Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - TSP - 2017.05.11Traffic Safety and Parking Commission City of Burlingame Meeting Agenda - Final BURLINGAME CITY HALL 501 PRIMROSE ROAD BURLINGAME, CA 94010 Council Chambers7:00 PMThursday, May 11, 2017 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. 1. Call To Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call 4. Approval of Minutes April 13, 2017 Regular Meeting Minutesa. April 13, 2017 Regular Meeting MinutesAttachments: 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. 5. Public Comments: Non-Agenda 6. Discussion/Action Items Vancouver Avenue Traffic Restrictionsa. Parking Restrictions on 2800 Block of Easton Driveb. 7. Information Items Engineering Division Reportsa. Staff ReportAttachments: Page 1 City of Burlingame Printed on 8/14/2019 May 11, 2017Traffic Safety and Parking Commission Meeting Agenda - Final Police Department Reportsb. Farmer's Marketc. TSPC Chair/Commissioner's Communicationsd. 8. Committee & Sub-Committee Reports Downtown Parking (Martos & Wettan)a. Broadway Parking (Bush & Wettan)b. School Traffic (Akers & Londer)c. Envision Burlingame (Londer & Martos)d. ECR Task Force (Londer & Wettan)e. Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee (Bush & Londer)f. 9. Future Agenda Items 10. 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 5:00 p.m. before the meeting and at the meeting. Visit the City's website at www.burlingame.org. Agendas and minutes are available on the site. NEXT TRAFFIC, SAFETY & PARKING COMMISSION MEETING: June 8, 2017 Page 2 City of Burlingame Printed on 8/14/2019 1 TRAFFIC, SAFETY AND PARKING COMMISSION Unapproved Minutes Regular Meeting of Thursday, April 13, 2017 1. CALL TO ORDER 7:05 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG 3. ROLL CALL MEMBER PRESENT: Akers, Bush, Londer, Martos, Wettan MEMBERS ABSENT: 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: To accept the minutes of March 9, 2017 with the following two edits: • Page 4, item 6a, paragraph 4 – correct reference from Commissioner Bush to Vice- Chair Bush; and • Page 9, item 7d, paragraph 2 – correct reference to San Mateo Citizens Advisory Committee to San Mateo County Transportation Authority Advisory Committee. M/S/C: Londer/Bush; 5/0/0 5. PUBLIC COMMENTS – NON-AGENDA Matthew Pavao, principal of Roosevelt School formally requested signage on Carmelita Avenue to restrict the right-turn movement onto Vancouver Avenue during peak drop-off and pick-up times to increase pedestrian safety. Sue Bottarini., a parent of students at Roosevelt and two other schools located in Burlingame shared similar sentiments with Principal Pavao. She formally requested the City to add/update 2 school zone signage on Easton Drive between El Camino and Vancouver Avenue. In addition, Ms. Bottoarini requested “brightening” of the crosswalks for better visibility in the general area. 6. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS a) California Drive Complete Streets Mr. Wong provided a thorough update to the Commission and residents in attendance regarding the California Drive Complete Streets Project efforts and current design concepts. Mr. Wong indicated the project will improve existing infrastructure to be more efficient for various modes of transportation. The first public meeting was held in July where “toolbox” items were generated. Speed reduction, maintaining on-street parking, improving facilities for cyclists and pedestrians, and maintaining tree screen and access for pedestrians and cyclists were among the top priorities gathered from the initial project discussion. The next public meeting occurred in January of this year and three design concepts were generated. Mr. Wong reviewed the design concepts to date, and then introduced a new concept—design concept 2B and requested feedback from residents and the Commission to determine the level of support for the revised 2B design concept. • Concept 1: Separated bike path/cycle track, maintains current roadway configuration and on-street parking, and improves safety. Option one however will remove the existing trees, requires utility relocation, right-of-way acquisitions and is the most expensive option ($10M). • Concept 2: Provides continuous bicycle lanes, maintains trees, and adds traffic calming measures. This concept is also less expensive than option one. However, option two requires removal of left-turn lanes, widening of the roadway, and removal of five on-street parking spaces. • Concept 3: Provides shared lane sharrows, continuous bike lanes, traffic calming measures, a shorter construction timeline, and is also less expensive than option one. However, option three would also remove five on-street parking spaces and left turn lanes. Mr. Wong then introduced design concept 2B which is a variation of concept 2. Design concept 2B provides a Class II bike lane on most of California Drive and south of Mills, a Class III facility would be provided between Mills and Lincoln Avenues. There would still be a loss of five on-street parking spaces but there would be no road widening required. Chair Wettan opened public comment. Erika James stated safety should be the first consideration and indicated she will not currently bike on California Drive. In her opinion, only experienced cyclists attempt to ride along the California Drive thoroughfare. She preferred some separation between vehicles and cyclists. Irvin Dawid indicated the option to turn off California onto Mills for those not comfortable riding on California Drive. In his opinion, the most dangerous place to be as cyclist is at an 3 intersection. He said driveways are always a concern too. Mr. Dawid also expressed his support of alternative option 2B as it pleases various types of cyclists with the option to use Laguna if they are not comfortable on California Drive. Maggie, a resident of Burlingame inquired if bike training and safety information would be provided by the City to which she was informed of the City’s bike rodeos and other resources for bicycle education. She also expressed concern of the manhole covers as she felt they are a death trap for cyclists. Glen Simon of 1451 California Drive indicated he liked the aesthetics and safety concept in design one. He said he has been in three accidents on California Drive and the amount of cars and speed seems to continually increase. Mr. Simon suggested the City communicate design concept 2B directly to the residents living on Laguna as he felt it would increase traffic on that roadway. He felt staff should seek City Council support for design concept one if that is the ultimate goal. He closed by requesting the speed and volume of cars be addressed before any decisions are made. Manito Velasco stated when walking or driving on California it is scary because of the path of travel. He said cyclists are most vulnerable due to the shifting of the path of travel—it is safest for cyclists to travel straight. In addition, Mr. Velasco does not support removing parking in front of residences on California Drive or the removal of trees and shrubs because he feels it will reduce property values. He indicated he supports an incremental approach by beginning with the easiest improvements. He also said he would be in favor of concept 2B but with certain modifications. Debra of 1420 California Drive said speed has been a constant issue and she has not seen any police presence in that corridor. She suggested lowering the speed limit. Debra said she favors option 2B so far but has concerns about the drainage and recent flooding on California Drive. Robin Hoggie, a resident on California Drive said his main concern is the elimination of parking. He also said it is difficult to pull out of driveways on California Drive too. Phil James, also a resident on California Drive also expressed concerns about speeding and shared his car was hit while parked on California Drive. He felt there has been a lack of police presence too. Chair Wettan closed public comment. Commissioner Londer thanked Mr. Wong for clarification of concepts 2 and 2B being short- term solutions, with concept one being the long-term goal. He noted concept one looked much safer for all methods of travel but concept 2B seems to have the most support from residents excluding those along Laguna. Commissioner Londer noted the concerns of speed by those during public comment and is hopeful the traffic calming measures included in concept 2B will reduce the speed and therefore possibly afford the City the opportunity to reduce the speed 4 limit on California Drive. He closed his comments by indicating he was In favor of option 2B because it satisfies the safety concerns. Commissioner Akers indicated he would love to see option one come to fruition eventually. He suggested staff engage with the HSRA for bicycle and pedestrian improvements when inquiring about the right-of-way. He thought concept 2B was interesting and suggested staff put thought into the opportunity of a pathway on Laguna to downtown an alternative route for those not comfortable staying on California Drive. Commissioner Akers felt the bike lanes will get utilized but said staff should also be mindful of pedestrian corridors. One issue he indicated regarding concept 2 is people use that access to Highway 101 and thought it would be worth providing estimates on possible queuing and cut-throughs to determine if and how it will it impact Broadway and El Camino traffic. Commissioner Martos asked a handful of clarifying questions regarding drainage, visibility and speed limits on California Drive. He then indicated the design concepts should not make it any more difficult to back out of driveways along California Drive; if anything it should provide for additional visibility. Commissioner Martos felt temporary measures are a reasonable compromise with conceptual plan 2B. He would also like to see a reduction in speed, liked the bike lanes better than sharrows as a straight path is more predictable. He closed his comments by indicating that lighting should be a consideration as part of the safety improvements. Commissioner Martos said he was in favor of concept 2B with other considerations. Vice-Chair Bush appreciated the amount of effort from Mr. Wong has dedicated to this project and all the community outreach that has been done. He also thanked members of the audience for their comments. Vice-Chair Bush also asked a handful of clarifying questions regarding traffic volumes, speed limits, and rules for roadway widening. Vice-Chair Bush said he is very excited about option one as it opens up the possibility of kids to bike to school from opposite ends of town. Option one also provides pedestrians to safely walk to the park. He felt one important consideration is the Broadway overpass, and ensuring there is a bicycle facility to make it across the highway. He said option 2B is a great move in the right direction. His personal preference would be to keep lanes narrow at 10 feet and add additional buffers. He acknowledged this is a tremendous amount of work and very appreciative of everyone’s efforts. Based on questions regarding the speed on California Drive, Sergeant Shepley shared the standards for speed surveys. He said they have changed and it has become more difficult due to approach of data collection. He indicated the speed was reduced to 30 MPH on California Drive in the past but due to public outcry, speed was increased back to 35 MPH. Chair Wettan stated option one is extremely appealing but poses extreme challenges as well due to the uncertainty of the Caltrain Electricfication Project and funding. He felt options one and two are completely independent of each other and people are going to bike on California Drive no matter what and as the City becomes denser it will increase. 5 Chair Wettan said he is in favor of option 2B and the alternative route may alleviate some bike traffic but suggested some thought and possible investment go into bike routes that are not on California Drive as a supplement. He also felt lighting is very important as some corners are very poorly lit and suggested staff look at lighting on and off the route. Chari Wettan closed by indicated concept 2B is a solid first step. Additional Q&A with the Commissioners and Mr. Wong occurred regarding buffers, trimming of foliage and additional outreach plans which resulted in the following motion: Recommend to City Council to pursue design option 2B as presented by staff with additional considerations for supplemental bike routes on side streets which may include necessary or useful improvements to lighting and other conditions and City Council also consider long-term planning for option one as presented. Wettan/ Akers 5/0/0 7. INFORMATION ITEMS a) Engineering Division Reports • US101/Broadway Interchange Project – Stage 4 work is approaching its completion in April. Contractor working on maintaining access to the bicycle/pedestrian overcrossing during eastern landing work. New southbound US 101 on-ramps tentatively scheduled to be opened next Thursday. Twitter, Facebook and our E-news blast have been utilized to communicate this to residents. Re-opening access to Airport Boulevard also anticipated for late-April. Crowne Plaza will be slightly impacted. Mr. Wong indicated Caltrans is still on schedule for completion this summer. • Larkspur/Linden Traffic Circle – Construction was scheduled to have started this past week but was delayed due to weather. The neighborhood has been updated regarding the status and also informed the construction of the traffic circle is roughly a three week process. • School Traffic concerns at Roosevelt School – City staff will be meeting with the school, Police Department, and the neighborhood on the morning of Monday, April 24 to discuss ways to improve circulation along Vancouver Avenue during drop-off and pick-up periods. • School Speed Limit – Work order is in to install 15 mph school speed limit signage along Quesada. Additionally notices have been placed on Bayswater/Anita for an all- way stop pilot program adjacent to Washington Elementary. • Peninsula Avenue Overcrossing – Two meetings have been scheduled for May. The f irst meeting will be held on May 3 at the City of San Mateo, and the second 6 meeting will be on May 16 in the Social Room at the City’s Recreation Center. Meetings to begin at 6:30 pm. The specific purpose of this meeting will be to obtain input from Burlingame residents. • OLA School Safety Update – Staff recently installed a driver feedback sign for eastbound Hillside, 15 MPH school speed limit signs on both Cabrillo and Cortez, and a high visibility crosswalk on Hillside at Cortez. Upcoming improvements include all- way stop controls at Hillside/Cortez, as well as implementing all-way way red-flash of the signal at Hillside/Cabrillo. • Stop Sign Warrant Revision – Staff will be using a revised stop sign warrant. The additional criteria will provide greater flexibility in determining stop sign installations. The revised warrants will be more consistent with other local agency processes. As a working document, it does not need to be ratified—it’s an internal process. Chair Wettan and Commissioner Akers requested the working document regarding stop sign warrants be included in an upcoming agenda packet. Mr. Wong indicated he will add the document as an attachment to the Engineer’s Report. • City Hall Area Traffic Calming – Staff has noticed the on-street space and the surrounding area regarding removal of one on-street space and the relocation of the 24-minute space. Staff has also provided the petition and supplemental material to the RPPP proponents. Notices were also mailed out to residents in the area informing them of the basics of the program and that a petition would be circulating. Vice-Chair Bush commented the lack of visibility coming from Chapin to Primrose. • TSPC Email Communications – No new communications. • TSPC Priority List (Updated April 2017): TSPC Led Effort 1 Downtown Modal Access 2 School Traffic Issues 3/9/17: Item 7a 3 California Complete Streets 4/13/17: Item 6a 4 B/PAC setup 5 Neighborhood Traffic Calming 6 SR2S Review 7 Broadway Parking 8 Public Shuttles/Transit 9 Grant Strategies 10 ECR Corridor (ECR Task Force) 11 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC 4/13/17: Item 7a 12 Parking and traffic considerations w/Planning 13 Bay Trail 7 14 Intro to Paving Staff Update via Report 1 Caltrans’ ECR/Floribunda 2 Hoover School Update 3 Downtown Parking Strategies 4 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda 4/13/17: Item 7a 5 California Roundabout 6 General Plan – Circulation Element 7 Bike\Ped Plan Update: fwd to BPAC 8 Rec Center Parking 9 Carolan Complete Streets Update 10 Grant Opportunities 3/9/17: Item 7a 11 Grade Separation 12 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC 4/13/17: Item 7a 13 School Speed Limit Updates 3/9/17: Item 7a 14 Burlingame Point - Bay Trail 15 School Safety Improvements 3/9/17: Item 7a 16 California Complete Streets 4/13/17: Item 6a 17 California Drive parking restrictions 18 Traffic Brochure b) Police Department Reports Sergeant Shepley indicated injury accidents have crept up this past month with two major injury accidents at El Camino and Ray Drive and El Camino and Rosedale. The number of hit and run accidents appear to be holding steady. There was one accident and El Camino and Floribunda but Sergeant Shepley said it was a minor rear-end collision. Commissioner Akers noted the concern of the intersection of Ray Drive and El Camino. Sergeant Shepley indicated he felt there have been severe accidents at that particular intersection. At this time in the meeting Chair Wettan had to depart due to a family emergency and Vice-Chair Bush took over. c) Farmer’s Market There will be no Farmer’s Market as it falls on Easter Sunday. The Commission will discuss participation at the May’s Farmer’s Market at the next Commission meeting. d) TSPC Chair/Commissioner’s Communications Vice-Chair Bush noted an interesting article on parking impacts and thought processes on 8 how to deal with parking challenges. Vice-Chair Bush will send a link to the Commission and Mr. Wong via email. 8. COMMISSION & COMMITTEE REPORTS a) Downtown Parking (Martos & Wettan) Commissioner Martos met with Mr. Wong a week prior after surveying lots. He noted a slight increase in vacancies but attributed that to spring break and vacations. Discussed idea to leverage empty space from private business; consider the possibility of a Council representative or City Manager to offer stipends to open up spaces in their lots to increase parking options. Commissioner Martos said he is creating a visual handout as opposed to the spreadsheet of vacancies. Commissioner Martos and Chair Wettan are also brainstorming wayfinding signage to direct people to the appropriate lots. Mr. Wong indicated that staff is looking into parking lot technology to assist with parking. Commissioner Akers suggested looking into free parking on weekends for banks closed on Sunday. b) Broadway Parking (Wettan & Bush) No update but Mr. Wong indicated a group has proposed EV parking spots in the Broadway area through a grant. The company is looking to provide three charging stations for multi-family residences, with the capacity for three more. There would be a parking loss—but it’s just a proposal currently. The project is being coordinated through the Sustainability Coordinator and the Commissioners were in favor of receiving an update or presentation regarding the possible project. c) School Speed Limits (Londer & Akers) Commissioner Londer indicated they will be meeting on April 24 with the appropriate parties. d) Envision Burlingame (Martos & Londer) Commissioner Martos indicated they have been meeting regularly and referenced a chapter of the draft General Plan that talks about mobility with 17 goals, one of which talks about California Drive. There is one more meeting left with the Committee and much of the information is available online. The next phase will be obtaining community input. e) El Camino Real Task Force (Wettan & Londer) One meeting occurred but Commissioner Londer did not attend and Chair Wettan was not 9 present to provide any information. 9. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Roosevelt School Electric Vehicle Parking Downtown Parking 10. ADJOURNMENT 9:18 pm 1 STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM NO: 7.a – Engineering Division Reports MEETING DATE: May 11, 2017 To: Traffic Safety and Parking Commission Date: May 11, 2017 From: Andrew Wong, Senior Engineer – (650) 558-7230 Subject: Item 7.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 • US101/Broadway Interchange Project – Stage 5 work is currently underway. Remaining Stage 4 work involves building Crowne Plaza approach to grade with Airport/Bayshore/Broadway intersection. Contractor working on maintaining some access to the bicycle/pedestrian OC, expect return to full access in June. Airport, Bayshore, and the US 101 SB on-ramps are currently open. Staff working with Caltrans and their contractor to improve signage within the project. • 2017 Street Resurfacing Program – At the April 17 City Council Meeting, the contract was awarded contract to O’Grady Paving. Work to commence after preconstruction meeting. • Larkspur/Linden Traffic Circle – Construction scheduled to first week of May, with the neighborhood noticed about the construction and potentials delays associated with the construction impacts. • Peninsula Avenue Overcrossing – Two meetings have been scheduled for May. First meeting will be on May 16 in Lounges 1 & 2 at the City’s Rec Center, and the second meeting will be held the following night (May 17) at the City of San Mateo. The specific purpose of the Burlingame meeting will be to obtain input from Burlingame residents. • City Hall Area Traffic Calming – Staff to still test traffic circle layout with CCFD. No update from residents circulating RPPP petition. Communications back to staff from neighborhood have not supported the program. • TSPC Email Communications – Request for additional red-curbing on Willborough (Desedare). Item 7.a – Engineering Division Reports April 13, 2017 2 • TSPC Priority List (Updated May 2017): TSPC Led Effort 1 Downtown Modal Access 2 School Traffic Issues 5/11/17: Item 6a 3 California Complete Streets 4/13/17: Item 6a 4 B/PAC setup 5 Neighborhood Traffic Calming 6 SR2S Review 7 Broadway Parking 8 Public Shuttles/Transit 9 Grant Strategies 10 ECR Corridor (ECR Task Force) 11 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC 4/13/17: Item 7a 12 Parking and traffic considerations w/Planning 13 Bay Trail 14 Intro to Paving Staff Update via Report 1 Caltrans’ ECR/Floribunda 2 Hoover School Update 5/11/17: Item 6b 3 Downtown Parking Strategies 4 City Hall Traffic Calming/Floribunda 4/13/17: Item 7a 5 California Roundabout 6 General Plan – Circulation Element 7 Bike\Ped Plan Update: fwd to BPAC 8 Rec Center Parking 9 Carolan Complete Streets Update 5/11/17: Item 7a 10 Grant Opportunities 3/9/17: Item 7a 11 Grade Separation 5/11/17: Item 7a 12 San Mateo's Peninsula Ave OC 4/13/17: Item 7a 13 School Speed Limit Updates 3/9/17: Item 7a 14 Burlingame Point - Bay Trail 15 School Safety Improvements 3/9/17: Item 7a 16 California Complete Streets 5/11/17: Item 7a 17 California Drive parking restrictions 4/13/17: Item 6a 18 Traffic Brochure 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 “Discussion/Action Items” (TSPC Agenda Item 6).