AMATS (Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions) Policy Committee

ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING 4700 Elmore Road Anchorage, Alaska December 17, 2020 1:30 PM Due to COVID-19, this meeting was conducted virtually. Policy Committee Members Present: Name Representing Wolfgang Junge Alaska Dept. of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) Chris Schutte Executive Director, MOA Economic & Community Development Cindy Heil Alaska Dept. of Environmental Conservation (ADEC), Air Quality Meg Zaletel MOA/Municipal Assembly John Weddleton MOA/Municipal Assembly Also in attendance: Name Representing Craig Lyon MOA/Planning Department Christine Schuette MOA/Planning Department Aaron Jongenelen MOA/Planning Department Joni Wilm MOA/Planning Department Jim Amundsen DOT&PF James Starzec DOT&PF Jamie Acton* MOA/Public Transportation Department (PTD) Dave Post DOT&PF *AMATS Technical Advisory Committee Member **Designated Assembly Alternate 1. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL CHAIR JUNGE called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. Chris Schutte, Executive Director, MOA Economic and Community Development, represented Acting Mayor Austin Quinn-Davidson. A quorum was established prior to Mr. Schutte’s arrival at 1:32 p.m. 2. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ANNOUNCEMENT CRAIG LYON encouraged public involvement in this meeting of the AMATS Policy Committee. He explained staff would first make their presentation, followed by any comments from  ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Policy Committee December 17, 2020 Page 2 of 9 Committee members, and the floor would then be open to public comment. As a result of the virtual meetings, the public has been asked to submit an email request providing their name, phone number, and agenda item to AMATS by 6:30 p.m. the day prior to the meeting, but can also participate via Teams and provide testimony when the item is opened to the public for comments. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mr. Schutte arrived at 1:32 p.m. MR. SCHUTTE moved to approve the agenda. MS. HEIL seconded. Hearing no objections, the agenda was approved. 4. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES – November 19, 2020 ASSEMBLY MEMBER WEDDLETON moved to approve the minutes. MS. HEIL seconded. Hearing no objections, the minutes were approved. 5. ACTION ITEMS a. Non-motorized Plan – Public Review Draft BACKGROUND: The Non-motorized Plan (NMP) provides the vision for a non-motorized network within the Anchorage Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions (AMATS) Metropolitan Planning Area that when implemented, will help residents travel more safely and efficiently throughout the AMATS Planning area without the need of a motor vehicle in all seasons. The NMP merges bicycle, pedestrian, and shared-use pathway planning efforts simultaneously. By addressing these topics together, a more comprehensive framework and vision for active transportation in the AMATS Planning area is developed. The 2020 NMP will supersede the existing bicycle and pedestrian and trail plans. When trail GIS data has been updated and expanded to include new and planned facilities, it will include a broad overview of trails that will be amended with finer details in 2021, This plan represents over three years of work within the AMATS planning area to study non-motorized facilities. A series of public involvement opportunities helped shape the development of the AMATS NMP. Residents, visitors, and other stakeholders were invited to provide feedback through a variety of formats, including workshops, presentations, mobile meetings, stakeholder interviews, field data collection, and an online community survey. An Agency Advisory Group (AAG) and Community Advisory Group (CAG) provided additional oversight throughout the process by reviewing key deliverables, informing plan goals and objectives, and guiding the regulatory and implementation component of the plan. In addition, this  ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Policy Committee December 17, 2020 Page 3 of 9 plan has undergone extensive internal agency review including two AMATS TAC work sessions, resulting in over 400 comments logged from various transportation related agencies. Funding for this project came from the Municipality’s AMATS federal grant program as an AMATS Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) action item. On December 3, 2020, the AMATS TAC recommended this plan for a 60-day public review and release period. MS. WILM provided a PowerPoint Presentation explaining the Non-motorized Plan in detail. There were no committee or public comments. MR. SCHUTTE moved to release the plan for public review. MS. ZALETEL seconded. Hearing no objections, this motion passed. b. Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) Seat Nomination BACKGROUND: The AMATS Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee is the citizen’s forum for bicycle and pedestrian issues affecting the AMATS area. This group serves to make recommendations about bicycle and pedestrian planning issues to the AMATS Technical Advisory Committee. Members of this committee serve rotating three-year terms. Committee bylaws limit members to two consecutive terms. On December 3, the TAC recommended approval of the appointment. After spending 30 years in the construction industry, CB Brady changed careers to become the Executive Director of the Alaska Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired. Twenty years ago, CB learned he had a degenerative eye disease that would lead to blindness. While he still has some vision, CB is now legally blind and no longer drives. For the past two years he has used walking and public transportation as his main means of travel. CB feels that his experience with pedestrian site planning and, now as a walking pedestrian, would add a good perspective to the BPAC Committee. MR. LYON presented the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee nomination recommendation of CB Brady. There were no committee or public comments. ASSEMBLY MEMBER WEDDLETON moved to appoint. MR. SCHUTTE seconded. Hearing no objections, this motion passed. c. Policy Committee Resolution #2020-03 on the SFY2022 Alaska Mental Health Trust Grant  ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Policy Committee December 17, 2020 Page 4 of 9 JAMIE ACTON, Public Transportation Department Director, is asking the Committee for support of Resolution 2020-03. This application has been submitted annually since 2009. $1 million is available statewide for this funding and allows us to provide transportation services via AnchorRides for beneficiaries of the trust. Trust beneficiaries are identified as people with mental illness, developmental disabilities, Alzheimer’s and other dementias, chronic alcoholism, and traumatic brain injuries. It will purchase, roughly, 50,000 trips during 2021 to these beneficiaries. We are asking for a Letter of Support to be passed by the Policy Committee allowing us to submit our grant application with the required elements by the deadline of December 21. MS, ZALETEL asked if the definition of trust beneficiaries align with those who qualify for AnchorRides to utilize AnchorRides. MS. ACTON replied, yes, this grant application allows us to use some of our other funds for other eligibility uses on AnchorRides. These are specific trips for trust beneficiaries. There were no public comments. MS. HEIL moved to approve. MS. ZALETEL seconded. Hearing no objections, this motion passed. 6. PROJECT AND PLAN UPDATES - None 7. GENERAL INFORMATION a. AMATS FFY20 4th Quarter Project Obligation Report MR. LYON presented the FFY20 report noting that AMATS is required to be either plus or minus within a certain percentage of their allocation and at zero obligation by the end of the fourth quarter. AMATS has obligated all allocated funds. There were no committee or public comments. b. Seward Highway to Glenn Highway PEL Resolution (Revised Version) MR. LYON and ASSEMBLY MEMBER WEDDLETON updated the Committee on the PEL resolution.  ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Policy Committee December 17, 2020 Page 5 of 9 CHAIR JUNGE mentioned that a Code of Federal Regulations process exists and does not allow us a particular alternative. If a Substitute “S” Version is drafted, it should be presented to the TAC for review and recommendation (based on the merits of the resolution) to the PC for execution. ASSEMBLY MEMBER WEDDLETON concurred that it should go before the TAC prior to being heard by this Committee. MR. SCHUTTE noted a Point of Order regarding the “S” Version. He thinks those that are unfamiliar with the Assembly Legislative drafting process should be spared what the notion of an “S” Version is and just call this a new version, or a new resolution and send it to the TAC. The document, as presented, is confusing because it combines the original version and the proposed changed version. He recommended it just be a standalone item and not title it an “S” version. ASSEMBLY MEMBER WEDDLETON agreed that the title does not really match the current wording. He asked Mr. Lyon to delete that title and suggested replacing it with “Request to Emphasize for the PEL regarding the Seward Highway to Glenn Highway Project” and assign it another resolution number. MR. LYON clarified that it would be assigned Resolution 2020-04. CHAIR JUNGE opened the discussion to public comments. Public: Will a copy be made available to the public? MR. LYON replied, yes, it will be posted and made available January 7, 2021, which is one week prior to the TAC meeting. There were no further comments. c. Pedestrian Safety Concerns at the Tudor Road and Wright Street Intersection SCOTT THOMAS with DOT&PF provided a PowerPoint Presentation. The Committee had the following questions with responses noted in Italic. (MZ) She represents Midtown District and it intersects the University Area and Campbell Park Community Councils, and Tudor Road. This particular part of Tudor Road and its safety is a common cause for conversation. Even sometimes delaying or making it difficult for businesses to get the support of the Campbell Park Community Council due to concerns about that business possibly being wildly successful and driving additional traffic, or needing left-hand turns. We talk about this stretch of road very often. Her question is in regard to the Interim Solutions, as it looks like a more  ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Policy Committee December 17, 2020 Page 6 of 9 permanent solution is a long-term thing that will be many years down the road. Is it possible to do temporary signage identifying the high-volume or the likelihood of a pedestrian crossing just to bring awareness? Similarly, if it is to be explored to do double-fines or a safety area, what makes that happen? (ST) Warning signs are an option. We use brighter yellow or fluorescent yellow warning signs. Signs on the side of a road have a hard time getting noticed, but the State can look at more warning signs and be consistent around the city where we do that. We are also trying to get people to watch for pedestrians. Since we know most of the serious crashes are at night, the lighting is coming and we are going to make it reach the backs of sidewalks, and double the levels. For double-fines programs, that is a policy type program because it involves enforcement and ticketing, and does the revenue just get collected for revenue, or does it come back to safety and helping with pedestrian crashes in this case? Some rules have to be rewritten for that and DOT&PF has done that for rural corridors through the traffic manual and the Legislature. This is a question that would come through city code and our top administrators on whether we can do this in an urban area. (MZ) With regard to signage, she understood that it needs to be brighter yellow and we need to be consistent throughout the city. Is there any way to consider gearing that signage more towards the pedestrians, instead of motorists? She also asked for more context regarding additional monies, beyond AMATS, that Mr. Thompson had mentioned. What exactly, as this goes before the TAC, are the expectations or desires DOT&PF is looking for? Is it just to run through the options, or see if there are others and prioritize, or put forward what they think the best solution might be? (ST) As for signs for people walking along the road, he does not know where to start with that because anything is possible, but it comes down to where to put the signs and does everyone see them. He appreciated the Rescue Mission’s efforts to inform people in that area to be careful. We do have transit use in the area, and he would want to reach people where they are at. He is not sure of wanting to just put signs anywhere. Maybe this would be an education program and his expertise is more in what we build, such as infrastructure. We can add the signs, but he would need help on the education front. With regard to what he would expect of the TAC, he supports having the public review the Non-motorized Plan. Upon reviewing it, he thinks the TAC has members and supporting agencies that should look at the plan, as we bring it to final, making sure we like the safety rankings and making sure we are targeting these high-crash areas, and the other needs that need to be balanced, such as finishing the links. In response to Ms. Zaletel’s question regarding safety or additional funding, he is pretty sure it cannot be done through the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) alone. He would like AMATS to do as much as they can for safety areas, as well as the missing links. The HSIP program is a federally funded safety program and is data driven. We look at these crash problems and places like it and try to prevent these crashes from happening. We see in the data a nighttime collision problem with pedestrians and respond by treating not just one spot, but the whole segment. Having to compete for $28 million, we try to justify that this is a good  ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Policy Committee December 17, 2020 Page 7 of 9 project, and we did get that secured for the lighting of five major corridors: Tudor Road, Muldoon Road, Campbell Street, Seward Highway (in front of Carrs, Fred Meyer and Minnesota Drive on the other end), and Walgreen’s and Carrs. We also have two major intersection projects that are safety funded to treat pedestrian refuge at those wide eight-laned intersections of Tudor Road and C Street, and Dimond Boulevard and C Street. What he is saying is that AMATS, working through the HSIP, can look for other funds to treat high- crash areas, and that is beyond the TIP allocation. (JW) Noting that it is no longer called the Highway-to-Highway Plan, he asked how much traffic it would eliminate from Tudor, if that were to be completed. (ST) He does not know the exact number, but would like to give an idea of the traffic reduction. He is amazed that Elmore Road and MLK took 18,000 off Tudor dropping it from 50,000 to 32,000, putting it like most other arterials, but still very busy. Connecting the freeways is going to put a lot of regional traffic on the freeway and take them off of arterials giving Anchorage its arterials back in a way that you can conduct local commercial business and pedestrian crossings, and apply a lot of these solutions and speed limits. He thinks it is key to getting these highways back to their next upgrades, and AMATS’ modeling is providing the evidence of just how much. It was the number one solution to affecting the whole grid in Anchorage and connecting Elmore Road to MLK was the number two solution in the modeling, in the past. He supported the number one solution. (JW) This would be a 30 or 40-year plan. Tudor could then be narrowed by knocking a lane out and reducing traffic down to 15,000 cars making it another Spenard Road. (ST) I think you are gauging it correctly, but it depends on the numbers from the AMATS modeling. If we can get the road down to 15,000 cars per day, it becomes a three-lane road. He is not sure that will happen with the Tudor/Muldoon route because it is such a connective route for the city and all its infrastructure, all the way to the airport. With most roads there are going to be a lot of those opportunities on a lot of roads, if we can get the freeways connected. (JW) Which plans were you referring to when you mentioned getting AMATS’ plans aligned with HSIP? (ST) The Non-motorized Plan heard today and going out for public review has a huge amount of information on building a network and doing the right things. The outcome of that analysis is a list of very specific projects. His point is that as we do the review, he would like to see us all refine that because some of those very specific projects in these safety areas are not ranking high. That means the State is going to have to do the best it can with the HSIP. He would like to pool our efforts and see if they can help rank these higher. CHAIR JUNGE opened the discussion to public comments.  ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Policy Committee December 17, 2020 Page 8 of 9 Public: Not sure if the bus barn area is still in the works. If so, it will increase both pedestrian and vehicle traffic on Tudor Road. What effect will that have on their designs? (ST) Currently, he is not sure of the status of that project. A development similar to that has been going through a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) process with the City and with the State. That analysis, done by an engineer, deals with questions, such as where is the traffic going to go, how are they going to use the signals, will it take another signal on Tudor Road, and how are we going to best serve the congestion and the pedestrians? That would come from this analysis and he knows that effort is not complete, but would have to be completed before there is any change or construction of access. (MZ) When she raises the topic that improved lighting will be coming in the area to the community council, they are going to want to know exactly where you have the cross streets, or the scope of that lighting. (ST) The plans are in the design phase and are going out for review to the City, so there will be an opportunity to see the plans, which is where the poles are going. We have modeled the light levels to light the roadway area and curb-to-curb twice as much, and light the sidewalks twice as much. There were no further comments or questions. 8. COMMITTEE COMMENTS MS. ZALETEL informed the Committee that the issue has been raised during the last few community council meetings regarding snowplowing and sidewalks along State roads. CHAIR JUNGE noted that the City and the State both own facilities within the Anchorage Bowl area. The State has different strategies when it comes to plowing the sidewalks and when to plow them. The Governor’s budget is at play right now, so always happy to have support from the community in terms of funding for sources to keep up on these and make improvements. 9. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None 10. ADJOURNMENT MS. HEIL moved to adjourn. MR. SCHUTTE seconded. Hearing no objections, the meeting adjourned at 3:10 p.m. ANCHORAGE METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Policy Committee December 17, 2020 Page 9 of 9