Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-14-14 Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee MinutesBozeman (Area) Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of the May 14, 2014 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 (At-large Member) Vance Ruff (Bozeman School District 7) Official Non-Voting Committee Members: John Van Delinder (City of Bozeman Streets Department) Dave Fowler (County Road and Bridge Department) City Commissioners, County Commissioners, and School Board Members (Non-Voting on PTS): Cyndy Andrus (City Commissioner) Liaison Law Enforcement Officers (Non-Voting on PTS): (None in attendance) Guests: Dustin Johnson (City of Bozeman Engineering) Andy Kerr (City of Bozeman Engineering) Bob Lashaway (MSU) Rob Bukvich (MDT) Larry Watson (Gallatin County) Tony Becken-Gaddo (DOWL HKM) Quorum: Present. NEW BUSINESS: Ralph called the meeting to order at 12:00 PM. Public Comment. Ralph offered the opportunity to provide comments on items not on the agenda. No comments at this time. Consideration of Meeting Agenda. Ralph offered the opportunity to provide input on the meeting agenda and noted that he will take some liberties as we have many items to discuss. Danielle noted that the Walk Friendly Communities deadline is coming up again on June 16. She and Taylor are working on an application for that deadline. No other comments were made. Minutes. Gary made a motion to approve the minutes of the April 9, 2014 meeting, second by Frank. Motioned passed. Update on Previous Actions. Danielle noted the Walk Friendly Communities application, as discuss previously. Ralph reported that we had not yet heard back on Kensleigh’s application for funding her project on sidewalk funding. Ralph provided a summary of the recent Transportation Coordinating Committee (TCC) meetings in January and April. In January, they discussed the extension of Highland north of Main Street and Ralph was under the impression the group was in favor of approving it with the proposed 60-foot right-of-way. Then it was pointed out that it was not on the agenda, so they decided to postpone the discussion unit their April meeting. PTS then discussed it at our March meeting and agreed to support the proposal. Additional discussion took place at the April TCC meeting, Bob Lashaway, TCC Chairperson, read Ralph’s letter there with the Mayor in attendance. The Mayor thought PTS went “wild” and implied that this group just rubberstamped the City’s recommendation and did not discuss the issue adequately. (Ralph subsequently sent an email to the Mayor describing what happened at the January TCC meeting and the process PTS followed in March. The Mayor then apologized, but still thought that we acted prematurely.) In April TCC decided that it was not a decision they should be making, it should be decided by the City. They did not make a recommendation one way or the other. Cyndy stated that she had not heard anything from the Mayor on this issue. She stated that they often get recommendations from various committees and she thought our writing that letter was appropriate as we are an advisory committee to the Commission. Bob also noted that advisory boards such as ours are not part of the official approval process. To make this board a part of the official process could add a lot of extra steps. TCC also meets only quarterly, so they’re job is to submit a recommendation, but they also are not at a project approval level. City Commission Report. Cyndy reported on the Commission’s recent decision to create an SID for Story Street improvements. The project is moving forward and they will have a separate meeting with the property owners regarding parking and the option to replace sidewalks at the same time. Gary asked if bike lanes should be considered. John said there is not enough width for bike lanes and even just one lane of parking, so they’ll probably use sharrows. Ralph acknowledged Cyndy’s email regarding the sequence of items on our agenda. He will discuss with the officers and send her a response. Cyndy’s suggestion is that we move the items we want to take action on to the front of the agenda, followed by our reports, etc. Liaison Officer Reports. Liaison officers were not in attendance today. City Street Department Report. John reported that the Main Street mill and overlay project will begin June 2 on the east side of Grand. Expect delays until mid-August. County Road Department Report. Dave reported that the County is working with the City and MDT on the Main Street project. They are currently milling Bracket Creek and should have it paved back in mid-July. They are also finishing up filling potholes in various locations. South 19th Crossings at Lincoln and Garfield. Ralph explained that the reason why this is on the agenda is that he received complaints from a couple of citizens that were unable to attend the meeting today. Ralph asked Rob Bukvich to explain the 19th and Lincoln intersection. Rob stated that the intersection was designed to eliminate left turns off of the minor approaches. Rob said they didn’t plan for pedestrian crossings there, but the project manager added them on his own. It is not known how many pedestrians cross in this location, but all agree there aren’t many. The complaint is that it’s difficult to get across 5 lanes of traffic at 40 mph. Vehicles in the near lane will stop, but the vehicle in the second lane often will not. Ralph assumed the same issues exist at Garfield, but there is not a striped crosswalk at that intersection. Rob noted that MDT would like to remove the turn limitations at Garfield and install a signal in that location instead, possibly as part of the upcoming College Street project. Ralph asked if the signal could be pedestrian activated with walk indications and he said yes. Ralph asked him if there’s anything more that can be done at Lincoln and he thought rectangular rapid flash beacons would work, but that would require doing away with the northbound left-turn bay so they could expand the median and install a flasher in the median. Another option may be a HAWK signal, that has a red indication requiring vehicles to stop, but they are not typically installed directly at an intersection. Danielle suggested that maybe it be considered in this location because there are no left or thru movements from the side street and the right turns are somewhat removed from the crosswalk location. Bob agreed and thought the overhead indications would be more effective with this option. Rob said that the only funding source MDT would have available is safety funding, but there just aren’t enough pedestrians crossing here to justify that. It could be eligible for urban funds if prioritized by the City of Bozeman, but it would be many years out. If we wanted to advocate for moving this project forward, our best bet would be to find a funding source. Andy thought the HAWK signal would be better for this location because the RRFB’s wouldn’t be as visible to multiple lanes of traffic. Bob said that MSU will eventually be improving Garfield with sidewalks, etc. There are not many (if any) pedestrians crossing 19th here now, but that’s likely because it is not a legal crossing. MSU will work with MDT to provide the necessary right-of-way. There is not anything this committee can do to move that project forward, they’re already headed toward a solution for this location. Cyndy asked if we have some sort of calculation similar to level of service for traffic to determine when crosswalks should be installed. Andy said that if you followed FHWA guidance, the crossing never would have been installed in this location with just signing and pavement markings. Maybe another option is to eliminate the crossing and move it to Garfield. Rob said we should expect that some would still cross in this location. Frank asked if a full signal could be considered like in front of the high school. It would not be warranted for the number of pedestrians in this location. Ralph asked if the committee would like to advocate for any improvement at Lincoln. Danielle thought it would be interesting to know the volume of pedestrians crossing in this location, but it’s difficult to justify advocating for anything more if there are only a few. All agreed we may discuss at future meetings, but will not advocate for any improvements at this time. Pedestrian crossings along College between 8th and 11th. We’ve discussed concerns here at several previous meetings. Ralph asked if anyone in attendance was aware of anything moving forward in this location. Bob said they need to upgrade ramps, but they have not planned for any crosswalks. Gary explained the walking audit that he participated in where the experts said this area is unacceptable. ADA ramps and crosswalks are needed and they also thought curb bulb outs or movable planters could also be considered. Gary thinks it should be enhanced with all of these features and improved lighting. It should be a much higher priority for pedestrian safety in our community. 9th and 10th are both T-intersections at College in this location. John explained the extent of the parking that would have to be eliminated for crosswalks in this location. Andy noted that there are legal crossings at the intersections even without signing and striping. Bob agreed that this is a challenge that would need to be addressed with reconstruction of the entire stretch, but he’s not sure about a viable interim improvement. Andy said they have CTEP funds designated for the ramp improvements and the City could cover the cost of pavement markings if it is decided they should be added. Gary stated that he doesn’t agree with the assessment that unmarked crosswalks are safer than marked crosswalks and we don’t know how effective they will be at telling pedestrians where to cross until we try it. Ralph asked Gary where he would advocate for crosswalks and he said both sides of both 9th and 10th intersections should be accessible and marked. Ralph asked how many of us support Gary’s point of view for marked crosswalks that are ADA accessible. Frank agrees and Danielle said she definitely supports the ADA improvements. Dustin and Andy thought they could fund the ADA improvements with available CTEP funds. Sue made a motion to advocate for use of remaining CTEP funds for the ADA improvements, second by Gary. Motion passed. Then Ralph asked if we would want to advocate for striped crosswalks. Danielle said she would want to observe it before she would advocate one way or the other. Ralph asked if some of the remaining CTEP funds could be used to paint the crosswalks and Dustin said yes. Vance asked what MSU’s take would be on the loss of parking. Bob said they understand it may need to go away for improvements in the area. They’re happy to use the parking, but its public right-of-way so they don’t have a say. He said the parking now does have a traffic calming effect, but it may be eliminated with some future reconstruction of the roadway. Dustin suggested that Gary provide public comment at the commission meeting on Monday asking the Commission to add crosswalks to the ADA improvements at this location. This is on the consent agenda, so it would have to be during public comment. Dustin also stated that the crosswalks could be funded as the staff memo is currently written without any amendments by the Commission. Cyndy stated that she could also pull it off the consent agenda if needed, but that doesn’t seem necessary given the way the staff memo is written. Gary asked if we need to advocate to make sure that ramps are included on both sides of both intersections. Dustin said we can, but it depends on available funding and constraints at each intersection. No additional motions were made regarding this topic. Community Transportation Enhancement Program (CTEP). Ralph invited Dustin Johnson and Larry Watson to attend the meeting today to report on the City and County plans for remaining CTEP funds. Larry reported that Gallatin County currently has $97,888 of CTEP funds left to be allocated. A public hearing was held yesterday and a second public hearing will be held on Tuesday. They received three proposals at the first meeting including $45,000 for an on-site trail at Anderson School, $59,000 for a ditch crossing in Manhattan, and $50,000 for a trail extension near the Airport parking lot in Three Forks. The next hearing will be Tuesday at 9:00 am where the Commissioners will make a decision on those projects. Larry is aware of other potential proposals (maybe Big Sky), but he’s not sure if they can get their proposal prepared by next Tuesday. Ralph asked Larry who’s responsible for preparing the proposal. Larry said it’s not necessary to have any design done ahead of time and he works with the interested parties to prepare the information necessary for the proposal. The applicants also need to commit to providing matching funds and long-term maintenance of the facility. Ralph asked if there were any museum projects and Larry said they do have a pending application for the Milwaukee Park (Trident Depot) project in Three Forks and have done others in the past. Ralph asked if we want to take any action in support of these projects or suggest any other projects. The consensus was that it is not necessary to comment on the current proposals or ask for any additional projects. Larry also noted that any remaining funds not allocated by the end of the month will go back into the CTEP pot at MDT. Rob said each jurisdiction does have the option of designating their funds for another jurisdiction if projects are not identified. He said the money doesn’t revert back to MDT, it would go back to the federal government. It’s possible that they could put it into some of their projects, but not any separate CTEP projects. Rob suggested both the County and City consider over-allocating the funds to be sure no funds are left on the table. Dustin said that’s exactly why the City set up their list of projects as they did, with the number of ramps in priority number 4 depending on the amount of funding left. Dustin explained that earlier he thought we had until the end of the fiscal year to allocate the remaining CTEP funds. The current CTEP project bids next week and he was hoping to wait until after that to determine how much money was left. Then they got the memo from CTEP stating they had to submit applications for all remaining funds by the end of May. Dustin explained that is also the reason why he put the recommendations on the Commission’s consent agenda as he didn’t have time or room to get it on the regular agenda and still meet the MDT deadline. He provided a brief overview of the projects listed on his staff memo, including a trail along 19th, curbing along north side of College from Tracy to Black, way-finding signage, and replacement of deficient accessible curbs and striped crosswalks. Matching funds have been allocated and $10,000 has also been contributed by Collin’s Coalition (Tom Keck). The City has $246,000 in unallocated funds, or possibly more depending on how the bids for current project come in. The cost of right-of-way on the 19th trail is an unknown. BABAB has been reaching out to those property owners to ask for easements. Gary asked if we have enough curb ramps identified to ensure we aren’t losing any money. The City used an estimate of $2000/intersection corner for ramp upgrades. Rob explained that once projects are identified, money can shift between projects, the City just will not be able to identify any new projects beyond the end of the month. The projects have to be ready for construction by June 1, 2015. Rob explained that the projects have to be identified through a public process and the City has to commit the matching funds, but funds can be shifted between projects with no additional input from MDT. This committee is happy with the recommended projects and we’re happy to work with City staff to ensure the ramps we’re interested in at College/9th and College/10th, and possibly crosswalks, get installed. Gary noted that he would prefer to see accessible crosswalks a higher priority than way-finding signage. Dustin said the Transportation Alternatives program could be allocated for the accessible ramps in the future, but this is probably the last chance for the way-finding signage project to get funded. That’s the primary reason why it’s higher on the list of priorities. Willson Pedestrian Crossings. We have already asked Andy to come back for this discussion at our next meeting. All agreed to postpone to our next meeting. Community Transportation Safety Plan Implementation. Danielle said she saw that Ralph asked Rick about this in a recent emails. He told us previously that he would assign this to one of his staff members and his response to Ralph’s email indicated that he would focus on that after the upcoming budget discussions. Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board (BABAB). John announced that this week is Bike to Work Week. Rebecca and Taylor are also working on the Commuter Challenge this week and next. It’s not too late to sign up. Next Meeting. Our next meeting will be scheduled for June 11th at 12:00 pm. Vance will not be able to attend because it’s the last day of school and they will have early release and be bussing during that time. No other conflicts for those in attendance. The meeting was adjourned at 1:30 PM. Next Meeting: June 11, 2014 at noon as noted above. Ralph hopes to discuss the soccer complex and the Willson crossings. Minutes by Danielle Scharf Edits by Ralph Zimmer