Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - TSP - 2015.11.12aTRAFFIC SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION AGENDA Thursday, November 12, 2015 Council Chambers, 7:00 p.m. Members of the public may comment on any action or study item appearing on the agenda at the time it is called. Comments on other items should be made under agenda item #5. Provision of identifying information is optional but assists in preparation of the minutes. All votes are unanimous unless separately voted for the record. Q 3. 91 7 A CALL TO ORDER — 7:00 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 8, 2015 regular meeting minutes PUBLIC COMMENTS — NON -AGENDA Members of the public may speak on any item not on the agenda. Members of the public wishing to suggest an item for a future Commission agenda may do so during this public comment period. The Ralph M. Brown Act (the State -Local Agency Open Meeting Law) prohibits the Commission from acting on any matter that is not on the agenda. Speakers are requested to fill out a "Request To Speak' card located on the table by the door and hand it to staff. The provision of a name, address or other identifying information is optional. Speakers are limited to three minutes each. The Commission Chair may adjust the time limit in light of the number of anticipated speakers. DISCUSSION/STUDY ITEMS California Roundabout Update Staff report b. TSPC Chair and Vice -Chair Discussion Oral report ACTION ITEMS INFORMATION ITEMS a. Engineering Division Reports Reports and/or updates on Public Works -Engineering Division projects and activities Staff report Police Department Reports Reports and/or updates on Police Department programs and activities Oral report C. Farmer's Market Reports on inquires/comments/topics brought up by residents at booth during the Farmer's Market. Oral report d. TSPC Chair/Commissioner's communications Reports on meetings with City Council Members, general public, interested parties. Oral report 9. COMMITTEE & SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS 10. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS a. California Drive Bike Route b. General Plan Update by Commissioners c. Nomination and selection of new TSPC Chair and Vice -Chair 11. ADJOURNMENT NOTICE: Any attendees wishing accommodations for disabilities please contact the City Clerk at 650-558-7203 at least 24 hours before the meeting. A copy of the Agenda Packet is available for public viewing at the City Clerk's office, 501 Primrose Road, from 8:00 a.m. to 5 p.m. before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org. Agendas and minutes are available at the site. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection during normal business hours at City Hall, 501 Primrose Road, Public Works - Engineering counter. NEXT REGULAR TRAFFIC SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION MEETING: Thursday, December 10th. 2015 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of Thursday, October 8, 2015 1. CALL TO ORDER. 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. 3. ROLL CALL. MEMBER PRESENT: Martos, Londer, Akers, Wettan MEMBERS ABSENT: Noworolski 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a) Motion: To accept the minutes of August 13, 2015 with the following edit: • Page 4 —Action Items — ECR/Floribunda Project Update Minor edit, B missing in Burlingame on line 8 M/S/C: Londer/Akers; 4/0/0 b) Motion: To accept the minutes of September 10, 2015 as submitted • Page 4 — Discussion/Study Items — Hoover School Update Minor edit, percentage sign missing on line 1 M/S/C: Londer/Akers; 4/0/0 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS —NON -AGENDA Jim Evans conveyed that the one-way sign on Devereux has been working well but due to heavy traffic in the afternoon, he recommended extending the one-way traffic to 3:30 pm. 6. DISCUSSION/STUDY ITEMS a. Hoover School Update Mr. Wong made a presentation which provided maps showing the locations of the 1 proposed improvements (A -G), a matrix of improvements, and the potential distribution of students. The goal of the discussion item was to prioritize the suggested improvements and make any necessary additions. After going over the potential paths of travel for clarification and conducting an in-depth discussion regarding the proposed improvements, the Commission prioritized the improvements by assigning each as low, medium, or high priority. Since this agenda item was not listed as an action item, but as a discussion/study item, it was decided to hold a special meeting on Tuesday, October 13, in order to take action and move forward with the Commission's priorities related to the proposed improvements. b. Stop Sign Discussion for Trousdale/Marco Polo and Trousdale/Ogden Mr. Wong provided the Commission with background information regarding a stop sign review at Trousdale Drive/Ogden Drive and Trousdale Drive/Marco Polo Way, which included an aerial map of the vicinity illustrating the housing increase. Commissioner Akers noted that the intersections referenced above are terrible and that staff should extend the public noticing efforts to the City's a -news outreach and by posting notices at the actual crosswalk(s). 7. ACTION ITEMS None. 8. INFORMATION ITEMS a) Engineering Division Reports Mr. Wong went over the staff report and provided updates on the following projects: • 2015 Street Resurfacing Program • US101/Broadway Interchange Project • Broadway Grade Separation • California Drive • TSPC Email Communications • Downtown Parking Strategies • RFP's for City Hall/Floribunda Traffic Calming and California Drive Bicycle Facility • Larkspur/Linden Traffic Circle At the close of Mr. Wong's report, Commissioner Akers requested to include the TSPC on the distribution list for the two RFP's referenced above. [►J b) Police Department Reports In the month of September, there was an increase in total accidents but a decrease in injury accidents. There were 32 accidents reported in September of 2015, which is only an increase of 2, compared to accidents in September of 2014. One of the 32 accidents occurred on Floribunda, and another involved a child on Quesada getting struck by a vehicle. Commissioner Akers requested to forward any education materials to the School District to share with students and parents. With the railroad accidents that have occurred near the Broadway station, BPD has stepped up railroad crossing safety education and enforcement. Enforcement at the Broadway/Rollins/Carolan intersection has increased as well due to the current construction conditions. The Police Department had a presence at the Burlingame Pet Parade and plans to be present for the upcoming tree lighting and escort the Burlingame High School Band at an event in late October. Two new officers are currently in motor school that should be rotating into patrol. c) Farmer's Market There was no participation at the last Farmer's Market but TSPC did participate at the Farmer's Market on September 20. Chair Martos summarized the following concerns gathered from residents: • Bike safety on California Avenue • U-turns at Broadway and Rollins • Repaving issues on Bloomfield • Speeding at the bottom of Riviera Drive Commissioner Wettan suggested visiting businesses and discussing the survey questions instead of spending those two hours at the Farmer's Market. d) TSPC Chair/Commissioners Communications Commissioner Akers noted that people do read the City's a -news and it would be a good avenue to reach residents regarding the California Roundabout Project, especially to articulate the problems with that intersection. Vice -Chair Londer attended the Community Advisory Meeting for the General Plan Update on September 30 where land use, retail trends, and economic conditions were among the major topics of discussion. He also has heard from several people that c3 would like the City to consider the possibility of 15 MPH signs in school zones. Chair Martos reminded the group that there is a workshop on Saturday, October 24 at the Recreation Center to take public comments regarding the General Plan. Commissioner Wettan believes that the Hoover School Project is an opportunity for Burlingame to be at the top of its game. He also received comments about resetting the speed limits within school zones. Chair Martos noted that all candidates have highlighted traffic, parking and safety issues as part of their campaign discussions. 9. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS No reports. 10. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS a) Hoover School Update b) California Roundabout Project The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee Update has been temporarily removed from the future agenda list per Commissioner Wetten. 11. ADJOURNMENT 9:50 p.m. 4 a STAFF REPORT To: Traffic Safety and Parking Commission Date: November 12, 2015 AGENDA ITEM NO: 6.a —California Roundabout Update MEETING DATE: November 12, 2015 From: Andrew Wong, Transportation Engineer — (650) 558-7230 Subject: Item 6.a — California Drive Roundabout Project Update RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission receive an update on the California Drive Roundabout Project. This is an informational item, and no action is required. BACKGROUND The intersection California Drive/Bellevue Avenue/Lorton Avenue is a three -approach intersection with multiple traffic movements, as well as a wide pedestrian crossing. There are stop controls on the Lorton Avenue/Bellevue Avenue approach, and the pedestrian crossing on California Drive. The multiple movements at this intersection as well as the proximity to the adjacent intersection of Lorton Avenue/Bellevue Avenue creates not only an atypical intersection for right-of-way assignment, but creates gridlock during many times of the day. In 2007, DKS Associates was hired by the City to prepare and complete a Traffic Signal Evaluation for California Drive/Bellevue Avenue/Lorton Avenue. This report reviewed the existing operation of intersection, as well as analyzed alternatives to improve the efficiency and safety at the intersection. Three alternatives were analyzed, they included: Signalization of the existing intersection Installation of a Roundabout Installation of a Half -Roundabout Through an evaluation process which included a review of engineering, safety, and aesthetics, the roundabout was identified as the preferred alternative. The roundabout option incorporated into the City's Downtown Specific Plan (adopted on 10/4/2010). On October 6, 2015, a project kick-off meeting was held in Social Hall at the Burlingame Recreation Center with the public. Approximately 25 members of the public attended, The goals 1 Item 6.a - California Drive Roundabout Project Update November 12, 2015 of this meeting were to introduce the project and obtain public comments and concerns. These comments and concerns would be evaluated by the design team, and then incorporated into the potential design. Benefits of Roundabouts Over 20 people are killed at intersections each day in the United States, most due to right-angle crashes at signalized and stop controlled intersections. Federal Highway Administration has identified roundabouts as one of nine proven life-saving roadway safety strategies. In comparison to signalized and/or and stop -controlled intersections, roundabouts: Eliminate left -turns across opposing traffic Virtually eliminate high-speed right-angle and head-on crashes Operate more efficiently (no waiting at red lights) Have lower life cycle costs Greener than signals (less idling, increased fuel efficiently) Slower vehicle speeds make it safer for pedestrians Public Comments and Concerns A meeting summary report with a table showing public comments and questions can be found as attachment, however some of the repeated items from that table: A. Concerns on if this project is a "done deal"? B. Desires of maintaining or even adding more green space C. Desire for an exclusive northbound lane D. Gateway feature is a good idea E. Single lane to provide traffic calming effects F. Complete streets treatment for bicyclists and pedestrian Next Steps After the design team gathers up comments, feedback, and suggestions from October 6, 2015 meeting, they would then by evaluated by the design team, and then incorporated into the design, or addressed at a future meeting. The Design team will proceed with gathering traffic counts and modeling the intersection with SIDRA software. Using the model outputs, the Design team will move forward with a preliminary design of intersection improvements A second public meeting will be held to present design simulation and preliminary design options. The design team will use this opportunity to gather additional public input on landscaping, hardscaping, and other amenities. 2 ATTACHMENT A California Drive Roundabout Project Community Meeting October 6, 2015 Meeting Summary Report The City of Burlingame hosted the first of two community meetings for the public to learn about the new California Drive roundabout project. The meeting was held on October 6, 2015 from 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. in the Social Hall at the Burlingame Recreation Center, 850 Burlingame Avenue in Burlingame. The project seeks to place a roundabout at the intersection of California Drive, Bellevue Avenue, and Lorton Avenue in downtown Burlingame. The meeting started with a brief introduction and review of the agenda by the facilitator. She introduced the Augustine Chou, Project Manager and Engineering Program Manager in the City's Public Works Department who gave a brief history of the project and the purpose of the Study effort. The project team, John Pulliam and Kevin Aguigui from Kimley Horn, introduced detailed information about project elements, the benefits of roundabouts and how to use them safely, the proposed schedule, and potential changes to the area. This information was augmented by several videos, including several taken at the existing intersection, a video of a similar project in Santa Cruz and a safety video from Canada. At the conclusion of the presentation, the audience had approximately an hour's worth of general questions and comments with the city staff and project team. The general questions and the answers provided at the meeting are captured below. The meeting was noticed through the mailing of the notice to the potentially impacted property owners and tenants in the project area around California Drive, Donnelly Avenue, Lorton Avenue, Primrose Road, Douglas Avenue, Burlingame Avenue, Bellevue Avenue, Howard Avenue and Mangini Way; through two e -blasts from the Burlingame staff to the broad city a -blast distribution list, special distribution to project stakeholders including the Business Improvement District, Chamber of Commerce and the area car dealers. The notice was also posted on the city website. The meeting was noticed through the Burlingame Voice web site. Approximately 80% of the attendees indicated they received the mailed notice and 20% said they received the email notice. One person indicated they saw it on the Burlingame Voice website. When the attendees arrived they were asked to sign -in to become part of a database for notification of future meetings. Approximately 25 people attended the meeting. Several business and area property owners identified themselves as such the remainder of the attendees indicated they were project neighbors or community leaders who have been involved with various planning efforts for the area. The facilitator asked the attendees if they had ever driven through a roundabout and about 80% indicated they had with only 15% indicating they did so regularly. An additional question was asked about prior bike and pedestrian use of roundabouts. Approximately 15% indicated they had biked through a roundabout and 10% indicated they had previously walked through a roundabout. The questions received during the general session question period are as follows the answers given are shown: Question Response Is a roundabout always two lanes? No it does not have to be. That is traffic demand dependent. We have not yet done traffic counts. Sometimes roundabouts are two lane with two lane approaches, sometimes one -lane with one lane approaches, sometimes two lane approaches to one lane roundabout. Is this a done deal? Has the decision The grant that is funding this study if been made to do this? Have we specifically for a roundabout. If the City already decided? decides not to do a roundabout then the City would need to reimburse the Transportation Authority. The City has not decided to move forward but is headed in this direction. The City will continue to seek public input and look at design implications to make sure everyone's interest are being considered. If the City moves forward with this concept, the City will need to do a lot of education regarding the use of a roundabout. The City will also reach out to Google and others who supply information to navigation systems to make that accurate. There are better places than this The crosswalk lighting is not currently location for a roundabout. Will there be part of the project scope but we can lighting in the pedestrian crosswalks as look into that. Street lighting will be part part of the project. It should be part of of the project. the project. The biggest impact of this project will The impacts and traffic movement on be on north south traffic on California California Drive will be looked at Drive. closely. There is a desire, as part of this pro'ect, to make it safer and easier cross California Drive. er of commercial building There is no proposed design yet. =concto erned s concerned to hear this These are important concerns to bring one deal." Concerned up. There is no design yet so we can s to downtown make sure to take this all into , specific impacts to his consideration. building and those nearby. Concerns expressed regarding impacts on building property values and access. Specific concerns and questions about existing driveway interface with proposed designs. Nearby residential property owner There are no proposed designs concerned about potential impacts to developed yet. The project team will southbound movement of California take these comments into Drive and the weaving involved. Also consideration when developing the would prefer "straight shot" for design. northbound California Drive. The pedestrian movements might not be safe in "proposed design." Question about specific elements of a Explanation given at the meeting.— graphic. What is green area in graphic? This could be a landscaped area—this was a concept only. There are no designs yet. The northbound California Drive Comment noted. The project team can movement should not have to go look into that as an option. through the roundabout. Why is round so curved in these To slow down the traffic and make it roundabout examples? safer for bikes, pedestrians and the mprging of vehicles. Residential neighbor expressed This project as a proposed roundabout frustration with the "done deal" aspect has been thought about since 2005. of the project. Property owner There have been several studies that explained the history of her property had public input on this design concept. going from residential/commercial to The roundabout design is also commercial only without her say. consistent with the Downtown Specific plan. These City planning efforts also went through City Committees and the City Council A property owner indicated he did not Comment noted. remember being noticed about the 2007 planning effort. California Drive green space is utilized Not necessarily, we can look at adding now. This design would take that green green elements and usable space as space away. nnrf of the lannin rocess. The green space on California Drive on Comment noted. the graphic would be a good location for a bus turn out. Can there also be parking lot The City leases but does not own that improvements along California Drive? land. It is not currently part of the project scope. The project team has been told not to impact that site. Can the roundabout be moved toward Yes, we can look at developing designs California Drive? that are in that direction. Push northbound lanes far over into The City leases but does not own that California Drive. Keep it away form land that is the parking lot. We will downtown. research the exact ownership/lease arrangement for the next meeting. The project team needs to take traffic The City will need to do education for counts during school drop off times. all drivers if a roundabout goes in at The project team needs to understand this location. We will be sure to take that the current route to the high school traffic counts during school times. is through this intersection, as a result there are a lot of new drivers using this intersection. Concern expressed on whether the new drivers and distracted parents would be able to navigate the roundabout appropriately. This project has been vetted in the We can look into the safer connection Specific Plan and it is good that it is to parking lot as a design element. being studied. The parking lot along California Drive is underutilized. There should be a safe connection from downtown to that side of California Drive and Caltrain. The roundabout slowing traffic down would be a good thing. Read a study that proved roundabouts can move more traffic through an intersection. There already has been a lot of public input on this concept. Would like the green elements of the We can look into this. roundabout to be useable. Property owner wanted to know how to There is no proposed design yet. access his parking lot under the Access to driveways and parking lots design. will be provided for in the desi --- The study should also look at a Comment noted. pedestrian bridge over California Drive A pedestrian bridge wouldn't be Comments noted. practical. There would be property takes, ADA issues and few would use it. The northbound California Drive should go straight through. There should not be flowers. It is unlikely that the middle of a circle would be an attractive place for a picnic. Has experienced some very nice and functional roundabout on travels to Canada. Keep in mind bike use in design. The intersection, as it is today, is not safe for bikes. A traffic light won't work in this location. There is too much traffic that will back up. Put in an island for pedestrians along California Drive to help them cross. Need to make sure the designs take Will do analysis as part of design. into account future bike paths and connections. Need to explain future bike path interface. Historic Cannon Park is a gateway Comment noted. opportunity. Explain connection to the road diet of The Project Team will incorporate California Drive between Burlingame these possible concepts into the design Avenue and Broadway Avenue. analysis of the roundabout. Likes the idea of roundabout area as a Comment noted. gateway opportunity. road diet. Comment noted. ill be a parking loss under the Comment noted. e will need to know whereit will be replaced.uld P be a financial The Project Team has been told to nt done as to how much the have no impacts on that property. If for the Caltrain property will cost some reason that would change then the pno'ect. an assessment would be done. Look at the Specific Plan and show Comment noted. how this is consistent. Where are the best bus stop Comment noted. opportunities? Existing conditions are very bad for pedestrians. The roundabout would be an improvement. The roundabout at two lanes will not The Project Team will look at a variety slow traffic. This should be a one lane of designs and at the traffic counts that roundabout. need to be accommodated. Residential property owner is We will look into that as the designs concerned about the driveway and are developed. parking impacts of any design in the area between Comcast and the surf shop, specifically how they will get out of their driveway. Gateway feature would be great. There are two gateways under design now perhaps there could be a theme. The underutilized parking lot is a This project team would like to make a concern how can this project help safer access to that lot to encourage make it more attractive? more usage. If the objective of this effort is to slow Comment noted. traffic that can be done without a roundabout. There could be wiggles or curves added to California Drive and a big island in the median. Bellvue Avenue resident likes the idea Comment noted. of a roundabout and the reduction of the traffic back ups. Gateway idea is a good one. Lorton Comment noted. used to be Main Street in Burlingame. In a strip along the long parking lot Comment noted. perhaps the project can add a cycle way and pedestrian access in a buffer zone all the way to Broadway. Swap the land with the parking lot and We can look into something like that. have the parking on the downtown side and the road over by the tracks. I want to learn about the half round We can post the 2007 DKS study on about. the City website so you can have access to that information. The parking meter technology in use in Comment noted. downtown and the long parking lot is confusing. Need to make it more understandable. There was on set of comments sent to the City staff prior to the meeting and their questions are outlined below: • What pedestrian — auto — bike problems have been identified in the existing street configuration? • What about bicycle paths? • What traffic studies have been done to date? What are the results? • What CA street design standards are in play? • Will there be sidewalks along California Dive at Caltrain Parking lot? • Are the 5 new crosswalks protected and signed with flashing lights? • What is envisioned for the inner circle? Art? • What is the speed limit in (and adjacent) to the roundabout? • Are there any stop lights in the roundabout? Meeting Summary by Apex Strategies a STAFF REPORT To: Traffic Safety and Parking Commission Date: November 12, 2015 AGENDA ITEM NO: 8.a — Engineering Division Reports MEETING DATE: November 12, 2015 From: Andrew Wong, Transportation Engineer — (650) 558-7230 Subject: Item 8.a - Engineering Division Reports/Public Works Update RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission receive a presentation by staff providing an update on various Public Works — Engineering projects and activities. BACKGROUND • 2015 Street Resurfacing Program — Project is about 80% complete. Remaining work includes Sanchez, Carolan, and Bayshore. Parking impacts. • US101/Broadway Interchange Project — Stage 2 of construction continues. The southbound 101 off -ramp and retaining wall construction almost all complete. New overpass concrete decking to be poured mid-November. PG&E replacement tower footing construction all month. • Broadway Grade Separation PSR — Design team and city staff continues detailed analysis of specific preferred design concepts. PSR document production almost complete. Update presentation to Council planned for late January/early February 2016. • California Drive Roundabout — See agenda Item 6.a • TSPC Email Communications — Four new communications. Status: addressed & closed. • Downtown Parking Strategies- Parking survey (-35 returned surveys), and parking lot inventory underway. • Request for Proposals — Staff issued RFPs for City Hall/Floribunda Traffic Calming and California Drive Bicycle Facility. 7 Item 8.a — Engineering Division Reports October 8, 2015 • Hoover School Update — Copies of TSPC report and staff report were distributed to Burlingame School District for their meeting with the City Council subcommittee on 11/9/15. • Peninsula Interchange Project — City of San Mateo has been awarded funding from the San Mateo Transportation Authority (TA) to complete the initial Caltrans documents to determine project feasibility. • TSPC Priority List (May 2015): 4 1) Caltrans' ECR/Floribunda 4 2) Hoover School Update 4 3) Parking Strategies update 4 4) Stop Sign installations 4 5) B/PAC setup 1 6) Floribunda corridor 7) California Drive parking restrictions 8) California Roundabout 9) General Plan — Circulation Element 10) Larkspur/Linden traffic circle 11) Commuter bike route DISCUSSION Some of these items may have been originally presented to City staff and/or the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission as public requests or comments. Items on this list are matters that would typically be addressed by City staff on an administrative level, or are City capital improvement projects. Matters that require broad public input or have a wide -spread impact are addressed as Commission "Study Items" (TSPC Agenda Item 6). 2 m o - 3 as o _ `o 00 2 H u E a v'q 'c oo o r c > > : 5 � 0 % an a° `von 00 u °'0 `cY no_ ° cc 0 y$ rYCY 9&ac5 —na° E d n a o o E o unE E E E E 5 'o v m �y z o « w o ° a° E ° u`pop`aa� t; L c `o Em o s ,� i m o 2 r fL° U5 E .o o E o"', v '; 'w v z c S E ns E n z e x h a e G Y a a w .m t= o` 0tSescWq =ac °° Ed pB @E c" ME a 0 - a� 4 4 4 4 N N N N N e e e O O OO% e N N N O O O O O O O O O m b N O O O O O O O N N O O O O O O O O O v\I\ N Sr\ N O n \ j m N m 01 O '1 N 1/1 'i N 4 N 4 N b h q O ncqm N 4 N N N