Way, as part of the City of Clearwater's plan. We fully support this project to make our neighborhood a safe and walkable community. Deer Run Island's Redwood Island February March April May June July August September October November December JL'. ./ ,/ Ie::. >>- ~ ./ :/ r // / v// / ../' /' v ./ y/ \/ "7/0/C)/ e N ('e\ i\ l,-- (CO I Slf,\1 CS B:=f-'i D (f D I Y'(OOfS ) UN QOGNrTl Q'f n,.y WI.j=t Aw."J -L') A IZ [ "'--CIA I?Lt 16 fmlND --r+-\[- [suf\iZO rnCl-rl/N6- \CI--J IG4-fI.. \-\Q0N t'lZ tJ....( ,-~(:,-:LO UI('t--- 10 tAt r m I S ()T'\..t:~~( N '10 \J....i III (\0 r of I NI (, ~ cP.111 t ilUlm ( CFt..m 1l'JG-- ~uru'r\ Lo m'f LV(Fr AND '_L l\1~t lCfllo FOe \1-1\ s, Ge:rtr ~TIz:r fQut~(D ~ylt\r C\11 of CLL=ttel,-.fiH e' 'Jt LJye A, 2<116 OttlL eLkJ ~. Lv"l.-nZr fOi t=tIIS \1ZQf{SriL f[)Z _ C').Jt elY1~1 rlill ~ -Qcf\SuJ SJ~'i. wE \\t10t' '2. Ctl\Uj0.:N ,Ol-JtZ S- A."-.JO ekE.. 3 )'C1iQs, QD~ TtiC <;;If"'~l\l OF we 2 cd \LDec~ \ s -n-\( Ot-..Jl'i ~~D~" N()\ \tV,T IT v.JJvLD ~cfrrref\CIl \JI.:: O~ .<lro \IN-U~ 'to Que f'Jcl~ ttcDO , AT \1-\[ R2t5tNTllm~ 00e CrllLDew rYe NJT 4lOJD \DRtN \t--..'J t12utJ( of we dCUS[/ (:\)(:10 l-vi1l+ Aouu ~\)PfJ2\)ISI~~ .ltl(- lvA'! eNS fly ro.utJ oCt'lL QJI'J 'T' ,y\ SG~2tD IT) Q ()JIn iJ2E',. 'IF --rt1t= RZoftSl\L l()ozr \CJ ~A~ s: I '"I, 11\ J r\JK. Il-\ L ) etlffl C lA.()(LO 1Sf. CtllCl'll:!) lb A ,?ell Nl wrk-l2E- Fnm IL\ es, CQJ~D 2tSfo''(\t1Qll ffiaJT YN{)~-A~ lJ.l~ A') l1--tl ~Kt' rnl Wlff /)Jo-:l ~OvW BJit1 )1[ W\LU~ID tlClP N\ft1f\jl1lIN ~ lfV;jj)~J~ \.,,JF AS\( '--n-if\T /He:- ful20 RJ-=MS[' rAsS tt-It: f~o I1!ftfFtC CfTZfVlII\L- frzC5J1.Uffir2 Ill-' gw-nJ or 01- afJ(l)i3-~! I 'i( co S"-..lL tIl G- fJ UI WILL ItlM L- Cli72/ gofOcU)S '7t'Z) D(1~ ~L)0 to. CltfY2uJme2 I R.,~/6'2 I ...:=> July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2924 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to instaU raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of aU. Sincerely: $2k:??~ ~ ~.~/ 2924 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2894 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: ~PlnlE.SC'~K-SL xS~ 2894 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2583 Deer Run East. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: 2583 Deer Run East Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2918 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Decr Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: ~t~ --- 2918 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2925 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: n .-/. ;/ (j /;/1 1~0~' '- 2925 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 4, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: I own the property at 2582 Knotty Pine Way which is on the comer of Deer Run North and Knotty Pine Way. I support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping along Deer Run North and the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: L ;) 2582 Knotty Pine Way Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 4, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We live at 2586 Deer Run North at the comer of Deer Run North and Redwood. This is the corner that we witness cars racing around the comer and running the stop sign. We fully support the opportunity to have raised landscaped islands in front of our house and we will assist in keeping these island beautiful. Please support this construction for our children and our quality of life. ~ 2586 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 4, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2906 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping along Deer Run North and for the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: c--\ f~ The Davis Family 2906 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2912 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: /p-Y /JZI-- 2912 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 4, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2888 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping along Deer Run North and for the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: /~~~~~e~ 2888 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2576 Knotty Pine Way. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: 1 Ii 'ifJ r- ~ j~~( . 2576 Knotty Pine Way Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2924 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: 29 4 Deer Run North CI arwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2936 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2894 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: 2894 Dee Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2583 Deer Run East. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. s~~ 2583 Deer Run East Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2576 Knotty Pine Way. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: #,-<',"" -7j (r~JJ ?'r'~J'-{f 2576 Knotty Pine Way Clearwater, Florida 33761 July 6, 1998 To: Board of Directors Northwood Estates City of Clearwater Commission Dear Officers and Commissioners: We own the property at 2936 Deer Run North. We support the Cities plan to install raised islands with landscaping and other devices along Deer Run North and Redwood. We also support the other communities to the west. Please support this construction for our community and for the safety of all. Sincerely: ~ 2936 Deer Run North Clearwater, Florida 33761 RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR: NORTHWOOD WEST/NORTHWOOD ESTATES/CYPRESS BEND SUBDIVISION AREAS PREPARED FOR: CITY OF CLEARWATER BOARD OF CITY COMMISSIONERS PREPARED BY: THE RESIDENTS SEPTEMBER 13, 1993 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subdivisions of Study Issues of Concern . . . . . . . . . . . . . EXISTING CONDITIONS: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Countryside Area Roadway Networks Travel Patterns Traffic Volumes Safety Issues Subdivisions of Study Roadway Networks Travel Patterns Traffic Volumes Safety Issues Recorded Speeds Origin/Destination Study Recorded Violations . . . . . . . . . FUTURE CONDITIONS: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Countryside Area Travel Patterns Traffic Volumes Safety Issues . . . . . . . . . ....... Subdivisions of Study Travel Patterns Traffic Volumes Safety Issues Participation from the ...... ..... City ALTERNATIVES TO CONSIDER: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 "T" End Treatment Street Revision One Way Channelization Stop Sign Control . . . . . . SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RECOMMENDATIONS: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE i 1 1 3 4 4 4 5 6 6 8 8 9 10 10 12 14 15 LIST OF TABLES PAGE TABLE 1 - Countryside Area; Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 TABLE 2 - Subdivisions of Study; Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . 10 TABLE 3 - Subdivisions of Study; Speed Study (Residents) 12 TABLE 4 - Subdivisions of Study; Speed Study (City) . . . . . . 13 TABLE 5 - Subdivisions of Study; Speed Study (Combined) 13 LIST OF FIGURES PAGE FIGURE 1 - Areawide Map of the Study Limits FIGURE 2 - Location of the Study Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 3 - Frisco Drive/Enterprise Road Concept . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 4 - Alternative 1, "T" End Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 5 - Alternative 2, Street Revision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 6 - Alternative 3, One Way Channelization . . . . . . . . . FIGURE 7 - Alternative 4, Stop Sign Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The residents of Northwood West, Northwood Estates and Cypress Bend have a safety concern due to the traffic problems within these subdivisions. The future of these areas is in jeopardy in terms of safety, neighborhood cohesiveness and potential loss of life. The intent of this study is to provide guidance to the City of Clearwater on how realistic, simple solutions to our neighborhoods travel patterns can eliminate years of assistance by the City while providing cohesiveness and serenity to all neighborhoods in question. This comprehensive study demonstrates over one year of work by the residents, assistance from the Florida Department of Transportation, assistance by pinellas County and most importantly, assistance from the City of Clearwater Commission and staff. Results of this study indicate that by providing Alternative 1 of the recommendations, traffic problems will be eliminated, the need for future police enforcement on transportation issues will cease, a safer environment within all neighborhoods studied will occur, cohesiveness and strengthening of the homeowners associations will follow, while safe and reasonable traffic flows and patterns will occur in the neighborhoods. This recommendation will still allow access to all residents and non-residents to anyone neighborhood, but will eliminate the convenience of cutting thru anyone neighborhood out of habit. Additionally, Alternative 1 does not hinder or delay emergenc~e~ons.e--t.imeand-a-l-l:-wal-ks-uf Life-h~ been th.9.1Jght thr-Ougfr1:o not disrupt 'the nciyhborhood E'tP;riru~nt. To thoroughly understand the problems within each subdivis~on and of the alternatives to consider, we ask that you read in its entirety this report before your views are expressed. Remember, although you may live on a side street that does not carry the bulk of the neighborhood traffic, your neighbors and friends do. A special thanks goes to the Clearwater Board of City Commissioners and staff, the Homeowwner Associations of the study and finally, the residents for their patience in receiving these facts and for their assistance in putting this study together. i INTRODUCTION: Homeowners of the Northwood West, Northwood Estates and Cypress Bend subdivisions have a concern related to the transportation problems within these residential areas and of the surrounding communities. The future of these areas is in jeopardy in terms of safety, neighborhood cohesiveness and potential loss of life. This report describes the immediate issues at hand; the future of the area and neighborhoods; common sense solutions to these concerns that are implementable; and the positive results that can be realized for all. Figure 1 illustrates the location of the subdivisions and study areas within the Countryside area. The following briefly describes the subdivisions and their characteristics. Northwood West Subdivision: The Northwood West subdivision is a moderately large residential community containing 144 homes that is bordered by State Road 580, Northwood Estates, Enterprise Road and the Cypress Bend Subdivision. This community is made up of young professional families that enjoy the freedom to walk with their children throughout the neighborhood, ride their bikes on neighboring residential streets and maintain a feeling of security while conversing with other neighbors. All of those simple elements of life are being taken away by the transportation problems within their immediate and surrounding subdivisions. Northwood Estates Subdivision: The Northwood Estates Subdivision is a large residential community containing 380 homes. Because of the different geographic boundaries of this subdivision, the area of concern consists of the central area which is made up of 148 homes and is bordered by State Road 580, Northwood West, Enterprise Road and Landmark Drive. This community is a well established residential area made up of young and elder families that enjoy social functions together, community cohesiveness by yearly street parties, and the opportunity to walk and bike within their community. Their feelings are also consistent with Northwood West in that neighborhood pleasures are being denied due to the traffic problems. - 1 - Cypress Bend Subdivision: The Cypress Bend Subdivision is a large residential community containing approximately 500 homes and patio homes. This subdivision borders Countryside Boulevard, Northwood West and SR 580. Only 8 homes have direct access onto the streets of concern with the balance fronting internal residential roads. The same problem exists for these 8 homesites as it does for Northwood West and Northwood Estates. The 8 homes are in the middle of the traffic problem due to the layout of the subdivision and Haverhill Drive. As personally described by several residents within each community, the everyday joys of living in and enjoying the neighborhood is being taken away due to the traffic concerns and of how their children's safety is in jeopardy even on the sidewalks. Discussions and actions of moving to other areas of the County are often being pursued and with remorse. Issues of Concern: The problems that are facing each resident within these communities on a daily basis are numerous. The City of Clearwater has done it's part in trying to solve several issues but to no avail at times. The following are the main concerns of the neighborhoods: 1. The existing roadway network that connects between three separate subdivisions is creating a dangerous condition for the residents due to the excessive volumes and speeding of vehicles. 2. Because of this roadway network, motorists who do not live within the boundaries of these described subdivisions utilize this roadway network as a short cut to avoid the major surrounding highways. This cut-thru utilization is not because of capacity problems on the external roadways, but due to the convenience and knowledge that "nobody will stop them from breaking the law" in a subdivision. 3. This condition will only escalate with the scheduled 10 years of road improvements and growth that will take place within the Countryside area. Alternative routes such as Winding Wood/Baverhill/Frisco/Deer Run will be even more popular and a standing problem enhanced. This same problem took place with the widening of US 19 at Barn Boulevard. - 3 - EXISTING CONDITIONS: The following sections describe the existing conditions that take place within the study area of Countryside and within the boundaries of the described subdivisions. Countryside Area: Roadwav Networks The existing roadway networks that surround the subdivisions of concern all operate at very good levels of service. The following describes their characteristics: State Road 580 - is a major arterial highway that connects from the intracoastal waterway in Dunedin to connections of major arterial highways in Tampa. State Road 580 is a heavily traveled roadway that surrounds the neighborhoods. State Road 580, between Countryside Boulevard and Landmark Drive carries moderate to heavy daily traffic volumes (22,980 vehicles) on 2 lanes (one in each direction). State Road 580 operates very well in this stretch due to the only connecting side road being Frisco Drive. State Road 580 widens at two major intersections that are signalized, Countryside Boulevard and Landmark Drive. The posted speed limit is 40 miles per hour (m.p.h.) on this stretch. State Road 580 serves the Northwood West Subdivision. Countryside Boulevard - is the busiest traveled road within the study area. Countryside Boulevard between Village Drive and State Road 580 carries large volumes of daily traffic (31,139 vehicles) on 6 lanes (3 in each direction). Countryside Boulevard operates very well in this stretch due to it's recent construction from a four lane road to six lanes with adequate turn lanes at the intersections. Countryside Boulevard is signalized at State Road 580. The posted speed limit is 35 m.p.h. on this stretch. Countryside Boulevard serves the Cypress Bend residents. - 4 - Enterprise Road - is the third most heavily traveled road within the study area. Enterprise Road, between Landmark Drive and Countryside Village Drive carries moderate daily traffic volumes on 4 lanes (2 in each direction). Enterprise Road operates very well in this stretch due to the limited amount of side streets that intersect and the driver comfort that is experienced by the design of the road. Existing traffic signals along Enterprise are at the intersection of Village Drive and Landmark Drive. The posted speed limit on Enterprise Road is 40 m.p.h. Enterprise Road serves the Northwood Estates and Northwood West Subdivisions. Landmark Drive - is a heavily traveled road that connects major east/west roads throughout Countryside. Landmark Drive between State Road 580 and Enterprise Road carries moderate daily traffic volumes on 4 lanes (2 in each direction). Landmark Drive operates very well in this stretch due to the limited length and by it's termination at Enterprise road. Traffic signals exist on this stretch at the intersections of State Road 580 and Enterprise Road. The posted speed limit on this stretch is 35 m.p.h. Landmark Drive serves the Northwood Estates Subdivisions. Countryside Area: Travel Patterns The Countryside area has experienced tremendous growth over the past 15 years to where the existing roadway network is being improved as fast as possible to keep up with the growth. Although many improvements are under way and some have been completed, the well established short-cuts that motorists have used over the past 15 years have not gone away. A typical example would be that of those that travel north on u.S. Hwy. 19 wishing to go east on State Road 580. Traffic Planners estimate and computer models generate that the preferred traffic pattern will be to stay on u.S. Hwy. 19 to State Road 580 and then east on State Road 580. Although this might be a movement that an unfamiliar driver or tourist might take, it surely is not the route that a local would use. It has been a habit of many Countryside residents to use Countryside Village and Countryside Boulevard for access to State Road 580. A similar true habit is to travel from Countryside Boulevard to Landmark Drive via the Subdivisions of study. This habit and cut-thru will be further explained and demonstrated in the section titled travel patterns within the Subdivision. - 5 - Other habits and short-cuts result from the comfort of using a neighborhood knowing that enforcement will not be present at all times. Such typical day to day routine cut~thrus within the Countryside area are those that desire to travel from Enterprise Road to State Road 580. Another typical example is one that the City is currently experiencing with wildwood Drive just north of State Road 580. It also has major cut-thru problems out of habit from the surrounding neighborhoods. It's not that State Road 580 cannot handle the traffic, it is truly more convenient to use Wildwood as a short cut at the expense of the residents. Countryside Area: Traffic Volumes The following traffic volumes were recorded by State, County or City officials. TABLE 1 - COUNTRYSIDE AREA: TRAFFIC VOLUMES Roadway Seqment 24 hour Count Date of Count Countryside Blvd. 31,139 April, 93 State Road 580 22,980 April, 93 Enterprise Road 19,581 April, 93 Landmark Drive 12,750 April, 93 Countryside Area: Safety Issues Safety issues are always a concern with every major road. In the case of the major roads that are studied in this report, it was found that the corridors are moderately safe. The following discussions concern the issues of safety for the Major Roads: State Road 580 - within the limits of the study area does not have a traffic safety problem. Accident statistics reveal that at the main entrance to the Northwood West subdivision a problem does not exist. However, most residents of Northwood West utilize Haverhill Drive for access to the US 19 area. - 6 - Enterprise Road - has more of a safety concern than State Road 580 even though it carries less traffic. The stretch of Enterprise road from U.S. 19 to McMullen Booth Road has probably had the most attention from the law enforcement agencies than any other road in the Countryside Area. Speeding has been a major problem on this road. The City and County have been changing the speed limit over and over to where it is now at the most reasonable and most enforceable by law. This corridor, because of its design, makes it very difficult to exit from Frisco Drive. The sight distance that a driver has when exiting Frisco Drive is substandard and should be redesigned if possible. Accidents have occurred at this location but not substantially. One accident was reported as severe. A Concept to consider for improving this intersection is illustrated in the Future conditions section. Countryside Boulevard - is similar in concern for safety as Enterprise Road. This corridor has had numerous accidents due to its alignment and the sharp curve that approaches the intersection of State Road 580. One of the main entrances and exits for the Cypress Bend Residential area is at the intersection of Countryside Boulevard and Winding Wood Drive. This also is used out of habit by Northwood West and Northwood Estates which adds to the problem. This is a dangerous intersection in that sight distance is limited and speeds are high on Countryside Boulevard. Landmark Drive - appears the lesser of concern for safety issues in that it is a collector road and does not have but one home that connects by driveway to Landmark. This road does have high speeds by vehicles and has been expressed as a major problem by homeowners north of State Road 580. Other issues concerning safety is the most recent installation of a traffic signal at Landmark Drive and Enterprise Road. This has been a tremendous improvement to the area and one that has been well received by the motoring public and by the residents of the study area. However, this improvement has had no effect positively or negatively on the neighborhoods being studied in this report. Further appreciation goes to the City for revising the traffic signal operation at State Road S80/Countryside Blvd., improved signage on Landmark Drive and Enterprise Road, police enforcement on Enterprise and holding a town meeting at the library. - 7 - Subdivisions of Study; Roadway Networks The existing roadway networks within the subdivisions of concern all operate at very good levels of service. The following describes the characteristics of the main residential roads in each subdivision: Northwood West - contains two main residential streets of concern (Frisco Drive & Haverhill Drive). These streets consist of single family homes that all front and have driveway attachments to these streets. Frisco Drive - is a north/south street that is the most traveled within the subdivisions of study. Frisco Drive is a two lane residential street with sidewalks on both sides and terminates at State Road 580 and Enterprise Road. It also contains a patrolled school crossing at the intersection with Deer Run North and has a reduced speed area for the school. The speed limit on Frisco drive is 25 mph. Haverhill Drive - is an east/west street that is the second heaviest travelled road wi thin Northwood West. Haverhill Drive is a two lane residential street with sidewalks on both sides and terminates at Winding Wood Drive and Frisco Drive. The posted speed limit on Haverhill Drive is 25 mph. Northwood Estates - contains one main residential street of concern (Deer Run North). This street has well established single family homes that front directly onto Deer Run North with driveways. Deer Run North is an east/west street that is traveled the most within the subdivision. Deer Run North is a two lane street with sidewalks on both sides and terminates at Frisco Drive and connects to Deer Run East. It also contains a marked and signed school crossing and has a patrolled crosswalk at the intersection with Frisco Drive. There is also an unpatrolled crosswalk at the sidewalk to Leila Davis Elementary School. The speed limit on Deer Run North is unsigned but is expected to be 25 mph to be consistent with the other streets. - 8 - Cypress Bend contains two main residential streets of concern (Winding Wood Drive and Haverhill Drive). These streets have well established single family homes that front directly onto Winding Wood and Haverhill with driveways. Windinq Wood Drive - is a north/south street that is the heaviest travelled road within Cypress Bend. Winding Wood Drive is a two lane residential street with sidewalks on both sides and terminates at State Road 580 on both ends. The posted speed limit is 25 mph. Haverhill Drive - is an east/west street that is the second heaviest travelled road within Cypress Bend. Haverhill Drive is a two lane residential street with sidewalks on both sides and terminates at Winding Wood Drive and Frisco Drive. The posted speed limit on Haverhill Drive is 25 mph. Subdivisions of Study: Travel Patterns All of the Subdivisions of study are at build-out with the exception of Northwood West. One or two lots are vacant but are primarily at the extreme north/south ends of the subdivision and would not change any findings of this study. In talking with several residents of the study area and in reviewing the studies conducted, results show that habits are truly developed to use certain streets over and over for access to certain residences even though alternative major streets should be used more. The data shows that non-residents of the subdivisions and residents that live in Cypress Bend utilize subdivision streets in Northwood West and Northwood as a cut thru for access to the east rather than utilizing the State or County roads that were intended for this travel. In comparison, habits have been formed by residents and non-residents of Northwood Estates area to use the subdivisions of Northwood and Cypress bend as a cut thru for access to the west rather than utilize the State or County road. These types of movements are what is causing the concern within the neighborhoods. It is evident that there are adjacent/convenient safe roads that can handle these movements with equal time to travel and equal driving distances. The reason for the continued cut thru maneuvers is due to habit and the design of the subdivisions. - 9 - In reviewing the primary cut-thru problems, the following maneuvers occur: * Non-residents of the study area like to cut-thru all three subdivisions and avoid State Road 580. * Residents of Cypress Bend use the Haverhill/Frisco/Deer Run Redwood Way path for access to shopping on McMullen Booth. * Residents of Northwood West and Northwood Estates use the Deer Run/Frisco Haverhill/Winding Wood Drive for access to Countryside Mall. This continuous flow of traffic on local residential roads causes above normal traffic volumes and speeding within the subdivisions. Subdivisions of Study:Traffic Volumes The following traffic volumes were recorded by the City or by the residents of the Subdivisions. TABLE 2 - SUBDIVISION AREA: TRAFFIC VOLUMES Roadway Seqment 24 hour Count Date of Count 1,891 May, 92 1,465 May, 92 1,252 May, 92 1,032 May, 92 1,027 May, 92 Frisco (Deer Run to Haverhill) Haverhill Drive Deer Run Drive Frisco (N. of Enterprise) Frisco (S. of State Road 580) Subdivisions of Study: Safety Issues Problems that have occurred within the subdivisions are numerous. The City has been very busy in trying to solve the safety issues within the neighborhood but have had difficulty because of lack of personnel, strict regulations or guidelines that may not fit a neighborhood need. - 10 - The following list some of the safety problems that are occurring within the neighborhoods. * At the intersection of Haverhill Drive and Frisco Drive, the traffic volumes are very heavy and the sight distance is unacceptable which makes the intersection dangerous. In addition, this intersection is heavily traveled by school children and pedestrians throughout the day. Motorists do not obey the existing stop sign and cause concern for the school children that cross here. * Traffic volumes along Frisco drive are above average for a neighborhood the size of Northwood West, and extremely high for the number of homes that front Frisco Drive. The reason for this abnormally high traffic count is due to the roadway network and of the poor design. * Traffic volumes along Deer Run North are very high and above national standards for the limited homes that front Deer Run. Additionally, this street has an unprotected crosswalk that allows direct access to the school and is dangerous because of the excess vehicles that use this road on a daily basis. * Speeds within the neighborhoods are very excessive and above national standards. One reason for this is that those drivers that violate the speed limit do not live within the area and it is not their concern or worry. The City has tried to alleviate this problem but to no avail because it is an enforcement problem and staff cannot be there all the time. * The Leila Davis school connects to Deer Run "North and causes several concerns for the residents, school board and the City. It has been very difficult to control traffic in this area because of the street layout. The City has studied this situation for a long time and have taken some measures but to no avail. It is again, an enforcement problem. * Access to and from Frisco Drive at Enterprise Road is very dangerous due to the limited sight distance, speeds, volumes and curvature of the road. * Now that the City has provided a park at the Enterprise Road complex, it has brought a concern to the City of how pedestrians that live on the south side of Enterprise can gain access to the park safely. It is extremely dangerous to cross Enterprise because of the sight distance problems and the speeds of the vehicles. - 11 - Subdivisions of Study: Recorded Speeds Speeding within a neighborhood can be one of the most frustrating problems to residents and homeowner associations. This is the most cornmon complaint within neighborhoods and one that is uncontrollable at times. The City has been asked numerous times and on a regular basis to enforce the speeding problem within the studied subdivisions. The residents are pleased with the assistance and response that is given but the results are disappointing. As soon as enforcement officials leave, another violation of the speed limit occurs. To illustrate how much of a concern the speeding problem is within the subdivisions, residents of the area conducted an independent speed study (Radar gun) on Deer Run North with the following results: TABLE 3 - Subdivisions of Study: Speed Study (Residents) Date of the Study: December 12, 1992 Time of the Study: 10 am to Noon Speed Limit of Road: 25 mph Total Vehicles Observed: 107 vehicles Total Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit: 98 vehicles (92%) Total Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit: (+5 mph) 71 vehicles (66%) Total Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit: (+10 mph) 28 vehicles (26%) Total Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit: (+15 mph) 6 vehicles (6%) Highest Recorded Speed 48 mph The study that was conducted by the residents is valid in that a high sample was taken and that all vehicles were recorded within the speed sample area. The equipment that was used was standard equipment used in the industry, fined tuned and tested for accuracy prior to its use and the operator was trained to perform this analysis. - 12 - The City of Clearwater conducted a speed study in May of 1992 to determine speeds within the subdivisions. Their study was conducted on Frisco Drive with "Road tube" machines which resulted in the following data: TABLE 4 - Subdivisions of Study: Speed Study (City's) Date of the Study: May 1992 Speed Limit of the Road: 25 mph Total Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit: 54.6 % Total Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit: (+10 mph) 5.9% To illustrate that the severity of the problem is not just on one street, Table 5 demonstrates the problem exists on two separate streets, Frisco Drive and Deer Run North, and two separate subdivisions, Northwood West and Northwood Estates. TABLE 5 - Subdivisions of Study. Speed Study (Combined) Frisco Drive Deer Run North Speed limit of the Road: 25 mph 25 mph Percent Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit: (55%) (92%) Percent Vehicles Exceeding Speed limit: (+10 mph) (6%) (26%) Percent Vehicles Exceeding Speed Limit: (+15 mph) (6%) - 13 - Subdivisions of Study; Oriqin/Destination Study An origin /destination study is the most complex study for Transportation professionals. The results of a study can clearly demonstrate where motorists begin and end their trips, provide travel patterns that take place within an area, why they use a particular route and amount of usage on a particular route. Two separate origin/destination studies were conducted, one by the City and one by the residents, to illustrate travel patterns within the three subdivisions of study. The following describes the parameters, terminology, the techniques used for each study and the results: Parameters & Terminoloqy for both studies: * Study Area - The boundaries of State Road 580, Landmark Drive, Enterprise Road and Countryside Boulevard. * Time of Study - Both parties conducted their studies during normal traffic pattern days. Their were no garage sales or special events at the mall to discredit these results. * Cut-through - is a vehicle that entered the study area and left the study area in one movement * Internal cut-through is a vehicle that entered a subdivision within the study area from a different subdivision within the study area for access to a major I.-oad. Oriqin/destination study; City of Clearwater The City of Clearwater conducted a "Floating Vehicle" origin/destination study. In this study technique, the driver of the recording car follows vehicles that enter a study area and an observer records the entering and exiting points or internal stopping points of the vehicle of study. The results of the City study indicate: * Total vehicles observed = 179 * Cut-throughs = 29 vehicles (16%) * Internal cut-through = 106 vehicles (59%) - 14 - Oriqin/destination study; Residents The residents conducted a "License Plate" origin/destination study. In this study technique, trained observers were stationed at all entrances and exits of the study area with data sheets and synchronized watches for times of entry or exit. Observers recorded the last three digits of license plates of all vehicles that pass for both directions. This study accounts for every movement that takes place at the borders of the study areas. The following are the results: * Total tags observed = 985 * Cut-throughs = 82 tags (8%) * Internal cut-through = 227 tags (23%) * Grand total of both = 309 (31%) * 261 tags of the 309 tags utilize Haverhill as a cut-thru * Virtually all cut-thrus utilize Frisco Drive Subdivisions of Study; Recorded Violations The following data was compiled from a study conducted on Saturday July 24, 1993 at 1:00 pm. A discretely placed video camera was used to record approximately one hour of the movements at the intersection of Frisco Drive and Deer Run North. This is a three way stop controlled intersection. The results are as follows: * Total cars observed = 149 * Total of complete stops Total of rolling stops Total of blatant disregard 15 (10%) 86 (58%) 48 (32%) * Total offenders = 134 (90%) - 15 - ALTERNATIVES TO CONSIDER: Based upon the existing conditions and the future travel problems and patterns of the neighborhood, the following alternatives have been developed to solve the issues: Alternative I - "T" End Treatment In reviewing all of the data that has been collected, conducting studies to determine the most effective means to solving the problem and analyzing the most cost effective and safe implementation, the alternative to use a "T" End Treatment on Haverhill Road at Peach Drive is the preferred alternative. This alternative would still allow residents who live on Haverhill Drive to gain access to their homes efficiently. The design would allow for utility services garbage pick-up and emergency access to not be denied and would still function without additional time or loss of service. The main advantages to this alternative are as follows: * This design eliminates 28% of the existing traffic cutting through the neighborhoods. This equates to the elimination of 532 vehicles per day on streets of concern. * A "T" End Treatment on Haverhill does not deny access to any neighborhood. * The neighborhood homeowners associations can take control of their jurisdictions to curtail repeat offenders from within the subdivision without constant attention from the City. * Consensus and togetherness will once established within each neighborhood. agaln be An illustration of this design is shown on the following page. Alternative 2 - Street Revision Alternative 2 will provide the same advantages as alternative 1 with the exception that the travel patterns will change and additional traffic may be diverted to Anderson Drive. Although this is not the preferred alternative to some residents, it does remove the problem of cut-thru traffic. This alternative would allow residents to gain access to all homes within all subdivisions without the "T" End Treatment of Haverhill Drive. This option would be designed with a grassed/landscaped diverter on the north side of the intersection of Frisco drive at Deer Run North. This design would eliminate all north/south movements through the Deer Run/Frisco Drive Intersection but still allow north/south movement via Anderson Drive for internal trips. The main advantage to this alternative are as follows: * This design eliminates 36% of the existing cut-thru traffic through the neighborhood. This equates to the elimination of 684 vehicles on the streets of Deer Run and parts of Frisco Drive. * This alternative neighborhood. does not deny access to any * The neighborhood homeowners associations can take control of their jurisdictions to curtail repeat offenders of speeding within the neighborhood without constant attention and expense to the City. An illustration of this design is shown on the following page. ALTERNATIVE.2 +- .... ANDERSON DRIVE HOUSE NORTHWOOD WEST HOUSE ~ t OUJ u> 11)- -0:: CX:C LA.. ~ . I .. l N NORTHWOOD ESTATES HOUSE OUJ u> 11)- -0:: a:o LA.. ~ t ,-- ~__ _-J' DEER RUN NORTH +- .... PIGOItB I 8I1IBBT RBV&ml Alternative 3 - One way channelization Alternative 3 will provide a lesser impact to solving the problem entirely. This alternative would be designed with a grassed/landscaped diverter on the north side of the Deer Run/Frisco drive intersection but allow northbound movements only. This design would cut the traffic in half but would not stop cut-thru vehicles from using the neighborhood. The main advantage to this alternative are as follows: * This design eliminates 16% of the existing cut-thru traffic but still allows repeated offenders from outside the neighborhood to enter and break laws. * This alternative neighborhood. does not deny access to any An illustration of this design is shown on the following page. 1- ,I ALTERNATIVE 'I +- -. ANDERSON DRIVE ~ t Ow u> CI)_ -0:: a:Q u.. N NORTHWOOD ESTATES ) HOUSE . HOUSE . .. l NORTHWOOD t WEST ,-,~ ---' DEER RUN ... HOUSE NORTH .... OlJJ 0> CI)_ -a: a:Q u.. ~ t PIGURB , ONE WAY CIIANNBUZA.'DON " Alternative 4 - Stop Sign Control In reviewing all of the 4 alternatives that are reasonable and make sense, this alternative is ranked the lowest. As discussed with Traffic Engineers throughout the State and in conducting our own research and collection of data, it is a known fact that stop signs do not slow speeding down and only causes disrespect for the sign and continuous enforcement problems. The main advantages of this type of installation are: * The initial cost and illusion of the installation is minimal. However, the cost of an accident, possible lawsuits, continuous enforcement and political pressure for further relief of the problem is beyond cost. Although additional measures to control the speeding and cut-thru volumes were discussed, they do not appear to have direct control of the problem. An illustration of this design is shown on the following page. f_ !. SUMMARY: The data of this study clearly demonstrates the following: 1. That speeding and traffic violations are out of control. 2. That motorists are using the subdivision networks as thoroughfares instead of their intended use as residential streets. 3. The design of the roadway network enhances the traffic problems. 4. The safety of both pedestrians and motorists is of maJor concern. This report was assembled with the expectation of solutions being implemented in a timely manner. It is now up to you to act responsibly to these issues. RECOMMENDATIONS: The following recommendations are based upon thorough research, meeting with the Commissioners and staff of the City of Clearwater, past performance to enforce speeding violators, the future of the road network, the existing and future safety of the neighborhoods and the concerns and issues of the residents that are directly and indirectly involved with the problem. 1. Design and install a "T" End Treatment on Haverhill Drive between Frisco Drive and Winding Wood Drive to eliminate cut-thru traffic, speeding and high volumes of traffic within all neighborhoods. ~ WON'T A 'STOP SIGN' SLOW TRAFFIC ON OUR STREET? Stop signs installed in the wrong places for the wrong purposes usually create more problems than they solve. One common misuse of stop signs is to arbitrarily interrupt traffic, either by 'causing it to stop or by causing such an inconvenience that motorists are forced to use other routes. Studies made in many parts of the country show that there is a high incidence of intentional violations where stop signs are installed as "nuisances" or "speed breakers". These studies showed that ~ was reduced in the immediate vicinity of the "nuisance" stop signs. But, speeds were actually hiQher between intersections than they would have been if these signs hadn't been installed. At the right place and under the right conditions, a stop sign tells drivers and pedestrians who has the right of way. Nationally recognized standards have been established to determine when stop signs should be used. These standards, or "warrants", take into consideration, among other things, traffic speed and volume, sight distance and the frequency of traffic "gaps" which will allow safe vehicle entry or pedestrian crossing. Most drivers are reasonable and prudent. But, when confronted with unreasonable restrictions, they frequently violate them and develop a general contempt for all traffic controls--often with tragic results. Traffic Information Program Series TIP No. 2 lr Neighborhood Speed Watch: Another Weapon in the Residential Speed Control Arsenal BY JOSEPH E. WOMBLE One of the most persistent and frus- trating complaints that traffic en- gineers in the public sector have to deal with is the issue of speeding on residen- tial streets. In dealing with new residential subdi- visions in Gwinnett County, Georgia, the Gwinnett County Department of Transportation, Traffic and Operations Division, seeks to solve the problem of residential speeding in advance by en- suring that residential streets are laid out This program is specifically designed to address the speeding problem in self-contained subdivisions that experience little or no through traffic. ious specific remedies requested (gener- ally, multi-way stops) are not good ideas (an explanation that generally falls on deaf ears), followed by a referral of the complaint to the Police Department for enforcement measures. The Police De- partment, busy with higher priority problems, will respond with a token ef- fort at enforcement that has little impacl. The situation then returns to normal, leaving both citizens and traffic engi- neers with a sense of frustration over a complaint not adequately addressed. Faced with the necessity of dealing with residential speed complaints in a more positive manner, the county has adopted a two-pronged program. The first element of this program seeks to eliminate through traffic on local resi- dential streets by selectively closing streets. A classic case of "cut-through" traffic is illustrated in Figure 1. In this case, two local streets were being heavily used by through traffic as a shortcut and to avoid a signalized intersection. A sim- ple closure of these streets solved this problem relatively easily, although the level of congestion at the signalized in- tersection undefStandably increased. Other closures proved to be not so straightforward, and some involved a considerable element of controversy. Ir order to deal with these situations in an even-hanaed manner, a formalized pro- cedure to evaluate street closure propo- sals was developed, which included a rat- ing system based on traffic volume, speed, and accident experience. The other major element in the Gwin- nett County approach is a new program known as Neighborhood Speed Watch. This program is specifically designed to address the speeding problem in self- contained subdivisions that experience little or no through traffic. The program relies on community spirit and peer ~ 1 1: i .~ 'J so as to minimize opportunities for through movement and to avoid long, straight stretches of streets, which tend to encourage higher speeds. Although these actions may prove at least partially successful in preventing problems in new subdivisions, there are nearly 1800 miles of local streets in the county that don't have such enlightened standards of de- sign. The department's typical response to a residential speeding complaint has been an explanation as to why the var- Figure 1. Typical residential street clo- sure: Through traffic pattern before street closure (lOp) and through traffic pattern after closure (bottom). 16 . ITE JOURNAL. FEBRUARY 1990 -.: ~ pressure to increase awareness and fos- ter a sense of responsibility among mo. torists and thus achieve better compli. ance with residential speed limits. The program recognizes that in a relatively self-contained subdivision it is usually the friends and neighbors of the com- plainant (and in some cases the com- plainants themselves) who are the resi- dential speed offenders. The program attempts to make motorists feel that speeding in their neighborhood is so- cially unacceptable behavior and that they would be incurring the disapproval and censure of their friends and neigh- bors by exceeding the speed limit in their subdivisions. In addition to carrying little or no through traffic, a street must meet the following other criteria in order to be included in the Neighborhood Speed Watch program: . Classification of particular street(s) in question as local residential street(s) on the county's official road classifica- tion map; . 85th percentile speed in excess of 10 miles per hour (mph) greater than the posted limit; and . Support of local residents in the form of a Neighborhood Speed Watch or- ganization representing at least 50 per- cent of the households in the neigh- borhood. Once a neighborhood has been included in the Neighborhood Speed Watch pro- gram, the actions taken are as follows: . A personal letter is sent to each area resident informing them of the pro- gram's goals and objectives; at the same time, Neighborhood Speed Watch signs are posted. The sign now in use is shown in Figure 2. . Concurrently, committee members un- dertake to call upon each household in the subject area and make a personal appeal for cooperation. . Radar observations are made at peri- odical intervals by transportation de- partment personnel, and, using merge! sort functions of the word processor, personal letters from the Chief of Po- lice to offending drivers are generated. The letters point out that the drivers have been operating their vehicles in a manner inconsistent with the stan- dards adopted by their friends and neighbors and goes on to mention the dollar fines and license points that would be assessed should the motorist receive a citation for this offense. . Periodic speed studies are made to monitor the effectiveness of the pro- gram. When indicated, police support in issuing citations is requested. Gen- erally, by this time, the problem has been well enough defined to focus the police support effort with maximum effectiveness. . Neighborhood groups join in the cen- sure effort in various ways, as deemed appropriate. Responses have included publication of names of offenders in the neighborhood newsletter and sus- pension from the subdivision swim! tennis club. The Neighborhood Speed Watch pro- gram was initiated in 1988. Currently, there are 13 subdivisions active in the program, with an additional 18 subdivi- sions under consideration. The results to date have been quite encouraging. In two subdivisions, 85th percentile speeds were reduced from 45 mph to 35 mph, and the total number of vehicles in these two subdivisions ex- ceeding speeds of 50 mph has been re- duced from 56 vehicles daily to 13 vehi- cles daily. The program is currently being man- aged by a single technician, thus freeing the rest of the staff to concentrate on arterial traffic problems. We are now in the process of further evaluating the program, including a de- termination as to the frequency at which an area must be "blitzed" in order to maintain the speed reduction. Over and above the program's measurable effec- tiveness, the introduction of Neighbor- hood Speed Watch is perceived to be a very positive program, even in those areas where the actual reduction in speeds is not that great. Neighborhood Speed Watch is a rela- tively new approach to the problem of residential speed control in one specific situation-the relatively self-contained subdivision or neighborhood with little or no through traffic. The program bor- rows some of the concepts of Neighbor- hood Crime Watch and ,involves active community participation. The results in some subdivisions have been significant; however, even in those areas where they ~ .' ~ ....., "'~ ~~~t~, ;h,..... :" :',-- - \ ~ -'~' . ~:t "~:.. X/)~:'h~~ Figure 2. Neighborhood Speed Watch warning sign. were not, residential speed complaints virtually ceased with the introduction of the program, proving once again that perception is often as important as real- ity. It is, after all, not enough to be doing good; you must also be perceived as to be doing good. I JosephE. Womble is the director of . Traffic and Opera- tions for Gwinnett County, Georgw. His previous posi- tions include city traffic engineer and director of utilities for the City of New Orleans and many years of consulting experience. Womble re- ceived his B.S. C. E. degree from the Uni- versity of Illinois and is a registered Professional Engineer and a Fellow of the InstitUle. ~ ITE JOURNAl. FE8RUARY 1990 . 17