Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin - TSP - 2006.05.18TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 1 of 20 The City of Burlingame CITY HALL - 501 PRIMROSE ROAD CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 www.burlingame.org TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Meeting Minutes - Approved Thursday – May 18, 2006 Commissioners Present: Eugene Condon, Chair Victor James, Vice-Chair Michael Bohnert Stephen Warden Commissioners Absent: Dan Conway Staff Present: Augustine Chou, Traffic Engineer, Public Works Sergeant Don Shepley, Police Department Visitors: Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue Linda Abbey, 1415 Adeline Drive Charles Bona, 1551 Bernal Avenue TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 2 of 20 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4 of 5 Commissioners present. 4. CURRENT BUSINESS 4.1 ACTION ITEMS 4.1.1 Traffic Engineer Chou explained that due to staff changes in the Public Works secretarial staff, the Minutes for March 9, April 13, and May 18, 2006 will be ready for approval at the next meeting. 4.2 DISCUSSION ITEMS 4.2.1 Ray Drive/Devereux Drive - Evaluate need for stop signs or actions to slow traffic. Traffic Engineer Chou informed the public that Mr. Dennis Creedan and his neighbors in the Ray Drive/Devereux Drive area requested that the city consider some type of safety measure regarding high traffic volumes and perceived high speeds on their streets. They also asked that stop signs be considered. Mr. Chou explained that the southbound approach of Ray Drive, from El Camino Real, is controlled by a stop sign. He added that the other intersection approaches (eastbound Ray and westbound Devereux), had no traffic control. The width of the road for both Ray and Devereux in the westbound direction was 30 feet. The section of Ray that was from El Camino Real was about 36 feet wide. Mr. Chou said the 30-foot roadway made for narrow driving conditions. Vehicles approaching in opposing directions would have to move in and out of the curb area in order to pass each other. Mr. Chou also explained that a stop sign warrant study was performed, and there were no reported accidents for the study time period. He also reported that the traffic volume counts were lower than the warrant requirements. Mr. Chou noted that the direction with the highest numbers of vehicles were actually from Devereux, coming from Bernal. The other TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 3 of 20 two legs of the approach were actually less. Mr. Chou said that based on those studies, the intersection did not meet the warrant conditions for stop signs. One of the issues that Mr. Chou highlighted was that this intersection, like the ones nearby at Ray/Quesada and Devereux/Bernal, suffered from drivers traveling through the intersection at perceived high rate s of speed. Mr. Chou stated that the perceived speeding seemed to be occurring at the corners of the intersection. He said that preliminary speed studies were conducted in this area and during free-flow times, the 85th percentile speed was 25 miles per hour. Mr. Chou also stated that there were vehicles driving as faster as 27 mph, and as slow as 15 mph. Mr. Chou explained that the request for stop signs would not address, and was not generally used for, speed control. He said that what should be addressed was the issue of drivers who cut corners when turning at each of these three intersections. Mr. Chou continued by stating that multiple field observations were conducted at the intersection of Ray and Devereux. He noted that some vehicles traveling along Ray from El Camino Real did not stop at the existing stop sign. He said that one of staff’s concerns was that if a 3-way stop sign were to be considered at that intersection, there might be a greater problem with compliance. Mr. Chou said that there appeared to be a growing non-compliance situation already and care should be taken since installing a 3-way might not help the situation. Mr. Chou went on to identify a second issue - traffic volume coming through the intersection. He said that if a stop sign or set of stop signs were installed, peak time would be approximately eight o’clock, with 188 vehicles going from Devereux to Ray. A main concern was that queuing would occur at the intersection, leading the vehicles backing up into the intersection at Bernal and Devereux. A possible end result might be that drivers would speed along Devereux and the rest of Ray in order to make up the difference in time for which they had to stop. Mr. Chou stated that this was a common occurrence, which has been borne out by various studies. Mr. Chou said that the City should consider mirroring the striping configuration at Ray/Quesada and Devereux/Bernal. He said that this would address the problem of cutting corners, which people were apparently doing in order to expedite their time through the intersection s. Mr. Chou also offered another recommendation to consider replacement of existing signage. Currently, there were “School Crossing” signs posted near the intersection. Mr. Chou indicated that certain signs at key locations could be replaced with more accurate “25 MPH Speed Limit” signs. Mr. TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 4 of 20 Chou felt this would address the issue better than having the crosswalk signs so far away from the schools. Mr. Chou summarized by saying the recommendation from staff was not to accept the request for a 3-way stop sign at the intersection since stop sign warrants were not met. He further stated that staff did recommend consideration of centerlines at the intersection to match the intersection at Devereux/Bernal and at Quesada/Ray. Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa, stated that she thought it had been suggested that the neighborhood might consider the buttons instead of striping. She indicated that if the City had stop signs and drivers were not complying, then that meant enforcement issues. She added that buttons could be felt, alerting a driver that they were speeding and cutting a corner. She felt that although drivers were aware of a painted stripe, they might not cut around a bump. Ms. Giorni said that with regard to traffic, a button would be the way to proceed. Commissioner Bohnert felt the Commission had done much research, and in looking at the intersections, said it would be appropriate to be consistent with what the City was doing on the entire project. He was in favor of the suggestions to install buttons and reflectors. Chair Condon said that he felt there was so much paint in the area that perhaps bots dots, rather than paint, could be installed at some of the surrounding intersections. Mr. Chou explained that this was an issue staff was considering. Regarding the intersection at Bernal and Devereux, Mr. Chou explained that the work order had not been issued yet to install the centerline paint. This was because the issue at Devereux and Ray was also to be looked at this month. He said that rather than having garish double-yellow lines in the three intersections of this residential neighborhood, staff could capitalize on using a single yellow row of buttons/bots dots and reflectors for centerlines. They would be visually unobtrusive but physically more intrusive for the driver, making them feel when they are cutting the corners. Mr. Chou stated that if buttons were to be reconsidered for the intersection of Devereux and Bernal, then staff would like the Commission to consider changing Quesada and Ray as well. Chair Condon said the Commission was looking at the whole area now versus an intersection at a time. He said he would support the use of bots dots/buttons and reflectors. Commissioner Warden asked Mr. Chou if it would be feasible or better to install bots dots and reflectors at all the locations that already have striping. TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 5 of 20 Mr. Chou replied that it was just as easy to “black out” the striping and just install the buttons. He indicated that it was more a question of whether or not adding the buttons to existing striping might be considered overkill. This issue, he said, may be something that should be re -visited with the neighborhood, especially at Quesada Way. Mr. Chou mentioned that through several after-studies and field investigations at Quesada and Ray during the afternoon traffic times, staff noticed that the vehicles were traveling slower through that intersection. He said that assuming that most drivers were considered law-abiding, they would see the new centerlines and made attempts to stay in their lanes when turning. The end result was that they were actually slowing down when negotiating their turns. Chair Condon stated that the painted centerlines on Quesada and Ray were already installed and working. He said that arriving from the schools, drivers can see the painted lines at the intersection. He felt that cutting the corners at the intersection was the issue. The paint was already present, and they seemed to be working, so he supported just keeping the painted lines at this point. Commissioner Bohnert asked Mr. Chou if he thought the lines were working sufficiently. He also asked for the Commission’s opinion, since he felt that if the painted lines were left, it would be just a matter of time before people stopped obeying them. He asked if the bots dots issue should be addressed at this time. Mr. Chou stated that typically lines and/or buttons work. If there were conditions where people began ignoring the painted lines, installing the dots could be considered. Mr. Chou stated that he offered the idea in case a neighborhood were to come before the Commission indicating that they really would have preferred the buttons over the painted lines. He said that an alternative was to wait until the residents brought up the issue, stating their preference. Mr. Chou said that at that point, staff could leave it to the Commission and agree that in the future, residents might contact staff directly saying the lines were faded and they would rather have buttons. Mr. Chou explained that the centerline was already approved, regardless of whether it was paint or buttons. Commissioner James asked Mr. Chou about the purpose of the centerline. Mr. Chou explained that the intent of the centerline was to delineate traffic and keep vehicles within their appropriate lanes when turning. He said that indications from field studies were that this was not happening. He added that when drivers drove closer to the center of the street, they were essentially doing so to start cutting the corners to make their turns faster. He said that this was when there was a perceived speeding problem, TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 6 of 20 especially at the intersection. Commissioner James asked about the purpose of the buttons. Mr. Chou explained that buttons have the same intent: they are used to delineate the lanes. He added that there were some advantages to buttons and some to paint. Advantages to buttons were that if there was a compliance problem, they would be more effective than paint. Also, buttons and reflectors might be considered less obtrusive visually than solid stripes of paint. Commissioner James stated if it was the intent to establish centerline uniformity throughout the neighborhood, why not use bots dots/buttons completely rather than leave one area out. He stated that they served a similar purpose. Mr. Chou concurred, saying the buttons would be for uniformity’s sake only. He said that staff was just attempting to address a potential concern of the neighbors on Quesada, as the neighbors might say they would have preferred buttons rather than painted stripes if they had known that the other intersections would have buttons. Motion: To move to Action Item. M/S/C: Warden, James; 4/0/0 Motion: To move to deny the request for a 3-way stop sign at Ray and Devereux; and, to install centerline buttons at Ray/Deverux and at Devereux/Bernal, and to install new 25 mph signs along Ray Drive at specific locations under staff’s discretion. M/S/C: Warden, Bohnert; 4/0/0 4.4.2 Crosswalk at California Drive and Sanchez Avenue – Request for crosswalk removal. Mr. Chou informed the Commission that on May 11, a special Commission meeting was held regarding pedestrian safety at the railroad tracks at the intersection of California and Sanchez. He said the meeting was held as a result of an April 18 fatality at th at location. As part of the discussions, Caltrain and SamTrans made the decision to remove the bus stop along California Drive at Sanchez. He added that the Commission determined there was no longer a need for the marked crosswalk at that location. As an item of discussion and action, the Commission agreed to have the issue placed on this regular meeting agenda. TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 7 of 20 Mr. Chou said that the removal of the crosswalk would have minimal effect on pedestrian traffic since with the elimination of the bus stop the crosswalk really does not lead pedestrians anywhere. He stated that since there was no formal sidewalk along the eastern curb, the existence of a specific sidewalk would not increase pedestrian safety. If the crosswalk remained, people who park there would have to walk along the uneven dirt area or along the roadside to get to the crosswalk before crossing over. Mr. Chou said that in this situation, it is almost safer to have drivers park their vehicles, get out, stand next to or in front of or behind the auto and make a safety judgment to cross at that point. Mr. Chou stated that the staff recommendation was to remove the crosswalk. Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa, spoke saying the businesspeople on the other side of California Drive raised the question about that crosswalk. She said their clientele often park across the five -lane street. She also said that California Drive was, and might still be, part of the San Mateo Bicycle Route. Ms. Giorni felt that, as a bicyclist, if she has to watch for pedestrians in the roadway in addition to car doors opening, it would make driving dangerous for her and any other bicyclists on the street. She reiterated her statement from the previous meeting, saying that removing the bus stop was a slap in the face to every person who uses public transportation in the County. She felt it would eliminate one more point where residents could walk to and board a bus. She agreed that there was a safety problem with Caltrain and the unauthorized crossing. She did feel, however, that it was separate from forcing people to travel to Broadway or the next closest bus stop. Ms. Giorni concluded by recommending the crosswalk not be removed, and having the bus stop reinstalled. Commissioner Warden stated that he did not want the bus stop reinstalled. He said he agreed with staff’s assessment that the City probably has a safer situation if people crossed directly from their vehicles. If the crosswalk was left, there would be pedestrians walking on uneven pavement or in a roadway. Commissioner Warden stated that he supported the staff recommendation. Commissioner Bohnert felt that the City still had a long way to go in regards to the corridor safety, and if the City was considering fencing to block the railroad track, then a crosswalk could be considered as well. But for now, Commissioner Bohnert felt that until the Caltrain situation was figured out, it would be safest to eliminate the crosswalk and eliminate the bus stop as an immediate safety precaution. He said that the Commission could meet again afterwards regarding what to do with the crosswalks and bus stops when Caltrain addresses the safety of the entire corridor. Chairman Condon agreed with his fellow commissioners. He felt that even if the sidewalk directly at the bus stop was present, it would be a sidewalk that goes nowhere. He said that this situation leads to people in the bicycle TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 8 of 20 lanes, which was unsafe. He mentioned that there was another bus stop about 200 yards away, at a nice location in front of the bike shop. He also agrees that until the Caltrain safety situation was settled, it was something the Commission could bring back. Motion: To move to Action Items. M/S/C: Warden, James, 4/0/0 Motion: To accept the staff recommendation to remove the crosswalk across California Drive at Sanchez Avenue. M/S/C: Warden, James; 4/0/0 4.2.3 Adeline Drive/Balboa Avenue – Evaluate Crosswalk Enhancements Mr. Chou explained that one of the items brought to the Commission by City Council’s Special Scoping Sessions was a concern that the Adeline/Balboa intersection was missing a pedestrian crosswalk. He explained that this intersection was a 4-way stop controlled intersection with only three marked crosswalks. He said that the southbound approach of Balboa only had a stop bar. Mr. Chou explained that Balboa goes through to Ray, and to make the intersection c onsistent with other 4-way stops in the area and for safety purposes, a crosswalk should be installed on the fourth leg. Linda Abbey, 1415 Adeline, asked if the referred to “fourth leg” on Balboa was on the north or south side of the intersection. Mr. Chou clarified that it was the north approach, heading south. Ms. Abbey asked further if that was the part going into Ray Park and Mr. Chou confirmed it was. Ms. Abbey said there were Mercy High School students who got off at Adeline and walked straight up past Balboa. She said that she thought there were still children in that area too. Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa, stated that there were a number of children not going up to Mercy but to Lincoln School. She also said that there were more families moving in with small children on her block, and she noticed them walking to school. Commissioner Warden asked with regard to the nearby softball fields, whether or not the Commission might want to consider the school crosswalk enhancements. He agreed that making the intersection a 4-way crosswalk now made sense. Mr. Chou answered that crosswalk enhancements would be something to look at based on pedestrian counts and pedestrian usage in the area. TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 9 of 20 Motion: To move to Action Items. M/S/C: James, Bohnert; 4/0/0 Motion: To accept staff recommendation to install a marked crosswalk across southbound Balboa Avenue at Adeline Drive. M/S/C: James, Bohnert; 4/0/0 4.2.5 Adeline Drive/Mercy High School Traffic Settings Mr. Chou said the Commission had a meeting with some of the residents and with Ms. Abbey regarding the Mercy High School traffic situation. He reported that the centerline buttons were installed on Adeline from Alvarado to Hoover as of the May 18. He also said that other issues in regards to signage would be performed on a staff level. Items being taken care of through the Planning Department and Planning Commission included traffic study issues and use permit-issues pertaining to the school and mansion administration. Mr. Chou also reported that City staff and the TSPC sub-committee met with the Planning Director to work out duties and essentially avoid overlaps of responsibilities. He said that the Planning Department would be working directly with the school and the administration. Mr. Chou said that the City requested a traffic consultant be hired by the school to conduct baseline studies in volume, turning movements, usages, and trip generations. The traffic consultant would be hired by Mercy High School but the data would be reviewed by City staff, and their observations and recommendations would be brought before the Commission. Mr. Chou said that from that point on, the information would be passed back to the consultants, who would either verify or rectify the report. Mr. Chou concluded by saying that baseline information would be available for the City to determine whether to allow the school to expand or continue to have its functions. Linda Abbey, 2415 Adeline Drive, thanked the group for thoughts and support, as well as the radar speed carts (trailers). She thought a small study may have been performed, as she noticed a small cart on the south side of Adeline between Columbus and Vancouver. She brought up an April incident (as told to her by neighbor Karen Young) involving Notre Dame students. The students were on Vancouver and Adeline and Ms. Abbey felt mass confusion was caused by students walking in the street and illegally parking. Ms. Abbey said that in speaking to the Vice Principal of Mercy High School, she learned that Mercy Center and Notre Dame students attended jointly that day. She said that letters were distributed, which included parking instructions and drop off points. Ms. Abbey TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 10 of 20 continued by saying that although there were instructions, she felt that the students were not following them. She felt a monitor should be in place, directing traffic before and after such a program. Ms. Abbey did note that some monitoring at the gate (across from her and up the block) was present and might possibly have been part of the Mercy traffic center. Ms. Abbey also said that the radar speed trailers were placed on the side where the traffic was parked. She stated that the radar speed trailer was parked near Columbus, but that people were not likely to speed at that point. She felt speeding would occur going downhill. She concluded by saying that the speed trailer should have been on the opposite side of Adeline so when driving down the street, drivers would see their speed. She suggested that the speed data be date/time stamped so as to ascertain whether it is Mercy traffic. Ms. Abbey’s also asked how Burlingame Police staffing was for traffic checks at Mercy from 7:30 – 8:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Ms. Abbey’s outlined her opposition to asking Mercy to hire traffic consultants to obtain baseline data and perform traffic studies. She said that this was similar to having the “fox watch the henhouse.” She said preferred that the study be performed by a third party not related to the high school. Commissioner Warden provided a summary of the staff/subcommittee meeting between himself, Traffic Engineer Chou, Commissioner Condon, and Planning Director, Meg Monroe. He said that it was agreed to turn most of this matter over to the Planning Department as part of the Building Permit process. He said that this would provide the City with tighter control and gave Mercy one place to focus their efforts to satisfy the needs and wants of the TSP Commission, Planning Commission, and staff. Commissioner Warden stated that the City had finished the promised items as far as the centerline striping/dots. He said that more time was needed to see if those actions worked, and he didn’t know if waiting until the end of school was sufficient. Commissioner Warden felt waiting until the end of summer and into the next school year would allow insight as to how these actions would transpire. He added that when the process began, the City knew it was not going to be a one, two or three -month fix. Commissioner Warden explained that the suggestion that the traffic study be performed by party not paid for by Mercy was not reasonable. He said that studies are frequently done and traffic engineers have sets of standards to which they must adhere. Commissioner Warden said he did not feel there would be an issue and believed that Mercy knows problems exist; and, that Mercy was willing to address them. TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 11 of 20 Chair Condon said that there was no prior baseline established, and with anything performed now, there would be nothing to compare with. He clarified that it was at the City’s request that Mercy hired a traffic consultant to have independent persons come up with a traffic plan study that could be presented to the City at a later date. He added that the Traffic Commission has done everything it could involving calming traffic, signs, and striping. Chair Condon said that the Planning Commission would take the lead, baseline data will have been established, the consultants have been hired, and neighborhood meetings (which the Commissioners can attend) will be held. Mr. Chou elaborated on the consultant situation by saying that based on the Director of Planning, the consultant is one that the City has confidence in and whose work is reputable. Mr. Chou said that he has reviewed work by the consulting company in the past with regard to other projects, and he found the results to be standard material. He added that even if there was to be some data that was questionable, the City could ask how the information was verified. Commissioner Warden asked Sergeant Shepley if the City would be able to continue Police Department enforcement or the use of the speed trailer in the area. Sergeant Shepley said that enforcement was always a bit of a challenge due to staffing issues. He said that two traffic officers should be returning to the Traffic Division by next week, but none were available this week. With regard to the radar speed trailer Sgt. Shepley was not sure if it could be placed near the upper or lower gates at this time because of the consultant study currently taking place. Before installing the radar speed trailer, he would ask for Mr. Chou’s opinion as to whether data would be skewed. Mr. Chou agreed that the City needed be careful so as not to skew the data. If the speed trailer was installed while the consultant study is going on, the City could end up with data that shows there is no speeding problem. Chair Condon noted that school would be out for the summer in two weeks. He said that traffic studies were being performed prior to school being out, and he would not recommend installing the trailer at this point. He felt the Commission had done everything possible as a Traffic Commission to calm everything down. He reiterated that the school was actively pursuing the traffic consulting, neighborhood meetings would be held, and input would be received. He added that the burden was for Mercy to pay for the consulting and come up with a traffic plan just like the other area schools. He said it has started and was working. He also restated that Planning was taking the lead so the City could establish a baseline to determine TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 12 of 20 counts, parking, and all included issues. If anything were to take place in the future, the City would have something to compare it to. Again he said that from this point, the issue would be passed to Planning. Mr. Chou clarified to the Commission that this item would not show as pending on the agenda. However, when the studies come in, this matter would be on the agenda as a new item. He said that the Commission and the Engineering and Police staffs had been able to take care of certain issues directly. Issues dealing with Planning, use permits, and trip generations from the studies would return to the Commission as separate items. He concluded that for meeting purposes, the Commission would put out meeting notification by posting signs indicating a traffic meeting on a particular date. He said that another possibility was to canvass the street with mailed notification letters. Chair Condon invited Ms. Abbey to speak for one more minute. She requested the times the traffic studies were done, on which days, and at what times. Chair Condon advised they were being done right now by a private traffic consultant. Ms. Abbey stated that when she drove “up” on Tuesday, someone was at the service gate. Chair Condon reiterated that Mercy had hired a private traffic consultant. Ms. Abbey agreed, saying the person appeared at 3:09, the beginning of the traffic study, and school had let out. Chair Condon advised that the reports would be available when the studies were completed, and they were done by Mercy. Ms. Abbey inquired as to whether she could perform her own traffic count/study. Chair Condon indicated Ms. Abbey was welcome to do whatever she would like, but as a private citizen and not a certified traffic consultant her data could not be officially used. Chair Condon did welcome her to compare her notes with the traffic consultant, as the consultant was a paid professional who provided such studies for a living. He suggested that Ms. Abbey might want to wait since school would be out in two more weeks, let the consultants gather their information then , take a look at the times through Mercy. Mr. Chou explained that studies were typically performed on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays. He said that some may be done on Mondays and Fridays, but that the bulk of the studies were performed in the middle of the week. Ms. Abbey asked about the counts the neighbors requested by way of letters. Chair Condon informed her that the request was turned down as there was no baseline data. He said that this was to be established by the Planning Department actions. Ms. Abbey inquired as to the date of the meeting in which the request was denied. Chair Condon informed her that it was at the public meeting in upstairs with Commissioner Warden, himself, Mr. Chou, Ms. Abbey, and four of her neighbors. He reminded her again that there was no baseline data as yet. TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 13 of 20 Ms. Abbey indicated the audio tapes were not available from that meeting. Chair Condon indicated Mr. Chou had said it was explained at the previously-mentioned meeting that past counts were done long ago and have either been archived or lost. Ms. Abbey said she was not referring to the past counts and that she was requesting current counts from the City. Chair Condon reminded her that the Commission said no at the meeting, that Mercy has their own traffic consultant, that there was no baseline data to compare those to, and that the City was not paying the expense to do the count since Mercy Properties was currently having the study performed. Ms. Abbey inquired as to why the City of Burlingame had traffic counts in other areas. Mr. Chou explained that traffic counts were generally done for two reasons. One was to obtain an overall picture of main arterials throughout the city, and the other is to obtain specific counts (for stop sign warrants). He said that in the case to which Ms. Abbey is referring, whether or not the City would perform counts, it was agreed upon by almost everyone at the past neighborhood meeting that the problem was that there was no data to compare to. Mr. Chou explained that at this point, it was easier to have the consultants do their counts at the same time as they perform turning movement counts and trip generations, and not have different counts done at different times. Ms. Abbey said she did not see the item crossed off he r list, which she felt was related to issues on Alvarado, Adeline and Hoover. Ms. Abbey requested the audio tapes and minutes for that meeting. Chair Condon explained that there were no tapes from the meeting held with the neighbors since it was an informal meeting between the sub-committee, staff and the neighbors. He reminded Ms. Abbey that they had said no traffic counts would be performed by the City for Mercy High School because there is no baseline to judge against. Commission Warden and Chair Condon stated again that counts would be performed by a paid private traffic consultant. Chair Condon said that the City would not perform the traffic counts. Ms. Abbey said she did not recall such, and Chair Condon reminded her that since that time Mercy has hired a traffic consultant. He further said that at that meeting, the answer was, “No, we are not going to do traffic counts.” Ms. Abbey indicated she thought that at that time, Mr. Chou “was going to check on that.” Chair Condon further said there is no reason to duplicate the expense when Mercy was already hiring an engineer. 4.2.6 Carmelita Avenue/Vancouver Avenue Crosswalk Enhancements. Traffic Engineer Chou said that this is another item that came before the Commission through the City Council, and was similar to the item 4.2.3, the TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 14 of 20 Adeline/Balboa Crosswalk. He explained that a resident had inquired to the Council about changing the colors of an existing set of crosswalks at Carmelita and Vancouver from white to yellow. Mr. Chou explained that a field investigation verified that the intersection was next to Roosevelt School. He said that possibly after the street was resurfaced by the City- hired paving contractor, the crosswalks were reinstalled in white instead of yellow paint. Mr. Chou said that as a matter of immediate action, the staff went ahead and painted it yellow. He said that this item did not require any action or approval for the Commission. But rather, he wanted to advise the Commission since Council had initially asked that the Commission be aware of this matter. Subsequently, a Councilmember had asked that the crosswalk be taken care of, and Mr. Chou explained that it was. Commissioner Warden verified that this was indeed one of the crosswalks one block away from the school. He said that there were many children walking in this direction and asked if this crosswalk was addressed by the crosswalk enhancement sub-committee report. Chair Condon answered that the sub-committee had looked at all of the schools in the City and that this location was in the program. He stated that this item would be reviewed for large numbers of pedestrians and schoolchildren, and any perceived driver visibility problem. If so, Chair Condon said that he would recommend this location for enhancement. 5. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF NEW ITEMS 5.1 Traffic Engineer Chou reported on the proposed overnight parking restriction signs along the 700 block of California Drive. Mr. Chou said that this item had been brought up at a past meeting, and that the purpose was to extend the parking restrictions that were previously approved on the other section of California Drive. He explained that it might be prudent to add this item to an agenda and notify the businesses across the street. This would provide an opportunity for those citizens to speak on the issue at the next meeting. Commissioner Warden mentioned that he had asked Mr. Chou to look at this, and that someone on Victoria Road was also parking their commercial vehicles there. He said the vehicles were not moved for two months. Chair Condon described this as a staging area, as employees arrived at 7:00 to 7:30 to remove the trucks. 6. FROM THE FLOOR 6.1 Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa spoke regarding the public meeting with Caltrain. She said that the City Council had given Commission the job of negotiating with Caltrain. Ms. Giorni read aloud her proposed speech to Cou ncil. She said that Caltrain placed level of service above safety and asked that the City ask the PUC TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 15 of 20 to slow the 79 m.p.h. rail speed. She further felt the City should demand fencing between Oak Grove and Broadway. 7. INFORMATION ITEMS 7.1 Bicycle Safety Issues in Burlingame Chair Condon said that a year and half had passed on this issue and he asked Mr. Chou to consider calling a meeting to bring up the City’s bicycle issues. Chair Condon proposed that a small forum or sub-committee meeting, with public invitation, be set up. Mr. Chou agreed that a date could be set, and the discussion will appear on the agenda. He further said t hat staff had not heard from Council regarding the formation of another bicycle sub-committee yet. Mr. Chou suggested that while work on that new sub-committee continued, the standing group was already assembled and could at least start looking at potential grant projects. He added that these items could be handed to the new bicycle sub-committee once it was established. Chair Condon felt that potential projects could be identified, as grant money will be forthcoming, and put into the application process. 7.2 From Council to Commission/Staff None. 7.3 From Staff to Commission 7.3.1 Traffic Engineer’s Report 7.3.1.1 Peninsula Avenue/101 Overpass. Mr. Chou indicated as yet there has not been any official from San Mateo regarding this situation, although some initial and unofficial discussions may have begun. 7.3.1.2 Broadway/101 Status Report. Mr. Chou advised that the City installed signs along the overpass, cautioning pedestrians that the walkway overpass was narrow and that a wheelchair probably could not pass. He said that the overpass was Caltrans property and the City had requested they install pedestrian signal heads at crosswalks at the Rollins intersection. Mr. Chou said that since Caltrans had not taken action, the City took it upon itself to warn pedestrians. TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 16 of 20 7.3.1.3 Radar Speed Zones. Mr. Chou reported that in November 2005, a radar speed zone survey was conducted for the entire city. In the report, the speed limits on three streets were changed to 30 mph from 35 mph. He said there had been public comments regarding whether or not the 30 mph limit was prudent or arrived at correctly. Mr. Chou explained that the City had received comments from the public both supporting, and opposing the speed limit reduction. Mr. Chou explained that in response to this, staff was individually examining each of the accident reports for the three streets, obtain the narratives, and better determine whether or not to keep the speed limit at 30 mph, or readjust them back to 35 mph. Mr. Chou indicated that staff was anticipating another two weeks to go through the expected 100 to 120 reports. He explained that if the reports did verify that 30 mph was more prudent, staff would bring that recommendation to the Commission for public discussion. From there, it would go to City Council for approval and ordinance change. Mr. Chou explained that if, however, the examination showed that it was more acceptable to return to the 35 mph speed limit, then would just reissue the report with the adjustment and i t would not have to go to Council for ordinance changes. Commissioner James asked what the tolerance level was in terms of radar speed enforcement, and at what point a citation would be issued. Mr. Chou said the citation threshold was limited and was something that was within the discretion of the police officer. Sergeant Shepley answered that the general consensus in law enforcement was that when using radar, the citation enforcement could range between 5 mph up to 15 mph over the limit. He added that an examination of the citation threshold since the beginning of the year until April was consistent, with two exceptions. Sgt. Shepley said that each citation written was over 50 mph. He added that other things were also taken into consideration. He said that an officer might lower the citation threshold depending on traffic conditions. Specifically, did someone pass when it was unsafe, and not only cite for unsafe passing but also for a lower speed? TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 17 of 20 7.3.2 Traffic Sergeant=s Report Sergeant Shepley stated that over the next two months the Police Department would be re-inspecting all taxis wishing to obtain permits in the City of Burlingame. He also reported that the Police Department was stepping up enforcement and was working on several projects. The Employee Parking Permit Program was continuing in its trial version. Challenges include tinted windows, so there is a possibility the ordinance might be changed to clarify permit placement and display. Sgt. Shepley said that there seemed to be quite a bit of support for the program’s continuance. Sgt. Shepley said the Red Flex red-light camera enforcement program was moving forward. He said Red Flex would be determining if their technology would meet the City’s needs. Four intersections were identified for trial testing. The candidate intersections are: Trousdale Drive/El Camino Real, Broadway/El Camino Real, Chapin Avenue/El Cam ino Real, and Broadway/Rollins Road. Sgt. Shepley also reported that the radar speed trailer was being circulated. He said that, as Ms. Abbey mentioned, the trailer was at Adeline/Vancouver. He noted that the radar speed trailer possessed old technology and did not know if the traffic counting feature had ever worked on the trailer. It was basically used as a feedback device for drivers as they passed by. The sergeant noted that Mr. Chou suggested the possibility of purchasing a newer, lighter weight radar speed trailer with better software and hardware technology through a grant from the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS). He said that he would be writing a submission later this year and felt OTS would support such a grant application. Sgt. Shepley said that the hope was that City Council would approve it and that a motorcycle officer position would be created; and, that a motorcycle could be purchased along with the radar speed trailer. October 1, 2007 was the soonest the officer would be available, as the grant is due in January of that year. Sgt. Shepley stated that the Street Racer Detail was moving forward with training in Burlingame. The operational briefing would be June 9 in Burlingame. Finally, a DUI checkpoint would be hosted in the last week of July on the County grant. Commissioner Warden said that the City was getting some enforcement action with two bars near the corner of Burlingame Avenue and California Drive. He asked if there were traffic issues as a result. Sgt. Shepley said that Burlingame was one of the county hotspots for DUI crashes. He said that considering the population, the City ranked similarly TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 18 of 20 to Redwood City, South San Francisco, and San Mateo. He said that crashes occurred primarily on Thursday nights (bar night) and tended to happen at the southern end of the city , off El Camino Real. 7.3.2 Other City Staff Reports. None. 7.4 From Commission to Staff 7.4.1 Commission Chairperson Report. Chair Condon reported that the Commission had come a long way and that they have had major issues come up. He stressed that as Commissioners, he advised members to run questions through the Commission so that the Commission as a whole can provide the same, consistent answers. He asked that Commissioners not provide personal answers or personal ideas. Chair Condon also reminded the Commission to continue to follow parliamentary procedures and Roberts’ Rules of Order. With regard to Caltrain, Chair Condon said there was more staff than public at the last meeting. At future meetings on this issue, staff would provide answers from Caltrain as to what they plan to do. Mr. Chou stated that staff would be coordinating with them to sit at a meeting and discuss fencing and bus route items. He said that what exactly would be done would be decided and issues would be pushed. Mr. Chou stated that upon consensus and agreement, a public hearing would be set up to report on what Caltrain and SamTrans would do. Chair Condon asked about a timeframe for feedback. Mr. Chou indicated that there was no established timeframe yet, but staff would not wait until Caltrain had completed the work before reporting back. Chair Condon noted that if Caltrain were not going to follow through, it would come before the public eye. Mr. Chou stated that if there are any delays, the public would be aware of them. Commissioner Warden said a special meeting focusing on one item, rather than being a part of a regular meeting would be better. Mr. Chou agreed and cited situations where special meetings were held for the downtown parking study issue. Chair Condon agreed that a special meeting would be held. Chair Condon said he wanted to have a Bicycle meeting and invite input from the public. He said that Commissioner Bohnert was now on the sub- committee to replace Councilperson Cohen, who used to be a TSP Commissioner and was on the sub-committee. Chair Condon requested a TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 19 of 20 small study session to identify issues to be brought up including items available for future grants. Commissioner Warden said crosswalk enforcem ent near Stacks restaurant had been discussed in the past. He said that several people had reported seeing pedestrian near-misses, with drivers ignoring the crosswalk. He realized that manpower was limited, but suggested using cadets for enforcement sting operations. Sgt. Shepley said this was a possibility, and a county-wide operation had been held there before. He added that it was not as productive an intersection when compared to Morrell and Carolan. Chair Condon asked if discussions regarding the history of parking restrictions along Peninsula Avenue would take place at a future meeting. Mr. Chou answered that it would and that some research needed to be done on the history and reasons for the restrictions. He also confirmed that the issue might involve speaking with Code Enforcement Officer, Sue Harris. Commissioner Warden asked about people commuting home with large panel trucks, and whether or not the City allowed such vehicles parked in a residential area. Sgt. Shepley said the vehicle had to be over 10,000 pounds to be in violation, and that someone would investigate what size it was. He added that if it was just one truck being driven home, there was nothing wrong with that. Commissioner Warden indicated the vehicle was not a pickup truck. He said it was larger, and with an enclosed box on the rear. Sergeant Shepley stated that 10,000 pounds is huge, but that the Police Department would take a look. Commissioner Warden identified the location as Oak Grove and Paloma. Chair Condon stated that he had a personal discussion with Larry Patterson, San Mateo Public Works Director about the Peninsula Avenue Overpass project. He said that San Mateo recognized that the project has created a property value issue with property owners in the area. Chair Condon reminded staff that this issue would be appearing sooner or later, and asked that staff remember the major impact on residents. Commissioner Bohnert added that the issue had gone through the real estate offices as a big disclosure. Chair Condon agreed, saying a quick decision had been made for that reason. 7.5 Comments and communications None. TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MAY 18, 2006 Minutes Page 20 of 20 7.5 Next meeting There were no anticipated absences for the next Commission meeting on June 8, 2006. 8. INACTIVE ITEMS 8.1 Broadway/Paloma Avenue being evaluated for stop signs. Mr. Chou stated this would be moved to an active/discussion item for next month. 9. AGENDUM ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING – June 8, 2006 9.1 Items Requiring Staff Reports $ Item 4.2.3 - Broadway/Paloma evaluating for stop signs. $ New Item - California Drive proposed overnight parking restrictions Mr. Chou requested clarification as to whether the Peninsula Avenue issue should be added as a discussion item. Chair Condon stated the issue was not pressing and that staff could discuss findings. Chair Condon suggested that Bicycle Safety Issues could be added or the Commission could provide a date. Mr. Chou said that since Chair Condon is on the committee, he and Mr. Chou will set up a date offline and hold one to two meetings. Mr. Chou hoped that by the next official meeting on June 8, there will be something to report. 10. ADJOURNMENT 8:39 p.m.