The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About0144.092"","'. - ~: .... ; ... ,".--, '. ' ... "-., February 6, 1992 HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL Palo i\lto, Calif::'rnia CITY/SCHOOL PEDESTRIAN SAFETY STUD\{ Members of the Co~ncil: REPORT IN BRT E F The purpose of this report is to respond to an earlier Council direction regardin~ the scope of a study to address pedestrian safety issues for school children. This report Dutlines three alternative approaches that such a study might follow and recommends that Council direct staff t~ proceed 'With a City/School Pedestrian Safety study that focuses on the Meadow/Charlest-on Commute Corridors between Barron Park. and Jane Lathrop Stanford (JLS) middle school. 'With the following understanding: a. Staff will ":lork with the City/School Traffic Safety Committee to ensure that the study process includes participation by appropriate representatives from the affected schools, prAs, and the School District; and b. The amount of the consultant contract for this study is not to exceed $25,000 and 'Will be developed and executed by the City Mai"ager, as provided in the Palo Al to Municipal code, without further review and ap~roval by coun::::il. Staff also recommends that council adopt the Amendment Ordinance (Attachment 1) to provide study. attached Budget funding for the On December 9, 1991, the-Council passed a motion -..:hich included the following: "Support a pedestrian safety study of the critical travel corridors used by Palo Alto school children. Direct staff to prepare a scope of the proposed study and to worK: with the CMR: 144 :92 -- . _____ 4t School Distr-ict~ its Traffic Safety committee and others in drafting the scop~.- Included as A.ttach!llent 2 is a m€:r.lorandlJm dated De(:entber 5. 1991, from Council Members MLlce Cobb and Jean McCollOm regarding this matter. This memo .as part of a series of actions that resulted from various meetings and discussions follo..,ing a tragic accident in which a JLS student ""as killed b::r-a train at the Meado,*, railroad crossing. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES Staff has reviewed this matter-and concluded th~t there are three basic approaches that could be followed. These three approaches are described in Attachment 3 3nd summarized below-. Approach 1: Approach 2: Approact. 3: Meadow/~~leston ComMute corridors betwe.en Barr_Q[L __ .p~~ .. sLJ_l§ This <:'I.pproach ,",ould have a sl'!'Iall/1Llttited study area, inch..;de 0:-11)0· affected schools and address all issues of concern. This approach would have a large/citywi~e studv area, include all schools and address .only-maj'or street issues of concern. This approach would have a large/citywide study area~ include all schools and address all issues of concern. While the scale of the study ~ould vary significantly for the three approaches, the conduct of the study -...rould be similar for each approach and include the follo'",ing ele:r.1ents: • Issue Identification • Datd Collection and Analysis • EValuation of Alternatives • Conclusions and Recommendations • Action Plan Attachment 4 provides a brief description of each of the above. Irrespective of which approach is selected, consultant resourCes to assist in the study process ... ill be required. Once a decision is made regarding ~hich approach to follow, staff will proceed with CHR: 144:92 2/6/92 Page 2 . ' -, , , - the solicitation, evaluation, selection and a ... ·ard of contract for consultant serJices. This procedur~ is outlined in Attachment 5. This pre-study procedure nOrffial1y takes approximately four months to accomplish. Ho~ever: if the cost of the con~ultant contract does not exceed $25,000, tt,e City Marcaqer has the authority to execute the contract, without ~he further revie~ and approval of tbe Council. Thi-s co..,;ld shorten the time it ..... ould. take to retain the s&rvices of a consultant from four months to two months. The time it takes to conduct the stUdy itself, ~s ~ell as the cost of the requir£d consultant services is directly related to the scale of the study. The dollar cost of required consultant assistance, as .. 'ell as the time required to cot:'lplete the actual study, is as follows: Approach 1 Approach 2 Approach 3 $20,000-$30,000 $50,000-$60,000 $80,000-$90/000 3-4 months 5-6 1II0nths 6-8 rtonths The above time periods, for each of the: t!~ree approaches, represent the amount of time it would normally take to conduct such a study, and do not include the t .. ,o to four month period required for the retention of consultant services. nor th.e impact of the suromer school closure period. Shown belot,{ is a summary schedule for each approach showing the period for rete~tion of a consultant 'and the duration of the actual study, inclusive of the impact of the summer school closure: FEB MAR APR HAY JUN-SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY hpproach 1 Retain Cons, 0-------0 condUct Study 0------/ / / /--'--00000.0 Approach 2 Retain Cons~ 0--------------0 C-onduct. St.udy 11110------------------00000 Appro_ach_~ Retain Cons. 0--------------0 conduct Study 11110----------------------0000000000 KEY o begin/end CHR:144:92 ------continue JIll inactive 2/6/92 Page 3 1 , I I J I .. ~ - GENERAL COMM{:NTS The initial discussion rega.rding s'.Jch a stud:{ -",'as clearly directed tOlori21rd the smalle.r study area represented by Approach l~ Subsequent discussion about the study suggests a coropr-ehensive citywide study represented by Approach 3 wo~ld more nearly reflect some .::o:mmunity expectations. Approach 2 represents a middle ground that addresses only :major street issues but on a citywide basis. Each approa~h is valid, Lut will have different results. ~~ichever ~pproach is selected, it is important that expectations are appropriately scaled. These a1 ternative apprc,aches ...... ere presented and discussed at tIle January 16, 1992 meeting of the City/School Traffic safety committee. The people present expressed a general interest in taking a more co~prehensive cit)vide approach, but also recognized the Meado'W/Charleston JLS/Barron Park area of Approach 1 as being the highest priority area. These alternative approaches ~ece also presented and discussed a~ the City/School Liaison Committee meeting on January 28, 1992. All four members e~pressed their preference for Approach 1, as being more readily achievable and focusing on the highest priority area of concern. staft bE'lieves 'that Approach 1 is the preferred 'Jay to proceed. This approach is readily achievable, responds directly to specific expressed concerns, and addresses a high priority area of concern. General traffic and pedestrian issues related to school access in o"ther areas of the City ..... ould continue to be addressed a::1d r~solved as part of the ongoing activities of the City/School Traffic Safety committee. Approach 1 also offers the opportunity of shortening the time it 'Would take to retain the services of a consultant from four mc.nths to two months. ~flile the consultant selection process ~ould still involve sol icitation, evaluation anrl selection on a competitive basis, the city Manager has the authority to execute contracts up to an amount of $25 1 DOG ... ithout the review and approval of the council. This shortened time period ..... C1uld permit dat.-a collection to occur prior to school closure in June and completion of the full study in early fall. For Approaches 2 and 3, the actual study cou!d not begin until mid--September. The necessary funds to provide a total of $25 1 000 for this study are proposed to come from the following two sources: (1) $3,000 from an existing Transportation Division line item that provides resources for traffic accident and safety studies, and (2) $22,000 from the Reserve for Capital proj ect.s. Tl-je ·'3ttached Budget Amendment Ordinance provides for the transfer of $22 1 000 from the Reserve for Capital Projects into the 'Transportation Division CMR: 144: 92 2/6/92 Page 4 l:a .. dget, for the purpose of funding this specific study. s·t3-'f! recolnm.=!nds that Council direct staff to proceed .... ith El. city/School Pedestrian Safety Study, in general conformance with Approach 1 as presented in this staff report, ..... ith the following understanding: a. Staff ..... il1 work ..,ith the city/Scl'lool Traffic Safet.y Committee to ensure that the study process include.s ~articipation bj' appropriate representatives fr-o:c. the affected schools, PTAs, and the School District, b. The amount cf the consultant contract for this srudy is not to exceed $25,000 and will be developed and executed by the City Manager, or his designee, as provided in the Palo Alto Municipal code, without further revieW' and approval by the City council. Staff also recommends that Council adopt the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment 1) transferrin~ $22,000 from the Reserve for Cayital Projects to the Transportation Division budget, in order to provide funding for the study. Respectfully submitted, ~- MARVIN L. O~~WAY Chief Transi ~~aticn Official KENNETH R. SCHREIBER Director of Planning and Community Environment .M )-~~~'" ~--- JUNE FLF.MING "\ Assistant City'~ager v' Attacrllnents: 1. Budget Amendment Ordina.nce 2. Memorandum from Council Members Mike Cobb and Jean McCown (December 5, 1991). 3. Alternative study Area Approaches 4. Scope of study 5. Study Process and Timeline CC: City/School Liaison co~~ittee City/School Traffic safety Co~~ittee Palo Alto Unified School District superintendent James Brown PTA Safety Committee Representatives CMR: 14<: 92 2/6/92 Pl3.ge 5 r ATTACHMENT 1 ORDINA.»CE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL yEAR 1991-92 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL '~PROPRrATION TO THE TRANSPORTATIO~ DIVISION TO CONDUCT A PEDESTRIAN SAFETY STUDY ';.o"HE'REA3, pursuaI'l_t to the provisions of section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo .Alto, the Council on Jun~ 24, 1991 did adopt a budget for fiscal year 1991-92; and WHEREAS, the City Council has directed staff to proceed a City/School Pedestrian safety st'l.ldy that focuses on Meadow/Charleston Commute Corrido~s between Barron Park and Lathrop Stanford Middle School; and with the Jane ~~EREAS, additional funds in the amount of $22,000 would have to be inco:-porated in the Planning Department, Transportation Division budget to accomplish this need; NOW. THEREFORE, the council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: ~CTION 1. The sum of Twenty-Two Thousand Dollars ($22,000) is hereby appropriated to Cont.ract Services in Traffic Operations Program in the Transportation Division of the Planning Depa~tment and the Reserve for Capital Projects is correspondingly reduced. SECTION 2. This transaction will reduce the Reser-ve [rom $5,320,031 to $5,298 1 031 as of February 3, 1992. RECT!~. The council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that the enactment of this ordinance is not a proje~t under the Califo~nia Enviro~ental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmen tal impact assessment is necessary. ~IO!L!. Hunicipal Code, adoption. As provided in section 2.04.375 of the Pal.o Alto this ordinance shall become effectiVe upon INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: -~' ... -............ • -• Al'TEST, APPROVED, cit.:y ClEJt'k Mayor -~--------- 1U'f'ROYED AS ro FORM: Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: Director of Planninq and c~~~unity Znvircnment 91-2.13 · , ," ATIACHMENT 2 MEMORANDUM December 5, 19~1 TO: Our Colleagues FROM: Council Members Mike cobb a~d Jean McCown city Representatives to city/School Liaison Co~~ittee SUBJECT: Report trom city/scbool Liaison Committ •• """========="""="" ... ====== ... ===========."...=~-==""'-=-==== The Alma/Meadow railroad crossing was among the issues discussed at the November 26~ 1991 meeting of the City/school Liaison. committee. As a result of the disc~ssionl committee members voted to recommend to their respective bodies that adult crossing guards (not sworn police cfficers) be funded for the Meadow and Charleston railroad crossings and that a stUdy of the critical tr~vel corridors used by school children be initiated. Therefore, we are asking that the Council: 1. Direct that tt~e City Manaqer "Work with the Supe-rir.t,ende.nt of the Palo Alto Unified School District to assure immediate shared funding for qualified adult crossing guards at the Alma/Meadow and Alma/Charleston railroad crossings. 2:~ Support a pedestrian safety ~tudy of the critical travel corridors used by Palo Alto school children. Direct staff to prepare a scope of the proposed study a.,d to work with tbe school district, its traffic safety committee and others in drafting the scope. The PAUSD Board of Education approved comparable recommendations at its meeting of OecemLer 3, 1991. --,--_ .... _ ...... -.. - ATTACHMENT 3 CITY/SCHOOL PEDESTRL .. '" SAFIT\' STUDY DRAFT ALTER"ATrVE STtD\" AREA COt\'CEPTS T.ext of Coundl Assignment: "Support a pedestrian safdy study of the critical travel corridors used by Palo Alta _c..c-hcol children. Dtrect staff to prepare a scope of the prcFosed study and to work with t~e schoo! distiict, its traffic safety commirtee and others in drafting the scope.~ ThLs would be a focu:ied study of the !\I.'O COfTlm .. !e routes. that invohe at g'!""ade f£!ilraad crossings from the Barron Park and west of El Camino Reat neighborhoc.'ds to }LS Middle Schol)l. Th-e study area wot..:ld include nit. sjgn311z.ed and u;-'isig!1alizt'd cressings of El Camino used by JLS, Gunn "nd JU::lna BriDnes and Hoover elementary SChDOf s:udc:1ts, the lv1eadm" Drive and Char{e~tan. Road COiTiuo:-\;., through tte railroad and Alma Street crossings to the .s.chool entr.anc~s.. ThlS approach would inc111de aU m.o.jor arterial streets which are crossed by ekmentary <Lnd middle school students, 'with secondary fQCu~ on high school CrO~s.Lng~. The arte;-i,:il corridors wou1d include Alma Street (including railro<!d cTOssings), El Camino Real, Emb.J.rcadcro Road, Page Mil1 and Oregcn Expre.ss.wJ.)', Ct1:1ries.\on :and A;as .... r-adcr·:) Ro::.ds, lJni,tr~tty Avenue, Middlefield Road, San A.l1~on:o Road. By definitio:1, L'-Ils approach would not encompass student commute -:orridors. on colleclor and local neighborhood streets within the school attendance ar~tls, nor v.:ould it focus on s.choo15afety issues related to tb.e immediDte .... icinity of the s.chool site, except as they may pertain to the major street system. Those: schools whcse attend;:luce area boundaries req<Jlre students to .cro~s any of these arterials would be included in the ~tud'y. The~e include the four secondary 5..::1,0015 and tr.t' foBowing elemental)' Scl100Is: Addison. Duveocck, \Valte[ HJ.Ys, Fairme.o.dow, El Carmek" Juana Briones, Escondido, and dlstrict~wide schools, Hou\,'er and Ohlone. AJ!proacb #3: Comprehensi"e CJ.tvwid~ Cf}nido[" Stud,,! This study would encompass all schools and all s.:hDQl comrr.ute routes in Palo A..lto; regardless of the street classiflcation. This study could addre~'S safe~y concerns shared by more than one school c0mmunity 2S well as i~sues relatt"d uniquel) to one school attendC1flC~ area. The piOcess of identifying the issues and soliciting: ir.put [rDr.1 eacb particip,,-rlng school could be t:me consuming. Should each school participate 3rld produce a lengthy list of concerns, h wm li~e\y be necessary to prioritize the issues 2nd:or address the study ~n multiple phases. - ATTACHMEl'o'T 4 CI1Y:SCHOOL PEDESTRIAN SAFElY sn:DY SCOPE or Sn'DY DRAfT 1. Issue IdeoHfiC3tion This phase of the study in .... olves woriOr!g with represe nta tives of indi\.~dual s.chaols, the PTA, PAUSD administration, and the City/School T[(J[fic S:J.fery CO!1::minee, to jden~ify issues ana concerns which need to be analyzed. II. Data Collection ~nd An2~Jsis This phase involves collection of periinent tICl.ffic engineering data inclUDing traffic volumes, bicycle and pedestrian counts., accident d:ua, traffle "ioiations, speed sUritY5, field observations, street geometries, e.c. !t further includes ccllecIir<g pertinent information fram the school dislrlct regGrcing attendance areas, enrollmer:t proje,:tlems., transportation policies, etc, and jrlforffiJtinr. from other a£en.:i~.s a':"ltljurisdictions thQt have control o .... er areas in questi(1f1 (e.g_, Calrran:s, SC'Llthc,n Pac ifi..: .... Ca1t[,J in JPB, S~n [<1 Clara County, privute propt~rty owners) All data is analyzed and findings sum!TImiz.ed for e\':lIuation. III. Evaluation or Attematives In this phase of the study, potenti'2l~ altem::J.tive Solutlons (s'hOIt, medium and lm·,g-tcl m) are identified, conceptual plans and preliminary cost estimJtts prepared and feajibillt'j of implementation eV.J!mJted. IV. Condus-ions and Recommendations This phase inVCll"'es dele:rm:nation of the prderred alternatt"ES, priorltlzation of alternatives for impleme[ltat;on and preparation of a find.! report with recommendations far consideration by the City/School Liaison Committee, Cit)' Council and Sc11001 Board. v. Action Pia n The iInplernentation timeline will be b.<lsed upon the decisions. of the (Ity Counci1 at the end of the study. The City or other responsible agencies ""''ill implement impra-.·ements on an ongoing b:lsis wi1hin the fr<lmework of exis.ting budgets. Other mid-to-long range improvements will rno~t likely need to be pro£rarn~ed inlo the Capital lmprovement Program. Project thilt involve other public agencies and jurisdictions will require coordinJ.tion and outside fUi1ding. • .----~--. 1 I , , i I 4 I • - AITACHMENT 5 cm'/SCHOOL PEDES'rRL>C'i SAFETI" STUDY STl;DY PROCESS ~"'D T1~IEL!NE DRAFT 1. Step 1: Define Scope of Study (3·4 weeks) Solicit views and ideas from the City/School Safety Cornmi::!ee and PAUSD :-epresentatives; fonn'J]ate a preferred appraa..::h tn study Present various approaches with comment~ to the City/School Liaison Committee Decision by City Council on study apprL'<J.ch 2. Step 2: Deve-lop ~pe-or Services and Request ror Proposals (3-4 weeks) Approval of Budget Amendment Ordinance by City Council Preparation of Request far Propo~(lis 3. Step 3: Con:.ultant Selection Process (11·14 weeks) Issue Letters of Intent Send out Request for Proposals to consu1tan:s. re~ponding to Leiter of Inrent Ev~.luate proposals Formation of Selection Advisory Committee Consultant Inte[\.'ie'.lw'S by Selection Advisory Commitlee Referral of Consultant Selection to FinD.nce Commiaee Negotiation of Contract Award of Contract by City Co·unsi1 4. St~p 4: Cno:duct Actual Stud)' (3-8 months) 1be content of the study would -:0110\'1-' th~ outline on the pr~~,.::dlrig pa.ge. T:'le time required to complete consultant ,"",ork ..... m Y<:.ry according: to the scope of .... iork. - Approach Cost Estimat'! I Time F~me Meadow/Charleston Corridors $20,000-S30,OOO 3·4 months - Major Streets Corridors $50,000·$60,000 5·6 months '--- Comprehensive Ciryv.ide Study $80,000·$90,000 6-8 months -- Genenll Notes 1. Rllte of City/School Traffic Safety Committee The City.!Schoo! Traffic Safety Commiltee wili be iTlvc·lved and serve as an ad ... isOi)' comI'!'linee throughout the study prxess, In trois role, the ccmmiHee could maintain its existing structure, designate a sUbc.omnlittee to w:)rk with City staff, or expand i~ membership on a temporary basis to include represen!a!ives from all interested schoois. 2. Inyoh'ement or Frh'ate Schools Students attending private schools may use many of the same routes 8.'i students in the PAUSD. Represeiltatives from private Echools CQuld be invited to p~rticipate in the study as part of the advisC'l')' committee or in some other ..... '01). • \. •