Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Transportation Advisory Commission - 07/26/2010 ` T r ■ RECEIVED Transportation Advisory Committee SEP 1 4 2010 Meeting Minutes Monday, July 26, 2010 CITY SECRETARY'S OFFICE Call Meeting to Order - Curtis A. Rock, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 2:33 p.m. II. Approval of Minutes - Minutes of June 28, 2010 were approved. III. Presentations and Discussions - a. Monthly Traffic Fatality Report: Sgt. Pena reported thirteen (13) fatalities to date for the year 2010. b. Monthly Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee Report: Ms. Beard discussed the recent "BPS Members Ride-Along Activity" she and Mr. Cardenas attended with a bicycle group. Ms. Beard reported that she and Mr. Cardenas rode along with Jason, he is part of the group, and followed some of the cyclists along their route. Ms. Beard described the bike route and said there was very minimal traffic from Lamar Park to Labonte Park. Ms. Beard continued to say that this route has been going on for 20 years. Mr. Price asked if there is a protocol the bicyclists use if trucks get behind them on some places like Up River Rd. Mr. Cardenas said yes with hand signals and of course this is 8/10 of a mile and the bicyclists are going 25 mph on Up River Rd. and there shouldn't be that much backup for the truck traffic. He said vehicles can pass safely along that stretch of Up River. Mr. Cardenas commented the ultimate plan the city is considering is trying to come up with a project to have a bike roadway, only for bikes, on TXDot ROW on IH37, so they do have to go into Up River Rd. He continued to say that a bike and pedestrian pathway could be designed that will hold the light loads and it could be an asphalt roadway about 10' to 20' wide. c. Bicycle Et Pedestrian Subcommittee Webpage Update: Ms. Beard stated they're still waiting on the guidelines from the city concerning the posting of the webpage. She mentioned the MPO has built a webpage for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Subcommittee and we need to verify if there are any conflicts with whatever we post, since we are a city subcommittee posting in the MPO's website. Mr. Cardenas mentioned that this item has been going back and forth with the City Secretary's Office and the city's legal staff and we are still waiting on their response. d. Speed Humps Policy "Residential Traffic Management Program": Mr. Cardenas briefly discussed this item. He said this is basically a speed humps program but it's considered a residential traffic management program. Mr. Cardenas said it was approved by City Council in 1998 and revised in 2007. The revision in 2007 was "Placement of the Speed Humps". He said this simply means that the City Traffic Engineer has the discretion, as far as placement, on a case by case basis. Mr. Cardenas introduced Ms. Chuck Wishert, who was in the audience, and said she is the one that administers the program. Next, Mr. Cardenas described what a diverter and traffic circle are and said everything has to be included in the speed Page of SCANNED humps packet. Mr. Cardenas said it's important to understand stop signs and mentioned people want to place stop signs in their neighborhood to slow traffic down but stop signs should not be used that way. Also, speed humps should only be used for residential streets and that's how they are approved. Mr. Cardenas stated they are not approved to be used for collector, arterial or streets that have more than two lanes. Also, there is a restriction on the width of the street. If the speed limit on the street is above 30 mph, that's a place that you don't want to install speed humps and that's already considered a collector street. He said we really need to focus on using this as a residential traffic management program and not for collector streets. Mr. Cardenas said he understands as some houses might reside on a collector's street or in Ocean Drive's case an arterial street but the program is geared towards residential streets. Mr. Cardenas commented that another hot topic for speed humps is the cost. The speed humps range from about $1000 to 2000, but more importantly there is residential sharing involved with installation of a speed hump. In a particular neighborhood, the procedure is as follows: a petitioner writes in, and then we find out what kind of classification that street is. If it's a residential street, then we will move forward with a speed study. Usually, the speed studies and count studies are done during the scholastic year because there is more activity or traffic involved. Mr. Cardenas continued to say that we do not want to do a speed study or volume study during summer because there is not a lot of traffic activity during that time, since school is out, so for obvious reasons it will not qualify then, the residents say they will petition again. Mr. Cardenas said that's basically a waste of taxpayers' money to do the double the work, so it's done during the scholastic year. Once we do the speed studies, we find out if it's going to qualify based on volumes and speeds. After it meets the criteria then it goes on to a point system. There are different points assessed due to the number of accidents in the stretch of roadway that's being studied. The more accidents, the more points assessed. Mr. Cardenas stated speeds and the volumes are also looked at. The more vehicles that go over 85th percentile, then the more points are assessed. Mr. Cardenas stated that they look at what kind of neighborhood it is, whether it's close to an elementary, middle or high school. Anything closer to an elementary school gets more points. The proximity of a park, for instance, whether it's 1000' or closer from a park, gives it more points. At the end we'll collect all the points. If it's over 20 points, the city's cost is 100% for speed humps. If it's from 16-19 the residents pay 25%. He continued to say we know there are concerns that the city should pay for the whole speed humps but the program is laid out in this type of priority ranking. There are design standards as far as the shape of the humps and placement. We don't want to place them in front of driveways or close to intersection and in addition, some blocks are possibly too short. He continued to say that they do have choices and that's where engineering judgment is involved. There is of course a petition process. Two-thirds of the residents must agree they want speed humps. Once that's established with all the appropriate signatures and it's verified, we then look at placement of speed humps. Mr. Price inquired if stop signs are not used to slow down traffic, why are there on Everhart Rd. between Alameda St. and Aberdeen Ave. Mr. Cardenas responded that he was not very familiar with this issue and he will look into this concern. Ms. Cudd asked if Page 2 of 3 .a there is ever a problem with drainage issues. Mr. Cardenas responded there are some dips that are out there for drainage purposes and as side effect the dips slow down traffic. Mr. Cardenas responded that the curb and gutter sections are not covered up with the speed humps. There is about 12" that the speed hump slopes into the lip of the completely open gutter, which is the edge of the concrete of curb and gutter section. Mr. Cardenas said we do look at drainage issues when placing the speed humps. Ms. Cudd inquired if Traffic Engineering is the one responsible to obtain a speed hump or not. Mr. Cardenas said yes, it goes through Traffic Engineering's office and we look at all the criteria and if they meet these criteria, they qualify for a speed hump. Mr. Cardenas said all of the speed humps are approved first through the Fire Department and Police Department. Ms. Beard asked if the residents or the property owners approve the speed humps. Mr. Cardenas said yes it is the property owner that approves it. Ms. Cudd asked if we have seen good results because of the speed humps. Capt. Vesely said yes they do seem to work but speed humps can't be installed on all the streets. e. Traffic Signal at McArdle @ Sunrise Mall Entrance: Tabled until next month. f. Traffic Signal at Nile & Ennis Joslin facing Hans Suter Park - Tabled until next month. IV. Staff Recommendations requiring Committee Review for Recommendations/ Actions - a. Appointments to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Sub-committee: Ms. Beard recommended to nominate Ms. Maricruz Cantu to the medical position for the Bicycle Et Pedestrian Subcommittee replacing Mr. Peter Gembol. Mr. Edd Price seconds. Motion passed. V. Identify items to be placed on a future agenda - • Brooke Rd. Et Rodd Field Rd. Intersection • Fire and Police Traffic Discussions • Median Construction Project VI. Public Comment - No public comment. VII. Adjournment - Meeting adjourned at 3:27 p.m. Page 3 of 3