HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - TSP - 2014.10.231
TRAFFIC SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION
Approved Minutes
Special Meeting of Thursday, October 23, 2014
1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:00 p.m.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG.
3. ROLL CALL.
MEMBER PRESENT: Wettan, Noworolski, Akers, Londer, Martos
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA
None.
5. DISCUSSION/STUDY ITEMS
a. Floribunda Avenue/El Camino Real Intersection Safety Project – DEIR
The following is a summary of the comments and question brought up at the Special
Traffic Safety and Parking Commission meeting on Thursday, October 23, 2014.
Public Comments:
Jennifer Pfaff:
1) All trees contribute to the overall feel of the canopy along El Camino Real, not
just the trees on the National Register.
Pat Giorni:
1) Project is significantly reduced from previous versions.
2) Concerns regarding no tree replacement within 200’ of intersection.
3) City has previously requested 25 MPH along ECR north of Floribunda.
4) Trees along ECR act has unofficial pedestrian safety barriers.
Michael Wiebraght:
1) Significant visual impacts due to tree removal.
2) Tree removal will have impact on nearby residences.
2
Steve Kaufmann:
1) DED totally disregards surrounding neighborhood.
2) Accident data does not indicate or identify specific accidents.
3) Report does not discuss speeding as contributing factor to accidents.
4) Report does not indicate accident ranking of intersection, relative to the ECR
Corridor.
Laurie Simonson:
1) Report cites no aesthetic impacts, but impacts are cited in a previously
published Visual Impact Report (VIR) document.
Commissioner Comments:
Commissioner Londer:
1) Removing trees should be a last resort.
2) Original proposed plan was outrageous.
3) Should start with signal changes (no impact on trees).
4) Consider converting Floribunda to one-way traffic (more extreme).
5) Consider converting inside lane to left-turn lane and provide a lane-drop for
the through traffic.
6) As this is Hillsborough’s only intersection, project impacts emergency
vehicles.
Commissioner Martos:
1) Request current accident data.
2) Concerns with tree replanting plan.
3) No identification of mitigations that have occurred to account for accident rate
changes.
Commissioner Ackers:
1) With build scenario, no identification of impacts to adjacent intersections, in
terms of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
2) Trees along ECR act as pedestrian safety barriers.
3) Provide more recent accident data. Sources could include Central County
Fire, SFPUC, Burlingame, Hillsborough, etc.
4) There is a dis-service done by the report with its inaccuracies.
Vice-chair Noworolski:
1) If there is a clear accident issue at ECR/Floribunda, then it must be
addressed.
2) All possible alternatives must be exhausted before trees are removed.
Chair Wettan:
1) Would request a more “robust” accident data set.
2) Funds might be better spent on other alternatives.
3) Provide northbound left-turn options.
3
Commissioner Questions:
Commissioner Martos:
1) With “Build Scenario”, how much additional traffic will use Floribunda
intersection?
Commissioner Ackers:
1) Does it make sense for both a northbound and southbound left-turn lanes at
ECR/Floribunda?
2) Can City look to FHWA for an appeal?
3) What if there is a change to the baseline “No Build” scenario, which may
include turn restrictions on ECR Floribunda, one-way street conversion, or a
temporary road closure?
Vice-chair Noworolski:
1) What if there is a city change to Floribunda? How will this affect the DED
report? One-way street conversion? Road closure?
2) What are the previous steps to improve safety at intersection and the
impacts?
3) Provide recent accident data.
Chair Wettan:
1) Have impacts been considered for adjacent intersections? Any special
consideration at Oak Grove due to McKinley Elementary School?
2) Were accidents selectively chosen?
3) Have the accidents been reviewed to determine if the previous improvements
(signal timing adjustments, pork-chop island) had a measurable impact?
4) Current signal phasing changes do not appear to be consistent. Please
explain.
5) Has the “bend” along ECR south of Floribunda been taken into
consideration? Best location for signal improvements?
6) Have the potential impacts to Floribunda been explored? Increased speeding
along Floribunda?
7) Is Oak Grove a better candidate for signal improvements?
8) Has Caltrans contacted any of the emergency services regarding the impacts
the “Build” scenario may have?
9) Provide justification for impacts on the aesthetics the project creates.
10) Does Caltrans have a listing/ranking of the accident at intersections along the
ECR Corridor?
11) What is Caltrans plan for the entire ECR Corridor?
12) Does Caltrans have any intersections which are split-phased along the ECR
Corridor? Anywhere with a similar characteristics?
13) Clarify, and confirm the Town of Hillsborough’s current position given the
proposed improvements.
General Comments/Questions:
1) Accident data does not show the details in which to derive the root cause of
the accident.
2) What about other low impact changes which could be implemented, such as
restricting NB left-turns only? SB Left-turns only? Any analysis associated
with it?
4
3) Quantitative data used in all the operational analysis? Why not in the
Appendix?
4) Modeling data and assumptions used? Appendix?
5) Why does State’s (TASAS) accident data differ from Burlingame Police’s
data?
6) Provide detailed explanation of “every attempt to replace trees”. Provide
process and locations of tree replacement.
7) What is the highest accident rate in the State? How does ECR/Floribunda
compare?
8) Re-issue/extend, and re-notice 45-day noticing period.
9) Concerns that Caltrans will go directly to “Build” scenario.
10) Project possibly addressing a problem that no longer exists.
11) What is ultimate plan for entire ECR Corridor, especially if ECR/Floribunda is
not the primary collision location?
12) Has Caltrans considered a NB left-turn at Bellevue?
13) Has Caltrans considered a signal at Bellevue to provide gaps?
14) DEIR fundamentally flawed because report states tree analysis was done, but
without a link/citation to the Visual Impact Report.
15) Try low impact/cost alternatives first, before going forward with “Build”
alternative.
16) How does this project fit into the overall plan of the Grand Boulevard
Initiative?
17) Will all crosswalks be restored? Or, will the pork-chop island remain?
18) What is the delay when using protected-left turns?
19) Does this proposed project’s funding allow for improvements to adjacent
intersection which may be impacted by the proposed changes to
ECR/Floribunda?
20) If the DEIR is certified, who certifies it?
6. ADJOURNMENT 8:50 p.m.