Traffic signals replace roundabout as preferred solution for town hill intersection
Administrator | Dec 06, 2024 | Comments 16
The preferred solution for the Picton Main Street town hill intersection has been changed to traffic signals instead of a roundabout following the completion of an improvements study.
The County reports the initial preferred solution – presented at a second public consultation in October 2023 – was revised, based on public feedback received during the Municipal Class Environmental Assessment, and a consideration of technical requirements.
The signalized intersection, with a northbound receiving lane, is to accommodate anticipated the increase in vehicle and pedestrian traffic due to future growth. A northbound receiving lane is to allow large trucks and farming equipment to bypass the signals of the intersection, and merge on a more appropriate grade.
The recommended plan includes:
Dedicated pedestrian crossings to enhance safety at the intersection
Considerations for heating the westbound approach to limit concerns with stopping on the hill in winter conditions.
A configuration that would enable the intersection to revert to a flashing mode during a significant winter event, allowing the intersection to operate as it currently does. The ‘Y’ intersection currently has stops on Picton Main and County Road 49, while Bridge Street is free-flow.
The County’s Transportation Master Plan, (TMP) completed in 2021, stated “Challenges that arise from the current configuration and operation of the intersection include confusion among all users, safety concerns for all users, suppression of walking and cycling, delay for all road users, and the concern that Bridge Street is steep enough
that trucks could roll backwards if they were to stop at this intersection.”
It further stated the southbound left-turn movement (County Road 49 to Bridge Street) is experiencing major delay and capacity issues in both peak hours. In addition, there is extensive queuing on the Picton Main Street and County Road 49 approaches due to insufficient intersection capacity during recreational traffic peak periods (summer weekends).
The previous term of council approved, in 2022, the capital budget for this study.
The Environmental Assessment study in 2023 looked at potential long-term upgrades and expanded on the short-term actions already completed – which include the installation of a new cantilever sign, updated line painting and pavement markings, and replacement of a retaining wall on Bridge Street.
The County will explore funding opportunities through the Ministry of Transportation’s Connecting Links program and consider a construction project to present to council in future budget years.
The 30-days to provide feedback on the project file report end Wednesday, Jan. 8. Visit the project webpage to view the project file report and documents.
Send feedback to Jeff Shortt, Project Manager, at 613.476.2148 extension 1007 or email jshortt@pecounty.on.ca
Roundabout called preferred plan to fix three-legged town hill intersection
Filed Under: Local News
People may be quick to decry such proposals, but we ought to be attempting to make our design and engineering decisions be in line with what a motorist might see across other jurisdictions.
It seems to me that the County has long held to engineering road design/traffic considerations a certain way, and that in 2024 these aren’t always the safest that could be chosen. My biggest problem is the number of things that are presented to a motorist that aren’t intuitive and not even easy to realize as non-intuitive until it’s too late.
The town hill is an example of another of these County three-way intersections where the through traffic is not proceeding more or less straight, but instead negotiates an approx. 90 degree turn. This situation exists in various other places in the County. There’s two of them in Demorestville alone, I believe there’s one in Cherry Valley and another one south of Picton and another down toward Black River but I can’t remember where. None of these situations are intuitive, and it isn’t uncommon to see people (visitors?) with the County right-of-way stopping as a sign of their uncertainty in whether they “really” have the right-of-way, almost as if they think a stop sign has gone missing.
For example, coming up the hill on County Rd 15 into Demorestville you don’t have to stop as you make a 90 degree turn east or west, but the straight-bound motorists have to. There’s no indication of this to that straight-bound motorist, other than maybe noticing that there’s no stop sign over there on the other side for traffic coming up the hill. Meanwhile the tourist coming up the hill sees his road ending, traffic stopped on both sides and hesitates wondering if this is a three-way stop.
It seems like the biggest issue with the town hill (if you leave aside pedestrian crossing concerns) is the turn from westbound to go down the hill. At certain times the wait can be long and the turn can be risky. Without anything that periodically creates a gap in eastbound traffic (such as a traffic light in the vicinity of the Regent Theatre) there can be long line-ups expected. Maybe we ought to be looking at lights not at, but near the top and/or bottom of the hill, that would create a gap for 30-45 seconds to allow traffic to turn at the top and clear up backlogs.
The standard for labeling crossroads is often poor as well. Drive down County Road 33 through Carrying Place in the dark and look for where to turn onto County Road 19 or Salem Road to head to Ameliasburgh. By the time you see the sign it’s too late, you’re turning around and heading back because they have positioned the turn signs for these crossroads right at the actual intersections as you travel along a highway posted at 80 km/h. Then drive along, for example, eastbound Blessington Road in Tyendinaga and see the sign for Read Road at least 100 metres from the actual intersection.
When you head along County Road 2 and want to head to Ameliasburgh you drive alongside the new sand dome building and find a yield sign with no merge lane or anything at the junction with 19. This is hardly safe either the way people drive today. Without a merge lane this ought to be a stop sign. Similar situations occur at these “off-ramps” on side roads, such as the Bethesda/Fry Road junction. Maybe the locals know this and have gotten used to it, but I’ve driven a lot of places in Ontario and don’t think these practices are common among most municipalities. Should we be trying to be standardized with the rest of the Province?
Then as you head into Ameliasburgh the stop sign for Valley Road is so bent around that a visitor at night on northbound 19 might think they had to stop at it.
All of the above situations presented are legal, but they aren’t the best practices in keeping with what we should expect as making things as safe as possible.
Finally, why is there not a prohibited left turn from northbound 62 into Rossmore at the base of the Bay Bridge? Anyone heading north on 62 who needs to go into Rossmore can easily use County Road 28 instead. It’s a much safer option that isn’t backing up northbound traffic heading onto the bridge.
It is a reality that pedestrian crossing at the 3-way Town Hill intersection is almost impossible to achieve, without spending massive amounts of money and creating yet more disruption to life for residents and all users of that intersection.
A much more sensible solution might be:
1) Let the Prince Edward County Affordable Housing Corporation (PECAHC) use their $5 million “Line of Credit” that our Council awarded them earlier this year, to buy those two properties and turn them quickly into affordable housing units to meet the high demand; AND
2) Ditch the idea of more road works for the intersection; AND
3) Erect barriers and signage preventing pedestrians from trying to cross on any of the 3 places in the intersection; AND
4) Create two new crosswalks in the style of the one between the Regent and the Royal area:
a) Across Highway 33 (Bridge St) between the PECFHT area and the east side of Union St. by the Stop Sign; AND
b) Across Highway 49 between Shire Hall and the west side of the street, slightly north of Paul St.
While not ideal for pedestrians, these three crosswalks would at least allow people to get from any area surrounding the intersection to any other area surrounding the intersection.
This solution would preserve the existing motor vehicle flows, which although less than ideal, cannot be improved upon by any solution presented by the Engineering firms thus far.
My 0.02 worth, and I am submitting these comments to the County and Engineering firm during the comment period, per below:
“The 30-day public review period runs from Thursday, December 5, 2024 to Wednesday, January 8, 2025. We respectfully request feedback by Wednesday, January 8, 2025 and additional information for submitted feedback is in the attached notice.
The Project File is available for review on the County’s website: https://www.thecounty.ca/government/municipal-projects/special-capital-projects/picton-town-hill-improvements-study/
This is going to be one big expense for a community that is struggling to keep tax rates and expenses down: Acquisition of the two properties – $1.5 to $2 mn. Reconfiguring the hill, including radiant heating – $2 to $3 mn. Installing traffic lights and pedestrian crossings -$250,000. Annual cost of running the heating system – approx $200,000. And who will all this expense benefit? The limited number of tourists who don’t understand the existing signage. So why don’t they pay for it? Maybe increase the Municipal Accommodation Tax to 6% and that might cover the expense.
I also have to wonder who came up with the idea of putting a crosswalk at the top of Bridge Street where heavy goods vehicles, having made it most of the way up the hill, now have to stop for a pedestrian and cause stopping right down the hill? Monty Python must have had a hand in the design. Why not move the crosswalk further along near Shire Hall where pedestrians would be safer.
What happens when the snow has been melted by the radiant heating and a power cut comes along at the same time as a rapid descent in the temperature? You could sell tickets for the sight of vehicles sliding backwards down the hill!
Finally, has anybody thought of doing a test run by installing temporary traffic lights and crosswalks for a month and watching the result? That could save us a big chunk of money.
I fail to see the necessity for any change at all. The least expensive solution is to leave the intersection alone. Who asked for this? The residents have no problem with this intersection, and everyone else should just learn to drive.
The traffic light installation is the least expensive part of this proposal. Tearing up the street and sidewalk (wasn’t it recently re-done?) isn’t a cheap prospect. I’m still baffled by Shire Hall’s need to acquire two properties (not cheap), to facilitate this intersection. I say carry on with the infatuation with demolition: don’t stop now! Shire Hall’s next in the way!
The “bleachers” are readily available now – It’s the front window of Lily’s at Books & Co.
Could we make the town hill a money maker by installing some bleachers for people to watch the tourists trying to figure out the town hill?
Russell thank you for the humour and sanity,
I said it before, Council has elected to use a sledge hammer to drive in a finishing nail.
Why not erect larger stop signs with additional signage such as (You Do Not Have the ROW or Hill Traffic Has the ROW). I have to think that would cost way less than heated roads and traffic lights (not to mention the cost probably paid to consultants to come up with these proposal).
I’m left to wonder, is it the Municipality that makes this decision or are there some Provincial rules that impact what can and cannot be done? There is much about this that does not make sense.
I’d like to hear from the businesses located on the hill. Will we see the hill bumper to bumper when the fire or ambulance needs a clear road? Is there enough room and time for traffic to pull over?
All good comments BTW.
Good one Russell LOL I totally agree with all of these posts.
the great thing about living in PEC, is we very wisely like to waste tax payers money, we buy the apartment building next to Shire hall(that was needed for a park and not for muchly needed residents), we spend more wise money on speed bumps/humps in cherry valley that quickly got installed and then got removed,now we’re gonna spend more wise money on traffic lights at top of town hill and the ACQUISITION of 2 more properties to do so, but we unwisely don’t have money to repair county road 49. Can we please start giving IQ tests to those who make these decisions. R.A.
Couple of signs posting “ do not cross here “
Anyone trying to walk across that area should receive a fine
This is an utter waste of time and money. I drive this portion twice a day, using Glenora ferry,and if anything have larger signage, bilingual for our Quebec friends, and that’s it. Who is going to pay for the heated road? I certainly feel the plows do an excellent job and let the traffic coming up the hill proceed with caution. Also, no way should there be a pedestrian crossing on that side of the road. Again, signs, cannot cross here. Been here 62 years and seems okay to me!
If it is not broke why fix it? I do not see where this is a problem. So a few forgot their basic driver’s ed (advance with caution on a flashing yellow light) and they stop at the top of the hill. Can you imagine the backed up traffic on Main St. with lights at the hill top? I would like council to address illegal U-turns on Main St. (A U-turn can be performed if there is no sign stating otherwise. It is illegal to make a U-turn on a curve in the road, on or near a railway crossing or hilltop, or near a bridge or tunnel that blocks your view. Never make a U-turn unless you can see at least 150 metres in both directions.). There needs to be signs disallowing U-turns – period.
Lights will be expensive, and to be honest, the locals don’t need this. This tourism industry, however, does. So how about the STA (MAT) taxes pay for this, one way or the other?
A traffic person for the peak season would make a huge difference. $$$