Public Safety Committee

ALBANY COMMON COUNCIL PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES Thomas Hoey, Chair Meeting called by: Thomas Hoey, Chair | Date: June 6, 2023 | Time: 5:37 PM Committee Members Present: Hoey, Chair ☒ | Balarin ☒ | Flynn ☒ | Frederick ☒ | Kimbrough ☒ Council Members Present: Zamer City Personnel Present: Howard Goebel (City Engineer), Jake Eisland (Research Counsel), Bryan Jimenez (Senior Legislative Aide) Invited Speakers: Jeffrey Pangburn (Creighton Manning Engineering) Public Comment: Dustin Moore, 332 State St, Albany, NY 12210 – Support for Local Law M of 2022 Edward Brennan, 389 McCormack Rd, Albany, NY 12208 – Support for Local Law M of 2022 Michael Campbell, 93 S Main Ave, Albany, NY 12208 – Opposition to Local Law M of 2022 Minutes Topic(s) of Discussion:  Local Law M of 2022 A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 359 (VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC) REDUCING THE SPEED LIMIT OF THE CITY OF ALBANY FROM 30 TO 25 MILES PER HOUR Discussion  The Chair called the meeting to order and introduced Local Law M of 2022 as the topic of discussion and called on Council Member Zamer to describe the legislation.  Council Member Zamer discussed the impetus behind the reduction in speed limits in the City of Albany to 25 MPH from 30 MPH.  Public comment was had. o Council Member Hoey asked Edward Brennan about statistics cited at previous meetings to which Edward Brennan responded that he does not have those on-hand. o Council Member Frederick cited a written comment which in turn cited statistics regarding decreased rates of serious injuries with decreased speeds. o Council Member Flynn spoke on driving as a privilege to which Michael Campbell responded.  City Engineer Goebel and Jeffrey Pangburn discussed the traffic study.  o Pangburn spoke further on the anticipated cost of replacing the signage ($300,000) and that Traffic Engineering suggests that the project be put out to bid. Pangburn spoke on the timelines thereof.  Council Member Hoey asked City Engineer Goebel if the city would be using the solar powered signs to advertise that the City roadway speed limit is changing to which City Engineer Goebel responded affirmatively.  Council Member Hoey asked if the City will be moving forward with the speed limit reduction project in school zones to which City Engineer Goebel responded affirmatively.  Council Member Flynn asked what the cost approximation is for the signage to which City Engineer responded that the cost would be about $300,000.  Council Member Flynn further asked if the signage would be produced in-house or if the city would contract out to which City Engineer Goebel responded that the intention is to contract out as there is a large quantity of signage to be replaced and an in-house process could take up to six months.  Council Member Flynn asked about the timelines to which City Engineer Goebel responded.  Council Member Flynn asked why there is a small portion of Central Avenue that would not be made 25 MPH to which Pangburn responded.  Council Member Balarin spoke on maintaining Central Avenue and Washington Avenue at 30 MPH and asked if there was any further consideration on excluding those avenues from the speed reduction to which Pangburn responded that the 5 MPH reduction would not lead to large increases in time costs along those corridors.  Council Member Zamer spoke in response to traffic concerns by citing information from New York City.  Council Member Frederick asked about the stretch of roadway between Old South Pearl Street and Binghamton Street to which Pangburn and City Engineer Goebel responded that it can be reviewed.  Council Member Hoey asked if neighboring localities are aware of the City of Albany's move towards reducing speed limits to which City Engineer Goebel responded. Pangburn stated that Bethlehem is reviewing reducing speeds on certain town streets.  Council Member Flynn asked about the speed limit changes across upper Washington Avenue to which Pangburn responded.  Council Member Balarin suggested that the firehouse along Washington Avenue by Brevator Street can be a marker for the speed reduction for travelers along that route.  Council Member Balarin further spoke on the efficacy of red light cameras in certain areas of his ward.  Council Member Zamer asked about the justification for exempting Washington Avenue along the Harriman and State University at Albany Campus to which Jeffrey responded that reducing the speed there further without adding street calming measures would not be effective and that a project at that scale would be expensive. Council Member Hoey further discussed street calming measures that were not implemented in the area.  Council Member Flynn offered the idea of a roundabout at the University at Albany to slow down traffic.  Council Member Frederick asked if exemptions are currently in the drafted legislation to which Research Counsel Eisland responded that they are not and that exemptions would need to be specified. Research Counsel Eisland further expounded on the requisite motion for moving the legislation through the committee appropriately with the proposed amendments.  Council Member Hoey and Frederick discussed additional changes to the exemptions. Council Member Frederick asked Council Member Zamer if the administration is aware and supportive of the legislation and if it will be taken into account for the fiscal year 2025 budget to which Council Member Zamer responded affirmatively.   Council Member Flynn moved to pass Local Law M of 2022 out of committee with a favorable recommendation with the addition of the following exemptions: o Old State Road o Washington Avenue (I-90 Exit 2 to Jermain Street) o Central Avenue (City line to Everett Road) o Everett Road o Port of Albany  S. Port Road  Normanskill Street  Smith Boulevard  Church Street (south of Broadway)  Dunnam Drive  Raft Street  Boat Street And Rapp Road and South Pearl Street regardless of the change, which President Pro Tempore Kimbrough seconded, and the motion passed by voice vote. Adjourn: The Chair adjourned the meeting at 6:46 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Bryan Jimenez Senior Legislative Aide Albany Common Council TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: January 10, 2024 To: William Trudeau, City of Albany Traffic Engineering From: Jeffrey Pangburn, PE, Mark Sargent, PE, Jesse Vogl, AICP cc: Re: Speed Limit Evaluation for City of Albany; CM Project No. 123-408 Executive Summary Changes in New York State legislation have enabled municipalities to set area wide speed limits as low as 25 mph compared to the previously permitted 30 mph minimum. The purpose of this evaluation is to review the posted speed limits on roadways under the City of Albany jurisdiction and make recommendations as to their appropriateness. This evaluation is based on a review of industry guidance for determining appropriate speed limits and an assessment of peer cities that have set a citywide speed limit less than 30 mph, in order to develop an approach to evaluating Albany City streets. Based on the guidance and peer studies, there is no consensus among practitioners concerning methods and techniques that should be used to select appropriate speed limits; however, the approaches generally fall into two categories: 1. Past Experience: These methods review historical and existing conditions data to determine operating speeds and motorist comfort on a given roadway. Based on the data and assessment of environmental conditions, speed limits are then set to align policy with existing conditions. 2. Desired Outcome: These methods identify policy goals, including improved safety and feasibility of compliance and enforcement, in order to set speed limits that align with desired outcomes. While each of the approaches have potential benefits and drawbacks, it is recommended that due to the urban nature of the City and importance of multi-modal mobility and safety, the City adopt a method of setting speed limits to achieve a desired outcome, rather than relying on past experience. Specifically, a default citywide speed limit of 25 mph with categorical exceptions is the most likely approach to satisfy the four criteria outlined by the FHWA and TRB to achieve a speed limit that is safe, enforceable, fair, and accepted. The following criteria should be considered to identify roadways that may warrant further study to determine whether or not they should be excluded from the default citywide speed limit: Functional Classification Individual roads and streets do not serve travel independently, but as part of a network of roads through which traffic moves. As such, roadways must balance competing functions such as access (the ability to reach a destination) and mobility (the ability to flow through an area). Roadways can serve these goals to varying extents and are defined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in terms of functional classification based on the extent to which they balance these needs. Roadways classified as arterials should be identified as part of the screening process and further evaluated based on their surroundings. Arterial Classification Similar to functional classification, arterial classification codes are used to categorize roads according to the level of travel mobility that they provide in the road network. This system uses a six level system with higher levels of classification representing roads that serve the greatest number of trips and the longest trips, while lower classifications represent neighborhood and residential access. Roadways classified as highways, major roads, and local roads should be identified as part of the screening process and further evaluated based on their surroundings. MEMORANDUM City of Albany Speed Limit Evaluation January 10, 2024 Parcel Density The built environment plays a significant role in determining the appropriateness of speed limits. Areas of denser development will have higher levels of activity, for both vehicles and pedestrians, when compared to more suburban and rural settings. Roadways in an area with parcel density greater than 700 parcels/square mile should be excluded from further evaluation based on the surrounding context and anticipated level of activity. These roadways would meet the criteria for the default citywide speed limit of 25 mph. School Locations Schools represent a unique land use with heightened roadway requirements due to the prevalence of children that often walk or bike to and from school. As such, the guidance identifies specific criteria for establishing school zones with posted speed limits below the default citywide speed limit. School locations should be identified and adjacent roads considered for a reduced speed limit of 20 mph. Engineering Judgement While the above criteria provide a solid foundation for determining the appropriateness of speed limits for City roadways, engineering judgement should also be applied when setting speed limits in order to account for context which may not be readily apparent based on the data and criteria. For instance, although the MUTCD does not specify a minimum segment length for which a speed limit should be held constant, short segments where the posted speed fluctuate are contrary to driver expectation and should be avoided. This is evident in other sections of the MUTCD which specify minimum distances for posting linear speed limits and maximum segment lengths for school zones. Therefore, segments must be greater than 1,320 feet long in order to be considered for exclusion for the citywide speed limit of 25 mph. Based on the above criteria, Creighton Manning recommends that the City adopt a citywide speed limit of 25 mph with categorical exceptions on the following roadways:  Old State Road  Rapp Road  Washington Avenue (I-90 Exit 2 to Jermain Street)  Central Avenue (City line to Everett Road)  Everett Road  S. Pearl Street (City line to Old S. Pearl Street)  Port of Albany o S. Port Road o Normanskill Street o Smith Boulevard o Church Street (south of Broadway) o Dunnam Drive o Raft Street o Boat Street The proposed speed limits for streets under City jurisdiction are shown in the attached map. 2 Winners Circle Page 5 of 2 518.446.0396 Albany, NY 12205 www.cmellp.com