A potential new traffic light proposed on the Beach Express has county commissioners and the city of Foley at an impasse, as both wait to see traffic studies from a developer.

Foley Holdings has proposed a traffic signal at the entrance to their property, formerly known as the Blue Collar entertainment development, that would cut into the Beach Express north of County Road 20.

At several recent county commission meetings, Commission Chairman Tucker Dorsey said he was not in favor of putting another traffic light at that location because of the congestion issues it could potentially cause.

“We’re not interested in another light on the Beach Express,” Dorsey said. “I think it’s going to generate traffic issues and other problems, so I’m not interested in giving them a red light there unless it’s absolutely necessary.”

Commissioner Frank Burt agreed with Dorsey.

“I don’t want to see a situation where traffic is backed up light to light right there,” Burt said. “We need to see a study to see if this is really the right plan for this area.”

Dorsey said he hoped the city of Foley would look at the impact study and decide not to grant the light, especially given the proposed location’s close proximity to an existing traffic light at the intersection of the Beach Express and County Road 20.

“To come to us and complain about all of the traffic you have on 59 and the help you want, but then try to come and jam up another road with more traffic stops – it’s unacceptable,” Dorsey said. “It negates the purpose of having a Beach Express if it’s going to be littered with traffic lights.”

Foley City Administrator Mike Thompson said the developers were going through the process to try to get the light approved and added they seemed to be following the access management plan (AMP) that governs that area.

“I believe the property owner has engaged a traffic engineering firm to analyze the traffic created by the anticipated use of the property and their work will indicate whether the request meets the criteria of the Access Management Plan, or not,” Thompson said. “The city would not be performing the studies, the applicant does so. The city will review those studies when complete, to determine if it does or does not meet the criteria as set forth by the AMP.”

Thompson said one of the main concerns for granting the request would appear to be safety.

“Some of the components within the criteria tie directly to safety, which is very important to the property owner, the city and the general public,” Thompson said. “If their signal warrant study does show that it meets the AMP of the Foley Beach Express then the city would likely approve the signal on the city-owned street. If it does not then we would likely reject the application.”

At the Oct. 18 Baldwin County Commission meeting, the commissioners voted unanimously to send a letter to the city of Foley outlining some concerns about the proposed traffic light.

“The Highway Department has reviewed the site plan drawings for the proposed median crossover and traffic signal,” the letter states. “Exhibit D to the AMP requires 800-foot acceleration lanes and 430-foot deceleration lanes. The dimensions on the site plan drawings do not meet that requirement. Section A(9) of the AMP requires that at least one or more of the MUTCD traffic signal warrants be met to justify the installation of a traffic signal. At the time of the writing of this letter, we have requested a copy of the signal warrant study for the proposed traffic signal but not received from the City of Foley.”

The letter also states that while the commission is generally in favor of economic development, there were issues with this particular request.

“The Baldwin County Commission supports economic growth in Baldwin County but

expects all requirements of the Access Management Plan be enforced to ensure that traffic flow on the Foley Beach Express remains as originally intended,” the letter stated.