Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Transportation Advisory Commission - 10/23/2000 �����t 22.?3�4 TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE �� MINUTES �� �QV.._. �;`1 (Meeting of October 23,2000) 2000 r REECEIVET-P c° c� eFrt'OFFICE ,?s ow Members Present r OFFICE w Clif Moss Anthony Alejandro Stuart Sher Orlando Noyola Robbie Foster MAC Karla Bennett 084 9 9 Israel Ybarra Members Absent Don Davenport CALL TO ORDER-Chairperson Alejandro called to order at 1:37 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF"MINUTES"- Motion made by Mr.Moss,seconded by MAC Bennett to approve minutes as published. Motion passed. III. COMMENTS BY CHAIRPERSON and/or VICE-CHAIRPERSON -None IV. RECOGNITION OF AUDIENCE/PUBLIC CONCERNS -None V. MONTHLY TRAFFIC FATALITY REPORT(ATTACHMENT"A") -Fatality report given by Capt.Tisdale and Sgt. Leeton stating there were two(2)fatalities during the month of October,2000. Capt.Tisdale also reported that pro-active steps were being taken in the Annaville area on Leopard Street between Violet Road and McKinzie Road and Phase II between Rand Morgan and McKinzie to warn motorists of the impending construction. VI. MONTHLY TRAFFIC ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE REPORT (September, 2000), (ATTACHMENT"B") - Mr. Seiler briefly reported that 780 accidents were re ported for the month of September down 4% compared to the same time last year. A total of 21 fatalities have been reported through September,2000 and 20 fatal accidents. Confirmed alcohol related statistics is 42% same as last year at this time. Top High Accident Locations are Staples/SPID;Ayers/SPID;Weber/SPID and Everhart/SPID; Everhart/Saratoga;Saratoga/Staples and Saratoga/Weber with the predominance of the accidents being rear-end and double left turn related. Mr.Ybarra inquired if Condition Diagrams will be reinstated in the TAC report. Mr.Seiler advised Mr.Ybarra that as soon as the Engineering Tech position is filled,the diagrams will be again generated. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS-None VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS SUBMITTED FOR COMMITTEE APPROVAL OR REVIEW A. Review of application to the City of Corpus Christi by Mr.Paul D.Carangelo to close and abandon the Hutsell Avenue undeveloped City street right-of-way abutting the Cayo Place and Oak Harbor Subdivisions in the Flour Bluff area Mr.Seiler briefly introduced this agenda item by identifying that property owner Mr.Paul Carangelo has presentation application for closing and abandoning an undeveloped 37,800 square foot right-of-way of Hutsell Avenue extending 630-feet south of Graham Road. This matter involves the concerns for proper neighborhood street circulation and public safety versus the position held by the local neighborhood residents that the closing of the Hutsell Avenue street right-of-way will help to maintain a quiet, crime-free neighborhood without non-resident traffic impact. City Charter requires Council approval to close and abandon any portion of street right-of-way. As part of this process,the City's Transportation Advisory Committee is requested to provide its input and recommendation to the City Council. Mr.Seiler referred to site map exhibits during his initial remarks, then introduced Michael Gunning,Director of Planning,to make his opening remarks. Mr.Gunning reported that on October 30,1984,a request for waiver of street dedication and construction was denied by the City Council. The Master Transportation Plan required that a collector street be constructed through this property. On April 12,2000,in its consideration of the proposed plat for the abutting La Cantera Estates Subdivision (immediately to the east of Hutsell Avenue)the Planning Commission conditioned its approval of the plat on a requirement for an off-site caliche road within the subject Hutsell Avenue public right-of- ;CANNED way to serve as emergency vehicle access into the La Cantera Estates Subdivision,which is now under construction. Mr.Gunning further stated that the significance of Hutsell Avenue to neighborhood development is to serve as a loop collector nnn(' street between Graham Road and the future extension of Don Patricio Road west of Flour Bluff Drive,as designated on the City's Master Transportation Plan since 1975. Hutsell Avenue would become a secondary access to the internal area of new development via Graham Road and Flour Bluff Drive. The fact that there will be no other north-to south collector roadway connecting Graham Road and the future extension of Don Patricio Road west of Flour Bluff Drive makes Hutsell Avenue a very important connection. Further, regardless of the loop connector shown on the Transportation Plan, Staff routinely seeks connectivity between abutting residential neighborhoods through one or more street connections. Mr.Ybarra inquired about the exit routes available in case of emergency at the intersection of Graham Road and Flour Bluff Drive. Mr.Gunning responded that Graham Road is the only exit available at present. Mr.Gunning further stated that when the final plat was brought to the Planning Commission,the La Cantera Estates Subdivision was advised that Hutsell Street remain open for usage as an emergency access. The Water Department also requested a minimal type of road remain open for water line and other utility installation. Mr.Moss briefly questioned the necessity of this issue being presented to the Transportation Advisory Committee. Both Mr. Gunning and Chairperson Alejandro stated that because Hutsell Avenue is intended to serve as an integral element of a planned loop neighborhood collector street and is shown on the City's Master Transportation Plan,the importance of this street's possible closing takes on a higher order of importance for the TAC's consideration is needed.On inquiry, Mr Leo Farias with Special Services stated that the caliche road has been placed on construction"hold"until the Contractor completes 75% of the public infrastructures required. Mr.Ybarra inquired if water facilities could be acquired from Flour Bluff Drive. Mr. Gunning stated it must be looped from Graham Road to maintain steady water pressure. Mr.Seiler further continued the Staff presentation and stated that along with the Traffic Engineering and Planning.Departments, the Corpus Christi Fire Department and Police Department along with the Zoning and Code Enforcement opposes the closure. Mr. Seiler delineated the various factors supporting the Staffs position, including the importance of having a neighborhood collector loop and normal connectivity between adjacent residential subdivisions for motorists,pedestrians and bicyclists. Mr.Seiler presented two options for the Committee's consideration. First option(Option I) would keep the Hutsell Avenue right- of-way open for construction of a future street connection,which would occur when further development within the area requires additional,flexible neighborhood circulation. In the interim,a partial cul-de-sac would be constructed at the current junction of the Graham Road with the Hutsell Avenue right-of-way to allow larger vehicles such as school buses,solid-waste collection vehicles to use Graham and a temporary caliche service road approximately 10-ft.in width would be constructed within the full length of the Hutsell Avenue right-of-way,but an emergency"crash-gate"would be constructed across the temporary road to deny public access. Option II-Would close the Hutsell Avenue Right-of-Way-thus amending the current Transportation Plan. This option would permanently remove the public street right-of-way,eliminating any future north-south collector roadway connecting with Graham Road and the La Cantera Subdivision. Maintain Graham Road as a 3,000-ft.length dead end street west of Flour Bluff Drive, would require construction of a partial cul-de-sac at some point on Graham to allow use by school buses,garbage collection vehicles,and emergency vehicles. Would require a modified neighborhood loop comprised of the east-west residential street (Cantera Trail)through the La Canters Estates Subdivision and a new section of Hutsell Avenue(south of the section requested to be closed),and extend south to the future extension of Don Patricio Road. Would hinder emergency response by Fire,Police and EMS units to both the Oak Harbor Estates and the La Cantera Estates development immediately to the south. Would require amending the City's Transportation Plan to downgrade Graham Road from its current"collector'street status to a local street status west of Flour Bluff Drive and designate Cantera Trail with the"collector'status. Planning Commission and Council approval of the street closing and Transportation Plan amendment would also be required and would require the abutting landowner along the closed portion of Hutsell Avenue to reimburse the city for the fair market value of the public right-of-way. in the amount of$8,928.00 assessed by the City's Property and Land Acquisition Division. Mr.Seiler closed his presentation by discussing the traffic impact of having the Hutsell Avenue connection. The current traffic demand on Graham Road is 247 vehicles per average weekday. With the completion of the La Cantera Subdivision,the traffic on Graham has been estimated to increase to 289 vehicles per day if Hutsell Avenue were opened to Graham Road. Further ,with the ultimate build-out of remaining land area between the La Cantera Subdivision and Division Road,the resultant traffic demand on to Graham would be nominal,with an estimated increase to only 350 vehicles per day. This nominal increase is attributed to other more direct east-west street connections to Flour Bluff Drive that would be constructed as part of the new development to bear the heaviest burden of newly generated traffic. Thus,Mr.Seiler concluded that Graham Road would not be negatively impacted by the Hutsell Avenue connection whenever it occurred. Committee member asked what development is beyond Graham Road and SPID? Mr.Seiler stated about 5 residential lots were located in this area. Mr.Mic Raasch with the Planning Department stated that a large vacant lot which extends to the west 000(2. of Flour Bluff Drive to the Cayo de Oso. Commercial property fronts to the north of SPID. Capt.Mark Wagner,of the Fire Prevention Bureau with the Corpus Christi Fire Department stated that Graham Road is a two- lane road approximately 3000 feet in length. Their main concern is ingress and egress out of this area. Fire equipment cannot be repositioned without backing out the entire length of Graham Road along with repositioning the fire equipment. Without needed access into thee large brush areas and grass covered areas,firefighters are forced to allow large areas to bum to the point where they can be attacked from a major roadway. The addition of one or more paved roads would supply a needed firebreak in the middle of heavy,brush-covered terrain. Both Mr.Alejandro and Mr. Sher asked if any experiences related to the ingress and egress into this location with the fire equipment. Captain Wagner stated that personnel must either back out or go to the end of Graham Road and turnaround with cumbersome maneuvering. Buses do not travel this route. Students are either driven to school or must walk to a designated pick-up location on Flour Bluff Drive. At this time,Chairperson Alejandro opened the floor to the public. Nancy Vatzmeyer,1675 Graham,resident for 10 years. She stated she is very pleased with the response time from both the Corpus Christi Police Department and Fire Departments in the past. She is very concerned with increase of traffic and change in life style if Hutsell Avenue is opened. Paul Carangelo thanked the Committee for letting them appear before the Committee,but expressed concern that the citizens were chasing a"moving target"in their attempt to address the issue of keeping Hustell Avenue closed. Residents were given short time topreparefor this meeting and address neighborhood issues concerning the La Contera Subdivision and is very distressed over controversial issue. Requests that opened Hutsell Avenue be closed. Although he is listed as the applicant of record,this is an neighborhood issue. Mr.Carangelo commented that residents were not granted the opportunity to plan their response at the Planning Commission's meeting. Mr.Carangelo further stated that the adjacent developer is not interested in opening Hutsell Avenue.He added that the City had not acted in good faith by clearing the Hutsell Avenue right-of-way to make a utility connection prior to the City's October 2 meeting with subdivision residents. Residents are interested in retaining the existing and variable environment of settings in this neighborhood. Opening road will lead to vandalism and ruin unique setting. Didn't want in 1984,now, or in the future. Mr.Carangelo requested the Committee to vote to recommend in favor of closure for residents of this very important issue. Mr.Sher questioned number of residents on Witner. Resident,Ms.Pam Lakhani stated that there are only four residents living on this cul-de-sac. Mr.Sher also questioned the possible construction of a cul-de-sac at the end of Witner. Mr.Seiler stated that there is not enough room on this existing cul-de-sac for larger vehicles(delivery and garbage collection vehicles)to turn around. Mr.Leo Farias with Special Services reiterated the City's need to maintain the Hutsell Avenue right-of-way,stating it is City's policy to disallow long dead-end streets acquired through annexation. Chairperson Alejandro asked Mr.Seiler if he had attended the public meeting for residents of Hutsell Avenue,Graham Road and other neighborhood residents affected by the opening of Hutsell Avenue. Mr.Seiler answered in the affirmative and the meeting was very well attended. Mr.Seiler identified that the vast majority of those residents in attendance voiced their adamant view that the Hutsell Avenue right-of-way should be closed. Mr.Foster asked what percentage of residents living on Graham Road signed petition. Mr.Carangelo answered 96.5% of the residents. 23 out of 24 have signed petition. Mr. Sher asked intention of Staff for opening of Hutsell Avenue. Mr. Seiler stated there are two reasons: One is for Transportation Plan Requirement and the other for proper subdivision circulation. The modified loop that is presented as a second option(Option II)with La Contera Drive substituted as the loop collector is not supported by Staff. The second is just good neighborhood connectivity for routine traffic generation to provide maximum potential for emergency response. Mr. Moss inquired if the City Council makes the final decision on this issue? Mr. Seiler stated that the City's Code of Ordinances that any street closure,paper street or city right-of-way must be dealt with by the City Council. Elizabeth Payne,resident stated that Graham Road is a very beautiful,quiet street and unique neighborhood. Residents were made aware that Hutsell Avenue would be opened after notification from the developer of La Contera Subdivision. She further stated that the City notified residents of two concerns that were preventing from closure of this road. Emergency response or water line breakage. Why alter the entire neighborhood by opening all the cul-de-sac in the.neighborhood. Residents thought maybe density was the driving issue. Residents are questioning opening of street and ask the Committee to consider their decision carefully. 00003 Peter Carangelo-Resident- Questioning the necessity of construction of caliche road and feels there are examples throughout the City where the same conditions exist and caliche roads are not installed. Questioned the validity of the traffic count when caliche road is constructed and opened. Advised the TAC,that the citizens of the residential area were not allowed to give a presentation at the last Planning Commission Meeting. Master Chief Bennett questioned the number of residents on Graham Road. She was told 14 residents live on Graham Road. City Planner Mic Raasch further stated that one concept that the City strives is to use paralleling collector streets to set up future traffic signal intersections at the arterial streets to alleviate congestion for future traffic increases. These are set-up at half mile intervals. Most efficient way of handling vehicular traffic in the developing areas of Corpus Christi. Mr.Ybarra made motion,seconded by Chief Bennett to maintain the concept identified in the current Transportation Plan identified in Option I. Discussion followed: Mr.Carangelo voiced his feeling that not all of the Staffs presentation was presented at the previous neighborhood meeting. Ms. Payne stated she was not aware that the TAC was limited to the two options presented. She expressed concern and confusion that she was under the impression another option"presented on request"would also be considered. Mr. Seiler clarified that the Staffs Option II was the same option supported by the neighborhood residents. Mr.Ybarra stated his reasons for voting for Option I are safety oriented. Mr.Foster stated he was in favor of structured streets and this is one of the small hazards of living in an undeveloped area and concluded be thought the City will never give up the right-of-way. Mr.Moss stated that this essentially leaves Hutsell Avenue in the hands of the City Council. Mr.Orlando asked if temporary status of caliche construction have to take place? Mr.Farias stated that the City is obligated to continue with construction,until a ruling body changes the plat and it is a condition of plat approval. Mr.Raasch also stated that Flour Bluff has a sandy base and this caliche road is being constructed for utility maintenance stability. Mr.Ybarra inquired sequence to follow TAC recommendation. Mr.Seiler stated and was confirmed by Mr.Raasch that within 3-4 weeks, an official public hearing date would be conducted by the Planning Commission,followed soon thereafter by the City Council's public hearing.TAC has three choices,voting Option I, II or as previously indicated to Mr.Carangelo that the Committee could table this matter until the next meeting to allow for further input from other residents. Mr.Seiler added that he didn't feel any new information would be presented by Staff or residents if the matter was tabled. Mr. Sher stated that he will be supporting Option I,and does not want to limit flexible of the community for opening of streets, also continued installation and synchronization of traffic signals and slow response in the event of emergencies. Motion passes 6 vs 1. Mr.Alejandro abstaining due to his work relation with Mr.Carangelo. IX. CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT - Mr.Seiler informed the Committee of the on-going construction on Airline Road between Wooldridge Road and Saratoga Boulevard; McArdle Road project between Weber/Everhart. Road construction to begin shortly includes Kostoryz Road and Ennis Joslin Road/SPID. Mr. Sher asked about the construction time frame for McArdle between Carroll/Weber. Mr. Seiler stated Contractor will start sometime later this year. Mr. Sher questioned construction on Leopard Street-Phase III. Mr. Seiler stated Contractor, Haas-Anderson has indicated construction will be accomplished in three phases. Mr.Seiler advised Mr.Sher that a Neighborhood Meeting will be held Thursday,October 26th at 6:30 p.m.at West Guth Community Center by TxDOT and the Contractor. X.. COMMITTEE MEMBER ISSUES for FUTURE TAC COMMITTEE MEETINGS-None XI. PREVIOUS CONCERNS-Mr.Noyola inquired about Mr.Ismael Soto's report to TAC regarding glare fence over Crosstown Expressway. Mr.Seiler stated Mr.Soto will give presentation at November 27,2000 meeting. Chairperson Alejandro asked about parking control issues at new U.S.Federal Courthouse. Mr.Seiler stated that presentation will be held in November,2000 meeting also. XII. NEW CONCERNS- Mr.Moss stated in the August 28,2000 TAC meeting he was quoted as saying in connection with a grant application that the"State appears to be dragging their feet". TxDOT local District Office questioned his making this comment 00004 and proceeded in writing to show him how much they had promoted City staff to make application in a timely manner. In light of this issue,he would like the minutes of this meeting to reflect that he apologizes for these comments. He praises the local TxDOT District Office for their efforts,particularly in this connection. Mr.Alejandro inquired the PSA disposition presently. Mr.Seiler informed Chairperson Alejandro that Public Relations City Staff is preparing PSA presently and it will be brought to the TAC for presentation. XII. ADJOURNMENT-Meeting adjourned at 4: 18 p.m. 00005