1. Introductions and Overview of Town Center Traffic Calming Process/Traffic and Transportation Commission Process a. Following introductions, Chair Oberg provided an overview of the purpose of the Town Center Traffic Calming Process and the role of the Commission in the Process. b. Ms. Kelly provided further background history and detail of the Process, including the Traffic and Transportation Commission’s rationale for determining which suggested items were deemed “top priority”.
2. Traffic and Transportation Commission/Staff Overview of Traffic Calming Measures
a. Ms. Kelly provided attendees with copies of three spreadsheets: - original traffic calming measures suggested by steering committees;
- traffic calming measures suggested by steering committee members that were deemed not “top priority” by the Traffic and Transportation Commission; and c) traffic calming measures deemed “top priority” by the Traffic and Transportation Commission.
b. Ms. Kelly briefly described those items deemed “top priority”.
3. Discussion of Suggested Traffic Calming Measures
The following are points raised during discussion about those items deemed “top priority” by the Traffic and Transportation Commission, and the rank/prioritization of those items:
a. E. Crane: Advocate for item #19 (Mt. Vernon going downhill needs
some kind of speed control device and a measure to improve the sight distance problems). With construction of Richard Montgomery HS an increasing number of students are crossing in this vicinity. b. R. Resnick: Regarding item #6 (Place traffic signs at the I-270 interchanges that forbid truck traffic on Maryland Ave., W. Montgomery Ave., and Great Falls Road. Identify alternate routes for both truck traffic and other vehicular traffic. Promote use of these routes through distribution of information and updating of signage), where would diverted trucks would be diverted to? This may impact the Montrose community. c. B. Newton: Diversion of trucks may not impact Montrose if the route is designated as exiting from I-270, turn onto Tower Oaks Blvd., to Wootton Pkwy., to MD355. d. S. Klein: The larger issue for discussion is how goods are moved throughout the City. e. L. Marcus: In response to a question, there are City funds available for the projects listed as “top priority” other than a crossover from E. Rockville to Town Center and signage on I-270. f. B. Newton: With regard to truck traffic, Great Falls Rd. has a middle school. West Montgomery and Maryland Ave. are the only two safe crossings. Therefore we need a traffic light at Monument and Great Falls. Truck traffic along Great Falls is an issue. g. S. Klein: Would Monument and Great Falls be a good location for flashing beacon? h. D. Cain: Re: suggestion for beacon near Mannakee/Lynch, I don’t see a rationale for this location. It’s close to a school but not on a high speed street. i. A. Filemyr, E. Crane: Agreed, it’s meant to be at a place where speed is a problem. j. R. Resnick: The Commission created a policy in 2001 that there should be at least one beacon installed near schools in the City every year. k. B. Newton: Average speeds on Great Falls Road are 45-50 MPH. l. R. Resnick: Keep the flashing beacon as a top priority, but change text to indicate that it be “in the vicinity of a school” (rather than at Mannakee/Lynch) m. D. Cain: What’s a speed-activated stop light? n. L. Marcus: Detects speed over drivers a distance before the light. The light changes to red if speeding. Requires much sight distance prior to the light, plus distance for the driver to stop safely, and would require loop detection systems. o. A. Rosselle: Are the two gateways at I270Exit/Maryland Ave. and Great Falls Rd. and at W. Montgomery/Nelson St. funded by the City? p. L. Marcus: Yes, they are in the FY06 CIP. q. T. Broad: The crossover item is not only cost prohibitive but is an engineering nightmare. r. A. Levine: If it were possible, disregarding engineering, would you like to have it? s. L. Marcus: Would a crossover create concern about shifting traffic from one area to another, creating cut-through traffic? t. T. Broad: I think the original idea for the crossover was to try to decrease truck traffic in E. Rockville residential areas. u. S. Klein: I suggest three determinations for items on the list: - City-funded;
- Developer funded that we’d like to have done;
- Can’t do or are complete.
Discussion turned from comments on suggested items to how to prioritize the items. - R. Resnick: I still support the crossover as a top priority.
- L. Marcus: Would it make sense to appropriate CIP funds for a feasibility study?
- All: General consensus to change request for a crossover to feasibility study for a crossover.
Discussion about prioritizations. The following were deemed the “top priority” items:
- Feasibility study for a grade separation/crossover over MD355 to connect East Rockville to Town Center and alleviate cut-through and congestion in the neighborhood.
- Flashing beacon in the vicinity of Beall ES.
- Concrete sidewalks on Beall Ave. (Nelson to Lynch).
- A series of turn restrictions and Do Not Enter signs through West End.
- General traffic calming (device to be determined) near Baltimore Rd./Grandin Ave.
- Traffic circle at Stonestreet Ave. and Park Rd.
- Speed activated Stoplights on Maryland Ave., W. Montgomery Ave., and/or Great Falls Rd.
- Speed sensor sign to be rotated among locations on Maryland Ave.
- Speed control device and a measure to improve sight distance on Mt. Vernon Ave.
- Advocate to State Highway Administration to place traffic signs at the I-270 interchanges that prohibit truck traffic on Maryland Ave, W. Montgomery Ave., and Great Falls Rd. Identify alternate routes for both truck traffic and other vehicular traffic. Promote use of these routes through distribution of information and updating of signage.
4. Review and Approve July 2005 Minutes and August 2005 Notes a. Minutes and Notes were approved.
5. Staff Report and Updates a. Commissioners reviewed the weekly staff report. b. S. Klein reported that the illuminated crosswalk at Twinbrook Metro was not working. c. S. Klein requested that staff investigate the parking lot near Staples at Congressional North shopping center. He suggested a barrier, sign, or markings to deter peds from walking across the lot---and directing them to the crosswalk in the Staples parking lot.
6. Additional Discussion of Agenda Items/Other Items a. Chair Oberg inquired if any large developments were in the pipeline and if any would come before the Commission. Ms. Kelly stated that the Maryland Motors project may be coming soon. b. Ms. Kelly agreed to bring the list of current development projects to the Commission. c. Chair Oberg agreed to draft a memo to Mayor and Council regarding noise on Darnestown Road.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 P.M.
| 
