HomeMy WebLinkAbout052108 Transportation Coordinating Committee Minutes.docMINUTES
BOZEMAN AREA TRANSPORTATION COORDINATING COMMITTEE WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 2008
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairperson Andy Epple called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. on Wednesday, May 21, 2008, in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, 411 East Main Street, and directed the TCC and
audience members to introduce themselves.
Members Present:
Andy Epple, Planning Director, City of Bozeman, Chair
Ross Gammon, Maintenance Chief, Bozeman Division, MDT
Pat Abelin, Citizen Member, Gallatin County
Rick Hixson proxy for Debbie Arkell, City Engineer, City of Bozeman
Al VanderWey, Urban Planning, MDT
Jeff Kraus, Bozeman Deputy Mayor
Jeff Ebert, District Administrator Butte District MDT
Ralph Zimmer, Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee
Bob Lashaway, Director, Facilities Services, MSU
Christopher Scott, Planning Department, Gallatin County
Jon Henderson, Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board
JP Pomnichowski, Planning Board, City of Bozeman
Doug McSpadden, Safe Trails Coalition, Gallatin County
Staff Present:
Shoni Dykstra, Recording Secretary
John Van Delinder, Street Superintendent, City of Bozeman
Bob Murray, Engineer, City of Bozeman
Chris Saunders, Assistant Director of Planning
Guests Present:
Jeff Key
Tamzin Brown
Lee Hazelbaker
Joe Gilpin
ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT
{Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Bozeman Area Transportation Coordinating Committee not on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker}
Chairperson Epple called for public comment, seeing none he closed public comment.
ITEM 3. MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2008
Jeff Ebert noted under 4B East Belgrade Interchange instead of “blue book” it should read the “tentative construction plan”.
Since there were no other corrections, additions or changes to the minutes of the regular meeting of April 23, 2008, Chairperson Epple announced the minutes are approved as corrected.
ITEM 4. NEW BUSINESS
Review of Problem Identification Memorandum (Jeff Key)
Jeff Key stated this was the 14th of 18 scheduled meetings to review and update the Transportation Plan. He noted preliminary recommendations should be ready for the Committee’s discussion
in June. He stated problem identification addresses intersections, levels of service, signal warrant analysis, corridor levels of service, safety, pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities,
transit systems, and other transportation considerations.
Mr. Key began the presentation by noting the definition being used for acceptable level of service, was level of service C for the entire intersection. He stated the definition allowed
for individual turn movements below a C at a signalized intersection. He stated intersections included in the memo could obtain an acceptable level of service by a phasing or timing
change, but noted those were short term fixes and often have implications for other intersections.
Bob Lashaway sought clarification on the intersection at 19th Avenue and Main Street. Rick Hixson responded that the full completion of the project was dependant on the completion of
the Babcock section of the project. Jeff Ebert noted W College and S 19th Avenue was also dependant on other factors. Mr. Key noted the memo did not mitigate for scheduled projects or
projects currently underway.
Mr. Key stated the handout contained individual turn movements with level of service for unsignalized intersections. He noted acceptable mitigation for some intersections might include
restricting specific turning movements or accepting a poor level of service due to the lack of volume. Jeff Krauss sought clarification on the acceptable level of service for an unsignalized
intersection. Mr. Key clarified the acceptable level of service for a signalized intersection was C or better, and C or better for the minor street legs for two way stops. Mr. Murray
noted the overall level of service for a two way stop intersection has been reported as the worst leg of that intersection in the past, and including the present table would be in conflict
with information provided in traffic surveys. Mr. Key noted the information pertaining to two-way stop control could be filtered out of the table.
Pat Abelin noted Oak and Griffin at Rouse were now signalized intersections. Mr. Key noted completed signal projects would also be removed before the next meeting. Mr. Murray asked if
Mr. Key could provide guidance for the thresholds which would require mitigation for a minor leg on a two-way stop intersection. Mr. Key stated some volumes are going to be so low that
mitigation would not be required. Mr. Hixson sought clarification about how MDoT distinguished between a signal being warranted but not justified. Mr. Key stated the scope of the update
only allowed for a look at one or two of the warrants which would indicate if further steps should be taken. Mr. Murray asked to get the description from MDoT of what criteria were used
for justification.
Mr. Key sought further clarification regarding the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) policy issue on two-way stop intersections. Chairperson Epple responded the longstanding policy
was that if one leg was failing at a peak hour, the intersection required mitigation before a project could proceed. Mr. Murray asked for the inclusion of minimum thresholds to be included
for required mitigation. Mr. Ebert responded justification was based on more than minimum threshold levels.
Mr. Key presented an overview of the corridor capacity analysis. He stated theoretical planning level capacities identify roadways near, at, or beyond capacity. He noted Volume over
Capacity (V/C) ratios were utilized in the problem identification exercise and intuitive information should be included as well.
Mr. Krauss noted there was not a Henderson Street along Willson Avenue. Tamzin Brown added that Gallatin Drive should read Gallatin Road. Mr. Krauss noted W Main Street would continue
to have corridor capacity problems from Cypress to N 7th Ave.
Mr. Key noted the crash locations which had been identified were not prioritized. He stated reviewing those intersections would come up with recommendations for mitigation. He noted
Joe Gilpin had reviewed the pedestrian systems and noted the lack of ADA compatible curb ramps through much of the City. Other concerns included lack of vegetation maintenance, old deteriorating
sections of sidewalk, snow removal in winter, longstanding gaps in the pedestrian network for the major street network, short term gaps in new development, and difficult crossing locations
of major streets. He noted the table provided identified specific locations grouped by corridors.
Mr. Key noted review of bicycle systems had identified the following themes, lack of bike lanes on arterial routes, bicycle detection at intersections, parking at major transit spots,
and the general perception of lack of safety for adults and children which requires mitigation through education. He noted Bozeman did not have a large Transit System, but problems identified
with the assistance of Lisa Ballard had reviewed areas with lack of service, resource gaps, information gaps, and the interaction of bus shelters in the context of the boulevard. Bus
bays have also been a conflict, along with the design for street furniture, and infrastructure needs for transit in specific areas.
Mr. Key noted other traffic concerns included the need to reduce neighborhood “cut thru” traffic, identify appropriate roadway typical sections in context with adjacent land use, need
for a “complete street policy” to guide transportation decisions, revisions to the City’s level of service criteria, establishment of County LOS standards, clearer guidelines on the
contents of Traffic Impact Studies, better definition of “traffic calming”, guidance on access control and corridor preservation techniques, and creative and alternative funding strategies.
Mr. Krauss commented on “cut thru” traffic as some would be intentional through the grid system as it was to help spread out the load. Mr. Krauss noted from 7th to Cypress on Main Street
might require corridor preservation and access control in order to handle the larger volumes of traffic from the Hospital Development and other projects to the east. He encouraged implementing
a policy for numerous buildings to share entryways. Mr. Key responded the access control modeling scenario was being utilized to show the correlation between access control and capacity.
He noted the grid system usually refers to the collectors and arterials and not necessarily local streets. Mr. Krauss responded a no “cut thru” policy virtualizes the neighborhoods by
giving them a gate or fence with the policy, and stated “we don’t want gated communities”. Mr. Murray mentioned a clear definition regarding an acceptable level of traffic on local streets
would be key. Mr. Key referenced a conversation with Andy Kerr to clarify that issue.
Doug McSpadden sought clarification on the impact of mixed use sites could have on the intersections identified as crash sites. Mr. Key responded the higher volume intersections would
have higher crash volumes and would not necessarily tie to mixed use development or land use. Mr. McSpadden noted building streets that require mitigation later does not make sense.
Mr. Key responded the intended use of principal arterials are intended to serve the moving of traffic and typically are higher speeds with access control management which placed more
traffic through the intersections. Mr. Hixson noted the concern should be if the intersections were inherently unsafe or if the intersections were within the level of norms for intersections
of the same type.
Mr. Lashaway noted a provision for a pedestrian crossing between College and Kagy should be included. Mr. Hixson noted there is a signal included in the project at Koch. He noted the
high school crossing on Main Street had met the pedestrian warrant. Mr. Krauss noted funneling pedestrians and cyclists to an intersection where the crossing would be most advantageous
could be taken into consideration. Mr. Hixson sought clarification if 23rd and College met a warrant. Mr. Key responded he would check. Mr. Hixson also noted he would like to see the
functional classification of Garfield and 23rd changed to collectors.
Mr. Key noted the next step would be the recommendations to include in the Update; he encouraged the TCC members to review the submittal requirements with care for the meeting in June.
Mr. Gammon noted how the Update addressed reducing neighborhood traffic could come back and haunt them if it was not carefully addressed. Chairperson Epple noted “cut thru” traffic was
one issue and the gridded system was another even though they interrelate. Lee Hazelbaker encouraged the Committee to keep Streamline in mind with regard to “cut thru” traffic.
Chairperson Epple announced Chris Kukulski had agreed to sponsor a day long workshop regarding the Implementation of Complete Streets. He noted it would be held at MSU on June 12, 2008
from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., and interested parties should contact Cathy Costakis at MSU.
Mr. Key reminded the Committee to contact him for any additional information to be included in the recommendations for next month. He noted his new email address is keyja@cdm.com.
ITEM 5. 2008 MEETING DATES AND ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Epple noted the next meeting would meet at 10:00 in the City Commission Room at City Hall on Wednesday, June 18, 2008. There being no further business to come before the
Committee at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 11:40 a.m.
_____________________________________________
Andrew C. Epple, Chairperson
Bozeman Area Transportation Coordinating Committee