Dearborn Hills Concerned Over MDOT Light Study
We’ve received quite a few notes from readers that live in the Dearborn Hills area who, like us, are upset about the possible removal of the traffic signal at the intersection of Fordson and Telegraph. Those same people have contacted the Taylor office of the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT), the office that is conducting the actual study on whether to keep the traffic signal or remove it. So we thought we might provide an update on the study now underway.
The study on whether to keep the signal was triggered by the state office of the Federal Highway Administration, whose ultimate role is to keep our roads safe. MDOT is working with the federal agency to deliver on that objective by studying traffic flow at this intersection.
Dearborn Hills residents want the traffic signal at Fordson and Telegraph to remain.
As MDOT describes it, any time a traffic signal (or stop sign) is installed it actually increases traffic accidents. Eliminate the signal and that section of roadway would see fewer rear end and side swipe accidents, according to MDOT.
While it sounds counterintuitive, MDOT says data shows that any time a motorist has to stop there is a high risk of vehicle “conflict.”
The city of Livonia, working with the Traffic Improvement Association (TIA), recently removed some 100 stop signs and traffic signals in its city as a way to reduce traffic accident and improve vehicle flow. The TIA has approached Dearborn, too, hoping to sell its services here.
The signal at Fordson was switched to a flashing signal on Dec. 5 and will continue through March 5, totaling 90 days in all. After that MDOT will finalize its study, working with Dearborn Police, and submit its findings to the Federal Highway Administration who will then make the determination on whether to remove the signal.
“It is not a foregone conclusion it will be removed,” said MDOT’s Michael Budai who is conducting the study. “We are working with the City of Dearborn, Dearborn Police and a very active neighborhood association. We are carefully studying the impact the flashing signal is having on traffic flow for that stretch of road.”
Dearborn Police have expressed concern to MDOT that the flashing signal has now caused vehicles to congest in the turnaround lane trying to head north on Telegraph from Rockford Street each morning and evening during peak business times. That isn’t safe.
Even so, the highway administration has a set of eight “signal rules” in its Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) handbook that it uses to determine whether to install or keep an existing traffic signal. Of course, the rules aren’t ironclad as city government, local police departments and neighborhood associations can have huge influences on placement of a signal should an intersection fail to meet the any of the eight signal rules.
One requirement in the MUTCD is that a traffic signal needs to have a vehicle flow of 400 vehicles per hour. Clearly, the number of vehicles exiting Fordson to the northbound lanes of Telegraph has never in its more than two decades in existence approached that level.
While people do cross at this interaction, it is not and was not designed as a crossing area, MDOT officials say. According to the MUTCD, to have a proper traffic walk signal installed for pedestrians there would require 150 crossings per hour.
As much as we would want to have the traffic signal remain in operation, when you step back and look at the facts from MDOT, it appears the only way the light might stay is through a request or resolution by Dearborn city leaders. This is likely how the light was installed at this intersection more than 20 years ago – through city intervention on behalf of residents – as the intersection has likely never met the minimum traffic requirements set by the Federal Highway Administration in the first place.
“Everyone assumes it is going out but we are going to continue to evaluate it for the next 60 days,” Budai said. “It is by no means a foregone conclusion.”
Concerned residents can contact Mike Budai at MDOT at 313-375-2400 to make clear why the traffic signal should remain. Callers should be prepared to explain why the signal should remain in operation.
January 29th, 2009 at 11:07 am
Why doesn’t the City remove some of the numerous ridicoulous traffic signs throughout the City. They cause unwanted congestion, and are mostly political favor signs anyways — show some balls, and look into the unwarranted saigns, and then remove them.
January 30th, 2009 at 8:50 am
I agree that there seem to be an overabundance of traffic signs in Dearborn, but perhaps the ones down sidestreets are there to keep people from driving down our sidestreets at high speeds like they’re major arteries. If this is the case, I have no issue with it.
But I think that the city needs to get rid of many of the “No Turn On Red” signs at so many intersections with lights on main arteries cause all it does is slow down already congested traffic.
I also hope the city and MDOT get enough calls to keep that light on northbound Telegraph and Fordson because from Oxford to Cherry Hill is one long stretch and people drive there are freeway speeds which doesn’t allow subdivision residents much of a chance to merge with traffic.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:10 am
“No turn on red” has never made much sense to me… If the road is clear of traffic, and there are no pedestrians crossing, why not allow turns?
I might also throw in (as long as we’re talking about traffic lights that irritate us in Dearborn) the light on Northbound Telegraph at Ford… That green light lasts just long enough for a few cars to get through and then it’s red again. On a busy day, you can forget it, you’re waiting ten minutes or so to get your turn through.
OK, that’s my traffic rant for the day 🙂
January 30th, 2009 at 9:30 am
I agree Dave. Also let me add that it may be wise to allow some of those ‘No Turn On Red’ signs but only in intersections that have visibility issues or in cerain intersections where numerous studies have shown turning right on red has caused serious accidents and/or a high amount of accidents. I say this in because our primary interest should be public safety and I think we could all live with that, no pun intended.
February 1st, 2009 at 1:01 am
Here is another example of “too many cooks…”. This is one of many situations where the City – and we its’ residents – need to step aside and let MDOT implement their design standards. Goodness knows, the City has demonstrated time and again that it cannot design roadways or traffic control systems:
Example 1: The mid-90s Michigan Ave. Farmer Jack exit/Nowlin crossover. Traffic from Nowlin turning left and from the shopping center turning right, both onto westbound Michigan…and no one knows who has the right of way. It’s a miracle that intersection isn’t a graveyard.
Example 2: The late 90’s Monroe Street repaving (at Gregory). One lane each way with a turning lane on Monroe suddenly became two lanes each way. The intersection essentially became a passing lane for a 30 mph street. Fortunately, the City soon rectified that lousy design.
Example 3: The circa 2005, short-lived median on Golfview at Ford Road (my favorite). Spend taxpayers money to put it, nine months later, spend more taxpayers money to take it out. I’ve always been curious if that wasn’t another – to quote Deep – “…City intervention on behalf of residents.”
It seems odd to have a signal that does not meet requirement criteria. In my own experience of travelling westbound Michigan to northbound Telegraph, I haven’t had difficulty merging in. And while I agree that long stretches of road entice traffic to exceed the speed limit, isn’t enforcing traffic laws one of the reasons we have a police force? If we decide we don’t need MDOT to implement design standards, we are leaving it up to the City Engineering Department…and they haven’t demonstrated the best track record in this sort of thing.
February 3rd, 2009 at 5:09 pm
I live on Meridan just off of Rockford. Crossing over Telegraph (South) to get to the other side of Rockford (Telegraph North) has become a challenge. Between 3p and 6p it is almost impossible to get across. In bad weather it is real dangerous. You spin your tires to get going and then hope you can stop when you get across. Hope MDOT take into account that cars are come out of Fordson, off of Michigan Ave. and from the other side of Michigan Ave. overpass. Hope they put the light back to the way it was before someone gets hurt.
February 6th, 2009 at 10:07 am
I don’t know what perhaps are logical reasons why DPD would not patrol that area to slow down speeders. But I just drove by there again a few days ago and while it was selfishly gratifying to know I didn’t have to stop at that light which almost always was red before, speaking for the main priority – the neighbors that live there, cars were flying by me left and right and I was doing 45-50. Reactivating the light would be far wiser and again create a much safer environment there and be far more cost-effective.
I don’t know how our citizens there without only a blinking light will be able to get out of that subdivision in a safe manner and safety should be our number one priority. I’m all for reactivating the light.
February 19th, 2009 at 9:40 am
We agree with all in this information! Thank you