Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-14-12 Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee Minutes I Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee 2 Minutes of the March 14, 2012 Meeting 3 Upstairs Conference Room Alfred Stiff Office Building. 4 5 Those Present: 6 7 Voting Committee Members: 8 Ralph Zimmer (Gallatin County) 9 Gary Vodehnal (City of Bozeman) 10 Danielle Scharf(City of Bozeman) 11 Frank Manseau (Gallatin County) 12 Sue Brown(Member At-Large) 13 14 Non-Voting Committee Members: 15 (none) 16 17 Liaison Officers: 18 Brandon Kelly (Gallatin County Sheriff s Office representing Jim Anderson) 19 20 Guests: 21 Taylor Lonsdale (MT Safe Routes to School Coordinator) 22 Stoney Wahl(River Rock Property Owners Association) 23 Gary Ullman(River Rock Property Owners Association) 24 Staci Venner (Robert Peccia and Associates) 25 Bob Lashaway (MSU& TCC Chair) 26 27 Quorum: present 28 29 NEW BUSINESS: 30 31 Ralph called the meeting to order at 12:05 PM. 32 33 1. Public Comment. No public comment, other than agenda items for which our guests have 34 attended. 35 36 2. Consideration of Meeting Agenda. Ralph offered the opportunity to provide input on the 37 agenda and noted that he will take some liberties as we have many items to discuss. No 38 additional comments were made. 39 40 3. Liaison Officer Reports. Brandon Kelly was in attendance today representing the Sheriffs 41 Office in place of Jim Anderson. He does not have anything specific to report on items not on 42 the agenda. 43 44 4. Street Department Report. John Van Delinder was not able to attend today. 45 46 47 48 5. CTEP Report. Danielle provided a brief summary of the County Commission's recent 49 allocation of County CTEP funds. The projects and funding allocations included: 50 51 • Anderson School Trail - $40,000 52 • Monforton School Trail - $60,000 53 • Manhattan School sidewalk- $40,000 54 • Three Forks Trident Depot Museum- $50,000 55 • Oak Street Trail (joint project with City of Bozeman) - $14,000 56 • West Yellowstone Streetscape - $10,000 57 58 The County had total of $214,000 available and chose to provide partial funding for all 59 projects, rather than full funding for only a few projects. On behalf of PTS, Ralph had spoken 60 in favor of the$38,000 request for the proposed Oak Street Trail project (none of the other 61 proposed projects had been brought to the attention of our committee). 62 63 6. Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Report. Taylor Lonsdale, MT SRTS Coordinator, reported 64 that the Bozeman School District has been working on the on-going planning of SRTS events 65 at its elementary schools and middle schools. Each of the events is being organized by the 66 individual schools. They are also working on District-wide bike safety events on May 3rd and 67 May 91' (National Bike to School Day). The District picked May 141' for their bike to school 68 day to coincide with bike week. Anderson, Monforton, and Gallatin Gateway are also 69 involved in SRTS activities at various levels. At the state level, they are currently in the 70 process of making funding decisions for the upcoming fiscal year, the results of which should 71 be announced by the middle of next month. 72 73 7. River Rock Subdivision Traffic Safety Concerns. Stoney Wahl (POA President) and Gary 74 Ullman (General Manager) were in attendance to share with us some of their concerns related 75 to pedestrian and traffic safety in River Rock Subdivision. They have approximately 1200 76 property owners, a K-3 elementary school, and a large park with pond located within the 77 subdivision. All of the roadways within the subdivision are County roadways maintained 78 privately by the POA. There are 52 bus stops within the subdivision for various Belgrade 79 schools. They are frustrated by parked vehicles (many of which are abandoned) obstructing 80 views at intersections, pedestrian crossings and bus stops. The POA does not have the 81 authority to tow vehicles and they understand that the Sheriff's Department has more 82 important priorities. They are also concerned about the speed limit along the park and school 83 and would like to install speed bumps or lower the speed limit to 15 mph. 84 85 Brandon acknowledged that the Sheriff's Department does not always get to these types of 86 calls because they are understaffed. They can enforce speed limits, stop signs, etc. and they 87 can use the County's abandoned vehicle program to tow abandoned vehicles. They have also 88 used a portable speed trailer near the school in the past, but are currently working toward 89 replacing their trailer with one that's more reliable. It was suggested that they consider post 90 mounted speed radar signs, but Taylor noted that they are only effective when combined with 91 increased enforcement. Gary noted that speed bumps could also be problematic because of 92 their effect on emergency response times. It was also suggested that they consider a raised 93 crosswalk at the main crosswalk between the school and the park. The crossing is signed 94 now, but it's difficult to see beyond parked cars. 95 96 Stoney asked Brandon what steps they could take to help identify abandoned vehicles. Time 97 stamped pictures, marking tires and documenting vehicle movement would all be helpful. 98 The Sheriffs Department could assist with looking up vehicle owner information. Brandon 99 also suggested that their first step toward reducing speed limits, installing speed bumps, etc. 100 should be a request to the County Commissioners. Because we're running low on time, 101 additional discussion on this topic will take place via email. Additional side conversation 102 occurred between Brandon and the POA representatives. 103 104 8. Proposed West College Improvements (including Intersection with 23"d). We have 105 discussed this MDT project at several of our recent meetings, including discussion of three 106 lanes vs. five lanes on College from 23rd to 19th and roundabout vs. signal for intersection 107 improvements at College and 23rd 108 109 We have also discussed MDT's recent adoption of the draft Public Rights-of-Way 110 Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) and its requirement that pedestrian signal be installed at 111 multi-lane roundabouts. We're concerned about the affect this may have relative to cost and 112 operation of the signals. There was some confusion at our last meeting about the operation of 113 these signals, so Rick Hixson arranged to have Staci Vernier from Robert Peccia and 114 Associates attend our meeting today to clarify these items and answer our questions about the 115 project. 116 117 Staci explained that they have recently completed the 30% design, alignment and grade 118 review and preliminary traffic report. The preferred design alternative consists of a 3-lane 119 typical section on College with a"traditional" signal at the College/23rd intersection. 120 121 They had originally recommended a 5-lane section, but recently completed some additional 122 data collection and volume projections and found that a 3-lane section would be adequate. 123 The design year is 2036 with design criteria for level of service (LOS) C or better at the 124 intersection of College and 23rd. They evaluated a no-build scenario, which showed LOS F 125 for 2036 traffic volumes. 126 127 Both single-lane and mult-lane roundabouts were considered for the intersection with 23 rd 128 even though there was concern about the intersection's proximity to the major signalized 129 intersection at 19th. (Note that a roundabout at 23rd would be closer to 19th than is the 130 roundabout at 11th.) 131 132 A single-lane roundabout also showed LOS of F for 2036 volumes. The main issue with the 133 single-lane roundabout is the heavy southbound to eastbound left-turn movement, which 134 would impede the eastbound through movement on College. 135 136 They also considered a multi-lane roundabout, but it's difficult to get the geometrics to work 137 with a 3-lane section and there is also concern over the large foot print and right-of-way that 138 would need to be acquired. This option would work with a 5-lane section, but the volume 139 data does not support it and the Commission does not want it. The traffic analysis results for 140 the multi-lane roundabout option showed LOS D for the PM peak hour and LOS E for the AM 141 peak hour. 142 143 The final design option is a "traditional" traffic signal. That is presently the preferred 144 alternative. Staci explained that the signal works well with the traffic volume projections and 145 is actually better for bicycles because the bike lanes can run right through the intersection, 146 rather than being terminated on either side of the intersection with the roundabout alternative. 147 There would be a one million dollar construction cost difference between the signal and a 148 multi-lane roundabout not including the cost of pedestrian signals required for a multi-lane 149 roundabout. 150 151 Taylor expressed his concerns related to giving priority to single-occupancy vehicles on 152 College when there are now several alternate routes available. We have the opportunity to 153 enhance this route for bikes, pedestrians and transit riders. As an example, the crossing 154 distance is much longer for the signal option than it would be for the roundabout. Gary 155 agreed, but acknowledged that there probably is not much we can do since the 156 recommendation for a signal is already moving forward. Staci explained that MDT does have 157 the final call and it is not out of the question that they will change their minds about the 158 preferred alternative. 159 160 The Garfield connection reduced traffic volumes on College by 20% to 25%. The project will 161 also include raised median on College. Another benefit to a roundabout is the ability to make 162 a right-turn from private accesses and then a-turn at the roundabout. The only new pedestrian 163 crossing will be at 23rd (and maybe Professional Drive), but that's probably ok because the 164 need to cross the street will go way down once there is sidewalk on the north side. 165 166 The City of Bozeman was originally in favor of the roundabout in general because of the 167 success of the roundabout at College and I1t'. After reviewing the data analysis for this 168 project however, they are now in favor of the signalized intersection alternative. It will be 169 interesting to see how it goes at the public meeting in late April. 170 171 Ralph explained that we were also hoping to get some clarification on the operation of 172 pedestrian signals at multi-lane roundabouts. Staci explained that pedestrian signals at 173 roundabouts can be either single-stage (more delay for vehicles) or two-stage (less delay for 174 vehicles). The most common treatment for this application has been the HAWK signal. 175 Another option could be a traditional red/yellow/green signal, but this treatment would result 176 in more delay for vehicles. The final option is the rectangular rapid flash beacon, which is 177 what the City has planned for in the future at College and 11t1i. 178 179 At our February 8 meeting, we had been led to believe that whenever a pedestrian activated a 180 traffic light on one leg of a multi-lane roundabout all traffic in the roundabout would have to 181 stop. Staci informed us that was incorrect. Only some of the vehicles in the roundabout 182 would have to stop and that stop would only be brief. 183 184 Ralph noted that if we want to advocate for a roundabout, we need to proceed immediately. 185 However, if we are ok with the signalized option, perhaps we do not need to do anything since 186 that's the direction it's already headed. We may also consider making suggestions for 187 modifications to certain design features for the signalized alternative. 188 189 190 Sue is in favor of a single-lane roundabout. Taylor agrees, but understands that is a tough sell 191 to MDT. Taylor thinks we should advocate for certain design changes for the signalized 192 option. His first concern is the corner radii for right-turning vehicles (WB-67 design vehicle). 193 He would prefer to narrow those up to reduce turning speeds and reduce crossing distances. 194 Perhaps we should also advocate for a multi-use trail instead of a sidewalk on the north side. 195 196 Gary agrees that it will be difficult to convince them to go with a roundabout, but does think 197 we should advocate for a trail on north side. Frank thought we should also recommend wider 198 medians to provide pedestrian refuge. Taylor also suggested 11-foot turn lanes. All agreed 199 we should recommend a multi-use trail on the north side and reduced curb radii on the 200 corners. 201 202 The majority agreed that we should clearly state our preference for a roundabout at this 203 intersection, but we understand that it does not meet MDT's level of service requirements for 204 design year traffic volumes. Based on our presentation from the consultant and because we 205 understand this is the direction the project is headed, we will accept the signal as the preferred 206 alternative, but would recommend the following modifications to the design: 207 • Install multi-use path on the north side of College instead of sidewalk 208 • Consider smaller design vehicle and other options for reducing curb radii in order to 209 reduce pedestrian crossing distance and vehicle turning speeds 210 211 Gary moved that we submit these comments into the public comment process. Sue seconded 212 the motion and it passed with all but Frank voting in favor of it. 213 214 9. Minutes. The minutes of the February 8, 2012 meeting were approved with minor edits made 215 by Ralph Zimmer prior to distribution. 216 217 10. Next Meeting. Our next regular meeting time will be April 11, 2012 at noon. Should work 218 for all in attendance. 219 220 11. College Street Crosswalks. Gary noted that he and John Van Delinder recently reviewed 221 pedestrian crossings on College between 8th and 11th. They agreed that we could improve 222 accessibility and crosswalk markings, but we need to get input from MSU. Gary suggested 223 we invite Bob Lashaway to attend one of our upcoming meetings to get his input. Ralph will 224 invite Bob to an upcoming meeting. 225 226 The meeting was adjourned at 1:55 PM. 227 228 Next Meeting: April 11, 2012 as noted above. 229 230 231 Minutes by Danielle Scharf 232 Edits by Ralph Zimmer