Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-01-17 Bicycle & Pedestrian_MIN Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission Thursday, January 17th, 2002 Meeting Minutes Roll Call Commissioners Bretko, Spear, Nutter, Rogers, Burke, and Chapman were present. Hartzell arrived late. Green and Baxter were absent. Call to Order Rogers called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Approval of Minutes Spear noted the following corrections: 1) On page 2, under “Report - Bike Education Classes” the last sentence should end “...but Harris stated that they would be from for the full, 10-week program.” 2) on page 2, under “Report - Siskiyou Boulevard Design Update” the last sentence in the first paragraph should be “He stated that a signal is will be wired in at Morton wired, but not installed.” 3) On page 3, under the Greenway Signs Discussion, in the second paragraph on the page, the fourth sentence should read “Green stated that 1/2 hour of the next meeting could be spent for regular business, with while the remaining 1 1/2 could be dedicated to working on signage and maps.” 4) On page 3, the second sentence in the first paragraph on Administrative Process should read, “Green noted that under this proposed system, a citizen would submit their comments in writing, via letter or e-mail.” th Chapman/Nutter m/s to approve the minutes of December 20, 2001 as amended. Public Forum No one present wished to speak. New Business Nutter asked to discuss pedestrian safety issue. Chapman clarified for Nutter that the Traffic Safety Commission (TSC) would not be meeting with the Police Chief and Municipal Judge due to scheduling difficulties. Chapman stated that he would like to request a meeting with these two, and Harris suggested that a combined meeting might be best. Chapman and Nutter concurred with the idea of a joint meeting, and Harris stated that she would talk to Assistant City Engineer Jim Olson, staff liaison to the TSC. Nutter/Bretko m/s to make a formal request to include the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission along with the Traffic Safety Commission in a meeting on speed limit enforcement with the Municipal Judge and Police Chief. DISCUSSION: Chapman suggested that this issue needs to be resolved now rather than waiting on a joint meeting, and he recommended attending the TSC meeting next Thursday, January 24th. Chapman recounted that at the last city council meeting, the pedestrian safety issue was addressed late in the meeting and the TSC was given a mandate to develop a public st safety plan prior to April 1. Chapman emphasized his belief that the TSC would develop a plan quickly and present it to the council well before April 1st. He indicated his belief that the recommendations included in the plan would include speed limit reductions and tickets for people driving 4 mph or more over the posted speed limit. Chapman concluded that Bicycle and Pedestrian Commissioners should consider what elements they feel are crucial and then present Commission recommendations to the TSC at next week’s meeting. Bretko stated that she had requested a round table discussion involving the Traffic Safety, Bicycle and Pedestrian, and Planning Commissions, the City Council, and city staff before this issue can be adequately addressed. Chapman disagreed, and suggested that there was not adequate time for such a discussion. Nutter suggested making recommendations to the TSC after commissioner discussion, but stated that he would also like to keep the meeting with the Judge and Police Chief as a priority. Nutter emphasized that he wants to put the TSC on notice that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission wants to be involved in developing a pedestrian safety plan. 2002-0117_Bike Min Page 1 of 1 Harris expressed concern that the Council has already issued a directive, and she suggested that the most that can be done at this point is to ask to be included in the process, and to make recommendations to the TSC. Harris suggested getting involved in this process rather than moving off in a separate direction. Harris emphasized that there is a need to work within the current directive from the City Council. Nutter stated that there is a need to determine members’ priorities if this commission is going to be ready to participate in the process. Rogers clarified that this was what Chapman had suggested earlier. Nutter emphasized that he wants to identify priorities and to be ready to speak as a group rather than as nine individuals in order to give focused input to the TSC. Chapman suggested looking at what the TSC has already prepared; he emphasized that the TSC has addressed many of the issues raised by this commission. Chapman stated that he could provide preliminary copies. Chapman suggested that the motion be withdrawn, and that a new motion be made asking to be involved in the formulation of a pedestrian safety plan. Harris stated she could let Olson know of the commission’s interest in working on the pedestrian safety plan. There was discussion of whether recommendations would have greater impact if they came from nine individual citizens or a unified commission. Bretko agreed that there was a need to clarify the commission’s stance prior to attending the TSC meeting. Chapman read an e-mail from the TSC’s Thomas Heumann, and suggested that each commissioner should clarify what is most important, look at the TSC plan, be organized in his or her own head, and attend the upcoming TSC meeting ready to help formulate a plan. Voice vote: Bretko, Spear, Nutter, Rogers, and Burke, YES. Chapman NO. Chapman clarified that he would like to expand the motion to include attendance and participation at the next meeting. Motion passed: 5-1. Chapman/Rogers m/s to direct staff to contact TSC staff liaison Jim Olson and notify him of this commissions’ interest in attending the next meeting, and to request that the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission be included on the e-mail and mailing lists. Voice vote: All AYES. Motion passed. Rogers stated that she did not believe commission attendance would give any more strength than simply appearing as citizens. Harris indicated that next week’s TSC meeting would not be the last opportunity to address this matter. Chapman asked TSC member George Fardelmann how long he thought it would be before the TSC presented its plan to the City Council. Fardelmann indicated that it was his hope to send something to the Council after next week’s meeting, including specific recommendations for lowering speeds. Fardelmann also suggested that the involvement of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission in this process would be great. Harris questioned whether this should be official involvement or from the commissioners as citizens. Fardelmann noted that the TSC is evenly split on the issue of lowering speeds, with staff recommending against reductions at this point. Fardelmann suggested that an official recommendation from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission would be helpful. Fardelmann clarified that he was uncertain whether the commissioners could be at the table with the TSC, fielding questions and participating in the meeting, but he urged the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commissioners to show up, with friends if possible, as this is the time to act on this issue. Chapman suggested holding a special meeting prior to next Thursday’s TSC meeting. Fardelmann suggested that a unified Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission speaking during the Public Forum would present a powerful voice. Bretko/Nutter m/s to call a later meeting to address tonight’s agenda items such as the school project and critical mass and devote the remainder of tonight’s meeting to continuing this discussion. DISCUSSION: Harris noted that there was a budget meeting in the council chambers immediately following this one, and stated that the meeting would need to conclude by 7:00. Hartzell recognized that there was need to publish public notice of a special meeting. Nutter noted his belief that this commission has a duty to the community. Hartzell stated that she did not feel that the TSC would finalize a plan next Thursday. Rogers clarified that the motion was to table the agenda and focus the remainder of this meeting on pedestrian safety priorities. Hartzell asked that the agenda not be tabled, but rather left open in case the other discussion could be wrapped up. Spear noted the number of times that signage and maps have been put off. Chapman noted that both the sub-critical mass issue and the video could be put off. The motion and second were withdrawn to allow discussion of agenda items. Those present agreed to dedicate twenty minutes to looking at priorities and then to dedicate the remainder of the evening to the school project and mapping. Members listed the following priorities: reduced speed limits, crosswalk improvements, better police enforcement, public education, and reducing the number of cars in the downtown. 2002-0117_Bike Min Page 2 of 1 Fardelmann stated that he did not feel there was a problem with enforcement, as people are within 5 mph of the posted speed. He indicated that the problem was with the speed limits. Chapman and Nutter disagreed, and stated that people are speeding when they exceed the posted limit. Chapman stated that he would like to see a citywide traffic study. Nutter suggested that this is a semantic issue relating to the discretionary application of enforcement. Hartzell questioned whether the group was looking for values of the commission or recommendations to the TSC. Fardelmann noted that there was nothing new on the list of recommendations so far. Bretko suggested that there is a need to close the downtown to cars. Nutter suggested that the possibility of doing this would be greater if a discussion were begun. Burke suggested that there was need for alternative routes to allow a more scenic downtown. There was discussion of the challenges of navigating downtown, even at the speed limit, due to the busy nature of the area. Nutter suggested that another freeway exit at Mountain Avenue would help to reduce traffic through the downtown. Chapman noted that this idea has been explored and denied by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). Bretko stated that she was not convinced that this would be a good thing. Spear suggested that members might be straying from what is needed right now by discussing closing down North Main and changing the interstate. Hartzell suggested that members examine the draft Downtown Plan document. Bretko stated that she was not for further police enforcement, and she suggested that police should not increase efforts at ticketing cyclists. Chapman noted that education and enforcement are the only tools available, and he suggested creating the option of a bicycle diversion course for ticketed cyclists. Nutter noted that he would recommend a single speed of 25 mph within the city, except for 20 mph through the downtown. Hartzell suggested that this would create issues where higher speeds are acceptable and it would thus be counter-productive. Fardelmann stated that this would be the argument of the TSC, but he indicated his agreement with this idea as a short-term solution. Hartzell questioned the true mechanics of such a move. Fardelmann explained that the recommendation would come from the TSC and would not involve the City Council. Hartzell suggested that there are discussions and processes that need to involve the community on this issue. Fardelmann stated that he would make a motion to lower speeds by 5 mph throughout town at every meeting from now on until it passes. Nutter stated that there should be a recommendation to lower speed limit. There was consensus among those present that the commission should make a recommendation to this effect. Members also agreed that there was a need to provide improved crosswalk markings and to examine alternative routes. Bretko stated that she would like to see a strong statement about reducing traffic downtown. Nutter suggested that this could be tied in with alternative/mass transportation. Burke emphasized the need to educate people about multi-modal transportation options. There was group consensus to recommend multi-modal education and on reducing the number of cars downtown, examining alternate routes, and encouraging alternative transportation. Fardelmann expressed his belief that lower speeds and enforcement will not work together. Members agreed to put off discussion of enforcement until a later date. Chapman recommended expressing support for crosswalk stings. School Project Car Free Day Postponed. Sub-Critical Mass Postponed. Signage & Maps Burke noted that the intent behind this item was to improve signage around town in order to help cyclists get to and from various portions of bikepaths and routes around town. Harris noted that staff had prepared large Transportation System Plan maps for commissioners to mark up with proposed sign and map locations. Burke briefly discussed his experience with bike route signs in other cities as a way to help cyclists navigate through unfamiliar residential neighborhoods. Hartzell questioned what the top priority was to be tonight, and asked staff for some guidelines. Harris explained that the State of 2002-0117_Bike Min Page 3 of 1 Oregon recommends against identifying routes, but she suggested that directional signage to indicate route connections would fit within the state guidelines. Spear noted that she has maps for each intersection on the Central Ashland Bikepath (CAB) to give directions from the CAB to the Bear Creek Greenway at Helman and Nevada Streets. Harris clarified for Hartzell that directional signs would be similar to city street signs. She stated that she would need to look into the cost per sign, but she recommended that commissioners identify points on the map where they would like to see signs placed. She clarified that members could identify directional sign placement on the map along with map-sign placement at the intersections along the CAB. Members placed green stickers on the TSP map to identify locations for directional signage, and they placed red stickers on the map where they wished to have map-signs. It was noted that members were basing sign placement on what a cyclist’s destination might be at a given intersection. It was also noted that each sticker would be lettered or numbered to identify what was intended. 1) Directional Sign at Helman indicated how to get from CAB to the downtown. 2) Directional to get to CAB via B Street. 3) Directional to the downtown 4) Arrow directing cyclists to use B Street. th 5) Directional to CAB at 7 Street. 6) Direction “to Tolman Creek Road” with map at Railroad Park. 7) Sign and map. 8) Map sign at Tolman. Chapman noted that he would like to see street signs at all CAB intersections. Nutter questioned budget issues that might come up. Harris clarified that this was preparing the initial stages of a master plan. Chapman also suggested that bike routes be colored and/or numbered. There was discussion of the need to identify placements of signs for those going the opposite direction. It was also noted that members would like to mention the downtown, the plaza, and Lithia Park, as well as coloring or numbering routes. Rogers suggested that there was also a need to direct cyclists from the plaza to use Pioneer Street to get out of the downtown and connect with bike routes. She also suggested placing a map at the plaza. Harris confirmed that Pioneer Street would be a good recommendation, as it is a signalized intersection. There was discussion of whether members preferred to recommend Pioneer or Oak Street, and members agreed to revisit this discussion at a later date. There was discussion of placing signs at Siskiyou and Wightman, and at South Mountain Avenue directing cyclists to the bikepath. It was also agreed that signs were needed at Walker and at Tolman Creek Road. Members discussed placement of signage near bike shops and bike rental locations, and they recognized a need to place a directional sign at Tolman Creek Road and Spring Way. Agenda Items for Next Meeting Rogers asked that signage and maps, the school project, and the state video be included on the next agenda. There was discussion of whether a special meeting was needed to draft a written statement to the TSC prior to next Thursday’s meeting. Harris suggested that staff could prepare a draft based on tonight’s discussion, and advertise a special meeting prior to the TSC meeting. After discussion, those present agreed to meet from 2:30 to 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, January 23rd. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:44 p.m. Next Regular Meeting st Thursday, February 21, 2002 2002-0117_Bike Min Page 4 of 1