Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - TSP - 2010.04.08April 8, 2090 7:00 p.m. — Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES —March 11, 2010 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS Persons in the audience may speak on any item on the agenda or any other matter within the jurisdiction of the Commission. 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 Commission Chairperson may limit speakers to three minutes each. 7. CURRENT BUSINESS 7.1 Mercy High School: Alvarado/Adeline Traffic —Discussion 7.2 Ray Drive/EI Camino Real Intersection Evaluation —Discussion 7.3 Adeline/Cortez Intersection &Pedestrian Access —Discussion 8.1 Traffic Engineer's Report 8.1.1 101 Auxiliary Lane Project —Staff Update 8.2 Traffic Sergeant's Report 8.2.1 General/Selective Traffic Enforcement Report —Staff Update 8.3 Commissioners' Comments and Concerns 8.3.1 Miscellaneous Comments and Concerns Traffic, Safety & Parking Commission - Agenda Apri18, 2010 Page 2 9. COMMUNICATIONS Report by Staff or Commissioners of citizen concerns or complaints regarding traffic, safety and parking issues that are within the Commission's jurisdiction. 10. COMMISSION &COMMITTEE REPORTS 10.1 Burlingame Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Will Committee meets 5:30PM in Conference Room B before each TSPC meeting. 10.2 Neighborhood Parking Working Group 10.3 Website/Communications Subcommittee 11. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Dates for discussion to be determined later by Staff or Commissioners. 11.1 Burlingame Avenue 2 -Hour Parking Evaluation (October) 11.2 Radar Speed Trailer —Future Procurement (Discussion Date Pending) 12. ADJOURNMENT 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 at the Engineering Counter at City Hall located at 501 Primrose Road during normal business hours. -2- LLLAWA SUN•. CALIFORNIA 94010-3997 www.burlingame.org . 1 1 . ■ ; Thursday,Meeting Minutes w Unapproved / 1 Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent Mark Noworolski, Chair Jeff Londer, Vice Chair Nicklas Akers Caroline Serrato Laurie Simonson Staff Present: Augustine Chou, Traffic Engineer, Public Works Sgt. Don Shepley, Police Department Joanne Louie, Administrative Secretary, Public Works Visitors: 1. CALL TO ORDER Jok Legallet, 1474 Alvarado Avenue Laura Held, 2750 Adeline Drive Jean Hastie, 2300 Adeline Drive Bill Leet, 1547 Columbus Avenue Janice Vandenbrink, 1412 Alvarado Avenue Barbara Arena, 1540 Hoover Avenue Randy Vandenbrink, 1412 Alvarado Avenue Pat Giorni, 1445 Balboa Avenue Dale Ferrel, 1442 Burlingame Avenue Jeff Silverman, 1410 Burlingame Avenue Daniel Whelan, 1528 Hoover Avenue Helen Whelan, 1541 Columbus Avenue Linda Abbey, 2415 Adeline Drive 7:00 p.m. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. 3. ROLL CALL. 4 of 5 Commissioners present (Commissioner Simonson absent) 4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Chair Noworolski acknowledged the presence of Councilmember Keighran in the audience. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Motion: To accept the minutes of February 11, 2010 with the following corrections: 10.1 Commissioner Simonson will serve along with Vice Chair Londer. 8.3.1 Commissioner Simonson suggested that we use electronic signage that alerts drivers that "Burlingame enforces the no cell phone while driving law". M/S/C: Akers, U" all 4/0/1 (Simonson absent) 6. PUBLIC COMMENTS Ms. Giorni stated that since the busy Rollins Road area is part of the bike plan that perhaps a bike lane would slow down traffic in that area. Ms. Giorni stated she hoped to get a report about the Red Flex camera, which has been down. 7. CURRENT BUSINESS 7.1 Mercy high School : Alvarado/Adeline Traffic — Discussion Mr. Chou presented background information regarding the traffic conditions and concerns on Alvarado Avenue by the residents near Mercy High School. He explained that the.main objective of the meeting was to receive neighborhood concerns of traffic problems, to determine if the current traffic control measures taken by Mercy High School were effective, and if other measures not yet implemented could be considered. Finally, Mr. Chou explained that the Planning Commission was requesting that the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission return a recommendation and/or finding as a result of this meeting on whether to proceed with their review process of the Conditional Use Permit for Mercy. Mr. Chou received written comments from residents and copies were presented to the Commission. Letters were received from Cindy B., Patrick Kinsella, Alexandra Kromelow, Stanley Kubiak & Patricia Sanford, and one with no name nor address. Chair Noworolski opened the floor for comments from 11% administration and for public comment. Mercy Principal Laura Held stated that the increased enrollment of 40 students and 3 facultY staff members would result in less than 8% increase for morning trips and less than 9% increase for evening trips. Ms. Held also described measures taken to address traffic congestion. She said that Mercy met with neighbors to discuss possible solutions and the key points were: Having the neighborhood approach the City for speed bumps. Use of an alternative street for student drop off. Implementing a One-way In and One-way Out loop within the Mercy property for traffic loop. (Ms. Held added that this was not possible.) Residents Janice Vanderbrink, James Gibney, Randy Vanderbrink, Jok Legallet, Pat Giorni, Linda Abbey, Katie O'Brien and Peter Comaroto expressed their concerns for the traffic congestion in this area due to the narrow roads and accessibility to the property. It was also mentioned that traffic congestion was evident at all school sites within the city during morning drop-off and afternoon pickup. The residents reported -2- that several of them have suffered vehicle damage as a result of the traffic. The residents asked for clarification of parking availability on the Mercy property and the number of carpoolers and shuttle riders. Some speakers felt the problem emanated from the narrowness of the surrounding streets and that residents needed to cope and plan accordingly. Sisters of Mercy Administrator Jean Hastie stated that there are two separate Mercy properties (convent and school) under one integrated permit. Ms. Hastie also stated that opening the roads would not appear to be the answer as doing so would change the culture and nature of the Sisters of Mercy property. Chair Noworolski sought Commission comments. Several Commissioners sought further clarification from Mercy's Administration on various concerns. Motion: Move to continue this to next month and ask staff to develop alternatives concerning traffic flows in the neighborhood and ensure noticing goes out appropriately including affected streets Adeline, Alvarado and Hoover. M/S/C: Akers/Conder; 3/0/2 (Noworolski abstained, Simonson absent) 7.2 Burlingame Avenue 2 -Hour Parking Evaluation —Discussion Mr. Chou presented a staff report recommending that this Commission hold several TSPC meeting to receive public/business comments and review staff analysis regarding the meter parking time limits along Burlingame Avenue and provide City Council with a recommendation with its findings resulting from these public meetings with the business community. Mr. Chou provided background information regarding the parking situation within the Burlingame Avenue Business District. Chair Noworolski opened the floor for public comments. Dale Ferrel, Frankie Mayer, and Pat Giorni supported a 90 -minute time limit for Burlingame Avenue. Jeff Silverman felt a 90 -minute time limit would work; however, he would rather like to see a 2 -hour limit. Other suggesti wons were to allow free parking during the holiday season and change the metered parking hours to start and end later. Several business owners present also stated that a collective att empt was being made to revitalize the Burlingame Avenue Business Improvement District; and, that if successful, they would be willing to meet with the Commission or some of its members in June or July. Chair Noworolski suggested that the Parking Subcommitt ee schedule time to meet with business owners and return with their feedback. Motion: Burlingame Avenue parking situation be referred to the Parking Subcommittee who will hold various meetings and conversations with all the concerned parties and report back to this Commission at a later date. M/S/C: Conder/Serrato; 4/0/1 (Simonson absent) -3- 7.3 City Parking Lot K: Possible Meter & Rate Change — Discussion Mr. Chou presented a staff report seeking concurrence with staff to recommend to City Council that no immediate changes be implemented to the current time limit and method of payment at City Lot K. He stated that the best time to consider a time limit modification to Lot K would be during the construction period in late summer or early fall A 2010 of the Safeway project. Mr. Chou also reported that the City was working with Caltrans on obtaining permission to construct a new driveway onto EI Camino Real from Lot K. Chair Noworolski opened the floor for public comment. Dale Ferrel, Jeff Silverman and Pat Giorni commented on the utilization of this lot and other 10 -hour lots. Discussion occurred amongst Commissioners about the utilization and time limits of various lots and the availability of parking brochures. Mr. Chou stated that since Lot H (across EI Camino Real) went from a free lot to $1 per day, the utilization and occupancy decreased. Motion: Accept staff recommendation and revisit the status of this issue sometime in October. M/S/C: Noworolski, Serrato; 4/0/1 (Simonson absent) 8. Staff Reports 8.1 Traffic Engineer's Report 8.1.1 101 Auxiliary Lane Project —Staff Update Mr. Chou reported that the Broadway Pedestrian Overcrossing work should be completed next Thursday. He added that the signals should be fully functional shortly thereafter. Commissioner Akers thanked the staff and police depart ment for getting the traffic through there. 8.2 Traffic Sergeant's Report 8.2.1 General/Selective Traffic Enforcement Report —Staff Update Sergeant Shepley reported that the Police Depart ment collected $2M in parking fines and $2M from meter revenue. Sergeant Shepley also report ed that the Red Flex program was running negatively approximately $3K per month. He said the Police Department was considering ending the program and would need to file a letter by April 22, 2010 and pay an associated fee to shut the program down. 8.3 Commissioners' Comments and Concerns 8.3.1 Miscellaneous Comments and Concerns None. 9. COMMUNICATIONS None. � • ►1 u"�C�7�E:��i7�l►�il�����:»:Zil��y 10.1 Burlingame Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory committee (B/PAC) Mr. Chou reported that Commissioner Simonson was unable to attend tonight's meeting due to her attendance at a Bicycle Seminar in Washington DC. Commissioner Londer mentioned the Drive Less Challenge, which was occurring April 22nd to May 5th. Interested parties could sign up at www.drivelesschallen.ge.com 10.2 WebsiteJCommunications Subcommittee None. 10.3 Neighborhood Parking Working Group Commissioner Akers volunteered to serve on this subcommittee. 11. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS 11.1 Ray Drive/EI Camino Real Intersection Evaluation (April) 11.2 Adeline/Cortez Intersection —Pedestrian Access (April) 11.3 City Parking Lot Q —Possible Re -configuration (Discussion Date Pending) 11.4 Radar Speed Trailer —Future Procurement (Discussion Date Pending) 12.ADJOURNMENT 10:30 pm -5- TO: Tr(affic, Safety and Parking Commission DATE: April 57 2010 FROM: Augustine Chou, Traffic Engineer k6� SUBJECT: Item 7.1 —Mercy High School/Alvarado Traffic Meeting Date: April 8, 2010 RECOMMENDATION: That the Traffic Safety and Parking Commission recommend to the Planning Commission approval of Conditional Use Permit with amendment to increase student enrollment by 40 students and 3 faculty; and, for Mercy to implement certain conditions. BACKGROUND: The Commission first met on March 11 regarding this matter, and then again on March 31 for a study session. At the study session, the Commission examined in greater detail the current traffic conditions, the conditions and requirements of the existing Conditional Use Permit, the relationship and differences between Mercy High School and Sisters of Mercy, and the varying interests and concerns of the neighborhood residents, Mercy High School, Sisters of Mercy, and the City. Finally, the Commission examined and discussed various options to possible solutions to the traffic situation in the neighborhood. DISCUSSION: Many options were explored and discussed at the March 31 study session. (See exhibit 7.1A.) The options with the greatest consensus for agreement were ideas that involved some form of cooperation from the City, the residents, and the Mercy administration in addressing the traffic situation along Alvarado Avenue. The most promising potential solutions are the following: • Develop and implement a carpool program using high -carpool occupancy as incentive for drop-off convenience. • Collectively identify and agree to several on-site and/or on -street locations for student pick- up and drop-off. • Consider the reconfiguration of the Alvarado/Hillside intersection as a Traffic Calming measure to control school traffic speeding entering Alvarado. The proposed actions to be considered should be done as conditions of approval by the City to amend the current Conditional Use Permit (regarding the issue of enrollment increase form 500 to 540 students). While the most current request for enrollment increase is only for a maximum of 40 additional students, it must be realized that the school was already granted a similar increase in 2007 for 60 students (440 to 500, or 14% increase). Therefore, if added together, the 2007 increase of 14% and the currently requested increase of 8% (500 to 540) would result in a total increase of enrollment from 2007 until 2010 of 23%, or nearly one-quarter more students. Beyond this request, the City and the Mercy administration must work together to have in place plans to address any future ideas regarding enrollment increases. Specific plans should be prepared on how potential parking and traffic circulation problems would be dealt with before they arise. Moreover, it would be in the best interest of Mercy High School to keep the City informed of future enrollment goals. Page 1 of 2 S:W Public Works Directory\TSP Commission\Staff Reports\2010\4-08-10 SR -7.1 Mercy Trafric.doc An example would be to work with the City on providing projected or planned school growth in a year, in two years, etc. for several years. The City would then be able to work with the Mercy administration on implementing those plans before any potential parking and traffic circulation problems arise. As a beginning step, staff will be conducting basic traffic volume counts to calculate "saturation" and volume capacity of Alvarado Avenue and Adeline Drive during peak traffic hours for the school. The results will be useful in determining the extent of the potential solutions presented above. Page 2 of 2 S:W Public Works Directory\TSP Commission\Staff Reports\2010\4-08-10 SR -7.1 Mercy Traffic.doc a I IF I IF IF IF � \\� IF \It. 04 Fa \ dd FFj 77 t 110 IF t To I Ft \ IF O u �7= D D 0 4 a n FEHR & PES pecembat 200g SFo&U4 S7lgrapbin1g477.1 campeamop FIGURE 1 TO: Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission DATE: April 5, 2010 FROM: Augustine Chou, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Item 7.2 — Ray Drive/EI Camino Real Intersection Evaluation Meeting Date: April 8, 2010 RECOMMENDATION: Staff to work with a TSPC subcommittee to develop citywide collision "pin map". Police and Engineering staff will provide data. DISCUSSION: This item was brought before the Commission over the previous two months of February and March of this year. The City received concerns over collisions at the intersection of EI Camino Real and Ray Drive/Rosedale Avenue. At the March 11 TSPC meeting, Police staff provided collision data for this intersection; however, there was insufficient collision data available regarding similar intersections at other locations. As a result, there was no way to accurately compare the information provided in the report with the collision rate of other intersections citywide. Staff briefly considered the restriction of left -turns along EI Camino Real (ECR) at Ray/Rosedale; however, it was determined that the prohibition of lett-turns for northbound ECR would unduly penalize drivers living in the Ray Park area. Residents needing to access this neighborhood would have to use the Adeline/ECR or Hillside/ECR intersections instead. The traffic diversion would most likely negatively impact surrounding streets such as Adeline, Hillside, Balboa, Devereaux, Ray and Bernal. Similarly, restrictions for southbound ECR would force drivers to use Dufferin Avenue as the only way to access streets in the Burlingame Village neighborhood. This in turn, would also negatively impact Westmoor Road. Staff also examined turn restrictions with specific times. This option also would not be any more effective, as the demand to turn coincides with the peak traffic commute hours. While the limited -time turn restrictions would improve the traffic flow along northbound and southbound ECR, it would also eliminate driver access to the Ray Park and Burlingame Village neighborhoods during a time when it is most necessary. Additionally, Police resources are limited, such that it is less likely that officers will be available to regularly enforce these restrictions. Staff feels that the appropriate course of action is to create a collision "pin map" for the city. This map would provide staff with quantitative information on the number of collisions occurring annually at intersections throughout the City. This map could then be used by the City to examine and develop measures to reduce collisions at higher incident locations. Finally, staff recommends that a commission subcommittee or single member of the commission work in conjunction with staff to develop the "pin map" and provide updates to the full commission on the project's progress. Page 1 of 1 S:\A Public Works Directory\TSP Commission\Staff Reports\2010\4-08-10 SR -7.2 Ray -ECR Turns.doc TO: Traffic, Safety and Parking Commission DATE: April 5, 2010 FROM: Augustine Chou, Traffic Engineer SUBJECT: Item 7.3 —Adeline/Cortez Intersection &Pedestrian Access RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends no further action. Meeting Date: April 8, 2010 DISCUSSION: Staff received a request to examine the intersection of Adeline Drive and Cortez Avenue. Specifically, staff was to look into pedestrian safety at the intersection. The concern is that this intersection is used by students of Lincoln Elementary School and does not have any marked pedestrian crosswalks. The intersection of Adeline and Cortez is a 4 -way intersection with Adeline situated roughly in the east/west orientation and Cortez roughly in the north/south orientation. Both approaches along Cortez are controlled by stop signs, while the Adeline approaches have no control and have the right -of --way. An examination of the adjacent intersections along Adeline show that they are fully controlled by 4 -way stops and have four fully marked crosswalks installed. These intersections are Adeline/Cabrillo and Adeline/Balboa. Staff had conducted pedestrian crossing counts at the subject intersection. The results showed that no more than four students from Lincoln Elementary School used this intersection to cross. Field observations further revealed that a significant number of pedestrians (students and parents) currently use the two adjacent stop -controlled intersections of Adeline/Cabrillo and Adeline/Balboa. Staff believes that this is due to the fact that these two intersections provide better and safer access points to the school than does the intersection at Cortez and Adeline. Page 1 of 1 S:W Public Works Directory\TSP Commission\Staff Reports\2010\4-08-10 SR -7.3 Adeline -Cortez Xwalk.doc i 1 ♦ � 1 1� 1, •� ��� � � � :� » � \ «� � 2 ��� »� \\� � w: / 2 � y� � � § <<\� ��� � / \\� /b� � < .° .� y:� � 22� ©� } � � �tm� � t� 2�