All persons are encouraged to participate in public meetings. Citizens requiring translation or sign language services or other reasonable accommodations may contact the City Clerk's office at 734.794.6140; via e-mail to: cityclerk@a2gov.org; or by written request addressed and mailed or delivered to: City Clerk's Office 301 E. Huron St. Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Requests made with less than two business days' notice may not be able to be accommodated.

March 8, 2018 Re: Invitation to Participate -- Traffic Calming on Bluett between Nixon and Yellowstone Dear Resident: This is a reminder that you have been invited to participate in onsite meetings for the Bluett Traffic Calming process. Please join us at two upcoming onsite meetings: Onsite Meeting #1: Wednesday, March 14, from 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. This walking meeting will start from the Clague Middle School parking lot. The route/schedule previously mailed, and details about potential inclement weather cancellation, is also available at a2gov.org/trafficcalming. Materials for discussion at Onsite Meeting #1 are enclosed. Onsite Meeting #2: Wednesday, April 11, from 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. This walking meeting will start from the Clague Middle School parking lot. Results of Bluett Orientation Meeting: Thank you to all who participated in the Orientation Meeting on February 28. Complete meeting notes are available at a2gov.org/trafficcalming, or contact staff to request printed materials. Your participation at Onsite Meeting #1 and #2, is important to provide input throughout the plan development process. We look forward to working with the Bluett neighborhood and appreciate your interest in traffic calming in your area. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 734-794-6000 ext. 43637 or by email at YLiu@a2gov.org. Sincerely,

Luke Liu, PE, PTOE Traffic Engineer C: Kayla Coleman, Systems Planning Cynthia Redinger, Engineering

Andrea Wright, Engineering

CITY OF ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN Public Services Area / Engineering 301 E. Huron Street, P.O. Box 8647

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48107 Phone (734) 794-6410 Fax (734) 994-1744

Web: www.a2gov.org

Bluett - Nixon to Yellowstone March 14 Traffic Calming Concept Plan Narrative The following outline provides a detailed review of the following:

Resident proposed devices and locations per feedback at February 28 Orientation Workshop; also see Resident Workshop Traffic Calming Plan.

Staff responses.

Outline of concepts for discussion at March 14 Onsite Meeting 1; also see Traffic Calming Concept Plan.

NOTE: All proposed devices are located on Bluett between Nixon and Yellowstone unless otherwise specified. A discussion summary from the February 28 Orientation Meeting/Resident Workshop is available online at a2gov.org/trafficcalming. Resident Proposal A: Speed table west of the Bluett and Prairie intersection (alongside 2663 Prairie, on Bluett) Staff Response: Staff support the use of this tool at this location. No changes suggested. Concept 1 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Speed table at resident proposed location. Resident Proposal B: Raised Crosswalk east of the Prairie and Bluett intersection (between 2648 Prairie and 2665 Shefman) at crosswalk to Clague Middle School. Staff Response: Staff support the use of this tool at this location. No changes suggested. Concept 2 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Raised crosswalk at resident proposed location. Resident Proposal C: Raised Crosswalk east of 2940 Bluett and west of 2981 Bluett at Clauge Middle School. Staff Response: Staff support the use of this tool at this location. No changes suggested Concept 3 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Raised crosswalk at resident proposed location Resident Proposal D: Raised Intersection at Bluett and Bunker Hill Staff Response: Engineering staff recognize the residents desire to provide additional safety for pedestrians at this intersection. A raised intersection would require adjustment to existing utility structures (manholes, storm inlets, etc.). Utility structure adjustments are expensive and would use a significant amount of the budget for Traffic Calming Program and would result in construction over multiple fiscal years. Additionally, vertical devices are not preferred treatments for multi-way stop controlled intersections. At this location horizontal devices such as curb bump outs could narrow the pedestrian crossing and bring the STOP signs closer to the driver’s field of vision. Per State law and local code parking is restricted in and around intersections and crosswalks. The curb bumpouts proposed at this location will not remove parking spaces because they are located within a statutory no parking area. Concept 4 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Curb bump outs just east of Bunker Hill Location: Intersection of Bluett and Antietam STAFF NOTE: Based on workshop feedback, residents did not propose a traffic calming device installation at the intersection of Bluett and Antietam. Staff have identified potential opportunity for a school safety improvement in this area and will pursue installation of a curb bump out and marked

crosswalk as a separate project outside of the Traffic Calming Program. See Potential School Safety Improvements Map, enclosed. Resident Proposal E: Speed Table between 3232 Bluett and 3236 Bluett in front of Sugarbush Park Staff Response: Staff support the use of this tool but recommend a location shifted east to avoid an existing utility structure. Staff have identified potential opportunity for a school safety improvement in this area and will pursue installation of a curb bump out and sidewalk as a separate project outside of the Traffic Calming Program. See Potential School Safety Improvements Map, enclosed. Concept 5 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Speed table between 3236 and 3240 Bluett. Resident Proposal F: Speed Table west of 3275 Bluett, along the curve Staff Response: Guidance from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) indicates that vertical devices located close to curves cause potentially dangerous conditions for roadway users. Per FHWA, speed tables “Should not be placed on a sharp curve; ITE Guidelines for the Design and Application of Speed Humps recommends a minimum horizontal curve radius of 300 feet.” (note: the safety considerations for speed humps and speed tables are consistent). Moving the speed table further west would provide sufficient spacing from the curve to comply with nationally recognized safety standards. Concept 6 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Speed table between 3259 Bluett and 3260/3256 Bluett. Resident Proposal G: Centerline Pavement Marking and residential traffic circle at the curve between 3276 Bluett and 3292 Bluett (note: resident request for traffic circle consideration was raised during discussion, after workshop breakout session) Staff Response: Staff agree the curve needs improved delineation. Painting a centerline on the Bluett curve is considered a “long line pavement marking.” Long line pavement markings are outside the scope of the Traffic Calming Program which emphasizes engineering retrofits to create physical obstructions to slow traffic. Long line pavement markings are not typically used on local streets. Staff are unclear whether the requested pavement marking would achieve the desired benefit for the neighborhood; if roadway users are not adhering to the posted advisory speed at the curve location, they are also unlikely to observe a pavement marking.

The proposed residential traffic circle is not an appropriate device choice because this location does not operate as an intersection; residential traffic circles are for use at intersection locations.

Staff encourage the community to give further consideration to the opportunity for a pedestrian refuge island on the edge of the curve adjacent to the pavement extension. This pedestrian refuge island would be designed such that plows, emergency vehicles and solid waste trucks could still access the area. The refuge island would serve the purpose of physically establishing a curb edge. Defining the curve would slow traffic moving through by constraining the roadway. A concept detail to help the community visualize this proposed device has been provided. See Pedestrian Refuge Island Concept Detail, enclosed. Note: this is not a final design drawing. Concept 7 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Pedestrian refuge island between the curve and the small cul-de-sac. Resident Proposal H: Speed table in front of 3292 Bluett Staff Response: Staff has safety concerns about curve location, see proposal F response. Additionally, the City typically uses 250-500 feet of space between traffic calming devices for maximum safety and effectiveness. Residents at the workshop also proposed a raised crosswalk located 100 feet from this location. Due to concerns about safety and industry best practices, staff does not recommend pursuing a speed table at this location.

Resident Proposal I: Raised crosswalk south of Yellowstone (between 3296 Bluett and 3295 Bluett) Staff Response: Staff support the use of this tool at this location. No changes suggested. Concept 8 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Raised crosswalk at resident proposed location Resident Proposal J: Curb Bump out across from 3302 Bluett Staff Response: Staff has concerns about device spacing, see proposal H response. Residents at the workshop also proposed a raised crosswalk located 100 feet from this location. Due to concerns about safety and industry best practices staff does not recommend pursuing a curb bump out at this location. Resident Proposal K: Curb bump out at the southwest corner of Bluett and Alton Staff Response: Staff has concerns about device spacing and existing utility structure placement. Based on existing inlet structures in this area staff does not think it would be possible to place a curb bump out at this location and maintain proper drainage. Additionally, this device is within 160 feet of the next proposed device. Due to physical constraints caused by the existing inlet structure and concerns about safety and best practices for device spacing, staff does not recommend pursuing a curb bump out at this location. Resident Proposal L: Raised intersection at Bluett and Burbank (multiple adjacent raised crosswalks, i.e. across Bluett and across Burbank, was also discussed during the resident workshop). Staff Response: Staff has concerns about raised intersection, see Proposal D response. Engineering staff recognize the resident request for a vertical device in this area. Instead of a raised intersection, staff recommends a raised crosswalk crossing Burbank to achieve the desired results. Because this is a school bus route, two adjacent vertical devices (i.e., across Bluett and across Burbank) is not feasible. Adjacent vertical devices would negatively impact school buses turning right off Bluett onto Burbank.

In addition to the raised crosswalk crossing Burbank, engineering staff recommend adding curb bump outs to tighten the intersection and reduce turning speeds, and narrow the pedestrian crossing. The proposed bumpouts at this location would not remove parking spaces, see Proposal D.

A concept detail to help the community visualize this proposed device has been provided. See Bluett and Burbank Concept Detail, enclosed. Note: this is not a final design drawing. Concept 9 and 10 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Raised crosswalk along Burbank at Bluett; and curb bump outs at the crosswalk south of Burbank across Bluett. Resident Proposal M: Speed table between 3370 Bluett and 3353 Bluett Staff Response: Staff has safety concerns about curve location, see Proposal F response. Staff recognize the request for a vertical device in this area and recommend that the device be moved west to observe recommendations for safety and best practices. Moving the speed table further west would provide sufficient spacing from the curve to comply with nationally recognized safety standards. Concept 11 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Speed table across from 3375 and 3374 Bluett. Resident Proposal N: Raised intersection at Yellowstone and Bluett Staff Response: Concerns about raised intersection, see Proposal D response. Staff recognize the request for a vertical device in this area and recommend a raised crosswalk across Bluett to achieve the desired results at a lower cost. Concept 12 for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1: Raised crosswalk across Bluett, at Bluett and Yellowstone.

Resident proposed devices and locations from February 28 workshop meeting

Concept plan for discussion at Onsite Meeting 1 (March 14)

NOTES: (1) The March 14 Draft Concept Plan is largely based on resident proposals from the February 28 Orientation

Meeting. (2) Some modifications to February 28 resident proposals are recommended, most often where safety concerns

or conflict with industry best practices were identified. (3) Staff acknowledge that some residents requested fewer total

devices in this project area. Staff have tried to maintain all potentially feasible options, and match the March 14 discussion

plan as closely as possible to the February 28 resident proposals. We will be looking for input at the March 14 and April 11

meetings to refine the draft concept plan, including potential reduction in number of devices.

Sugarbrush Park Concept Detail NOTE: This is not a final design drawing. Municipal service needs have been taken into consideration in this concept, including but

not limited to Ann Arbor Police Department, Ann Arbor Fire Department and Solid Waste collection.

Pedestrian Refuge Island Concept Detail NOTE: This is not a final design drawing. Municipal service needs have been taken into consideration in this concept, including but

not limited to Ann Arbor Police Department, Ann Arbor Fire Department and Solid Waste collection.

Bluett and Burbank Concept Detail NOTE: This is not a final design drawing. Municipal service needs have been taken into consideration in this concept, including but

not limited to Ann Arbor Police Department, Ann Arbor Fire Department and Solid Waste collection.