HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-08-12 Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee MinutesPedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee
Minutes of the August 8, 2012 Meeting
Upstairs Conference Room Alfred Stiff Office Building.
Those Present:
Voting Committee Members:
Ralph
Zimmer (Gallatin County)
Gary Vodehnal (City of Bozeman)
Danielle Scharf (City of Bozeman)
Frank Manseau (Gallatin County)
Sue Brown (Member At-Large)
Vance Ruff (Bozeman School District)
Non-Voting
Committee Members:
Lee Provance (Gallatin County Road Road & Bridge Superintendent)
Liaison Officers:
Tommie Franscioni (Bozeman Police Department Liaison Officer)
Brandon Kelly (Gallatin
County Sherriff’s Office Liaison Officer)
Guests:
George Durkin (Gallatin County Road Department)
Rob Bukvich (Montana Department of Transportation)
Kraig McLeod (Montana Department
of Transportation)
Andy Kerr (City of Bozeman Engineering Department)
Bob Lashaway (MSU and Chair of Bozeman’s Transportation Coordinating Committee)
Trever McSpadden (Morrison Maierle)
Doug
Sangster (Lazy TH Resident)
Larry Biladeau (Lazy TH Resident)
Quorum: present
NEW BUSINESS:
Ralph called the meeting to order at 12:05 PM.
Public Comment. Ralph offered the
opportunity for public comment on items not on the agenda. No public comment.
Consideration of Meeting Agenda. Ralph offered the opportunity to provide input on the agenda and noted
that he will take some liberties as we have many items to discuss. No additional comments were made.
Minutes. The minutes of the July 11, 2012 meeting were approved with minor edits
made by Ralph Zimmer prior to distribution.
Liaison Officer Reports. Sheriff’s Office liaison officer, Brandon Kelly, and Bozeman Police Department liaison officer, Tommie Franscioni, were both in attendance, but did not have
anything specific to report.
Street Department Report. John Van Delinder is on vacation this week. Ralph announced the retirement party for Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell
on September 7th at 5:00 pm at the American Legion.
Gallatin County Road Department. Lee Provance was in attendance, but did not have anything to report on items not on the agenda.
CTEP
Report. Sue asked about the reduced funding in the new transportation bill. Ralph explained that the three funding programs for bike/pedestrian projects have been combined and overall
funding has been reduced. See minutes from our previous meeting for additional details.
Ralph asked at the TCC meeting for a status update on the Oak Street Trail project and was told
by Bill Murdock, County Commissioner that the County will be contributing additional non-CTEP funds to proceed with the project. Danielle noted that the County is waiting to hear back
from MDT on their CTEP application for this project, but she is not sure if the City is required to submit their own application.
Safety Concerns on South 19th Avenue. Ralph explained
that we do not have an official proposal for turn lanes at any particular locations on South 19th Avenue, so we will ask for input regarding safety concerns, including citizen input.
Ralph noted that one citizen interested in providing comments was not able to attend today, but she did provide a letter.
Frank lives south of Patterson so he travels through the
area regularly and has witnessed many occasions where drivers cross the centerline to go around turning vehicles and has witnessed several close calls. He has been advocating for a
right-turn lane at Patterson for several years. Frank read the letter from Linda Price, a resident of Lazy TH Subdivision, who has witnessed a near-accident at Goldenstein.
Ralph
explained that there have been a number of concerns expressed at both intersections and there was a fatality a few months ago at Goldenstein. Shortly after the fatality a representative
from the Sheriff’s Office told Ralph that a turning lane might have prevented the fatality but there was no way of determining that conclusively.
Larry Biladeau lives near Frank
and affirmed his comments related to both the line of cars at Goldenstein and having cars go into the left lane around him while he’s turning right at Patterson. He would also like
to see a trail constructed along 19th all the way to Hyalite.
Doug Sangster also lives in Lazy TH and agrees with the comments made. He makes a point to ensure that there’s a significant
amount of distance between him and the cars in front and behind of him so he can safely make the turn onto Patterson. Goldenstein is also an issue. He is concerned about other areas
too, particularly the stretch where three lanes have been constructed because he is constantly being passed on the right even when going 60 mph. He thinks we should plan for roundabouts
at College, Kagy, and Main Street. They are better for
facilitating traffic movement than stop lights and turn lanes. He thinks we should install turn lanes at Goldenstein and Patterson and do something about the stretch with three lanes.
Danielle read a letter submitted by Phyllis Sangster, also a resident of Lazy TH, stating that she agrees that traffic safety could be greatly improved by the installation of turn
lanes.
Lee explained that South 19th Avenue is maintained by Gallatin County and owned by MDT. He acknowledged that there is no perfect solution to the problems on 19th, unless we
have constant enforcement. He does not feel that Patterson is an issue because there is no record of accidents in this location. He agrees that a left-turn lane should eventually be
installed at Goldenstein, but there are several hurdles to getting that installed.
Kraig McLeod (safety engineer from MDT) manages the state’s Highway Safety Improvement Program.
Funds are available for safety improvements on any public facility statewide. The annual budget is approximately $10 million. The typically allocate these funds based on their crash
database and other criteria. They have to see a crash trend that can be mitigated, determine the cost effectiveness of the required improvements, and then rank projects statewide.
They evaluated the Goldenstein intersection in 2002 and determined that it was not cost effective to make any major improvements. The made a signing improvement there in 2009 and are
currently evaluating similar signing improvements at Patterson.
Ralph asked for confirmation that Kraig’s office does the leg work rather than some local governments. Kraig explained
that it can work either way and they like to receive assistance from local governments, but it is not necessarily up to the local governments. MDTy can also initiate the evaluation
itself through a query of its crash database. For South 19th Ave, the County has to agree to whatever MDT proposes because the County maintains it. At Patterson, they did not determine
that there was a need for a left-turn lane. The more practical low-cost solution is signing improvements likely including intersection ahead warning signs and larger stop signs on the
minor approach with stop ahead warning signs.
Danielle expressed similar concerns about turning on Wildflower Way and other neighborhood streets, and explained that she is also concerned
about the condition of the signs these streets and is hoping to see them improved through the existing RID. Lee suggested she call Jack Schunke at Morrison-Maierle. They don’t technically
cover signage improvements, but have in the past. It may require approval by a majority of the property owners, but Jack can explain that further.
Rob Bukvich from MDT explained why
turn lanes are not always the best safety improvements. Vehicles in the right-turn lane obstruct the view of oncoming vehicles from someone stopped at the stop sign, which introduces
another safety concern. He wants us to understand that turn lanes are not always the best solution.
Frank asked who required the extra southbound thru lane on the three lane section
of South 19th. Rob explained that was a City requirement for Meadow Creek subdivision.
Gary asked if it would be helpful if we requested a letter from the County Commissioners stating
that they support the installation of these turn lanes. Kraig said that he will take this meeting as the request for evaluation of additional improvements in this location. Kraig said
that, other than the fatality in May, he did not see a crash history that would be improved by a left-turn lane based on data since the signage improvements were installed.
Frank
asked one more time that they consider both Goldenstein and Patterson in their additional evaluation. Ralph agreed that he would appreciate that they take a further look at both locations.
Middle
Creek Parklands Phase 1 Development Proposal. The developer has submitted a request for a variance which, if granted, would exempt the developer from installing sidewalks in the next
phase of development. A system of trails was installed with a previous phase of the subdivision. The developer feels that the trails throughout the subdivision provide adequate pedestrian
access.
Peior to the meeting, two committee members had the opportunity to see the developer’s complete submittal. At the meeting, photocopies of the relevant pages out of that document
were distributed to all committee members. Trever McSpadden of the Morrison-Mairle ingineering firm was present to represent the developer and answer questions and hear our input. George
Durkin was present to present staff input on the requested variance. George brought maps to acquaint the committee with the area.
Ralph reported he had also heard that the County
Commission had previously approved 3 foot sidewalks within the subdivision. County regulations require 5-foot sidewalks. However, George reported that, contrary to staff recommendations,
the County Commission had approved the installation of 4-foot sidewalks elsewhere in the subbivision.
If we would like to make any comments, we need to get them submitted by September
4th.
George explained the history about how the previous phase was subdivided before the County’s subdivision regulations required sidewalks. They do require them now, unless a variance
is obtained. Some of the existing streets out there do have sidewalks, but there would still be a gap between this area and Monforton School. At this time, we only have the opportunity
to comment on just the small area (11 lots) that is being re-subdivided now into 22 lots.
Frank made a motion that we recommend denial of the variance. We should recommend that the
County require installation of sidewalk in conformance with the County Subdivision Regulations. The Subdivision Regulations require a minimum of 5-foot wide sidewalks, but they can
have a permeable or impermeable surface, it just needs to be maintained year-round. A width of 5 feet is generally considered to be the minimum standard by most guidelines.
Frank
restated his motion that we recommend that the variance avoiding sidewalks be denied. Sue seconded the motion. Danielle stated that she is always in favor of getting sidewalks installed
whenever possible, but noted that it still doesn’t solve the problem of the additional missing sidewalk links between this area and Monforton School. Gary explained that even though
there will still be gaps, having these sidewalks installed will improve the chances of getting the remaining gaps filled in in the future.
Frank’s motion passed unanimously. There was discussion about whether the committee would object to 4-foot wide sidewalks. It was the consensus of the group that we want the full 5-foot
width called for in the County’s subdivision regulations.
The County apparently does not currently have any requirement in the Subdivision Regulations for snow removal. The County
requires all subdivisions to have a homeowners association that is responsible for road maintenance, but George is not sure if they are also required to remove snow on sidewalks. We
agreed to make an inquiry to the County Planning Department about the requirement for snow removal in County subdivisions. All agreed that would be a good idea.
Ramifications of the
Transportation Bill Reauthorization (MAP-21). We discussed the new transportation bill reauthorization during our last meeting, and it was also discussed during the recent TCC meeting.
Ralph asked if we want to at least advocate for funding bike/pedestrian projects at the new 67% level, the allowed 33% level or somewhere in between. Discussion at the TCC meeting
indicated that it is highly unlikely that these projects will be funded at higher than the 67% level. Gary suggested that we advocate for funding these projects at the highest level
possible and all agreed.
Ralph reiterated that the Safe Routes to School Coordinator position is allowed under this bill, but no longer required. He asked if we want to advocate for
the continuation of that position. All agree that it is an important position toward the success of the program and we should advocate for its continuance.
Ralph also asked if we want
to advocate for any sort of funding split among the three programs (Community Transportation Enhancement Program, Safe Routes To Schools, and Recreational Trails Program). After discussion
we all agreed that we should advocate for non-motorized bike and pedestrian safety projects receiving the highest priority with a focus on the combination of recreation and transportation.
Next
Meeting. Our next regular meeting time will be September 12, 2012 at noon. Danielle may have a conflict that day, but the meeting time should work for others in attendance today.
The
meeting was adjourned at 1:50 PM.
Next Meeting: September 12, 2012 at noon as noted above.
Minutes by Danielle Scharf
Edits by Ralph Zimmer