SR 109
INFORMATION
COMMUNICATION
All notes are posted below as I received copies. The object is to keep everyone up to date and coordinate efforts
MEETINGS
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Briggs, Sumner County Planning & Zoning, December 16, 2008
To: Meehan, Leslie (MPO); William Anderson; B. Kortness; Bruce Day; David Hardin; Doug Depew; Frank Bowers; Jeff Sammons; Jim Overmohle; Tim Nichols; Tom Evans
Subject: RE: Highway 109
FYI – We get a call almost every week asking about the status of 109 construction. TDOT prepared a detailed update on each section for Leslie’s organization, so we’ve posted that on our website. Go to www.sumnertn.org, click on Planning & Zoning, and look for the December 2 update under the Latest News section. As we get anything regarding 109, we’ll continue to post it there.
------Original Message-----
From: Meehan, Leslie (MPO), December 15, 2008
To: William Anderson; B. Kortness; Bruce Day; David Hardin; Doug Depew; Frank Bowers; Jeff Sammons; Jim Overmohle; mbriggs@sumnertn.org; Tim Nichols; Tom Evans
Subject: Highway 109
Good Afternoon - I apologize for the late notice, but tomorrow I will be meeting with Mike Choate, TDOT project manager for all Highway 109 improvements, and with Rusty Staggs, interim bike/ped coordinator for TDOT. I will share with Mike the concerns about the rumbles strips and also try to get an idea how bicycle facilities will be accommodated on Highway 109 in all construction projects from outside of Lebanon in Wilson County to Portland in Sumner County.
If you have any specific questions, areas of concern, etc., please email them to me and I will try to get your questions answered. I will report back to the group after the meeting. Thank you,
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Day, December 15, 2008
To: Meehan, Leslie (MPO) Cc: William Anderson; B. Kortness; David Hardin; Doug Depew; Frank Bowers; Jeff Sammons; Jim Overmohle; mbriggs@sumnertn.org; Tim Nichols; Tom Evans
Subject: Re: Highway 109
Leslie, I agree with all Tom's statement plus as a several times weekly automobile driver of 109 between Gallatin and Portland, the rumble strips "Up the Ridge." have made it feel more dangerous by decreasing the width of usable pavement. Improving 109 South of Gallatin would be a great thing for everyone. Cyclists will not be able to use it as a route from Gallatin to Lebanon until Martha Gallatin Bridge over the Cumberland River is also improved. You might ask what the plans are for that. Thanks,
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Bowyer, December 15, 2008
To: Tom Evans; 'Meehan,Leslie (MPO)'; 'William Anderson'; 'B. Kortness'; 'Bruce Day'; 'David Hardin'; 'Doug Depew'; 'Jeff Sammons'; 'Jim Overmohle'; mbriggs@sumnertn.org; 'Tim Nichols'
Subject: RE: Highway 109
I agree with Tom's observations below with addition of the following:
If Hwy 109 between I-40 and Gallatin were improved in the same way as the section south of I-40 (to I-840), then I'd be willing to ride the newly improved section on a bike without concern. In the section of Hwy 109 between I-40 and I-840, there is a shoulder that is about 8-10 ft wide and visibility is excellent. Also regarding the northern section of Hwy 109, as Bruce points out, the bridge over Old Hickory Lake/Cumberland River needs to be widened sufficiently to allow a cyclist/pedestrian to cross safely.
As for the section of Hwy 109 north of Gallatin, some of us have ridden that section of the by-pass north of Hwy 31E/Gallatin Rd. without issue, except where the road narrows back down to two-lane, then it becomes a suicide mission up the hill. But, as the new section is completed, we'd either ride that new section (provided it is consistent with the lower portions of Hwy109 as noted above) or brave the old section, depending on how traffic behaves. But, I think even the old section of Hwy 109 in that northern area parallel to the new section will still be unsafe for cyclists even with reduced traffic and no rumble strips. So, if I had my choice of a old narrow two-lane road versus a modern highway with wide-enough shoulders, I'd opt for the new highway.
Hwy 109 would be an excellent north-south connector for all traffic, including cyclists, as there is no other such connector that currently crosses over the river
-----Original Message-----
From:Tom Evans, December 15, 2008
To: Meehan, Leslie (MPO); 'William Anderson'; 'B. Kortness'; 'Bruce Day'; 'David Hardin'; 'Doug Depew'; 'Frank Bowers'; 'Jeff Sammons'; 'Jim Overmohle'; mbriggs@sumnertn.org; 'Tim Nichols'
Subject: RE: Highway 109
Leslie, There are three very different sections of RT109: That south of Gallatin, the Gallatin By-pass, and that north of Gallatin. I know of no cyclists that dare ride RT 109 south of Gallatin. The shoulder is narrow, in serious disrepair with considerable debris, and has VERY heavy, high speed traffic (>45MPH) with lots of Tractor/Trailers. TDOT has already started widening sections of it. This road can (and will because we have no other North-South Route) become a great bike route if TDOT follows the same design they did in the Gallatin By-pass.
The Gallatin By-pass starts about a mile north of the bridge over Old Hickory Lake and ends about a mile north of RT25. This section is divided four-lane highway with very wide shoulders (probably eight-feet). It would be great for cyclist but not too many use it because we have alternate parallel routes with virtually no auto traffic. Rumbling this section of road would be no issue.
The section of RT 109 north of Gallatin is now under construction. TDOT is creating a new RT109 and re-directing it away from the section that they just rumbled. It looks like it will be a continuation of the Gallatin By-Pass which would be great. With this new construction cyclists will have two options: the old Rt 109 and the new divided highway with its wide outside lanes.
Old RT109 is dangerous to cyclists because of narrow 18” max. shoulders, blind curves with hills, and high-speed traffic. We use a very limited and relatively flat section north of Bug Hollow intersection. Well, at least we did until TDOT made it unsafe for cyclists with the rumble. Without a doubt Run-off-the-Road is an issue on RT109 mainly because of the speed and traffic level being too high for this narrow road. I highly doubt if rumble has done anything but drive the cyclists off the road.
In the future I would expect the heavy high-speed traffic to travel the new RT109 and abandon this narrow two lane section. Cyclist would prefer the old RT 109 if TDOT reduced the speed to 35MPH and removed the rumble. That would also reduce the ROR problem significantly.
The above comments are my opinion with consultation with no one. Thanks for you help.
-----Original Message-----
From: Meehan, Leslie (MPO), December 16, 2008
To: Meehan, Leslie (MPO); William Anderson; B. Kortness; Bruce Day; David Hardin; Doug Depew; Frank Bowers; Jeff Sammons; Jim Overmohle; mbriggs@sumnertn.org; Tim Nichols; Tom Evans
Subject: RE: Highway 109
Thank you for the quick reply on your comments. I will write up something later this week in more detail, but the meeting with TDOT was very insightful. When Highway 109 is complete, there will be 10' shoulders on each side with 8' of pavement. The various sections of Hwy 109 are in different stages, but I know that this whole roadway is important to many, including elected officials, and may be recommended for some funding in the economic stimulus package. The good news is that when it is complete it will be very bicycle friendly, the bad news is that it could be awhile. But, the project manager was very receptive to your comments and is aware that this facility is quite important to bicycling.
As I mentioned, I'll try to provide a more detailed report later this week.
