Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowThe Westfield City Council voted 5-2 Monday morning to install a signalized pedestrian crossing where the Monon Trail and 161st Street meet as they identify funding for a future underpass.
In 2012, the city of Westfield installed preliminary infrastructure beneath 161st Street to allow for a future underpass that would allow Monon Trail users to cross under the road. The council has spent nearly a year debating whether to resume work on the estimated $5.25 million tunnel or implement another approach.
A majority of the council voted Monday to temporarily install a signalized pedestrian crossing on the road’s surface to address safety concerns as officials come up with a funding plan for the full tunnel project.
Council members Joe Edwards, Troy Patton, Cindy Spoljaric, Mike Johns and Scott Frei voted in favor of the stop-gap plan. Council members Scott Willis and Jake Gilbert voted against it.
Johns expressed concerns about the city’s recent issuance of other debt and the threat the COVID-19 pandemic poses to future tax revenue. He said he supports safety measures such as flashing lights, safety bumps or speed monitoring.
“My inclination is to look for some other more reasonable ways of spending taxpayers’ money at this point, as we try to work our way through all of the financial issues facing our city,” Johns said.
“At the end of the day, I guess I find it difficult to support another $5 million for a tunnel—which is supposedly needed for safety reasons—when the data tells us, of the 11 pedestrians hit by cars in Westfield during the last three years, only one was struck at this intersection,” Johns said.
The signalized pedestrian crossing will cost the city $122,719 to procure and install. However, city engineers have warned that such an installation would cause westbound traffic to back up 1,800 feet into a roundabout and past U.S. 31.
“I don’t think this is the right move,” Willis said. “Based on the study results, they said it wouldn’t enhance safety and would create a worse traffic congestion in that area.”
If the installation causes a problem or is deemed ineffective, the city’s engineers said the signals can be relocated to another intersection along the Monon Trail and a portion of the infrastructure’s cost will be recovered.
Todd Burtron, Westfield’s chief of staff, said the city’s funding options for the eventual tunnel include using revenue from an east-side tax increment finance district, cash or a general obligation bond. Burtron said using the TIF district wouldn’t raise any taxes, so it would be the primary recommendation.
Jeremy Lollar, the city’s public works director, said there is still time to explore funding options. Designers won’t have detailed renderings for the project until October 2021, and the project won’t go to bid until July 2022.
“We’ve got a little bit of time from a funding perspective,” Lollar said.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
I think this is absolutely the right move for this intersection. I would have to look at the math on the study that indicates traffic backing up onto US 31. That situation sounds pretty unlikely. I still advocate for a future tunnel, not sure if councilman Johns utilizes that intersection- I cross twice daily- and have seen numerous close call fatalities- both pedestrian/bicyclist and inattentive, speeding drivers at fault. One kid gets killed at that intersection and the money invested will be well spent.
can’t dig a tunnel for $123K?
This is the worst choice of all. Does anybody think that those in a hurry all the time will stop? Cars “run” red lights all the time, and especially those who may dislike trail traffic will be the worse. Remember, they are supposed to start a roundabout at 161st and Westfield. So, now you have a red light that will surely back up traffic and then the traffic coming off US31, and finally a new construction project. Oh, yea…..this is a great decision. As usual, those bureaucrats always try to “please all the time.”
As someone who run and bikes this area often, I can say that this will probably fail. It was more than likely passed by those that hope it might work so that the tunnel issue will go away, even though 8 years ago, when 161st was closed, the city went ahead and constructed the shell for the tunnel underneath the intersection. One comment that John’s made that wasn’t included in this article was when he mentioned something about tunnel supporters having an agenda. So what’s that agenda, public safety?
C’mon Westfield, dig the tunnel. I suppose you’re waiting for more serious accidents or a death to rationalize the expenditure. Remember when you had INDOT spend all that money to design and install the infrastructure for that “iconic gateway” at US31 and SR32? Those large bump outs on either side of the bridge are still sitting there like a white elephant. Maybe if you hadn’t wasted funds on that boondoggle there’d be money for a tunnel under 161st Street that thousands of people actually use and keep them safe.
Actually the state paid for those as part of the 31 upgrade.
Thank you Scott Willis and Jake Gilbert for voting for the safety of the people.
Dig a $6MM tunnel or people will die. This is one of the great false binary choices that government people love to assert. Of course a tunnel can be built for less but that does not let the friends and family of the mayor make as much money. The light is a great compromise for the 90+% of us who will probably never go through that location. A well known safety feature being added to a needed location without gutting the taxpayers.
Grand Park, Grand Junction, and the Gateway mentioned by Michael F. All complete wastes of our money. Should have been left to private developers using their own money. When the money is not yours it means less. Let’s be thoughtful with money and not use the bodies vs money play.
I didn’t mention all the traffic coming out of those new apartments will also exacerbate this issue. There is NOTHING SAFE or smart about this inane decision. Like Mark above; thanks to, Scott and Jake. Two or three “rumble-strips” on each side of 161st can be placed and removed. Install in April and remove in November. Just how many will go through that red light will be hazardous and perhaps deadly.
Means to construct a tunnel should proceed immediately. A signal can serve as a stop-gap measure in the interim; however, how valuable is a life – certainly more valuable that the seconds lost to drivers. If the city were more proactive in planning, widening 161st Street to two lanes in each direction with separate left turn lanes would provide more space for vehicle to queue at the signal. And, yes, that would cost $$$ but growth and development requires additional infrastructure. Frankly, it is short-sighted, counterproductive, and more costly if the ultimate cross section and corresponding infrastructure improvements are not implemented concurrently with tunnel construction. Westfield needs to improve the arterial network prior to land use build out, rather than after the fact.