Junction Task Force to Seek Traffic Signal Adjustment on a Trial Basis

The Takoma Junction Task Force is drafting a proposal requesting the Takoma Park City Council pursue adjusting the traffic signals at the junction on a trial basis so that the impact of such adjustments can be ascertained.

Seth Grimes, the task force co-chair, supports the creation of a document that is focused on trying a signal adjustment, and having it before the council prior to the next meeting the task force is scheduled to attend, which is during the second half of March. It is important for the task force to not “just show up at the council meeting with this,” but to have presented it to council members before the meeting in anticipation of the proposal’s sponsorship by some council members, he said.

The issue was raised by task force member Lorig Charkoudian, who said, “I wonder if it makes sense” to push for a test of flashing lights or changing the signals at the junction sooner, rather than later. The task force could “spend nine months” on the issue of the traffic lights, after which time would recommend to the council, “let’s flash the lights,” she said. The council would then “spend six months thinking about it” before the lights start flashing sometime during 2012, and at that point we could find out the strategy does not work, she said.

“My proposal is we change the timeline and we ask the council to push to make it happen so we can see what the impact is,” Charkoudian said. “I’m saying we have to go back to the council in two or three months, lets shoot for—at that time—to say, ‘let’s make this change,’ and don’t wait until we’re doing our final recommendation,” she said.

Howard Kohn, task force co-chair, asked if the task force should “just try to convince the council to” examine how a change will affect an area, or does any proposal need to be “based in a recommendation from a traffic engineer?”

Simulating traffic flow has been done before on a number of different corners in Takoma Park, said Andy Kelemen, task force member. To devise a plan for simulating traffic flow—specifically the impact of changing the traffic signals’ timing—it “would be helpful” to have all the officials from the different agencies that oversee that involved, including State Highway Administration and the Park and Planning.

In a coincidence, task force Subcommittee C—traffic, pedestrian, streetscape and live ability—had already planned to meet with SHA officials to talk about signaling, said Lorraine Pearsall, task force member. “Because it’s clear we’re over signalized, and the signals aren’t phased and blinking the way they should,” she said. Therefore, changing the signal timing “will work,” and “there’s no point in waiting a huge amount of time” to do that, she added.

However, while traffic capacity might be perceived as a problem, a 2007 study of the traffic flow at the junction found that under any scenario traffic is under capacity, even at the peak of a.m./p.m. rush hours, said Roger Schlegel, task force member. “As of 2007, it was still under capacity. So the question is, do we have a really big problem with traffic or not?” he said.

“Part of the problem with capacity is in terms of the impact of people going through, but the other thing is the impact on cut throughs,” Charkoudian said.

Also, if a driver has “to wait two light changes” before passing a traffic signal, that signal has “reached capacity,” Kelemen said.

On the proposal requesting the City Council pursue adjusting the traffic signals at the junction on a trial basis, the task force has “some definite plans,” Grimes said. Those plans are that subcommittee C will meet with state highway officials to discuss what can be done with junction traffic signals, and the drafting of a resolution to present to the council on that issue, which it “hopefully” will enact, he said.