Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation and Planning Meeting November 2011 - 2 Page 1 of 6 PLANNING COMMISSION TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION November 29, 2011 Council Chambers, 1175 East Main Street Minutes Planning Commission Attendees: Mick Church, Michael Dawkins, Eric Heesacker, Pam Marsh, Deborah Miller, Melanie Mindlin (arrived at 6pm) Transportation Commission Attendees: Tom Burnham, Shawn Kampmann, Steve Ryan (Chair), Colin Swales, and Corinne Vieville Absent: Brent Thompson, David Young Council Liaison: David Chapman Staff Present: Mike Faught, Bill Molnar, Mary McClary, Jodi Vizzini Ex Officio Members: Brandon Goldman I. CALL TO ORDER: Meeting was called to order at 5:05 pm. by Chairperson Steve Ryan. II. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS AND ADOPTION OF PREVIOUS MEETING MINUTES Chairperson Ryan announced there were two sets of minutes for approval: September 27, 2011 November 7, 2011 Commissioner March made a motion to approve both sets of minutes. Commissioner Burnham seconded the motion. Voice Vote: All Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote. Commissioner Church abstained from voting for the minutes of September 27, he was not present. Chairperson Ryan announced the motion was carried. Chairperson Ryan defined the meaning of E-Quorum as a qualified quorum (number of members needed to qualify a quorum) communicating through electronic communication and was advised by Barbara Christensen (City Recorder) Commission members may not communicate electronically representing a quorum. Chairperson Ryan asked for any introductory remarks from the Commissions. Commissioner Swales remarked about bike path lighting and general city lighting emphasizing the lack and dimly lit areas. Commissioner Marsh commented Siskiyou Blvd was purposely under lit by the city and felt the Commissions could designate staff to conduct another study and re-visit the idea of bike path lighting. III. FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSIONS ON THE DRAFT PREFERRED AND FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN FACILITATED BY MIKE FAUGHT: (tape stamp-8:40) In preparation for the meeting, a review of Draft Technical Memo 9 – Preferred and Financially Constrained Plans is suggested. Page 2 of 6 The Draft Preferred and Financially Constrained Plan is available for download at: http://www.ashlandtsp.com/statics/draft_documents A. Road Intersections, Railroad Crossings, Transit, and Sidewalks (50 minutes) Groups: Group A: Debbie Miller, Eric Heesacker, Colin Swales Group B: Tom Burnham, Steve Ryan, Pam Marsh Group C Michael Dawkins, David Young, Melanie Mindlin Group D: Shawn Kampmann, Mick Church, Corinne Vieville Mike Faught briefly went over the scope of work for the next portion of the meeting and explained the color codes for the different sharpie pens. Black—delete or remove Orange—non-consensus Yellow—unknown, (need more information) Blue—use for comments The Commissioners broke into the different groups to further work on the maps. They reconvened at tape stamp 20.00. Mike asked the Commissioners to consider the next meeting date, December 15th. They polled and both Commissions would have a quorum. He asked them to consider dates for January. B. Review Results of November 7, 2011 meeting, Group Input on Policies, Programs, Studies and Roadway Projects Not addressed at this time. I. PUBLIC FORUM: (tape stamp 23.43) Dan Lindner/15097 Hwy 66 spoke to the Commission regarding the proposed R22 which runs along the Cooper property. (Tolman and Clay, county property) He stated the road set up calls for 53 feet as a minimum and the distance between the electric boxes and the property line was 29 feet. There would not be enough room for the road. In addition he felt there has never been a traffic problem in this area. In addition the west end of the connection with Clay Street was also designated as Wetlands. Sheri Smilo/215 Tolman Creek Rd. spoke to the Commission representing 12 members of her neighborhood community that were also present at the meeting. She appreciated expressing her pont of view and felt very optimistic. Zach Brombacher/642 Tolman Creek Rd. gave each member of the Commissioners another letter from his attorney, Chris Hern, outlining his objection to the proposed road through his property between Tolman Creek Road and Washington street. 1) Tolman Creek Road is a on land collector 2) The Road would bisect IPCO’s property 3) IPCO paid roughly $50,000 for its share of the LID improvement to Tolman Crk. Rd. 4) IPCO’s property would in no way be benefitted by the proposed road 5) IPCO is extremely concerned about the value and marketability of its property. Jill Gilbert/215 Tolman Creek Road., #12 spoke to the Commission regarding unreported accidents that would affect the safety of her street and area. She believed this project would also add to an increase of accidents. Mike Faught will bring back to the next meeting the statistics of reported accidents on Tolman Creek Road along with any money limitations for reporting accidents. Page 3 of 6 II. DETERMINE NEXT MEETING DATE / TOPICS: December 15, 2011 / Shared Roads, Review all of A (see above), Functional Classification, Bikeway Network (tape stamp 37.11) Mike led the discussion about some of the results from their last meeting. He presented different sections for discussion. If the Commissions decided to not take new action at this time, the original vote would stand. (L4) Street Patios One of seven policies to enhance the downtown. Allow for downtown restaurant owners to apply for temporary seasonal street patios. Original Vote: 3 against, 1 non-consensus The Commissions held a lengthy discussion about street patios looking at all sides of the issue including from the standpoint of traffic, pedestrian congestion, business owners, tourists, citizens, the Chamber of Commerce and fairness issues. Commissioner Miller moved to include the (L4) street patios into the (S2) Downtown Parking Study. Commissioner Dawkins seconded the motion. Commissioner Dawkins amended the motion to also include (L7) into the (S2) Downtown Parking Study. The amended motion was seconded by Commissioner Kampmann. Commissioner Dawkins felt removing any parking spaces becomes an issue with the merchants and it is not always necessarily to make room for bikes. Including (L7) in the study would allow for a comprehensive view of all areas. Commissioner Marsh asked for clarification because (L7) incorporates bicycle parking into downtown projects. By adding the bicycles into the study, would that mean the main objective would not be addressed until a parking study would be done? She believes that is a separate issue. The Commissioners discussed the issue. Mike suggested looking at bike parking and not including stalls. The Planning Department is putting together several locations that would meet bike parking standards. Commissioner Kampmann made a motion to amend the amended motion to only include the bicycle parking aspect that would take away from a vehicle parking spot. Commissioner Dawkins seconded the amendment to the amended motion. Mike Faught clarified the amendment stating it would leave L7 in place and add a comment to S2 that said any bike parking that remove parking spaces would be included in the study. Chairperson called for the question on the amendment to the amended motion. Voice Vote: All Ayes, one opposed (Commissioner Burnham). The motion passed with a majority vote. Chairperson called for the question on the main motion. Voice Vote: All Ayes. The motion passed with a unanimous vote. (S2) Downtown Parking Management Plan Study This study is to evaluate the effectiveness of updated downtown parking management strategies and initiatives (i.e. viability to street patios and bicycle parking that removes vehicle parking spots) as well as consider their transferability to other parts of Ashland such as the Railroad District and Croman Mill Site. Original Vote: 3 agree, 1 non-consensus Page 4 of 6 Commissioner Marsh corrected the minutes for this section to read 3 agree, 1 non consensus from 3 disagree, 1 con-consensus. Chairperson Ryan explained if the Commissions want to change any part of theses sections, they would make a motion for change, otherwise the original vote stands. Commissioner Burnham asked if (L7) needed to be addressed/discussed and Commissioner Mindlin explained the original vote was 3 agree, 1 non-consensus. Commissioner Burnham spoke in favor to the Commission about removing a parking spots to make way for bicycle parking. He believes putting in 8 bicycle parking increases the number of customers for merchants. Commissioner Dawkins believes the City should consider in-house staff/commissioners to conduct studies instead of outside consultants. The Commissioners discussed hiring consultants (outside sourcing) and/or Commissioners to conduct studies. They discussed different aspects including expense, length of time, using other resources, guarantees, expertise, quick response and staff. They concluded for this discussion, it was important to conduct the study and not determine how the study would take place at this time. (tape stamp) 1:10 Commissioner Kampmann make a motion that we approve the downtown plan study but do it in phases and start out by assigning it to the Transportation Commission to get it started on track. Because it is a transportation issue, instead of hiring an outside consultant. Mike explained he does not have staff available to assign to this study now, and wanted to make it clear, if the motion is to involve staff’s involvement. Commissioner Marsh asked if Commissioner Kampmann would be willing to convert his motion to a comment on the record. Commissioner Kampmann withdrew his motion. Commissioner Swales reported he has never seen the results for the 2002 Turn Over Study that was conducted by high school students. Brandon Golden explained the Planning Dept. orchestrated the study with some paid HS students and some college student collecting raw data. A consultant company analyzed the data but returned back in a raw format. The final report has not been completed. (O1) Travel Smart Education Program Invest in individualized, targeted marketing materials to be distributed to interested individuals for the purpose of informing and encouraging travel as a pedestrian or by bicycle. The approximate cost of the program (including maps, materials, incentives, outreach staff and mail) is $30.00 per household. Original Vote: 1 agree, 2 against, 1 unknown Commissioner Miller felt some aspects of this were already in place within the city. Commissioner Kampmann felt the money spent for this would be a waste. Commissioner Dawkins felt the added expense to each household was too much money. Commissioner Marsh felt maps are an important and a useful tool to help parents and their children. Commissioner Miller also felt maps create a safer option and was not sure the cost of $30.00 was needed. Commissioner Church asked about the stated objective. Mike talked about the consultant’s suggestions for multi-mode transportation and how education helps to accomplish this diversity. Susan Wright (the consultant from Kittelson and Associates, Inc.) from felt the primary objective was change and explained the strategy for accomplishing different kinds of changes. The Commissioners talked about different possible avenues for communicating the different maps. Commissioner Mindlin reminded the members about giving a message of “caring” for the community and there were ways to reduce the costs. Commissioner Church felt our communication hasn’t been adequate. Commissioner Miller wondered if we could leave it in and have information available in a coordinated way. Commissioner Marsh didn’t think the $30.00 per household was correct calculations. She also wondered if the bus system could be incorporated. (O2) Directed Patrols Page 5 of 6 With the assistance of the Transportation Commission, provide collected complaints to local law enforcement to help identify targeted enforcement of speed zones, adherence to traffic control devices, and adherence to traffic laws. This includes proper adherence by motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Original Vote: 1 against, 1 non consensus, 2 unknown Commissioner Marsh didn’t understand the problem to be addressed. Mike agreed staff was not in full support of this item. Chairperson Ryan thought the idea was to mollify all mobile traffic. (time stamp 1:34) The Commissioners felt this project was already included in their regular job duties. Mike agreed this item would be deleted unless the Commissions objected. Also, (O3) Electric Assist Bicycle Program would again go with the original vote to delete. (O4) Retrofit Bicycle Parking Program (time stamp 1:37) Establish a retrofit bicycle parking program allowing interested property owners to apply for bicycle racks or bicycle corrals to be installed in front of their establishment. The City will coordinate with local business owners as to where bicycle racks are installed to be sensitive to the potential impacts on pedestrian space and vehicle parking. Mike stated he understood that the Commissions agreed with 04. Chairperson Ryan asked if anyone wished to block O4? No comment from Commission members. (O4) stands approved. Original Vote: 3 agree, 1 non consensus (O5) Transit Service Program (time stamp 1:38) The Transit Service Program provides funds and guidance on how to allocate funds to improve transit service (and Increase transit ridership) in Ashland independent of and in collaboration with RVTD. Original Vote: 3 agree, 1 against Mike explained this was the investment Council has committed to in the past. Susan recommended looking at 250,000 a year, increasing each year. Commissioner Miller felt when subsidized, citizenship utilized the buses a lot more. Commissioner Mindlin felt the way this was written implies spending 7 million to receive guidance and not actually subsidizing anything. The consulting firm/staff will rewrite to state true intention for subsidizing. (L25) Truck Freight Movement Plan (time stamp 1:43) The City of Ashland has identified Hersey Street as an alternative truck freight route allowing truck movements to avoid passing through downtown Ashland (unless the truck is destined to downtown Ashland). Original Vote: 3 agree, 1 non-consensus Commissioner Miller felt a truck route was needed but wasn’t sure Mountain St. was the correct route. Susan remarked the intention to create an alternative route. Commissioner Mindlin doesn’t believe the route would be a good idea. Commissioner Dawkins looked at the structure of the town and felt this route was the best. He believes this would be an alternative route and Hersey is already established as a Blvd and commercial traffic. Commissioner Church felt there was an inconsistency, and thought there had been prior discussion about a round-about at Hersey and East Main. Mike asked to revisit this item because there was already a lot of truck traffic on this route, and he will try to get more information for the Commissions. Commissioner Burnham felt there would be minimum truck traffic. Commissioner Swales stated this route was already designated as a truck route according to plan. Commissioner Marsh proposed to meet again at 4:30 on December 15th, seconded by Commissioner Heesacker. Without objection Chairperson Ryan called for adjournment. III. ADJOURN: 7:30 PM Page 6 of 6 Respectfully submitted by: Mary McClary, Administrative Assistant to the Electric Department