WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:12.160 Good evening and welcome to the City of Denton Traffic Safety Commission meeting of Monday, 00:00:12.160 --> 00:00:15.600 November 5th, 2018. 00:00:15.600 --> 00:00:24.360 We have a quorum and the first items on our agenda will be number one, items for consideration. 00:00:24.360 --> 00:00:33.260 Item A, TSC 18-043 is to consider the approval of the Traffic Safety Commission meetings 00:00:33.260 --> 00:00:37.380 of October 1st, 2018. 00:00:37.380 --> 00:00:42.680 Did everybody have a chance to take a look at those minutes? 00:00:42.680 --> 00:00:46.920 Were there any corrections or did someone make a motion for approval? 00:00:46.920 --> 00:00:48.920 Motion for approval. 00:00:48.920 --> 00:00:49.920 Okay. 00:00:49.920 --> 00:00:50.920 We've got a motion for approval. 00:00:50.920 --> 00:00:51.920 Do I have a second? 00:00:51.920 --> 00:00:52.920 Second. 00:00:52.920 --> 00:00:53.920 Everyone in favor say aye. 00:00:53.920 --> 00:00:54.920 Aye. 00:00:54.920 --> 00:00:55.920 Anyone opposed? 00:00:55.920 --> 00:00:56.920 Okay. 00:00:56.920 --> 00:01:01.920 The minutes will be accepted as submitted. 00:01:01.920 --> 00:01:11.880 Item 1B, TSC 18-026 is to receive a report and hold a discussion regarding narrow streets 00:01:11.880 --> 00:01:20.000 defined as less than 32 feet wide with on-street parking and emergency access in the Villages 00:01:20.000 --> 00:01:24.440 of Carmel Subdivision. 00:01:24.440 --> 00:01:25.440 Good evening Commissioners. 00:01:25.440 --> 00:01:26.640 My name is Brad Layhart. 00:01:26.640 --> 00:01:32.600 I'm the Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Chief for Denton Fire Department. 00:01:32.600 --> 00:01:38.200 Today we're going to discuss with you a couple of minutes about narrow roads discussions 00:01:38.200 --> 00:01:42.440 and where we're at on the process. 00:01:42.440 --> 00:01:47.560 Over the past few years we've had several projects that have been improved with roads 00:01:47.560 --> 00:01:53.960 that are narrower than 28 feet, which is generally clear and free, about 26 feet, free and clear 00:01:53.960 --> 00:01:58.720 once you throw the curbs in there, depending on what type of curbs that they have. 00:01:58.720 --> 00:02:05.480 The advantages of doing this, it's reduced speed and also reduction in number of accidents. 00:02:05.480 --> 00:02:10.760 The disadvantages is city vehicles and especially also city fire apparatus have a difficult 00:02:10.760 --> 00:02:16.240 time navigating these streets because they're too narrow, especially when you allow parking 00:02:16.240 --> 00:02:22.800 on both sides and it also increases emergency response times. 00:02:22.800 --> 00:02:26.200 What are possible solutions? 00:02:26.200 --> 00:02:30.200 The main solution that we've come up with with the traffic engineer for the city and 00:02:30.200 --> 00:02:35.480 the city engineer is to widen the minimum widths of the streets going forward. 00:02:35.480 --> 00:02:40.320 There are several projects though that are in various stages that were approved prior 00:02:40.320 --> 00:02:48.440 to this so they have various stages and levels of grandfathering that have taken effect. 00:02:48.440 --> 00:02:52.720 We can also restrict parking on one side of the street. 00:02:52.720 --> 00:02:57.280 Certain developments we could do this, certain developments we might not be able to do this 00:02:57.280 --> 00:03:03.480 and also it would have to be go through city council approval to limit parking on one side 00:03:03.480 --> 00:03:09.340 of the street or no parking at all in developments. 00:03:09.340 --> 00:03:12.640 What we have been doing since originally we were going to come to you guys in May but 00:03:12.640 --> 00:03:18.720 that meeting got canceled so what we've been doing in the interim time, we've been using 00:03:18.720 --> 00:03:25.080 different ordinances which we started enforcing especially in the villages of Carmel too about 00:03:25.080 --> 00:03:33.280 not parking within 20 feet of intersections, stop signs, right aways, etc. which has helped 00:03:33.280 --> 00:03:40.720 a lot in that development, also 30 feet and our approach to flashing signal stop sign 00:03:40.720 --> 00:03:45.300 or yield sign. 00:03:45.300 --> 00:03:49.080 This is a picture of the narrow streets that have been approved in the past. 00:03:49.080 --> 00:03:53.740 You can see there's maybe an inch or two clearance on that side and a couple inches 00:03:53.740 --> 00:03:57.400 clearance on that side and this is just a standard size engine. 00:03:57.400 --> 00:04:02.200 This is even one of our lighter trucks so this is the village of Carmel too. 00:04:02.200 --> 00:04:06.360 I think all the streets are about this narrow, or actually several of them are this narrow. 00:04:06.360 --> 00:04:15.600 Some of the other primary streets aren't as narrow as this but if you have any questions. 00:04:15.600 --> 00:04:19.920 Like I said we've addressed this issue with Pre-Tam already and going forward we have 00:04:19.920 --> 00:04:20.920 a solution. 00:04:20.920 --> 00:04:21.920 Yes sir? 00:04:21.920 --> 00:04:26.440 Where are we with the debt and development code on this? 00:04:26.440 --> 00:04:32.560 They have to follow them through traffic and traffic in road manual which has the increased 00:04:32.560 --> 00:04:35.680 size of the roads already built into it. 00:04:35.680 --> 00:04:43.840 So the development code refers back to our transportation criteria manual which identifies 00:04:43.840 --> 00:04:51.040 and defines the width of the street so the sections within the manual itself have been 00:04:51.040 --> 00:04:57.040 widened to 32 feet. 00:04:57.040 --> 00:04:58.040 So will that include parking on both sides? 00:04:58.040 --> 00:04:59.040 Correct. 00:04:59.040 --> 00:05:00.200 So we're going to get 26? 00:05:00.200 --> 00:05:04.000 We're going to get a clear 20 feet if we go with the fire code. 00:05:04.000 --> 00:05:07.680 We have six feet parking on either side. 00:05:07.680 --> 00:05:11.680 Six feet either side available for parking and a clear 20 foot lane in the middle. 00:05:11.680 --> 00:05:12.680 Is that enough? 00:05:12.680 --> 00:05:20.400 Yeah, that's about six more feet, five to six more feet than we currently have. 00:05:20.400 --> 00:05:25.120 We had to come up with a middle point where everyone's happy. 00:05:25.120 --> 00:05:28.840 We don't want to make the roads too wide especially in neighborhoods that people are just starting 00:05:28.840 --> 00:05:35.000 to do 40, 50 miles an hour down a residential street so they have to be wide enough for 00:05:35.000 --> 00:05:41.880 fire apparatus and then also other city apparatus like all the yard waste and trash vehicles. 00:05:41.880 --> 00:05:42.880 Solid waste. 00:05:42.880 --> 00:05:43.880 Solid waste vehicles. 00:05:43.880 --> 00:05:50.900 So this is a width that is no longer approved in the updated development code? 00:05:50.900 --> 00:05:51.900 Correct. 00:05:51.900 --> 00:05:52.900 Okay. 00:05:52.900 --> 00:05:53.900 And what is the setback? 00:05:53.900 --> 00:06:00.600 So one of the thoughts about widening the road, it doesn't look like there is a front 00:06:00.600 --> 00:06:05.360 yard setback that is like the one in my neighborhood. 00:06:05.360 --> 00:06:10.240 Yeah, this subdivision had some different setbacks. 00:06:10.240 --> 00:06:17.080 The way it was multifamily, it's a single building that's connected all the way and 00:06:17.080 --> 00:06:22.680 even though they're different units and they're sold separately, it's just the way it was 00:06:22.680 --> 00:06:23.680 set up. 00:06:23.680 --> 00:06:24.680 It's different. 00:06:24.680 --> 00:06:30.840 It's a condo/townhome/different mix. 00:06:30.840 --> 00:06:34.560 We've had a few other developments through grandfather and they've been approved already 00:06:34.560 --> 00:06:39.160 for the narrow roads but Todd and Preetam have worked with those developers already 00:06:39.160 --> 00:06:44.720 and a lot of the developments now that are just starting that are getting the narrow 00:06:44.720 --> 00:06:49.720 roads are only going to be allowed to park on one side of the street so that's a huge 00:06:49.720 --> 00:06:50.720 win. 00:06:50.720 --> 00:06:57.080 And have the neighbors in this area been approached about going to one side of the road park, 00:06:57.080 --> 00:07:01.920 one side of the street parking only or what do you want to do with this? 00:07:01.920 --> 00:07:03.360 Yeah, that's a tough one. 00:07:03.360 --> 00:07:08.520 I think we started with, as Brad mentioned, we started with focusing our attention on 00:07:08.520 --> 00:07:14.080 the intersections which is where it becomes really more difficult for a truck to navigate. 00:07:14.080 --> 00:07:19.600 In between mid-block, there's okay spacing so that the truck can zip by but turning around 00:07:19.600 --> 00:07:25.080 is where they're having a tough time so we started enforcing some of that setbacks that 00:07:25.080 --> 00:07:29.760 we require from intersections, 20 feet clear and 30 feet clear. 00:07:29.760 --> 00:07:34.760 And that has helped a lot in this area. 00:07:34.760 --> 00:07:40.480 Due to the density of this area, they don't really have a lot of other options to park. 00:07:40.480 --> 00:07:41.480 Right. 00:07:41.480 --> 00:07:42.480 Right. 00:07:42.480 --> 00:07:43.480 Are there alleys? 00:07:43.480 --> 00:07:46.680 They have alleys but they're real narrow alleys too. 00:07:46.680 --> 00:07:48.280 I think they're 10 or 12. 00:07:48.280 --> 00:07:51.440 Yes, they're really narrow. 00:07:51.440 --> 00:07:54.480 And then off-street parking of nowhere? 00:07:54.480 --> 00:07:57.080 Well, garages. 00:07:57.080 --> 00:08:03.880 Garage driveways from the alley so they have driveways and then garages, yeah. 00:08:03.880 --> 00:08:09.440 And this is at least a newer part that was approved recently but there are older neighborhoods 00:08:09.440 --> 00:08:15.440 around UNT that have similar situation where the road was not designed for that kind of 00:08:15.440 --> 00:08:16.960 parking on street. 00:08:16.960 --> 00:08:17.960 Right. 00:08:17.960 --> 00:08:19.400 And it's very narrow. 00:08:19.400 --> 00:08:27.200 Part of it needs to be no parking and I think as part of the old gateway plan, we're coming 00:08:27.200 --> 00:08:28.200 up with solutions. 00:08:28.200 --> 00:08:32.520 What are the interim solutions and long-term solutions as far as when streets are less 00:08:32.520 --> 00:08:41.120 than 32 feet wide, at a minimum, we should go with one-sided parking restriction and 00:08:41.120 --> 00:08:46.400 if it's less than 26 feet or 20 feet, go with both-side restriction. 00:08:46.400 --> 00:08:51.800 So we are recommending, I mean, once the plan goes through, we will recommend something 00:08:51.800 --> 00:08:58.840 like that just because of the emergency response and the way the fire trucks move through this 00:08:58.840 --> 00:08:59.840 area. 00:08:59.840 --> 00:09:05.760 There were a couple other locations within the UNT area, McCormick, and we worked one 00:09:05.760 --> 00:09:12.560 location at a time where it had been an issue and we've gone through and considered it as 00:09:12.560 --> 00:09:17.760 a special case to move forward. 00:09:17.760 --> 00:09:27.200 I'm curious, how do cities where they can't make the streets wider, how do they deal with 00:09:27.200 --> 00:09:28.200 this problem? 00:09:28.200 --> 00:09:32.200 Do they have smaller fire trucks or is there smaller equipment ever? 00:09:32.200 --> 00:09:41.580 Some cities like San Francisco, for instance, I know have smaller apparatus, they're narrower, 00:09:41.580 --> 00:09:46.760 but they're in pretty unique situations too. 00:09:46.760 --> 00:09:55.720 Our main concern is new construction and we've worked out a long-term plan for existing areas. 00:09:55.720 --> 00:10:00.560 Right now there's no incentive for the universities to build any additional parking, so they're 00:10:00.560 --> 00:10:08.640 using parking, off-campus parking, and using and congesting the roads that way now. 00:10:08.640 --> 00:10:11.360 It's becoming worse and worse. 00:10:11.360 --> 00:10:15.600 You should see fire station number three before, we used to have no one parking there, and 00:10:15.600 --> 00:10:22.840 now there's probably 50 cars surrounding that station every single day from UNT students. 00:10:22.840 --> 00:10:28.560 I'm sure there's been studies done on narrow streets and where the border is on this, because 00:10:28.560 --> 00:10:34.280 obviously narrow streets with cars on it are safer and if safety is our big issue, but 00:10:34.280 --> 00:10:38.280 this is the best middle of the two. 00:10:38.280 --> 00:10:41.760 This is like walking a thin line and we're right in the middle where we don't want the 00:10:41.760 --> 00:10:46.520 streets to be super wide, where people are racing up and down like Old North and Nottingham 00:10:46.520 --> 00:10:48.600 on the north side. 00:10:48.600 --> 00:10:54.760 We don't want this situation to happen either, so we're really running on the line. 00:10:54.760 --> 00:11:00.240 To that end, what we did also is we've approved rolled curbs for future, so if a developer 00:11:00.240 --> 00:11:04.680 comes in and they're like, "Okay, I don't want to widen it to a point where it's 32 00:11:04.680 --> 00:11:07.880 or 33 feet wide," then what's the option? 00:11:07.880 --> 00:11:13.400 You can do it 31 where if you have a rolled curb, part of the parking or the car is much 00:11:13.400 --> 00:11:19.200 closer to the curb than it is on a six inch curb, so that still provides us the 20 feet 00:11:19.200 --> 00:11:22.200 that we need. 00:11:22.200 --> 00:11:25.000 Yeah. 00:11:25.000 --> 00:11:29.480 A lot of the national codes don't even take into effect Texas-sized vehicles either, I 00:11:29.480 --> 00:11:30.480 don't know about that. 00:11:30.480 --> 00:11:31.480 That's old. 00:11:31.480 --> 00:11:32.480 Okay. 00:11:32.480 --> 00:11:40.600 Unless you have any more questions, that's all we have for you today on this subject. 00:11:40.600 --> 00:11:43.600 Anything, anything. 00:11:43.600 --> 00:11:44.600 Okay. 00:11:44.600 --> 00:11:47.840 Well, thank you. 00:11:47.840 --> 00:11:56.880 We will then move on to Item 1C, TSC 18-044, which is to receive a report and hold discussion 00:11:56.880 --> 00:12:04.640 regarding the Idaho stop or rolling stop law for bicyclists and if possible implementation 00:12:04.640 --> 00:12:08.360 in the city of Denton. 00:12:08.360 --> 00:12:10.160 Mark. 00:12:10.160 --> 00:12:16.600 Good evening and thank you. 00:12:16.600 --> 00:12:27.600 Good evening, my name is Mark Oliphant, I am the Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator 00:12:27.600 --> 00:12:28.600 from the city. 00:12:28.600 --> 00:12:34.860 It's my pleasure to address you tonight and discuss the Idaho stop or rolling stop. 00:12:34.860 --> 00:12:44.560 This is a law that originated in Idaho in 1982 and the long and short of it is that 00:12:44.560 --> 00:12:50.160 cyclists in Idaho may treat a stop sign as a yield sign. 00:12:50.160 --> 00:12:56.500 So they can approach an intersection, slow down, check that it's safe for them to proceed, 00:12:56.500 --> 00:13:01.560 but cyclists are not required to stop or put a foot on the ground or come to a complete 00:13:01.560 --> 00:13:05.240 stop at stop signs. 00:13:05.240 --> 00:13:13.960 Delaware has implemented a similar law just last year and in Colorado, the state legislature 00:13:13.960 --> 00:13:19.640 just this year allowed individual cities to make the decision as to whether or not they 00:13:19.640 --> 00:13:23.840 wanted to implement that type of law. 00:13:23.840 --> 00:13:32.800 Here's just a quick graphic of what a cyclist is encountering as they come to an intersection 00:13:32.800 --> 00:13:40.200 with a stop sign, looking both ways, the cyclists and if you think about it, within the dimensions 00:13:40.200 --> 00:13:46.400 of a typical automobile, that cyclist can often slow down to the point where he or she 00:13:46.400 --> 00:13:52.600 can check to make sure that there are no competing vehicles at the intersection that may make 00:13:52.600 --> 00:13:54.880 it dangerous and then proceed. 00:13:54.880 --> 00:14:04.480 If it's all right, I would like to show about 90 seconds, two minutes of a little video 00:14:04.480 --> 00:14:07.560 that demonstrates this really well. 00:14:07.560 --> 00:14:15.040 About three or four years ago in Oregon, they were considering a similar law statewide and 00:14:15.040 --> 00:14:23.700 this video was put together by an advocate for the Idaho stop or rolling stop. 00:14:23.700 --> 00:14:48.320 Let's see, hold on, I'm going to do the volume. 00:14:48.320 --> 00:15:01.200 Thank you. 00:15:01.200 --> 00:15:22.120 Let's try it now. 00:15:22.120 --> 00:15:34.800 A bicycle is probably the most efficient form of transportation ever devised. 00:15:34.800 --> 00:15:41.800 The average bicycle rider generates only around 100 watts of propulsion power, about as much 00:15:41.800 --> 00:15:42.800 as it takes to power a light motor. 00:15:42.800 --> 00:15:43.800 Compare this to the output of a typical car engine, which generates something like 1,000 00:15:43.800 --> 00:15:44.800 light volts worth of power. 00:15:44.800 --> 00:15:45.800 An inner bicycle can be a practical alternative to an automobile. 00:15:45.800 --> 00:15:53.240 A bicycle's efficiency is almost entirely dependent on its momentum. 00:15:53.240 --> 00:16:02.280 A moving bicycle is operating at peak efficiency, even as it slows it remains efficient. 00:16:02.280 --> 00:16:08.440 It's coming to a dead stop that really saps a rider's available energy, so white riders 00:16:08.440 --> 00:16:16.720 do the best to preserve their momentum, to make the most efficient use of their 100 watts 00:16:16.720 --> 00:16:17.720 of power. 00:16:17.720 --> 00:16:22.720 Even though they want to keep moving, most white riders approach stop signs with extreme 00:16:22.720 --> 00:16:23.720 care. 00:16:23.720 --> 00:16:30.560 If only because they know they usually have the most to lose in collision. 00:16:30.560 --> 00:16:34.720 Most cyclists approach stop signs with the caution they were taught in driver's debt. 00:16:34.720 --> 00:16:41.200 They slow down, they look left, they look right, they look left again. 00:16:41.200 --> 00:16:45.200 They make sure the way is clear, and that they have the right of way before they proceed. 00:16:45.200 --> 00:16:52.000 Yet many, if not most, do all this while preserving some small amount of forward motion. 00:16:52.000 --> 00:17:01.380 This approach to stop signs is known as a rolling stop. 00:17:01.380 --> 00:17:06.120 The proposed Idaho stop sign law would seem to allow white riders to treat stop signs 00:17:06.120 --> 00:17:07.120 as yield signs. 00:17:07.120 --> 00:17:13.160 It would, in effect, allow for rolling stops, making this common sense approach legal, and 00:17:13.160 --> 00:17:18.440 in doing so, encourage safe, sensible, and efficient bicycle transportation. 00:17:18.440 --> 00:17:22.040 There's no question as to the safety of the proposed law, because it's based on a law 00:17:22.040 --> 00:17:27.440 that's been in effect for the last 27 years in Idaho, and Idaho's bike safety record 00:17:27.440 --> 00:17:28.440 is excessive. 00:17:28.440 --> 00:17:33.200 Despite being a more rural state than Oregon, Idaho makes for a fair comparison, because 00:17:33.200 --> 00:17:36.700 if Boise were a city in Oregon, it would... 00:17:36.700 --> 00:17:42.040 It goes on to discuss the merits specific to Oregon. 00:17:42.040 --> 00:17:50.300 But I think you can see from there the argument that is made for the Idaho stop in preserving 00:17:50.300 --> 00:17:55.680 that forward momentum, because the engine powering a bicycle is much less powerful than 00:17:55.680 --> 00:17:58.880 that of an automobile. 00:17:58.880 --> 00:18:12.200 But talking about options, we are a small body, we are a small town and a big state. 00:18:12.200 --> 00:18:20.780 Unfortunately, any movement toward legalizing the Idaho stop or the rolling stop would require 00:18:20.780 --> 00:18:26.680 something to happen at the state level, would require Austin to either make that the law 00:18:26.680 --> 00:18:36.200 statewide or pass some sort of legislation that allows individual municipalities to have 00:18:36.200 --> 00:18:38.580 an Idaho stop or a rolling stop. 00:18:38.580 --> 00:18:45.740 That has not happened, and the leading bicycle advocacy organization in the state is not 00:18:45.740 --> 00:18:50.420 currently pushing that as a major item on their agenda. 00:18:50.420 --> 00:18:58.840 So as a cyclist, I see some benefits here, but we are limited in what we might do. 00:18:58.840 --> 00:19:02.360 But I'm happy to take questions. 00:19:02.360 --> 00:19:05.040 Which organization is that that's not pushing for it? 00:19:05.040 --> 00:19:06.040 That's... 00:19:06.040 --> 00:19:07.040 What is it? 00:19:07.040 --> 00:19:08.040 Bike Texas? 00:19:08.040 --> 00:19:09.040 Yes, Bike Texas. 00:19:09.040 --> 00:19:10.040 Bike Texas, yeah. 00:19:10.040 --> 00:19:15.440 Do they have a legislative agenda at all? 00:19:15.440 --> 00:19:23.120 They do advocacy for certain items, and they post some of those things on their website, 00:19:23.120 --> 00:19:25.040 but it's not to be found. 00:19:25.040 --> 00:19:30.160 What do you think the odds are? 00:19:30.160 --> 00:19:37.200 Well, it's interesting that this was in Idaho in, what was it, '82, and it was 30 years 00:19:37.200 --> 00:19:40.040 later, 35 years later than the next state. 00:19:40.040 --> 00:19:45.360 So maybe the tipping point was Delaware. 00:19:45.360 --> 00:19:46.720 I don't know. 00:19:46.720 --> 00:19:53.240 And Texas is, I would say, a more automobile-oriented state, although Idaho has a lot of industry 00:19:53.240 --> 00:19:57.600 and it's hard to say. 00:19:57.600 --> 00:20:03.760 The thing I always point out is it's a very automobile-friendly policy because automobiles 00:20:03.760 --> 00:20:07.960 don't want to be behind slow bikers, and this gets you through the intersections at a much 00:20:07.960 --> 00:20:11.880 better, more reasonable speed, and so I think automobiles like it better, too. 00:20:11.880 --> 00:20:16.040 We can't do it. 00:20:16.040 --> 00:20:22.200 Thank you for doing the research because I've asked about this over the years, and this 00:20:22.200 --> 00:20:29.120 is the first time somebody has done the research and said, "This is where we sit," so I appreciate 00:20:29.120 --> 00:20:31.320 that you did the research for us. 00:20:31.320 --> 00:20:38.960 I'm sad, though, that the research points to this, but thank you. 00:20:38.960 --> 00:20:42.280 I guess I have one question. 00:20:42.280 --> 00:20:43.280 Uh-huh. 00:20:43.280 --> 00:20:48.560 Is there an agenda that you would like us to prompt? 00:20:48.560 --> 00:20:54.360 This is dialogue in Austin, or is this FYI? 00:20:54.360 --> 00:20:55.680 This is FYI. 00:20:55.680 --> 00:21:02.400 The question arose, I believe, in September at this meeting. 00:21:02.400 --> 00:21:06.640 I've been here three months. 00:21:06.640 --> 00:21:12.920 But probably there's some other things that we could talk about as far as being more bicycle 00:21:12.920 --> 00:21:13.920 and pedestrian-friendly. 00:21:13.920 --> 00:21:18.840 They're probably near-term, lower-hanging fruit to focus on rather than this at this 00:21:18.840 --> 00:21:19.840 time. 00:21:19.840 --> 00:21:20.840 Yeah. 00:21:20.840 --> 00:21:21.840 I think so. 00:21:21.840 --> 00:21:24.840 I just wanted one of those yellow arrows to come out of my head. 00:21:24.840 --> 00:21:25.840 All right. 00:21:25.840 --> 00:21:36.960 That's true. 00:21:36.960 --> 00:21:40.680 I have a question, please. 00:21:40.680 --> 00:21:47.040 Are we aware of any significant data that shows that there's a lot of citations of bicyclers 00:21:47.040 --> 00:21:54.680 actually receiving if they're utilizing the rolling stop and getting ticketed for it? 00:21:54.680 --> 00:21:58.160 I'm not aware of that data, not here in Texas. 00:21:58.160 --> 00:22:04.440 I can say from my experience coming from Washington, D.C., there were occasional pushes by law 00:22:04.440 --> 00:22:09.280 enforcement to make sure that cyclists were doing this. 00:22:09.280 --> 00:22:15.200 But I've also seen some recent data that says that actually cyclists are more mindful of 00:22:15.200 --> 00:22:20.000 stop signs and coming to a complete stop, I think because of how much skin they have 00:22:20.000 --> 00:22:27.520 in the game, if you will, that if struck by a motor vehicle, they'd never win. 00:22:27.520 --> 00:22:30.800 And the consequences are often very tragic. 00:22:30.800 --> 00:22:31.800 Thanks. 00:22:31.800 --> 00:22:32.800 All right. 00:22:32.800 --> 00:22:33.800 Any other questions, comments? 00:22:33.800 --> 00:22:34.800 All right. 00:22:34.800 --> 00:22:35.800 Well, thank you very much for doing that. 00:22:35.800 --> 00:22:36.800 I should address the question about bicycle citations. 00:22:36.800 --> 00:22:37.800 Oh, great. 00:22:37.800 --> 00:22:38.800 Thank you. 00:22:38.800 --> 00:22:58.440 I have been the prosecutor here for almost 25 years. 00:22:58.440 --> 00:23:03.200 I don't know the number of citations, but they're very small. 00:23:03.200 --> 00:23:08.800 UNT writes more of them than Denton because of the problem with keeping their pedestrians 00:23:08.800 --> 00:23:15.360 safe to their bicyclists, but even UNT doesn't write very many. 00:23:15.360 --> 00:23:20.600 Often if I get a bicycle citation, they've, you know, run into an intersection against 00:23:20.600 --> 00:23:26.160 a red light or stop sign and been struck by a car and they were determined at fault. 00:23:26.160 --> 00:23:29.360 And the officers are very quick to write the car if the car is at fault. 00:23:29.360 --> 00:23:36.840 I had a vulnerable road user citation to a driver who struck a bicyclist. 00:23:36.840 --> 00:23:39.720 Thank goodness the bicyclist wasn't hurt very badly. 00:23:39.720 --> 00:23:42.200 But it's a very, very small number. 00:23:42.200 --> 00:23:48.280 Officers are not out there looking for bicyclists that don't stop all the way at the stop signs. 00:23:48.280 --> 00:23:53.240 But again, they're more common at UNT and I think it's because of their heavy pedestrian 00:23:53.240 --> 00:23:57.520 and bicyclists and skateboarders, they have a lot of skateboarders too, but it's a very 00:23:57.520 --> 00:23:58.520 small number. 00:23:58.520 --> 00:24:02.640 Have you ever had a DUI on a bicycle? 00:24:02.640 --> 00:24:03.640 I have. 00:24:03.640 --> 00:24:04.640 No, sir. 00:24:04.640 --> 00:24:05.640 Personally? 00:24:05.640 --> 00:24:06.640 No. 00:24:06.640 --> 00:24:07.640 No, no, sir. 00:24:07.640 --> 00:24:13.320 I'm sure there's been, I'm sure there's been some public in talks is what they would 00:24:13.320 --> 00:24:18.080 charge him with, but I can't even think of any of those. 00:24:18.080 --> 00:24:23.040 I knew somebody in another state that got arrested for that. 00:24:23.040 --> 00:24:25.040 It depends on how it's defined, right? 00:24:25.040 --> 00:24:27.040 I agree with Mark, though. 00:24:27.040 --> 00:24:35.280 We can't do it right now because of state laws, so the legislatures would have to prompt 00:24:35.280 --> 00:24:36.280 that. 00:24:36.280 --> 00:24:37.280 Yes, sir. 00:24:37.280 --> 00:24:38.280 Who are you? 00:24:38.280 --> 00:24:39.280 I'm sorry. 00:24:39.280 --> 00:24:40.280 I'm Stephanie Berry. 00:24:40.280 --> 00:24:41.280 I'm an assistant city attorney. 00:24:41.280 --> 00:24:42.280 I'm standing in for Trey. 00:24:42.280 --> 00:24:44.160 I work at the police department, but I'm the prosecutor. 00:24:44.160 --> 00:24:45.160 So when Patrice? 00:24:45.160 --> 00:24:46.160 Patrice, yes. 00:24:46.160 --> 00:24:47.160 Asked a question about citations, I think. 00:24:47.160 --> 00:24:48.160 Or somebody did. 00:24:48.160 --> 00:24:49.160 One of you all asked how many citations we had. 00:24:49.160 --> 00:24:50.160 Oh, I'm sorry. 00:24:50.160 --> 00:24:51.160 That's okay. 00:24:51.160 --> 00:24:52.160 I thought I could address that. 00:24:52.160 --> 00:24:58.400 It's a very small number. 00:24:58.400 --> 00:24:59.400 Thank you. 00:24:59.400 --> 00:25:00.400 Take care. 00:25:00.400 --> 00:25:01.400 Thanks. 00:25:01.400 --> 00:25:02.400 Okay. 00:25:02.400 --> 00:25:03.400 Okay. 00:25:03.400 --> 00:25:14.040 I always just think, you know, one of the things, this is like a moment of the pet peeve 00:25:14.040 --> 00:25:21.880 thing for me, that when there's a discussion about bicycle, pedestrian safety, and somebody 00:25:21.880 --> 00:25:27.920 doesn't like the idea of bike and, you know, making any kind of accommodations for bicyclists 00:25:27.920 --> 00:25:34.280 and pedestrians, this little sentence comes like zooming out of their mouths of, "Bikes 00:25:34.280 --> 00:25:44.080 don't follow the rules," as though that completely nullifies all discussion of bike safety, pedestrian 00:25:44.080 --> 00:25:48.080 safety, infrastructure, bike lanes. 00:25:48.080 --> 00:25:53.000 And so, you know, if I just feel, I mean, we're not going to get a rolling stop probably 00:25:53.000 --> 00:26:01.520 in my lifetime in Texas, but if there's one less rule that has to be followed when it's 00:26:01.520 --> 00:26:07.960 not necessary, then that's one less time for people to shake their fingers at cyclists 00:26:07.960 --> 00:26:11.800 and say, "They don't follow the rules." 00:26:11.800 --> 00:26:17.000 Well, give me one less rule that I don't have to follow when it's ridiculous that I follow 00:26:17.000 --> 00:26:19.680 it, and I'll be OK. 00:26:19.680 --> 00:26:20.680 That's my soapbox. 00:26:20.680 --> 00:26:21.680 Getting down. 00:26:21.680 --> 00:26:22.680 OK. 00:26:22.680 --> 00:26:23.680 Anything else for Mark? 00:26:23.680 --> 00:26:24.680 All right. 00:26:24.680 --> 00:26:25.680 Thanks. 00:26:25.680 --> 00:26:36.720 That moves us on to item 1D, TSC 18-045, which is to receive a report, whole discussion 00:26:36.720 --> 00:26:43.320 regarding citywide sidewalk infrastructure and the ongoing efforts for improving connectivity. 00:26:43.320 --> 00:26:49.320 Since you guys like Mark, he's going to continue talking. 00:26:49.320 --> 00:26:50.320 We do like Mark. 00:26:50.320 --> 00:26:52.280 I'm just going to stay right here. 00:26:52.280 --> 00:26:53.280 All right. 00:26:53.280 --> 00:26:58.320 Well, thank you again for your time, so now moving on to discuss sidewalks. 00:26:58.320 --> 00:27:03.480 Sidewalks is an interesting topic because the city has developed, obviously, over many 00:27:03.480 --> 00:27:09.120 decades, and at various times, sidewalks have received more value than at other times. 00:27:09.120 --> 00:27:14.920 Unfortunately, a lot of the city developed, I would say, from the '60s through the '80s 00:27:14.920 --> 00:27:20.360 when sidewalks were not given a high priority, and so they're just missing in large areas 00:27:20.360 --> 00:27:21.360 of the city. 00:27:21.360 --> 00:27:29.120 Now, also, in 1990, the Americans with Disability Act was passed, which mandated certain sidewalk 00:27:29.120 --> 00:27:36.640 infrastructure, and it had to abide by a certain nationwide code. 00:27:36.640 --> 00:27:41.400 Also, in some places in the city where we do have existing sidewalk infrastructure, 00:27:41.400 --> 00:27:46.600 it does not meet current Americans with Disabilities Act requirements. 00:27:46.600 --> 00:27:52.800 The city has been working to update the infrastructure, but just everyone needs to keep in mind it's 00:27:52.800 --> 00:27:55.320 a very large effort. 00:27:55.320 --> 00:28:01.600 The amount of roadway that we have without sidewalks is significant in the city. 00:28:01.600 --> 00:28:08.600 There was a bond in 2014 that was passed that included money to build sidewalk infrastructure. 00:28:08.600 --> 00:28:14.560 The last of that money was just obligated in the last fiscal year, so there are two 00:28:14.560 --> 00:28:23.280 big design packages going on right now for sidewalks in the city, but one interesting 00:28:23.280 --> 00:28:29.600 aspect of sidewalks, though, is that there is not a dedicated annual fund or annual program 00:28:29.600 --> 00:28:34.840 to make sure that this happens, so now that those funds from the bond have been exhausted, 00:28:34.840 --> 00:28:41.600 we don't have a plan on the horizon to continue the improvements. 00:28:41.600 --> 00:28:46.480 In your packets, we included information about sidewalk segments. 00:28:46.480 --> 00:28:52.200 It was quite large, but if there are any specific questions or anything like that, we will tell 00:28:52.200 --> 00:29:01.280 you city transportation staff go through a process to vet sidewalk segments and prioritize 00:29:01.280 --> 00:29:06.560 them as to which should be completed sooner rather than later. 00:29:06.560 --> 00:29:10.520 We keep continuing lists of suggested segments. 00:29:10.520 --> 00:29:15.920 We get communication from residents or from members of the city council, or if we notice 00:29:15.920 --> 00:29:20.960 a particular area where it could benefit, and then as money becomes available, we go 00:29:20.960 --> 00:29:30.320 through a process to rank and prioritize which segments might get funded. 00:29:30.320 --> 00:29:36.780 Qualities that cause them to score high are things like proximity to schools, so for making 00:29:36.780 --> 00:29:41.400 it safe for children to get to school. 00:29:41.400 --> 00:29:53.720 This is an example of some segments, proximity to schools, other areas where we have high 00:29:53.720 --> 00:30:00.420 pedestrian traffic already, so for example, in the downtown area, this is a very walkable 00:30:00.420 --> 00:30:09.720 area, and areas connecting to the universities, things like that. 00:30:09.720 --> 00:30:14.920 Some other aspects are if we have a network of sidewalks, but we are missing a small segment 00:30:14.920 --> 00:30:20.920 or something like that, where we could add some infrastructure and it would connect and 00:30:20.920 --> 00:30:23.680 give us a much larger network. 00:30:23.680 --> 00:30:30.280 One other factor for consideration is whether or not we own either right-of-way or easements 00:30:30.280 --> 00:30:35.920 or something like that, because if we have to obtain the right-of-way, that can add time 00:30:35.920 --> 00:30:38.800 and cost to some of the projects. 00:30:38.800 --> 00:30:43.480 These are things we look at, all these segments are current projects that we are looking at 00:30:43.480 --> 00:30:46.520 to bring sidewalks up to ADA compliance. 00:30:46.520 --> 00:30:54.800 One other thing I will mention is that projects that touch sidewalks, for example, the repaving 00:30:54.800 --> 00:31:00.300 of Hickory Street, that touches the sidewalks on both sides, so by law we are required to 00:31:00.300 --> 00:31:07.640 bring that touching sidewalk infrastructure up to ADA compliance, which is a good thing. 00:31:07.640 --> 00:31:12.280 One thing I will also say is that since Americans with Disabilities Act was passed, the City 00:31:12.280 --> 00:31:19.880 has been requiring new development and redevelopment to have pedestrian infrastructure that meets 00:31:19.880 --> 00:31:22.520 Americans with Disabilities Act standards. 00:31:22.520 --> 00:31:27.920 Going forward, new development and redevelopment does do that. 00:31:27.920 --> 00:31:35.680 It's something important for everyone and also especially for those who might use mobility 00:31:35.680 --> 00:31:41.840 devices or something like that, because if it's not ADA compatible, sometimes it is just 00:31:41.840 --> 00:31:47.080 not passable. 00:31:47.080 --> 00:31:48.840 I think those are all the major points. 00:31:48.840 --> 00:31:49.840 Are there any questions? 00:31:49.840 --> 00:31:50.840 Go ahead. 00:31:50.840 --> 00:31:59.120 I was going to ask, when you redo these sidewalks, I think we've talked about this before, how 00:31:59.120 --> 00:32:03.600 often are there trees or other things added, specifically on some of these streets like 00:32:03.600 --> 00:32:07.800 McKinney when you have cars moving pretty quick, and so like trees could provide a pedestrian 00:32:07.800 --> 00:32:10.680 barrier potentially? 00:32:10.680 --> 00:32:13.760 Is that part of it, or is there just in most cases not room for it? 00:32:13.760 --> 00:32:16.680 Yeah, it's on a case by case basis. 00:32:16.680 --> 00:32:22.980 A lot of these streets are already up to their right-of-way, so when the sidewalk is typically 00:32:22.980 --> 00:32:30.480 put in, it's the edge of the sidewalk is technically the right-of-way in all of these older areas 00:32:30.480 --> 00:32:36.960 where the streets are what they used to be, for example, Bell, going through the whole 00:32:36.960 --> 00:32:38.560 downtown area. 00:32:38.560 --> 00:32:45.160 We've widened as much as we could almost to the face of the buildings, so there are places 00:32:45.160 --> 00:32:50.120 that we don't have, but when we go back and redesign, for example, McKinney will be redesigned, 00:32:50.120 --> 00:32:57.400 then we will add the parkway area, we'll get as much as we can within the right-of-way 00:32:57.400 --> 00:33:04.040 to put in landscaping as well as have the infrastructure for bikes and pedestrians built. 00:33:04.040 --> 00:33:08.480 And I guess just one key is like putting the trees between the cars and the pedestrians, 00:33:08.480 --> 00:33:14.320 because right there on I think it's Boulevard, when we had the new parking lot that was built, 00:33:14.320 --> 00:33:17.800 for some reason the little trees on the sidewalk were put just kind of right in the middle 00:33:17.800 --> 00:33:21.280 of the sidewalk, and so you walk back out to the street now on those, and I don't know 00:33:21.280 --> 00:33:25.640 why the trees weren't just pushed to the other side to provide the barrier for pedestrians. 00:33:25.640 --> 00:33:29.440 I don't know, that may have just been a single case where that happened. 00:33:29.440 --> 00:33:33.800 I think it was case by case, it's a single area. 00:33:33.800 --> 00:33:38.720 It is the city's preference, though, to have that grass strip between the curb and the sidewalk 00:33:38.720 --> 00:33:42.920 when space does allow pedestrians to feel more comfortable, and you also have space 00:33:42.920 --> 00:33:45.080 to plant a tree. 00:33:45.080 --> 00:33:50.720 So I do have questions about right-of-way, but I noticed that one of the segments that 00:33:50.720 --> 00:33:56.640 you're planning to put in is on Parkway, across from like the library and the parking lot. 00:33:56.640 --> 00:34:04.080 So that side, that north side, is that some -- that city owns enough of that in order 00:34:04.080 --> 00:34:06.880 to put in a sidewalk, or is -- 00:34:06.880 --> 00:34:12.160 >> So part of the design process is identify how much right-of-way we have. 00:34:12.160 --> 00:34:16.160 And so once we get the surveying in, we'll find out how much we have and what kind of 00:34:16.160 --> 00:34:18.600 sidewalk we can implement there. 00:34:18.600 --> 00:34:23.320 But we're also looking at that segment of Parkway to go on a road diet, most likely, 00:34:23.320 --> 00:34:24.320 so -- 00:34:24.320 --> 00:34:25.320 >> Oh, okay. 00:34:25.320 --> 00:34:29.400 >> Because there's very little traffic that goes across between -- all the way from Carroll 00:34:29.400 --> 00:34:34.000 to where it ends or bends around at the library. 00:34:34.000 --> 00:34:36.480 It's a very low-traffic area. 00:34:36.480 --> 00:34:43.560 We're also looking at if the signals are warranted at Almond Locust, they will be pulled out if 00:34:43.560 --> 00:34:44.560 they're not warranted. 00:34:44.560 --> 00:34:47.240 We're looking at studying that particular corridor. 00:34:47.240 --> 00:34:49.360 >> Mm-hmm, okay. 00:34:49.360 --> 00:34:56.960 And that can be a dangerous -- to cross onto Congress from the Emily Fowler parking lot 00:34:56.960 --> 00:34:59.480 because of that turn. 00:34:59.480 --> 00:35:04.980 >> So once it goes to road diet, it'll have that middle area for cars to pull into or 00:35:04.980 --> 00:35:09.880 pull from so that that way they don't have to make the hole across four lanes. 00:35:09.880 --> 00:35:10.880 >> Yeah. 00:35:10.880 --> 00:35:13.080 >> They will have a middle lane for refuge. 00:35:13.080 --> 00:35:15.640 >> Mm-hmm, okay. 00:35:15.640 --> 00:35:20.080 >> And I noticed, so when we're looking, for instance, at that section of Walnut, if we're 00:35:20.080 --> 00:35:25.960 going to do sidewalks, then are we -- I'm really not up to speed on my Muse Street projects. 00:35:25.960 --> 00:35:30.760 And are we then going to be minimizing or eliminating parking, for instance, on the 00:35:30.760 --> 00:35:31.760 Muse -- 00:35:31.760 --> 00:35:32.760 >> That's the -- 00:35:32.760 --> 00:35:33.760 >> -- streets? 00:35:33.760 --> 00:35:39.360 >> Isn't that what we got the report on, the one that just came out with the three different 00:35:39.360 --> 00:35:40.360 options? 00:35:40.360 --> 00:35:41.360 >> Yes. 00:35:41.360 --> 00:35:42.360 >> Okay. 00:35:42.360 --> 00:35:44.560 >> I think this might be not in the list, actually. 00:35:44.560 --> 00:35:45.560 >> Okay. 00:35:45.560 --> 00:35:46.560 >> But what we did is we -- 00:35:46.560 --> 00:35:47.560 >> Oh, this one moved to Muse? 00:35:47.560 --> 00:35:48.560 >> Yeah. 00:35:48.560 --> 00:35:49.560 I think it was pulled out for Muse. 00:35:49.560 --> 00:35:50.560 >> Okay. 00:35:50.560 --> 00:35:52.680 >> So all the Muse streets are out of the actual package. 00:35:52.680 --> 00:35:53.680 This might be in there. 00:35:53.680 --> 00:35:54.680 >> Right. 00:35:54.680 --> 00:35:55.680 Oh, okay. 00:35:55.680 --> 00:35:56.680 Okay. 00:35:56.680 --> 00:35:58.600 >> But I do want to point out a couple of things. 00:35:58.600 --> 00:36:04.680 So we had $2 million for bond funding for the total sidewalk program. 00:36:04.680 --> 00:36:12.620 We sent out two packages, total of 45 segments for sidewalk, which had almost five linear 00:36:12.620 --> 00:36:15.000 miles of sidewalk in there. 00:36:15.000 --> 00:36:21.020 So we're designing all of it, but we won't be able to fund all of it through the $2 million 00:36:21.020 --> 00:36:22.020 that we have. 00:36:22.020 --> 00:36:26.560 So we might be able to only fund half of those, which is the first package. 00:36:26.560 --> 00:36:31.280 And once that money is exhausted, as Mark pointed out, we'll have to go and ask for 00:36:31.280 --> 00:36:37.560 more money, which is at some point we're going to come back to the committee and, you know, 00:36:37.560 --> 00:36:38.560 make recommendations. 00:36:38.560 --> 00:36:40.800 We're already done designed, so we need money. 00:36:40.800 --> 00:36:43.400 Where do we find the money? 00:36:43.400 --> 00:36:47.980 >> What's the -- is the Muse project going before City Council, is that? 00:36:47.980 --> 00:36:50.880 >> I think they're starting in the conceptual phase. 00:36:50.880 --> 00:36:56.460 So it will go to City Council early next year with a concept plan. 00:36:56.460 --> 00:36:59.920 And from that point forward, they'll go into design and then construction. 00:36:59.920 --> 00:37:02.560 So it's not going to happen any time soon. 00:37:02.560 --> 00:37:07.160 >> But they haven't approved the comprehensive improvements that we -- right, the three options 00:37:07.160 --> 00:37:08.160 we got sent, they haven't. 00:37:08.160 --> 00:37:10.200 >> No, they haven't approved that. 00:37:10.200 --> 00:37:13.480 So it has to go through an engineering study. 00:37:13.480 --> 00:37:18.280 Because those streets are being converted into one-ways or being proposed as one-ways, 00:37:18.280 --> 00:37:23.480 they have to go look at traffic, look at parking, engineering studies. 00:37:23.480 --> 00:37:27.920 And then once they come back, they're going to present three feasible options or two feasible 00:37:27.920 --> 00:37:32.840 options and go from there. 00:37:32.840 --> 00:37:36.200 >> Okay. 00:37:36.200 --> 00:37:37.320 Any questions? 00:37:37.320 --> 00:37:42.880 >> I like to see sidewalks, so keep bringing them back. 00:37:42.880 --> 00:37:53.040 >> What -- what could we do to create a continuing improvement fund that's continuing? 00:37:53.040 --> 00:38:00.200 >> We'll come back with that item, but I need to ask that question and see what's the process 00:38:00.200 --> 00:38:05.360 rule can be put in place as far as the continuous approval. 00:38:05.360 --> 00:38:08.600 Because I think we have continuous approval on bike funding. 00:38:08.600 --> 00:38:12.440 We have, I think, a marked amount of $50,000 a year. 00:38:12.440 --> 00:38:17.080 We can establish something similar, but I need to ask that question. 00:38:17.080 --> 00:38:18.080 >> How much sidewalk could -- 00:38:18.080 --> 00:38:22.880 >> City management, just the process, how do we present it? 00:38:22.880 --> 00:38:24.640 How do we take it to council? 00:38:24.640 --> 00:38:30.400 Do we come through the traffic safety, mobility, the process itself? 00:38:30.400 --> 00:38:33.960 >> You said $50,000 a year for a bike? 00:38:33.960 --> 00:38:34.960 >> Correct. 00:38:34.960 --> 00:38:38.720 >> That goes a lot further for the bike if you're just talking about striping or something 00:38:38.720 --> 00:38:39.720 because it's on. 00:38:39.720 --> 00:38:40.720 It's not -- 00:38:40.720 --> 00:38:47.920 >> So how much -- just for a frame of reference, how much would $50,000 buy you in sidewalk? 00:38:47.920 --> 00:38:48.920 >> Very little. 00:38:48.920 --> 00:38:49.920 I think it's -- 00:38:49.920 --> 00:38:55.560 >> I did -- Commissioner Thurmond and I were speaking the other day, and I pulled some 00:38:55.560 --> 00:39:01.880 sample numbers that we got from a consultant, so please everyone put a lot of asterisks 00:39:01.880 --> 00:39:09.000 on this number, but we did talk about it, and so I wanted to bring it up, let's see. 00:39:09.000 --> 00:39:10.000 Okay. 00:39:10.000 --> 00:39:15.520 This was a sample estimate, which was -- we typically have five-foot wide sidewalks, the 00:39:15.520 --> 00:39:21.560 concrete and so forth, $6 a square foot, so we're talking $30 for each linear foot, you 00:39:21.560 --> 00:39:27.600 know, so if a frontage of 20 feet or whatever, just multiply by that. 00:39:27.600 --> 00:39:35.600 But also I think about a 100% addition of other things, like do utilities need to be 00:39:35.600 --> 00:39:36.600 moved? 00:39:36.600 --> 00:39:39.680 And this is on a gross basis where you're talking about thousands of feet or something, 00:39:39.680 --> 00:39:46.680 this is the number you get to, but because, you know, you have utility poles, you might 00:39:46.680 --> 00:39:54.560 have fire hydrants and things like that, so you have those costs, and then the right of 00:39:54.560 --> 00:40:02.080 way, easement, but so this was, you know, something, take it with a grain of salt, but 00:40:02.080 --> 00:40:08.280 this is a rough cost that was delivered to us by a contractor looking at a large project. 00:40:08.280 --> 00:40:14.240 Yeah, and if we can avoid what I think Dallas did, they had a sidewalk that went straight 00:40:14.240 --> 00:40:22.520 into a traffic signal pole and just ended right there, and there was six inches on either 00:40:22.520 --> 00:40:27.040 side. 00:40:27.040 --> 00:40:28.040 Thank you. 00:40:28.040 --> 00:40:29.040 Okay. 00:40:29.040 --> 00:40:39.640 I also suggest that maybe City Council does not grant any variances for developers who 00:40:39.640 --> 00:40:43.200 don't want to build sidewalks, but what do I know? 00:40:43.200 --> 00:40:44.200 Sorry. 00:40:44.200 --> 00:40:50.960 I think sidewalks are in our requirement, it's a requirement, it's in our specifications 00:40:50.960 --> 00:40:51.960 now. 00:40:51.960 --> 00:40:58.360 And sometimes those variants are granted. 00:40:58.360 --> 00:41:04.760 One other thing happening in the city is recently the City Council moved to reestablish the 00:41:04.760 --> 00:41:12.280 Mayor's Committee on Americans with Disabilities Act, and so I think that is a move in the 00:41:12.280 --> 00:41:22.720 direction of more attention and hopefully some funding, dedicated funding for sidewalks. 00:41:22.720 --> 00:41:47.360 I'm aware of an incident in a file location similar to Clay's question, a ramp on a corner 00:41:47.360 --> 00:41:57.180 of the city, and I'm not going to suggest it, but how do we prevent it from happening? 00:41:57.180 --> 00:42:02.400 Yeah, so that's part of the design review, and currently where we look, especially in 00:42:02.400 --> 00:42:08.400 subdivisions and some of these designs, that none of the utilities are in the same area 00:42:08.400 --> 00:42:11.000 as these sidewalks, especially on the corners. 00:42:11.000 --> 00:42:17.200 So if you visit all the new subdivisions, you'll see ADA ramps going across the intersections, 00:42:17.200 --> 00:42:19.760 there are no utility folds in the middle. 00:42:19.760 --> 00:42:26.040 It's more of an issue in the older part of the town where there was no sidewalk, per 00:42:26.040 --> 00:42:29.600 se, considered back in the day. 00:42:29.600 --> 00:42:36.880 And those streets or the utilities were not designed or looked at from a holistic perspective 00:42:36.880 --> 00:42:38.160 for the whole cross-section. 00:42:38.160 --> 00:42:46.280 So things went in at different times, and there was one time where the street was constructed 00:42:46.280 --> 00:42:49.760 and the next thing you know the utilities build their poles, and then someone asked 00:42:49.760 --> 00:42:53.720 for a sidewalk and ramps, and it was just another place to put it. 00:42:53.720 --> 00:42:57.960 So the sequencing has changed now with all the new development. 00:42:57.960 --> 00:43:01.480 We look at everything that's going through that corridor and make sure that they're 00:43:01.480 --> 00:43:02.480 spaced appropriately. 00:43:02.480 --> 00:43:23.000 There are quite a few things that they will be involved in, but from our perspective, 00:43:23.000 --> 00:43:28.360 engineering perspective, there are many capital projects that we're currently working on, 00:43:28.360 --> 00:43:32.240 and that's something that we'll discuss, that there are certain corridors going through 00:43:32.240 --> 00:43:41.680 the middle of the city or on the outside, and how would access be on some of these streets 00:43:41.680 --> 00:43:44.720 or where would you like the access to be? 00:43:44.720 --> 00:43:51.240 What type of signage, what type of elements do you need as far as from an ADA perspective? 00:43:51.240 --> 00:43:55.320 So those are the things that we're looking for an input in. 00:43:55.320 --> 00:43:59.800 A lot of the projects are retrofit, so if we're retrofitting something, then we'll 00:43:59.800 --> 00:44:06.560 need a perspective and some feedback from the committee saying, "Okay, if you go this 00:44:06.560 --> 00:44:12.720 direction or post signage here or put ramps here, that would be a better alternative than 00:44:12.720 --> 00:44:14.840 what you're suggesting in your plans currently." 00:44:14.840 --> 00:44:15.840 So that's the input. 00:44:15.840 --> 00:44:19.440 >> Would you have somebody from staff that shines after that? 00:44:19.440 --> 00:44:23.040 >> Yes, absolutely, and probably you're looking at him. 00:44:23.040 --> 00:44:25.280 >> That's more of a thing. 00:44:25.280 --> 00:44:26.280 >> Okay. 00:44:26.280 --> 00:44:34.040 We're going to stay on topic, so we have to keep to our agenda, but good question. 00:44:34.040 --> 00:44:37.520 Okay, anything else on sidewalks? 00:44:37.520 --> 00:44:40.120 Okay, thank you. 00:44:40.120 --> 00:44:47.560 That brings us to 1ETSC 18-046, which is our staff update. 00:44:47.560 --> 00:44:55.680 We got some suggestions about rescheduling our December meeting. 00:44:55.680 --> 00:44:58.400 And then we also need to talk about our matrix. 00:44:58.400 --> 00:45:02.920 I don't remember what the dates were in December because I was pretty open, so. 00:45:02.920 --> 00:45:07.800 >> So let me start with why we're requesting this. 00:45:07.800 --> 00:45:18.060 A couple of weeks ago, a week and a half ago, we had a meeting with TWU, and TWU wants to 00:45:18.060 --> 00:45:22.120 look at alternatives in implementing their master plan. 00:45:22.120 --> 00:45:31.200 And part of the goal there working with TWU is conduct a big traffic study that analyzes 00:45:31.200 --> 00:45:33.600 different options. 00:45:33.600 --> 00:45:38.420 Closing down bill is what they're requesting, and in a similar fashion, we've done something 00:45:38.420 --> 00:45:39.800 similar with the UNT right now. 00:45:39.800 --> 00:45:43.560 We're going through the traffic study and understanding what are the impact. 00:45:43.560 --> 00:45:48.120 So we want to embark on something similar. 00:45:48.120 --> 00:45:55.720 The thinking was that next December, I think December, we have a joint meeting between 00:45:55.720 --> 00:45:58.920 city staff as well as TWU staff. 00:45:58.920 --> 00:46:03.800 And within that, we're supposed to come with a plan to decide if we're moving forward with 00:46:03.800 --> 00:46:04.800 the study. 00:46:04.800 --> 00:46:09.440 And once we have that set up, we'll bring it to this committee and go through the elements 00:46:09.440 --> 00:46:12.320 of this is where we'll be covered in the study. 00:46:12.320 --> 00:46:18.240 Once we get approval from the committee and recommendation, then we can move forward to 00:46:18.240 --> 00:46:23.520 council and get their approval on funding and moving forward with the study. 00:46:23.520 --> 00:46:27.600 That's the reason we're looking for moving this meeting. 00:46:27.600 --> 00:46:35.160 The joint staff meeting is first week of December, and it was right after our first meeting. 00:46:35.160 --> 00:46:38.080 So we're thinking if we can meet second week. 00:46:38.080 --> 00:46:43.820 I think the dates are 13th, 19th, 20th, and 27th. 00:46:43.820 --> 00:46:45.440 Who wants to meet on the 27th? 00:46:45.440 --> 00:46:46.440 No. 00:46:46.440 --> 00:46:47.440 I'm just kidding. 00:46:47.440 --> 00:46:48.440 [ Laughter ] 00:46:48.440 --> 00:46:55.440 >> Does anybody have any preferences? 00:46:55.440 --> 00:47:06.360 The 13th would be our first shot, maybe a Thursday night. 00:47:06.360 --> 00:47:08.440 >> Very much open to anything except the 20th. 00:47:08.440 --> 00:47:09.440 That's my granddaughter's birthday. 00:47:09.440 --> 00:47:10.440 >> Okay. 00:47:10.440 --> 00:47:11.440 So we're taking 20th off the table. 00:47:11.440 --> 00:47:12.440 That leaves us with the 19th and the 13th. 00:47:12.440 --> 00:47:13.440 >> I think the 13th. 00:47:13.440 --> 00:47:14.440 >> Anybody feel? 00:47:14.440 --> 00:47:15.440 >> For me. 00:47:15.440 --> 00:47:16.440 >> Okay. 00:47:16.440 --> 00:47:17.440 Jeff? 00:47:17.440 --> 00:47:18.440 >> I'm open. 00:47:18.440 --> 00:47:19.440 >> Okay. 00:47:19.440 --> 00:47:20.440 >> 13th. 00:47:20.440 --> 00:47:21.440 Jim? 00:47:21.440 --> 00:47:22.440 Okay. 00:47:22.440 --> 00:47:23.440 Do we want a motion? 00:47:23.440 --> 00:47:24.440 >> Yeah. 00:47:24.440 --> 00:47:25.440 That way, yeah. 00:47:25.440 --> 00:47:26.440 We can -- definitely. 00:47:26.440 --> 00:47:27.440 >> Okay. 00:47:27.440 --> 00:47:28.440 So who wants -- 00:47:28.440 --> 00:47:33.440 >> I make a motion that we reconvene on December. 00:47:33.440 --> 00:47:36.440 >> 13th? 00:47:36.440 --> 00:47:37.440 >> 13th. 00:47:37.440 --> 00:47:38.440 >> Thursday? 00:47:38.440 --> 00:47:39.440 Okay. 00:47:39.440 --> 00:47:40.440 530? 00:47:40.440 --> 00:47:41.440 >> 530. 00:47:41.440 --> 00:47:42.440 >> Okay. 00:47:42.440 --> 00:47:46.040 We have a motion to reschedule to Thursday, December 13th. 00:47:46.040 --> 00:47:47.040 530. 00:47:47.040 --> 00:47:48.040 Do we have a second? 00:47:48.040 --> 00:47:49.040 Melissa seconds. 00:47:49.040 --> 00:47:50.040 Everybody in favor? 00:47:50.040 --> 00:47:51.040 Aye. 00:47:51.040 --> 00:47:52.040 >> Aye. 00:47:52.040 --> 00:47:53.040 >> Aye. 00:47:53.040 --> 00:47:54.040 >> Anybody opposed? 00:47:54.040 --> 00:47:55.040 Excellent. 00:47:55.040 --> 00:48:02.400 We will be back on the 13th of December with a report from TWA and city staff. 00:48:02.400 --> 00:48:08.920 And then that brings us to our matrix, our favorite part. 00:48:08.920 --> 00:48:14.600 >> So I'd like to ask you if you have any specific item on the matrix that you want 00:48:14.600 --> 00:48:23.880 to talk about because I'm going to most likely jump to the last item that is the collision 00:48:23.880 --> 00:48:28.280 reports and data that was asked in the previous meeting. 00:48:28.280 --> 00:48:33.720 We did request some information from PD and there's a lot of information that needs to 00:48:33.720 --> 00:48:34.720 be distilled. 00:48:34.720 --> 00:48:43.440 They just gave a list of top 10 intersections that have collisions and as expected these 00:48:43.440 --> 00:48:51.520 are U.S. 38935, those tech stock roadway intersections that are large, that carry a large number 00:48:51.520 --> 00:48:52.520 of vehicles. 00:48:52.520 --> 00:49:01.600 So we want to get into and get a better idea of how much are those involving pedestrians 00:49:01.600 --> 00:49:05.080 and bicyclists because that's a lot of our focus. 00:49:05.080 --> 00:49:08.720 And then also come back with a better explanation. 00:49:08.720 --> 00:49:16.820 So most likely next meeting we'll come back with a better report breaking it down further. 00:49:16.820 --> 00:49:22.760 On the Mew Street we can include that because we're moving forward with the design aspect 00:49:22.760 --> 00:49:29.280 of it and we'll have some more information but I'm not sure if I can bring that next 00:49:29.280 --> 00:49:32.540 meeting because we wouldn't have that much information more than what you've already 00:49:32.540 --> 00:49:35.360 seen on it. 00:49:35.360 --> 00:49:38.360 Any specific one that? 00:49:38.360 --> 00:49:48.040 I was curious about, so I had asked about the poor signage on Welch near the Union and 00:49:48.040 --> 00:49:49.040 I have... 00:49:49.040 --> 00:49:50.040 Poor signage. 00:49:50.040 --> 00:49:51.040 Oh yes. 00:49:51.040 --> 00:49:55.120 So that street has been closed for the past couple weeks as you may know because of drainage 00:49:55.120 --> 00:49:56.120 construction. 00:49:56.120 --> 00:50:00.640 So yes, once that construction moves out we'll take a look at the whole street and drive 00:50:00.640 --> 00:50:02.500 it and install the signage. 00:50:02.500 --> 00:50:04.480 This is for the lane assignment, correct? 00:50:04.480 --> 00:50:07.960 The lane assignment changes and no one understands. 00:50:07.960 --> 00:50:17.040 I'll take that if you want. 00:50:17.040 --> 00:50:24.000 I was going to just follow up on nine. 00:50:24.000 --> 00:50:30.080 So we just have those businesses, I think we mentioned, station motors specifically 00:50:30.080 --> 00:50:36.520 right on the corner of McKinney and Locust where their cars block the sidewalks and push 00:50:36.520 --> 00:50:41.960 pedestrians right when the roads open out into the street area and everything's unclear 00:50:41.960 --> 00:50:42.960 over there. 00:50:42.960 --> 00:50:45.280 You probably know it's not clear anywhere. 00:50:45.280 --> 00:50:49.840 And so maybe resolving that with those businesses and I don't think they're the only one that's 00:50:49.840 --> 00:50:50.840 blocking those sidewalks. 00:50:50.840 --> 00:50:51.840 There are a lot of those. 00:50:51.840 --> 00:50:56.000 And they've probably been doing it for a long time and no one said anything but it's a pretty 00:50:56.000 --> 00:51:00.120 dangerous situation because it pushes you pretty close to cars that are speeding up 00:51:00.120 --> 00:51:03.120 quickly. 00:51:03.120 --> 00:51:15.240 I can update, nothing's changed. 00:51:15.240 --> 00:51:19.280 And so I guess aside from actual changes to the street, even just letting the business 00:51:19.280 --> 00:51:20.280 know. 00:51:20.280 --> 00:51:27.680 We'll get with the enforcement and see what we can do. 00:51:27.680 --> 00:51:30.680 Can I add one? 00:51:30.680 --> 00:51:31.680 Yes, absolutely. 00:51:31.680 --> 00:51:50.720 Is it possible, because the cars come all the way out to the end and that's where the 00:51:50.720 --> 00:51:57.560 white stripe is, is it possible to move the stripe back on the left-hand side? 00:51:57.560 --> 00:51:59.360 Oh, I see. 00:51:59.360 --> 00:52:02.960 So big trucks, fire trucks. 00:52:02.960 --> 00:52:03.960 So the stop bar. 00:52:03.960 --> 00:52:10.000 The buses, you know, we can't, you know, it's very hard to make the turn, you know, and 00:52:10.000 --> 00:52:11.440 not hit the curb. 00:52:11.440 --> 00:52:14.520 Okay, we'll look at it, definitely. 00:52:14.520 --> 00:52:32.640 Turning radius. 00:52:32.640 --> 00:52:35.800 Does anybody else have items for the matrix? 00:52:35.800 --> 00:52:44.360 I'd like to add looking at protected bike lanes. 00:52:44.360 --> 00:52:47.440 Looking at all the different options that we could have. 00:52:47.440 --> 00:52:53.760 I mean, we've done a lot about traffic calming and stuff like that, and I think we need to 00:52:53.760 --> 00:53:01.000 look at that in the same way with protected bike lanes, and maybe what kind of pilot projects 00:53:01.000 --> 00:53:02.000 we could do. 00:53:02.000 --> 00:53:07.360 You know, Eagle Drive was a pilot project for a road diet, and it's worked out pretty 00:53:07.360 --> 00:53:15.640 well and now Welch is, I mean, not Welch, but Malone is, particularly starting around 00:53:15.640 --> 00:53:25.440 schools or something, and since you just did Malone, maybe around Newton-Razor, some type 00:53:25.440 --> 00:53:32.240 of bollards that can protect the approach to school from both directions, and just the 00:53:32.240 --> 00:53:34.120 different options we can have. 00:53:34.120 --> 00:53:35.120 Okay. 00:53:35.120 --> 00:53:39.920 You're talking, focusing on existing bike facilities, or are you talking about brand 00:53:39.920 --> 00:53:40.920 new? 00:53:40.920 --> 00:53:49.960 I'd like both, but I think we need to look at what we've got, and then any new construction, 00:53:49.960 --> 00:53:55.200 trying to incorporate that into it, as well as you're talking about pedestrians. 00:53:55.200 --> 00:53:56.200 Yeah. 00:53:56.200 --> 00:54:00.200 Well, I mean, I wonder if Hickory would make sense, too, between UNT and the square as 00:54:00.200 --> 00:54:03.360 a possible one, because we already have a bike lane there and seeing what it would look 00:54:03.360 --> 00:54:05.720 like to make it a protected lane. 00:54:05.720 --> 00:54:06.720 Right. 00:54:06.720 --> 00:54:13.080 I'd be curious also about Bell, just because of the Strickland Middle School. 00:54:13.080 --> 00:54:18.320 I mean, could kids ride their bike down Bell to get to Strickland? 00:54:18.320 --> 00:54:19.320 And Bell's... 00:54:19.320 --> 00:54:20.320 Not safely. 00:54:20.320 --> 00:54:21.320 Bell's fairly wide street. 00:54:21.320 --> 00:54:22.320 Yeah, it's great. 00:54:22.320 --> 00:54:23.320 Just throwing it out there. 00:54:23.320 --> 00:54:24.320 Okay. 00:54:24.320 --> 00:54:25.320 We'll look at it. 00:54:25.320 --> 00:54:34.520 Anyone else have anything for the matrix? 00:54:34.520 --> 00:54:35.520 Yeah. 00:54:35.520 --> 00:54:38.560 I'd like to make a request, please. 00:54:38.560 --> 00:54:39.560 I was just curious. 00:54:39.560 --> 00:54:40.560 I get a lot of questions. 00:54:40.560 --> 00:54:41.560 I'm sure a lot of you all do, too. 00:54:41.560 --> 00:54:47.840 And I know that we've touched on it briefly here in the past about the construction on 00:54:47.840 --> 00:54:54.520 I-35 between Teasley and State School, or 2499, I think it is now. 00:54:54.520 --> 00:54:59.240 And I was just wondering if you might be able to provide us or put on the agenda to provide 00:54:59.240 --> 00:55:04.680 us information on, you know, what the original plan was there, you know, kind of where we're 00:55:04.680 --> 00:55:12.240 at with the plan now and moving forward, and any details that would be, you know, supply 00:55:12.240 --> 00:55:17.480 us with a better understanding of exactly what's going on there. 00:55:17.480 --> 00:55:22.920 And also, if possible, you know, once we receive that information that you could actually provide 00:55:22.920 --> 00:55:29.240 us with any -- if there's any significant changes in the current plan, that you might 00:55:29.240 --> 00:55:31.600 be able to provide those updates to us. 00:55:31.600 --> 00:55:32.600 Definitely. 00:55:32.600 --> 00:55:33.600 Thanks. 00:55:33.600 --> 00:55:34.600 All right. 00:55:34.600 --> 00:55:35.600 All right. 00:55:35.600 --> 00:55:36.600 Anything else for pre-TEMS matrix? 00:55:36.600 --> 00:55:37.600 That's how I like to think of it. 00:55:37.600 --> 00:55:38.600 Okay. 00:55:38.600 --> 00:55:39.600 So is there anything else, then, from staff? 00:55:39.600 --> 00:56:00.760 No, I think we -- quick update on the -- some of the changes that's happening with the -- our 00:56:00.760 --> 00:56:02.240 staff organization. 00:56:02.240 --> 00:56:08.480 We have had two new engineers added to the traffic group, which is really helping me 00:56:08.480 --> 00:56:12.800 out on top of Mark being there as a bike/pet coordinator. 00:56:12.800 --> 00:56:18.840 We have a senior engineer, Tracy, that's being assigned to traffic, and she's diligently 00:56:18.840 --> 00:56:22.120 writing down what needs to be done. 00:56:22.120 --> 00:56:23.640 And there is a new person that started. 00:56:23.640 --> 00:56:30.080 She unfortunately didn't make it today, but her name is Pam, and she's starting with traffic 00:56:30.080 --> 00:56:31.280 too. 00:56:31.280 --> 00:56:34.120 So she's more on the signal side. 00:56:34.120 --> 00:56:35.480 Tracy is more on the planning side. 00:56:35.480 --> 00:56:39.920 So we -- I -- now we have help, and we can get more things done. 00:56:39.920 --> 00:56:46.720 Just wanted to know that there are more people to help on the staff side. 00:56:46.720 --> 00:56:51.480 Tell them about your promotion. 00:56:51.480 --> 00:56:59.880 So I think there was a -- there was a memo or some information out there last week. 00:56:59.880 --> 00:57:02.000 I'm getting new duties assigned. 00:57:02.000 --> 00:57:06.240 I'll be working on the development review. 00:57:06.240 --> 00:57:11.040 I'll have a new group under me called engineering services that will review all the new development 00:57:11.040 --> 00:57:12.040 going in. 00:57:12.040 --> 00:57:17.920 So all the design criteria that we updated make sure that the lane sizes and all the 00:57:17.920 --> 00:57:20.640 requirements are implemented appropriately. 00:57:20.640 --> 00:57:26.000 So that's going to be -- that's why I have -- I'm happy I have more traffic folks that 00:57:26.000 --> 00:57:31.520 can focus on all the traffic needs, and then I'll be focusing on development review. 00:57:31.520 --> 00:57:33.320 So are you still going to be ours? 00:57:33.320 --> 00:57:34.320 Yes. 00:57:34.320 --> 00:57:35.320 Okay. 00:57:35.320 --> 00:57:36.320 Good. 00:57:36.320 --> 00:57:41.320 Do your other job, that's fine, but just -- so you're still ours. 00:57:41.320 --> 00:57:42.320 Okay. 00:57:42.320 --> 00:57:43.320 Okay. 00:57:43.320 --> 00:57:44.320 Congratulations. 00:57:44.320 --> 00:57:45.320 Thank you. 00:57:45.320 --> 00:57:46.320 Yeah. 00:57:46.320 --> 00:57:47.320 Congrats. 00:57:47.320 --> 00:57:48.320 All right. 00:57:48.320 --> 00:57:49.320 Anything else? 00:57:49.320 --> 00:57:50.320 Okay. 00:57:50.320 --> 00:57:58.080 We will adjourn at 627, and we'll see you in December.