The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-03-2020 - Agenda Pkg - Adjournded Regular Mg (Joint Mtg with School Board)City Council and School Board City of Hermosa Beach Adjourned Meeting Agenda City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 MAYOR Mary Campbell MAYOR PRO TEM Justin Massey COUNCILMEMBERS Hany S. Fangary Michael Detoy Stacey Armato SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT Jennifer Cole SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS Margaret Bove-LaMonica Stephen McCall Barbara Zondiros Douglas Gardner Council Chambers7:00 PMMonday, February 3, 2020 All City Council and School Board meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND. You may access the agenda packet and stream the live meeting from the city website: www.hermosabeach.gov To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Assistive Listening Devices (ALD) will be available for check out at the meeting. If you require special assistance to participate in this meeting, you must call or submit your request in writing to the Office of the City Clerk at (310) 318-0203 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Submit Supplemental eComments in three easy steps: Note: Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information (i.e. phone numbers, addresses, etc) that you do not want to be published. 1. Go to the Agendas/Minutes/Video webpage and find the meeting you’d like to submit comments on. Click on the eComment button for your selected meeting. 2. Find the agenda item for which you would like to provide a comment. You can select a specific agenda item/project or provide general comments under the Oral/Written Communications item. 3. Sign in to your SpeakUp Hermosa Account or as a guest, enter your comment in the field provided, provide your name, and if applicable, attach files before submitting your comment. Public Participation Speaker Cards: If you wish to speak during Public Participation, please fill out a speaker card at the meeting. The purpose of the speaker card is to streamline and better organize our public comment process to ensure names of speakers are correctly recorded in the minutes and where appropriate, to provide contact information for staff follow-up. Page 1 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 2/4/2020 February 3, 2020City Council and School Board Adjourned Meeting Agenda 7:00 P.M. - JOINT MEETING AGENDA CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL ANNOUNCEMENTS APPROVAL OF AGENDA PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Although the City Council and School Board value your comments, the Brown Act generally prohibits the Council and Board from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda as a business item. The Council and Board may take action to schedule issues raised in oral communications for a future agenda. Comments from the public are limited to three minutes per speaker. REPORTS AND DISCUSSIONS 1.REPORT 20-0065 NORTH SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAFT PLAN INTRODUCTION (School District Superintendent Pat Escalante and Environmental Analyst Leeanne Singleton) 1. North School NTMP Draft 2. Study Session Draft Presentation 3. SUPPLEMENTAL eComments (submitted 02-03-20).pdf Attachments: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ADJOURNMENT Page 2 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 2/4/2020 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 20-0065 Honorable Mayor & Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Honorable President & Members of the Hermosa Beach City School District Board Study Session of February 3, 2020 NORTH SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAFT PLAN INTRODUCTION (School District Superintendent Pat Escalante and Environmental Analyst Leeanne Singleton) Background: The passage of the Measure S school bond in June 2016 created the Measure S School Facilities Project,which includes the reconstruction of North School and revitalization/modernization of the School District's two current schools.To comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),the School District prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)for the North School Reconstruction Project and took action to certify the Final EIR and approve the project on January 9, 2019. Following certification of the Final EIR by the School Board,the City and School District representatives met as a team to collaborate on the conditions to be included in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).On February 27,2019,the Memorandum of Understanding was approved by both the City Council and School Board memorializing the commitment of both parties to work together collaboratively to safely manage transportation,traffic,and student loading and unloading activities,primarily through the development of a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP)for the streets and neighborhood surrounding North School. As part of the MOU,the City and District agreed to form a stakeholder group that would share information and gather public input on relevant topics to be included in the NTMP.Over the last nine months,staff and the consulting team have collaborated in the evaluation of the study area and facilitation of a stakeholder working group and community workshops to inform the development of the NTMP.A draft of the NTMP has been prepared (Attachment 1)and it is timely to introduce the draft plan and present feedback from the stakeholder working group to the City Council,School Board,and the community for initial feedback and discussion ahead of formal action by the City Council and School Board in March 2020. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 1/29/2020Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 20-0065 Project Goals: The City of Hermosa Beach and the Hermosa Beach City School District sought the development of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan for the neighborhood surrounding North Elementary School to achieve the following goals: 1.Identify solutions that will enhance public safety and traffic flow at North School without causing delays in the school’s construction,which may include additional offsite loading and unloading zones on public property. 2.Maximize the efficient use of limited funds of the City and School District and leverage outside funding opportunities. 3.Utilize a collaborative process to incorporate City,School District,and community input on the design and operation of transportation facilities and traffic concerns. 4.Comply with the conditions set forth in the MOU and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the North School EIR. 5.Complete by March 31,2020,including adoption of plan by both the School Board and City Council. Study Session Agenda: The Joint Meeting format will allow staff and the consulting team to introduce the elements of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (Attachment 2),outline the next steps in the process,and provide an initial opportunity for School Board and City Council questions and discussion.The agenda for this topic includes: ·Purpose, Goals, & Process ·Stakeholder Working Group ·NTMP Recommendations ·Adaptive Management Program ·Study Next Steps & Discussion Discussion Questions: To help frame the discussion, staff is seeking initial input and feedback from the School Board, City Council, and the community on the following questions: 1.Do you think we have missed any categories of recommendations? 2.Which of the recommendations interest you most? 3.Do you have feedback or concerns about any of the recommendations? 4.Do you agree with the relative priorities identified for near- and long-term solutions? 5.Do you have recommendations that you’ve seen in/at other schools that you think may work well? City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 1/29/2020Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 20-0065 Next Steps: In order to realize the goals of the NTMP, a series of procedural steps is needed to move from recommendations to implementation. The proposed next steps and tentative dates are outlined below: ·Public Comment Period: Through February 28, 2020 ·Public Works Commission Review and Input: March 18, 2020 ·City Council Adoption: March 24, 2020 ·School Board Adoption: March 25, 2020 ·Coordination on Short-Term Recommendations: Spring + Summer 2020 ·Implementation of Short-Term Recommendations: Fall 2020 ·Adaptive Management Program Review: Spring 2021 + Annually Thereafter Attachments: 1.January 2020 Draft-North School Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 2.Study Session Presentation Slides City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 1/29/2020Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 1 acknowledgements NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH City Council Mary Campbell, Mayor Justin Massey, May Pro Tem Hany Fangary Michael Detoy Stacey Armato Staff Suja Lowenthal, City Manager Leeanne Singleton, Environmental Analyst HERMOSA BEACH CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Trustees Jennifer Cole, President Stephen McCall, Clerk Douglas Gardner Margaret Bove-LaMonica Barbara Zondiros Staff Pat Escalante, Superintendent NORTH SCHOOL NTMP STAKEHOLDER GROUP Lucy Brining Scott Davey Robert Fortunato Melyssa Guerry Samantha Kuhr Steve Moseley Steve Mullins Nikki Nance Steve Peterson Christine Shultz Ralph Spargo Peter Spragg FEHR AND PEERS TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS Steve Brown Rachel Neumann Melody Wu THE HERMOSA BEACH COMMUNITY The City of Hermosa Beach and Hermosa Beach City School District would like to thank the community for their interest and participation in this process. Your participation in this collaborative dialogue has led to the development of a comprehensive and coordinated plan to address public safety and traffic flow in and around the North School neighborhood and we are one step closer to fulfilling our collective community vision to provide exceptional local schools to the Hermosa Beach community. table of contents 4 Hermosa Beach 1 introduction 5 2 history 7 3 planning process 9 4 ntmp recommendations 11 5 implementation 23 6 adaptive management program 27 appendices 29 1 introduction NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 5 COMMUNITY CONTEXT The City of Hermosa Beach is located within the southwestern coastal portion of Los Angeles County in what is commonly referred to locally as the “South Bay” area. The City is bounded on the north by the City of Manhattan Beach, on the south by the City of Redondo Beach, on the east by the City of Redondo Beach and the City of Manhattan Beach, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean. The city limits for Hermosa Beach encompass a relatively small land area, approximately 1.4 square miles. School Configuration The Hermosa Beach City School District provides public education in the City of Hermosa Beach providing instruction for students in Kindergarten through eighth grade. High school age residents of Hermosa Beach attend Mira Costa High School or Redondo Union High School in Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach, respectively. In June 2016 the voters of Hermosa Beach passed Measure S and the Hermosa Beach City School District created the Measure S School Facilities Program which called for the reconstruction of North School and the revitalization/modernization of the School District's two current schools, to create a three-school district in which schools are organized by grade level. Safe Routes to School Network The Mobility Element of PLAN Hermosa, the General Plan for the City of Hermosa Beach identifies a proposed Safe Routes to School Network that, when implemented, connects each of the District’s three school campuses, a private school located in east Hermosa Beach, and the high schools located in the city’s neighboring jurisdictions. The intended safe routes to school network was developed based on input from parents of students through a 2016 survey and through collaboration between the City and School District to encourage students and parents that wish to walk or bike to and from school. The network is provided in Figure 1 and assists in identifying locations for crossing guards, assessing capital improvement needs, and evaluating safety and enforcement measures. WHAT IS A NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN? A Neighborhood Traffic Management Program or Plan (NTMP) is a community-based process that involves the collaboration of community members, transportation engineers, public safety professionals, and community planners to find solutions to traffic concerns on neighborhood streets within a defined area. The objective is to provide safe, comfortable streets and improve the quality of life in our neighborhoods by developing and implementing innovative and effective transportation solutions to make residential streets safer and more comfortable for everyone to use. This program provides community members the opportunity to not only voice their concerns regarding traffic related issues such as speeding, traffic collisions, and cut-through traffic, but also work to solve traffic related concerns by considering various traffic calming solutions. As options are considered, the surrounding street network must be carefully evaluated to avoid shifting impacts from one area to another. Strategies to address these issues generally come from a large toolbox of improvements that can be implemented include updating street signs, adding pavement markers and roadway striping, increased enforcement, and items such as traffic diverters and speed lumps and are tailored based on the strategies that are likely to be most effective in addressing the specific traffic concerns of the neighborhood. The NTMP process duration varies depending on the severity of the issues, size of the neighborhood study area, level of community engagement needed, and the types of improvements recommended. For less complex issues, traffic calming improvements may be implemented within a few months. For projects that require substantial design and construction, the process may take up to a year to develop and longer to implement. Once implemented, additional data is typically collected to compare pre and post implementation scenarios and determine whether the measures implemented are effectively addressing the concerns identified in the NTMP. This iterative process provides opportunities to refine and improve the solutions implemented either in the affected neighborhood or in other similar NTMP efforts. Figure 1 – Intended Safe Route to School Network 6 Hermosa Beach Figure 2 – North School Study Area STUDY AREA North Elementary School is located at 417 25th Street in the northern part of Hermosa Beach, north of 25th Street, east of Myrtle Avenue, south of 26th Street, and west of Valley Park. Morningside Drive dead- ends at the southeast edge of the site and picks up north of the site at the intersection of 26th Street. The streets directly adjacent to the school are narrow residential streets and the nearest arterial streets are Gould Avenue to the north and Valley Drive to the east. The Study Area for the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan includes the local streets immediately surrounding the school site and is generally bounded by Ardmore Dr to the east, 27th St/Gould Ave to the north, Manhattan Ave to the west, and 24th St to the south (with the intersection of Monterey Blvd and Park Blvd also included, as shown in Figure 2. NORTH SCHOOL PROJECT DESIGN The improvements at North School include construction of a two-story classroom and administration building (main building), multipurpose building, loading and parking areas, play areas, and associated school improvements. An asphalt playground will be developed between the two buildings, and a natural turf field will be installed in the eastern portion of the site; the field will be supported above the grade of the hillside by a retaining wall. A surface parking lot with 41 stalls will be developed in the western portion of the site, and vehicular access to the site was proposed from 25th and 26th Streets. North School is planned to serve the District’s 3rd and 4th grade students and is designed to accommodate a maximum enrollment of 510 students. While View School is under construction in 2021, North School is anticipated to accommodate the District’s 2nd, 3rd, and 4th grade students estimated at approximately 400 students in 2021. Vehicular access to the site will be from 25th street; pedestrian access would be from four access points: 25th Street with direct access from the proposed passenger loading area on 25th Street, 26th Street at the eastern perimeter of the parking lot with direct access from the proposed passenger loading area on Myrtle Avenue, 26th Street at the intersection of Morningside Drive, and end of the cul-de-sac on 26th Street in the southeast portion of the campus NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN GOALS The City of Hermosa Beach and the Hermosa Beach City School District sought the development of the Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan for the neighborhood surrounding North Elementary School to achieve the following goals: 1. Identify solutions that will enhance public safety and traffic flow at North School without causing delays in the school’s construction, which may include additional offsite loading and unloading zones on public property. 2. Maximize the efficient use of limited funds of the City and School District and leverages outside funding opportunities. 3. Utilize a collaborative process to incorporate City, School District, and community input on the design and operation of transportation facilities and traffic concerns. 4. Comply with the conditions set forth in the MOU and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the North School EIR. 5. Can be completed by March 31, 2020, including adoption of plan by both the School Board and City Council. 2 history NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 7 NORTH SCHOOL SITE HISTORY Historical maps show the project site developed as early as 1912. Two residential dwellings, including one that operated as a Baptist church, were on the western portion of the property. The dwellings eventually moved away as the school expanded. The main school building on 25th Street was constructed in 1924 after the City of Hermosa Beach passed a bond measure to build new grammar schools. In 1933, an earthquake with an epicenter in Long Beach damaged the building. Although the school reopened eight days after the earthquake, the building was restored in 1934. Two new buildings (kindergarten building and classroom building) were constructed in 1938/1939 with federal money under the New Deal Program. In 1958, the District constructed another kindergarten classroom and five-classroom building to house “Baby Boom” children. In the 1970s and ‘80s, the District experienced declining enrollment, and in 1984, North School was closed and leased to various public and private institutional entities until 2018. LONG RANGE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN The District completed a Long-Range Facilities Master Plan in June 2014 (2014 FMP). Based on feedback gathered from the FPAC, the 2014 FMP included four layouts to redevelop the North School site. All four options identified school parking along Morningside Drive at Gould Avenue. Option D of the 2014 FMP was selected as the preferred plan during the District’s 2014 Measure Q bond campaign. 2014 MEASURE Q BOND In 2014, the District placed Measure Q on the November 2014 ballot. Measure Q failed by 32 votes. It would have authorized the District to issue $54 million in bonds. With the loss of Measure Q, the District conducted a tracking poll and learned that the bond failed mainly because the Hermosa Beach community wanted to preserve the City’s limited open space; the community did not want the proposed school to encroach onto limited parkland. 2016 MEASURE S BOND With the information gathered from the tracking poll, the District conducted community envisioning workshops that ultimately resulted in two options to reconstruct the North School site within the former school’s general footprint. The new layouts were used as the preferred plans during the District’s June 2016 Measure S Bond. Measure S passed by 59.72 percent and includes $59 million dollars for facility improvements at all three District school sites. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PROJECT APPROVALS To comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the School District prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the North School Reconstruction Project and took action to certify the Final EIR and approve the project on January 9, 2019. Additional project approvals for certain elements of the project were required prior to construction commencing from: • California Department of Education, School Facilities and Transportation Services Division • California Department of General Services, Division of the State Architect • California Coastal Commission • Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board MOU AND NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN Following certification of the Final EIR by the School Board on January 9, 2019, the City and School District representatives met as a team frequently to collaborate on the conditions to be included in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). On February 27, 2019 the Memorandum of Understanding was approved by both the City Council and School Board memorializing the commitment of both parties to work together collaboratively to safely manage transportation, traffic, and student loading and unloading activities, primarily through the development of a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) for the streets and neighborhood surrounding North School. The Memorandum of Understanding between the City and District was identified as a mechanism to bring the two agencies together with the various interests of the students, parents, neighbors, and community through the creation of a stakeholder group. The stakeholder group role was established to share information and gather public input on relevant topics including: peak traffic conditions, speed, safety, sight distance, anticipated and proposed student loading, and parent or resident concerns that might deter walking and biking to school or use of certain routes to/from the project. Aerial View of North School Prior to 1933 Long Beach Earthquake NORTH SCHOOL 3 planning process NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 9 Beginning in summer 2019, the City of Hermosa Beach and Hermosa Beach City School District (HBCSD) embarked on a collaborative, iterative, and public process to develop the NTMP agreed upon in the MOU. The NTMP proactively addresses transportation issues and traffic safety around North School, focusing on safe student loading and unloading activities, and the spillover effects from those activities. Transportation planning firm, Fehr & Peers, facilitated the process and provided technical guidance throughout the process. The planning process (see Figure 3) included an evaluation of existing conditions, identification of issues and opportunities, creation of evaluation criteria to refine the recommendations and priorities, and ultimately development of the plan for review, adoption, and implementation. Each step in the process additionally involves various levels of community input and feedback to inform and refine the plan through an adaptive management program. EXISTING CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT The process was informed through the collection of new data on traffic and parking conditions in the vicinity of the school, including: daily traffic counts, identification of background traffic peaks, speed surveys, and an inventory and utilization assessment of street parking around Valley Park. Traffic Volume and Speeds Traffic counts and speed surveys were conducted on two weekdays of the same week (Tuesday, September 10 and Thursday, September 12). Traffic counts evaluated traffic volumes in 15-minute increments for a 24-hour period. Speed surveys identified the 85th percentile speed. They were collected at the following locations: • Gould St, from Morningside to Valley • Valley Drive, from Gould Avenue to 25th Street • Myrtle Avenue, from 26th Street to 25th Street • 25th Street, from Myrtle Avenue to 25th Street/Park Avenue Results from the data collection are shown in Figure 5. Parking Conditions Parking occupancy was collected on a weekday (Wednesday, September 11) during anticipated school operation hours. On-street and off-street parking occupancies were counted every half hour, between 7 AM to 2:30 PM at the following locations: • Gould Avenue, from Morningside Avenue to Valley Drive (on- and off-street) • Valley Drive, from Gould Avenue to 25th Street (on-street) • Kiwanis/Rotary Club Lot (off-street) • 25th Street, Myrtle Avenue to 25th Street/Park Avenue (on- street) Safe Routes to School Survey HBCSD parents were surveyed regarding their children’s mode of transportation to school, as well as the factors that affected their mode choice, including those factors which deter children from walking and/or biking to school. According to the 2019 Safe Routes to School survey from parents representing 340 students from Valley and View Schools, 87% of students live within one mile of school. On most days, 35% of school drop-off trips are by car, and similarly, 39% of school pick-up trips are by car. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT The process was shaped by a broad range of stakeholders, including the MOU Team, comprised of HBCSD school leadership, school board members, elected city officials, and city staff, and the Stakeholder Working Group, comprised of North School neighborhood residents, current and former HBCSD parents, and other Hermosa Beach residents who live adjacent to existing HBCSD schools. Public input to the process was solicited through two Community Workshops, as well as through social media and on the HBCSD and City websites. Throughout the process, other key stakeholders including the Hermosa Beach Police Department and the Department of Public Works. A regular series of meetings was scheduled throughout the 6-month NTMP development period. These included three meetings with the MOU Team, five meetings with the Stakeholder Working Group including one neighborhood walking tour, two Community Workshops, and working meetings with representatives from the Police Department and the Department of Public Works. Figure 3 – NTMP Planning Process Adaptive Management Program Community Engagement Existing Conditions Issues + Opportunities Evaluation Criteria Recommendations + Priorities Plan Development, Review + Adoption Plan Implementation + Monitoring 10 Hermosa Beach MOU Subcommittee The process kicked-off in July 2019 with a meeting of the full project team and members of the MOU Team. A brief site visit and walking tour of the North School neighborhood helped set the stage, and a productive first conversation led to an initial list of transportation issues and potential ideas for how to address those issues. The list of issues and ideas were mapped for ease of visual communication purposes. Community Workshops The first Community Workshop occurred at the end of October and members of the public were invited to participate. At the workshop, City and technical consultant staff introduced to attendees the idea categories and elements, then divided into small groups to allow for attendees to provide input. At the end of the workshop, a “dot” voting activity was conducted in which all attendees were able to vote their support for up to 10 of the ideas. Following the first Community Workshop, the project team synthesized all that they had heard over the course of the fall to develop an Evaluation Matrix. The Evaluation Matrix identified whether the idea had been previously studied in the North School EIR, feasibility, the type of benefits expected from each idea, whether the idea was intended for near-term implementation before the opening of North School, or for longer-term implementation at a later date depending on need and/or further technical evaluation, and whether the idea was supported by the community. In November, the Evaluation Matrix was vetted and refined through conversations with the MOU Team, the Stakeholder Working Group, the Police Department, and Public Works. Stakeholder support, feasibility, and implementation timeframe were updated where necessary, and a holistic package of improvements was agreed upon. This package of improvements was brought to the public for another round of input at the second Community Workshop, held in early December. Following the second Community Workshop, a final round of refinements was conducted through one more meeting each with the MOU Team and the Stakeholder Working Group. Stakeholder Working Group Through the end of the summer and into the beginning of fall, the initial list of transportation issues and ideas were more fully developed and categorized through in-depth discussions with the MOU Team and the Stakeholder Working Group. The Working Group participated in a walking tour, with members of the group who lived in the neighborhood providing particularly informative insights as to potential transportation challenges. Following the walking tour, the Stakeholder Working Group met to identify priorities and preferences as to which would be the most effective. STAKEHOLDER WORKING GROUP IDENTIFIED PRIORITIES Through the series of stakeholder meetings between September 2019 and January 2020, the stakeholder working group came to collectively identify a set of priorities for the NTMP. These priorities are identified below and have been integrated into the recommendation and implementation of this plan. 1. Monitoring Program • Pre and post North School (NS) data collection • On-going analysis for monitoring post NS construction • Additional actions or reductions based on post construction analysis 2. Onsite Loading/Unloading at North School 3. Bus or Trolley for All Three Schools 4. Kiwanis/Rotary Parking Lot • Loading and unloading configuration for parking lot • Crossing to Greenbelt with stoplight (similar to Valley School) • Pathway to NS from parking lot 5. Alternate Drop-off and Pick-up Locations • Hermosa Avenue @ 25th Street • Gould Avenue @ Valley Drive (West of Valley Drive) • Gould Avenue @ Ardmore Drive (East of Ardmore) • Valley Drive adjacent Valley Park • Other options pending monitoring analysis 6. Pedestrian and Bike Access Improvements (Physical) • Valley/Ardmore Corridor • Widen sidewalks on “Safe Routes to School” • Optional sidewalks on 24th St., 24th Pl., and 25th St. (for those interested) 7. Pedestrian and Bike Access Improvements (Programs) • Walking School Bus • Parent/Student incentive programs for walk, bike or bus 8. Pre and Post School Child Care Programs • Spread out loading and unloading periods 9. Traffic Calming • Crosswalks, speedbumps, signage, one-way streets • Crossing Guards, Traffic Officers COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 4 neighborhood traffic management plan recommendations NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 11 The Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) was a collaborative process to identify potential traffic problems on nearby residential streets and develop recommendations to manage those concerns accordingly. As part of the process, the City and School District formed a stakeholder group of residents that provided local knowledge and input on concerns such as: projected traffic volumes, speed, safety, student drop-off/pick-up, and other topics that might impact walking and bicycling to school. Recommendations were developed throughout the public outreach process and grouped into the following categories: • Trip Reduction • Drop-off and Pick-up • Pedestrian Accessibility and Safety • Traffic Safety and Calming • Other TRIP REDUCTION Increasing the number students who walk, bike, bus, and/or carpool can decrease congestion during school drop-off/pick-up times, reduce vehicle emissions, and increase overall physical activity and emotional well-being levels. Carpool and Bus or Trolley Programs Opportunities to develop formal and informal carpool programs and provide alternative transportation options such as a bus or trolley that serves all three school sites would help to alleviate vehicular congestion around the schools during drop-off/pick-up times. Safe Routes to School Programs Safe Routes to School strives to create a safe, convenient, and enjoyable opportunity for your children to walk or bike to and from school. There have been declines in the number of children walking and biking to schools, a nationwide increase in childhood obesity, and a lack of physical activity among children. While Hermosa Beach enjoys a relatively high rate of walking and biking to school participation, by continuing to implement safe routes for children to get to school, we hope to increase participation in these programs to reduce traffic strain on local streets around the schools and throughout the city. Successful Safe Routes to School Programs incorporate what is known as the six E’s: evaluation, education, encouragement, engineering, enforcement, and equity. 1. Evaluation of the school district and areas around the school assist in getting the program started. Surveys of parents and students serve as a great tool for collecting information about reasons for driving children instead of allowing them to walk or ride bikes. Surveys also help identify attributes of the program that would appeal to the students to make it an enjoyable experience. 2. Education of students, parents, school staff, and other community members is important to provide opportunities to learn about bicycle and pedestrian safety. Educational programs can also be offered about following the rules of the road when driving, walking, or riding a bike. 3. Encouragement from special events and programs help get students, parents, city officials, and school staff members involved in Safe Routes to School. Contests and challenges, within classrooms or schoolwide, often provide incentives for walking and riding bikes to and from school. 4. Engineers are needed after collecting data from surveys. The data identifies concerns about street infrastructures, such as street designs, intersections, signage, etc. Audits or walk- abouts can be organized for parents and police officers to identify problems that children may encounter and discover the shortest and safest route to/from school. 5. Enforcement of traffic laws in the vicinity of schools from local law enforcement officers is very important for the safety of children and other pedestrians. They also assist in enforcing proper walking and bicycling behaviors. This can also be done through implementing the use of crossing guards and student safety patrols around school. 6. Equity is another important component of Safe Routes to School, with the goal of providing a safe, active, and healthy environment for all income levels, ethnicities, backgrounds, etc. in the community. Safe Routes to School wants to allow access to everyone in the hopes of creating safe and equitable opportunities for children, families, and other community members. DROP-OFF/PICK-UP Getting students safely to and from school is one of the primary goals of the NTMP. For those that are driven to school, the locations at which students are dropped off or picked up from school is a key consideration in the identification and implementation of other traffic calming and safety measures and providing a distributed range of options for parents and guardians to utilize helps to ensure no one street or area is disproportionately congested. In the NTMP process, there are three types of drop-off and pick-up locations considered: on-site, school site adjacent in the public right- of-way, and at remote locations around Valley Park. On-Site Loading and Unloading Dedicated space that occurs within the boundaries of the District- owned property to facilitate the loading and unloading of students before and after school. On-site configurations must meet California Department of Education standards to ensure student safety. School Site Adjacent Loading and Unloading Designated spaces within the public right-of-way or City streets that are directly adjacent to or adjoining with the school district property are also an opportunity facilitate student loading and unloading. At these locations that border the school site, parking restrictions would be necessary during school times to ensure the curb space is available to safely and efficiently facilitate drop-off and pick-up. Remote Drop-Off/Pick-Up and Parking With the school site located next to Valley Park, there are a number of on-street and off-street parking areas within the vicinity that could be considered formally or informally for parents to either drop-off and pick-up students or park for a short duration and walk with their students to the school site. At these locations, some adjustments or additions to parking restrictions may be necessary to facilitate their use as drop-off or pick- up locations. 12 Hermosa Beach PEDESTRIAN ACCESSIBILITY AND SAFETY This section summarizes types of engineering treatments and operational programs that can help to improve pedestrian accessibility and safety around the school site and neighborhood. Crossing Guards Crossing guards help children safely cross the street at key locations and remind drivers of the presence of pedestrians. High-Visibility Crosswalks Crosswalks should be designed with continental markings to be more visible to approaching drivers and use high-visibility material, such as inlay tape or thermoplastic tape instead of paint. Raised Crosswalks Raised crosswalks are elevated to match the sidewalk to make pedestrians more visible to approaching vehicles. Typically located at midblock crossings, they encourage motorists to yield to pedestrians and reduce vehicle speed. Rectangular Rapid-Flash Beacons Pedestrian-activated flashing lights and additional signage enhance the visibility of marked crosswalks and alert motorists to pedestrian crossings. TRAFFIC SAFETY AND CALMING This section summarizes the types of treatments related to traffic safety and calming that that may be appropriate given the context of the streets within the study area. Centerline Striping Centerline striping can be used to delineate travel lanes on residential streets. As a neighborhood traffic management measure, they are often used on curves where vehicles tend to deviate outside of the proper lane, risking collision. Curb Extensions Curb extensions widen the sidewalk at intersections or midblock crossings to shorten the pedestrian crossing distance, to make pedestrians more visible to vehicles, and to reduce the speed of turning vehicles. One-Way Street Conversion Streets with limited right of way to accommodate on-street parking on both sides simultaneously with vehicular travel in both directions could be considered for conversion to a one-way street that would preserve limited parking, while improving the flow of travel. Red Curbs Red curbs indicate parking prohibitions on the streets within the City. They can enhance safety, especially on curved roads and near driveways, by improving sightlines for pedestrians and motorists. Speed Feedback Signs Real-time speeds are relayed to drivers and flash when speeds exceed the limit. Speed feedback signs are typically mounted on or near speed limit signs and can also be mobile units. Speed Lumps These traffic calming devices use vertical deflection to encourage motorists to travel at slower speeds. Speed lumps have cut-outs designed to allow large vehicles, such as emergency vehicles and buses, to pass with minimal slowing, while significantly slowing passenger cars and mid-size SUVs. Signage Signage that can be used as a neighborhood traffic management measure include: • ‘No left-turn’ signs (during school hours) • ‘No stopping’ signs (during school hours) • ‘One way’ signs • ‘15 mph Speed Limit’ signs (during school hours) • Four-way ‘Stop’ signs Targeted Enforcement Targeted enforcement may be used in conjunction with new neighborhood traffic management devices to help drivers become aware of the new restrictions. Depending on police department resources, the targeted enforcement may be limited in duration. Traffic Control Traffic control officers at strategic locations can help to improve the flow of vehicle traffic similar to a traffic signal. Traffic control officers are typically used in instances where traffic congestion may be present only during short time durations or certain times of day and a traffic signal is not warranted. = RRFBs Raised Crosswalk and Curb Extensions Speed lumps NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 13 OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS A series of other solutions identified through the process that aim to improve traffic flow, by offsetting the number of trips that are generated during a peak time period are identified below. Staggered Bell Schedule The North School Environmental Impact Report includes a mitigation measure for the District to stagger the bell schedule for school start and end times between grades at the school. This mitigation does not necessarily reduce the number of trips that occur, but helps to distribute the trips over a wider time period to reduce potential traffic congestion. The staggered bell schedule, as described in the EIR includes a minimum of 15 minutes between start times, with a goal of 30 minutes between school grades. Before and After School Programs Before and after school programming for students provides numerous benefits to both students and parents, but in the context of a neighborhood traffic management plan provides an opportunity similar to a staggered bell schedule to distribute the trips to and from the school so that they occur outside of peak drop-off or pick up times. Regular Monitoring and Evaluation Regular monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of the measures is key to the implementation and iterative process of the plan. The adaptive management program has been developed to establish parameters for ensuring the recommendations implemented are effective and whether additional measures are warranted based on data and analysis. RECOMMENDATION FRAMEWORK The recommendations were generated over the course of four stakeholder group meetings, two public workshops, and three meetings with the MOU subcommittee comprised of City Council and School Board members. The outreach process provided recommendations that would be most effective based on public feedback, alignment with the North School Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and the costs/benefits of implementation. While the input from stakeholder meetings and public workshops provided general priorities, the consultant team provided technical expertise on the type and placement of treatments. The comprehensive set of recommendations are shown Figure 4 and in the corresponding table. Following the graphic depiction of the set of recommendations, each recommendation is then described briefly and includes information on the implementation timeframe, any additional evaluation needed, planning level cost estimates, and where appropriate conceptual designs presented for the recommendation. Implementation Timeframe Recommendations are divided into near-term and long-term implementation projects described below. • NEAR-TERM PROJECTS that the City and School District will install before the school opens. • LONG-TERM PROJECTS that the City and School District will consider and plan for implementation as funding is available and as the adaptive management program monitoring warrants. Additional Evaluation Needed For long-term measures, areas of additional evaluation that may be needed are identified as follows: • REQUIRES ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS are projects that additional data must be gathered to assess and monitor whether the measure would be effective • REQUIRES PUBLIC CONSULTATION that the technical team determined are effective recommendations but will require petition of support from the residents on the affected street or block • REQUIRES AGENCY COORDINATION are projects that may require more time and coordination among agencies and other organizations for implementation Planning Cost Estimates Planning-level cost estimates are also included for both near-term and long-term projects. Estimated construction costs are based on available bid result information for similar types of project work. Bid result costs are compiled from projects from 2015 to 2019. Conceptual Designs For those projects that require engineering plans or designs prior to implementation, conceptual designs have been prepared to illustrate the general location and design of the proposed treatment or infrastructure needed. 14 Hermosa Beach NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 15 16 Hermosa Beach NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 17 NEAR-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations have been identified to be implemented in the near-term, prior to the opening of North School. 1. FORMAL SCHOOL DROP-OFF/PICK-UP ALONG 25TH ST IN FRONT OF SCHOOL Description At the front of the school site, a street widening/curb cutout is proposed along 25th Street stretching approximately 200 feet to serve as a school drop-off and pick-up location directly adjacent to the main entrance of the school. This space is intended to accommodate approximately 9 vehicles at a time. A school valet program will also be implemented to assist in the efficiency of the drop-off/pick-up process by having parent volunteers assist students in and out of vehicles as they are picked up or dropped off. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: Included in school construction project contract Conceptual Designs: See Appendix A 2. ON-SITE SCHOOL & ADA DROP-OFF/PICK-UP Description On-site school parking lot was re-designed by the School District with help from project neighbors, the transportation consulting team, and stakeholder to revise the configuration to introduce on- site drop-off/pick-up while still complying with accessibility standards under the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) and California Division of the State Architect standards, while maintain the 41 on-site parking spaces approved by the California Coastal Commission. The on-site loading and unloading area is designed to accommodate approximately 4 vehicles at a time. A school valet program will also be implemented to assist in the efficiency of the drop-off/pick-up process by having parent volunteers assist students in and out of vehicles as they are picked up or dropped off. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 15,000 for design Conceptual Designs: See Appendix A 3. ADD PORK-CHOP ISLAND AT SCHOOL DRIVEWAY Description To restrict eastbound left-turn traffic from 25th Street into the school parking lot and left-turn traffic from the school parking lot back onto 25th Street, and concrete pork chop island is recommended for installation at the beginning of the driveway to prohibit those turning movements. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 1,100 Conceptual Designs: See Appendix A 4. RAISED MIDBLOCK CROSSWALK WITH RECTANGULAR RAPID- FLASH BEACONS WITH APPROPRIATE SIGNAGE AND MARKINGS - 25TH ST IN FRONT OF SCHOOL MAIN ENTRANCE Description Raised crosswalks are elevated to match the sidewalk to make pedestrians more visible to approaching vehicles. A midblock crossing near the front entrance to the school on 25th Street would make smaller pedestrians more visible when crossing the street, encourage motorists to yield to pedestrians, and reduce vehicle speed. To balance the flow of vehicular travel and safe crossing for pedestrians, a pedestrian-activated flashing lights and additional signage would enhance the visibility of marked crosswalks and alert motorists to pedestrians waiting to cross or actively in the crosswalk. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 46,000 5. CROSSING GUARD - 25TH ST & MYRTLE AV Description Crossing guards help children safely cross the street at key locations and remind drivers of the presence of pedestrians. A crossing guard is recommended for the intersection of 25th Street and Myrtle Avenue. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $10,900 per year 18 Hermosa Beach 6. HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS - 25TH ST & MYRTLE AV Description Crosswalks should be designed with continental markings to be more visible to approaching drivers and use high-visibility material, such as inlay tape or thermoplastic tape instead of paint. High- visibility crosswalk markings are recommended at the intersection 25th Street and Myrtle Avenue on the east, south and west legs. In addition to striping, reconstruction of the intersection corners would be needed to mitigate the downslope, as well as installation of new directional ramps for each crosswalk and potential drainage changes. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 40,400 7. HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK - 25TH ST & MANHATTAN AV Description Crosswalks should be designed with continental markings to be more visible to approaching drivers and use high-visibility material, such as inlay tape or thermoplastic tape instead of paint. High- visibility crosswalk markings are recommended at the intersection 25th Street and Manhattan Avenue on the east and west legs. In addition to striping, reconstruction of the intersection corners would be needed to mitigate the downslope, as well as installation of new directional ramps for each crosswalk and potential drainage changes. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 39,300 8. HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK WITH STOP SIGNS - 24TH ST & MANHATTAN AV Description Crosswalks should be designed with continental markings to be more visible to approaching drivers and use high-visibility material, such as inlay tape or thermoplastic tape instead of paint. High- visibility crosswalk markings are recommended at the intersection 24th Street and Manhattan Avenue on the north and south legs. In addition to striping, reconstruction of the intersection corners would be needed to mitigate the downslope, as well as installation of new directional ramps for each crosswalk and potential drainage changes. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 35,100 9. SPEED LUMP - MIDWAY ALONG MYRTLE AV Description Speed lumps use vertical deflection to encourage motorists to travel at slower speeds. Speed lumps have cut-outs designed to allow large vehicles, such as emergency vehicles and buses, to pass with minimal slowing, while significantly slowing passenger cars and mid-size SUVs. Speed lumps are recommended for installation along Myrtle Avenue midway between 24th Street and 25th Street. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 3,300 10. SPEED LUMP - MIDWAY ALONG SILVERSTRAND AV Description Speed lumps use vertical deflection to encourage motorists to travel at slower speeds. Speed lumps have cut-outs designed to allow large vehicles, such as emergency vehicles and buses, to pass with minimal slowing, while significantly slowing passenger cars and mid-size SUVs. Speed lumps are recommended for installation along Silverstrand Avenue midway between 24th Street and 25th Street. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 3,300 11. YELLOW CENTERLINE STRIPING ALONG 25TH ST/PARK AVE Description Centerline striping can be used to delineate travel lanes on residential streets. As a neighborhood traffic management measure, they are often used on curves where vehicles tend to deviate outside of the proper lane, risking collision. Centerline striping is recommended for installation along 25th Street and Park Avenue between Manhattan Avenue and 24th Street due to the curvature of the road and limited roadway width. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 400 12. SPEED LUMP - 25TH ST Description Speed lumps use vertical deflection to encourage motorists to travel at slower speeds. Speed lumps have cut-outs designed to allow large vehicles, such as emergency vehicles and buses, to pass with minimal slowing, while significantly slowing passenger cars and mid-size SUVs. Speed lumps are recommended for installation along 25th Street north of the intersection with 24th Place and Park Avenue. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 3,300 NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 19 13. HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK - 25TH ST & PARK AV Description Crosswalks should be designed with continental markings to be more visible to approaching drivers and use high-visibility material, such as inlay tape or thermoplastic tape instead of paint. High- visibility crosswalk markings are recommended at the intersection 25th Street where it intersects with Park Avenue on the east leg. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 4,800 14. RED CURB - EAST SIDE OF 25TH ST/PARK/24TH PL Description A red curb is proposed on the east side of the intersection between 25th Street, Park Avenue and 24th Place due to the curved roadways, unusual intersection geometry, and sloped nature of the roadway approaches to improve sightlines for pedestrians and motorists. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 210 15. SPEED LUMP - 24TH PL & 25TH ST/PARK AV Description Speed lumps use vertical deflection to encourage motorists to travel at slower speeds. Speed lumps have cut-outs designed to allow large vehicles, such as emergency vehicles and buses, to pass with minimal slowing, while significantly slowing passenger cars and mid-size SUVs. Speed lumps are recommended for installation along 25th Street at the intersection with 24th Place and Park Avenue. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 3,300 16. HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK - 24TH PL/25TH ST/PARK AV Description Crosswalks should be designed with continental markings to be more visible to approaching drivers and use high-visibility material, such as inlay tape or thermoplastic tape instead of paint. High- visibility crosswalk markings are recommended at the intersection 24th Street where it intersects with Park Avenue on the east leg. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 11,900 17. SPEED LUMP - PARK AV Description Speed lumps use vertical deflection to encourage motorists to travel at slower speeds. Speed lumps have cut-outs designed to allow large vehicles, such as emergency vehicles and buses, to pass with minimal slowing, while significantly slowing passenger cars and mid-size SUVs. Speed lumps are recommended for installation along Park Avenue south of the intersection with 24th Place and 25th Street. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 3,500 18. PROHIBIT DROP-OFF/PICK-UP ON MORNINGSIDE DR Description The southern segment of Morningside Drive which is accessed from 25th Street is a narrow dead-end street without space for proper vehicle turning. To avoid the use of that location as a drop-off or pick-up spot for students, signage will be installed that prohibits drop-off activity at the intersection of the street with 25th Street. Compliance with this recommendation will be monitored by school officials, City officials, and enforcement personnel. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 1,900 19. ONE WAY STREET HEADING EASTBOUND FOR 26TH ST Description This roadway is very narrow, and with added traffic volume from the school, it will be very difficult to function as two-way with parking on both sides of the street. Converting to one-way would allow parking on both sides with sufficient space for reasonable vehicle circulation. Two-way access would be maintained on Morningside Drive, between Gould Avenue and 26th Street, to preserve alley access. Conversion of 26th Street to one-way will require a petition of support from the residents on the affected street. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 4,200 20. “STOP AHEAD” ROADWAY MARKING - 26TH ST HEADING EAST TOWARDS SCHOOL Description Roadway markings such as ‘stop ahead’ are intended to warn drivers of an upcoming change to the roadway conditions. This type of roadway marking is recommended for installation along 26th Street as drivers approach the intersection with Morningside Drive, which will be used primarily to access the gate of the school site that allows emergency access and school deliveries. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 300 20 Hermosa Beach 21. SCHOOL ZONE SPEED LIMITS Description A reduction in the maximum speed limit is recommended for implementation along Valley Drive from Gould Avenue to 21st Street through designation as a School Zone speed limit, as allowed under the California Vehicle Code. The lower speed limit of 15 MPH would be limited to enforcement during school hours. Real-time speeds can be relayed to drivers and flash when speeds exceed the limit through the installation of speed feedback signs. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 4,500 22. CROSSING GUARD - MORNINGSIDE DR/27TH ST Description Crossing guards help children safely cross the street at key locations and remind drivers of the presence of pedestrians. A crossing guard is recommended for the intersection of Morningside Drive and 27th St adjacent to Valley Park. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $10,900 per year 23. GOULD AVE ON-STREET PARKING Description Designate a portion of the spaces (approximately 8 spaces) as 15- minute parking zones 30 minutes before and after school intake and dismissal. This parking is currently unrestricted and typically used by park-goers during the daytime and adjacent residents overnight. During the beginning and ending of school, these spaces are not heavily subscribed. Therefore, making them available for school-related drop-off/pick-up will benefit the neighborhood by not requiring these parents to drive on the smaller residential streets adjacent to the school. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 3,700 24. CROSSING GUARD - GOULD AV/VALLEY DR/ ARDMORE AV Description Crossing guards help children safely cross the street at key locations and remind drivers of the presence of pedestrians. A minimum of two crossing guards are recommended for the intersections of Gould Avenue where it intersects with Valley Drive and Ardmore Avenue. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $10,900 per year 25. TRAFFIC CONTROL OFFICER AT GOULD AV/VALLEY DR/ARDMORE AV Description Traffic control officers at strategic locations can help to improve the flow of vehicle traffic similar to a traffic signal. Traffic control officers are typically used in instances where traffic congestion may be present only during short time durations or certain times of day. In conjunction with crossing guards, a traffic control officer is recommended for the intersections of Gould Avenue where it intersects with Valley Drive and Ardmore Avenue. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $14,200 per year 26. 15 MPH SPEED LIMIT ON VALLEY DR (ONLY DURING SCHOOL HOURS) Description A reduction in the maximum speed limit is recommended for implementation along Valley Drive from Gould Avenue to 21st Street through designation as a School Zone speed limit, as allowed under the California Vehicle Code. The lower speed limit of 15 MPH would be limited to enforcement during school hours. Real-time speeds can be relayed to drivers and flash when speeds exceed the limit through the installation of speed feedback signs. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 4,500 27. VALLEY DR ON-STREET SPACES Description Designate a portion of the spaces (approximately 8 spaces) as 15- minute parking zones 30 minutes before and after school intake and dismissal. This parking along Valley Drive currently has 6-hour time restrictions and typically used by park-goers during the daytime. During the beginning and ending of school, these spaces are not heavily subscribed. Therefore, making them available for school-related drop-off/pick-up will benefit the neighborhood by not requiring these parents to drive on the smaller residential streets adjacent to the school. Throughout the outreach process, the nearby Kiwanis/Rotary Club lot was identified as a potential asset for off-site drop-off/pick-up during school hours. The lot was considered for school-related drop-off/pick-up, but is not feasible in the short-term as it will require approval from the California Coastal Commission and additional capital improvement program funding to build out an ADA-compliant pedestrian path across Valley Park. The City and District have identified other nearby locations, including the on-street spaces along Valley Drive for drop-off/pick- up that are less costly, giving more time to accumulate the funds and pursue the approvals needed for to formally utilize the Kiwanis/Rotary Club lot in the future. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 3,700 28. RED CURB - WEST SIDE OF VALLEY DR, JUST NORTH OF KIWANIS CLUB (ELIMINATES 2 ON-STREET PARKING SPACES) Description A red curb is proposed on the west side of Valley Drive, just north of the Kiwanis/Rotary Club parking lot. This red curb would result in the elimination or adjustment of two on-street parking spaces, but would improve visibility reduce conflicts between vehicles along Valley Drive and those exiting the parking lot. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 140 NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 21 29. CURB EXTENSION - VALLEY DR & 25TH ST Description A curb extension is proposed on the northwest corner of the intersection between 25th Street and Valley Drive to address pedestrian visibility, slope change, and vehicle speed concerns as southbound motorists turn from Valley Drive on to 25th Street. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 11,400 30. HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK - VALLEY DR & 25TH ST Description Crosswalks should be designed with continental markings to be more visible to approaching drivers and use high-visibility material, such as inlay tape or thermoplastic tape instead of paint. High- visibility crosswalk markings are recommended at the intersection 25th Street and Valley Drive on the west leg. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 1,050 31. NO LEFT-TURN RESTRICTION FROM VALLEY DR ONTO 25TH ST (ONLY DURING SCHOOL DROP-OFF/PICK-UP HOURS) Description Northbound left turn movements from Valley Drive onto 25th Street by vehicles attempting to access the school site have the potential to increase the volume of traffic on this street, interfere with pedestrian crossings, and delay northbound traffic on Valley Drive. Signage is proposed at this intersection to prohibit left-hand turns during school hours to address these concerns. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 465 32. HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK - VALLEY DR & 24TH ST Description Crosswalks should be designed with continental markings to be more visible to approaching drivers and use high-visibility material, such as inlay tape or thermoplastic tape instead of paint. High- visibility crosswalk markings are recommended at the intersection 24th Street and Valley Drive on the west leg. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 1,050 33. NO LEFT-TURN RESTRICTION FROM VALLEY DR ONTO 24TH PL (ONLY DURING SCHOOL DROP-OFF/PICK-UP HOURS) Description Northbound left turn movements from Valley Drive onto 24th Street by vehicles attempting to access the school site have the potential to increase the volume of traffic on this street, interfere with pedestrian crossings, and delay northbound traffic on Valley Drive. Signage is proposed at this intersection to prohibit left-hand turns during school hours to address these concerns. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 465 34. ENCOURAGE WALKING AND ALL ROLLING MODE OPTIONS Description The District will encourage and support all non-auto transportation modes, including walking, biking, skateboarding, scootering, and others, through a combination of ongoing education, encouragement, and incentives. This encouragement applies to all students who utilize non-auto modes to school, not just those participating in the Walking School Bus program (see # 35, below). Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: Minimal infrastructure development costs, costs primarily related to labor. 35. WALKING SCHOOL BUS ON VALLEY DR WITH ENHANCED STOPS Description HBCSD’s existing Walking School Bus program utilizes trained adult volunteers, usually parents, to safely walk students to school along a designated Safe Route To School, with coordinated stops to allow additional students to “get on the bus” along the way. Due to the program’s voluntary nature, both in terms of the adults who supervise the walk and students participants, participation varies from school year to school year. To ensure sustained high levels of participation in the North School Walking School Bus program, appropriate incentives will be determined and offered to participants. Routes will be adjusted annually to best serve student home origin locations. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: Minimal infrastructure development costs, costs primarily related to labor. 36. TARGETED TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT DURING SCHOOL DROP- OFF/PICK-UP TIMES Description Targeted enforcement by the Police Department will be used as resources are available to focus on safe travel behaviors by vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. Key times in which targeted enforcement may be used include: when new neighborhood traffic management devices to help drivers become aware of the new restrictions; when school schedules change or reset (back to school, school breaks); and as concerns arise regarding unsafe travel behaviors that can be reduced through traffic enforcement. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: Minimal infrastructure development costs, costs primarily related to labor. 22 Hermosa Beach 37. DEVELOP SUGGESTED PARENT TRAVEL ROUTE MAPS FOR ENTRANCE/EXIT TO/FROM NEIGHBORHOOD Description A school route map can inform parents of students about suggested driving routes to and from school depending on where they live. While the suggested driving routes are intended to make the school trips safer by identifying optimal routes, the map also identifies alternate drop-off/pick-up locations to mitigate traffic congestion around the school during peak hours and encourage more students to walk to/from school. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: Minimal infrastructure development costs, costs primarily related to labor. 38. STAGGERED BELL SCHEDULE Description The North School Environmental Impact Report includes a mitigation measure for the District to stagger the bell schedule for school start and end times between grades at the school. This mitigation does not necessarily reduce the number of trips that occur, but helps to distribute the trips over a wider time period to reduce potential traffic congestion. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: Minimal infrastructure development costs, costs primarily related to labor. 39. BEFORE AND AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS Description Before and after school programming for students provides numerous benefits to both students and parents, but in the context of a neighborhood traffic management plan provides an opportunity similar to a staggered bell schedule to distribute the trips to and from the school so that they occur outside of peak drop-off or pick up times. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: Minimal infrastructure development costs, costs primarily related to labor. 40. REGULARLY SCHEDULED RE-EVALUATION OF NTMP EFFECTIVENESS (I.E. BUILT-IN MONITORING TO EVALUATE TRAFFIC VOLUMES) Description Regular monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of the measures is key to the implementation and iterative process of the plan. The adaptive management program has been developed to establish parameters for ensuring the recommendations implemented are effective and whether additional measures are warranted based on data and analysis. The City and School District proposed approach to regular monitoring and evaluation is described in the adaptive management program chapter of this document. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: Minimal infrastructure development costs, costs primarily related to labor. 5 implementation NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 23 FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES As noted in the recommendations, each project will require funding to implement. While many of the smaller cost and short-term projects may be implemented using existing funding resources, other projects will require the City and School District to consider and apply for outside funding resources from federal, state, local, and even private granting agencies. The range of resources available are described in this chapter. FEDERAL FUNDING Safe Routes to School Program (SRTS) http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/localprograms/saferoutes/srts.htm Cycle 3 of the Federal Safe Routes to School program has been extended after the success of California’s Safe Routes to School (SR2S) program which began in 1999. Originally a five year program, extensions through continuing resolution have been enacted by Congress allowing the program to remain funded for the purpose of: 1) enabling and encouraging students in kindergarten through eighth grade (K-8), including students with disabilities, to safely walk and bicycle to school, 2) making walking and bicycling to school a more appealing mode choice, and 3) facilitating the planning, design, and implementation of projects that will improve safety, environment, and overall quality of life. Consistent with other federal-aid programs, each State Department of Transportation is held responsible for developing and implementing the program. Transportation Enhancement Activities www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/transportation_enhancements The Transportation Enhancement (TE) activities offered funding opportunities to help expand transportation choices and enhance the transportation experience through 12 eligible TE activities related to surface transportation, including pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure and safety programs, scenic and historic highway programs, landscaping and scenic beautification, historic preservation, and environmental mitigation. STATE FUNDING SOURCES Active Transportation Program (ATP) https://catc.ca.gov/programs/active-transportation-program The California Transportation Commission developed program guidelines and project selection criteria for the first call for projects for the statewide Active Transportation Program (ATP) in March 2014. The ATP consolidates existing federal and state transportation programs, including the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), and State Safe Routes to School (SR2S), into a single program with a focus to make California a national leader in active transportation. A fourth cycle of the ATP is anticipated in 2019 and expected to last through 2023. The purpose of ATP is to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation by achieving Increase the proportion of trips accomplished by biking and walking, Increased safety and mobility for non-motorized users, advance the active transportation efforts of regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals, enhance public health, ensure that disadvantaged communities fully share in the benefits of the program, and provide a broad spectrum of projects to benefit many types of active transportation users. In addition, the Senate Bill 1 (SB1) transportation bill funds an additional $1 billion for the Active Transportation Program (ATP) over the next ten years —that’s an additional $100 million per year for cities, counties and regional transportation agencies to build more bike paths, cross- walks and sidewalks. The Safe Routes to School (SR2S) grants are awarded through the ATP, listed below: Safe Routes to School (SR25) SR2S is administered by Caltrans, and funds engineering and education projects that improve safety to/from schools. Authorized by Section 1404 of SAFETEA-LU (the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users), the SRTS Program came into effect in August of 2005. This federal funding program emphasizes community collaboration in the development of projects, and projects that incorporate elements of – education, encouragement, engineering, enforcement, and evaluation. Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program www.resources.ca.gov/grants/environmental-enhancement-and- mitigation-eem The Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program (EEMP) was established in 1989 and is administered by the California Natural Resources Agency and Caltrans. The program offers a total of $7 million each year for grants to local, state, and federal governmental agencies and to nonprofit organizations, funded through gasoline taxes. EEMP Funds are allocated to projects that either directly or indirectly offset environmental impacts of modified or new public transportation facilities including streets, mass transit guideways, park- n-ride facilities, transit stations, tree planting to offset the effects of vehicular emissions, and the acquisition or development of roadside recreational facilities, such as trails. EEMP is an annual program with the next solicitation expected in April of 2019. Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/hsip.htm The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core federal-aid program that aims to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries on public roads. HSIP funds can be used for projects such as bike lane or sidewalk projects on local roadways, improvements to Class I multi-use paths, or for traffic calming measures. Applications that identify a history of incidents and demonstrate their project’s improvement to safety are most competitive for funding. Program is administered by Caltrans in the State of California. California Office of Traffic Safety Grant Opportunities www.ots.ca.gov/Grants/default.asp The California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) provides grants for safety programs and equipment. Drivers of motor vehicles need to share the road with pedestrians and bicyclists. OTS grantees develop programs to increase awareness of traffic rules, rights, and responsibilities among various age groups. Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety is a specifically identified funding priority. This category of grants includes enforcement and education programs, which encompass a wide range of activities, including bicycle helmet distribution, design and printing of billboards and bus posters, other public information materials, development of safety components as part of physical education curriculum, or police safety demonstrations through school visitations. 24 Hermosa Beach REGIONAL AND LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES At the regional and county level, SCAG and Metro administer much of the funds that can be used to implement active transportation projects. Metro administers several programs that are sources of funding for recommended projects. SCAG Grant Opportunities http://www.scag.ca.gov/opportunities/Pages/Grants.aspx The Southern California Association of Governments’ Grant opportunities offered by various agencies that may be pertinent to your agency’s workplan. SCAG gathers this information in order to disseminate it to all interested agencies in the SCAG region. Measure M http://theplan.metro.net/ The Measure M Expenditure Plan devotes its funds to nine transportation categories as follows: 35% to new rail and bus rapid transit construction, 17% highway/Carpool lane/Goods movement improvements, 20% Bus operations, 17% to local city transportation improvements, 5% to Metro Rail system improvements, 2% for state of good repair, 2% to keep fares affordable for seniors, students and disabled, 2% for active transportation projects, 1% for Metrolink projects. Many jurisdictions use their local Measure M funding for active transportation projects and local transportation improvements. Air Quality Improvements through Automobile Trip Reduction & Roadway Congestion Mitigation http://www.scag.ca.gov/opportunities/Pages/Grants.aspx The AQMD announces the availability to local governments of up to $5 million in grant funds for opportunities to reduce automobile trips, traffic congestion, and their associated air pollutant emissions by shifting attendees of major event center functions out of their personal automobile and onto public transportation. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Each year, the City allocates a portion of the general fund budget to transportation capital projects, including pedestrian-related facilities, street lighting, and traffic calming. This is typically the largest source of funds for existing communities. This is typically the largest source of funds for existing communities. While sidewalk repair and replacement are usually the responsibility of the adjacent land owner, the City is responsible for the repair of sidewalk damage caused by City-owned trees, vehicle crashes, water main breaks and natural subsidence. The majority of CIP funds, however, are for new installations associated with city streets, buildings and other infrastructure. Community Development Block Program (CDBG) CDBG Partners with rural cities and counties to improve the lives of their low- and moderate-income residents through the creation and expansion of community and economic development opportunities in support of livable communities. The CDBG program is the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment and through expanding economic opportunities, principally, for persons of low- and moderate-income. “Persons of low and moderate income” are defined as families, households, and individuals whose incomes do not exceed 80 percent of the county median income, adjusted for family or household size. Beach Cities Health District Beach Cities Health District offers two types of grants: our Grants for Non-Profits and our Micro Enrichment Grants for small, one-time health projects. The District funds programs that provide: • Health education and prevention • Support groups • Health promotion • Health maintenance • Efforts to develop and test new approaches to solving problems within the health field • Safety net programs for vulnerable and underserved populations (e.g., senior and homeless meal program) PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS Increasingly, innovative bicycle projects are being implemented with the assistance and funding from private entities. Examples of local projects include the provision of shared bicycles at hotels, the construction of shower and changing facilities in office buildings, and the development of bicycle storage rooms at new residential development sites. The National Institutes of Health The National Institutes of Health funds projects that “study primary and secondary prevention approaches targeting environmental factors that contribute to inappropriate weight gain in children, adolescents, and adults.” Applications may be submitted by for-profit and non- profit organizations (e.g., universities, colleges, hospitals, laboratories, units of state and local governments, and eligible agencies of the federal government). Approximately 4,000,000 dollars are committed to fund successful applications and NIH anticipates making 5 to 12 awards. The application guidelines that apply to pedestrian and bicycle programs are listed below: • Promoting walking or bicycling to school or to worksites • Increasing physical activity during, before, and after school care • Decreasing sedentary behaviors in children and adolescents • Promoting physical activity at worksites • Increasing family participation in physical activity NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 25 COST SHARING APPROACH This section specifies the financial arrangement between the Hermosa Beach School District and the City of Hermosa Beach in service of implementing the NTMP project, which considers operational and physical improvements on the school site and its adjacent public right- of-way. The physical improvements of the School District might include curb extensions, gateways, speed humps, crosswalks, lane reconfiguration, new traffic signals, site access, and tiered pick up/drop off zones. The infrastructure and operational components would be identified and evaluated after analyzing the existing and future conditions of the area, and establishing the objectives in terms of traffic management, safety, and health. Also, the District will require to develop a construction work site traffic control plan and must restrict equipment and construction vehicles from parking in from local streets once the construction begins, as stated in the EIR Mitigation Measures. Both parties would have financial responsibilities throughout the development of the project, for the planning, design, and implementation, to the on-going operational requirements and updates to the initial plan. Their level of participation will depend on their jurisdiction and defined geographical limits as it follows: • The School District is responsible for 50% of the planning and designing costs of the NTMP, and any future updates applied to the plan. Consequently, The District will pay 100% of the implementation cost of the portion of the project set within the school limits (on-site), which includes the site access and the adjacent right-of-way. All proposals for construction must first be submitted and approved by the Hermosa Beach Public Works Department; the District will assume the total cost of the fees related to such process. If any of the planned interventions, within and out of the School District limits, has a negative impact on Level of Service, the District will cover a proportional cost calculated in the planning process and based on the projects attributable increase in vehicle activity relative to existing or future vehicle activity, to help fund the projects identified. Similarly, if on-going operational support is needed during, and after the construction of the project (e.g. traffic control officers or devices), the District can request support from the City Council. However, this might entail an additional partial cost (50% of the total) for the District, as the NTMP may require an update. • The City is responsible for 50% of the planning and designing cost of the NTMP, and any future updates applied to the plan. Consequently, the City will pay for the total cost of the physical and operational interventions in the public right-of-way adjacent to the School District limits, with the exemption of the proportional cost attributable to the school, based on project generated traffic. If the project is provided with on-going operational support and/or traffic control devices during, and after the construction of the project by the City Council, the City will pay for 50% of the costs required to update the NTMP. COST SHARING BETWEEN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THE CITY BREAK DOWN Cost-sharing allocations were derived from the MOU: As established in the MOU dated February 27, 2019, any costs associated with the recommendations of the NTMP that entail construction of physical improvements or implementation of traffic control devices will be assigned a proportional cost to the District relative to the level of service (LOS) impact or increased volume of traffic that would otherwise be generated by the project. PHASE THE DISTRICT THE CITY PLANNING AND DESIGN 50% 50% IMPLEMENTATION ON-SITE 100% SCHOOL SITE ADJACENT RIGHT-OF-WAY 100% PUBLIC RIGHT-OF- WAY* 100% PLAN UPDATES + MONITORING 50% 50% 6 adaptive management program NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 27 Local traffic conditions are, by nature, fluid due to random fluctuations (from individual choices), economic conditions, technology changes, and local land development. In the case of the North School, conditions will also vary based upon enrollment and the grades being accommodated at the school. Beyond the fluid traffic conditions, estimating the success of traffic management measures is an in-exact science. The consultant team advising on this effort have used their knowledge of similar treatments at other schools, but the context of every school is different. In this case, Hermosa Beach uses a citywide approach to grade levels, which is not common to other communities. DATA COLLECTION PARAMETERS Given the uncertainty described above, it is appropriate to monitor conditions and adjust the NTMP from time to time. Moreover, some potential treatments have been identified as “long-term” due to questions about their efficacy, difficulty of implementation, or potential negative side-effects. Monitoring will help determine when/whether long-term measures are implemented. The following parameters for data collection are recommended to maximize opportunities to compare data: • Frequency: monitoring should be conducted annually for at least the first five years after the school is reopened. • Schedule: during the school year on days when school is in session. • Duration: for a three-day period (Tues-Thurs) that is representative of an average school week (i.e. no holidays, minimum days, atypical weather conditions) DATA TO BE COLLECTED Figure 5 provides base-level data with respect to traffic volume and speed, but some additional “pre” data should be collected to fill all the categories described below: • Enrollment Numbers and Grades at School will be an essential foundation to understanding other data collected and providing a point of comparison from year to year. • Walk and Bike to School Participation Rates using the sample safe routes to school survey provided in the appendices will assist in evaluating effectiveness of programs implemented. • Traffic Collision Reports prepared by the Police Department or School Officials will be reviewed to understand patterns and primary collision factors that may be involved and identify opportunities to reduce instances of traffic collisions by addressing primary factors (speed, visibility, distraction, etc) • Traffic Volume and Speeds collected hourly and in two- directions on: o Manhattan Avenue (both north and south of 25th Street) o Gould Avenue (adjacent to park) o Valley Drive (adjacent to park) o 25th Street (between Manhattan Avenue and Park Avenue) o 25th Street (between 25th Street/Park Avenue to Valley Drive) o 24th Place o 24th Street (between Park Avenue and Valley Drive, and from Park Avenue to Manhattan Avenue) o 26th Street (adjacent to school) o Silverstrand Avenue o Myrtle Avenue (between 24th Street to 26th Street) o Park Avenue (between 25th Street and Monterey Boulevard) Existing traffic volumes from the 2018 North School Reconstruction Environmental Impact Report (EIR) included 2016 traffic volumes, as well as projected 2019 volumes with and without the opening of North School. As a point of reference for future volume counts, the table in Appendix B compares the volumes from the EIR with the 2019 volumes that were recorded as part of the NTMP. • Parking Occupancy collected hourly from 7 AM to 4 PM at: o off-street parking on the school site parking lot o off-street on Gould Avenue at park (perpendicular spaces) o on-street on Gould Avenue at park (parallel spaces) o off-street on Valley Drive along park o Kiwanis/Rotary Club lot o 27th Street (between Manhattan Avenue and Morningside Avenue) o 26th Street (between Manhattan Avenue and Morningside Avenue) o Morningside Avenue (between 26th Street and 27th Street, and north of 25th Street) o Myrtle Avenue (between 26th Street and 24th Street) o Silverstrand Avenue o 25th Street/Park Avenue (Manhattan Avenue to 24th Street) o 25th Street (between 25th Street/Park Avenue to Valley Drive) o 24th Place o Ozone Court (between 24th Street to 26th Street) o Park Avenue (between 25th Street and Monterey Boulevard) • Queuing noted the extent and duration of vehicle queues on the streets bordering the school Figure 6 shows the location of the suggested data collection points as described above. ANNUAL REVIEW PROCESS After the annual monitoring is completed, the City and School District will summarize the results and compare to both the baseline data and any prior years (post 2020). The results will be published on both the City and School District websites and then discussed with the stakeholder group that was formed to advise on the NTMP. Given there are no absolute standards for traffic volume, speed, and parking, it is the opinion of the community that will shape any modifications to the NTMP. Any modifications developed to the NTMP, because of the annual monitoring program, will be brought to both the School District Board and City Council for consideration. 28 Hermosa Beach appendices NORTH SCHOOL Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan 29 APPENDIX A 30 Hermosa Beach APPENDIX B Comparison of traffic volumes that were taken as part of the 2018 EIR and the 2020 NTMP. Based on the EIR, the 2016 volumes were taken at one-hour intervals during the peak period from 7:00 to 9:00 am on Thursday, November 19, 2015 and Tuesday, December 1, 2015. 2018 EIR 2020 NTMP 2016 Existing Peak (7 - 9 am) 2019 Projected Peak (7 - 9 am) 2019 Projected w/ North School Open Peak (7 - 9 am) 2019 Existing Peak (7 - 9 am) 2019 Existing (24-hour) Gould Av Bet. Morningside Dr & Valley Dr EB WB 300 240 345 279 361 287 438 534 3,609 4,042 Valley Dr Bet. Gould Av & 25th St NB SB 200 410 204 417 212 441 439 480 2,084 4,299 Myrtle Av Bet. 26th St & 25th St NB SB 25 15 25 15 69 41 35 24 182 182 25th St Bet. Myrtle Av & 25th St/Park Av EB WB 45 60 45 61 76 128 33 33 186 174 agenda topics Purpose, Goals, & Process Stakeholder Working Group NTMP Recommendations Adaptive Management Program Study Next Steps & Discussion purpose + project goals 1.Identify solutions that will enhance public safety and traffic flow at North School without causing delays in the school’s construction, which may include additional offsite loading and unloading zones on public property. 2.Maximize the efficient use of limited funds of the City and School District and leverages outside funding opportunities. 3.Utilize a collaborative process to incorporate City, School District, and community input on the design and operation of transportation facilities and traffic concerns. 4.Comply with the conditions set forth in the MOU and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the North School EIR. 5.Can be completed by March 31, 2020, including adoption of plan by both the School Board and City Council. Project Consultants: Fehr & Peers City of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach City School District MOU Subcommittee of Board and Council NTMP Stakeholder Group project team what is an ntmp? •objective is to provide safer, more comfortable streets and improve the quality of life in our neighborhoods by developing and implementing innovative and effective transportation solutions on residential streets. •identify and address traffic related issues such as speeding, traffic collisions, and cut-through traffic. •As options are considered, the surrounding street network must be carefully evaluated to avoid shifting impacts from one area to another. •the toolbox of improvements that can be implemented include updating street signs, adding pavement markers and roadway striping, increased enforcement, and items such as traffic diverters and speed lumps planning process Existing Conditions Issues + Opportunities Evaluation Criteria Recommendations + Priorities Plan Development, Review + Adoption Plan Implementation + Monitoring •The process included an evaluation of existing conditions, identification of issues and opportunities, creation of evaluation criteria to refine the recommendations and priorities, and ultimately development of the plan for review, adoption, and implementation. •Each step in the process additionally involves various levels of community input and feedback to inform and refine the plan through an adaptive management program. Adaptive Management Program CommunityEngagement community engagement •October 21, 2019 •December 3, 2019 Community Workshops •September 11, 2019 •November 7, 2019 •December 9, 2019 •January 15, 2020 MOU Subcommittee •September 23, 2019 •October 16, 2019 •November 20, 2019 •December 16, 2019 •January 15, 2020 Stakeholder Working Group stakeholder working group priorities •Pre and post North School (NS) data collection •On-going analysis for monitoring post NS construction •Additional actions or reductions based on post construction analysis 1. Monitoring Program 2. Onsite Loading/Unloading at North School 3. Bus or Trolley for All Three Schools •Loading and unloading configuration for parking lot •Crossing to Greenbelt with stoplight (similar to Valley School) •Pathway to NS from parking lot 4. Kiwanis/Rotary Parking Lot •Hermosa Avenue @ 25th Street •Gould Avenue @ Valley Drive (West of Valley Drive) •Gould Avenue @ Ardmore Drive (East of Ardmore) •Valley Drive adjacent Valley Park •Other options pending monitoring analysis 5. Alternate Drop-off and Pick-up Locations •Valley/Ardmore Corridor •Widen sidewalks on “Safe Routes to School” •Optional sidewalks on 24th St., 24th Pl., and 25th St. (for those interested) 6. Pedestrian + Bike Access Improvements (Physical) •Walking School Bus •Parent/Student incentive programs for walk, bike or bus 7. Pedestrian + Bike Access Improvements (Programs) •Spread out loading and unloading periods 8. Pre and Post School Child Care Programs •Crosswalks, speedbumps, signage, one-way streets •Crossing Guards, Traffic Officers 9. Traffic Calming Through the series of stakeholder meetings between September 2019 and January 2020, the stakeholder working group came to collectively identify a set of priorities for the NTMP. These priorities are identified below and have been integrated into the recommendation and implementation of this plan. ntmp recommendations NTMP Categories 1.Trip Reduction 2.Drop-off and Pick-up 3.Pedestrian Accessibility and Safety 4.Traffic Safety and Calming 5.Other Safe Routes to School Programs Evaluation Education Encouragement Engineering Enforcement Equity recommendations recommendations recommendation framework 3. ADD PORK-CHOP ISLAND AT SCHOOL DRIVEWAY Description To restrict eastbound left-turn traffic from 25th Street into the school parking lot and left-turn traffic from the school parking lot back onto 25th Street, concrete “pork chop” island is recommended for installation to prohibit those turning movements. Implementation Timeframe: Near-Term Planning Cost Estimates: $ 1,100 Conceptual Designs: See Appendix A on-site parking lot layout redesignCOST •$15,000 re-design fee to architects and for re-submission to the DSA •Associated construction costs grant funding opportunities FEDERAL FUNDING •Safe Routes to School Program (SRTS) •Transportation Enhancement Activities STATE FUNDING •Active Transportation Program (ATP) •Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program •Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) •OTS Grant Opportunities REGIONAL & LOCAL FUNDING •SCAG Grant Opportunities •Measure M •Air Quality Improvements through Automobile Trip Reduction & Roadway Congestion Mitigation •Capital Improvement Program (CIP) •Community Development Block Program (CDBG) •Beach Cities Health District PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS •The National Institutes of Health cost-sharing approach * As established in the MOU dated February 27, 2019, any costs associated with the recommendations of the NTMP that entail construction of physical improvements or implementation of traffic control devices will be assigned a proportional cost to the District relative to the level of service (LOS) impact or increased volume of traffic that would otherwise be generated by the project. PHASE THE DISTRICT THE CITY PLANNING AND DESIGN 50%50% IMPLEMENTATION ON-SITE 100% SCHOOL SITE ADJACENT RIGHT-OF-WAY 100% PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY*100% PLAN UPDATES +MONITORING 50%50% adaptive management program DATA COLLECTION PARAMETERS The following parameters for data collection are recommended to maximize opportunities to compare data: •Frequency:monitoring should be conducted prior to the opening of the school and annually for the at least the first five years after the school is reopened. •Schedule:during the school year on days when school is in session. •Duration:for a three-day period (Tues-Thurs) that is representative of an average school week (i.e. no holidays, minimum days, atypical weather conditions) ANNUAL REVIEW PROCESS After the annual monitoring is completed,the City and School District will summarize the results and compare to both the baseline data and any prior years (post 2020).The results will be published on both the City and School District websites and then discussed with the stakeholder group that was formed to advise on the NTMP.Given there are no absolute standards for traffic volume,speed,and parking,it is the opinion of the community that will shape any modifications to the NTMP. Any modifications developed to the NTMP,because of the annual monitoring program,will be brought to both the School District Board and City Council for consideration. adaptive management program Enrollment Numbers and Grades at School Walk and Bike to School Participation Rates Traffic Collision Reports Traffic Volume and Speeds Parking Occupancy Queuing next steps •Public Comment Period: Through February 28, 2020 •Public Works Commission Review and Input: March 18, 2020 •City Council Adoption: March 24, 2020 •School Board Adoption: March 25, 2020 •Coordination on Short-Term Recommendations: Spring + Summer 2020 •Implementation of Short-Term Recommendations: Fall 2020 •Adaptive Management Program Review: Spring 2021 + Annually Thereafter discussion •Clarifying Questions •Public Comment •Council and Board Discussion Seeking Input On: 1.Do you think we have missed any categories of recommendations? 2.Which of the recommendations interest you most? 3.Do you have feedback or concerns about any of the recommendations? 4.Do you agree with the identified timeframe for near-and long-term solutions? 5.Do you have recommendations that you’ve seen in at other schools that you think may work well? February 3, 2020 Joint Meeting of the City Council and School Board NORTH SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN DRAFT PLAN INTRODUCTION (School District Superintendent Pat Escalante and Environmental Analyst Leeanne Singleton) SUPPLEMENTAL E-COMMENTS: Glenn Menard at February 03, 2020 at 12:37pm PST As a Kiwanis Board member, I would like more detail about what "reconfiguration of the Kiwanis/Rotary parking lot to create a drop/off pickup lot" means. Can we have a drawing to look at? Anthony Higgins at February 03, 2020 at 10:27am PST The proposed one way street on 26th eastbound will throw the parking situation on Morningside into disarray and people will only use that parking as a last resort. Why? Well if you park on Morningside between 27th and 26th you will either encounter a dead end with no easy turnaround. This dead end will be made worse by the 26th eastbound one way traffic. The city acknowledges this problem when it says it’s going to put up signage telling folks dropping students off there because turning around at the intersection of 26 at Morningside will be virtually impossible. Parking is already very tight on Morningside. The one-way will make 6 parking spots very hard to use. Making a right into the often blocked alley is often not a reliable option. It’s commonly blocked. Besides that doesn’t work for the parking south of 27th ct on Morningside. Couple this with the 6 spaces you want to take on Gould for the student drop-off and I believe you rise to the level where the city must either issue a CEQA negative declaration or go through the CEQA EIR Process before approving this one-way change to 26th. Add to this all the traffic calming measures and their potential effect on other roads and streets and I believe the city must now enter the CEQA process for the NNTP or at at a minimum issue negative declarations for the three points above. I would hope the city lawyer would make a public determination on this in tonight’s meeting. Add to this. I do not believe you can legally bypass the CEQA process and ignore the cumulative effects of these changes. Thank You Anthony Higgins Anthony Higgins at February 03, 2020 at 7:31am PST Neutral The agenda below has two public participation sections in the agenda. The first is before the presentation of the NNTP to the public. The Public is not fully informed of the plan at this point since it has not been presented. Then the NNTP presentation follows. This is followed by a discussion period where the School Board and Council Members will be able to ask questions about the presentation. Only then do the council & board members hear about the concerns of a public that has been informed by the presentation. Then the meeting is adjourned according to the agenda. So what’s the problem? First the public should be given the opportunity to ask questions of if the presentation managers. The process makes it far too easy to just bury legitimate concerns if the public’s questions about particular impacts can simply be ignored in the plan and never answered by the city, the stakeholders or the school district. Questions like “when heavy trucks comprise approximately 1 out of 8 vehicles proceeding westbound on Gould in the morning drop off period and the same in the afternoon period can you explain why you feel Gould is the best drop-off location when the percentage of heavy trucks on Valley Drive is at least 5 times less”. Questions like “why was an analysis of the heavy truck traffic specifically EXCLUDED in the traffic analysis of each road segment? The equipment used to capture vehicle counts and speeds had the capability to capture data on trucks by size. A automobile operating at 30mph presents far different safety hazards than a heavy truck” Questions like”the backups on Gould during the drop off period often already extend from valley drive 2/3 to 3/4 of the way back to Morningside. How will vehicles using the dropoff on Gould backup into this oncoming traffic safely and without causing even more honking and noise? I sent several questions like this to the stakeholder team that via the environmental analyst and superintendent and the stake holder team. These questions have not been answered in the plan nor to me individually. Shouldn’t the public be given the opportunity to ask these questions of the environmental analyst and superintendent directly and followup on those questions in full view of the public and school board members. Without this it’s far to easy to continue whitewashing these concerns. And wouldn’t it be better for the council and board to discuss the NNTP and ask their questions AFTER they have heard from a public that has been INFORMED by the presentation? Thank You for considering this? Anthony Higgins Page 1 of 2 7:00 P.M. - JOINT MEETING AGENDA CALL TO ORDER I call to order the February 3rd Joint Meeting of the City Council and School Board. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Will _____________ please lead us in the pledge of allegiance? ROLL CALL Roll call please: • School Board roll by Michell Meraz • City Council roll call by Ann Yang ANNOUNCEMENTS Do any School Board members have any announcements? Do any of my colleagues have announcements? I have a couple of announcements: Community Theatre Needs Assessment Survey The City Council has awarded DLR Group a contract to conduct a Community Theatre Needs Assessment. The assessment will evaluate operations and infrastructure and will provide options and costs for two scenarios; a major renovation of the facility that would transform it into a regional performing arts center and a conservative renovation that would maintain the community-focus of the facility. The first phase of the assessment is community engagement to ensure the Community Theatre best serves the community. The City values the community’s input regarding the building's future use and programming and encourages everyone to take the survey at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/hbcommunitytheatre. The survey link can also be found on the City’s website at the Community Theatre page and will remain open until Feb. 14th. West Basin Water District Rain Barrel GIveaway West Basin Water District provides residents in the service area with an alternative way to use water resourcefully by providing equipment such as rain barrels to reduce the region's reliance on imported water supplies. West Basin will be hosting a rain barrel distribution event on Saturday February 15, 2020 at the Hermosa Beach Community Center. Advance registration for this distribution event is required and registrants may pick up their rain barrel(s) between 8 AM and 11 AM. Please register online at www.sbesc.com/calendar. For any additional questions about the rain barrel program, please call West Basin at (310) 371-4633. Page 2 of 2 APPROVAL OF AGENDA Is there a motion to approve the agenda? PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Although the City Council and School Board value your comments, the Brown Act generally prohibits the Council and Board from taking action on any matter not listed on the posted agenda as a business item. The Council and Board may take action to schedule issues raised in oral communications for a future agenda. Comments from the public are limited to three minutes per speaker. REPORTS AND DISCUSSIONS Leeanne and Pat, please provide your report. 1. REPORT NORTH SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN 20-0065 DRAFT PLAN INTRODUCTION (School District Superintendent Pat Escalante and Environmental Analyst Leeanne Singleton) Attachments: 1. North School NTMP Draft 2. Study Session Draft Presentation PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ADJOURNMENT This meeting is adjourned. [No need to adjourn to the next regular meeting]