Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - TSP - 2016.07.141 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of Thursday, June 9, 2016 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:04 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL MEMBER PRESENT: Akers, Bush, Londer, Wettan MEMBERS ABSENT: Martos 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Prior to the approval of minutes, Chair Londer recognized Council Member Beach in attendance. Motion: To accept the minutes of May 12, 2016 with the following three edits: • Page two, item 7a, paragraph one – change the word missing to remaining; • Page two, item 7b, paragraph two – correct Sergeant Ford’s name; and • Page six, item 8d, paragraph one – change Wettan to Akers. M/S/C: Wettan/Akers; 4/0/1 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA No public comments. 6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS a) Carolan Avenue Complete Streets Update Mr. Chou provided the Commission with an update on the Carolan Avenue Complete 2 Streets Project. Mr. Chou recognized the Commission has previously provided input and was instrumental in coming up with some of the design work related to the project. He also stated that while staff can look into any Commission comments and requests that are generated from this update, it will have to be done in a very limited time frame before the planned construction phase; as staff did not want to negatively impact the grant funding schedule for the project. Mr. Chou explained that, as heard at previous TSPC meetings, the City has had difficulties with Caltrans regarding the required archeological studies. This has held up the project. He continued that, as of today, Caltrans has not responded to the City to confirm approval of the archeological studies submitted for the project. Mr. Chou said the City’s expectation is to go ahead with submitting the plans and specifications to Caltrans for the construction funding obligation (E76) later this month unless the archeological studies are rejected. He reiterated that the studies were a requirement of federal grant funds. Mr. Chou reviewed the striping plan and “road diet.” Some design details that were pointed out include: • High visibility crosswalk at the intersection at Morrell Avenue; • Turn pockets for the North Park Apartments; • Bicycle boxes at Broadway and Oak Grove intersections; • 9’ Parking areas northbound and southbound; • 5-6’ Bike lanes with 3’ buffers northbound and southbound; • New signage for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists; • Raised curbs and buffers at each intersection; and • Landscaping in selected locations such as Cadillac Way and Toyon Drive. Mr. Chou went on to explain the bike lane transition/crossover at the Carolan and Oak Grove intersection for those bicyclists making a right on to Oak Grove. He also noted that the City has funds programmed for a future project to install signals at Oak Grove and Carolan, as does Caltrain as part of their Electrification Project. Commissioner Wettan voiced his concerns about how bicyclists would interact with cars turning right on Oak Grove from Carolan traveling southbound. He said it is troubling because it’s a pathway to Burlingame High School with students possibly biking to school. He noted that he understands there were many constraints that factored into the current design but felt having cars on both sides of the bicyclists, coupled with people rushing in the morning to get somewhere, is a safety concern. Mr. Chou explained the challenges and logic behind the current design. He indicated it was a difficult balance because if a dedicated bike lane were to be moved to the curbside, there would now be a sight visibility problem with the northbound traffic having trouble seeing bicyclists. Mr. Chou said the current design is the accepted design 3 standard and is the best way for riders to be seen. Chair Londer indicated that he shared the same concern as Commissioner Wettan. He noted that many of the drivers traveling towards Burlingame High School may be less experienced behind the wheel. Vice-Chair Akers inquired about the anticipated users for Carolan Avenue, the traffic flow, and the entrance to the Rosalie O’Mahony Pedestrian Bridge. Mr. Chou indicated that the City’s data showed there are not many student bicyclists traveling through that corridor, but mostly service workers. Mr. Chou acknowledged that this may change. In regards to the flow inquiry, Mr. Chou said the plan is to encourage northbound bicycle traffic to utilize Cadillac Way where there is less traffic. He also indicated a new signal has been agreed upon with Caltrans at Rollins and Cadillac Way. He indicated that the City is planning a separate follow-up project to improve the Carolan/Cadillac intersection with additional bike safety features. Mr. Chou shared that the follow-up design project would look similar to a signalized intersection—but is not. He said currently the City is having a conceptual discussion about bicycle-only signals and indicated staff is working with the design team to determine appropriate use and effectiveness. Lastly, Mr. Chou pointed out that the entrance to the Rosalie O’Mahony Pedestrian Bridge will be further south, closer to Cadillac Way. Commissioner Bush inquired about the priority of bicyclists traveling through the Rollins and Cadillac intersection. Mr. Wong replied by indicating that staff talked with the design team to possibly create a standalone signal that is pedestrian actuated (no flashing). He said this feature is not currently shown on the plans. Commissioner Bush shared that he is not as concerned with the bike lane crossover on Carolan and Oak Grove, as he has observed and ridden through similarly designed areas such as Page Mill in Palo Alto. He also noted that his observations have indicated that there is not much morning traffic in the area in question and he did not share the same level of concern as other Commissioners. Commissioner Bush did inquire about moving the signal prior to the crossover of cars and bikes going southbound on Carolan so people stop before the crossover occurs. Mr. Chou indicated that the crossover occurs approximately 400 feet prior to the intersection. Commissioner Bush also inquired about moving the bike lane inside of the parked cars similar to bike lanes he has observed in New York in order to provide increased safety and to reduce the chances of being “doored.” Mr. Chou said the City looked at several alternatives which included moving the bike lanes, including cycle tracks and diagonal parking, but found during the public comment period that the majority of riders preferred the current design as presented. He went on to say he could ask the design team to pull up the alternative drawings from a year ago to see what the concept looks like again; however, the project needed to move forward so as not to negatively affect federal grant money for the project. 4 Commissioner Wetten and Vice-Chair Akers reiterated their safety concerns for the younger and inexperienced bicyclists utilizing the southbound bike lane at Carolan Avenue and Oak Grove. Vice-Chair Akers acknowledged that staff has vetted the best possible engineering solution on a street that isn’t a great place for a bike lane being utilized by high school students. He said this is a challenge given the close proximity of the High School but if the advanced rider is the main user of this particular bike lane, it would be worth doing. He also added that he is hopeful this will not deter the option of having a bike lane along California Drive. In response, Mr. Chou articulated that the original concept of the bike lane on Carolan Avenue was for recreational and commuter bicyclists. He also stated that a bike lane along California Drive for the school population would be beneficial. Vice-Chair Akers stated that the Oak Grove and Cadillac intersection needs to be a high priority after the conclusion of this project. Chair Londer opened public comment. Elaine Breeze representing Summer Hill Apartment Communities expressed her gratitude with the City’s outreach efforts and indicated she is thrilled about the project. She also inquired about enlarging the bike boxes to which Mr. Wong indicated that staff would look into the request. Chair Londer closed public comment. b) Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Mr. Wong provided an update as to what’s occurred to date with the BPAC efforts— more specifically the draft charter. The Charter expands duties of the current BPAC, establishes a structure, and reporting process. The Charter was presented to the City Council on April 18, 2016. There are some shared concerns between the City Council and BPAC supporters regarding the proposed structure being limited to 3-5 members, composition of membership, how members are selected, and continuing a free exchange of ideas and concerns. Based on all the feedback staff has received, there are two options which would allow the BPAC to proceed without being regulated by the Brown Act. Option #1 – Community-based BPAC The first option involves adopting a structure similar to that of the City’s Citizen’s Environmental Council (CEC). This structure provides a free-flowing discussion without being bound by the Brown Act. The CEC has an open membership, with directors and members who are represented on the City’s TSPC, Planning Commission, Park and Recreation Commission, Beautification Committee, and various PTAs. This group has a 5 diverse membership which was desired by many members of the current BPAC. • Not bound by the Brown Act. • This option would have an open membership, with directors and members. • Community based BPAC would not be affiliated with the City, but an independent group. • No restriction on the number of members, nor how often they would meet. • Responsible for costs of being a tax-deductible charitable organization (501(c)(3). • Staff members would be invited to group meetings to provide expertise or provide updates on City projects. This effort would include staff from both from Public Works and Planning Departments. Option #2 – Presentation-based BPAC The second option would be to have open discussions, with the public in attendance. These meetings would similar to the public outreach meetings which occurs for some of the City’s larger capital improvement/planning projects. At these meetings a discussion is initiated with a brief presentation, followed by questions, and then comments from the public regarding the specific project. The process involves a notification with a venue, date, time, and topic; this is usually done via E-news and emails. • This structure also provides a free-flowing discussion without being bound by the Brown Act. • This option would have no formal membership. • This group would not be affiliated with the City, but if they so choose they could be an independent group free to meet without City staff in attendance. • Staff would in turn take the information gathered at the meeting and incorporate it into the project, or work in collaboration with the TSPC Chair and Vice-Chair to place it onto the TSPC agenda for further discussion. • This option also would allow for other City staff members to be invited to group meetings in order to provide expertise or provide updates on particular City projects. This effort would include staff from both from Public Works and Planning Departments. A third option was developed after options one and two were presented to BPAC supporters based on cost concerns associated with being a tax-deductible charitable organization (501(c)(3). The third option is a City-based BPAC which would be subject to the Brown Act but would allow for City funding and regular staff support. Meetings would occur on a bi-monthly basis under a City-based BPAC. All three options meet the requirements for various funding agencies. Chair Londer opened up public comment. 6 Laurie Simonson spoke in favor of a City-based BPAC that meets on a monthly basis (versus every other month). She stated that the history of the BPAC is important when deciding which option to choose. Based on her previous experience, she felt the City- based BPAC is the best option because it provides the most structure, specifically a Chair and formal agenda. She added that in the past, meetings would be “high-jacked” therefore the items needing to be addressed would not get the amount of attention necessary and public comments were not regulated to a time-frame. Ms. Simonson was unsure if a Presentation-based BPAC with a non-standing committee would fulfill the MPO requirements for federal funding and suggested that staff look into this. Ms. Simonson indicated that she would be relocating and will be unable to spearhead the BPAC. She stressed that if the City continues to linger with their BPAC efforts, much interest of the BPAC supporters may be lost. Chair Londer closed public comment. Commissioner Wetten felt the draft Charter was good overall, specifically pointing out the structure and feedback mechanisms; but is concerned with the lack of independence it would provide to the BPAC. He stated the value of the BPAC lies in their ability to have independent views. Commissioner Wettan felt the Presentation-based BPAC is too much like an Ad-Hoc committee and may softly put BPAC out of existence. He said that if the City-based model can only be as it’s currently written, he favors the Community- based model as the ability to be more independent is of high importance. Commissioner Bush stated that he has been in touch with former members of the BPAC and there is a lot of concern about whether or not the draft Charter incorporates the ideas and concerns raised by the group, and therefore people have been losing interest and stepping down. He stated that this is of great concern to him. Commissioner Bush indicated that the Community-based model essentially gives the impression that the City does not want a BPAC due to the lack of staff involvement and assistance to drive policy decisions at the City level. He also felt that the BPAC would not survive under the community model because you are relying on the good will of the public. He is similarly concerned with the Presentation-model because it lacks continuity. Ultimately, Commissioner Bush favored the City-based model as adhering to the Brown Act doesn’t appear to be of concern. In closing, he noted that he is concerned with meeting on a bi- monthly basis under the City-model because it’s challenging to keep momentum and get things done if the group meets every other month instead of monthly. Vice-Chair Akers supports a Community-based BPAC to start with but feels the question the City faces is what would be the best adjunct to the TSPC, which already devotes a substantial amount of time to bicycle related issues. He felt there is value in accommodating a type of information exchange that is less constrained than the TSPC. Startup costs can be paid through a City-grant and if the Community-based model does not work, the City can shift to the City-based model. 7 Chair Londer supports the Community-based BPAC but questioned what is driving the need to be a (501(c)(3) under the community model. Since the CEC has a community like structure, Chair Londer shared some of his positive experiences with that particular commission and the current model they follow. After additional clarification and discussion, Vice-Chair Akers made the following motion: The Commission recommends that the Council support and encourage the creation of a community-based Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee. The City should be prepared to provide meeting space, staff support, and, at an appropriate time, grant funding to support the organization. We believe that a community-based BPAC is more likely to be effective than a City committee, which would be subject to the Brown Act and other constraints. The Commission notes the success of the Citizens Environmental Council, which may serve as a useful model for a community-based BPAC. M/S/C: Akers/Wettan; 3/1/1 c) Parking Impact Notification Process This discussion was initiated with the intent to review the noticing practices as a result of a particular group of residents not receiving notice from the City regarding new parking restrictions on a portion of California Drive. The group of residents that were not notified is located behind California Drive on Hamilton Lane. Chair Londer suggested the City extend the noticing boundaries past the bare minimum required as to include all that may be directly impacted by the changes. He also suggested placing signage in the project area to increase communication to pedestrians and bicyclists. Commissioner Wettan felt this is an unusual circumstance as staff has been diligent with notifying the public and thinks a quick turnaround time may have played a role. A larger concern of Commissioner Wettan was prioritization as he felt we rushed this project and we have the same issues—only more severe—north of Dufferin. Vice-Chair Akers echoed other Commissioner’s comments about the general satisfaction with staff regarding public noticing. On a go forward basis, he suggested that staff use good judgment by determining who will be impacted and the best way to communicate it. 8 7. INFORMATION ITEMS a) Engineering Division Reports • US101/Broadway Interchange Project – Stage 3 construction continues. Soil stabilization and mixing work continues on both sides of the southern limits of the overpass ramp area. Utility and road work on Bayshore Boulevard has also begun. PG&E to close US101 and Broadway for several 10-minute durations to raise transmission towers and pull new transmission lines across US101 on the morning of June 10. • California Drive Roundabout – 2nd community public meeting held on May 24 in the Lane Room. The City received positive feedback regarding the roundabout concept over a signalized intersection. Next community meeting is planned for fall of this year. There will be a presentation on specific design components based on comments from the 2nd public meeting and presentation/discussion of aesthetic elements for the roundabout. • TSPC Email Communications – No new communications for June. • City Hall Traffic Study – 2nd presentation held on May 23 in the Lane Room. Lower turnout than previous meeting, but positive feedback from the attendees. Finalized concepts to be presented to the Commission at upcoming meeting. • ECR/Floribunda Update – Southbound turn restriction signs install by Caltrans the first week of June. Duration of pilot study reduced to 18-months. • Hoover School Update – Notices for the crosswalk relocation at Hillside Circle and Alvarado Avenue have been posted, and an encroachment permit has been obtained for the raised crosswalk in front of the school. • TSPC Priority List (Updated June 2016): TSPC Led Effort 1 Downtown Modal Access 2 B/PAC setup 6/9/16: Item 6a 3 School Speed Limit Notices/Review 4 School Traffic Issues 3/10/16: Item 6a 5 California Drive Commuter bike route 2/11/16: Item 6b 6 California Drive parking restrictions 2/11/16: Item 6b 7 Broadway Parking 3/10/16: Item 6c 8 Public Shuttles/Transit 9 Downtown Speed Limit Review 10 Review TSPC Mandate 9 11 Joint agreements with Caltrans Countywide 12 ECR Corridor Infrastructure 4/14/16 & 5/12/16 13 Bay Trail 14 Fee Schedules 15 Joint Commission Meeting (City Council) Staff Update via Report 1 Caltrans’ ECR/Floribunda (Completed) 6/9/16: Item 7a 2 Hoover School Update 6/9/16: Item 7a 3 Downtown Parking Strategies 3/10/16: Item 6b 4 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda 6/9/16: Item 7a 5 California Roundabout 6/9/16: Item 7a 6 General Plan – Circulation Element 7 Bike\Ped Plan Update: fwd to BPAC 8 Taxi Regulation: Update by BPD 9 Carolan Complete Streets Update 6/9/16: Item 6b 10 Grant Opportunities 11 Grade Separation 4/14/16: Item 6b 12 Traffic Brochure Completed 13 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC b) Police Department Reports Sergeant Ford provided the following information. There were a total of 29 accidents since the last TSPC meeting with speed being the number one collision factor. Two accidents occurred at El Camino Real and Floribunda. The first was a right-of-way violation that caused the collision on June 18 and another accident occurred today therefore no details were available yet. Sergeant Ford reminded the group that when thinking about these stats, half of the intersection at El Camino Real and Floribunda belongs to the Town of Hillsborough. Tomorrow, June 10, is Railroad Train Track Safety Day. The PD will use this as an opportunity to educate people and to focus on Broadway looking for people that stop on the railroad tracks at a red light. Social media, such as Facebook and Twitter will be used to get the word out. The Traffic Unit handled the Diva Race on the east side last weekend. The team did a good job of advertising the event as there were very little complaints. There will be a check point on Thursday, June 23 as part of an OTS grant. The Bike Rodeo event last week in South San Francisco was a success. This Saturday, June 11, there will be another Bike Rodeo at North Fair Oaks in Redwood City with the Sherriff’s Office and CHP. 10 At the next TSPC meeting the newest Traffic Officer, Garrett Penn will attend in Sergeant Fords place. Sergeant Ford received an email from Pat Giorni regarding complaints discussed on NextDoor pertaining to school zones on Trousdale between 280 and Quesada, more specifically vehicles not stopping at stop signs. Sergeant Ford wanted to let the Commission and staff know he responded to Ms. Giorni. Since the school year, the PD has conducted 200 traffic stops on Trousdale alone and there have been 62 selected traffic enforcement calls in that area. Sergeant Ford also provided Ms. Giorni with a link for Stanley Roberts’ People Behaving Badly ride along with the BPD, which captured a lot of video for the show along Trousdale. Vice-Chair Akers inquired about Sergeant Ford’s contacts at SFO related to cab drivers as he has noticed cabs speeding back and forth to the airport late at night with a fair amount of regularity. He suggested that Sergeant Ford call his contact at SFO or SFPD and/or if feasible, conduct targeted enforcement along the northern stretch of El Camino Real between the hours of 10 – 11 pm. Commissioner Wettan suggested creating an educational pamphlet for cab drivers. Vice-Chair Akers also inquired about NextDoor and whether or not it’s monitored, and if we can encourage people to post to it. Sergeant Ford indicated it’s citizen-based and not monitored. Sergeant Ford said we can post to the site, but we don’t have the capability to monitor it. He requested that if anyone sees anything he should be aware of, cut and paste the details and send to him via email. c) Farmer’s Market Chair Londer and Commissioner Martos attended last month’s Farmer’s Market and they did not receive any comments or complaints. There will be another Farmer’s Market on June 19 (Father’s Day) to which Chair Londer and Commissioner Wettan indicated they were available. d) TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communications Commissioner Wettan noticed that while making a right turn on Rollins from Broadway, the sidewalk seems widely separated. Commissioner Wettan said he received a pedestrian access complaint at that location. Mr. Wong took note and will look into it. 11 8. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS a) Downtown Parking (Martos/Wettan) No update. b) Broadway Parking (Bush/Wettan) No update. c) BPAC (Akers/Londer) No update. d) School Speed Limits (Akers/Londer) No update. 9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS • City Hall Streets Plan / Traffic Calming (July) • Working session regarding Broadway parking (July) • Working session for Commission and Subcommittees (July/August) • Hoover School opening and school speed limits (August) • Public shuttles and transit is the next item on the priority list 10. ADJOURNMENT 10:05 p.m.