Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-09-11 Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee Minutes 1 Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee 2 Minutes of the February 9, 2011 Meeting 3 Upstairs Conference Room Alfred Stiff Office Bldg. 4 Those Present: 5 6 7 Voting Committee Members: 8 Ralph Zimmer (Gallatin County) 9 Frank Manseau (Gallatin County) 10 Gary Vodehnal (City of Bozeman) 11 Danielle Scharf (City of Bozeman) 12 Sam Miller (At-large Voting Member) 13 14 Non-Voting Committee Members: 15 John Van Delinder (City of Bozeman – Street Superintendent) 16 17 Liaison Officers: 18 Tommie Franscioni (Bozeman Police Department) 19 20 Guests: 21 Bill Bartlett (Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board member) 22 Daniel R. Peterson (Concerned Citizen) 23 Mary Keck (Concerned Citizen) 24 Quorum: 25 present 26 NEW BUSINESS: 27 28 29 Ralph called the meeting to order at 12:05 PM. 30 Public Comment. 31 1.Daniel Peterson read an excerpt from his recent letter to the editor 32 regarding snow removal on sidewalks and asked who is responsible for enforcement. John 33 said the Engineering Department is in charge of enforcement. It may be Tom Hudson, but he 34 suggested that Daniel ask at the front desk to be sure. After a certain amount of time has 35 passed after a storm and snow has not been removed, the snow will be removed by a private 36 contractor or the Street Department and the property owner will receive the bill. 37 38 Mary Keck was in attendance to support our efforts working on the distracted driving 39 ordinance. Her husband has spoken previously on this issue and her son was killed by a 40 truck driver who was on the phone at the time of the accident. She feels that it’s extremely 41 important that we raise awareness about this issue in our community. Ralph explained that 42 our committee and BABAB have both established a firm position on this topic and have 43 developed a joint task force with the goal of getting an ordinance enacted. 44 Liaison Officer Reports. 45 2. Our liaison from the Sheriff’s Office was unable to attend today. 46 Our liaison from the Bozeman Police Department reported that a “Saved by the Belt” award 47 (promotion for seatbelt safety) was given this morning by Sam to a young lady from 48 Bozeman that was recently in a rollover accident, but was able to walk away because she was 49 wearing her seat belt. 50 Street Department Report. 51 3. John mentioned two community meetings that will be held 52 tonight, one on the Bozeman Creek enhancement project and one on the new Belgrade th 53 Interchange. The City is still considering options for funding South 8 improvements and th 54 will present them to the Commission on February 14. They will also be presenting funding 55 options for improvements on Babcock. Ralph mentioned that Tim McHarg told him that the 56 2011 goals for planning, engineering, etc. would also be discussed at that meeting, but they 57 aren’t shown on the current agenda. John said he will forward Ralph any agenda updates he 58 receives. 59 60 Gary asked John about the large piles of snow near the parking garage that limit sight 61 distance at the nearby intersections. John said they have notified the contractor who’s been 62 clearing the parking garage that they should not be storing it there. The Street Department 63 has cleared these piles themselves several times. Snow storage is an on-going problem, but 64 they’re working to find a resolution. 65 Willson & College Intersection. 66 4. Ralph provided a summary of his recent discussion with 67 Andy Kerr regarding the collection of before and after traffic volume data. Andy collected 68 before data and three times has done observations of whether vehicles approaching on 69 College have complied with the new turning restrictions prohibiting those vehicles from 70 making any movement other than turning right. Results showed 75%, 78%, and 64% 71 compliance for vehicles traveling on College. This is the only data we currently have 72 available, but we will discuss this further after additional data has been collected. Mary 73 asked if people are being cited for non-compliance and Tommie said they are beginning to, 74 but it’s a difficult intersection to enforce because a patrol car is very visible when sitting and 75 watching the intersection. 76 City Commission 2011 Priorities. 77 5. There have been a series of meetings addressing the 78 Commission’s priorities for 2011. We have encouraged them to consider distracted driving 79 and the designation of a staff member to serve as a bike/ped coordinator for the City of 80 Bozeman. Ralph submitted a memo to the Commission on behalf of our committee 81 regarding these two initiatives and provided copies today for reference. 82 th 83 Danielle spoke on behalf of the committee at the January 24 Commission meeting. Several 84 others spoke in favor of these initiatives the same night. The Commission didn’t vote on 85 priorities that night, but each went around and listed their top priorities for the coming year. 86 Several mentioned both distracted driving and the bike/ped coordinator position. The Mayor 87 stated that he plans to invite representatives from our committee and BABAB to come back 88 before the Commission to discuss these items further this spring. Ralph noted that he would 89 prefer to have this meeting April and John suggested that we ask now to get on an agenda 90 because they will be filling up soon. 91 92 Prior to our meeting with the Commission, four representatives from the City will attend our nd 93 meeting on March 2 to discuss topics of mutual interest, which will include these two 94 initiatives. The City representatives will be Director of Public Safety Debbie Arkell, City 95 Engineer Rick Hixson, Planning Director Tim McHarg and Parks Director Ron Dingman. th 96 Our March meeting normally would occur March 9, but we are planning to reschedule for nd 97 March 2 so they can attend. There were no objections to rescheduling the March meeting nd 98 (and just the March meeting) to the first Wednesday of the month, March 2. The following 99 meeting will go back to the second Wednesday of the month. 100 101 The same four city representatives met last week with BABAB and Ralph was in attendance. 102 During that meeting, they noted that the City does not have the funds to establish a new 103 position and Tim has expressed concern that he cannot dedicate the necessary time of an 104 existing staff person because they are already over capacity. Tim suggested at the BABAB 105 meeting that in lieu of assigning the responsibility to an existing staff person, that they would 106 instead schedule a bi-weekly or monthly meeting of department heads to discuss projects and 107 provide the opportunity for coordination on bike and pedestrian related issues. When asked 108 if the public could be involved in such a meeting, they said yes. So our committee could 109 have a representative attend those meetings. This is staff’s counter proposal to establishing a 110 bike-ped coordinator position. 111 112 Ralph asked if we want to push for our original proposal or support staff’s counter proposal. 113 Gary asked John how effective he thought this would be. John said he thinks it can be 114 effective and pushing for the position now is probably not very realistic. After previous cuts 115 in planning, they really are very busy now. There is also a new grant writer at the City who 116 could help pick up the slack on some of the bike-ped funding applications. We could 117 consider inviting him to one of our meetings to discuss the available grants. Gary had 118 previously contacted other major cities in MT to see what they’re doing related to bike-ped 119 coordinators. Gary is willing to research this again prior to our next meeting. 120 nd 121 Ralph requested suggestions for other topics to discuss at the March 2 meeting with the 122 department heads. John suggested that we make sure we come up with several prior to the 123 meeting. Gary is very interested in seeing the City make more progress with filling in 124 missing sidewalk links and forming a partnership with home owners to make this happen. nd 125 Our homework assignment is to generate a list of additional questions for March 2. 126 127 Ralph also requested suggestions for topics to discuss at our subsequent meeting with the 128 Commission this spring. Frank suggested that we continue the discussion on distracted 129 driving. John said the Commission will likely ask us what we feel they can do to help 130 involve us more in the decision-making process. Sam said he thought an effort to meet with 131 us on a more regular basis would be a good start. As an example, he feels like we were still 132 discussing the College and Willson intersection when the decision was made by the 133 Commission. Gary would like to see us have the opportunity to do more development review 134 for bike-ped safety issues. There haven’t been a lot of new developments recently, but it 135 would be good to establish a more formal process for this now. 136 Distracted Driving. 137 6. Ralph provided a summary of recent activity related to distracted 138 driving at the state legislature. Four legislators turned in requests to have bills prepared. 139 Two are on hold and will likely not move forward. One request has turned into a bill and has 140 been assigned as Senate Bill 251. The remaining request (LC0907) was drafted in the form 141 of a bill and was ready to go into the hopper, but the legislator that requested it has not 142 picked it up yet. We are rapidly approaching the deadline for transmittal to the other house, 143 but the deadline for revenue bills is not eminent. Senate Bill 251 was picked up by the 144 sponsoring state senator from Helena with another legislator co-sponsoring the bill. 145 146 147 Ralph explained that there are three “readings” by each chamber on a bill. In the first 148 reading, the bill’s title is quickly read and it is assigned to a legislative committee. After 149 possibly amending the bill, the committee will vote on the bill. If the committee is opposed 150 to the amended bill, it will probably table the bill in which case it is likely the bill will die 151 right there. If the committee favors the bill with whatever amendments it made, the bill will 152 go back to the full chamber for its second reading. That’s where the full chamber will 153 consider the (possibly amended) bill, perhaps further amend it, and finally vote on it. The 154 bill will then come up for one last vote by that chamber on the third reading. Almost without 155 exception, the vote on the third reading is identical to the vote on the second reading. If the 156 chamber votes against the bill, the bill will die right there. However, if the chamber votes for 157 the (possibly amended) bill, the bill will move to the other chamber and the same process of 158 three readings and consideration by a legislative committee will be repeated. If both 159 chambers eventually pass the bill with identical wording, the bill will go to the Governor for 160 his signature. 161 162 Senate Bill 251 started its life in the Senate and was assigned to the Senate Highways and rd 163 Transportation Committee. That committee had a public hearing on February 3 during 164 which 10 people testified (9 in favor and 1 opposed). The committee does not vote at this 165 stage, they just listen to public comment. The committee will then meet in an executive 166 session were they will discuss the bill, possibly amend the bill and vote on the bill. It’s not 167 clear when this committee meeting will take place, but they usually meet on Tuesdays and 168 Thursdays. It may not be this Thursday, but could likely be as soon as next Tuesday. 169 170 Per our previous direction, Ralph has communicated with the members of the Senate 171 Highways and Transportation Committee in favor of the bill. He also urged the director of 172 MDT to support Senate Bill 251, but he’s not sure if that will actually take place. At least 173 one other of our members and representatives from BABAB have advocated for the bill. 174 There are no local senators on that committee, but we could contact other committee 175 members to advocate for the bill. We could also communicate with our local senators and 176 later with our local representatives to advocate for the bill when it moves further down the 177 legislative path. 178 179 Sam used the link Ralph sent out by email for communicating electronically with any 180 legislators and it only took five minutes to contact the entire committee. If you use any 181 special characters (including apostrophes) it will ask you to correct them before it will allow 182 you to submit your comments. 183 184 Frank asked if the texts of the three other “bills” on distracted driving are available for 185 examination 186 . Ralph said only Senate Bill 251 is available for public review. Senate Bill 251 is 187 proposing a primary offense with a $100 maximum fine. It doesn’t say that specifically, but 188 it is written in a manner that makes it sound like a primary law. Ralph will try to keep the 189 committee updated on how this progresses through the process, but he also encouraged us to 190 track it ourselves. 191 192 Sam noted that he has a friend that testified before the same committee regarding a primary 193 seat belt law and her testimony was not well-received, so he isn’t very optimistic about their 194 impression of the cell phone law. There has been strong support from Anaconda, so that 195 might help, but overall he is not very optimistic. 196 Minutes. 197 7.The minutes from the January 12, 2011 meeting were reviewed. The date listed 198 for the next meeting was changed from 2010 to 2011 and the minutes were approved with 199 this correction. 200 Future Agenda Items. 201 8. The following items have been carried over from previous meeting 202 minutes as potential future agenda items. 203  204 Missing sidewalk sections and accessible curb ramps along Main Street  205 Sidewalk/trail along Oak from 7th to Rouse  206 Longfellow Crossing  207 Path along Bridger Canyon Road  208 Galligator Trail crossing at South Willson & Lincoln – review # of crossings along 209 Willson from Kagy to Garfield and consider a recommendation to install another at 210 Mason  211 South Willson & College intersection improvements  212 Citizen proposal to install flashers on South Willson at Dickerson  213 Continue discussion on Complete Streets Policy  214 Continue discussion on Sidewalk Encroachment Policy  215 Continue discussion on Distracted Driver Issues  216 South 19th Avenue turn lanes 217 218 The meeting was adjourned at 1:50 PM. 219 Next Meeting: 220 March 2, 2011 (rescheduled from March 9 as noted above). 221 222 223 Minutes by Danielle Scharf 224 Some edits by Ralph Zimmer