Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-01-16 Bicycle & Pedestrian_MIN Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission th, January 16 2003 Regular Meeting Minutes Roll Call Marvin, Reynolds, Nutter, Beaudoin, Spear, Catron, Baxter, and Chapman were present. Matthew Barnes from the Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) was also present. Hartzell was absent. Call to Order Chapman called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m. Approval of Minutes Spear noted that the word “not” in the third line of the first full paragraph of page 2 should be “note.” Marvin noted that the last line of the fourth full paragraph on page two was incorrect and the $500 should be changed to $150. Carol Lee Rogers of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (BTA) asked that the sixth paragraph be corrected to clarify that the Bike Education Program bikes are in fact kept in the Community Education barn on East Main Street. th The minutes of December 19, 2002 were approved as amended. Public Forum Matthew Barnes of the Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) provided copies of the RVTD Survival Kit which was published to encourage people to consider other options, including cycling, to deal with the road construction currently occurring on I-5. He also noted that RVTD ridership had doubled under the current free ride program in Ashland. Barnes also provided a list of CMAQ grants listing local bicycle and pedestrian related projects being considered. Barnes suggested that it would be helpful for the commission to express support of projects, or to have representatives attend upcoming meetings. He asked for a letter of support and for the commission to appoint attendees for the upcoming Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting and the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) policy meeting to help obtain funds for bicycle-related projects. Barnes went on to explain that Ashland is about to join the MPO, and he added that a letter from the commission to the MPO as soon th as possible would cover the possibility of a February 12, 2003 meeting. Barnes added that those projects having a direct impact on Ashland were highlighted. Nutter/Catron m/s to direct staff to draft a letter of support for these projects to the MPO. Discussion: Reynolds asked that the rack enhancement project for RVTD be added to the list of projects for which support would be expressed. Nutter suggested that the racks were not very successful. Barnes suggested that the racks have been too successful, to the degree that drivers must turn down cyclists because the racks are full at times. He emphasized that the proposed enhancement would add a third bike rack to each bus. Barnes explained for BTA’s Scott Bricker that the rationale behind the focus on paving within the AQMA is that it reduces particulate matter and thereby improves air quality. Harris added that smaller streets are better for cyclists and as such she suggested that the commission support the other Ashland project as well. Reynolds questioned whether support of the four directly bicycle-related projects and the fifth Ashland project would create any problems. Motion withdrawn. Nutter/Marvin m/s to direct staff to draft a letter in support of the four highlighted projects to the MPO. Discussion: Barnes clarified for Marvin that $4 million in funding was available. Reynolds asked whether members wanted to include the Ashland paving project as well. Nutter responded that some members oppose paving in principle; he added that he felt a letter of support would be given more weight if it were bicycle-specific. Voice vote: Nutter, Beaudoin, Marvin, YES. Reynolds and Catron, NO. Chapman, Baxter, and Spear, ABSTAIN. Motion passed 3-2. Safe Routes to School & Bike Safety Education Program Marvin pointed out that she would be leaving the commission and the city and as such there would be no potential conflict if she were to remain for the discussion. Chapman introduced Scott Bricker, the Youth Programs and Education Director from the Bicycle Transportation Alliance (BTA) in Portland. Bricker explained that a bike safety pilot program in Ashland began in 1999, and the BTA is trying to expand its efforts. 2003-116_Bike Min.doc Page 1 of 5 He added that the BTA has submitted an OCF grant application for a safe routes test program in several locations (Ashland, Corvallis and Portland) around the state. He noted that this grant, for $12,000 had been approved, and that he had distributed a copy of the narrative portion of this application. He pointed out that this was the only grant approved of the 8-10 applications that were submitted. Bricker briefly summarized the key points of the proposal, noting that a survey would be conducted within schools to identify habits and areas of concern, some take-home information would be provided, and there would be a coordinated program addressing bike safety, walking, bus-riding, and an outreach element. He recognized that the work plan proposed was an ambitious one, but he noted the success of similar programs in Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and now the U.S. He emphasized that these programs have demonstrated excellent success in reducing driving and changing attitudes. He reiterated that the scope of work proposed approximates these proven programs, but he pointed out that at this point the BTA has only $12,000 of the $50,000 needed to carry out the program as proposed. He stated that the BTA would be seeking state, federal, foundation and CMAQ funding as well as trying to find funds outside the community. He emphasized that the hope was to start the program up in one elementary school this year. He stated that they would use existing maps and transportation system plans to identify safe routes and hazardous areas, and from there they will prepare materials to be sent home to parents. He emphasized that the hope was to find another instructor to replace Rogers, and to have that instructor work intensely within one school. He explained that the BTA had requested funding assistance from this commission in the past, but stated that they were not asking for funds at this time. Chapman questioned what level of school would be the best focus of the program, elementary or middle. Bricker stated that most safe routes programs have tended to focus on elementary schools while bike safety programs have been aimed at middle schools. He added that at the middle school level, there would be less parental involvement. He stated that both possibilities were worth looking at. He pointed out that all work in Oregon so far has been in the assessment phase, and he noted that other programs in the United States are almost exclusively at the elementary level. He stated that the National League is looking at a national program targeting bike safety programs to the middle school level. Spear noted the difficulties the commission had encountered in trying to conduct a weekly walk/bike day at Lincoln School; she explained that there were few students or teachers interested in being involved. Bricker suggested that paid staff would be more effective at outreach and promotion. Bricker noted that the BTA found Ashland to be an appropriate site for the program in part because initiating a program was a goal of this commission. Harris clarified that the commission had also been supportive of the grant application. Chapman noted that one difficulty at the middle school level is that in Ashland, the middle school is farther to bike or walk for everyone. Bricker suggested that this was not as decisive a factor as parental concern with “stranger danger.” Bricker clarified that they will need to shop the program around to find a school that works. Rogers added that after having bike safety at the elementary school level, it would seem like a continuous flow to have safe routes at the middle school level. Bricker clarified for Baxter that he would like to see the same contract person handling both programs for the sake of logistics, but he added that other arrangements were possible. Baxter discussed the issue of fundraising at the local level, and he asked for Bricker’s thoughts on having a separate fundraiser to make this a long-lived, sustainable program. Bricker stated that ODOT should provide continuing funding, but he recognized that these funds could continue to shrink. Bricker stated that he was open to discussion, but he added that he would not be able to oversee a fundraiser from Portland. He emphasized that BTA does similar work in all communities with an advocate and contractor to help. He stated that a separate fundraiser would make things easier, but he asked for more specifics. Baxter explained that the commission might opt to pay a contracted fundraiser. There was discussion of the fundraising and teaching/advocacy roles as separate skills. Rogers stated that she had tried to raise funds, and she indicated that she felt a committed, contract teacher could best express the passion necessary to help raise funds for the program. Bricker stated that he thought the commission paying a fundraiser would be a good idea. Reynolds suggested that the overhead costs from administering things from Portland down to Ashland seemed to make things top-heavy. She questioned what would be needed to raise funds locally for the program and an intertie with BTA. She recognized that the commission’s entire budget might not be adequate to fund a fundraiser. 2003-116_Bike Min.doc Page 2 of 5 Bricker explained for Reynolds that administration is 20% of the budget within each community; he clarified that this covered other direct costs, such as printing of materials, bicycle maintenance, travel, training, and etc. He stated that for $6000, $4800 would go to program costs and $1200 to the BTA for administration. Harris added that the 20% also covers program development and preparing of all materials. Bricker emphasized that the funds are raised by BTA as well. There was further discussion, and it was noted that the commission might need to hold a portion of funds raised by the commission’s contract person in order to further fund that contract person. Bricker stated that the details of oversight and supervision of a fundraiser would need to be worked out. Bricker discussed the process for hiring a local staff person, and noted that they would begin by networking and then interview potential applicants. Harris clarified that while the BTA might allow this commission to suggest candidates, the BTA would most likely be the body that interviewed and selected the person to hire. Harris added for Reynolds that there were still further details to be looked at relative to the possibilities of the commission hiring a contract fundraiser, including verifying RFP threshold amounts. Chapman noted that despite interest the commission could not likely fund the program valley-wide due to limited funds. Bricker noted that it would be difficult to limit a fundraiser to seeking funds only in Ashland. Bricker stated that the BTA currently has programs in Ashland, Portland and Medford, with Talent also expressing interest. Barnes noted that there was a $100,000 in CMAQ funds for a sidewalk project at Howard School. Chapman suggested that the two programs (safe routes and bike safety) needed to be combined and held at least twice a year. Bricker concurred, and emphasized the need to involve the school, parents, and students. Reynolds stated that Ashland Middle School (AMS) had the most potential, and presented the greatest challenge. Marvin added that if is were consistent, a program at AMS could reach every child in town. Spear agreed that the Middle School offered the most chance of success. Reynolds added that it was the most demographically even possibility. Harris summarized the two issues raised previously relative to AMS: 1) the willingness of staff to be involved, and 2) the distance issue. Reynolds suggested that she felt impacts on the teachers could be minimized, and she stated that she knew at least one teacher who would be interested. She noted that there is also the issue of uncertainty on the part of teachers due to state budget issues. Rogers noted there is a logistical issue at AMS in that three teachers are needed to be involved there. Reynolds recognized the difficulty created when a program has to rely on individual teacher personalities. Harris noted that the BTA has $12000 and intends to use Ashland as a pilot program. Bricker stated that he would like to get development work going, even if no further funding meant a pared-down program, and get the program going in the schools. He recognized that the proposed timeline is an ambitious one, but he added that he did not want to sit and wait. He stated that the BTA would like to hire staff for the bike safety program and incorporate the safe routes program in. Harris clarified that the next step was to find staff. Bricker added that the BTA may be able to work with RVTD. Reynolds asked if Bricker would rather focus on safe routes programs as it is more of an umbrella for the whole program. She stated that it could be worked out and implemented while getting the bike safety program back up and running. Chapman noted that the existing fifth grade bike safety program already has a safe routes overlap, and he suggested that the two programs are closely tied. He stated that he would rather expand the safety program to include the safe routes. Rogers noted that it was already difficult to the time from the schools. Bricker stated that getting back underway in the fall would work just as well if they had school interest. Marvin suggested finding ways to use program curriculum to take pressure off of teachers; Rogers agreed that it could give teachers time off while a contactor teaches. Chapman added that an afterschool program could also be considered. There was discussion of program funding, with Bricker noting that the safe routes program would cost more up front as it is a new program. He added that with development costs, it would run about $10,000 per community per school. He stated that with everything considered he felt they were close to having enough for three schools in the spring or fall. Baxter stated that the funds committed by the Bicycle & Pedestrian Commission and the Traffic Safety Commission were for finishing out the bike safety program in schools this year, and he suggested that switching horses on the run by changing the focus of the program from the elementary schools was not a good idea right now. Rogers emphasized that there was a lot of legwork to be done at this point. Reynolds indicated that she felt things could still be switched at this point. 2003-116_Bike Min.doc Page 3 of 5 Nutter questioned whether the three elementary schools planned could be incorporated into the one program at AMS, with the safe routes curriculum brought into the bike safety program, to make the best use of funds. Bricker stated that if it were possible to conduct the program at the Middle School it would be great. Members expressed general consensus that AMS was the preferred option. Catron suggested forming a subcommittee to explore this issue further. Bricker listed the following as next steps: 1) find a staff person to run the program in Ashland; 2) approach AMS about the feasibility of conducting the program there; and 3) if AMS is not interested in having the program, reevaluate plans with an eye to carrying out the program in elementary schools. He added that this would work either for this spring or next fall. Harris noted that the commission funds committed to the bike safety program need to be spent this budget year (by June 30, 2003). Harris suggested that someone on the commission agree to work with the BTA to help advocate the program at AMS. Bricker concurred. Reynolds stated that she would be willing to do this. Marvin added that she would be willing to work with AMS and RVTD. Bricker stated that the program would work best if connections could be built on connections with teachers, students and administrators, and he noted that Reynolds and Marvin had connections in these areas. Nutter concluded that the plan as it stands now was to try to get the bike safety program back underway at AMS for this spring, while developing the safe routes curriculum and looking at funding mechanisms to create a sustainable program. Bricker reiterated that he was willing to discuss the logistics of a contracted fundraiser. Nutter stated that he would like to see a permanent grantwriter in place to seek outside funding. Harris noted that most grants are for getting programs started, and she suggested that to be sustainable the program would need to find long-term funding from the city, the Youth Activities Levy, and through foundation support. Rogers noted that Siskiyou Velo had agreed to dedicate a percentage of their profits from the annual Triple Challenge to support the program. Nutter asked for any budget or fundraising suggestions that the BTA might have. Baxter stated that he would like to hear from BTA that they are amenable to exploring the issue of hiring a fundraiser. Bricker explained that logistics were the issue, he emphasized that BTA was willing to discuss the matter further, but that if the commission was looking for BTA oversight of the fundraiser they are amenable although there may be logistical differences. Bricker reiterated for Baxter that BTA is interested in exploring the matter further. He stated that BTA would be interested if the fundraiser could be successful and worth the effort, but he emphasized that they are interested in keeping the program going and if they are able to fund it without a fundraiser it may not be worth the additional effort of having a fundraiser. Harris clarified that the BTA is in effect a contractor providing services, and the question is finding a way to fund expanding these services. She added that the commission either needs to find the additional funding or ask for the BTA’s help in finding the funds. Bricker emphasized that up until this point, the BTA has been handling the fundraising portion. Baxter suggested looking at CMAQ funds to support the program. Marvin pointed out that the Bike Swap generates $5000-$8000 and currently no one has signed on to take over this event. Chapman stated that he would like to get Marvin’s information on the Bike Swap before she leaves the commission. Chapman also noted that he would try to help Reynolds in working at AMS as needed. Combining Commissions th Harris noted that a meeting had been scheduled for 3:00 p.m. on Thursday, January 30 in the Siskiyou Room of the new CDESB building. Bike Commuting Instruction Marvin passed out two handouts promoting the commuting classes. She asked if members were interested in having a February ride, but she noted that she might be leaving by then. She questioned whether anyone was willing to take over this item, or if anyone had preferences for handouts. Both Chapman and Nutter expressed an interest in helping with the ride, but they indicated they were unable to work on set-up. rd Baxter stated that he could lead a February ride. There was discussion of holding this event on February 23, the last Sunday in February. Baxter agreed to take the lead on this, with Marvin to continue handling the public relations side for now. Marvin asked whether the commission wanted to provide snacks; Reynolds suggested getting things established first to gauge interest prior to committing to provide snacks. Marvin stated that bike lights could be used as an incentive, and Harris stated she would get fifteen light sets to Marvin as a start. After discussion it was agreed to begin with the #1 flyer and look at using the #2 version later. Harris stated that she could take Marvin’s electronic version of the flyer and put it in the City’s press release template. 2003-116_Bike Min.doc Page 4 of 5 Crosswalk Enforcement It was agreed that this item would be placed at the top of the agenda for next month. Agenda Items for Next Meeting Sidewalk inventory, Crosswalk Enforcement, and other items from the January agenda not addressed tonight. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:02 P.M. Next Meeting th 5:00 p.m. on February 20, 2003 2003-116_Bike Min.doc Page 5 of 5