HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - Citizens Transportation Advisory Commission - Meeting Date: 10/2/2014 CITY OF GLENDALE
CITIZENS TRANSPORTATION OVERSIGHT COMMISSION
5850 W. GLENDALE AVENUE
GLENDALE, ARIZONA 85301
OCTOBER 2, 2014
6:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: James Grose, Vice Chair
Jennifer Cameron
John Ferguson
Judith Padia
Thomas Schmitt
Joyce Stribling
Gerald Woodman
MEMBERS ABSENT: Jeff McAffee
Kevin Frei
William Sheldon, Chair
OTHERS PRESENT: Purab Adabala, Senior Transportation Analyst
Debbie Albert, Transportation Engineer
Megan Casey, Valley Metro
Bob Darr, Transportation Planning Manger
Matt Dudley, Transit Manager
Erik Elias, Management Assistant
Allan Galicia, ITS Analyst
Howard May, Citizen
Jennifer Pyne,Valley Metro
I. CALL TO ORDER
Vice-Chair Grose called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Commissioner Schmitt motioned to approve the September 4, 2014, meeting minutes as
written. Commissioner Stribling made the second. The motion carried 7—0.
III. CALL TO THE AUDIENCE
No comments.
IV. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Commissioner Stribling motioned to approve the October 2, 2014, agenda as presented.
Commissioner Woodman made the second. The motion carried 7- 0
1
V. PUBLIC INPUT—COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF
Commissioner Schmitt commented that it was important that for city-owned properties in the downtown
area, the right-of-way necessary for high capacity transit should be designated before selling. Ms. Albert
stated that would be further addressed in tonight's presentations.
VI. MANAGER'S REPORT
Ms. Albert reviewed most recent GO Transportation Program activities, noting that the site for the park-
and-ride facility tentatively is going to be located on vacant land on the west side of the Loop 101 and
north of Union Hills Drive. Ms. Albert mentioned that appraisals were underway for this potential site.
Ms. Albert also said that the potential transit center is to be located at the Arrowhead Mall and that staff is
working with the Mall management company. Ms. Albert added that citizens seemed most interested in
an area that would provide good pedestrian and bike access.
VII. TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING
Ms. Albert introduced Mr. Galicia, ITS Analyst, who provided a presentation on traffic signal timing,
noting the turning signals and timing at the intersections of:
83rd Avenue and Bell Road
79th Avenue and Bell Road
77th Avenue and Bell Road
75th Avenue and Bell Road
73rd Avenue and Bell Road
69th Avenue and Bell Road
67th Avenue and Bell Road
Mr. Galicia noted that these are all crucial intersections that would determine the flow of traffic across
Bell Road, one of the most heavily travelled corridors in the state. Mr. Galicia also reported that typical
signal cycle lengths are 90 to 135 seconds and to allow for maximum green time should the Lead/Lag
system combination be followed.
Commissioner Schmitt inquired about the purpose of the flashing yellow arrow and what direction it
conveys to drivers. Mr. Galicia responded that flashing yellow arrows are another indication for the
permissive phase.
Commissioner Schmitt expressed a concern over making people wait needlessly to make a left turn. Mr.
Galicia noted that reduced delay is an advantage of flashing yellow arrows.
Commissioner Schmitt noted that the AZTech Project years ago had intended to coordinate the Bell Road
traffic signals for better traffic flow and inquired if this project was ever completed.
Mr. Galicia noted that Peoria, Glendale, MCDOT and ADOT meet on a regular basis to coordinate efforts
to provide for best traffic operations on the Bell Road corridor. Mr. Galicia added that the
implementation of Lead/Lag at 75th3 77th, 79th and 83rd doubles the ability of catching the subsequent
lights green on Bell Road.
2
Commissioner Stribling noted that sometimes a driver will lose seconds due to inattention, which causes
delay for the subsequent lights.
Mr. Galicia stated that the Connected Vehicle Concept was set for testing regarding talking vehicles, that
communicate with each other via onboard computers, and the effect on the signals sometime in the near
future. He added that the new technology in cars was designed to cut down on crashes. She noted that a
federal mandate required new cars to have short wave communication capability in the future.
Commissioner Stribling asked about how this would work with a mixed fleet of newer equipped vehicles
and other vehicles. Mr. Galicia stated that once the new and advanced cars were on the road, older cars
would need to adhere to signals as always.
Mr. Galicia stated that Glendale's technology would run far ahead of many other cities' since the
infrastructure for the new cars was already in place. He noted that the City had also invested in Bluetooth
and continued fiber optic to all locations and TMC's, with sensors on the road. Mr. Galicia believed this
system would improve traffic and reduce accidents on Bell Road.
Vice-Chair Grose asked about the difference between connected vehicle technology and adaptive signals.
Mr. Galicia explained that they are different. Connected vehicles use technology on the vehicle as well as
the roadside, while adaptive signals use sensors in the roadway to adjust signal timing based on demand.
The downside is that you lose progression of traffic signals.
VII. WEST PHOENIX/CENTRAL GLENDALE TRANSIT CORRIDOR STUDY
Ms. Jennifer Pyne, Project Manager, Valley Metro, presented the following highlights of the West
Phoenix/Central Glendale Transit Corridor Study:
• Gave the Citizens Transportation Oversight Commission an update a year ago
• Ridership on Light Rail and Bus equaled about 70,000,000 passengers a year (14,000,000 on the
Light Rail alone)
• Exceeded expectations (now at 20-year forecast)
• Development along Central Phoenix East Valley Light Rail corridor estimated at $6.9 billion
o 16,500 Residential Units
o 13M sq. ft. commercial
o 3,500+hotel rooms
• Proposed future transit possibilities to connect 19th Avenue and downtown Glendale
• Background (Non-federal funding):
o 2000:Phoenix Transit Tax (T-2000)
o 2001: Glendale Onboard Program (1/2-Cent Transportation Sales Tax)
o 2004: Proposition 400 (Regional Sales Tax)
• Purpose:
o Improve Mobility, Connect to existing Valley Metro light rail, Support local planning
priorities
• Timeline:
o Planning(current phase) 2013 —2015
o Project Development 2018—2020
o Final Design 2020—2022
3
o Construction 2022—2025
o Operations 2026
• Goal of Planning Study: Develop a recommendation:
1. What type of transit?
2. Where to locate the route?
• Study Area encompasses Northern to Camelback Road and the 19th Avenue to 67th Avenue:
• Study Process:
o Purpose: Identify routes that meet purpose
o Level I: Route and Connections
o Level 2: Type and Route: what types of transit are best for the study area
o Level 3: Types and Route: How do the different types of transit and route combinations
compare
o Recommendation: Which type of transit and route are best?
o Public input throughout process
o Fewer alignment options and more detailed analysis will occur over time
• Level I Route Alternatives (19th Avenue to 59th Avenue and Northern Avenue to Camelback
Road):
o Bethany Home Rd/43rd Avenue
o Bethany Home Rd/Grand Avenue
o Camelback Rd/43rd Avenue
o Camelback Rd/Grand Avenue
o Glendale Avenue
o Northern Avenue/43rd Avenue
• Level II Route Alternatives (19th Avenue to Glendale Avenue and Camelback to 59th Avenue):
o Bethany Home Rd/43rd Avenue
o Bethany Home Rd/Grand Avenue
o Camelback Road/43rd Avenue
o Camelback Road/Grand Avenue
o Glendale Avenue
• Types of Transit:
o Light Rail (higher speed)
• Dedicated traffic lanes
• $80-$130M per mile cost to build
• Capacity 200 per car(connect up to 3 cars)
o Bus Rapid Transit (higher speed)
• Dedicated or shared traffic lanes
• $40-$70M per mile cost to build
• Capacity 90 persons per bus
o Streetcar(moderate speed)
• Shared traffic lanes
• $40-60M per mile cost to build
• 160 persons per car
• Level II Analysis of Route and type of transit included encompass:
o Right-of-Way Impacts
o Existing Land Use—compatibility with transit
o Economic development potential
o Employment density
o Transit-dependent populations levels
4
o Location of activity centers
o Public input received to date
• Level II Results—routes for further study:
o Camelback Road/43rd Avenue
o Camelback Road/Grand Avenue/51st Avenue
o Glendale Avenue
• Level II Results—types of transit advanced for further study:
o Light Rail—high development potential, carries more riders, higher speed
o Bus Rapid Transit—lower cost,higher speed
• Removed from consideration:
o Streetcar—limits future expansion options
o Bethany Home Road/43rd Avenue and Bethany Home Road/Grand Avenue routes
o Camelback Road/Grand Avenue route modified to 51st Avenue based on technical results
and public input to date
• Study Schedule:
o Public Involvement Process (all quarters) 2013 —2015
o Data Collection 2nd quarter of 2013
o Develop Project Goals and Evaluation Criteria 2nd quarter of 2013
o Alternatives Evaluation 1St and 2nd quarters of 2013 —3rd and 4th quarters of 2014
o Final Definition of Preferred Alternative 3rd and 4th quarters of 2014
o Recommend and Adopt Locally (Preferred Alternative) 1st quarter of 2015
• Next Steps:
o Obtain and incorporate public input
o Begin Level III analysis
• Ridership potential
• Detailed right-of-way and traffic impacts
• Detailed cost estimates
• Downtown Glendale opportunities/constraints
o Develop'a recommended alternative (route and type) for Council action in Spring 2015
• Public Outreach Activities:
o Alhambra Village Planning Committee
o Cactus District Open House
o Canyon Corridor Neighborhood Alliance
o Centerline Business Alliance
o Christmas In July event
o Downtown Merchants Meeting
o First Southern Baptist Church of Glendale Seniors Group
o Glendale Chamber of Commerce
o Glendale Citizens Transportation Oversight Commission
o Glendale Family Bike Ride
o Glendale GAIN events
o Glendale Glitters
o Glendale Neighborhood Commission
o Glendale Planning Commission
o Glendale Rotary Club
o Glendale Serve Day
o Glendale Touch-A-Truck
o Glendale West Rotary Club
5
o Glendale Women's Club
o GO Glendale Open House
o Grand Canyon University Fall Festival
o Heart of Glendale
o Maryvale Village Planning Committee
o N.E.I.G.H.B.O.R. Alliance
o Ocotillo District Open House
o Ocotillo Glen Neighborhood Association
o Orangewood Elementary PTA
o Phoenix GAIN events
o Public Meetings (2)
o West Phoenix Revitalization Community Advisory Board
o West Plaza Neighborhood Association
Commissioner Schmitt wondered how LRT, whatever alignment is eventually selected, would get past
Grand Avenue and the Railroad. Ms. Pyne replied that this was still under a best options study. Ms. Pyne
agreed that it appeared that the bus or light rail would have to go over or under the area and then allow
time to circumvent upwards or downwards for traffic flow. Ms. Albert added, that this exact issue is one
of the reasons the downtown area is a special analysis area.
Vice-Chair Grose commented that I-17 could also present a challenge. Ms. Albert stated that I-17 was
definitely a consideration. Ms. Pyne added that a preliminary plan should be available soon. Ms. Pyne
added that most of the analysis should be completed by the end of 2014, with a route identified in 2015,
and an update to this Commission ready by spring of 2015. Ms. Pyne noted that the public outreach is
ongoing throughout the study process.
Commissioner Schmitt asked how difficult it might be to jump Grand Avenue and extend the transit to
Westgate. Mr. Matt Dudley, Transit Manager, replied that the preliminary financial estimate did not
include the transit extending to Westgate. Mr. Dudley indicated that he would be presenting additional
information next.
Mr. Dudley gave an overview presentation on transit funding, the Proposition 402 ballot language relative
to LRT, and future extensions of LRT to Westgate.
Mr. Dudley listed the three most common ways other cities fund such projects as:
1. Regulatory and Federal 500 - formerly Prop 400
2. Use of local and federal funds
3. Local funds 100% - less expensive initially but do not allow federal funds to defray any future
expansion costs
Mr. Dudley stated that a study would have to begin a few years in advance at a cost of approximately
$100,000 to $150,000.
Commissioner Schmitt asked if a public/private partnership had been considered and Mr. Dudley replied
in ,� ..� :�:_ - -=— _, — TOC meetings.
C, Westgate. Mr. Dudley
st: wr been discussed. This
in wide a higher federal
6
b ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 4 n.
° � z
rating, hence more eligibility for federal funds. However, under the current federal administration, the
Glendale downtown route might be the most strategic. Mr. Dudley added that Phoenix was re-prioritizing
their system and the Northwest Phase I would be complete in 2016.
Commissioner Schmitt noted that a dense business corridor, rather than an express, would provide more
opportunity for the light rail to pay for itself.
Commissioner Schmitt pointed out that having the transit underground might result in less expense for
right-of-way and utilities relocation. Mr. Dudley stated that it could be evaluated.
Commissioner Schmitt noted the importance of stations being above ground and visible. Ms. Pyne agreed,
noting that stations would be placed approximately one mile apart. Mr. Dudley added that it was
important for the stations to be placed strategically for economic development purposes.
Ms. Casey added that public input received to date came from a core area of those who were concerned
about business disruption in the Glendale downtown area. The focus was more about road width and
right-of-way, not the actual appearance of stations and the light rail or conveyance.
Commissioner Schmitt noted that the business impact at Westgate would be worth the effort if the
extension was financially feasible. Commissioner Schmitt asked if there was anything CTOC could do to
assist the process. Ms. Albert replied that CTOC would best assist by making recommendations to
Council to begin a study for the possibility.
Ms. Albert noted that on October 21, 2014, staff would present today's information to Council.
IX. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Commissioner Schmitt asked that a future agenda item be included to recommend a future LRT Extension
study.
X. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. by consensus.
The next regular meeting will be held on Thursday, November 6, 2014 at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall — Room
B3, 5850 W. Glendale Avenue.
Respectfully submitted,
//dird
William Sheldon, Chair
7