Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneoust ~, MEMORANDUM CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI~I ~®st ®€ffE~e ®$ ~~ ~AO~ T~~ ~~~~aue C~19~g~ ~g~~~~n9 a~ 7~~~~m~~6~ ~~~~ `7~~-~5b~ TO : Planning and Zoning Commission'' FROM : Ed Hard, Transportation Planner/ DATE : July 25, 1996 RE : Amendment to Bikeway Ordinance Parking in a bike lane iscurrently. prohibited by city ordinance. This item is an amendment to the city's bikeway ordinance to allow parking in a bike lane in certain areas during specified "off peak" times. It will not allow parking, in general, to occur in all bike lanes in the city. It is only intended to be used on alimited basis and applied to recurring problem areas. Where parking in a bike lane is permitted,. signs will. be installed to make bicyclists aware of times when parking is .allowed to occur.. Parking in bike lanes has been. has been a long standing problem. On-street parking and. bike lanes are indirect competition for the curb space on the street. Streets with bike lanes adjacent to public parks .and churches are where this problem most commonly occurs. The section of Holleman Drive adjacent to Anderson Park and. the section of Krenek Tap Road .adjacent to Central Park are frequent: problem areas. This issue- has. also been reviewed by the City's legal. department. They indicate that the City can set aside certain times when vehicles: can park in bike lanes,. but that the City has a legal. duty to warn cyclists of the change. See the attached memo the city's legal department. This amendment could be viewed as a compromise solution between the need on-street parking and the desire for bike lanes. The. City's Parks. and Police Departments are in favor of this change. See the. attached memo. from Chief Feldman. cc: Ed Feldman Steve Beachy Jim Callaway attachments Flo ~ ®~ 3° as tv~a°atty TO: FROM: RE: DATE: ~•~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI~I LEGAL DEPARTMENT \ ;/ POST OFFICE BOX 9960 .1101 TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-9960 (409) 7643507 MEMORANDUM Ed Hard, Transportation Planner Carla Robinson, Assistant City Attorney RFLA -Parking in a Bike Lane July 11, 1996 BACKGROUND: Your. RFLA dated March. 5, .1996, questions the City of College Station's authority to permit parking in .designated bike lanes during off--peak times. This inquiry was spurred by a recurring problem when cars park in the bike lane on Holleman Drive during Saturday soccer games. ISSUES: 1) Are bike lanes considered a designated traffic lane? 2) Can the City legally permit parking in a bike lane during "off-peak" hours? 3) What potential .liability does .the City face if an accident were to occur as a result of vehicles parked in the bike lane? SHORT ANSWER: Designated bicycle lanes are not a separate traffic lane. As a home-rule municipality, College Station is authorized to set aside certain times in which vehicles can park in bike lanes. Because this is a discretionary act, the City should be immune from liability for damages or .injuries proximately caused by permitting parking. But, because such a change could be considered a special defect, College Station has the legal duty to warn bicyclists of the change. DISCUSSION• Bike lanes are not considered designated .travel. lanes After searching applicable statutes and common: law I failed to find any language that defines. a bike lane as a separate lane of traffic. The Code of Ordinances, City of College Station, Texas, defines a bike lane as "a facility where part of the roadway or shoulder is striped, signed, and marked for exclusive or preferential bicycle use rrw/c: /my-ag96/bike[ane. doc Memo to Ed Hard July 11, 1996 Page 2 and where vehicle parking is not permitted." Chapter 9, Section 8-N.2(2). This language impliedly precludes a bike lane from being considered a .separate travel lane. Further, the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, adopted by City ordinance, defines a designated bicycle lane as "a portion of a roadway or shoulder which has been designated for use by bicyclists. It is distinguished from the portion of the roadway for motor vehicle traffic by a paint stripe, curb, or other similar device." Section 9A-3. This also fails to distinguish a bike, lane as a separate. lane of travel. College Station can Hermit parking in a bike lane. during "vff--Weak" hours. The City of College Station is a home-rule municipality and, as such, has exclusive control over and under the public highways, streets and alleys of the municipality. TEX. TRANSPORTATION CODE §311.001. (Vernon 1996)... Under this statutory language, the City has authority to designate part of a roadway as a bike lane and permit parking in the bike lanes during certain hours. The City's Code. of Ordinances does, however, expressly prohibit the City from allowing parking in the bike lanes. The definition of a bike lane in Section 8-N.2(2) cited above, includes ".. . where vehicle parking is not permitted." The general rule is that, to be valid, an ordinance must conform to and not conflict with state law, and this is true for traffic regulation. McQuillin Mun. §24.611 (3rd Ed.). The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devicesand other applicable state law do not restrict parking in bike lanes. Therefore, an amendment to permit parking in a bike lane is permissible.. College Station is immune from liability since creating both bike lanes and parking are discretionary acts The City does, however, have a duty to .warn bicyclists that cars. may be parked in the lane. In general, municipalities are immune :from liability under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. But the legislature has waived governmental immunity in the Tort Claims Act ("TCA"). TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 101.001 et. seq. ,Under the TCA, a governmental unit, including a' city, is liable for damages arising from the operation and use of motor-driven vehicles or equipment. or proximately caused by a condition or use of personal or real property. § 101.021. Section 101.0215, .added by the legislature in 1987, specifically concerns municipal. liability under the:. TCA. A city is liable for damages arising from its governmental functions, defined'. as "those functions that are enjoined on a municipality by law and are given it by the state as part of the state's sovereignty, to be exercised by the municipality in .the interest of the general public, including but not limited to. .street construction and design , .street maintenance . regulation of traffic ...maintenance of traffic signals, signs and hazards." §101.0215(a)(3), (4), (21), (30)• Once it is determined that a governmental function. exists, further analysis is required to,determine the municipality's potential liability. Simply determining that a function is governmental does not automatically result in a waiver of immunity. See McKinney v. City of Gainesville, 814 S.W.2d 862 (Tex. App. -- Fort Worth 1991). In .fact, immunity is not waived and, accordingly, a municipality is not liable if the listed governmental function falls within at least .one of two statutory exemptions provided by TCA. rrw/c: /my-ag96/b ikelane. doc Memo to Ed Hard July. 11, 1996 Page 3 First, the TCA does. not apply (i.e., the government has not waived immunity) when a governmental unit exercises its discretionary powers. Specifically, the TCA does not apply "to a claim based on: (1) the. failure of a governmental unit to perform an act that the unit is not required by law to perform; or (2) a governmental unit's decision not to perform an act or on its failure to make a decision. on the performance. or nonperformance of the act if the law leaves the performance or nonperformance of the. act to the discretion of the governmental unit." § 101.056. A discretionary act has been defined as an action that requires personal deliberation, decision and judgment as opposed to a ministerial act which requires performance of a duty to which the governmental unit has no choice;1 State law does not .require governmental entities to provide bike lanes, nor does state law.:prohibit a city from permitting parking in bike lanes. Therefore both policy'decisions are discretionary in nature. Another area where the TCA does not apply is traffic and road control devices. The TCA does not apply to a claim arising from "(1) the failure of a governmental unit to place a traffic or road sign, signal or warning device ifthe failure is the result of a governmental unit's discretionary action; (2) the .absence, condition or malfunction of a traffic or road sign, signal or warning device unless the absence, condition or malfunction is not corrected by the governmental unit within a reasonable time after notice; or (3) removal or destruction of a traffic or road sign, signal, or warning device by a third person unless the. governmental unit fails to correct it within a reasonable time after actual notice." §101.060(a). .This section does not apply to the duty to warn of special defects. § 101.060(c). In a case involving a special defect there is no governmental immunity. A special defect has been defined as "something .out of the ordinary course of events rather than a long standard, routine, or permanent defect. Villareal v. State, 810 S.W.2d 419 (Tex.App. --.Dallas 1991'.). The circumstances that we are dealing with are unusual and I located no similar fact patterns dispositive of this issue. Permitting cars to park in a bike lane. during certain hours would most probably qualify as a special. defect in that such parking is out of the ordinary and it will be permitted only. during certain hours. College Station can best preserve its immunity by .posting signs that meet guidelines set .out' in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and enforcing the parking hours (i.e. citing vehicles parked in the bike lane outside the posted hours.) CONCLUSION• The City of College Station can designate ;certain times in which vehicles can park in bike lanes. This type of regulation is a discretionary act and College Station is immune from liability under the Texas Tort Claims Act. The following are suggestions for implementation. 1) Provide adequate notice to bicyclists that the City will allow parking in the designated bike lanes during specified times. ' See i/asquez v. Hernandez, 844 S.W.2d 802 (App. 4 Dist 1992). See also Murillo v. Garza, 881 S.W.2d 191 (App. 4 Dist. 1994); City of Fort Worth v. Adams, 888 S.W.2d 607 (App. 2 Dist 1994). rrw/c: /my-ag96/b i kelane. doc Memo to Ed Hard July 11, 1996 Page 4 2) Install appropriate signage. 3) Consistently enforce the posted parking hours. 4) .Take necessary steps to amend the language in the city ordinance defining a bike lane as "where vehicle parking is not permitted." 5) Monitor the number of incidents reported as the result of a parked car in the bike lane. If I can help you with this or provide more information, just let me know. CR: rrw cc: Jim Callaway Tom. Brymer Ed Feldman t rnv/c: /my-ag96/b ikelane.doc R~CEt~~D .~A 3 Q 1 ,. `•~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I `~ POLICE DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 9960 2611-A TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-9960 (409) 764-3600 MEMORANDUM TO: Tom Brymer, Assistant City Manager FROM: Ed Feldman, Chief of Police ~ir'~ DATE: January 29, 1996 SUBJECT: Parking --Holleman Drive As in the past, we are experiencing problems with soccer fans parking in the bicycle lane on Holleman Drive on Saturdays. This past Saturday the bicycle lanes were full of vehicles again. Our officers contacted as many people as they could and. asked them to move their vehicles, which most of them did reluctantly comply.. I am .afraid the problem will continue! I talked to some of the involved citizens .last year and advised them to seek permission to park on Saturdays during the soccer games. I would suggest that we deal with this through Mr. Hard. I do not feel this is a police issue. i r cc: Major Newton yt ,~~ 2 ~: ~'~ CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I Post Office Box 9960 1101:Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842.9960 (409) 7643500 I MEMORANDUM TO : Planning and Zoning Commission FROM : Ed Hard, Transportation Planned/~j~ DATE : July.25, 1.996 III RE : Amendment to Bikeway Ordinance I! Parking in a bike lane is currently prohibited by :city ordinance. This item is an amendment to the city's bikeway ordinance to allow parking in a bike lane in certain areas during specified. "off peak" times. It will not allow parking, in general, to occur in all bike lanes in the city. It is only intended to be used on a limited basis and applied to recurring problem areas. Where parking in a ~' bike .lane is permitted, signs will be installed to makebicyclists aware of times when parking is allowed to occur. Parking in bike lanes has been has been a longstanding problem. Ori-street parking and bike lanes are in direct competition for the curb space on the street. Streets with bike lanes adjacent to public parks and churches are where this problem most commonly oecurse The section of Holleman Drive adjacent tc~ Anderson Park and the section of Krenek Tap Road :adjacent to Central .Park are frequent problem areas. ` This issue has also been reviewed by the City's legal department: They indicate that the City can set aside certain times when vehicles can parkin bike lanes, -:but that ahe City has a legal duty to warn cyclists of the change. See the attached memo the city's legal department. This amendment could be viewed as a compromise solution between the. need on-street parking and the desire for bike lanes. The.. City's Parks and Police Departments are in favor of this change. See the attached memo from Chief Feldman. ~, ~, I - cc: Ed. Feldman Steve Beachy I Jinn Callaway i,~i attaclunents ~, Home of 'Texas ASM University REGEIVEQ JAS 3 0 ~•~ CITY OF ..COLLEGE STATIOI~I `~ MEMORANDUM TO: Tom Brymer, Assistant City Manager FROM: Ed Feldman, Chief of Police ~/'~ DATE: January 29, 1996 SUBJECT: Parking -- Holleman Drive As in the past, we are experiencing problems with soccer fans parking in the bicycle lane on Holleman. Drive on Saturdays. This past Saturday the bicycle lanes were full of vehicles again. Our officers contacted as many people as they could and asked them to move their vehicles, which most of them did reluctantly comply. I am afraid the problem will continue! I talked to some of the involved citizens last year and advised them to seek permission to park on Saturdays during the soccer games. r I would suggest that we .deal with this through Mr. Hard. I do not feel this is a police issue. ~ /~ cc: Major Newton. t V~ - ~n ~/I z~ POLICE DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 9960 2611-A TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION. TEXAS 77642-9960 (409)764-3600 ~~I MEMORANDUM at:. CITY: OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I Post Office Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842-9960 (409) 764.3500 TO Planning and Zoning Commission FROM : Ed Hard, Transportation Plannei~j DATE : July 25, 1996 RE : Amendment to Bikeway Ordinance Parking in a bike lane is currently prohibited by city:ordinance. This item is an amendment to the .city's bikeway ordinance to allow parking in a bike lane in certain areas during specified "off peak" times. It will not allow parking, in general, to occur in all bidce lanes in the city.. It is only intended to be used on a limited basis and applied to recurring problem areas. Where parking in a bike. lane is .permitted, signs will be installed to`make bicyclists aware of times when,parking is ~,"~ allowed to occur. Parking ~in~bike lanes has been has been'a longstanding problem 'On~treet parking and bike lanes are in direct:competition for,the curb space on the, street. Streets with bilca lanes adjacent to public p_, 5. ; parks and churches are where this problem most commonly occurs. 'Ihe'sec~ion of Holleman-Drive -adjacent~to';~'Anderson )'ark-and .the-sedion~of Krenek.Tap~Road adjacent to :Central Park are frequent problem areas. This issue has also -been reviewed by the City's legal, department. They indicate that the City can set aside certain times when vehicles can park` ui9b'ike"; lanes~~but thatt}ie"City has a legal duty to warn cyclists of the change. See the attached memo the city's legal department. ~. This amendment could be viewed as a compromise, solution between the need on-street parl~g and the desire for bike lanes. The, City's Parks and Police Departments are in favor of~this change.'See ti ~' - the'attached memo frorn~Chief Feldman: n i ,. .c,~ " ~ ~} cc: 'Ed~Fcldman ~~~ , ~`_ r~ ~-; Steve BeachS ~ <Li ~ ~~ Y t ! -,~ y ,~ ~im`Callaw,ay ~~n; T~ f3 p ~, r ! ~ .~4ig{lI i. . ty„~{ , ~ # ~,~.,~ 'y • CITY OF COLLECT STATIDI`I ~'~ LEGAL DEPARTMENT P T OFFICE BOX 9960 1109 TEXAS AVENUE OS COLLEGE STATION. TEXAS 77842-9960 (409) 764-3507 MEMORANDUM TO: Ed Hard, Transportation Planner FROM: Carla Robinson, Assistant City Attorney RE: RFLA -Parking in a Bike Lane DATE: July 11, 1996 .BACKGROUND: Your RFLA dated March S, 1996, questions the City of College Station's authority to permit parking in designated bike lanes during off-peak times. This inquiry was .spurred by a recurring problem when cars park in the bike lane on Holleman Drive during Saturday soccer games. ISSUES: 1) Are bike lanes considered a designated traffic lane? 2) Can the City legally permit parking in a bike lane during "off-peak" hours? 3) What potential liability does the City face if an accident were: to occur as a result of vehicles parked in the bike lane? SHORT ANSWER: Designated bicycle lanes are not a separate traffic lane.. As a home-rule municipality, College Station is authorized to set aside certain times in which vehicles can park in bike lanes. Because this is a discretionary act, the City should be immune from liability for damages or injuries proximately caused by .permitting parking. But, because such a change .could be considered a special defect, College Station has the legal duty to warn bicyclists of the change. DISCUSSION: Bike lanes are' not considered designated travel lanes After searching applicable statutes and common law I failed to find. any language that defines a bike lane as a separate lane of traffic. The Code of Ordinances, City of College. Station, Texas, defines a bike lane as "a facility where part of the roadway or shoulder is striped, signed, and marked for exclusive or preferential bicycle use rrw/c:/my-ag96/bikelane.doc Memo to Ed Hard July 11, 1996 Page 2 and where vehicle .parking is not permitted." Chapter 9, Section 8-N.2(2). This language impliedly precludes a bike lane from being considered a separate .travel lane.. Further, the Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, adopted by City ordinance, defines a designated bicycle ..lane as "a portion of a roadway or shoulder which has been designated for use by bicyclists_ It is distinguished from the. portion of the roadway for motor vehicle traffic by a paint stripe, curb, or other similar device;" Section.9A-3. This alsofails to distinguish a bike lane as a separate lane. of travel. College Station can permit parking in a bike lane during "off-peak" hours. The City of College Station is a home-rule municipality and, as such, has exclusive control over and under the public highways, streets and alleys of the municipality. TEX. TRANSPORTATION CODE §311.001 (Vernon 1996). Under this statutory language, the City has authority to designate part of a roadway as a bike lane. and permit parking in the bike lanes during certain hours.. The City's Code of Ordinances does, however, expressly prohibit the City from allowing parking in the bike lanes. The definition of a bike lane in Section 8-N.2(2) cited above, includes ".. . where vehicle parking is not permitted." The general rule is that, to,be valid, an ordinance must conform to and not conflict with state law, and this is true. for. traffic regulation. 1vlcQuillin Mun. §24.611 (3rd Ed.). The Manual on Uniform` Traffic Control Devices and other applicable state law do not restrict. parking in bike lanes. Therefore, an amendment to permit parking: in a bike lane is permissible. discretionary acts The City does, however, have a duty to warn bicyclists that. cars may be parked in .the lance In general, municipalities are immune -from habilrty under the doctrine of sovereign immunity. But he legislature has waived governmental immunity in tthe Tort .Claims Act ("TCA"). TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE § 101.001 et. seq. Under the TCA, a governmental unit, including a city, is liable for damages arising from the operation and use of motor-driven vehicles or equipment or proximately caused by a condition or use of personal or real property. § 1:01.021. Section 101.0215, added by .the legislature in 1987, specifically concerns municipal liability under the TCA. A city is liable for damages arising from its governmental functions, defined as "those functions that are enjoined on a municipality by law and are given it by the state as part of the state's sovereignty, to be exercised by the municipality in the interest of the general public, including but not limited to. .street"construction and design . .street maintenance . . regulation of traffic ...maintenance of trafl7c signals,. signs and hazards." §101.02.15(x)(3), (4), (21), (30)• Once it is determined that a governmental function exists, further analysis is required to determine the municipality's potential liability.. Simply determining that a function is governmental does not automatically result in a waiver of immunity. See McKinney v. City of Gainesville, 814'... S.W.2d 862. (Tex. App. -- Fort Worth 1991), In fact,. immunity is not waived and, accordingly, a municipality is not liable.. if the listed governmental function. falls within at least one of two statutory exemptions provided by TCA. 4, rrw/c: /my-ag96/bikelane.doc ~. Memo to Ed Hard July l 1, 1996 Page 3 First, the TCA does not apply (i.e., the government has not waived immunity) when a governmental unit exercises its discretionary powers. Specifically, the TCA does not apply "to a claim .based on: (1) the failure of a governmental unit to perform an act that the unit is not required by law to perform;. or (2) a governmental unit's decision not to perform an act or on its failure to make a decision on the performance or nonperformance of the act if the law leaves the performance or nonperformance of the act to the discretion of the governmental unit." § 101.056. A discretionary act has been defined as an action that requires .personal deliberation, decision and judgment as opposed to a .ministerial act which requires performance of a duty to which the governmental unit has no choice.' State law. does not require governmental entities to provide bike lanes, nor .does state law prohibit a city from permitting .parking in bike lanes. Therefore both policy decisions are discretionary in nature. Another area where the TCA does not apply is traffic. and road control devices. The TCA does not apply to a claim arising from "(1) the failure of a govemmental unit to place a traffic or road sign, signal or warning device. if the failure is the result of a governmental unit's discretionary action; (2) the absence,'condition or malfunction of a traffic or road sign, signal or warning device unless the absence, condition or malfunction is not corrected by the governmental unit within a reasonable time after notice; or (3)-removal or destruction of a traffic or road sign, signal, or warning device by a third person unless the .governmental unit .fails to correct it within a reasonable time after actual .notice." § 101.060(x). This section does not .apply to the duty to warn of special defects. §101.060(c). In a case involving a special' defect there is no governmental immunity. A special defect has been defined as "something out of the ordinary course,of events rather than a long standard, routine, or permanent defect. Villareal v. State, 810 S.W.2d 419 (Tex.App. -- Dallas 1991). The circumstances that we are dealing with are unusual and I located no similar fact patterns dispositive of this issue. Permitting. cars to parkin a bike lane during certain hours would most probably qualify. as a special defect in that such parking is out of the ordinary: and. it will be permitted only during certain hours. College Station can best preserve its immunity by posting signs that meet guidelines set out in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and enforcing the parking hours (i.e. citing vehicles parked in the bike lane outside the posted hours.) CONCLUSION: The City of College Station can designate .certain times in which vehicles can park in bike lanes. Thistype of regulation is a discretionary act and College Station is immune from liability under the Texas Tort Ctaims Act. The following are suggestions for implementation. 1) Provide adequate notice o bicyclists that the City will allow parking in the designated bike ::lanes. during specified times. ' See Vasquez v. Hernandez, 844 S.W.2d 802 (App. 4 Dist 1992). See also Murillo v. Garza, 881 S.W.2d 191 (App. 4 Dist. 1994); City ojFort Worth v. Adams, 888 S.W.2d 607 (App. 2 Dist 1994). rrw/c: /my-ag96/bikelane. doc Mem® to Ed Hard July 11, 1996 Page 4 2) Install appropriate signage. 3) Consistently enforce the posted parking hours. 4) 'Take necessary steps to amend the language in the city ordinance defining a bike lane as "where vehicle parking is not permitted." 5) Monitor the number of incidents reported as the result of a parked car in the bike lane. If I can help you with this or provide more information, just let me know. CR:rrw cc: Jim Callaway Tom Brymer Ed Feldman !` j rrw/c:/my-ag96/bikelane.doc REGEIVEQ JAf~ ~ 01996 ~ ~• CITY OF C4LLECE STATIOI`I ~~ MEMORANDUM TO: Tom Brymer, Assistant City Manager FROM: Ed Feldman, Chief of Police ~/'--~ DATE: January 29, 1996 SUBJECT: Parking -- Holleman Drive As in the past, we are experiencing problems with soccer fans parking in the bicycle lane on Holleman Drive on Saturdays. This past Saturday: the bicycle lanes were full of vehicles again. Our officers contacted as many people as they could and asked them to move their vehicles, which most of them did reluctantly comply. I am afraid the problem will continue! I talked to some of the involved citizens last year and advised them to seek permission to park on Saturdays during the soccer games. I would suggest that we deal with this through Mr. Hard. I do not feel this is a police issue. t /~ cc: Major Newton 5~ f c ~~ _ Jl/ '~ 2~ POLICE DEPARTMENT POST OFFICE BOX 9960 2611-A TEXAS AVENUE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77842-9960 (409) 764-3600