Nov 05, 2018 Traffic Safety Commission on 2018-11-05 5:30 PM

Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Traffic Safety Commission meeting of Monday, November 5th, 2018. We have a quorum and the first items on our agenda will be number one, items for consideration. Item A, TSC 18-043 is to consider the approval of the Traffic Safety Commission meetings of October 1st, 2018. Did everybody have a chance to take a look at those minutes? Were there any corrections or did someone make a motion for approval? Motion for approval. Okay. We've got a motion for approval. Do I have a second? Second. Everyone in favor say aye. Aye. Anyone opposed? Okay. The minutes will be accepted as submitted. Item 1B, TSC 18-026 is to receive a report and hold a discussion regarding narrow streets defined as less than 32 feet wide with on-street parking and emergency access in the Villages of Carmel Subdivision. Good evening Commissioners. My name is Brad Layhart. I'm the Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Chief for Denton Fire Department. Today we're going to discuss with you a couple of minutes about narrow roads discussions and where we're at on the process. Over the past few years we've had several projects that have been improved with roads that are narrower than 28 feet, which is generally clear and free, about 26 feet, free and clear once you throw the curbs in there, depending on what type of curbs that they have. The advantages of doing this, it's reduced speed and also reduction in number of accidents. The disadvantages is city vehicles and especially also city fire apparatus have a difficult time navigating these streets because they're too narrow, especially when you allow parking on both sides and it also increases emergency response times. What are possible solutions? The main solution that we've come up with with the traffic engineer for the city and the city engineer is to widen the minimum widths of the streets going forward. There are several projects though that are in various stages that were approved prior to this so they have various stages and levels of grandfathering that have taken effect. We can also restrict parking on one side of the street. Certain developments we could do this, certain developments we might not be able to do this and also it would have to be go through city council approval to limit parking on one side of the street or no parking at all in developments. What we have been doing since originally we were going to come to you guys in May but that meeting got canceled so what we've been doing in the interim time, we've been using different ordinances which we started enforcing especially in the villages of Carmel too about not parking within 20 feet of intersections, stop signs, right aways, etc. which has helped a lot in that development, also 30 feet and our approach to flashing signal stop sign or yield sign. This is a picture of the narrow streets that have been approved in the past. You can see there's maybe an inch or two clearance on that side and a couple inches clearance on that side and this is just a standard size engine. This is even one of our lighter trucks so this is the village of Carmel too. I think all the streets are about this narrow, or actually several of them are this narrow. Some of the other primary streets aren't as narrow as this but if you have any questions. Like I said we've addressed this issue with Pre-Tam already and going forward we have a solution. Yes sir? Where are we with the debt and development code on this? They have to follow them through traffic and traffic in road manual which has the increased size of the roads already built into it. So the development code refers back to our transportation criteria manual which identifies and defines the width of the street so the sections within the manual itself have been widened to 32 feet. So will that include parking on both sides? Correct. So we're going to get 26? We're going to get a clear 20 feet if we go with the fire code. We have six feet parking on either side. Six feet either side available for parking and a clear 20 foot lane in the middle. Is that enough? Yeah, that's about six more feet, five to six more feet than we currently have. We had to come up with a middle point where everyone's happy. We don't want to make the roads too wide especially in neighborhoods that people are just starting to do 40, 50 miles an hour down a residential street so they have to be wide enough for fire apparatus and then also other city apparatus like all the yard waste and trash vehicles. Solid waste. Solid waste vehicles. So this is a width that is no longer approved in the updated development code? Correct. Okay. And what is the setback? So one of the thoughts about widening the road, it doesn't look like there is a front yard setback that is like the one in my neighborhood. Yeah, this subdivision had some different setbacks. The way it was multifamily, it's a single building that's connected all the way and even though they're different units and they're sold separately, it's just the way it was set up. It's different. It's a condo/townhome/different mix. We've had a few other developments through grandfather and they've been approved already for the narrow roads but Todd and Preetam have worked with those developers already and a lot of the developments now that are just starting that are getting the narrow roads are only going to be allowed to park on one side of the street so that's a huge win. And have the neighbors in this area been approached about going to one side of the road park, one side of the street parking only or what do you want to do with this? Yeah, that's a tough one. I think we started with, as Brad mentioned, we started with focusing our attention on the intersections which is where it becomes really more difficult for a truck to navigate. In between mid-block, there's okay spacing so that the truck can zip by but turning around is where they're having a tough time so we started enforcing some of that setbacks that we require from intersections, 20 feet clear and 30 feet clear. And that has helped a lot in this area. Due to the density of this area, they don't really have a lot of other options to park. Right. Right. Are there alleys? They have alleys but they're real narrow alleys too. I think they're 10 or 12. Yes, they're really narrow. And then off-street parking of nowhere? Well, garages. Garage driveways from the alley so they have driveways and then garages, yeah. And this is at least a newer part that was approved recently but there are older neighborhoods around UNT that have similar situation where the road was not designed for that kind of parking on street. Right. And it's very narrow. Part of it needs to be no parking and I think as part of the old gateway plan, we're coming up with solutions. What are the interim solutions and long-term solutions as far as when streets are less than 32 feet wide, at a minimum, we should go with one-sided parking restriction and if it's less than 26 feet or 20 feet, go with both-side restriction. So we are recommending, I mean, once the plan goes through, we will recommend something like that just because of the emergency response and the way the fire trucks move through this area. There were a couple other locations within the UNT area, McCormick, and we worked one location at a time where it had been an issue and we've gone through and considered it as a special case to move forward. I'm curious, how do cities where they can't make the streets wider, how do they deal with this problem? Do they have smaller fire trucks or is there smaller equipment ever? Some cities like San Francisco, for instance, I know have smaller apparatus, they're narrower, but they're in pretty unique situations too. Our main concern is new construction and we've worked out a long-term plan for existing areas. Right now there's no incentive for the universities to build any additional parking, so they're using parking, off-campus parking, and using and congesting the roads that way now. It's becoming worse and worse. You should see fire station number three before, we used to have no one parking there, and now there's probably 50 cars surrounding that station every single day from UNT students. I'm sure there's been studies done on narrow streets and where the border is on this, because obviously narrow streets with cars on it are safer and if safety is our big issue, but this is the best middle of the two. This is like walking a thin line and we're right in the middle where we don't want the streets to be super wide, where people are racing up and down like Old North and Nottingham on the north side. We don't want this situation to happen either, so we're really running on the line. To that end, what we did also is we've approved rolled curbs for future, so if a developer comes in and they're like, "Okay, I don't want to widen it to a point where it's 32 or 33 feet wide," then what's the option? You can do it 31 where if you have a rolled curb, part of the parking or the car is much closer to the curb than it is on a six inch curb, so that still provides us the 20 feet that we need. Yeah. A lot of the national codes don't even take into effect Texas-sized vehicles either, I don't know about that. That's old. Okay. Unless you have any more questions, that's all we have for you today on this subject. Anything, anything. Okay. Well, thank you. We will then move on to Item 1C, TSC 18-044, which is to receive a report and hold discussion regarding the Idaho stop or rolling stop law for bicyclists and if possible implementation in the city of Denton. Mark. Good evening and thank you. Good evening, my name is Mark Oliphant, I am the Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator from the city. It's my pleasure to address you tonight and discuss the Idaho stop or rolling stop. This is a law that originated in Idaho in 1982 and the long and short of it is that cyclists in Idaho may treat a stop sign as a yield sign. So they can approach an intersection, slow down, check that it's safe for them to proceed, but cyclists are not required to stop or put a foot on the ground or come to a complete stop at stop signs. Delaware has implemented a similar law just last year and in Colorado, the state legislature just this year allowed individual cities to make the decision as to whether or not they wanted to implement that type of law. Here's just a quick graphic of what a cyclist is encountering as they come to an intersection with a stop sign, looking both ways, the cyclists and if you think about it, within the dimensions of a typical automobile, that cyclist can often slow down to the point where he or she can check to make sure that there are no competing vehicles at the intersection that may make it dangerous and then proceed. If it's all right, I would like to show about 90 seconds, two minutes of a little video that demonstrates this really well. About three or four years ago in Oregon, they were considering a similar law statewide and this video was put together by an advocate for the Idaho stop or rolling stop. Let's see, hold on, I'm going to do the volume. Thank you. Let's try it now. A bicycle is probably the most efficient form of transportation ever devised. The average bicycle rider generates only around 100 watts of propulsion power, about as much as it takes to power a light motor. Compare this to the output of a typical car engine, which generates something like 1,000 light volts worth of power. An inner bicycle can be a practical alternative to an automobile. A bicycle's efficiency is almost entirely dependent on its momentum. A moving bicycle is operating at peak efficiency, even as it slows it remains efficient. It's coming to a dead stop that really saps a rider's available energy, so white riders do the best to preserve their momentum, to make the most efficient use of their 100 watts of power. Even though they want to keep moving, most white riders approach stop signs with extreme care. If only because they know they usually have the most to lose in collision. Most cyclists approach stop signs with the caution they were taught in driver's debt. They slow down, they look left, they look right, they look left again. They make sure the way is clear, and that they have the right of way before they proceed. Yet many, if not most, do all this while preserving some small amount of forward motion. This approach to stop signs is known as a rolling stop. The proposed Idaho stop sign law would seem to allow white riders to treat stop signs as yield signs. It would, in effect, allow for rolling stops, making this common sense approach legal, and in doing so, encourage safe, sensible, and efficient bicycle transportation. There's no question as to the safety of the proposed law, because it's based on a law that's been in effect for the last 27 years in Idaho, and Idaho's bike safety record is excessive. Despite being a more rural state than Oregon, Idaho makes for a fair comparison, because if Boise were a city in Oregon, it would... It goes on to discuss the merits specific to Oregon. But I think you can see from there the argument that is made for the Idaho stop in preserving that forward momentum, because the engine powering a bicycle is much less powerful than that of an automobile. But talking about options, we are a small body, we are a small town and a big state. Unfortunately, any movement toward legalizing the Idaho stop or the rolling stop would require something to happen at the state level, would require Austin to either make that the law statewide or pass some sort of legislation that allows individual municipalities to have an Idaho stop or a rolling stop. That has not happened, and the leading bicycle advocacy organization in the state is not currently pushing that as a major item on their agenda. So as a cyclist, I see some benefits here, but we are limited in what we might do. But I'm happy to take questions. Which organization is that that's not pushing for it? That's... What is it? Bike Texas? Yes, Bike Texas. Bike Texas, yeah. Do they have a legislative agenda at all? They do advocacy for certain items, and they post some of those things on their website, but it's not to be found. What do you think the odds are? Well, it's interesting that this was in Idaho in, what was it, '82, and it was 30 years later, 35 years later than the next state. So maybe the tipping point was Delaware. I don't know. And Texas is, I would say, a more automobile-oriented state, although Idaho has a lot of industry and it's hard to say. The thing I always point out is it's a very automobile-friendly policy because automobiles don't want to be behind slow bikers, and this gets you through the intersections at a much better, more reasonable speed, and so I think automobiles like it better, too. We can't do it. Thank you for doing the research because I've asked about this over the years, and this is the first time somebody has done the research and said, "This is where we sit," so I appreciate that you did the research for us. I'm sad, though, that the research points to this, but thank you. I guess I have one question. Uh-huh. Is there an agenda that you would like us to prompt? This is dialogue in Austin, or is this FYI? This is FYI. The question arose, I believe, in September at this meeting. I've been here three months. But probably there's some other things that we could talk about as far as being more bicycle and pedestrian-friendly. They're probably near-term, lower-hanging fruit to focus on rather than this at this time. Yeah. I think so. I just wanted one of those yellow arrows to come out of my head. All right. That's true. I have a question, please. Are we aware of any significant data that shows that there's a lot of citations of bicyclers actually receiving if they're utilizing the rolling stop and getting ticketed for it? I'm not aware of that data, not here in Texas. I can say from my experience coming from Washington, D.C., there were occasional pushes by law enforcement to make sure that cyclists were doing this. But I've also seen some recent data that says that actually cyclists are more mindful of stop signs and coming to a complete stop, I think because of how much skin they have in the game, if you will, that if struck by a motor vehicle, they'd never win. And the consequences are often very tragic. Thanks. All right. Any other questions, comments? All right. Well, thank you very much for doing that. I should address the question about bicycle citations. Oh, great. Thank you. I have been the prosecutor here for almost 25 years. I don't know the number of citations, but they're very small. UNT writes more of them than Denton because of the problem with keeping their pedestrians safe to their bicyclists, but even UNT doesn't write very many. Often if I get a bicycle citation, they've, you know, run into an intersection against a red light or stop sign and been struck by a car and they were determined at fault. And the officers are very quick to write the car if the car is at fault. I had a vulnerable road user citation to a driver who struck a bicyclist. Thank goodness the bicyclist wasn't hurt very badly. But it's a very, very small number. Officers are not out there looking for bicyclists that don't stop all the way at the stop signs. But again, they're more common at UNT and I think it's because of their heavy pedestrian and bicyclists and skateboarders, they have a lot of skateboarders too, but it's a very small number. Have you ever had a DUI on a bicycle? I have. No, sir. Personally? No. No, no, sir. I'm sure there's been, I'm sure there's been some public in talks is what they would charge him with, but I can't even think of any of those. I knew somebody in another state that got arrested for that. It depends on how it's defined, right? I agree with Mark, though. We can't do it right now because of state laws, so the legislatures would have to prompt that. Yes, sir. Who are you? I'm sorry. I'm Stephanie Berry. I'm an assistant city attorney. I'm standing in for Trey. I work at the police department, but I'm the prosecutor. So when Patrice? Patrice, yes. Asked a question about citations, I think. Or somebody did. One of you all asked how many citations we had. Oh, I'm sorry. That's okay. I thought I could address that. It's a very small number. Thank you. Take care. Thanks. Okay. Okay. I always just think, you know, one of the things, this is like a moment of the pet peeve thing for me, that when there's a discussion about bicycle, pedestrian safety, and somebody doesn't like the idea of bike and, you know, making any kind of accommodations for bicyclists and pedestrians, this little sentence comes like zooming out of their mouths of, "Bikes don't follow the rules," as though that completely nullifies all discussion of bike safety, pedestrian safety, infrastructure, bike lanes. And so, you know, if I just feel, I mean, we're not going to get a rolling stop probably in my lifetime in Texas, but if there's one less rule that has to be followed when it's not necessary, then that's one less time for people to shake their fingers at cyclists and say, "They don't follow the rules." Well, give me one less rule that I don't have to follow when it's ridiculous that I follow it, and I'll be OK. That's my soapbox. Getting down. OK. Anything else for Mark? All right. Thanks. That moves us on to item 1D, TSC 18-045, which is to receive a report, whole discussion regarding citywide sidewalk infrastructure and the ongoing efforts for improving connectivity. Since you guys like Mark, he's going to continue talking. We do like Mark. I'm just going to stay right here. All right. Well, thank you again for your time, so now moving on to discuss sidewalks. Sidewalks is an interesting topic because the city has developed, obviously, over many decades, and at various times, sidewalks have received more value than at other times. Unfortunately, a lot of the city developed, I would say, from the '60s through the '80s when sidewalks were not given a high priority, and so they're just missing in large areas of the city. Now, also, in 1990, the Americans with Disability Act was passed, which mandated certain sidewalk infrastructure, and it had to abide by a certain nationwide code. Also, in some places in the city where we do have existing sidewalk infrastructure, it does not meet current Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. The city has been working to update the infrastructure, but just everyone needs to keep in mind it's a very large effort. The amount of roadway that we have without sidewalks is significant in the city. There was a bond in 2014 that was passed that included money to build sidewalk infrastructure. The last of that money was just obligated in the last fiscal year, so there are two big design packages going on right now for sidewalks in the city, but one interesting aspect of sidewalks, though, is that there is not a dedicated annual fund or annual program to make sure that this happens, so now that those funds from the bond have been exhausted, we don't have a plan on the horizon to continue the improvements. In your packets, we included information about sidewalk segments. It was quite large, but if there are any specific questions or anything like that, we will tell you city transportation staff go through a process to vet sidewalk segments and prioritize them as to which should be completed sooner rather than later. We keep continuing lists of suggested segments. We get communication from residents or from members of the city council, or if we notice a particular area where it could benefit, and then as money becomes available, we go through a process to rank and prioritize which segments might get funded. Qualities that cause them to score high are things like proximity to schools, so for making it safe for children to get to school. This is an example of some segments, proximity to schools, other areas where we have high pedestrian traffic already, so for example, in the downtown area, this is a very walkable area, and areas connecting to the universities, things like that. Some other aspects are if we have a network of sidewalks, but we are missing a small segment or something like that, where we could add some infrastructure and it would connect and give us a much larger network. One other factor for consideration is whether or not we own either right-of-way or easements or something like that, because if we have to obtain the right-of-way, that can add time and cost to some of the projects. These are things we look at, all these segments are current projects that we are looking at to bring sidewalks up to ADA compliance. One other thing I will mention is that projects that touch sidewalks, for example, the repaving of Hickory Street, that touches the sidewalks on both sides, so by law we are required to bring that touching sidewalk infrastructure up to ADA compliance, which is a good thing. One thing I will also say is that since Americans with Disabilities Act was passed, the City has been requiring new development and redevelopment to have pedestrian infrastructure that meets Americans with Disabilities Act standards. Going forward, new development and redevelopment does do that. It's something important for everyone and also especially for those who might use mobility devices or something like that, because if it's not ADA compatible, sometimes it is just not passable. I think those are all the major points. Are there any questions? Go ahead. I was going to ask, when you redo these sidewalks, I think we've talked about this before, how often are there trees or other things added, specifically on some of these streets like McKinney when you have cars moving pretty quick, and so like trees could provide a pedestrian barrier potentially? Is that part of it, or is there just in most cases not room for it? Yeah, it's on a case by case basis. A lot of these streets are already up to their right-of-way, so when the sidewalk is typically put in, it's the edge of the sidewalk is technically the right-of-way in all of these older areas where the streets are what they used to be, for example, Bell, going through the whole downtown area. We've widened as much as we could almost to the face of the buildings, so there are places that we don't have, but when we go back and redesign, for example, McKinney will be redesigned, then we will add the parkway area, we'll get as much as we can within the right-of-way to put in landscaping as well as have the infrastructure for bikes and pedestrians built. And I guess just one key is like putting the trees between the cars and the pedestrians, because right there on I think it's Boulevard, when we had the new parking lot that was built, for some reason the little trees on the sidewalk were put just kind of right in the middle of the sidewalk, and so you walk back out to the street now on those, and I don't know why the trees weren't just pushed to the other side to provide the barrier for pedestrians. I don't know, that may have just been a single case where that happened. I think it was case by case, it's a single area. It is the city's preference, though, to have that grass strip between the curb and the sidewalk when space does allow pedestrians to feel more comfortable, and you also have space to plant a tree. So I do have questions about right-of-way, but I noticed that one of the segments that you're planning to put in is on Parkway, across from like the library and the parking lot. So that side, that north side, is that some -- that city owns enough of that in order to put in a sidewalk, or is -- >> So part of the design process is identify how much right-of-way we have. And so once we get the surveying in, we'll find out how much we have and what kind of sidewalk we can implement there. But we're also looking at that segment of Parkway to go on a road diet, most likely, so -- >> Oh, okay. >> Because there's very little traffic that goes across between -- all the way from Carroll to where it ends or bends around at the library. It's a very low-traffic area. We're also looking at if the signals are warranted at Almond Locust, they will be pulled out if they're not warranted. We're looking at studying that particular corridor. >> Mm-hmm, okay. And that can be a dangerous -- to cross onto Congress from the Emily Fowler parking lot because of that turn. >> So once it goes to road diet, it'll have that middle area for cars to pull into or pull from so that that way they don't have to make the hole across four lanes. >> Yeah. >> They will have a middle lane for refuge. >> Mm-hmm, okay. >> And I noticed, so when we're looking, for instance, at that section of Walnut, if we're going to do sidewalks, then are we -- I'm really not up to speed on my Muse Street projects. And are we then going to be minimizing or eliminating parking, for instance, on the Muse -- >> That's the -- >> -- streets? >> Isn't that what we got the report on, the one that just came out with the three different options? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I think this might be not in the list, actually. >> Okay. >> But what we did is we -- >> Oh, this one moved to Muse? >> Yeah. I think it was pulled out for Muse. >> Okay. >> So all the Muse streets are out of the actual package. This might be in there. >> Right. Oh, okay. Okay. >> But I do want to point out a couple of things. So we had $2 million for bond funding for the total sidewalk program. We sent out two packages, total of 45 segments for sidewalk, which had almost five linear miles of sidewalk in there. So we're designing all of it, but we won't be able to fund all of it through the $2 million that we have. So we might be able to only fund half of those, which is the first package. And once that money is exhausted, as Mark pointed out, we'll have to go and ask for more money, which is at some point we're going to come back to the committee and, you know, make recommendations. We're already done designed, so we need money. Where do we find the money? >> What's the -- is the Muse project going before City Council, is that? >> I think they're starting in the conceptual phase. So it will go to City Council early next year with a concept plan. And from that point forward, they'll go into design and then construction. So it's not going to happen any time soon. >> But they haven't approved the comprehensive improvements that we -- right, the three options we got sent, they haven't. >> No, they haven't approved that. So it has to go through an engineering study. Because those streets are being converted into one-ways or being proposed as one-ways, they have to go look at traffic, look at parking, engineering studies. And then once they come back, they're going to present three feasible options or two feasible options and go from there. >> Okay. Any questions? >> I like to see sidewalks, so keep bringing them back. >> What -- what could we do to create a continuing improvement fund that's continuing? >> We'll come back with that item, but I need to ask that question and see what's the process rule can be put in place as far as the continuous approval. Because I think we have continuous approval on bike funding. We have, I think, a marked amount of $50,000 a year. We can establish something similar, but I need to ask that question. >> How much sidewalk could -- >> City management, just the process, how do we present it? How do we take it to council? Do we come through the traffic safety, mobility, the process itself? >> You said $50,000 a year for a bike? >> Correct. >> That goes a lot further for the bike if you're just talking about striping or something because it's on. It's not -- >> So how much -- just for a frame of reference, how much would $50,000 buy you in sidewalk? >> Very little. I think it's -- >> I did -- Commissioner Thurmond and I were speaking the other day, and I pulled some sample numbers that we got from a consultant, so please everyone put a lot of asterisks on this number, but we did talk about it, and so I wanted to bring it up, let's see. Okay. This was a sample estimate, which was -- we typically have five-foot wide sidewalks, the concrete and so forth, $6 a square foot, so we're talking $30 for each linear foot, you know, so if a frontage of 20 feet or whatever, just multiply by that. But also I think about a 100% addition of other things, like do utilities need to be moved? And this is on a gross basis where you're talking about thousands of feet or something, this is the number you get to, but because, you know, you have utility poles, you might have fire hydrants and things like that, so you have those costs, and then the right of way, easement, but so this was, you know, something, take it with a grain of salt, but this is a rough cost that was delivered to us by a contractor looking at a large project. Yeah, and if we can avoid what I think Dallas did, they had a sidewalk that went straight into a traffic signal pole and just ended right there, and there was six inches on either side. Thank you. Okay. I also suggest that maybe City Council does not grant any variances for developers who don't want to build sidewalks, but what do I know? Sorry. I think sidewalks are in our requirement, it's a requirement, it's in our specifications now. And sometimes those variants are granted. One other thing happening in the city is recently the City Council moved to reestablish the Mayor's Committee on Americans with Disabilities Act, and so I think that is a move in the direction of more attention and hopefully some funding, dedicated funding for sidewalks. I'm aware of an incident in a file location similar to Clay's question, a ramp on a corner of the city, and I'm not going to suggest it, but how do we prevent it from happening? Yeah, so that's part of the design review, and currently where we look, especially in subdivisions and some of these designs, that none of the utilities are in the same area as these sidewalks, especially on the corners. So if you visit all the new subdivisions, you'll see ADA ramps going across the intersections, there are no utility folds in the middle. It's more of an issue in the older part of the town where there was no sidewalk, per se, considered back in the day. And those streets or the utilities were not designed or looked at from a holistic perspective for the whole cross-section. So things went in at different times, and there was one time where the street was constructed and the next thing you know the utilities build their poles, and then someone asked for a sidewalk and ramps, and it was just another place to put it. So the sequencing has changed now with all the new development. We look at everything that's going through that corridor and make sure that they're spaced appropriately. There are quite a few things that they will be involved in, but from our perspective, engineering perspective, there are many capital projects that we're currently working on, and that's something that we'll discuss, that there are certain corridors going through the middle of the city or on the outside, and how would access be on some of these streets or where would you like the access to be? What type of signage, what type of elements do you need as far as from an ADA perspective? So those are the things that we're looking for an input in. A lot of the projects are retrofit, so if we're retrofitting something, then we'll need a perspective and some feedback from the committee saying, "Okay, if you go this direction or post signage here or put ramps here, that would be a better alternative than what you're suggesting in your plans currently." So that's the input. >> Would you have somebody from staff that shines after that? >> Yes, absolutely, and probably you're looking at him. >> That's more of a thing. >> Okay. We're going to stay on topic, so we have to keep to our agenda, but good question. Okay, anything else on sidewalks? Okay, thank you. That brings us to 1ETSC 18-046, which is our staff update. We got some suggestions about rescheduling our December meeting. And then we also need to talk about our matrix. I don't remember what the dates were in December because I was pretty open, so. >> So let me start with why we're requesting this. A couple of weeks ago, a week and a half ago, we had a meeting with TWU, and TWU wants to look at alternatives in implementing their master plan. And part of the goal there working with TWU is conduct a big traffic study that analyzes different options. Closing down bill is what they're requesting, and in a similar fashion, we've done something similar with the UNT right now. We're going through the traffic study and understanding what are the impact. So we want to embark on something similar. The thinking was that next December, I think December, we have a joint meeting between city staff as well as TWU staff. And within that, we're supposed to come with a plan to decide if we're moving forward with the study. And once we have that set up, we'll bring it to this committee and go through the elements of this is where we'll be covered in the study. Once we get approval from the committee and recommendation, then we can move forward to council and get their approval on funding and moving forward with the study. That's the reason we're looking for moving this meeting. The joint staff meeting is first week of December, and it was right after our first meeting. So we're thinking if we can meet second week. I think the dates are 13th, 19th, 20th, and 27th. Who wants to meet on the 27th? No. I'm just kidding. [ Laughter ] >> Does anybody have any preferences? The 13th would be our first shot, maybe a Thursday night. >> Very much open to anything except the 20th. That's my granddaughter's birthday. >> Okay. So we're taking 20th off the table. That leaves us with the 19th and the 13th. >> I think the 13th. >> Anybody feel? >> For me. >> Okay. Jeff? >> I'm open. >> Okay. >> 13th. Jim? Okay. Do we want a motion? >> Yeah. That way, yeah. We can -- definitely. >> Okay. So who wants -- >> I make a motion that we reconvene on December. >> 13th? >> 13th. >> Thursday? Okay. 530? >> 530. >> Okay. We have a motion to reschedule to Thursday, December 13th. 530. Do we have a second? Melissa seconds. Everybody in favor? Aye. >> Aye. >> Aye. >> Anybody opposed? Excellent. We will be back on the 13th of December with a report from TWA and city staff. And then that brings us to our matrix, our favorite part. >> So I'd like to ask you if you have any specific item on the matrix that you want to talk about because I'm going to most likely jump to the last item that is the collision reports and data that was asked in the previous meeting. We did request some information from PD and there's a lot of information that needs to be distilled. They just gave a list of top 10 intersections that have collisions and as expected these are U.S. 38935, those tech stock roadway intersections that are large, that carry a large number of vehicles. So we want to get into and get a better idea of how much are those involving pedestrians and bicyclists because that's a lot of our focus. And then also come back with a better explanation. So most likely next meeting we'll come back with a better report breaking it down further. On the Mew Street we can include that because we're moving forward with the design aspect of it and we'll have some more information but I'm not sure if I can bring that next meeting because we wouldn't have that much information more than what you've already seen on it. Any specific one that? I was curious about, so I had asked about the poor signage on Welch near the Union and I have... Poor signage. Oh yes. So that street has been closed for the past couple weeks as you may know because of drainage construction. So yes, once that construction moves out we'll take a look at the whole street and drive it and install the signage. This is for the lane assignment, correct? The lane assignment changes and no one understands. I'll take that if you want. I was going to just follow up on nine. So we just have those businesses, I think we mentioned, station motors specifically right on the corner of McKinney and Locust where their cars block the sidewalks and push pedestrians right when the roads open out into the street area and everything's unclear over there. You probably know it's not clear anywhere. And so maybe resolving that with those businesses and I don't think they're the only one that's blocking those sidewalks. There are a lot of those. And they've probably been doing it for a long time and no one said anything but it's a pretty dangerous situation because it pushes you pretty close to cars that are speeding up quickly. I can update, nothing's changed. And so I guess aside from actual changes to the street, even just letting the business know. We'll get with the enforcement and see what we can do. Can I add one? Yes, absolutely. Is it possible, because the cars come all the way out to the end and that's where the white stripe is, is it possible to move the stripe back on the left-hand side? Oh, I see. So big trucks, fire trucks. So the stop bar. The buses, you know, we can't, you know, it's very hard to make the turn, you know, and not hit the curb. Okay, we'll look at it, definitely. Turning radius. Does anybody else have items for the matrix? I'd like to add looking at protected bike lanes. Looking at all the different options that we could have. I mean, we've done a lot about traffic calming and stuff like that, and I think we need to look at that in the same way with protected bike lanes, and maybe what kind of pilot projects we could do. You know, Eagle Drive was a pilot project for a road diet, and it's worked out pretty well and now Welch is, I mean, not Welch, but Malone is, particularly starting around schools or something, and since you just did Malone, maybe around Newton-Razor, some type of bollards that can protect the approach to school from both directions, and just the different options we can have. Okay. You're talking, focusing on existing bike facilities, or are you talking about brand new? I'd like both, but I think we need to look at what we've got, and then any new construction, trying to incorporate that into it, as well as you're talking about pedestrians. Yeah. Well, I mean, I wonder if Hickory would make sense, too, between UNT and the square as a possible one, because we already have a bike lane there and seeing what it would look like to make it a protected lane. Right. I'd be curious also about Bell, just because of the Strickland Middle School. I mean, could kids ride their bike down Bell to get to Strickland? And Bell's... Not safely. Bell's fairly wide street. Yeah, it's great. Just throwing it out there. Okay. We'll look at it. Anyone else have anything for the matrix? Yeah. I'd like to make a request, please. I was just curious. I get a lot of questions. I'm sure a lot of you all do, too. And I know that we've touched on it briefly here in the past about the construction on I-35 between Teasley and State School, or 2499, I think it is now. And I was just wondering if you might be able to provide us or put on the agenda to provide us information on, you know, what the original plan was there, you know, kind of where we're at with the plan now and moving forward, and any details that would be, you know, supply us with a better understanding of exactly what's going on there. And also, if possible, you know, once we receive that information that you could actually provide us with any -- if there's any significant changes in the current plan, that you might be able to provide those updates to us. Definitely. Thanks. All right. All right. Anything else for pre-TEMS matrix? That's how I like to think of it. Okay. So is there anything else, then, from staff? No, I think we -- quick update on the -- some of the changes that's happening with the -- our staff organization. We have had two new engineers added to the traffic group, which is really helping me out on top of Mark being there as a bike/pet coordinator. We have a senior engineer, Tracy, that's being assigned to traffic, and she's diligently writing down what needs to be done. And there is a new person that started. She unfortunately didn't make it today, but her name is Pam, and she's starting with traffic too. So she's more on the signal side. Tracy is more on the planning side. So we -- I -- now we have help, and we can get more things done. Just wanted to know that there are more people to help on the staff side. Tell them about your promotion. So I think there was a -- there was a memo or some information out there last week. I'm getting new duties assigned. I'll be working on the development review. I'll have a new group under me called engineering services that will review all the new development going in. So all the design criteria that we updated make sure that the lane sizes and all the requirements are implemented appropriately. So that's going to be -- that's why I have -- I'm happy I have more traffic folks that can focus on all the traffic needs, and then I'll be focusing on development review. So are you still going to be ours? Yes. Okay. Good. Do your other job, that's fine, but just -- so you're still ours. Okay. Okay. Congratulations. Thank you. Yeah. Congrats. All right. Anything else? Okay. We will adjourn at 627, and we'll see you in December.