Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Transportation Advisory Commission - 06/24/1993 k ;v TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMI'1'1'EE MINUTES* JUNE 24, 1993 (*These minutes reflect the meeting that was held by the Transportation Advisory Committee prior to the joint meeting with the Water/Shore Advisory Committee. Minutes of the joint meeting are also attached.) CALL TO ORDER Mr. Barry Pillinger, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 2:05 p.m. (No absences will be recorded because meeting is not being held on regularly scheduled date.) II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the May 28, 1993 meeting were approved by the Committee without any changes. III. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT W. CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER'S REPORT Mr. David Seiler indicated for clarity that this meeting was taking the place of the regularly scheduled meeting on June 28 and any absences from today's meeting will not be classified as absences. In response to the Committee's interest regarding the Water Street pedestrian accident,the Traffic Engineering staff has met with the management of the Shoreline Terrace Building. There have been some improvements in the area regarding painting of curb area to increase the sight distance. The pedestrian crosswalk was repainted for increased visibility. A study was also completed regarding the motorists behavior in that area. There is a long gap between the Water/Kinney signalized intersection (heading in the southbound direction of travel), and no stops going all the way into the Shoreline Terrace Building towards Furman Avenue. There is potential complacency created on the part of the driver/motorist driving in that direction, and no real alert factor involved in terms of coming to a stop at a stop sign or a crosswalk on a typical basis. Traffic Engineering is planning installation of flashing/blinkingsignalization at the Water/Park intersection which should have some positive effect on whatever speeding may be taking place on Water Street and also to draw more of a sense of caution to motorists that are traveling in that southbound direction on Water Street. This has been reported to the Shoreline Terrace management. This is a project that is probably several months away but it is 1 SCANNED 0 something that we do have in our plans at this point. Mr. Pillinger asked what is the signal going to consist of--four-way flashing red? Mr. Seiler confirmed plans to use four-way stop with overhead flashing signals. Mr. PiRinger inquired about signals on Water Street at night defaulting to flashing yellow? Mr. Seller stated that at some intersections they do default to flashing but at others we have all-way stop. There is a long stretch between Water/Kinney and Water/Park, it's close to 1/4-mile in terms of distance and we feel that this would be the best method of control. Another item mentioned by Mr. Seiler was that we will be receiving responses on our 'Request for Proposal' on the southside study on July 9th. We are pretty close to the point in time that we will be short listing a consultant for that study. This is the southside MPO study that the Transportation Advisory Committee has had quite a bit of involvement. Regarding some information that has been reported,more less sensationalized in the Caller-Times regarding the difference in statistics on what we have reported to the Transportation Advisory Committee in the way drug and alcohol-related traffic accidents and those records that are maintained by the Police Department. Mr. Seller stated that the information that has been reported to the Transportation Advisory Committee is 100% accurate,based on the first accident report information received from the Police Department. Traffic Engineering is now with the understanding that quite a bit of follow-up information by the Police Department. In some cases, changes in those statistics on the Police Traffic Accident Report which at this point in time,we had not previously been the recipient. In essence,the information the Police Department has been reporting is certainly accurate. Bottom line on this is that Traffic Engineering and the Police Department are going to work closely together on this to make sure that we have a 'hand-shake' type of communication on this report. Captain Byrd has a sample of the traffic accident report with that information coded that she will pass around to you. There is a particular category used to determine that information without having to read through the traffic accident report. There is a check-off list that indicates if the traffic accident was alcohol-related or not, whether there is some possibility that it was and then based on the follow-up investigation, sometimes that information is deleted in follow-up by the Police Department after it is determined not to be an alcohol-related or drug-related accident. Mr. DeVille asked Captain Byrd how much time lapses between the first report to Traffic Engineering and the follow-up report. (Due to the fact that Captain Byrd was speaking from the audience and not into a microphone, the recorder did not pick up Captain Byrd's response.) Mr. Seiler stated Traffic Engineering's intention from this point forward is to not report the information until we have gotten the follow-up report from the Police Department. (Recorder did not pick up Captain Byrd's response.) ;. r< 2 Mr. DeVille commented that we make decisions on false information or we could make decisions on false information. (Again, recorder did not pick up response by Captain Byrd.) Mr. DeVille stated that it would always be adjusted down and this is a concern to him. Mr. Seiler stated that with approximately 9,000 traffic accidents a year, there is going to be some error and we have to do the best we can to provide the most accurate information to the Committee, particularly in those things that decisions are being based. Traffic Engineering will do its best to improve statistical information with the Police Department, particularly in those things that we report to the Committee. Another item that Mr. Seiler mentioned the status of several items that had previously approved by the Transportation Advisory Committee.Traffic Engineering is in the process of resubmitting that information in the new City Council format that was developed months ago in terms of an agenda item. V. TRAFFIC FATALITY REPORT (Attachment "A") Captain Byrd reported that the City had recorded the sixth and seventh fatalities of the year. She gave details of the two fatality accidents as was reported on the handout to the Committee (copy attached). Our alcohol-related fatalities for the year stand at 43%. One death of the seven was totally drug-related. At the same time last year, we had eleven fatalities. DWI arrests stand 560 people so far this year. This time last year, we had arrested 559. Mr. Braselton asked about article in paper recently about revocation of driver license, has this bill passed? It is a state law. Mr. Pillinger stated that it is not an automatic revocation,it provides for a hearing for that. Captain Byrd stated that she was not familiar with the bill. Mr. Pillinger stated that Governor Richards had just signed it a couple of days ago and it is not administrative revocation on the scene but it provides for a hearing. Mr. Pillinger didn't know what the effective date of the bill is. Captain Byrd stated that the Corpus Christi Police Department separates alcohol- related and drug-related accidents. The State of Texas does not separate and she didn't know whether Traffic Engineering's Tracer traffic accident computer program does or not. Mr. Seiler stated that we can separate these accidents if the Committee wishes to have it just alcohol-related. Mr. DeVille asked if it wouldn't be deceiving that way. Mr. Seiler responded that both categories could be distinguished. Captain Byrd then explained the Police Department's Traffic Accident Report(copy passed out to the Committee members). She went over this one particular report 3 referring to part on back of report officers are required to check factors and conditions listed, in this investigator's opinion. Then it says factors and conditions contributing. Another box asks other conditions or factors which may or may not have contributed. The officer says anybody out at 3 a.m. that runs a stop sign and goes into a ditch is drunk, so that's the code they put in box. On review for this type of accident report, where we have no evidence of alcohol involvement,we just have a wreck scene and that's it, we do not count this as alcohol-related accident. The Tracer program does because the clerk looks at these numbers and that's what they record. The consistency in our records is that the same person is reviewing all of these reports. All of these reports come through and the same standards are applied. When we count them we consider whether the alcohol contributed to the accident, and that is the key word and the consistency factor when we look at these reports. We still don't know who the driver was, we don't know whether he was drunk or not, whether he was just going to fast on neighborhood street, didn't know where he was. We don't know what the circumstance was. It is more truthful to call it alcohol-related or drug-related. It is an assumption and we don't count the assumptions. On the other part, if they had been drinking and we know, we report it as alcohol- related, even though they may not be drunk or they may not be arrested for DWI. But if they had been drinking and this surfaces as part of the investigation, we include it. The officer is asked to put down his opinion when he fills out the report, so what we are counting is someone opinion. The Caller-Times reported one of the eschewed stats too but when you look at the stats overall, they aren't that different. The State hasn't upgraded their software recently, they are still using software that doesn't have all of these factors and conditions to report, they count them all as drug-related. Captain Byrd replied that you can depend on stats but anybody who works with stats knows that you have to look at them with a critical eye. VI. MONTHLY TRAFFIC ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE REPORT Mr. Seiler reported 734 total traffic accidents during May as compared to same time last year, it is barely significant increase of 1/2 of 1% increase. The alcohol/drug- related accidents those that we received and which we do not have follow-up reports on shows 45 occurring during May as compared to same time last year, shows 36% increase. Injury accidents totaling 1,223 to date, compared to same time last year, our experience is down 2.6%. Total injuries not really shown as an increase or decrease statistic. There is 439 during May, giving a total of 1,982, that's less than a 1% increase compared to the same time last year. We would like to make some specific references to our top 27 high accident locations through May 1993 (second page of report). Everhart and S.H. 358 access road/frontage road system, there are ten accidents which is quite a large number. Statistical breakdown is shown on the bottom of page somewhat scattered by type of accidents, by frontage road location. Biggest category is rear-end collisions. The next highest total for the month was 4 eight traffic accidents at the Weber/SPID intersection and again, statistics are shown on bottom of page. Mr. Seiler referenced two locations, #11 David and Segrest which is not a signalized intersection. It is an intersection but the traffic accident reports report that the traffic accidents that are occurring at that location which is the one on the southbound Crosstown Expressway frontage road between Baldwin and Morgan coming from the direction of Morgan where the exit ramp precedes the on ramp. There is a sight distance problem and those accidents are primarily related to traffic on the frontage road failing to yield to the exit ramp. These accidents are not actually involving traffic turning from Segrest,which is a residential street. Also Interstate 37 and Lantana, this is one that we probably need to take off our report. Those are actually expressway/main lane accidents. They occur on Interstate 37 where Padre Island Drive northbound merges in with the westbound Interstate 37 main lanes. They do not involve Lantana Street traffic and therefore it is not an intersection. The type of accident that is occurring is primarily out of control accidents in the curve area where Padre Island Drive is merging with Interstate 37 westbound and also collisions where the merge actually takes place with the westbound traffic intersecting with traffic from northbound S.H. 358. (One of the committee members asked question but could not be heard on recorder). Mr. Seiler response to this question was some of those accidents are actually double turned, side-swiped collisions with the two vehicles colliding with each other even though they are in separate marked lanes. In closing, at Everhart and South Padre Island Drive, we have a tendency to think these accidents are occurring during peak hour traffic. Strangely enough, most of the accidents are occur at Padre Island Drive intersections are not peak hour traffic related. Only one of the 10 traffic accidents has occurred during the traditional 7 to 9, 4 to 6 or 12 to 1 peak hours. Most of them occurred during the week day, during off peak hours. There were some on Saturday and Sunday where the peak hours are more or less from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. But most of these accidents are non-peak hour traffic related accidents. Mr. Braselton commented that all of sudden Gollihar and Staples have jumped up two months in row. There was nothing going on there that he could think of. Asked what kind of accidents are happening there. Mr. Seiler did not have breakdown of kinds of accidents at that intersection stating that we need to be very specific on is that alienation between the two Gollihar and Staples intersections. We have two, one Gollihar and Staples and one Gollihar and Staples at Autotown. Itmightbe some reporting of both of those into one intersection. I'm not saying that's what the case is here but before I can answer your questions I'll have to check and will report back next month. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Jogging and bicycling special events across the Corpus Christi Ship Channel, Harbor Bridge and other controlled access roadways in Corpus Christi. Mr. Pillinger stated that the committee didn't have any advance information on 5 this item. Mr. Seiler referred to Captain Byrd, and only lead in by saying there is a growing number of special events that we have permitted to Harbor Bridge to be used by bicyclists,joggers. It is becoming an increasing concern to the City because of the difficulty in providing traffic control assistance and traffic enforcement. There are also dangers and hazards involved. Staff has no recommendation at this meeting but wanted to leave a 'bug in your ear' per se in the way of discussion, talking about some of the things seen as problems in continuing to permit those type of things over the Harbor Bridge and that we will soon be coming to the Transportation Advisory Committee in the way of a recommendation to take to the City Council. Captain Byrd showed a video tape of the recent bicycle ride advertised as a Fun Ride which started at convention center and went across the Harbor Bridge all the way around the bay back across the JFK Causeway, through the Naval Air Station and back to the convention center. Video taped were some of the problems that are encountered. (Video tape was shown, Captain Byrd made comments but was out of microphone distance.) Mr. Pillinger asked if item could be held as a discussion item because of shortness of time before joint meeting. B. Discussion of previously recommended speed limit reduction on South Alameda Street between Louisiana Parkway and Six Points(Attachment"C"). Mr. Pillinger stated that the committee was aware of the speed limit reduction on South Alameda that we reviewed last time and if you read Mr. Seiler's memo, Committee members may wish to comment. Mr. Seiler indicated that the Committee may not have understood the signalization impact there. Mr. PiRinger asked for any input from committee. Mr. DeVille asked if it could be tabled until the next meeting. Mr. Pillinger stated that it couldn't because it is pending City Council action. Mr. Braselton indicated that his vote wouldn't change. Mr. Pillinger stated that if Mr. DeVille wanted to make a motion to table and if we get a seconded that will happen. Mr. PiRinger then asked for a 'straw'vote to see where anybody wants to change their vote from the previous meeting. If there is no indication, Mr. Pillinger asked for a motion to that effect so that we have some official action by the Board. Mr. DeVille made motion that previous vote on this matter be maintained. Mr. Braselton seconded the motion. Vote was unanimous with Mr. Len Brandrup abstained from the vote. C. Information regarding the proposed horse drawn carriage (shuttle) service within the Corpus Christi Beach area. Mr. Seiler presented information to the Transportation Advisory Committee on matters regarding the vehicles for hire which are areas not under the review of the City Council,but nonetheless there have been some traffic safety analyses and I would like Mr. Willie 6 rt Medina from the Engineering Services Department that handles vehicles for hire to make a brief comment regarding the proposed horse drawn carriage (shuttle) service on Corpus Christi Beach. Mr. Medina stated that on Tuesday (June 29) Mr. Bob Braun is proposing to operate a new carriage shuttle service in the North Beach area. He wants to offer a shuttle service between the parking lots and the Texas State Aquarium and the USS Lexington. Based on recommendations from Traffic Engineering and the Animal Advisory Board, we are approving his going before the City Council to have his permit approved under the conditions we received from Traffic Engineering of two specific routes, one primary route and one secondary route he will be allowed to travel. His service will be restricted to the North Beach area and he is proposing to operate Monday through Sunday from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. The carriages have a capacity of 25 passengers and he will charge $1.00 per person. The City permits another horse-drawn carriage company that operates strictly in the downtown area. The permit will be awarded for three years and he will be restricted to the North Beach area. If the applicant proposes to operate outside the North Beach area, he will have to come back to the City to have a special permit approved. He had originally requested to operate in the downtown area but his carriages are pretty good size and we felt at this time we wanted to give him the primary route and the secondary route is more of an experimental route to see how it works out. He will operate in June, July August and September. He has received permission from one of the. properties in Rincon Industrial Park to provide portable stables for his horses. Mr. Len Brandrup asked if he is aware of the Aquarium's request and the RTA board's purchase of the tram that is going to be operating there on almost an identical route. Mr. Medina responded that Mr. Braun was aware of this but he feels he has a little extra to offer in regards to the horses and carriage. This is why he was proposing the secondary route which will run along Surfside. Mr. Brandrup stated that the Tide does that and where he is proposing twice a day, the current Tide that is currently operated by the RTA does that hourly. You may want to let him know that this is a duplicate of services that is being operated by the RTA so that he is not surprised. Mr. Braun has been made aware of the RTA shuttle service. VIII. RECOGNITION OF AUDIENCE FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND CONCERNS. No comments were made. IX. ACTION ON ABSENT MEMBERS FROM MAY 1993 MEETING. Mr. PiRinger asked for motion to excuse the absences of Mr. Hecht and Mr. Routh from the May meeting. Mr. Braselton made motion and Mr. DeVille seconded. 7 XI. NEW CONCERNS. Mr. PiRinger dispensed with this due to the meeting running late for the joint meeting with the Water/Shore Advisory Committee. XII. RECESS. Mr. Pillinger recessed this meeting at 3:05 p.m. and the committee will reconvene for joint meeting with Water/Shore Advisory Committee. XIII. JOINT MEETING WITH THE WATER/SHORE ADVISORY COMM A:FEE Dune Protection and Beach Access Plan: Mr. Brandol Harvey, Director of Planning and Development, gave a brief overview of the draft Dune Protection and Beach Access Plan prepared by City Staff. Mr. David Seiler, City Traffic Engineer, presented the Vehicular Control element contained within the Plan. Both the Water/Shore and Transportation Advisory Committees have advisory jurisdiction over these elements. Mr. Seiler first clarified that the Transportation Advisory Committee was being requested to address only the portion of the Dune Protection and Beach Access Plan within the Committee's area of purview--naming the Vehicular Control Plan element of the overall plan and associated Traffic Section of the Dune Protection and Beach Access Ordinance (Regulations). Mr. Seiler then explained specific elements that the Vehicular Control Plan of the Dune Protection and Beach Access Plan must address since the City is proposing new and amended vehicular controls for the gulf beach section within the city limits and then addressed in detail each Vehicular Control Plan element. The focus of the staff presentation was on the proposed prohibition of traffic from the Gulf Beach seawall area and designation of off-beach parking on Windward Drive and associated public pedestrian access ways between Windward Drive and the Gulf Beach seawall. Mr. Tom Utter provided clarification on certain other issues, including explanation that Beach Access Road #3-A is presently a privately owned easement to Nueces County which the City must obtain in the way of a conveyance as it is critical to the City's traffic routing from the beach to Windward Drive, as well as serving as a public access way conforming to the GLO's 1/2-mile spacing criteria for public access ways. Mr. Utter also clarified the City's position on the'need to require beach parking permits for parking along Windward Drive related to this street serving as an area for beach parking. The respective Committees' then opened the meeting to public comment: ° Elizabeth Walker, President of Padre Isles Property Owners' Association, stated their Board has agreed to donate the two easements to the City so that we can have public access to the beach for the safety of the public who use the beach in front of the seawall. 8 o . Tom Reeves, General Manager of Holiday Inn on Padre Island, commented that the plan is pretty self-explanatory and wanted to state that this is in no way by the property owners, as has been speculated, to privatize this area. It is strictly for safety and safety only. o Joseph Farrah,Padre Island businessman and member of Padre Isles Business Association, stated seeing this as an attempt to privatize the beach and is a denial of the public's right to use the beach. o Marie Speer, 909 Red Start, stated that Mr. Farrah's comment was right in one aspect. Public conception is going to be that this is going to give a 'foot in the door' for the property owners to privatize the beach. • David Coggins, representative of Padre Isles Business Association, commented that visitors want a 'safe beach' and traffic conflicts bother tourists. Following the presentations, questions and answers by Committee members and hearing from the public, the Water/Shore Advisory Committee opted to delay action until their regularly scheduled July 1st meeting when they would take action on all elements of the plan. The Transportation Advisory Committee elected to take action on the plan. Motion was presented by Mr. Len Brandrup and seconded by Mr. Fred Braselton to approve the Vehicular Control Plan and Traffic Section (Appendix A of Vehicular Control Plan) of the Dune Protection and Beach Access Ordinance subject to clarification being provided within the text of the Vehicular Control Plan on certain definitions of terms, and clarification of other specific elements (i.e., pedestrian access easements providing direct barrier free access to the Gulf Beach seawall rather than directly to the beach, traffic restrictions applicable to beach area within the city limits south of the Gulf Beach seawall). Mr. Pillinger called for a vote of the Transportation Advisory Committee. Vote was all in favor of motion with Mr. Walter DeVille abstaining. IX. ADJOURNMENT. There being no further business for the Transportation Advisory Committee, the Transportation Advisory Committee adjourned at 5:45 p.m. TACMNJUN 9