Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-08-14 TAC MINUTES• • • City of Englewood, Colorado ENGLEWOOD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE Minutes of August 14, 2003 The regular monthly meeting of the Englewood Transportation Advisory Committee was called to order by Chairperson Anderson at 7:05 p.m. in the City of Englewood Community Room. Members Present: David Anderson Joe Christie Gary Dounay Betty Goosman Ken Ross, Director of Public Works, ex officio Members Absent: Cinda Losee A quorum was present. Also Present: Ladd Vostry, Traffic Engineer Approval of Minutes Wendy Weiman, Transportation Analyst Linda Wilks, Recording Secretary John Collins, Police Lieutenant See attached sign-in sheet Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any additions or corrections to the minutes of July 10, 2003. There being none, a motion was made and seconded to approve the minutes as presented. Motion passed . Public Comment Mr. Bill deSimone was present, and inquired about the outcome of staff's investigation regarding traffic concerns that were presented at the July ETAC meeting by residents living on Lafayette St. between Hampden Ave. and Dartmouth Ave. Traffic Engineer Vostry reported that speed and volume studies were conducted on this stretch of Lafayette St., during which, counters were placed in each of the four blocks for a period of one week during the two phases of the study: phase one included the 3100 and 3200 blocks, and phase two included the 3300 and 3400 blocks. Mr. Vostry stated that the average daily count of vehicles on Lafayette St. from Dartmouth to Eastman (3100 block) was 770 vehicles per day; from Eastman to Floyd (3200 block), 760 vehicles per day; from Floyd to Girard, 1100 vehicles per day; and, from Girard to Old Hampden, 1150 vehicles per day. For comparison, Mr. Vostry stated that Downing St. carries approximately 8,000 vehicles per day. Committee Member Goosman inquired if the number of vehicles counted at this location was a normal number for side streets. Mr. Vostry stated that typical residential streets that don't connect to collector streets could be as low as 300-400 cars per day. He stated that each house can generate from 6 to 10 "trips" per day. Mr. Vostry stated that the highest speeds were recorded between Dartmouth and Eastman. The median speed for this stretch was between 29-30 mph, an 85th percentile of 34 mph. Mr. Vostry explained that the 85 th percentile indicates that 85% of the vehicles are traveling at that speed or lower. Between Eastman and Floyd, the median speed was 25 mph, or 29.6 for northbound and between 23 and 27.4 mph for southbound. Between Floyd and Girard, the northbound median speed was 25 mph, with an 85th percentile of 29.8 mph, and the southbound median speed was 22 mph, with an 85th percentile of 24.8 mph. Between Girard and Old Hampden, the northbound median speed was 28 mph, with an 85th percentile of • 30.9 mph, and the southbound median speed was between 26 and 29.7mph. Mr. Vostry stated that the mode speed, that is the vehicle speed most traveled, varied block by block between 20-30 mph. Statistics showed that 15%-30% of the motorists were exceeding the 30 mph speed limit, again varying block by block. However, considering vehicles traveling 36 mph or higher, the percentage drops to 2.1 %-8%. Lt. Collins noted that, although the speed study indicates that a speeding problem does not exist at this location, he believes that with fifteen citizens attending the July ETAC meeting describing speeding incidents, that there is, in fact, a situation that needs investigation. Lt. Collins advised that he has increased the police patrol in the area, and within the next month he expects to present a report to ETAC with improved findings for that time period. Mr. Vostry added that a second speed study will be conducted a few weeks following the opening of school to compare the traffic patterns for the two time periods. Additionally, Mr. Vostry advised that Parking Enforcement staff spoke to management from both Kimberly Woods Apartments and the Julia Temple Center nursing home. Mr. Vostry stated he plans to also visit these establishments to reinforce the parking concerns of the neighborhood, and inquire about their plans for assisting with the neighborhood parking problems. To Committee Member Dounay's inquiries, Mr. Vostry explained that the counters have a margin of error, typically around 5%, but the magnetic field contained in each counter will indicate the speed of a vehicle, time of day, and day of the week. The printout summarizes speed activity on an hourly basis, and shows higher speeds during the A.M. peak (5-8:00 a.m.) and the P.M. peak (3-6:00 p.m.). Typically, drivers exceeding the 85th percentile speed occur during these peak times. Mr. Vostry stated they were particularly interested in whether or not there was a significant amount of traffic on Lafayette cutting through from Old Hampden to Dartmouth, and the study indicated that was not the case. Mr. Vostry explained the ratios of average weekday traffic (Monday through Friday) and of average daily traffic (Monday through Sunday). Average weekday and average daily traffic ratios close in number would indicate primarily neighborhood traffic for the area, while a high average weekday and low average daily traffic ratios would indicate cut-through traffic in the area. Where only neighborhood traffic exists, people living closer to collector streets will experience higher traffic from those neighbors traveling to and from the collector streets. Mr. Dounay commented that the speed study eludes to the fact that many drivers, in reality, believe they are not speeding until they reach a speed at which they think they will be ticketed, so if they know they can drive 35-37 mph before being ticketed, then, to them, that is really the effective speed limit. Mr. Dounay expressed his disagreement with conversation from the July ETAC meeting wherein it was stated that lowering the speed limit to 25 mph would be ineffective. He reiterated his opinion that the speed limit should be lowered to 25 mph, and reminded Members that they previously recommended to City Council that the speed limit be lowered to 25 mph. He opined that lowering the speed limit to 25 mph would allow 2 • • • • • traffic citations to be issued to motorists traveling 32+ mph instead of 35+ mph before being cited. Additionally, he stated that parked larger vehicles, SUV's, etc., make it difficult for motorists to see around them. Mr. Dounay stated that if the speed limit is established at 25 mph, then a margin exists of when it will be enforced, and that margin drops it down to something closer to what people think is the proper speed limit. Director Ross stated that the data shows motorists drive at the speed they feel comfortable driving. Mr. Ross stated traffic engineers are charged with looking at the 85th percentile speed along with any accident history when assigning speed limits; prima facie evidence indicates that the a5t h percentile speed is the safe speed for that area. Mr. Ross stated that in many court jurisdictions in the country, the a5 th percentile determines whether or not the motorist is driving at a safe and prudent speed. Mr. Dounay opined that, for the Englewood community and the existing culture, and the fact that City Council wanted the 25 mph speed limit and ETAC supported them on that, the speed limit should be 25 mph. Mr. Dounay stated that data can be interpreted in many ways, and he emphasized that ETAC should go forth and establish the speed limit at 25 mph . Mr. deSimone stated he does not believe there is a speed limit sign of any kind posted on Lafayette St., and inqu ired how it would be determined that speed ing has taken place when a sign is not posted to designate the speed limit. Director Ross advised that the Model Traffic Code for all cities in the state of Colorado determines that the safe speed on a residential street is 30 mph. Once a city adopts the Model Traffic Code, and exceptions are not taken, the speed limit does not have to be posted on every street. Mr. Ross offered to take a look at posting speed limit signs along this stretch of Lafayette St. Traffic Engineer Vostry suggested not posting 30 mph speed limit signs around the school between Dartmouth and Floyd because it is now posted for a 20 mph school zone, and this may confuse motorists. However, he will look at post ing the stretch of Lafayette St. between Floyd Ave. and Old Hampden for 30 mph. There was some discussion regarding the confusion caused by school zone signs that include "on school days". Mr. Vostry noted that that particular signage was actually approved by the School Safety Committee. Mr. Dounay asked about removing that wording, since school grounds are used not only during regular school hours, but by neighborhood children also on weekends, holidays , and other times when school is not in session. Mr. Ross stated that, on a case by case basis , the Traffic Engineer can take a look at speed limits in certain areas and make recommendations for adjustments, and asked that Mr. Vostry discuss with the School Safety Committee the issue of eliminating the wording "on school days", and posting the speed limits around the elementary schools at 25 mph year round, and additionally, leaving the flashing lights and changing that speed from 20 to 25 mph. Committee Member Dounay suggested that police officers attend the upcoming Back to School Night at the Eng lewood Schools, and personally meet with parents to promote safety around the schools as well as consideration for adjacent neighborhoods, and to let them know that officers will be patrolling the areas. Director Ross stated he will provide Committee Member Dounay with a copy of a speed study that was conducted by the City of Golden in 2001 for their Alive at 25 Program. The result of the study indicated that, in some cases, the speed actually increased after the program was initiated . Chairperson Anderson requested that the remainder of this discussion take place under New Business. 3 Old Business There was no Old Business. New Business Director Ross reiterated that, in response to Committee Member Dounay's concern pertaining to speed limits adjacent to the elementary schools, Traffic Engineer Vostry will speak with the School Safety Committee regarding changing the speed limit to 25 mph on a year around basis, and that the existing flashing lights will remain to reinforce the 25 mp h speed limit. Additionally, it will be suggested that the existing wording, "on school days", be removed. Director's Choice • Traffic Engineer Vostry reported that Xcel Energy has provided the needed power at the designated sites for the two variable speed message signs. One sign is located, westbound, on Quincy Ave. at Jason Park, and a second sign is located, southbound, on Logan St. just south of Bates Ave. Mr. Vestry explained that the signs are currently programmed to post the speeds of approaching vehicles and begin flashing when the speed is higher than 35 mph. Mr. Vestry stated that the sign on Logan St. reads, "The Speed Limit is 30 mph -Your Speed Is ... ". However, because of the park playground at Quincy Ave. and Jason St., there is a 25 mph speed plaque posted prior to the variable speed sign on Quincy Ave., and that speed sign only reads "Your Speed Is ... ". Mr. Vostry stated that he will conduct a second speed study at these locations within the next 2-3 weeks to compare the most current speeds w ith speeds recorded previously. Mr. Vostry • commented he read an article regarding a speed study conducted after posting the variable speed message • signs for a period of two years by the City of Phoenix, AZ., and the study found that there has been a 3-5 mph reduction in speed in the areas where the variable message signs were posted. Additionally, in the City of Phoenix, the same speed reduction was recorded in areas where the speed trailer had been stationed. At Committee Member Dounay's inquiry, Mr. Vostry stated that the variable speed message signs will pick up the speeds of vehicles and motorcycles, but not the speeds of bicycles. The cost of these signs is approximately $4,500 each. Director Ross stated that if Englewood has a similar speed reduction as Phoenix, that perhaps we could look at purchasing additional signs to install on the Oxford hill and also on Dartmouth Ave. • Traffic Engineer Vostry advised that he spoke with the Director of Air Life regarding the increased Swedish Hosp ital helicopter traffic traveling over the neighborhoods. In 1994, it was established with DRCOG that S.H. 285 would be used as a guideline route for helicopters traveling to and from the hospital. Mr. Vostry stated that the Director of Air Life emphasized that each pilot is responsible for a safe flight, and, depending on the wind and other factors, may divert from this pattern. The Director of Air Life agreed to speak to his pilots regarding using flight patterns over S.H. 285. Mr. Vostry stated that Air Life is exploring the possibility of installing cameras in the helipads to monitor the flights in and out. To Mr. deSimone's inquiry, Mr. Vostry stated that regulations require that helicopters fly a minimum of 1,000 ft. above ground, first and foremost taking safety into consideration. Mr. Vostry noted that the Director of Air Life offered his assistance should the citizens desire changes in flight patterns or other information. 4 ·- • • • • Director Ross reviewed the list of 2004 Capital Project recommendations. He noted that 85% of the items listed are ongoing maintenance activities for existing programs. Mr. Ross was pleased to report, however, that funds have been allocated for Englewood to proceed with an agreement initiated by Denver in 2002 to expand the Northwest Greenbelt trail to meet the Platte River Trail. This project was discussed with ETAC in August of 2002. • Director Ross recognized a thank you note received from Mr. Steve Wood regarding the communication he received from Mr. Ross pertaining to the recent traffic study that was completed as a result of Mr. Wood's request. The thank you note was routed to Committee Members. • Director Ross distributed and reviewed his memorandum to ETAC Members regarding motorized skateboards and scooters. Mr. Ross stated that City Council has requested that ETAC revisit the issue of motorized skateboards and scooters, which is not addressed in the Municipal Code. As stated in the memo, motorized skateboards and scooters are treated as human powered roller skates, roller blades, roller skis, etc. and are, therefore, unlawful on public property where posted signs prohibit their use and on private property unless permission has been obtained from the property owner. They may be used on public sidewalks as long as the user uses good judgment, yields the right-of-way to pedestrians, etc. Additionally, motorized skateboards, scooters, gopeds, trail bikes, minibikes, go-carts, golf carts, snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles, and toy vehicles which are not designed for travel on public roads are treated as toys and are prohibited on City streets. Neighborhood electrical vehicles meeting certain conditions are permitted. Wheelchairs are exempt. Motorized bikes are permitted on the streets when the operator has a valid driver's license, they ride as close to the right edge of the roadway as possible, they don't ride two abreast, and obey all the rules of the road. Motorized bikes are not permitted on sidewalks unless specifically approved with appropriate signage. Mr . Ross inqu ired if there is a public perception that there is a problem with motorized skateboards, scooters, gopeds, etc. Members expressed concern for the safety of children driving these vehicles, not being aware of the rules of the road, not stopping for stop signs, and, additionally, for the safety of pedestrians. Committee Member Dounay opined that these vehicles should not be allowed to run on City streets or sidewalks, and that the Code should be changed to address these types of vehicles. Mr. Dounay stated they should not be riding on the sidewalks, and should be on the street only with a license. Committee Member Christie stated he believes the current treatment of these types of vehicles is sufficient, and that enforcement of the current law should be addressed. Brief discussion ensued regarding how much control a child can have when driving a motorized vehicle. For clarification, Mr. Ross stated that currently, the Englewood Municipal Code regarding these types of vehicles is "silent", and the City treats them as pedestrian powered vehicles, and as such are entitled to be on the sidewalk but not allowed to be on the street. Mr. Ross reviewed the treatment of this issue in other jurisdictions. Denver prohibits these vehicles except in areas where "play streets" have been created. Greenwood Village has no prohibition against sidewalk operation. Littleton indicates that any vehicle other than a bicycle or any other human powered vehicle is not allowed on the sidewalk. Westminster has a specific prohibition against any other device 5 powered by an internal combustion engine on any property owned by the city. Thornton prohibits these vehicles in all areas. Arvada, Aurora, and Layfayette, with the exception of public streets, prohibits these vehicles on public property (parks, etc.). • Considerable discussion ensued regarding obeying the rules of the road; combustion powered vs. human powered vehicles; acceptable locations for driving vehicles of this type other than sidewalks and streets; high speeds of these vehicles; noise created by these vehicles; the young age of drivers and their inexperience and lack of knowledge of the rules of the road; danger to the driver as well as danger to others; increased number of these types of vehicles on the roadways; citations for wreckless behavior while driving these vehicles, etc. Following discussion, Director Ross stated that prior to the September meeting, he will put together some information regarding this issue for Committee's review and further discussion at the September meeting. Committee concurred. • Director Ross distributed copies of a memorandum addressing project submittals for the 2005-2010 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Mr. Ross will be discussing these items with City Council on August 18th and asking for their input prior to submitting the required advance notification to DRCOG by the August 21st deadline. The actual application is due October 3rd. Mr. Ross reviewed each of staff's recommendations for this program: South Broadway Beautification -median improvements from Tufts Ave. south to Belleview, similar to improvements that were made on Broadway from Hampden Ave. north to Yale Ave. Little Orv Creek Bike Trail Connection -construct a pedestrian bridge to connect the Little Dry Creek Trail with the Platte River Trail. Reconstruction of Englewood Parkway between Broadway and the Roundabout -reconstruct this • stretch of Englewood Parkway with a concrete roadway to accommodate the increased bus traffic. Windermere Bike Trail Connection to CityCenter Englewood and the Light Rail Station -connect the on-street bike trail on Windermere St. with CityCenter Englewood Light Rail Station that would enable pedestrians and bicyclists to cross over S.H. 285 via a pedestrian bridge. As stipulated in a negotiated agreement with Gart Brothers for enhancements, construction of the bridge would require obtaining federal funds. Platte River Trail Bridge at Englewood Golf Course -This project was requested by the Director of Parks and Recreation. Currently, golf cart traffic and bike traffic make use of the same bridge over the South Platte River at the Englewood Golf Course. The new bridge would separate the bike traffic from the golf cart traffic. Mr. Ross explained that, beginning this year, the TIP application process now requires a conceptual design-with each application. Because this new application process requires "up front" money for the conceptual design, as well as the time element for submitting the application by the October 3rd deadline, Mr. Ross opined that the City may have to pare down the list to two or three items. Mr. Ross stated that staff will be glad to consider other projects ETAC Members would like to include on the list. Committee Member Christie inquired if the City could prepare the required conceptual designs for the projects without hiring a contractor, to which Mr. Ross explained that staff has been cut back over the years and are currently engaged in numerous other projects. Committee Member Dounay opined that the South Broadway Beautification project, as well as Reconstruction of Englewood Parkway, could have an impact on the adjacent businesses, and suggested that, because of the need for sales tax revenues, the City must be very careful not to impact the businesses 6 • • in a way that would cause a reduction in that revenue source. He added that this type of construction would create some traffic problems and people will avoid those areas and, therefore, the businesses. Mr. Ross commented that the first year of these TIP projects is 2005, and could go as late as 2010-2015, and likely, construction of any of these projects is several years out. Mr. Christie suggested that in the long run, completion of the South Broadway Beautification project could create an increase in business. Mr. Dounay opined that the Broadway medians in north Englewood are undesirable and he would not like to see that problem extended on Broadway in south Englewood. Brief discussion ensued regarding project costs. Director Ross estimated the Broadway Beautification project at $900,000; the LDC Trail at $400,000; Englewood Parkway Reconstruction project at $600,000; Windermere Bike Trail Connection to CityCenter project at $900,000; and the Platte Rover Trail Bridge project at $400,000. Required City matching funds depends on the points awarded by DRCOG to a given project, depending on the City's offer to over-match. The minimum match is 20%. Committee agreed that this list of five items is a viable list of projects to submit to DRCOG. Chairperson's Choice Chairperson Anderson asked if ETAC could be provided with a copy of Community Development's Long Range Plan to see if there are any transportation issues that ETAC should be aware of. Director Ross stated he will obtain a copy of the transportation section of that document for ETAC . Mr. Anderson inquired about a citizen complaint regarding a section of Federal Blvd. where the speed • limit has been lowered by 5 mph. Mr. Ross stated that this Littleton resident complained about the 2 tickets he received over a two year period. Mr. Ross stated that a letter from the mayor was sent to this individual advising him that this speed limit has been in place for some time and recommended that he observe the posted speed limits. • Mr. Anderson advised that he will be on vacation during the September ETAC meeting, and Vice-chair Christie will run the meeting. Committee Members' Choice At Committee Member Goosman's inquiry, Traffic Engineer Vostry reiterated that he plans to speak with staff from the Julia Temple Center nursing home to reinforce the parking concerns of the neighborhood. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Linda Wilks, Recording Secretary 7 City of Englewood ENGLEWOOD TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE VISITOR SIGN-UP SHEET NAME ..... ~ ·""'-r• ·c• ~,i I ~ :S/r11ur; j)frV,'d c.J"C:-S / w--.:-:C.. Regular Meeting August 14, 2003, 7:00 p.m. Englewood Civic Center ADDRESS -~ 332 7 5;h-kt1ffe 332 , s . L-: j"C.. ~ I 1 PHONE ~~·,: 3rP5 -1f/ -3~3!' ~ . .A-.{\. • • •