City, county spar over truck route

The Hancock County commissioners plan to deny an annexation the city of Findlay needs to improve the truck-frequented intersection of county roads 212 and 236. Both sides say their priority is safety. The proposed annexation involves 21 parcels along county roads 212 and 236 and totals 15 acres. Findlay for decades has sought to steer more truck traffic away from downtown via County Road 236 on the east and County Road 212 on the north end of town. That effort, and motorist safety, would be boosted by a $1.5-million city plan to widen and move the 212-236 intersection a bit southwest, Mayor Christina Muryn said. Truckers and other eastbound motorists on County Road 212 wanting to turn south onto County Road 236 would have a smoother, wider right turn; they currently must make a sharp right-angle turn on a narrow road. Similarly, truckers and other motorists traveling north on County Road 236 and wanting to turn west onto County Road 212 would have a smoother, safer left turn. The county commissioners agree the changes would improve traffic flow for many. But Commissioner Timothy Bechtol said a traffic signal would be needed at the new intersection. In the new configuration, the portion of County Road 236 north of County Road 212 would curve southwest as it intersects the bend where County Road 212 and the southerly stretch of County Road 236 would come together in a bend. It would form a T-shaped intersection, much like where Manor Hill Road intersects Bright Road, Bechtol said. A motorist southbound on Manor Hill can easily turn left onto busy Bright Road because he has the help of a traffic light — the same thing a southbound County Road 236 motorist would need to safely turn left at the proposed T-intersection, Bechtol said. "I wouldn't want to make a left-hand turn there into two-lane traffic, two ways especially with semis," Bechtol said. "We just don't want to put the high school drivers in jeopardy." Muryn said there is a critical distinction between the Manor Hill-Bright Road intersection and the proposed County Road 212-County Road 236 scenario: The Manor Hill intersection warrants a traffic light under state and federal standards because it has sufficient traffic volume. The County Road 212-236 intersection does not have enough traffic to warrant a traffic light, she said. The city plans to install a conduit at the intersection to someday install a light when warranted, she said. However, installation of a traffic light anytime soon would pose multiple problems, the mayor said. Because traffic in the area is lower than would normally merit a traffic light, it could lead to motorists disregarding it, resulting in traffic collisions, she said. Muryn expressed frustration with the commissioners. "I told them that (a traffic light) is unwise from a liability standpoint, given that ODOT (Ohio Department of Transportation) and federal standards and our engineering firm and our city engineer and our assistant city engineer all say that it is not warranted," the mayor said. An unwarranted traffic light "can actually make an unsafe environment because people start to ignore it and you get this false sense of comfort." In addition, state and federal officials have the right to order the removal of unwarranted lights. They have done it in Bluffton and other communities, she said. A traffic light would cost the city about $200,000. Muryn challenged the commissioners, saying the city's proposed intersection changes would be safer than the current intersection. "I asked (the commissioners), 'OK, if this annexation doesn't move forward, are you going to put in a traffic signal at the existing (intersection)?' If not, then you are choosing a less-safe (intersection) over our improved design," the mayor said. "And, at the time that it warrants it, the city is willing to put in the traffic signal. But at this time it is not warranted." In fact, traffic at the intersection is far below the threshold to warrant a traffic signal, she said. Bechtol said the commissioners like the city's intersection upgrade plan. They are simply concerned the situation would be unsafe without a traffic signal. "We don't want to deny (the annexation). We really don't want to deny it. We want to make the progress happen. It will improve the traffic flow around that corner of town. Absolutely," Bechtol said. "We just don't want to put anyone in an unsafe situation if it is without the light." "The mayor's already stated … they are already planning on putting in underground electric to put in a light if needed. They're just waiting to decide whether it warrants it after the commissioners are done," he said. "The commissioners are not willing to let any accidents happen while (city officials) are waiting to have that decision." Muryn said the commissioners were insulting. "I got testy with them when they said it's about safety and 'What if you wait to put in a signal and then somebody could die in that time,'" the mayor said. "Well, we obviously prioritize safety. Saying that we're not putting safety as a priority is insulting. We're not just designing things to be convenient for us, we're trusting the experts." The city could appeal an annexation denial in Hancock County Common Pleas Court.