Responsible Growth Coalition HomepageResponsible Growth Coalition

Encouraging transportation solutions consistent with safety, environmental, and wildlife core values.

By

Y changes are a positive step forward

December 21, 2016

TO:
Jackson Hole News & Guide, Letters to the Editor

WYDOT should be commended for developing and accelerating its planned improvements to the Y Intersection. With this interim measure that is expected to last for up to 15 years, WYDOT has taken two important steps forward: (1) adding a second left-hand turn from US 89 north to WY 22 westbound; and (2) installing new signals that will provide more accurate traffic data and the ability to manually change the signal timing to address actual traffic patterns. In the summer of 2015, when the Integrated Transportation Plan (ITP) was under consideration, the vast majority of community members providing public comment strongly urged that changes to the Y Intersection be made first, before designing or constructing any new residential county roads. The community consistently spoke with many voices to ask that buses, trucks, and cars traveling on WY 22 and US 89 remain on those state roads rather than be diverted into residential neighborhoods through new county built bypasses.

While WYDOT and the County have yet to collect or analyze updated traffic data promised when the ITP was adopted, the Responsible Growth Coalition hired a nationally recognized traffic expert to help us understand and analyze the considerable traffic data on the Y that currently exists. Our organization is a local non-profit whose mission is to raise public awareness concerning planning and transportation issues in Teton County and the Town of Jackson. www.responsiblegrowthjh.org. We learned that WYDOT maintains Automatic Traffic Recorders at locations north, south, and east of the Y Intersection that operate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. WYDOT made this traffic data for 2008 through 2015 available to us. We asked our expert to analyze that data and provide his observations to us. (2016 data was not yet available at the time).

Our expert reviewed the data and found that traffic volumes at the Y were generally flat between 2008 and 2014 with a small uptick in 2015 and most of the highest traffic hours occurred in the summer months and in the late afternoon. He recommended a number of cost effective, simple solutions to alleviate the traffic congestion at the Y: (1) addition of a second left-hand turn for vehicles from Highway 89 heading north onto WY 22 through the Y; and (2) installation of adaptive smart signal technology at the Y and related intersections that will adapt to traffic patterns without manual intervention.

See full report: Review of Traffic Data at the Y Intersection – May 2016

WYDOT’s planned changes to the Y are a good step in the right direction. Use of adaptive signals would be preferable, but WYDOT’s new signals will provide the information needed to manually adjust the timing of the signals at the Y to address congestion.

Concerns have been raised about the impact of these planned changes to surrounding town streets. Those concerns are real and need to be addressed by WYDOT and the County with updated traffic data, thoughtful design, and coordination to enable safe and convenient use of Buffalo Way, Scott Lane and Maple Way. The only redirection proposed by WYDOT is the closure of Buffalo Way to traffic heading west straight onto WY 22. This change would appear to affect a small number of vehicles who have alternative routes to access WY 22.

WYDOT’s planned changes to the Y show responsiveness to community input. Thank you!

Sincerely,

Lance Cygielman
Michele Gammer
Geoff Gottlieb

By

RGC comments on Public Review Draft of Integrated Transportation Plan (ITP).

July 24, 2015

TO:
Teton County Board of County Commissioners
Mr. Tyler Sinclair, Teton County Planning Director
Via email to council@townofjackson.com, commissioners@tetonwyo.org, sbirdyshaw@tetonwyo.org and tsinclair@tetonwyo.org

Dear Commissioners and Council Members:

We write on behalf of the Responsible Growth Coalition as a follow-up to the July 6 JIM on the Public Review Draft of the Jackson/Teton Integrated Transportation Plan (ITP). Our organization has secured signatures of at least 330 individuals who share our concerns about the Draft ITP’s prioritization and inclusion of a proposed Tribal Trails Connector (“TTC”).

At the July 6, 2015 JIM, the County Commissioners and the Town Councilors focused on two key transportation challenges they seek to address: (1) increased traffic and congestion at the Y Intersection of US Hwy 89 and WY22; and (2) the need for redundancy to allow emergency vehicles to access South Park and the West Bank in the event of an emergency or a blocking accident at the Y Intersection.

As currently proposed, the TTC is a bypass road that, if built, would dump 13,000 vehicles per day into a quiet rural and residential area and a dense zone of six schools and 15 athletic playfields. As recently as 2010, it was estimated that 2/3 of these vehicles would be non-local traffic. More current information has not been obtained either by the Engineering Staff or the Consultant retained to develop the Draft ITP.

We believe it would be a grave mistake for our County and Town Elected Officials to make any commitment in the ITP to build a TTC. The current prioritization and inclusion of the TTC is based on incomplete and stale data and critical analysis of impacts of the proposed bypass and viable alternatives is missing. Even Engineer O’Malley conceded at the July 6 JIM that he lacked current traffic information on the volume of vehicles (local or non-local) that might use a proposed TTC and had yet to engage in any analysis of safety or environmental implications of a proposed TTC.

At the July 6 JIM, the Board and Council agreed that there must be additional information, data, and critical analysis before the numerous questions surrounding a proposed TTC can be answered. Accordingly, the Elected Officials should direct their staff to obtain and make public the following critical data and analyses before further considering a proposed TTC:

 

  1. Current and accurate information about existing and anticipated traffic on WY 22 and US 89 through the Y, as well as the anticipated volumes of vehicles per day that are expected to use the proposed TTC, South Park Loop Road, and proposed East-West bypass road ;
  2.  A complete analysis of the safety, environmental, and other impacts that a TTC would have on South Park residential neighborhoods and their residents and the children who attend all of the schools on the proposed bypass route;
  3. A full and fair analysis of alternatives to address the two key transportation challenges of increased traffic at the Y and redundancy access options for emergency vehicles, including using the existing one lane pathway for emergency vehicles only between WY22 and South Park Loop Road similar to the new Snake River Bridge.

This critical data can be obtained by the County and Town staff; however, it will take additional time and funding to do so. For that reason, the portion of the Draft ITP relating to a proposed TTC should be removed from the ITP or deferred until such data and analysis is provided and considered.
Our request to defer consideration of a TTC is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the many comments voiced by the County and Town Elected Officials, along with their staff, at the July 6 JIM. The Comprehensive Plan requires the Elected Officials to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the County’s residents and preserve the community in which we live. The proposed TTC would involve building multiple new roads in a quiet rural and residential area in which six schools and fifteen athletic fields are located. At the July 6 meeting, Elected Officials and their staff noted:

  1. There should be a redesign and improvement of the Y first (Allen);
  2. We can build our way out of traffic problems with improvements at the Y (O’Malley)
  3. Roundabouts are 2-3 times more efficient at moving traffic than signal lights (O’Malley)
  4. We need to get our hands around safety issues for foot and bike traffic on the TTC (Flitner)
  5. There are too many unanswered questions about the TTC (Allen)
  6. We need more meetings to encourage additional public review and outreach (Vogelheim)
  7. We need to figure out how to make the TTC safe, get it right, and look at alternatives (Rhea)
  8. We should make sure we understand correct data (Flitner)
  9. I’m very much in favor of bringing people in and getting as much comment as possible (Newcomb)
  10. I recommend to staff that they come up with concept drawings of what the TTC would look like (Vogelheim)

We ask you, the Elected Officials, to direct your staff at the next JIM to gather and make public the necessary information and analysis that we request outlined above to allow for an informed decision about how to address these key traffic issues as they relate to the Y Intersection and a proposed TTC. In addition, we ask that additional opportunity for public input be provided once this additional information is obtained and disclosed to the public and prior to inclusion of a proposed TTC in the Draft ITP.

Mr. Sinclair stated at the July 6 JIM that “it is time for you to decide if there are any projects that you would like in or not in the Plan.” Mr. O’Malley previously told you that you would be “married” to the ITP (June 1 JIM) and you were told that it would serve as the staff’s “blueprint and action plan.” (July 6 JIM). Given the level of commitment you are making and the absolute lack of critical information and analyses that are needed for consideration and approval of a proposed TTC, we again respectfully suggest that a proposed TTC be removed from the Draft ITP and any decision related to a proposed TTC be deferred until the above-requested data and information is gathered and analysis is complete and made public. Alternatively, you could request that the Draft ITP be amended to require in-depth exploration of alternatives and design and development of major capital projects, including a proposed TTC, before the Draft ITP is adopted.

Thank you for consideration of this letter and our requests.

Sincerely,
On Behalf of the Executive Committee of the Responsible Growth Coalition
Jason Anderson
Michele Gammer
cc: Nicole Krieger

By

Mother’s ITP Safety Concerns

From: Adrianna Anderson

Date: June 8, 2015 at 7:14:35 AM MDT

To: commissioners@tetonwyo.org, council@townofjackson.com
Cc: sbirdyshaw@tetonwyo.org, awatkins@tetonwyo.org, county@jhnewsandguide.com

Subject: Teton County Resident with ITP Safety Concerns

Dear Commissioners & Town Council Members,

Thank you for your hard work and time dedicated to the ITP last week. Last Monday’s Joint Information Meeting was a long, informative session that provided many solutions as well as areas needing further exploration in the coming weeks regarding Teton County’s traffic situation. We trust that you will make the right call for Teton County and it’s inhabitants and I look forward to future discussions.

I am writing you today as a South Park resident and mother to two young children (6 & 9) who attend Jackson and Colter Elementary schools. My comments are regarding the proposed Tribal Trails Connector Road (TTCR) being built as a bypass in the South Park neighborhood. I am aware you have heard many rationale in favor and opposed to the TTCR and with so much information it can be challenging to sort through the minutiae of it all. I promise to stick to the facts of the matter.

While Mr. Charlier spent much time persuading how the TTCR would reduce traffic at the Y by up to 10,000 cars a day, he did little to provide rationale as to how the TTCR would not become a bypass for pass-through traffic. According to the study on South Park traffic by his competitor he mentioned (Teton County’s 2010 Felsburg South Park Study), Mr. Charlier states that most of the traffic using the TTCR would be South Park local traffic. When reading the study however, I was surprised to find that only 33% of traffic using the connector would be South Park “Local” residing traffic. The other 67% would be pass-through traffic. See details in traffic engineer Robert Bernstein’s Analysis of the 2010 Felsburg South Park Study.

How this increase in pass-through traffic will affect our children:

One of the main take-away points of the ITP is that Teton County’s goal is to increase pedestrian and bike traffic while decreasing vehicular traffic. A wonderful goal for our future indeed. While facing a 400-1,200% increase in traffic on many South Park roads that already deal with traffic congestion during school drop-off/pick-up times, how can a parent feel comfortable allowing their children to bike/walk to school and athletic practices? Daily I witness drivers failing to stop at cross walks for children and adults attempting to cross the road in school zones. What will be done to mitigate this blatant danger to our children? I find it contradictory that our county goal is to increase bike/pedestrian commuter traffic yet the proposed TTCR will make it more dangerous for our kids to get to school this way. I think you will find more parents driving their children to school if the TTCR is built thus nullifying our goal.

The thing I found troubling about Mr. Charlier’s comments was his attitude that addressing safety is not something that should be first and foremost. Comments like, “I’m not an advocate for writing a safety section” and “It’s essential to everything that’s in there but it’s not a separate topic” seemed lacking to me when referencing our most child-dense and sensitive zone in Teton County. His inability to provide details when questioned by Commissioner Newcomb on Charlier’s outline for safety consideration left me disappointed and feeling like this proposal hasn’t properly been vetted. Perhaps an independent child-safety analysis would be prudent?

When asked by Commissioner Vogelheim if roundabouts in the TTCR proposal would mitigate traffic, Mr. Charlier’s answer was, “You really don’t know until you get into the details of project planning”. The impression I got was that this is a plan that has been drafted yet details of safety mitigation and how to protect our children have not been fully thought out. Is this how Teton County works? Vote on a road rife with child safety concerns yet wait until later to find out if the risk is worth it? I believe our kids deserve better from us, the adults who are granted the honor of keeping them safe and out of harm’s way.

These are the questions that keep me up at night and I feel you have the power to challenge our county engineers and planners as to giving us the full story before a vote comes to order. I disagree with Mr. Charlier about the details; the details are where we are going to find out if the risk to our children’s safety is worth easing congestion at the Y. If you also felt like vital information was lacking, I urge you to please dig deeper on this one.

Please feel free to contact me to discuss this further.

Sincerely,
Adrianna Anderson