City of Lawrence

Traffic Safety Commission Agenda

June 5, 2006-7:30 PM

City Commission Room-City Hall

 

MEMBERS:  John Ziegelmeyer Jr., Chair, David Hamby, Vice-Chair, Carol Bowen, Caroljean Brune, Paul Graves, Robert Hagen, Richard Heckler, Ken Miller and Jim Woods.

 

 

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 1:         Review and approve the minutes of the Traffic Safety Commission meeting, May 1, 2006.

 

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 2:         Consider request for an ADULT CROSSING GUARD at the intersection of George Williams Way and Harvard Road.

 

                             Facts:

 

1.     The City’s School Crossing Control Policy states that an ADULT CROSSING GUARD may be provided at an unprotected marked crosswalk if the average number of students exceeds 40 and the available safe gaps in the traffic is 1.0-1.5 per minute.

2.     A traffic study conducted May 9,16 and 18, found an average of over 41 students using the crossing during the afternoon crossing period with four of the six five-minute time periods having less than 1.5 safe gaps per minute.

 

ACTION:  Provide recommendation to the City Commission.

 

 

 

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 3:         Consider an ordinance prohibiting the use of wireless communication devices by drivers during the operation of motor vehicles.

 

                             Facts:

 

1.     At the October 3, 2005, Traffic Safety Commission meeting, the Commission received a request to prohibit the use of cell phones while driving.

2.     The commission requested that the Legal Department investigate the feasibility of such an ordinance.

3.     At the May 1, 2006, Traffic Safety Commission meeting, the commission discussed the proposed ordinance; the item was tabled and the commission requested that the Legal Department prepare an ordinance prohibiting the use of wireless communication devices by all drivers during the operation of motor vehicles, with appropriate exceptions.

 

ACTION:  Provide recommendation to the City Commission.

 

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 4:         Consider an ordinance establishing an additional fine for a person who commits an act of inattentive driving while using a wireless communication device.

 

                             Facts:

 

1.     This ordinance was presented at the May 1, 2006, Traffic Safety Commission meeting

2.     A motion to recommend approval of the ordinance failed on a 3-3 vote and then was tabled on a 6-0 vote pending receipt of the ordinance in Item 2 above.

 

ACTION:  Provide recommendation to the City Commission.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 5:         Consider an ordinance establishing SPEED LIMITS on West 6th Street.

 

                             Facts:

 

1.     West 6th Street was recently reconstructed and widened between Folks Road and the West City Limits.

2.     Traffic studies conducted by the Kansas Department of Transportation Bureau of Traffic Engineering indicated that the appropriate speed limit for the area between Fire Station No. 3 and the West City Limits is 45mph.

3.     In order to simplify the city ordinance and signing, it is recommended that the speed limit change from 45mph to 40 mph at Monterey Way.

 

ACTION:  Provide recommendation to the City Commission.

 

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 6:         Public Comment.

 

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 7:         Commission Items.

 

                            

 

 

ITEM NO. 8:         Miscellaneous.

 

                             Receive minutes of the Pedestrian Advisory Sub-committee dated April 20, 2006.

 

                             Receive minutes of the Pedestrian Advisory Sub-committee dated May 18, 2006.

 

                             City Commission action on previous recommendations:

 

Concurred with the recommendation to establish NO PARKING along the west side of Stewart Avenue from 19th Street, south 500 feet;

 

Concurred with the recommendation to establish NO PARKING along the south side of 9th Street between New Jersey Street and Pennsylvania Street;

 

And, concurred with the recommendation to install STOP LINES on each approach to the intersection of 9th Street & Connecticut Street.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City of Lawrence

Traffic Safety Commission

June 5, 2006 Minutes

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:  John Ziegelmeyer, Jr., Chair, David Hamby, Vice-Chair, Carol Bowen, Caroljean Brune, Paul Graves, Robert Hagen, Richard Heckler, Ken Miller and Jim Woods.

 

MEMBERS ABSENT:  None.

 

STAFF PRESENT:  David Woosley, Public Works Department; Tracy Russell, Police Department; Scott Miller, Legal Department.

 

 

 

Chair John Ziegelmeyer, Jr. called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. in the City Commission Room in City Hall.

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 1:

 

Review and approve the minutes of the Traffic Safety Commission meeting, May 1, 2006.

 

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAMBY, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BOWEN, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING, May 1, 2006; THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0-3 (Brune, Graves, Miller).

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 2:

 

Consider request for an ADULT CROSSING GUARD at the intersection of George Williams Way and Harvard Road.

 

David Woosley reviewed the information provided in the staff report.

 

Paula Pepin, 1109 Stoneridge Drive, President of the Langston Hughes Site Council:  I am representing the school principal, teachers and parents; there is a lot of support for a crossing guard; George Williams Way is going to be a major thoroughfare; there is a lot of traffic at all times and there is a lot of construction traffic; parents want their kids to be able to walk or bike to school; a lot of them will allow that if there is a crossing guard; there will be no bussing to the school from south of 6th Street or west of Wakarusa Drive now that the roadways in this area are open to traffic.

 

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER GRAVES, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BRUNE, TO RECOMMEND ESTABLISHING AN ADULT CROSSING GUARD AT THE INTERSECTION OF GEORGE WILLIAMS WAY & HARVARD ROAD; THE MOTION CARRIED 9-0.

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 5:

 

Consider an ordinance establishing SPEED LIMITS on West 6th Street.

 

David Woosley reviewed the information provided in the staff report.

 

Commissioner Miller asked what the 85th percentile speed was in this area; Woosley advised that KDOT studies showed it at approximately 48-49mph.

 

Commissioner Miller asked what would happen if the speed limit were set artificially low; Woosley advised that there would likely be a high percentage of violators and possibly an increase in crashes due to higher speed differentials.

 

Greg Robinson, 3116 Trail Road:  The speeds have been kept artificially low due to targeted enforcement in the area; I suggest the speed limit should be 55mph west of Wakarusa since it is a 4-lane divided highway.

 

Commissioner Hamby asked if KDOT recommended 45mph west of Wakarusa; Woosley advised that was correct.

 

Commissioner Miller asked when another KDOT study could be performed; Woosley advised that they usually review all speed limits on state highways every two years.

 

Commissioner Brune:  I think 45mph is appropriate for the roadway.

 

Commissioner Heckler:  Considering the development in the area that is on the table, I don’t think the speed limit should be more than 45mph.

 

Michael Clover, 3213 Trail Road:  The speed limit should go back to what it was before since sight lines have been improved.

 

 

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WOODS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MILLER, TO RECOMMEND ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF KDOT FOR ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS ON WEST 6TH STREET; THE MOTION CARRIED 9-0.

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 3:

 

Consider an ordinance prohibiting the use of wireless communication devices by drivers during the operation of motor vehicles.

 

David Woosley reviewed the information provided in the staff report and distributed several e-mail’s that had been received on the subject.

 

Richard Williams:  I am a small business owner in this town; I do millions of dollars of business on my cell phone driving around the streets of Lawrence every day; I’ve been using this phone for years and I’ve never had an accident based upon my cell phone; if we have an accident, we get cited; we don’t need another regulation; people can be distracted by many things, targeting cell phone is wrong; as a small business owner, this phone is my livelihood; the police department has more important things to do than to worry about if I’m talking on my cell phone while driving; I request that you deny this request.

 

Robert Lewis:  If Lawrence wants to kill economic development, ban cell phones; bio-technology will not come to this community; you can’t regulate cell phones at night like during the day because you can’t be seen, that’s discrimination.

 

Drewsilla Asher:  I do not own a cell phone; cops don’t enforce the ordinances we have, why would they pull someone over for talking on a cell phone; who determines what an emergency is; what about CB’s; what about utility workers and city workers; if you ban cell phones, you need to ban all distractions, you can’t discriminate.

 

Greg Robinson, 3116 Trail Road:  Something that’s lost in all this emotion is “where’s the data;” I haven’t seen any data; how many cell phone accidents occurred in 2005, in 2004, what about this year; there has to be data to support an ordinance like this.

 

Louise Pennewell:  I’ve had a cell phone for 15 years, when the phone rings, your first thought is “that could be urgent;” if someone pulls over to answer the phone, that could be more distracting than if they answered it while driving; what’s next, smoking while driving?

 

Greg Thompson, 737 Maine Street, read a prepared statement, provided a copy of a study by the University of North Carolina and a pamphlet from AAA (all attached).

 

Michael Clover, 3213 Trail Road:  Creating a ban on cell phone use in our cars is taking away our personal responsibilities; I drive a semi daily, I know when I can get on a cell phone and when I can’t; I know what my limitations are.

 

Mark Cline:  I’m concerned whether we will keep kindergartener’s on scooters alive; I’m an opponent of such a ban, our focus needs to be on the current problems that exist; the drivers are getting worse and worse and worse in Lawrence.

 

Patrick Fucik, Director of Government Affairs, Sprint Nextel:  Driver safety should be everybody’s primary focus no matter what they are doing in their vehicle; one of the biggest benefits is from education; education is the key, not legislating; we are now primarily a wireless company and legislation that takes a big bite out of our pocket concerns us; it would be more important to enforce existing laws about reckless driving than adding new ones.  Fucik also provided a Sprint Fact Sheet (attached).

 

Beth Canuteson, Cingular Wireless:  We are regulated at the federal level, not the state level, so it will be very difficult for Lawrence residents coming into town and the rules suddenly change; there are several state highways that go through town and I don’t think you can have city ordinances that pertain to them; there should be one rule, not patchwork city by city; people think of wireless phones as a safety device, most buy a cell phone for safety purposes; there are only three states and two major cities that have banned hand-held cell phones, none have considered a complete ban; Kansas does track wireless phone use in accidents, it’s 0.4% where wireless phones are a contributing factor in accidents and 0.2% where they are a causal factor.

 

Patrick Fucik:  A November 2005 study by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration found cell phones number 8 out of 9 distractions that cause accidents; we would be willing to work with any community on education of drivers.

 

Paul Atchley, Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of Kansas:  On my way to work today, a woman in front of me ran off the road more than 10 times and as I passed her, I noticed her hanging up her cell phone; yesterday, an 8-year-old was hit on Massachusetts by a driver on a cell phone; this illustrates that while cell phones can be used safely in isolated incidents, the number of minutes being spent on cell phones is increasing and the data indicate that they are dangerous; a recent study by North Carolina found cell phones to be the number one distraction to drivers and the number one threat to driver safety; all the data show that cell phones are at least as dangerous as driving drunk at the .08 level and another study showed that drunk drivers drove better than drivers on a cell phone; I would encourage the commission to think about the real issue, this is the TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION, which determines whether we need to have regulations to maintain safe streets.

 

 

Bob Lewis, W 22nd Terrace:  I encourage the cell phone companies to launch a nation-wide television campaign advising DON’T USE YOUR CELL PHONE AND DRIVE; the only kind of data I can give you is my private data from driving around Lawrence, and I would say over the past 6 months, 80% of the near accidents I have had have involved someone occupied with a cell phone in their car; I urge you to consider the ordinance for private vehicles.

 

Bruce Liddel, 901 Randall Road:  I believe safe operation of communication devices is possible through education; I have a lot of questions about what the proposed ordinance really says is legal and what’s not legal; is a pager legal?; what does operate mean?; will enforcement of the ordinance be primary or secondary?; will satellite radio be legal?; how do you know in advance whether answering a call is an emergency or not?; would KC SCOUT be legal?; what about weather spotters?; what about ONSTAR?; what about two-way radios and amateur radio operators?; to be respected by the public, a regulation needs to be uniformly enforced and I’m not sure this ordinance can be.

 

Tanya Kulaga, 737 Maine Street:  I’m a realtor and this would hugely affect my business; if I’m not on my cell phone in between showing of houses, how will I conduct my business?  I will lose business; my 8-year-old daughter is a concern, there have been times when showing houses that the school has called to have me pick her up due to illness; I do stop talking when there is something going on in front of me and I am always looking out for other drivers on cell phones that may not be paying attention; it’s more likely that I would crash while reaching down to scratch my toe or getting gum out of my purse than while talking on my cell phone.

 

Commissioner Woods:  If this passes, will we have to put up signs as you enter town?  Woosley advised that the Legal Department would have to determine that.

 

Commissioner Hamby:  Is there an ordinance that pertains to distracted driving?  Officer Russell advised that there was not.

 

Commissioner Hagen:  We do not have any adequate statistics on infractions caused by cell phone use.

 

Commissioner Hagen asked if additional police officers would be needed; Scott Miller advised that it would probably take additional officers to provide sufficient enforcement to make a difference by increasing safety or decreasing accident rates.

 

Commissioner Brune:  I was struck by the individual that pointed out that we are the Traffic SAFETY Commission and charged with making decisions to improve safety; we don’t debate the merits of commerce or personal responsibility; in my mind, I believe that cell phone usage by a driver is a hazard that I would like to see banned in the City of Lawrence.

Commissioner Hagen:  I’m convinced that cell phone use is a problem, but I’m concerned that this ordinance will not address the problem effectively because of enforceability and dependency of businesses.

 

Commissioner Miller:  The biggest problem I have is that the safety problem is anecdotal; the analysis of the NHTSA study is yet to come; there have not been enough studies that show that using a cell phone is going to cause an accident.

 

Commissioner Bowen:  Enforcement is something we deal with no matter what the ordinances are; we can only enforce our speed limits when there is someone around to do it, but we still have to try.  We do have to address safety.  Most people I have talked to think that it is a problem.

 

Commissioner Heckler:  I don’t see how this could be enforced any more than running red lights or driving drunk, you can only do the best you can do, you can’t expect any more than that; I would suggest that a large enough fine be set to support the enforcement.

 

Commissioner Graves:  I agree that our primary mission is traffic safety and this would send an important message that safety is more important then personal convenience or commerce.

 

Commissioner Ziegelmeyer:  I can’t be supportive of an all-out ban on cell phones because of enforcement, particularly hands-free; most people I have talked with think this is a bad ordinance.

 

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRUNE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER GRAVES, TO RECOMMEND ESTABLISHING AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE USE OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICES BY DRIVERS DURING THE OPERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES; THE MOTION FAILED 4-5 (Hagen, Hamby, Miller, Woods, Ziegelmeyer: enforceability, different way to approach it, more research is needed).

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 4:

 

Consider an ordinance establishing an additional fine for a person who commits an act of inattentive driving while using a wireless communication device.

 

David Woosley reviewed the information provided in the staff report.

 

Richard Williams:  If we already have a law on the books that says we can be cited, what in the world is the point of putting an additional charge on one you’ve already got?  What about putting on make-up, eating a cheeseburger or drinking coffee?

 

Beth Canuteson, Cingular Wireless:  Singling out one action of inattentive driving will skew crash statistics data; we would like to see accurate data, so increase the fine for all inattentive driving, start keeping accurate data and lets see where it gets us.

 

Greg Thompson, 737 Maine Street:  I think this is potentially a good route, but I’m not sure a fine is the way to go; I think you need to use education; I don’t think that people realize that if they speak on a cell phone at inappropriate times they have the potential of injuring people; if you’re distracted while you’re driving, you should be forced to take some sort of educational course to explain why that’s bad.

 

Michael Clover, 3213 Trail Road:  My viewpoint is that this would not necessarily create a safer environment for driving; instead of fining them, make them pay for an educational course.

 

Louise Pennewell:  I think this should be attached to the careless driving ordinance instead of the distracted driving ordinance, and should pertain to anything distracting the driver.

 

Commissioner Hagen:  I don’t think its ideal, but I think it’s the best we can do as a first step.

 

Commissioner Brune asked that if this ordinance is approved, that a report on the number of citations be provided six months after implementation.

 

Commissioner Ziegelmeyer:  I think I like the educational component more than the fine issue.

 

Commissioner Bowen:  If we are right and there are sufficient citations, perhaps the police department could then develop a brochure on the subject.  I think we should mention both the need to collect the data and the need to do something about education.

 

Commissioner Woods:  I guess I have a problem singling out the cell phones.

 

Commissioner Hagen:  There is something very different about the conversations, they fool people into thinking they are paying attention; most other distractions are very brief, while conversations can last for a very long time.

 

 

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER HAGEN, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BOWEN, TO RECOMMEND ESTABLISHING AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING AN ADDITIONAL FINE FOR A PERSON WHO COMMITS AN ACT OF INATTENTIVE DRIVING WHILE USING A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION DEVICE; THE MOTION CARRIED 6-3 (Heckler; Woods; Ziegelmeyer:  hoping for a more preventive action, singling out cell phones).

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 6:

 

Public Comment.

 

Sohel Khan, 206-S Windsor Place:  When I leave for work at 6:15 in the morning, there is very little traffic on 23rd Street and most people drive about 45mph;  I think it would be a good idea to increase the speed limit on 23rd Street from Clinton Parkway to K-10 until 7am in the morning so that we can go faster to Kansas City.

 

Greg Thompson, 737 Maine Street:  AAA has a brochure on distracted driving (attached) which may be of use for educational purposes.

 

The speed limit on Harper Street should be lowered because of Kennedy School; there is a beacon, but it doesn’t come on until 5 minutes before school starts.  Woosley advised that is should start flashing 45 minutes before school, staff will check it out to make sure it is operating properly.

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 7:

 

Commission items:

 

Election of Chair and Vice-Chair:

 

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER ZIEGELMEYER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BOWEN, TO ELECT DAVID HAMBY CHAIR FOR THE NEXT YEAR; THE MOTION CARRIED 8-0-1 (Hamby).

 

MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BRUNE, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HECKLER, TO ELECT CAROL BOWEN VICE-CHAIR FOR THE NEXT YEAR; THE MOTION CARRIED 8-0-1 (Bowen).

 

 

 

ITEM NO. 8:

 

Miscellaneous:

 

The Commission acknowledged receipt of the minutes of the Pedestrian Advisory Sub-committee dated 20 April 2006 and 18 May 2006.

 

Commissioner Woods advised that he had received concerns about the increase in emergency runs down Ousdahl Road since the opening of the new fire station and the conflicts with school children, KU foot traffic and school buses.

 

 

 

The meeting adjourned at 10:45 P.M.

 

 

 

The next scheduled meeting of the Traffic Safety Commission, if needed, will be Monday, July 10, 2006, in lieu of July 3.

 

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

David E. Woosley

Transportation/Traffic Engineer