WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:09.560 All right. Welcome everyone to our first virtual meeting for the Traffic Safety Commission. 00:00:09.560 --> 00:00:15.380 Just a few points of housekeeping. In order to keep on track one, we do have a hard stop 00:00:15.380 --> 00:00:23.480 at five o'clock. Is that correct, Becky? And so that's our allotted time. We will be, I'll 00:00:23.480 --> 00:00:29.760 be transitioning this to Mr. Krutka in just a few seconds, but just to establish if you 00:00:29.760 --> 00:00:36.320 have a question, I think there we can use the chat function or you can raise your hand 00:00:36.320 --> 00:00:43.040 or one of the things we did like to has been working out well is if we could hold the questions 00:00:43.040 --> 00:00:48.320 as much as possible to the end and let the presentations complete and then come back 00:00:48.320 --> 00:00:53.440 and have a question and answer session. I believe that's been working better. So again, 00:00:53.440 --> 00:01:00.200 welcome and I will now hand it off to Mr. Krutka. Chairman. 00:01:00.200 --> 00:01:07.720 Okay. Thank you. And it's been a while since we've met. So hopefully I'm not too rusty 00:01:07.720 --> 00:01:11.680 on running one of these meetings, but please let me know in this virtual environment if 00:01:11.680 --> 00:01:17.200 there's anything that I get wrong. If my audio is slow at all, please let me know also I 00:01:17.200 --> 00:01:23.360 can turn off my video to make sure that my audio is clear. Okay. So I think we're going 00:01:23.360 --> 00:01:30.560 to start right into it. The first item on, well, first we, we do have a quorum, sorry, 00:01:30.560 --> 00:01:36.120 for there's a little bit of noise in the background here. So we do have a quorum to start the 00:01:36.120 --> 00:01:42.080 meeting. So call to order. And so our first item that we can go ahead and do is we have 00:01:42.080 --> 00:01:46.880 a presentation from members of the public. And I do believe we have one submission from 00:01:46.880 --> 00:01:55.640 the public that we could hear now. No, we do not have any callers for presentations 00:01:55.640 --> 00:02:01.440 from members of the public. Okay. Good deal. Sorry. I thought we had one. Okay. Well then 00:02:01.440 --> 00:02:10.800 we'll just go right into item A TSC 20-010 and consider the approval of minutes for the 00:02:10.800 --> 00:02:19.360 March 2nd, 2020 meeting. Do we have a, for the approval of minutes, are there any corrections 00:02:19.360 --> 00:02:29.600 that need to be added to the minutes? I didn't see any corrections. All right. All those 00:02:29.600 --> 00:02:35.040 in favor of approving the minutes, we can use an I, I guess we can do an I or a hand 00:02:35.040 --> 00:02:46.120 raise too. Either way. I see Clay, Melissa, Connie, and I all approve. Okay. Seems like 00:02:46.120 --> 00:02:53.120 then that one passes and we are on to item B TSC 20-011. Receive a report, hold a discussion 00:02:53.120 --> 00:02:58.240 and give feedback regarding staff's recommendations to update the speed and parking ordinances. 00:02:58.240 --> 00:03:02.800 Sorry, I was on mute. That's on me. Actually, we've got to take a roll call vote because 00:03:02.800 --> 00:03:09.320 we're doing it by zoom. Okay. So we don't show everybody at every moment because we 00:03:09.320 --> 00:03:12.080 just can't show it all. So we've got to do a roll call vote. You've just got to go down 00:03:12.080 --> 00:03:18.640 the list of those who are here. Sorry. Okay. So I'll just go down the list. Kevin sample's 00:03:18.640 --> 00:03:35.240 not here. Um, let's go with, uh, clay, Connie. Yes. Is Jeff here? Jeff is not here. Jeff 00:03:35.240 --> 00:03:48.240 is absent. I correct. Yes, that's correct. He's, he's not here. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. 00:03:48.240 --> 00:03:58.240 My video was slow for a second there and Melissa here. Okay. And, and I also vote I, um, does 00:03:58.240 --> 00:04:11.080 that satisfy everything, Trey? You're muted, Trey. You're muted. I'm still muted there. 00:04:11.080 --> 00:04:17.400 I looked on it, but it didn't undo it. I guess I'm supposed to be able to do a space bar, 00:04:17.400 --> 00:04:21.760 but I can't ever get to the work for some reason. Okay. Um, going down the roll and 00:04:21.760 --> 00:04:31.880 then just, you announced that it passed and we can move on. Okay. All right. So, uh, item, 00:04:31.880 --> 00:04:39.480 item a TSE, uh, 2010, sorry, doing it like this. We've got to see your face while you're 00:04:39.480 --> 00:04:49.520 the one talking. Okay. My, my, my video is, is running slow, which is why I'm turning 00:04:49.520 --> 00:05:04.560 it off. So hopefully you can, sorry, everyone. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay. Sorry. The, 00:05:04.560 --> 00:05:09.520 my internet connection is having some problems and that's why I turned my video off, but, 00:05:09.520 --> 00:05:15.360 um, it seems like, uh, we ran down the roll and there's approval. So, um, item a TSE 00:05:15.360 --> 00:05:24.320 2010, uh, passed. And so if that's okay, then we will move on to item B TSE 20 dash zero 00:05:24.320 --> 00:05:28.760 11, or see report or discussion and give feedback regarding the staff's recommendation to update 00:05:28.760 --> 00:05:38.520 the speed and parking ordinances. Hi. Good morning, everybody. I'm going to go ahead 00:05:38.520 --> 00:05:52.280 and share my screen and go through our presentation. See here. All right. And can we all see the 00:05:52.280 --> 00:06:00.840 PowerPoint presentation? Yes. Perfect. So, um, I'm Haley Salazar with capital product, 00:06:00.840 --> 00:06:09.160 capital projects, and I'm here today to talk about an update to our speed and parking ordinances. 00:06:09.160 --> 00:06:14.560 And the objective in doing this is to improve our transportation management, uh, as far 00:06:14.560 --> 00:06:19.560 as the ordinances go for both of these areas. So both of our speed limits and our parking 00:06:19.560 --> 00:06:25.840 ordinances. And we're doing this, um, Haley, this is Billy with the TV. We need that full 00:06:25.840 --> 00:06:39.000 screen please. Thank you. Is that better? Yes. Perfect. All right. So in order to understand 00:06:39.000 --> 00:06:44.400 why we're proposing the update, I want to run through how we currently handle the ordinances 00:06:44.400 --> 00:06:50.360 for parking and speed limits. Right now, the way it works is each time we pass a new rule 00:06:50.360 --> 00:06:56.000 for either parking or a speed limit, it gets passed as an ordinance. This is an independent 00:06:56.000 --> 00:07:02.280 exercise. The language is gathered. The recommendation is made. It pounces passes through council, 00:07:02.280 --> 00:07:08.360 any other governing bodies, and it gets adopted and stored into laser fish, which is our repository 00:07:08.360 --> 00:07:14.920 for all of our ordinances. And there's all specific to certain areas. So each street 00:07:14.920 --> 00:07:21.120 typically gets its own ordinance. Each parking rule gets its own ordinance. And therefore 00:07:21.120 --> 00:07:26.560 we're left with the transportation system that's governed by many separate ordinances 00:07:26.560 --> 00:07:34.240 that get passed over time. But what we would like to do in order to streamline the process 00:07:34.240 --> 00:07:39.400 and not have to make sure that we're in accordance with all these separate ordinances, we want 00:07:39.400 --> 00:07:46.480 to make one holistic ordinance for all of our speed limits and another for all of our 00:07:46.480 --> 00:07:52.400 parking ordinances. And what we'll do is we're going to divide them into tables. So for example, 00:07:52.400 --> 00:07:57.040 if we're talking about the speed ordinance, we have a table that calls out all of the 00:07:57.040 --> 00:08:02.880 speeds for our park streets, our textile roads, city streets, and school zones. And it's all 00:08:02.880 --> 00:08:08.180 listed in one table. So you can get a glance any time we deviate from prima facie, which 00:08:08.180 --> 00:08:13.680 is the 30 miles an hour that you can assume you can drive a road unless listed otherwise 00:08:13.680 --> 00:08:19.600 by an ordinance. You can get one quick glance at all of these changes to that 30 miles an 00:08:19.600 --> 00:08:26.880 hour. Anytime we make an update, we would actually update the entire table and put that 00:08:26.880 --> 00:08:32.480 into the AIS that we bring before the group. And then that way, when the updates are made 00:08:32.480 --> 00:08:37.920 and the presentations are made, we're actually okaying an update to the entire table and 00:08:37.920 --> 00:08:42.460 nothing gets lost in translation. There's no singleton ordinance out there that can 00:08:42.460 --> 00:08:46.960 get stored in laser fish and not applied to the whole table. We know we've got one place 00:08:46.960 --> 00:08:52.800 to look as well, which is really going to help the organization. In order to do this 00:08:52.800 --> 00:08:58.960 overhaul, it is going to be quite a process. The first go around, we're very invested in 00:08:58.960 --> 00:09:05.080 just making sure that the table we pull together as our master table is of the highest quality. 00:09:05.080 --> 00:09:10.800 So what we did with the speed ordinance, and we're going to do with the parking ordinance 00:09:10.800 --> 00:09:16.160 as well, is first we're going to visit the code and find what codified tables are there. 00:09:16.160 --> 00:09:22.520 And we're going to QC them to the best of our ability. Then we're going to go into GIS 00:09:22.520 --> 00:09:29.160 and pull all of the centerline data reflecting our streets and compare to the table and then 00:09:29.160 --> 00:09:35.480 make any amendments that we need to the codified table based on what we find in GIS. We're 00:09:35.480 --> 00:09:40.760 also going to research all of our existing ordinances compared to the data set we have, 00:09:40.760 --> 00:09:45.800 really do an overhaul through laser fish, which again is our repository. We're also 00:09:45.800 --> 00:09:50.960 going to drive the streets and compare what signage we see out there, just in case there's 00:09:50.960 --> 00:09:57.520 some signage that doesn't have an ordinance that we can find to back it. We're also going 00:09:57.520 --> 00:10:03.720 to QC all of this data against Cartograph, which is our asset management system for our 00:10:03.720 --> 00:10:09.800 traffic system and our street system as well. Once we reviewed all of these separate areas, 00:10:09.800 --> 00:10:13.920 we're going to compile all that data and then put that into the master table that we're 00:10:13.920 --> 00:10:18.720 going to work off of going forward. And that'll be what we take to the boards and to council 00:10:18.720 --> 00:10:25.000 for approval. And so the next steps are going to be pretty aggressive because we feel this 00:10:25.000 --> 00:10:30.960 is very important to get all of our data in one easy source of truth to reference. We 00:10:30.960 --> 00:10:35.520 want to shoot for August, September to get our speed ordinance table pulled together. 00:10:35.520 --> 00:10:39.240 And then we're going to repeat that process, kind of figure out what did we learn in doing 00:10:39.240 --> 00:10:45.060 that and then apply that to our parking ordinances that we would hope to take before the group 00:10:45.060 --> 00:10:51.240 in October. And essentially that's it. We just wanted to share our plan with the group 00:10:51.240 --> 00:11:04.840 to get any feedback. Any questions or comments? I have one question. So can you tell me just 00:11:04.840 --> 00:11:12.040 kind of practically what kind of will this result in like changes to existing speed limits? 00:11:12.040 --> 00:11:17.080 Can you just kind of give me like some of the practical applications of these changes? 00:11:17.080 --> 00:11:25.400 Absolutely. So there should not be any surprises for a motorist out on the road. Right now, 00:11:25.400 --> 00:11:31.280 if you go to our municipal code and you look up where our speed limits are listed, where 00:11:31.280 --> 00:11:37.340 they deviate from prima facie, so where they're not 30 miles an hour, there's a table of maybe 00:11:37.340 --> 00:11:45.440 about 12 streets listed in there. And I think most of the people on the call here could 00:11:45.440 --> 00:11:49.860 probably think of at least 12 streets off the top of their head, if not quite a few 00:11:49.860 --> 00:11:55.680 more that deviate from that 30 mile an hour. So we really just want to make sure that we 00:11:55.680 --> 00:12:04.100 have the ordinances to back up what's on the road. And so really, it's just a better articulation 00:12:04.100 --> 00:12:10.960 of what's out there. And also, we anticipate that we might find some old outdated ordinances 00:12:10.960 --> 00:12:16.400 that don't necessarily have street signs representing them on the road that we really haven't been 00:12:16.400 --> 00:12:21.840 following and there's no reason to keep them. Some of them are quite old. We've got some 00:12:21.840 --> 00:12:26.840 ordinances from back in the 70s and 80s. We're even finding where the context of the road 00:12:26.840 --> 00:12:32.880 and the development around it has changed. So really, the implication we hope for is 00:12:32.880 --> 00:12:37.560 just kind of better management and a better source of truth for those enforcing the management 00:12:37.560 --> 00:12:41.660 as well as our residents driving on the roads. 00:12:41.660 --> 00:12:48.300 Does anyone else have questions? 00:12:48.300 --> 00:12:52.680 Are you saying that this is going to help you with continuity also? 00:12:52.680 --> 00:12:59.800 Yes. Yes. It will definitely help all of us. And I think it's going to be huge just being 00:12:59.800 --> 00:13:05.320 able to have one source of truth in the code instead of all of these independent ordinances 00:13:05.320 --> 00:13:06.560 out there. 00:13:06.560 --> 00:13:09.480 Great. Thank you. 00:13:09.480 --> 00:13:11.960 Thank you. 00:13:11.960 --> 00:13:20.160 Haley, one thing we've had a discussion about in the past was even the idea of a more uniform 00:13:20.160 --> 00:13:25.240 speed limit around the square, like surrounding the square area. Some cities have started 00:13:25.240 --> 00:13:32.160 to do that as a way to give motorists a more clear sense they're entering a more pedestrian 00:13:32.160 --> 00:13:38.320 active area. Is that something this process could be aligned with this process or would 00:13:38.320 --> 00:13:41.920 that be totally separate? Is that something that could be considered? 00:13:41.920 --> 00:13:50.120 Well, I think certainly any changes we make, we'll want to make sure that that's reflected 00:13:50.120 --> 00:13:56.520 in this table of ordinances. Any changes to existing speed limits and signage we have 00:13:56.520 --> 00:14:00.520 now, that would be some additional effort and probably some studies that we would have 00:14:00.520 --> 00:14:07.640 to go through and just collaboration with our department. But the transparency of these 00:14:07.640 --> 00:14:16.360 speed limits and rules will definitely come into play with this project. 00:14:16.360 --> 00:14:18.920 Thank you. 00:14:18.920 --> 00:14:23.920 Is there any other questions? 00:14:23.920 --> 00:14:37.320 Okay. If there's no other questions, then we can move to our next item. Our next item 00:14:37.320 --> 00:14:44.540 is CTSC 20-012. Receive an updated report and hold a discussion regarding initiatives 00:14:44.540 --> 00:14:49.280 to reduce wrong way driving. 00:14:49.280 --> 00:14:52.840 Hello, everybody. That would be me again. 00:14:52.840 --> 00:14:58.000 Haley, can you make the screen big again, please? 00:14:58.000 --> 00:15:03.080 I hit share. There's a bit of a lag. Is it, can we all see it on full screen now? 00:15:03.080 --> 00:15:04.080 Yes. 00:15:04.080 --> 00:15:10.720 Fantastic. All right. So this item is just us talking about our initiatives to reduce 00:15:10.720 --> 00:15:17.320 wrong way driving on one way streets. And so the objective of the wrong way driving program 00:15:17.320 --> 00:15:22.520 is to increase our public safety just within the right of ways. And it's through the implementation 00:15:22.520 --> 00:15:28.520 of countermeasures that reduce wrong way driving on one way streets. Some background on why 00:15:28.520 --> 00:15:35.520 we're working on this. This initiative was one of the initiatives we did not satisfy 00:15:35.520 --> 00:15:41.560 in the 2019 policy bundle submission. For those unfamiliar with the policy bundle, it 00:15:41.560 --> 00:15:48.720 is funding that we can get through cog if we satisfy 20 initiatives that are part of 00:15:48.720 --> 00:15:58.520 mobility 2045. And we did, we satisfied over half of the 20. So we got $750,000 in credits 00:15:58.520 --> 00:16:03.700 that we could use towards projects, which was really exciting. One of the board members 00:16:03.700 --> 00:16:09.520 in mobility had mentioned if there were any initiatives though, that we did not satisfy 00:16:09.520 --> 00:16:15.260 that we should look into and initiatives to reduce wrong way driving really stood out. 00:16:15.260 --> 00:16:20.500 So we decided to take a deeper dive and see what, what this means and how it could be 00:16:20.500 --> 00:16:25.760 applied to the city of Denton's transportation system to improve everything we have on the 00:16:25.760 --> 00:16:32.160 road. Um, a little bit of statistics in wrong way driving that we found as we studied this 00:16:32.160 --> 00:16:40.280 initiative was that in 2018 we had 170 wrong way crashes on rural roads. So that's roads 00:16:40.280 --> 00:16:45.640 through cities, much like the city of Denton. We're not talking highways here. Um, they 00:16:45.640 --> 00:16:50.440 are typically head on collisions, which means they're the most fatal cause you can double 00:16:50.440 --> 00:16:57.120 the speed of the two cars, um, that collide, but most of them do occur between six at night, 00:16:57.120 --> 00:17:01.580 six in the morning. And there's an even smaller window between midnight and three AM where 00:17:01.580 --> 00:17:08.080 these crashes occur. Um, they're most often on weekends, most often they involve alcohol 00:17:08.080 --> 00:17:16.080 and there's an over-representation of drivers under 25 or over 70. And when we consider 00:17:16.080 --> 00:17:21.920 that we have a population that's relatively young here in the city of Denton, due to the 00:17:21.920 --> 00:17:28.960 draw of the universities, we also have a very vibrant nightlife here as well as, um, with 00:17:28.960 --> 00:17:33.560 these new drivers kind of here in town, a lot of them, it's their first year and they're 00:17:33.560 --> 00:17:41.200 not sure, um, how to drive around one way roads. And so we thought given the statistics 00:17:41.200 --> 00:17:44.680 and the fact that we do have a few one way roads, we wanted to go ahead and adopt this 00:17:44.680 --> 00:17:51.600 program and just make the most of it to keep our drivers safe. So the first step we did 00:17:51.600 --> 00:17:57.720 was we targeted all of the one way roads within the city of Denton. And so you can see a map 00:17:57.720 --> 00:18:01.900 that we highlighted from our GIS system with just some of the one way roads we really want 00:18:01.900 --> 00:18:08.440 to target first. So of course we've got the service roads along 35, but Elm, Locust, Oak 00:18:08.440 --> 00:18:17.920 and Hickory, um, Shady Oaks, Mayhill, Teasley, Carroll, and Loop 288. And there's also several 00:18:17.920 --> 00:18:22.720 more roads we want to continue to target, but these, because they're so heavily traveled, 00:18:22.720 --> 00:18:28.920 we thought what a great opportunity to increase safety on these roads first. And we've already 00:18:28.920 --> 00:18:35.320 installed some countermeasures at Stewart and Loop 288. So for those not familiar with 00:18:35.320 --> 00:18:42.760 this intersection, as you head north on Stewart towards Loop 288, we had one, and you can 00:18:42.760 --> 00:18:47.080 look in the picture in the top right hand corner, we had one little signage that was 00:18:47.080 --> 00:18:52.920 an arrow that said this way only. But if the driver was distracted, they could easily make 00:18:52.920 --> 00:18:57.780 a left turn going the wrong way. But if you look across the bottom of this slide now, 00:18:57.780 --> 00:19:02.600 you can see the new wrong way driving signs that our traffic crew has installed in that 00:19:02.600 --> 00:19:08.600 area. So if a driver does in fact turn left or coming southbound, if they turn the wrong 00:19:08.600 --> 00:19:13.760 way as well and miss that arrow, these large reflective signs are there letting the driver 00:19:13.760 --> 00:19:18.800 know that they need to turn around quick. Luckily, another statistic with wrong way 00:19:18.800 --> 00:19:24.920 driving is that the majority of drivers do correct and turn around before any incident 00:19:24.920 --> 00:19:30.840 is had. And so if we do in fact have motorists going the wrong way, we're happy these signs 00:19:30.840 --> 00:19:38.460 here are here to help alert them. The next area of focus is going to be Locust and Parkway. 00:19:38.460 --> 00:19:43.180 So this is going at the intersection of Locust and Parkway. We actually just got word today 00:19:43.180 --> 00:19:49.400 from TextDOT that we have approval to go ahead and install some signs here as well just to 00:19:49.400 --> 00:19:55.040 let the driver know if they've turned the wrong way. Similar to 288 and Stewart, all 00:19:55.040 --> 00:19:59.540 we have here is an arrow. So these red signs will help communicate that the driver is going 00:19:59.540 --> 00:20:06.840 the wrong way if they do in fact miss the arrow. We also wanted to partner with our 00:20:06.840 --> 00:20:11.720 citizens. We do have a lot of roads we're trying to manage and our citizens have been 00:20:11.720 --> 00:20:20.320 fantastic letting us know where opportunities lie. So our webmaster Sarah Fullwood has done 00:20:20.320 --> 00:20:25.680 something really cool. She set up an area on the website where wrong way driver people 00:20:25.680 --> 00:20:31.200 can go and log where they think a wrong way driving sign could be of benefit to be installed. 00:20:31.200 --> 00:20:35.580 Let us know. This is live on the website and then we'll get our crews out there right away. 00:20:35.580 --> 00:20:42.000 Our traffic team is fantastic. We can actually print signs in house. So the turnaround time 00:20:42.000 --> 00:20:48.000 once we see a need is very quick to get those signs out there especially if the opportunity 00:20:48.000 --> 00:20:54.160 is within a city of Denton right away. So that's really exciting as well. Another project 00:20:54.160 --> 00:21:02.660 that we're looking into is called a FLIR sensor product. Sorry, project. And this FLIR sensor, 00:21:02.660 --> 00:21:07.840 what it does is it actually has a sensor that will pick up on vehicles going the wrong way 00:21:07.840 --> 00:21:14.520 and it will illuminate with LEDs one of those wrong way driving signs. Instead of just being 00:21:14.520 --> 00:21:21.880 a reflective sign, this is a bright flashing sign that really gets the driver's attention. 00:21:21.880 --> 00:21:28.700 Where Avenue A and Hickory Street meet, that used to be a two-way street that we very recently 00:21:28.700 --> 00:21:34.920 converted to a one-way street. And so this area is one of the targets that we're looking 00:21:34.920 --> 00:21:41.360 at installing this sensor because many drivers who have been used to turning down Avenue 00:21:41.360 --> 00:21:46.920 A where they can no longer turn might just happen to not see that arrow sign and then 00:21:46.920 --> 00:21:54.200 the no longer the one-way sign as well. So this will be a huge countermeasure to prevent 00:21:54.200 --> 00:22:00.360 folks from kind of going on autopilot and turning the wrong way down the street. And 00:22:00.360 --> 00:22:05.720 so our recommendations are to continue our focus on a proactive wrong way driving prevention 00:22:05.720 --> 00:22:10.200 program. We really want to get out there and find all the areas that can be improved with 00:22:10.200 --> 00:22:15.400 those wrong way signs. We do want to continue to use a variety of preventative measures. 00:22:15.400 --> 00:22:22.600 So as nice as that sensor sign was with the LED edge lit, it is a bit cost prohibitive, 00:22:22.600 --> 00:22:26.800 but the signs, the static reflective signs are not. So we want to use those everywhere 00:22:26.800 --> 00:22:31.960 we can and on key areas where we can provide additional safety, we want to look at those 00:22:31.960 --> 00:22:36.560 alternative tools like the LED edge lit signs. And then of course we want to continue to 00:22:36.560 --> 00:22:43.480 partner with the public to get signs communicating the correct directions in the wrong ways wherever 00:22:43.480 --> 00:22:57.640 we can. And that's it. Any questions? 00:22:57.640 --> 00:23:03.880 Thank you Haley for that presentation. I do have one question. Is part of the one-way 00:23:03.880 --> 00:23:10.480 road initiative also to identify like unnecessary or unsafe one-way roads that could potentially 00:23:10.480 --> 00:23:16.000 just be made two-way? Have we looked at that as part of the solution too? 00:23:16.000 --> 00:23:21.980 That's a great question. So right now the scope of the program is just to install the 00:23:21.980 --> 00:23:28.560 signage. However, in doing that, we are definitely going to take note in any roads that don't 00:23:28.560 --> 00:23:36.120 make sense to be one-way. If we see something and think, this really should not be a one-way 00:23:36.120 --> 00:23:41.520 this is very dangerous with or without signs. We will certainly take a look at that and 00:23:41.520 --> 00:23:47.160 then do any studies we have to to confirm whether or not we should continue as such 00:23:47.160 --> 00:23:56.120 or look into making it a two-way road. Haley, can I ask a question? 00:23:56.120 --> 00:24:00.440 Yes, sir. Okay, I grew up here. So I was here when they 00:24:00.440 --> 00:24:06.560 changed these one ways, Locust and Helm, which was a lot of fun for even the people that 00:24:06.560 --> 00:24:16.320 lived here. The only one that I see that they have problems at is that Locust and University 00:24:16.320 --> 00:24:22.040 right there where the CBS is that little shopping center. You catch people coming out of there 00:24:22.040 --> 00:24:27.560 and going down to the light, you know, pulling out of the parking lot either way, both ways. 00:24:27.560 --> 00:24:32.800 Excuse me. That's the only thing that I've noticed the other day that was dangerous and 00:24:32.800 --> 00:24:40.360 I've seen somebody do it, I think it was the day before yesterday, come out the wrong way. 00:24:40.360 --> 00:24:47.560 He got a surprise. There was a policeman sitting there. So, but that's a bad intersection. 00:24:47.560 --> 00:24:51.240 That's about the only one that I've really seen that everybody seems to not really pay 00:24:51.240 --> 00:24:56.380 attention to when they come out of either one of those parking lots. That one's very 00:24:56.380 --> 00:25:03.120 dangerous. But I would like to say I was here when they had Locust and Helm were two-way 00:25:03.120 --> 00:25:08.480 and they were deadly. Even back when I was growing up here and like I say, I ain't gonna 00:25:08.480 --> 00:25:15.260 tell my age, but they were deadly. But when they changed them to one ways, it helped the 00:25:15.260 --> 00:25:22.760 traffic. It really did move it, in other words, University back to the square. So, and like 00:25:22.760 --> 00:25:28.720 you say, there's some that, you know, you just have to look at. That's the only intersection 00:25:28.720 --> 00:25:32.480 that I really see that's kind of dangerous right there. You know, everybody wants to 00:25:32.480 --> 00:25:40.200 go down to University and go, you know, yes, unfortunately, I've witnessed that several 00:25:40.200 --> 00:25:45.680 times as well. And I've only lived here 17 years and I can probably tell you quite a 00:25:45.680 --> 00:25:52.440 few times. I've seen that but we are working on getting the permits for that intersection 00:25:52.440 --> 00:25:58.120 as well. These, some of them do take a little bit longer to get the permits when we're coordinating 00:25:58.120 --> 00:26:03.560 with TechStop right away, which I believe that is, but we are absolutely working to 00:26:03.560 --> 00:26:07.800 secure the authority to put signs in there as well. 00:26:07.800 --> 00:26:10.480 All right. Thank you very much. 00:26:10.480 --> 00:26:13.480 Thank you. 00:26:13.480 --> 00:26:18.320 Sorry, go ahead. 00:26:18.320 --> 00:26:24.680 So to Connie's comment, I go down that street pretty often to go home. When I used to commute 00:26:24.680 --> 00:26:29.080 from TWU, now that we're home, I don't do it as often, but yeah, absolutely. People 00:26:29.080 --> 00:26:32.840 always, so you know, I end up flashing my lights to get people to realize they're going 00:26:32.840 --> 00:26:37.920 the wrong way. That one, absolutely. But then I was going to ask, are you guys going to 00:26:37.920 --> 00:26:42.080 try and do anything with the downtown square? Because I've actually stopped somebody who 00:26:42.080 --> 00:26:49.600 was going the wrong way on Locust. They were going south, not north on Locust. And so I 00:26:49.600 --> 00:26:54.960 was curious if you guys were going to do anything about that or talk about like different kind 00:26:54.960 --> 00:26:58.320 of signage for that space. Thanks. 00:26:58.320 --> 00:27:05.320 We can certainly look into the intersections along Elm and Locust to see if any of them 00:27:05.320 --> 00:27:11.040 would do better with that LED edge lit sign. Right now, all up and down the Elm and Locust 00:27:11.040 --> 00:27:15.920 corridors, we're targeting to get permits for wrong way signs. We had a resident reach 00:27:15.920 --> 00:27:22.800 out to us just mentioning the opportunity to put them in at Parkway and Locust, how 00:27:22.800 --> 00:27:27.200 I showed earlier. And as we looked at that, we kind of thought, well, let's look up and 00:27:27.200 --> 00:27:32.360 down the corridor. And there certainly is a lot of opportunity up and down the entire 00:27:32.360 --> 00:27:37.200 corridor to improve safety. So we'll keep in mind and definitely give the committee 00:27:37.200 --> 00:27:42.160 an update if we find out there are certain areas within that corridor that we want to 00:27:42.160 --> 00:27:45.840 go ahead and use that edge lit signage on. 00:27:45.840 --> 00:27:48.520 Thank you. 00:27:48.520 --> 00:27:57.480 Are there any other comments? 00:27:57.480 --> 00:28:11.080 Okay. Well, we look forward to hearing back on that. So, okay, our next item is item, 00:28:11.080 --> 00:28:19.120 let's see, DTSC 20-013. Receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction 00:28:19.120 --> 00:28:24.080 regarding the 2020 Ditten Mobility Plan update with a focus on the one-way versus two-way 00:28:24.080 --> 00:28:29.360 traffic analysis. So I'm following right on into that same topic. 00:28:29.360 --> 00:28:45.920 Exactly. So I will be presenting this as Brian, let me share my screen. Okay. Can everybody 00:28:45.920 --> 00:28:57.880 see that now? Making sure I'm not on mute. Okay. So I've changed this presentation. Originally 00:28:57.880 --> 00:29:02.760 it was one-way versus two-way, but there's really no versus because both one-way streets 00:29:02.760 --> 00:29:08.360 and two-way streets have an appropriate use. So I'm really, today I want to talk about 00:29:08.360 --> 00:29:17.500 the characteristics of one-way and two-way streets and how they might impact the mobility 00:29:17.500 --> 00:29:24.520 plan as we move forward. So one of the requests that council has made of our mobility plan 00:29:24.520 --> 00:29:33.000 is that we evaluate Elm, Locust, Hickory and Oak relative to one-way operation as they 00:29:33.000 --> 00:29:40.680 currently are and two-way operation and what would be the impacts of those changes. So 00:29:40.680 --> 00:29:46.200 if you ask any two traffic engineers are two-way streets better than one-way streets, you will 00:29:46.200 --> 00:29:53.880 get three answers. Yes, no, and it depends. And so it's this, it depends answer that I 00:29:53.880 --> 00:30:01.220 want to focus on today because it does depend on the goals of the community and the leadership. 00:30:01.220 --> 00:30:07.520 So several goals are listed here. Safety is always the highest on our, this is from the 00:30:07.520 --> 00:30:12.240 traffic engineering standpoint, that's our highest priority is to make our roadways safe 00:30:12.240 --> 00:30:18.160 for all users. And so we look at pedestrian safety, cyclist safety, the number versus 00:30:18.160 --> 00:30:24.000 the severity of crashes. So is it better to have fewer crashes, but some of them may be 00:30:24.000 --> 00:30:32.920 more severe or is it better to have more crashes and just with a less of a dollar impact and 00:30:32.920 --> 00:30:40.460 a life impact. So, and again, lower versus higher speed. So safety is very important 00:30:40.460 --> 00:30:47.200 to the determination of how these roadways need to operate. Economic vitality. So how 00:30:47.200 --> 00:30:52.520 do the businesses that are on a given roadway, how are they affected by a one-way versus 00:30:52.520 --> 00:30:59.240 a two-way operation? Ease of access, shorter travel distances. Mobility options. How do 00:30:59.240 --> 00:31:04.560 one-way streets differ from two-way streets when it comes to offering ped and bike facilities, 00:31:04.560 --> 00:31:09.960 when it comes to serving transit and even on street parking. And then the last one, 00:31:09.960 --> 00:31:15.300 which typically would have been the first one, maybe 20 years ago, is decreased congestion, 00:31:15.300 --> 00:31:21.120 but now we're learning to live with a little congestion. And so do we look at a roadway 00:31:21.120 --> 00:31:27.720 network that provides less delay, improve vehicle flow, and then the negative side when 00:31:27.720 --> 00:31:33.440 you get to congestion is this traffic migration issue. Are we pushing people from the roadways 00:31:33.440 --> 00:31:39.480 that we have and intend for the drivers to use? Are we pushing them to parallel facilities 00:31:39.480 --> 00:31:44.320 that may or may not be appropriate? So I'm going to go through these one at a time. Safety 00:31:44.320 --> 00:31:51.040 again is the first and foremost concern. Relative to pedestrians, if you're crossing the main 00:31:51.040 --> 00:31:56.520 street and it's a one-way street, you only have to look one direction. So that's a plus. 00:31:56.520 --> 00:31:59.240 Two-way streets, you've got traffic coming from both directions. You need to make sure 00:31:59.240 --> 00:32:05.740 that there's a safe gap or that both drivers see you. The streets that we're talking about 00:32:05.740 --> 00:32:10.560 are all multi-lane. So there are two lanes in each direction or more, and they're currently 00:32:10.560 --> 00:32:16.780 one way. So one of the downfalls of that is for a pedestrian is as you start off the curb, 00:32:16.780 --> 00:32:21.600 you see a gap in the traffic, you're going to start walking. That first car stops, it 00:32:21.600 --> 00:32:27.000 sees you, it comes to a stop, and it may shadow you from the car on the other lane. So that's 00:32:27.000 --> 00:32:35.920 a concern of not only pedestrians, but cyclists as well. On two-way streets, because again, 00:32:35.920 --> 00:32:42.840 we're talking about these four streets, if you convert them from two lanes in one direction 00:32:42.840 --> 00:32:47.200 to one lane in each direction, you've opened up that visibility so there's not that shadowing 00:32:47.200 --> 00:32:53.840 issue. It's a little bit safer for pedestrians. You've got better visual contact with drivers. 00:32:53.840 --> 00:33:00.000 One-way streets typically will have very, very few or much fewer or much lower number 00:33:00.000 --> 00:33:08.180 of conflict points. If we have a two-way main street and a two-way side street, when you 00:33:08.180 --> 00:33:14.240 add in the vehicular and the pedestrian/cyclist conflict points, you've got over 40. Roughly 00:33:14.240 --> 00:33:22.000 half of that if you've got a one-way main street, even with a two-way side street. Every 00:33:22.000 --> 00:33:27.440 time we have a conflict point, that is a potential crash. It's a potential crash location. You've 00:33:27.440 --> 00:33:32.960 got vehicles or pedestrians that are basically trying to use the same piece of pavement at 00:33:32.960 --> 00:33:40.640 the same time. One-way streets. Can I ask a quick question on that? Do we know how that 00:33:40.640 --> 00:33:47.160 plays out? Is there good data on not just the potential, but the actual results of the 00:33:47.160 --> 00:33:51.720 number of wrecks at those conflict points versus one-way versus two-way? I'll get to 00:33:51.720 --> 00:34:01.720 that in a second. Yes, it's a trade-off. On one-way streets, you have fewer but more severe 00:34:01.720 --> 00:34:05.680 crashes because your speeds are typically higher or certainly have the potential for 00:34:05.680 --> 00:34:12.640 being higher. On two-way streets, because you've introduced those conflict points, you'll 00:34:12.640 --> 00:34:19.280 typically have a greater number, but with the slower speeds, you'll have less severe 00:34:19.280 --> 00:34:25.480 crashes. It's kind of a trade-off. It's certainly something that we have to take into consideration 00:34:25.480 --> 00:34:29.460 when we look at the main street volumes and the side street volumes and what our crash 00:34:29.460 --> 00:34:35.840 history is. I do have a slide on crash history in here. Just a few slides ahead. We talked 00:34:35.840 --> 00:34:43.040 about the higher speeds and greater severity of crashes on one-way, slower speeds, and 00:34:43.040 --> 00:34:49.760 less severe but more frequent crashes on a two-way street. Here's some crash history. 00:34:49.760 --> 00:34:56.720 This is from 2010 to 2020. This is all the crash data that I could gather from the TxDOT 00:34:56.720 --> 00:35:05.280 online system. Oak and Hickory, you can see you've got fairly consistent crash numbers 00:35:05.280 --> 00:35:12.680 throughout the corridor. You've got 617 crashes during those 10 years. No fatalities on record, 00:35:12.680 --> 00:35:20.560 but 110 injuries. Elm and Locust, much higher volumes. I'm sorry, but north is to the right. 00:35:20.560 --> 00:35:28.240 You see that 219, that's University, 380. You've got some hot spots. Downtown around 00:35:28.240 --> 00:35:39.840 the square, 322. You get up to Congress or so. You've got 104, 113, and then up to University, 00:35:39.840 --> 00:35:46.240 you've got 219, but you've got fairly low crash volumes in between there. That's just 00:35:46.240 --> 00:35:51.640 something to look at. We've got almost 1,100 crashes in 10 years, the two fatalities and 00:35:51.640 --> 00:35:59.340 362 injuries. Not all of those injuries, some are minor, some are severe. I don't have a 00:35:59.340 --> 00:36:04.680 split of the severity of those injuries. That just gives you an idea of the crash history 00:36:04.680 --> 00:36:10.360 that we see with the current one-way configuration. 00:36:10.360 --> 00:36:21.960 These include cars? Yes, these are all modes. The next goal or topic is economic vitality. 00:36:21.960 --> 00:36:28.480 This is one that a lot of people don't think about, but one-way streets, and I think Haley 00:36:28.480 --> 00:36:37.080 did bring it up in the one-way wrong way, they're not as easy for visitors to navigate. 00:36:37.080 --> 00:36:41.440 If you're not from here, you don't know which streets are one-way. You don't know if there's 00:36:41.440 --> 00:36:46.120 a parallel one-way in the other direction, or if there is, you don't know which side. 00:36:46.120 --> 00:36:52.340 Is it to the east, to the west, to the north, to the south? It's confusing or potentially 00:36:52.340 --> 00:36:57.920 confusing for people trying to drive in and around town. Two-way streets take a lot of 00:36:57.920 --> 00:37:03.400 that away. They allow access from all directions. You know that you can go one block over and 00:37:03.400 --> 00:37:09.880 continue in the same direction, or you can take a U-turn and head back in the other direction. 00:37:09.880 --> 00:37:14.880 There's no confusion as to whether or not the next intersection you come to is going 00:37:14.880 --> 00:37:26.940 to offer a turn restriction. Another item that's related to the friendliness of one-way 00:37:26.940 --> 00:37:34.800 versus two-way. So what I've picked here, and I just picked Giuseppe's Italian restaurant, 00:37:34.800 --> 00:37:41.640 and a depiction of the travel distance on a one-way system versus on a two-way system. 00:37:41.640 --> 00:37:47.220 So the orange line is with the current one-way configuration. If you're coming from the east 00:37:47.220 --> 00:37:54.640 on University, you come over, you take Elm South, you cut across, and you come back up 00:37:54.640 --> 00:38:02.040 onto Locust to get to your destination versus just simply turning. If Locust was two-way, 00:38:02.040 --> 00:38:05.920 then you simply turn on Locust and travel to the restaurant and turn. So this is just 00:38:05.920 --> 00:38:14.160 kind of an example of how that can add travel distance and travel. The industry, we try 00:38:14.160 --> 00:38:21.240 to minimize vehicle miles of travel. It helps on emissions, it helps on congestion, and 00:38:21.240 --> 00:38:27.800 it eliminates some potential crashes. So again, this is just a depiction of how a one-way 00:38:27.800 --> 00:38:34.300 system is a little bit less efficient than a two-way system. So mobility options. On 00:38:34.300 --> 00:38:39.520 a one-way street, typically you will have a bike lane in one direction. On a two-way 00:38:39.520 --> 00:38:43.560 street, the expectation is that there will be a bike lane in both directions if you're 00:38:43.560 --> 00:38:54.000 providing bike facilities. So it becomes again a trade-off or a balance as to how do we provide 00:38:54.000 --> 00:38:59.960 all modes of travel on those streets that really want it. So Hickory and Oak each have 00:38:59.960 --> 00:39:05.880 a bike lane in one direction or the other. If those streets were converted, now we have 00:39:05.880 --> 00:39:12.280 the question, do we take away on street parking to provide a bike lane in the new direction, 00:39:12.280 --> 00:39:19.380 or do we simply say we're going to maintain a bike lane on Hickory that is eastbound and 00:39:19.380 --> 00:39:24.960 will maintain a bike lane on Oak that is westbound, and that serves as a couplet. But for people 00:39:24.960 --> 00:39:30.380 using a bike, it's a little bit more confusing because you expect, again, if I'm on a roadway 00:39:30.380 --> 00:39:34.200 that provides bike lanes, typically if it's a two-way road, there's going to be a bike 00:39:34.200 --> 00:39:38.400 lane in each direction. So that's again another consideration that has to be taken into account 00:39:38.400 --> 00:39:44.880 when we talk about converting from one way to two-way. This next one relates to primarily 00:39:44.880 --> 00:39:53.040 deliveries, but also to transit because both maneuvers are very similar. The delivery vehicle 00:39:53.040 --> 00:40:01.480 tends to park and either load or unload, and it is the same maneuver for transit, although 00:40:01.480 --> 00:40:05.600 typically a much shorter time. But if you see on the left-hand side of your screen, 00:40:05.600 --> 00:40:11.640 it's Hickory currently. We've got a delivery truck, and he's blocked a lane, but we have 00:40:11.640 --> 00:40:18.120 that second lane eastbound where motorists can drive around and not have to wait for 00:40:18.120 --> 00:40:24.560 that truck to move. So the other side of the screen is also Hickory. It's a two-way section 00:40:24.560 --> 00:40:31.040 of Hickory, and you see a delivery van. I believe that's a FedEx van. And that vehicle 00:40:31.040 --> 00:40:37.320 is blocking a lane, but there is no other lane. So anybody who's traveling eastbound 00:40:37.320 --> 00:40:42.440 has to wait for this vehicle to clear or has to wait for a gap in traffic that's large 00:40:42.440 --> 00:40:47.880 enough to provide a safe maneuver around that parked vehicle. So that's just another consideration 00:40:47.880 --> 00:40:54.120 again that takes because the assumption that as we looked at the conversion from one-way 00:40:54.120 --> 00:40:58.680 to two-way, one of the base assumptions is that we're not reconstructing these roadways. 00:40:58.680 --> 00:41:04.160 So the curb-to-curb distance is what we have. We're not going to widen to get another lane 00:41:04.160 --> 00:41:08.440 or to put an extra rule of parking. What we have is what we have, and how can we best 00:41:08.440 --> 00:41:14.200 utilize that? And does it make sense to convert from one-way to two-way? And again, this is 00:41:14.200 --> 00:41:20.160 talking about the on-street parking may limit or preclude an on-street bike lane in either 00:41:20.160 --> 00:41:27.280 direction for one-way or two-way. And that again goes back to the goals of the community. 00:41:27.280 --> 00:41:34.600 What is most important? What are our priorities? Is it mobility or is it parking? And that's 00:41:34.600 --> 00:41:39.840 just another element that we have to weigh. So decreased congestion. This is again, this 00:41:39.840 --> 00:41:46.740 is what would be the traditional traffic engineering concern is how do we move more cars faster? 00:41:46.740 --> 00:41:54.480 So one-way streets provide up to 50% more capacity per lane. So if you think about locusts 00:41:54.480 --> 00:42:00.920 and how many cars it can carry, so you've got locusts in one direction and elm in another. 00:42:00.920 --> 00:42:07.960 What we're saying with this is that those four lanes of travel, if you convert them 00:42:07.960 --> 00:42:16.240 to two-way, just the friction that you introduce by allowing left turns in all directions significantly 00:42:16.240 --> 00:42:20.840 reduces the availability, the capacity that's available to move cars in those corridors. 00:42:20.840 --> 00:42:25.840 So you're not going to be able to see the same throughput that you have with the one-way 00:42:25.840 --> 00:42:32.240 streets on a two-way system. One of the other things, and this is very closely related, 00:42:32.240 --> 00:42:38.960 but the one-way streets allow for what we call progression. So if you're in a signalized 00:42:38.960 --> 00:42:46.400 corridor, it's much easier for us to give the basically that what we call a green band. 00:42:46.400 --> 00:42:50.200 So if you get to one light green, you get to the next light green, you get to the next 00:42:50.200 --> 00:42:54.120 light green instead of start, stop, start, stop. Again, when you introduce those left 00:42:54.120 --> 00:43:03.500 turns, that decreases the availability of that opportunity to offer that green throughout 00:43:03.500 --> 00:43:09.600 the corridor because you've got to offer out green time to the opposing direction. So left 00:43:09.600 --> 00:43:18.960 turns can inhibit that available throughput. And this point is very, very important, especially 00:43:18.960 --> 00:43:27.000 as we look at Oak and Hickory. One-way networks, because they offer that additional capacity, 00:43:27.000 --> 00:43:32.960 because they are better at moving cars in a corridor, tend to retain that traffic in 00:43:32.960 --> 00:43:38.960 that corridor. When you introduce that congestion and that delay, or even if it's just perceived 00:43:38.960 --> 00:43:44.920 delay for motorists, people are going to try and find a quicker route, or at least the 00:43:44.920 --> 00:43:49.920 route they think is quicker. And typically that will push them on to parallel facilities. 00:43:49.920 --> 00:43:55.680 Now on Elm and Locust, we've got a lot of parallel facilities. We've got Bell, we've 00:43:55.680 --> 00:44:03.080 got Carroll. Eventually Riddell will be improved and offer some more capacity. But on Oak and 00:44:03.080 --> 00:44:06.800 Hickory, you really have residential streets that you're going to be pushing this traffic 00:44:06.800 --> 00:44:11.320 through. That's something that we don't want because that's something that is these roadways 00:44:11.320 --> 00:44:16.880 were not designed to carry through traffic. They are local residential streets that you're 00:44:16.880 --> 00:44:22.360 supposed to get people from their home to a collector or to an arterial using these 00:44:22.360 --> 00:44:28.880 roadways and not use them as cut through. So we get a lot of those engaged debt and 00:44:28.880 --> 00:44:34.920 requests for speeding through the neighborhoods and cut through traffic through the neighborhoods. 00:44:34.920 --> 00:44:40.800 And by converting or by introducing that congestion, by converting one-way to two-way, we're going 00:44:40.800 --> 00:44:45.080 to see more of that. And that's something we try to avoid. 00:44:45.080 --> 00:44:52.960 So what I've done here is we've asked our consultant to do a comparison, prepare a comparison 00:44:52.960 --> 00:44:58.960 of the one-way streets and their traffic volumes that our traffic model expects, and then convert 00:44:58.960 --> 00:45:03.840 those streets. And what we're looking at is all four, Oak, Hickory, Elm, and Locust, convert 00:45:03.840 --> 00:45:09.760 those to two-way and see what the impact does through the modeling process. So this is kind 00:45:09.760 --> 00:45:17.400 of the baseline. This is the 2045 model with one-way roadways. And you can look at -- and 00:45:17.400 --> 00:45:23.680 I don't know if you can see my cursor, but Elm and Locust, 15 to 20,000 vehicles a day 00:45:23.680 --> 00:45:29.080 north of 380 and about the same, a little bit higher when you get south of University 00:45:29.080 --> 00:45:39.680 and through downtown. Oak and Hickory are carrying about between 6 and 8,000 each direction. 00:45:39.680 --> 00:45:46.060 So when we go to a two-way system, just the friction and the congestion, if you want to 00:45:46.060 --> 00:45:51.620 call it that, that is introduced with cars now traveling in both directions and the left 00:45:51.620 --> 00:45:58.040 turns that that introduces, we see the Elm and Locust north of University drops about 00:45:58.040 --> 00:46:02.680 11,000. So you look at where those cars went. Well, it looks like most of them went to Carroll 00:46:02.680 --> 00:46:08.400 and/or to Bell. So out of the 11,000, you've got 8,000 accounted for just in those two 00:46:08.400 --> 00:46:12.600 ways. But that's okay, at least especially on the Carroll side, because that certainly 00:46:12.600 --> 00:46:19.000 is designed to accommodate the traffic volumes. When you look at Oak and Hickory, you lose 00:46:19.000 --> 00:46:27.040 8,000. But there's no -- and I apologize, the model is not detailing -- the printout 00:46:27.040 --> 00:46:33.040 that I had didn't detail it. But these 8,000 cars are now migrating through what will be 00:46:33.040 --> 00:46:39.440 neighborhood streets. So for traffic engineers, we see that as a negative one. Much rather 00:46:39.440 --> 00:46:44.720 accommodate those vehicles. Even though Oak and Hickory are residential streets, they 00:46:44.720 --> 00:46:49.320 have morphed into something a little bit different. The expectation is different. But when we 00:46:49.320 --> 00:46:57.720 push those volumes through two-way, two-lane residential streets, we begin to see increased 00:46:57.720 --> 00:47:06.520 crashes, lower pedestrian safety levels. So the Oak and Hickory is much more of a concern 00:47:06.520 --> 00:47:11.080 from a safety standpoint when we talk about that migration from the main corridor to the 00:47:11.080 --> 00:47:16.240 parallel corridors. And I just have one more slide here on parking. And I want to talk 00:47:16.240 --> 00:47:21.720 about a couple of things. We talked about the potential of conflict with bike facilities. 00:47:21.720 --> 00:47:27.560 That's certainly an issue we need to consider. And then we look at is it angle parking or 00:47:27.560 --> 00:47:35.360 parallel. And so parallel offers a lot of flexibility. It gives you fewer spaces, but 00:47:35.360 --> 00:47:40.640 it offers the ability to approach that parking space from either direction. So if you're 00:47:40.640 --> 00:47:46.080 -- I mean, if we convert the roadway from one way to two-way, if we have parallel parking, 00:47:46.080 --> 00:47:50.860 we don't have to restripe anything. They're just going to park in that area. Angle parking 00:47:50.860 --> 00:47:57.040 takes twice as much of the pavement width, but it gives you more spaces. So it's kind 00:47:57.040 --> 00:48:03.120 of a tradeoff. You're giving up something, either a bike lane or a travel lane, the ability 00:48:03.120 --> 00:48:08.600 to provide a turn lane to add angle parking. And typically, it is associated with one direction 00:48:08.600 --> 00:48:17.580 of travel. Now, the exception is the rear, the back end parking, which is sometimes not 00:48:17.580 --> 00:48:22.920 as popular with certain drivers. So the angle parking and the parallel parking is something 00:48:22.920 --> 00:48:29.860 we have to look at. If we decide to convert, how can we, if parking is a priority, how 00:48:29.860 --> 00:48:35.180 can we optimize the utilization of that pavement to provide the greatest number of parking 00:48:35.180 --> 00:48:42.800 spaces we can? So just as a summary, I know it's a lot of information. One-way streets, 00:48:42.800 --> 00:48:50.880 higher capacity, a little bit less congestion, allows delivery and transit to occupy some 00:48:50.880 --> 00:48:57.960 space and still provide a bypass, fewer conflict points. Negatives include the increased travel 00:48:57.960 --> 00:49:01.920 distance, potentially higher traffic speeds, which could be, you know, we're talking about 00:49:01.920 --> 00:49:08.160 pros and cons. Some people see the higher speed as a pro. Some people see it as a con. 00:49:08.160 --> 00:49:12.360 Because of the association with the severity of crashes, I see it as a negative. And that's 00:49:12.360 --> 00:49:17.140 what the next slide, the next line says, fewer but more severe crashes. And we certainly, 00:49:17.140 --> 00:49:22.680 we don't want to introduce, you know, nobody wants to introduce more crashes, but we certainly 00:49:22.680 --> 00:49:29.780 want to reduce or eliminate the fatalities and the severe injuries. So two-way streets, 00:49:29.780 --> 00:49:36.080 lower speeds, that's a plus. Reduction in severity, but increase in number of crashes. 00:49:36.080 --> 00:49:40.160 We talked about the reduction in vehicle miles of travel. Just because it's easier, you can 00:49:40.160 --> 00:49:46.120 go either direction. You don't have to make that U-turn and loop around. More convenient 00:49:46.120 --> 00:49:56.280 access, a little more intuitive for visitors. Better visibility for peds and cyclists. Overall, 00:49:56.280 --> 00:49:59.600 more conflict points. That's, and every time we have a conflict point, that's a potential 00:49:59.600 --> 00:50:04.280 crash location. So we try and minimize those. And then the potential for increased delay 00:50:04.280 --> 00:50:10.200 and congestion. We may introduce the need for doubling our bike infrastructure if bike 00:50:10.200 --> 00:50:15.720 facilities are deemed a priority on a roadway or in a corridor. We talked about lower capacity 00:50:15.720 --> 00:50:21.640 and that negative impact for traffic to migrate to parallel streets. If the parallel streets 00:50:21.640 --> 00:50:26.000 are adequate and designed to carry the traffic, that's not a negative. But if they're residential 00:50:26.000 --> 00:50:29.880 streets and they're not really designed to carry high speeds or high volumes, it certainly 00:50:29.880 --> 00:50:36.240 is a negative. So just to give you an idea of why you're seeing this today, council has 00:50:36.240 --> 00:50:41.240 asked us to take this to, and we have taken it to the downtown Main Street. We've taken 00:50:41.240 --> 00:50:48.160 it to the economic development committee, and we took it to COPWD last week, the committee 00:50:48.160 --> 00:50:57.720 on persons with disabilities. And substantial support of retaining the one-way roadway network. 00:50:57.720 --> 00:51:05.960 Some were based on the concern about pushing motorists into residential areas. Some concerns 00:51:05.960 --> 00:51:17.540 about why are we doing this now? They're working fine. The COPWD was fairly unanimous in support 00:51:17.540 --> 00:51:24.160 of the one-way because of the safety factors that they lend to pedestrians and cyclists. 00:51:24.160 --> 00:51:33.520 So what we are here today to do is just present this information and get -- there is no formal 00:51:33.520 --> 00:51:39.320 action. The action that we're looking for is basically a consensus on does this group 00:51:39.320 --> 00:51:45.780 support the one-way or support the two-way or however you want to attack that. So I'll 00:51:45.780 --> 00:51:52.440 leave that with questions and comments. Just discussion on any of the items I've presented 00:51:52.440 --> 00:52:03.600 and then basically a consensus of do you support the one-way, the two-way, combination or further 00:52:03.600 --> 00:52:12.320 study. So I'll open that up. >> Okay. We can open up to questions if -- for 00:52:12.320 --> 00:52:23.600 Brian. >> It was a lot of information in a very short 00:52:23.600 --> 00:52:28.680 time, I understand. >> Can I ask a question? Like I say, I've 00:52:28.680 --> 00:52:34.760 been here and I've seen them change. Why are they wanting to go backwards? They want to 00:52:34.760 --> 00:52:43.280 go back to two ways on Oak and Hickory. They'd like to go in backwards, not forwards on all 00:52:43.280 --> 00:52:48.440 these. >> Well, so this request came from city council 00:52:48.440 --> 00:52:54.380 as part of the mobility update. And I think it's just -- staff had made a presentation 00:52:54.380 --> 00:53:00.440 and I think the mayor wanted us to hire the -- get our consultants to look at the impact, 00:53:00.440 --> 00:53:06.760 do the modeling and see exactly what would happen or what we think would happen with 00:53:06.760 --> 00:53:11.080 this one-way to two-way conversion. I think it might have just been a fact check. And 00:53:11.080 --> 00:53:22.080 so the data seems to support in some areas the one-way streets as a better, safer option. 00:53:22.080 --> 00:53:26.440 But there is that -- I was always that concerned about the high speed and severity of crashes. 00:53:26.440 --> 00:53:33.080 So I think they just wanted to look at it again and have this current mobility plan 00:53:33.080 --> 00:53:39.680 take a stand on whether we're going to retain the one-ways or if we should consider all 00:53:39.680 --> 00:53:50.360 or part of those roadways to convert to two-way. >> I'll add a comment. Connie, this I guess 00:53:50.360 --> 00:53:56.540 speaks to your question. I actually think one problem with one-way roads is it's actually 00:53:56.540 --> 00:54:02.000 hard to see, to me, the damage they've done. There's been a lot of research that one-way 00:54:02.000 --> 00:54:08.040 roads are very bad for the local economy, right? The Giuseppe's example is a great example. 00:54:08.040 --> 00:54:13.480 You get more people who drive past our local businesses as opposed to stopping or seeing 00:54:13.480 --> 00:54:19.680 them and so you get this fast. But the other thing is the loss of -- if you go on Locust, 00:54:19.680 --> 00:54:24.480 it's probably one of the streets I'm most concerned with, but Elm would fit, too. It 00:54:24.480 --> 00:54:30.900 is a very uninviting street for pedestrians and cyclists, right? You just feel -- you 00:54:30.900 --> 00:54:36.880 feel unsafe. So we are really losing the ability to have a multimodal transportation network 00:54:36.880 --> 00:54:41.720 because these streets feel unsafe. I'm very against all one-way streets pretty much except 00:54:41.720 --> 00:54:47.400 for in extreme circumstances. I think they're very bad for cities, particularly in the core. 00:54:47.400 --> 00:54:52.740 And I think the recent changes to Locust, in particular, are -- I'm very scared we'll 00:54:52.740 --> 00:54:58.220 have a death there soon. When you come off the hill, off the square, and you pass Oak 00:54:58.220 --> 00:55:03.880 off Locust, you hit a downhill area where we've removed a stoplight and we don't have 00:55:03.880 --> 00:55:08.460 a crosswalk at a new -- we've got a new ramp right next to Barlin Board and we did not 00:55:08.460 --> 00:55:13.180 put a crosswalk there. So people are now going to be running across and there's also a library 00:55:13.180 --> 00:55:17.540 there that children and families frequent. So I'm just really concerned. I think our 00:55:17.540 --> 00:55:23.280 one-way streets are bad for Denton. And so that's my argument. But there's a lot of research 00:55:23.280 --> 00:55:28.200 to back up the harms they do. And you can't see the harms they do because it's lost opportunities, 00:55:28.200 --> 00:55:35.320 lost economic opportunities, lost transportation opportunities that would be there if we didn't 00:55:35.320 --> 00:55:40.120 have one-way streets. So that's -- so I just would like to state that I would love to see 00:55:40.120 --> 00:55:45.200 those all moved to two-way streets. And I think it was a mistake to ever move them and 00:55:45.200 --> 00:55:49.960 Denton would see a lot of economic growth if they went back to two-way and see more 00:55:49.960 --> 00:55:51.960 bicyclists and pedestrian use. 00:55:51.960 --> 00:55:55.960 >> May I speak? 00:55:55.960 --> 00:55:58.960 >> Yes. Melissa, go ahead. 00:55:58.960 --> 00:56:06.920 >> Okay. Thank you. Well, looking at the data that was presented, it looks like to me -- and 00:56:06.920 --> 00:56:10.980 I know there's a lot of balancing that goes on with that. But it seems like to me that 00:56:10.980 --> 00:56:18.120 one-way streets have a slight -- to me have a slight edge over two-way streets. But I 00:56:18.120 --> 00:56:26.520 would like to ask because I am a cyclist and people do go very fast on those one-way streets. 00:56:26.520 --> 00:56:33.100 And I've ridden down them before on my bike. I always -- generally when I do it, we're 00:56:33.100 --> 00:56:38.520 in a group. So we have a lot more people. I'm not alone. So a lot of times we'll do 00:56:38.520 --> 00:56:48.080 a two-up. But that's not always the case. So what can we do to make those streets safer 00:56:48.080 --> 00:56:53.360 for cyclists and for pedestrians? 00:56:53.360 --> 00:57:03.480 >> So my response would be, when TXOT hands Elm and Locust back to the city. And that's 00:57:03.480 --> 00:57:08.880 in the process right now. We're taking that 77 overlay. We're taking them off system. 00:57:08.880 --> 00:57:14.700 The city is going to take ownership. And we'll have a freer hand to make modifications because 00:57:14.700 --> 00:57:23.720 those will be city roads and not state roads. What we can do, certainly, is look at the 00:57:23.720 --> 00:57:28.640 viability of something like what we've done on Hickory where we've got -- we took parking 00:57:28.640 --> 00:57:36.960 off one side and put in that separated buffered bike lane. And that can -- we can replicate 00:57:36.960 --> 00:57:44.240 that on Elm and Locust. We can also, to Mr. Kretke's comment about the pedestrians, one 00:57:44.240 --> 00:57:48.000 of the things we're doing at Parkway -- and I'm not sure if we've ordered the hardware 00:57:48.000 --> 00:57:53.560 yet, but it's in the process -- because we took the signal out and people were used to 00:57:53.560 --> 00:57:59.520 being able to cross with the traffic signal, we're going to put in the edge lit LED crosswalk 00:57:59.520 --> 00:58:06.880 signs so that you activate or passively activate. But when somebody wants to cross, those signs 00:58:06.880 --> 00:58:11.280 -- and we're going to have four of them, so you'll have a lot of LEDs blinking at one 00:58:11.280 --> 00:58:18.080 time -- but we're going to have them give a visual cue to the drivers that something's 00:58:18.080 --> 00:58:21.200 changed. They're not going to blink. They're not going to flash all the time. But when 00:58:21.200 --> 00:58:26.120 somebody activates it or when somebody's there waiting to cross, if we use a passive sensor, 00:58:26.120 --> 00:58:30.520 then the signs will go active. And we can do that as well throughout the corridor. And 00:58:30.520 --> 00:58:35.960 Haley talked about the one way/wrong way. We can look at some modifications to the speed 00:58:35.960 --> 00:58:43.960 limits. There are a number of tools that we can utilize to calm the traffic in those corridors. 00:58:43.960 --> 00:58:48.560 A lot of it is visual. If we could do something like the Hickory bike lane, just having taken 00:58:48.560 --> 00:58:53.560 the parking off one side and having those pylons -- which I'm going to ask -- what do 00:58:53.560 --> 00:58:58.760 y'all think of those white pylons that we've installed on Hickory? 00:58:58.760 --> 00:59:06.680 I haven't seen them yet. I'll be honest. So we've talked about it so many times with 00:59:06.680 --> 00:59:11.840 this group. Now that we actually installed them, we're just trying to get some feedback 00:59:11.840 --> 00:59:20.540 on do they work? Are they too far apart? Are they too short? Just some general feedback. 00:59:20.540 --> 00:59:28.640 But that certainly -- I can add, Brian. I've seen them. I was very excited the first time 00:59:28.640 --> 00:59:34.720 I saw it after all of our talking to see them there. So I'm glad to see that. I'm very curious 00:59:34.720 --> 00:59:40.640 to see how cars react to them. I think the physical, you know, the vertical nature of 00:59:40.640 --> 00:59:43.720 them will hopefully lead to it. But it'll be interesting to see. I'm very interested 00:59:43.720 --> 00:59:48.260 to see about their durability if they're hit and when they're hit. So that'll be interesting. 00:59:48.260 --> 00:59:53.400 You know me. I'm always for bigger structures for bike lanes and things like that. But I'm 00:59:53.400 --> 00:59:55.160 interested to see how they work. 00:59:55.160 --> 01:00:00.520 Okay. So, again, to answer your question, how do we make those more friendly for cyclists 01:00:00.520 --> 01:00:07.080 and pedestrians, there's a number of tools that we have. But on Elm and Locust specifically, 01:00:07.080 --> 01:00:12.320 it's going to be a lot easier for us to utilize those tools once the city owns those roadways. 01:00:12.320 --> 01:00:14.720 Thank you. 01:00:14.720 --> 01:00:24.640 Daniel? Okay. I'm kind of with Melissa on the one ways and also with Connie. I appreciate 01:00:24.640 --> 01:00:34.960 Connie's historical lived experience here. And I think that those are good. I've written 01:00:34.960 --> 01:00:42.000 Elm and Locust on my bicycle quite often. And those shoulders, could those be part of 01:00:42.000 --> 01:00:43.720 the bike lane? 01:00:43.720 --> 01:00:50.520 Certainly. And we've looked at, again, we're talking about utilizing the existing pavement. 01:00:50.520 --> 01:00:55.320 So we're not going to widen. But you've got shoulders on both sides. So what if you move 01:00:55.320 --> 01:01:00.520 the traffic over and put a wider shoulder on one side? And I've actually measured some 01:01:00.520 --> 01:01:04.840 of those and I believe in most of the areas where you've got those shoulders, if we combine 01:01:04.840 --> 01:01:10.960 them, that we could do a fairly decent bike lane. It may not be quite as substantial as 01:01:10.960 --> 01:01:17.040 hickory. But we may not be able to put the same size of pylon. We may have to go to something 01:01:17.040 --> 01:01:20.120 a little bit smaller. But I think we can accomplish something. 01:01:20.120 --> 01:01:28.640 Right. I would encourage us to do protected bike lanes with bollards there. And that will 01:01:28.640 --> 01:01:37.920 be another very good, highly visible point for all of our road users to see. And it will 01:01:37.920 --> 01:01:44.440 start getting some of our people that are hesitant to be on streets to be more comfortable, 01:01:44.440 --> 01:01:52.360 to be on them, see that the city's taking these connected, protected bikeways seriously. 01:01:52.360 --> 01:01:58.760 And one of the other things that we can do is just overall narrowing the roadways of 01:01:58.760 --> 01:02:05.760 the travel lanes. So when tech stop stripes a road, they like a 12 foot lane and then 01:02:05.760 --> 01:02:12.520 the outside lane wants to be 14. When the city takes ownership of Elm and Locust, then 01:02:12.520 --> 01:02:17.760 we have a much freer hand of providing an 11 foot or a 10 and a half foot lane. Narrowing 01:02:17.760 --> 01:02:23.880 those lanes typically has the effect of slowing traffic down as well. So not only does it 01:02:23.880 --> 01:02:28.440 give us more room for the bike facility, but it also makes those drivers, even if it's 01:02:28.440 --> 01:02:32.200 a one way facility, drive a little more slowly. 01:02:32.200 --> 01:02:38.680 Right. And downtown also, I don't think two way would work very well, particularly with 01:02:38.680 --> 01:02:46.780 all the deliveries that, you know, one beer truck takes up a whole lane. And if you make 01:02:46.780 --> 01:02:52.380 that two lanes, then you're really stuck. And I was actually improperly ticketed on 01:02:52.380 --> 01:03:00.760 Oak for off or unloading my mobility impaired wife, because I had to pull over to the side 01:03:00.760 --> 01:03:13.920 lane because there was no parking access. But there is that issue also. 01:03:13.920 --> 01:03:20.480 If I can, if I can piggyback a little bit on your comments, Clay, right now, I mean, 01:03:20.480 --> 01:03:24.800 Elm almost has a bike lane because there's parking kind of on the street. It's not so 01:03:24.800 --> 01:03:31.120 unused that I usually bike in that. So I, Brian, I agree with your comment that there's 01:03:31.120 --> 01:03:35.760 a lot of road space to use and Locust coming off of Eagle, you know, going towards the 01:03:35.760 --> 01:03:40.920 square too. It's just so wide when you're coming down that street and you can sometimes 01:03:40.920 --> 01:03:47.100 take a picture with three lanes with no cars, you know, in it all the way down the stretch. 01:03:47.100 --> 01:03:52.240 And so some of some of these don't really have the traffic counts needed for that many 01:03:52.240 --> 01:03:57.880 lanes anyway. So I think we do have some road to work with. So I doubt that. But Clay, I 01:03:57.880 --> 01:04:04.760 wonder, I can't answer your point to about a good drop off place, particularly for, for 01:04:04.760 --> 01:04:09.160 someone with disabilities. I wonder if more loading could happen in the alleys. I was 01:04:09.160 --> 01:04:12.120 going to ask about that. It doesn't really answer the second part of your point, Clay. 01:04:12.120 --> 01:04:21.360 And I think that's a well, this was in front of a medical office where she services. And 01:04:21.360 --> 01:04:31.720 eventually we did get a handicap spot put over there. But then I also saw the someone 01:04:31.720 --> 01:04:43.000 who works in one of those buildings park there all day long. 01:04:43.000 --> 01:04:50.240 There are there other comments. I have one more thought that just came to me. And that's 01:04:50.240 --> 01:04:56.220 because I work for Texas Women's University. But I, I know that they've talked about trying 01:04:56.220 --> 01:05:02.480 to close Bell and I don't know where that's at. But it sounds like to me, correct me if 01:05:02.480 --> 01:05:10.760 I'm wrong, that if we, if we went from a one way to a two way on Locust, that could affect 01:05:10.760 --> 01:05:16.400 Bell? Would that be a yes or a no? 01:05:16.400 --> 01:05:20.920 So we do have a study underway that's, it's the same consultant and we're using the same 01:05:20.920 --> 01:05:26.920 travel demand model, looking at the Bell Street closure. Basically part of it right there 01:05:26.920 --> 01:05:35.520 in the middle of campus. I think it's from Chapel to Texas. No, anyway, forget for sure. 01:05:35.520 --> 01:05:42.480 But what the impact that has is actually because the Bell traffic can no longer go through, 01:05:42.480 --> 01:05:51.880 it pushes more traffic over to, to Locust and Elm. And so the only countermeasure that 01:05:51.880 --> 01:06:01.000 we've, it is, it is a good one is the improvement of Redel to a four lane roadway. So, and those 01:06:01.000 --> 01:06:08.160 plans are underway. I don't know that there's construction dollar that have been identified, 01:06:08.160 --> 01:06:14.400 but we are looking to widen that facility from that two lane wide, two lane with parking 01:06:14.400 --> 01:06:20.880 to a four lane roadway. And that will more than offset the, the traffic that's displaced 01:06:20.880 --> 01:06:27.160 from Bell. Bell doesn't really carry the same traffic loading because it's for, it's one 01:06:27.160 --> 01:06:34.080 lane in each direction, but as, as Elm and Locust do, but providing that improved Redel 01:06:34.080 --> 01:06:38.520 offsets that displacement. So we're looking at that. We'll be presenting that to council 01:06:38.520 --> 01:06:45.520 in the future. Okay. I guess I was just thinking in the sense that if there's less, if there's 01:06:45.520 --> 01:06:51.520 less traffic on Locust because now it's a two way, would it get pushed over to Bell? 01:06:51.520 --> 01:06:55.760 And if Bell got closed, then would that make it even worse? That's where I was going. Right. 01:06:55.760 --> 01:07:03.080 And we've looked at all the scenarios and the consultant has looked at all two way, 01:07:03.080 --> 01:07:08.320 all one way, half two way, half one way, and then all of those same scenarios with Bell 01:07:08.320 --> 01:07:15.360 closed and without it closed. So we've, we've got, we've got a matrix of traffic volume 01:07:15.360 --> 01:07:21.840 maps that show the impact. None of them are deal breakers and none of them are just throw 01:07:21.840 --> 01:07:27.840 everything into complete failure. But again, it's, it's, it's okay. If, if Bell wants 01:07:27.840 --> 01:07:33.560 to close and we convert Elm and Locust to two way, then that really heightens the need 01:07:33.560 --> 01:07:39.560 to improve the Redel corridor so that it can carry that displaced traffic rather than push 01:07:39.560 --> 01:07:45.720 it over to two streets that now have a less capacity than they had before. Okay. Thank 01:07:45.720 --> 01:07:51.360 you. Melissa and Brian, is there talk of Bell closing still? Is that a, is there movement 01:07:51.360 --> 01:07:57.920 on that? Yes, definitely full steam ahead. We're, we're looking at the, the university 01:07:57.920 --> 01:08:02.380 is trying to create a pedestrian corridor, a wide pedestrian corridor through the heart 01:08:02.380 --> 01:08:07.960 of campus. What we're looking at is creating some mini roundabouts on either end of that 01:08:07.960 --> 01:08:14.440 so that your traffic is, is diverted East West instead of North South. Obviously it's 01:08:14.440 --> 01:08:20.980 going to displace some people who use Bell as a through street, not associated with TW 01:08:20.980 --> 01:08:24.400 and I think that's what Melissa's concern was. Well, if you're going to put, you take 01:08:24.400 --> 01:08:27.900 that and then you're going to push it over to Elm and Locust and if they're two way with 01:08:27.900 --> 01:08:33.320 less capacity, then what's that going to do? Because Carroll is pretty far to the West 01:08:33.320 --> 01:08:37.680 to carry somebody who's, you know, wants to, wants to be on Bell. That's several streets 01:08:37.680 --> 01:08:43.080 over and my response was that is what's going to heighten the need for us to complete and 01:08:43.080 --> 01:08:50.480 implement that Redel corridor improvement. That's, Senator, I guess I don't understand 01:08:50.480 --> 01:08:55.920 the closing of Bell because it seems like cars and people actually interact there like 01:08:55.920 --> 01:09:00.120 they should in an urban environment. Cars move very slowly through the center of campus, 01:09:00.120 --> 01:09:05.720 not once you get off down the hill that those areas can be a little better. But I'm surprised 01:09:05.720 --> 01:09:10.040 to hear that's, that's moving forward because I think it's a good, it's a good safe way 01:09:10.040 --> 01:09:16.920 to move traffic and keep pedestrians, bicyclists and, and cars that interact very, very smoothly 01:09:16.920 --> 01:09:21.800 there from I worked there for, you know, four years right on, right on Bell and never really 01:09:21.800 --> 01:09:26.480 noticed the problem. So when I say it's moving full speed ahead, our portion, the study is 01:09:26.480 --> 01:09:34.280 moving. Gotcha. I, I don't think there's, there's, there is no guarantee that council 01:09:34.280 --> 01:09:40.280 will adopt that change or the university will push that to occur. But the study has occurred. 01:09:40.280 --> 01:09:46.720 We do have a final report and those travel demand model runs have been, have been made. 01:09:46.720 --> 01:09:51.460 So we have the answers. Now we have the information to present to council for them to weigh and 01:09:51.460 --> 01:09:56.040 make a decision. So that's when I say it's, it's moving forward. Our portion, the analysis 01:09:56.040 --> 01:10:03.000 portion is moving forward. Will that come to us? Certainly. Okay. Cause I believe it 01:10:03.000 --> 01:10:10.600 came to us earlier and I think then it'd be a good time to address it. We're kind of addressing 01:10:10.600 --> 01:10:19.460 it a little bit now, different traffic of east and west. All this ties together. Yes. 01:10:19.460 --> 01:10:25.440 So we kind of have to discuss it together. And my concern is less Riddell. Cause I think 01:10:25.440 --> 01:10:32.100 the traffic you're pushing out to Riddell is going to be more eastbound. And once they 01:10:32.100 --> 01:10:38.680 hit university, they're going to come back. But the other point is I'm concerned about 01:10:38.680 --> 01:10:46.920 the traffic that would go through the neighborhood between Bell and Locust down Oakland and some 01:10:46.920 --> 01:10:55.760 of the side streets there. You could be putting quite a bit of traffic into those neighborhoods. 01:10:55.760 --> 01:11:03.120 So anyway, for next discussion. I think it's a good point, Clay, that this will come back 01:11:03.120 --> 01:11:10.720 to us. We are being mindful of time where, you know, got about 35 minutes before we have 01:11:10.720 --> 01:11:24.760 a hard stop. Are there any other comments or questions on this item? Okay. Brian, do 01:11:24.760 --> 01:11:29.600 you need anything else from us? Right. And this is, this was just a discussion, correct? 01:11:29.600 --> 01:11:39.280 Unless you want to, and again, it's just a consensus of, is the commission in support 01:11:39.280 --> 01:11:45.480 of or one way or in support of two way or, and I think we have a mix. So I'm not sure 01:11:45.480 --> 01:11:53.400 if we have a consensus, but we can probably just rely on the minutes to reflect the comments 01:11:53.400 --> 01:11:59.280 from each of the commissioners present. Right. This was posted as a give staff direction, 01:11:59.280 --> 01:12:06.600 not make a recommendation. Okay. All right. Well, if there's no more comments, then we 01:12:06.600 --> 01:12:15.120 will move on to our next item. Another presentation. ETSC 20-014, receive a report, hold a discussion 01:12:15.120 --> 01:12:19.720 and give staff direction regarding an update of the all walk crosswalk pilot program at 01:12:19.720 --> 01:12:25.240 the downtown intersections at Oak and down Oak and Locust, Hickory and down and Hickory 01:12:25.240 --> 01:12:34.960 and Locust. All right. And that's me again. So, and I'm going to make a change here on 01:12:34.960 --> 01:12:47.200 the fly because we took this presentation to the committee on persons with disability 01:12:47.200 --> 01:12:51.560 and they made the comment that it shouldn't say all walk, it just say, we should say something 01:12:51.560 --> 01:13:02.720 else. And so we're choosing all way crosswalk. So in your packet, I included some spreadsheet 01:13:02.720 --> 01:13:07.540 information and what this presentation does is just basically summarize the public input 01:13:07.540 --> 01:13:14.020 that we got through the online survey and through the other means that our, our public 01:13:14.020 --> 01:13:22.580 outreach people gathered this data and it shows the response from a driver or pedestrian 01:13:22.580 --> 01:13:28.980 or from a cyclist on whether or not the all way crosswalk is a positive or a negative. 01:13:28.980 --> 01:13:33.480 So it's a series of questions and I just picked some of the ones that made the most sense 01:13:33.480 --> 01:13:39.600 to graphically represent, you know, and I use the pie charts, obviously. So the first 01:13:39.600 --> 01:13:47.200 question was I am a and a visitor resident employee student or business owner. And this 01:13:47.200 --> 01:13:53.520 70% is the Denton residents. So primarily the people who responded to this survey are 01:13:53.520 --> 01:14:03.620 residents who were simply visiting downtown either for work or for dining or entertainment 01:14:03.620 --> 01:14:10.520 is this just kind of gives you an idea of who's answering the questions. The second 01:14:10.520 --> 01:14:16.160 question is have you traveled through an all walk all way crosswalk intersection and 92% 01:14:16.160 --> 01:14:24.040 of the people who responded were positive and eight had not. And so most of the people 01:14:24.040 --> 01:14:32.160 who responded to this actually abused it. So we can trust that they're familiar with 01:14:32.160 --> 01:14:38.400 the way the operation the signals operate and the way the crosswalks operate. And then 01:14:38.400 --> 01:14:43.280 this is the question that says are you are you an auto driver a cyclist transit passenger 01:14:43.280 --> 01:14:53.200 or pedestrian 44% were drivers were motorists and 51% were pedestrians. So primarily pedestrians 01:14:53.200 --> 01:14:59.760 and drivers very limited 5% total on transit and cyclists. So we didn't see as many cyclists 01:14:59.760 --> 01:15:06.600 as we probably hope but we got a lot of pedestrians and a good number of drivers as well. This 01:15:06.600 --> 01:15:13.560 question is regarding the safety for pedestrians and is it safer than before which is if you 01:15:13.560 --> 01:15:19.400 remember that's the way we had these crosswalks working as the pedestrians and drivers would 01:15:19.400 --> 01:15:32.320 move at the same time. We did have the potential for what we call a vehicle initial interval 01:15:32.320 --> 01:15:37.440 so that the pedestrians get a signal first but with the with the all way crosswalk nothing 01:15:37.440 --> 01:15:43.360 moves except pedestrians and then nothing moves except vehicles. So we've isolated those 01:15:43.360 --> 01:15:51.160 two and remove the conflict points 55% of the pedestrians thought it was safer 35% thought 01:15:51.160 --> 01:16:01.200 it was about the same and 10% thought it was not as safe as the previous operation. Again 01:16:01.200 --> 01:16:05.680 pedestrian oriented question how safe do you feel using the all way crosswalk intersection 01:16:05.680 --> 01:16:16.720 when no vehicles are moving 86% thought that that was higher safety level and 9% were neutral 01:16:16.720 --> 01:16:24.600 and then 5% thought it was less safe than moving with the vehicles. Again predominantly 01:16:24.600 --> 01:16:31.840 in favor or in support of the safety that we think the all way crosswalk brings. So 01:16:31.840 --> 01:16:39.880 this is the drivers how safe do you feel 55% safer 28% less are neutral and then 17% less 01:16:39.880 --> 01:16:49.760 safe. So my expectation is that the 17% is primarily due to the elimination of the turns 01:16:49.760 --> 01:16:54.440 on red. We got a lot of feedback about how are you going to you know we can't turn on 01:16:54.440 --> 01:17:03.920 red anymore and there's a lot of negative sentiment regarding that restriction. And 01:17:03.920 --> 01:17:08.280 then this is for all users and you think the all walk crosswalks are safer for all modes 01:17:08.280 --> 01:17:15.600 of transportation 78% yes and 28% no. So again significant support and significant finding 01:17:15.600 --> 01:17:22.280 of increased safety with the all way crosswalk. And then this if you'll remember one of the 01:17:22.280 --> 01:17:27.120 things that one of the negatives potential negatives that the all way crosswalks introduced 01:17:27.120 --> 01:17:31.840 was because we're taking away that overlap when pedestrians and vehicles moved at the 01:17:31.840 --> 01:17:38.360 same time and isolating into discrete movements. It adds a little bit of delay for drivers 01:17:38.360 --> 01:17:43.180 for both drivers and pedestrians. So it's about a three or four second delay or a longer 01:17:43.180 --> 01:17:48.760 wait and this question is do you think that's worth it and 75% of the people thought that 01:17:48.760 --> 01:17:53.680 that additional delay that it takes before your signal comes up was worth the enhanced 01:17:53.680 --> 01:17:59.920 safety that the all way crosswalks bring. Do you think that there are benefit to downtown 01:17:59.920 --> 01:18:06.160 again the same 75 25 75% of the people who are using these crosswalks think that they 01:18:06.160 --> 01:18:14.280 are positive for the downtown around the square. And then would you like to see us employ these 01:18:14.280 --> 01:18:19.080 in other locations and I would say that the other locations that we're primarily looking 01:18:19.080 --> 01:18:24.280 at are somewhere where we've got high pedestrian volumes around the universities around entertainment 01:18:24.280 --> 01:18:33.560 districts two thirds of the people said yes and basically 25% said no and the 8% are people 01:18:33.560 --> 01:18:39.400 who made a further comment about which roadway they wanted to see included. But again we're 01:18:39.400 --> 01:18:44.600 looking for areas that have high pedestrian volumes fairly high vehicle volumes where 01:18:44.600 --> 01:18:48.320 we want to separate the vehicles from the pedestrians we don't want to move it at the 01:18:48.320 --> 01:18:53.360 same time we want to eliminate those conflicts. So with that I'll take questions or comments 01:18:53.360 --> 01:19:04.000 and again we're requesting feedback in the form of is this group supportive of the all 01:19:04.000 --> 01:19:10.000 way crosswalk. Do you think it is an enhancement. Do you think it is a detriment. There is no 01:19:10.000 --> 01:19:15.440 formal action again we're just trying to get feedback from the different committees and 01:19:15.440 --> 01:19:22.280 commissions and user groups that are affected by the all way crosswalk. So with that I'll 01:19:22.280 --> 01:19:40.360 open it up for questions. Okay I like it and as both a driver and a pedestrian I haven't 01:19:40.360 --> 01:19:48.560 gone through my bicycle yet but I think I would appreciate it as a cyclist I appreciate 01:19:48.560 --> 01:20:01.640 it as a pedestrian and I think it helps quite a bit particularly with people with some hindrances 01:20:01.640 --> 01:20:09.160 in moving fast to get across the street. I like that and there's nothing that precludes 01:20:09.160 --> 01:20:15.440 anybody from doing a diagonal during the all way is there. No not at all in fact we had 01:20:15.440 --> 01:20:21.240 that question that came up at the COPWD and actually in the survey as well why don't you 01:20:21.240 --> 01:20:26.480 stripe the diagonals but if you remember this is a pilot program and so we did not want 01:20:26.480 --> 01:20:33.260 to spend any capital money to make the changes that are going to be required to make those 01:20:33.260 --> 01:20:37.920 diagonal crosswalks safe and legal. So we're going to have to add additional ramps on the 01:20:37.920 --> 01:20:43.800 corners and markings on the street and it has always been our plan if this is something 01:20:43.800 --> 01:20:48.120 that council decides to make permanent in which you want to continue the operation of 01:20:48.120 --> 01:20:52.160 the all-way crosswalk then we're going to identify dollars come back and make those 01:20:52.160 --> 01:20:59.200 changes that are needed to really invite that diagonal because that's truly the benefit 01:20:59.200 --> 01:21:05.960 of having the you know another way to another common term for this is the pedestrian scramble 01:21:05.960 --> 01:21:10.200 so you can go any direction you want to when it's you've got the green light and only you 01:21:10.200 --> 01:21:15.720 have the green light and you can go diagonal or across in each direction what we did initially 01:21:15.720 --> 01:21:21.240 with this pilot program is try and provide enough time so that you could cross two legs 01:21:21.240 --> 01:21:27.440 so when we open up that diagonal we actually bring we may be able to bring some time back 01:21:27.440 --> 01:21:34.280 into the vehicle mode so we lessen their delay and still provide safe crossings for everybody 01:21:34.280 --> 01:21:40.560 because it takes less time to make the diagonal crossing than it has to make two single leg 01:21:40.560 --> 01:21:46.520 crossings so again that's something that has always been the plan to include in if this 01:21:46.520 --> 01:21:52.480 is determined to be a worthy operation and it becomes permanent then we're going to come 01:21:52.480 --> 01:21:59.500 back and add those diagonals right I remember that we just got through reworking those corners 01:21:59.500 --> 01:22:05.680 not too long ago yeah so I hate tearing it up that fast but I just want to make sure 01:22:05.680 --> 01:22:14.320 that is any body out there can be unafraid of crossing diagonally and even if we put 01:22:14.320 --> 01:22:20.400 the if we put the the markings down that would certainly invite the majority of the population 01:22:20.400 --> 01:22:26.520 but for anybody who is disabled then we certainly want to be able to provide a safe crossing 01:22:26.520 --> 01:22:33.960 detectable surfaces so that the unsighted person can find it easily we still have to 01:22:33.960 --> 01:22:40.160 I know we just finished not too long ago beautifying those corners and making them nice and new 01:22:40.160 --> 01:22:44.080 but we really need to add those if we want the diagonal crossing we really need to add 01:22:44.080 --> 01:22:53.120 those ramps is there any problem with painting a X in the middle of the diagonal X that doesn't 01:22:53.120 --> 01:22:59.000 go all the way to the corners maybe about four or five feet each direction none at all 01:22:59.000 --> 01:23:03.840 and we can do that initially even before we put the ramps in but again we didn't want 01:23:03.840 --> 01:23:08.560 to put any capital dollars everything we did was operational change we didn't add any hardware 01:23:08.560 --> 01:23:13.880 we didn't there were no the only things we added were some no turn on red signs and I 01:23:13.880 --> 01:23:19.080 think council did not want us to spend a lot of money going out and remarking if three 01:23:19.080 --> 01:23:24.480 months remember this was supposed to be a three to six month trial well we passed that 01:23:24.480 --> 01:23:30.200 but they'd have to go back and remove them so what we didn't want to do is have to mark 01:23:30.200 --> 01:23:34.360 something or creates or build something and then have to go take it out if this was not 01:23:34.360 --> 01:23:44.920 selected to go for a permanent operation I'd like to say that I'm part of it I really like 01:23:44.920 --> 01:23:49.200 it I like the fact that you know when the cars stop everybody gets to walk it's your 01:23:49.200 --> 01:23:55.560 turn you get to go and as an automobile list you know I know that I can't go anywhere and 01:23:55.560 --> 01:24:03.320 I know I'm not gonna hit you buddy I'm just there and I'm waiting my turn I like it this 01:24:03.320 --> 01:24:11.800 is Jeff go ahead I'm so thank you I'd like to Jeff excuse me Jeff you have to be visible 01:24:11.800 --> 01:24:18.160 if you choose to speak in the meeting please okay I can't get my camera to come on so okay 01:24:18.160 --> 01:24:26.560 thanks Trey how do you want to handle that I mean it's the open meeting Zach says that 01:24:26.560 --> 01:24:29.560 if they're gonna if they're gonna speak and they're on the board they've got to be visible 01:24:29.560 --> 01:24:37.960 I don't I don't have an exception to that it is it worth pointing out that I think he's 01:24:37.960 --> 01:24:42.680 calling in by phone which does not have a visibility option I don't know if that makes 01:24:42.680 --> 01:24:47.800 any difference as opposed to being on the zoom app which does that's okay my comments 01:24:47.800 --> 01:24:57.720 were consistent it's okay I'll I'll add two quick comments I'm a little bit of a contrarian 01:24:57.720 --> 01:25:03.520 today probably always I guess right I'm what I've my only comment is I'm concerned that's 01:25:03.520 --> 01:25:11.200 the the all walk way it's set up has increased car speeds through the square which I think 01:25:11.200 --> 01:25:16.080 puts more risk to pedestrians while I know it sounds really great you get to walk both 01:25:16.080 --> 01:25:19.840 ways and everything like essentially that's how it used to be too because when I would 01:25:19.840 --> 01:25:24.240 walk up to the square if I was going if I needed to cross both sides of the street I 01:25:24.240 --> 01:25:28.760 could cross one and by the time I got there I could be able to cross the other so I mean 01:25:28.760 --> 01:25:33.160 I think they're fine overall one thing I would say though if we really want to understand 01:25:33.160 --> 01:25:37.160 what how the public feels about it is we might look at how we do those questions because 01:25:37.160 --> 01:25:41.260 the questions we asked were pretty leading and so they wouldn't be very scientifically 01:25:41.260 --> 01:25:47.720 reliable if you notice they were all framed as a new whenever you frame something as new 01:25:47.720 --> 01:25:52.360 people tend to say yes that's great and so if we were able to frame the questions where 01:25:52.360 --> 01:25:56.920 we actually pose some of it we didn't pose for example how the all walk the dot any downsides 01:25:56.920 --> 01:26:00.880 really of the all walk or any threats and so as people read through the questions they 01:26:00.880 --> 01:26:05.280 probably tend to get a very favorable perspective from the very questions that's all walk is 01:26:05.280 --> 01:26:10.280 an innovation or an improvement so it's hard to really tell how people feel unless we develop 01:26:10.280 --> 01:26:16.480 sign kind of more reliable and scientifically valid questions but but yeah if we do do it 01:26:16.480 --> 01:26:22.320 I would love to see us to the earlier suggestion I would love to see is maybe even do some 01:26:22.320 --> 01:26:27.160 kind of mural in the middle that really marks the square as a space that shows arrows across 01:26:27.160 --> 01:26:38.880 and the all work or crosswalk could be really cool 01:26:38.880 --> 01:26:42.520 so I will take this opportunity sorry let me add one comment about and that's something 01:26:42.520 --> 01:26:47.560 you had mentioned the last time we talked about this and I wanted to bring up a point 01:26:47.560 --> 01:26:52.180 that I think you asked if we could do a passive detection where you don't actually have to 01:26:52.180 --> 01:26:58.720 push the button so we've had this and this was a result of the the cove it environment 01:26:58.720 --> 01:27:03.920 not so much people not want to push a button they just don't want to touch anything anymore 01:27:03.920 --> 01:27:11.280 but we're actually testing some hardware at Riddell and 380 probably 30 days out because 01:27:11.280 --> 01:27:17.240 we're working with the same vendor who did the with the FLIR sensor for the one way wrong 01:27:17.240 --> 01:27:22.740 way but we're going to be testing some passive sensors at that intersection that's a fairly 01:27:22.740 --> 01:27:29.680 high pedestrian crossing of university and it's a long crossing but we're we'll be testing 01:27:29.680 --> 01:27:36.360 and tweaking that hardware to see if we can fine tune it my biggest concern on on utilizing 01:27:36.360 --> 01:27:50.460 that hardware is that around the square people are often opt to stand on a corner and talk 01:27:50.460 --> 01:27:55.440 because the corners are I mean we've got benches we've got landscaping they're very they're 01:27:55.440 --> 01:28:01.960 inviting and so you've got these wide sidewalks and you've you've got kind of a nice space 01:28:01.960 --> 01:28:06.760 to be people are going to eventually cross but they may meet somebody or they're with 01:28:06.760 --> 01:28:11.560 somebody and it's they they they're standing in the place where they want to cross but 01:28:11.560 --> 01:28:15.120 they aren't ready to cross yet but the the detection system doesn't know that so what 01:28:15.120 --> 01:28:18.800 we're going to try and figure out is we're going to we're going to learn how to place 01:28:18.800 --> 01:28:25.080 those and where we can put them so that if it detects a person there's no question they 01:28:25.080 --> 01:28:31.440 are ready to cross and instead of doing a more generalized wider sensory area we've 01:28:31.440 --> 01:28:41.120 got one of these on the ground already on elm right across from the diesd facility and 01:28:41.120 --> 01:28:45.720 i've seen it false call a lot of times because we've got and again this is just where it's 01:28:45.720 --> 01:28:49.640 a learning curve we've got parking along the same side of street as we've got the sensor 01:28:49.640 --> 01:28:53.560 so people coming in and out of their cars that's that space that's closest to the sensor 01:28:53.560 --> 01:28:57.680 are often detected so that's what we want to learn with this hardware is how can we 01:28:57.680 --> 01:29:02.880 deploy it till minimize the false calls we're going to do that up on university and then 01:29:02.880 --> 01:29:07.240 we'll bring that to council and say okay we know how to use it here's what it costs do 01:29:07.240 --> 01:29:13.520 we want to deploy it because it's pretty expensive it's eight to ten thousand dollars per intersection 01:29:13.520 --> 01:29:18.240 to put those sensors out so it's it's not terribly expensive but if we're talking about 01:29:18.240 --> 01:29:24.960 130 intersections and it will make this our standard then it does become a cost of and 01:29:24.960 --> 01:29:29.400 maybe we only want to focus on certain areas where we do the all-walk crosswalks i don't 01:29:29.400 --> 01:29:35.360 know but that's something that we are testing is that passive detection hardware and and 01:29:35.360 --> 01:29:39.320 just to clarify i would be okay with it just always stopping like i mean i've been fine 01:29:39.320 --> 01:29:44.120 with it stopping every cycle whether there's people standing there or not because i think 01:29:44.120 --> 01:29:50.440 deferring towards the pedestrians is in our most pedestrian friendly area is um creates 01:29:50.440 --> 01:29:55.960 a lot safer environments it also deters people who are wanting to speed through an area right 01:29:55.960 --> 01:29:59.480 they say oh i'm not going to go through the square you get you stop at this you get stopped 01:29:59.480 --> 01:30:03.720 on the square as opposed to thinking they might be able to speed through so um but i 01:30:03.720 --> 01:30:12.760 think if that is software is doable it could be a good compromise 01:30:12.760 --> 01:30:19.320 other comments i i this is on the topic that brian just brought up but i would like to 01:30:19.320 --> 01:30:24.520 say to his comment about having i guess a system in which you could automatically have 01:30:24.520 --> 01:30:31.840 the lights change is that's what i'm getting from that as somebody who was riding up oak 01:30:31.840 --> 01:30:44.280 street going west and hitting carol in my car i watched two people cross carol even 01:30:44.280 --> 01:30:49.600 though they didn't push the light to cross where there's all that construction right 01:30:49.600 --> 01:30:58.400 now and they just like ran for it and the one was it was a couple and the man just like 01:30:58.400 --> 01:31:03.280 walked in front and the car started to slow down and then he made his way over and then 01:31:03.280 --> 01:31:09.760 his wife eventually made it and they didn't hit the signal which i don't understand but 01:31:09.760 --> 01:31:26.160 with this technology in the right places that could be helpful right 01:31:26.160 --> 01:31:34.160 any other comments 01:31:34.160 --> 01:31:40.400 and again i don't think we need to you don't need any feedback from us formally on this 01:31:40.400 --> 01:31:46.260 or any kind of votes on that so that is our last item brian are you good was there anything 01:31:46.260 --> 01:31:52.080 else you need to say in response to anything before we move on the only question we had 01:31:52.080 --> 01:32:00.440 or in concluding remarks or closing comments is our next meeting and there's still some 01:32:00.440 --> 01:32:05.800 discussion about are we meeting and i'm going to let trey maybe are we meeting only if we 01:32:05.800 --> 01:32:16.600 have time sensitive topics because as we have moved into this virtual realm we now have 01:32:16.600 --> 01:32:22.360 to have daytime meetings and there are we're competing with i think becky said 27 other 01:32:22.360 --> 01:32:31.280 committees and commissions and groups and we need to if we want to have an august meeting 01:32:31.280 --> 01:32:37.320 we need to have that placeholder we need to grab that spot early we can so i think we've 01:32:37.320 --> 01:32:43.600 got the third thursday in august tentatively penciled in for this committee i think it's 01:32:43.600 --> 01:32:50.320 at 11 a.m becky is that correct yes so i don't need an answer now but look at your and i 01:32:50.320 --> 01:32:56.600 think that's the 21st of august at 11 a.m if you could check your calendars and see if 01:32:56.600 --> 01:33:06.720 that works it's actually the 20th okay august 20th just so we we don't want to lose the 01:33:06.720 --> 01:33:12.000 spot we've we've kind of tentatively grabbed it we don't know that we're going to have 01:33:12.000 --> 01:33:15.880 a meeting but if we are that's the date so if we get feedback on whether or not that 01:33:15.880 --> 01:33:25.980 date works it'd be great okay i already have a conflict okay on that day would it be best 01:33:25.980 --> 01:33:30.560 best to address this by email so that way everyone can check their schedules and sure 01:33:30.560 --> 01:33:37.840 i don't need an answer now i just um and again moving forward we're not sure if we are only 01:33:37.840 --> 01:33:44.120 having meetings if we have time sensitive issues for council or if we're just moving 01:33:44.120 --> 01:33:50.140 into opening up for general agenda items we're still getting clarification on that but if 01:33:50.140 --> 01:33:54.280 we want to have an august meeting we need to start and if that august 20th date doesn't 01:33:54.280 --> 01:33:58.240 work we do need to start nailing that down so becky will be working with you and i think 01:33:58.240 --> 01:34:03.800 email would be fine just so we can at least put one we can hold a place if we don't have 01:34:03.800 --> 01:34:10.320 a meeting we'll cancel but and then that's no harm no foul so we just need to we need 01:34:10.320 --> 01:34:15.640 to start thinking about our meeting dates they're not automatic anymore and so we need 01:34:15.640 --> 01:34:21.880 to start thinking about whether or not we're having a meeting in the following month and 01:34:21.880 --> 01:34:26.600 the current month so now is the time to start looking at our calendars and saying okay does 01:34:26.600 --> 01:34:32.640 that work if it doesn't let's pick another date and time okay so we will look for those 01:34:32.640 --> 01:34:39.000 emails so thank thank you brian um i i had a couple items i wanted to potentially just 01:34:39.000 --> 01:34:44.000 add for when we next meet not necessarily uh it's not time sensitive but a couple requests 01:34:44.000 --> 01:34:49.520 um becky is this an okay time to go ahead and and add a couple items to for potential 01:34:49.520 --> 01:34:55.600 future agenda i believe that is correct as part of our concluding items trey right yes 01:34:55.600 --> 01:35:01.280 this is the place to do it we just can't have any discussion on now yeah so i had a few 01:35:01.280 --> 01:35:05.480 items that came out of today i'll say them really quickly one is i was just curious it 01:35:05.480 --> 01:35:09.920 was brought up early in the discussion about the possible report on the feasibility of 01:35:09.920 --> 01:35:14.520 a common speed limit around the square that had come up so i was going to see if there's 01:35:14.520 --> 01:35:18.520 any way we could look at like what that would look like and again that's not time sensitive 01:35:18.520 --> 01:35:22.160 but i think with the changes we're looking at that'd be interesting another is i was 01:35:22.160 --> 01:35:27.740 i was wanting to to see if we could potentially get a report on the area i mentioned locust 01:35:27.740 --> 01:35:32.120 going north off the square and those couple blocks there i'm very concerned about the 01:35:32.120 --> 01:35:38.080 safety there's a new ramp there with no crosswalk um and there's the light area which we we 01:35:38.080 --> 01:35:42.080 did get some of that but i was wondering if we might get some more advice on other safety 01:35:42.080 --> 01:35:47.320 um uh possibilities there and just see if that could be something that could be brought 01:35:47.320 --> 01:35:52.880 to us i'm i'm just very worried about that area and then lastly is just uh something 01:35:52.880 --> 01:35:59.480 that didn't come up today but there's there's still a persistence in a lot of um construction 01:35:59.480 --> 01:36:04.160 crews are placing you know whenever there's construction on the street they're placing 01:36:04.160 --> 01:36:09.600 they're blocking sidewalks with their construction signs saying a lane is closed and they block 01:36:09.600 --> 01:36:15.600 the full sidewalk is there a way that we could get a report on the city policy um on that 01:36:15.600 --> 01:36:20.920 because it seems to be a widespread policy that sidewalks are good places for construction 01:36:20.920 --> 01:36:25.480 street construction signs um and that just is a i was seeing if there's we could get 01:36:25.480 --> 01:36:31.680 a report on the possibilities of reducing that practice um if if it is problematic and 01:36:31.680 --> 01:36:41.880 that's it for me anybody else have items to add 01:36:41.880 --> 01:36:46.520 okay with that and with not a lot of time left only 10 minutes it was great to see everybody 01:36:46.520 --> 01:36:51.700 that that concludes all our items and that should adjourn our meeting so thank you everyone 01:36:51.700 --> 01:36:54.940 for joining. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.