Athens in Motion Commission

Athens in Motion Commission Tuesday, July 28, 2020 – 4:00-6:00 pm Online via ACC WebEx https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AOiaHmM6oM PRESENT Carol Myers Aaron Redman Mark Ebell Teresa Friedlander Roswell Lawrence James Barlament Jake Maas Craig Topple Hillary Essig (TPW, Bike and Pedestrian Coordinator) Rani Katreeb (TPW) Derek Doster (SPLOST) Todd Miller (LS) Scott Long (Bike Athens) ABSENT Lauren Blais 1. Call to Order a. Carol called the meeting to order at 4:02. 2. Agenda Additions and Approval a. Jake suggested adding a debrief of the M&C discussion of Cherokee Road. Hillary suggested adding that to the Jefferson River Road concept discussion for reasons of time. b. Mark moved to approve the agenda; Jake seconded. Agenda approved. 3. Public Comment a. There were no public comments. 4. Approval of Minutes a. Teresa noted a broken sentence in the section about where Steve Decker worked in Florida (FDOT) – this will be corrected. Hillary sent the Bike/Ped presentation for Jake to attach to the minutes. Jake received clarification about dates of M&C work sessions. b. Teresa moved to approve; Aaron seconded. Minutes were approved. 5. TSPLOST Corridor Update (Derek Doster) a. Derek shared the program they showed the M&C on the Lexington and Atl Highway Corridors (TSPLOST projects #14 and #15). i. They started with reports from the Urban Land Institute from 2013 and 2104; these focused a lot on long- and short-term business outside the right-of-ways; how to leverage land use goals; how to deal with traffic. ii. All the AiM projects together are in the multi-hundreds-of-millions of dollars range. There are some Tier 1 projects on Lexington Highway. How can we make things more bikeable and walkable? iii. Connect Athens Reports – high level down to specific projects. Usergroup worked on this to nail down some target areas to work on. b. Lexington Road Corridor i. Usergroup did not look at loop interchange area since a GDOT project is about to start there. ii. Considered traffic information and bike/ped information, looking at leveraging some potential improvements to airport, bus stop improvements for bike and ped users of transit. “Get people’s feet out of the grass when they are walking to the bus stop.” Traffic is hard to look at sometimes – focused on area between Gaines School and Whit Davis. Traffic study on Jail Rd intersection, potentially signalization. How do you cross the street safely? So many people playing frogger, and it’s just dangerous. There are different ways to do this – light or signal improvements to slow traffic down, and other treatments. There are ongoing traffic studies. iii. Local use trails coming out of corridor study – goal of getting from Satterfield to Southeast Clarke Park safely. Talk with the airports since the county owns so much land here – potential for connectivity there, to Firefly? Cut across country on land that the county already owns. iv. Sidewalk and gap improvements on the south side of Lexington, where the major traffic is. Utilize all these reports to break it down into opportunities (potential projects) – airport, bus stop, sidewalks, intersection improvements (incl. bike and ped), multi-use trail improvements, sidewalk gaps, signage. Some low-hanging fruit and some large ticket items – and they only have about $4 million. List of potential projects has been pre-approved by the M&C. We can look at these projects and weigh in on prioritization. v. They have talked with GDOT about doing a phased approach, determining which of these can be locally funded. A Special Encroachment Permit would allow us to do some work without having to bring the whole roadway system up to a certain standard (e.g., putting a sidewalk in without redoing shoulders, redoing ditches, adding retaining walls, etc.). As long as it is safe and affordable, DOT will assist in making improvements. Very helpful – this has not always been the case with the DOT. The new standards are not practicable in many areas on Lexington corridor. They are willing to work with us as long as State and federal dollars are not involved. c. Atlanta Highway Corridor i. GDOT has a project around loop 10 on Atl Highway in the next 12-24 months. We don’t want to spend any resources on anything that will be ripped out during this GDOT construction project.  ii. The Atlanta Highway Corridor usergroup followed the same process as with the Lexington Road Corridor. iii. Bus stops and intersection improvements, reconfiguration of Atl Highway at Mitchell Bridge Road, which is a bugger at certain times of day. This would be a bigger project requiring GDOT support, but some TSPLOST funds could be leveraged to acquire this. County may provide money for design and engineering; we can take that to GDOT when asking for assistance. iv. Lane adjustments and restrictions for better traffic management. The drop lane in front of the mall is a problem, for example, with poor signage to boot. Low cost and high impact improvements to traffic pattern. v. This information is on the SPLOST website. Carol got caught taking pictures of the screen. vi. Roads such as Jennings Mill Road and Heyward Allen flyovers may provide opportunities to reduce traffic on Atl Highway and provide safer routes for bikes and peds, since all new roads will consider the Complete Streets policy. especially for bikes and peds. vii. Bus stop connectivity improvements/sidewalk gaps will be addressed (some will be handled by GDOT project). viii. These sub-projects need to be prioritized; AiMC and TPW can use unfundable but high-priority projects to start new requests for the next TSPLOST that are follow-on projects to this round of TSPLOST. AiMC can weigh in on project prioritization. d. 50 public comments for Lexington Road and 76 comments for Atl Highway. (But 2600 interactions on Nextdoor App!) e. Prince Avenue Corridor project is coming – usergroup is being put together. f. Questions? i. Carol: what does it mean for a project to be “let”? Derek: they “let” a contractor have a job – it is basically “bid day” which is also called a “letting.” The 3rd Thursday of every month is “let day.” ii. Carol: For these corridors, will there be a prioritized list given to the M&C at a certain point? Derek: that day is coming; lists are being developed. Working with usergroup, Hillary, AiMC to help prioritization effort. We are at the M&C pre-approval stage, to make sure the M&C like the projects on the list to be prioritized. Oct/Nov for Atl Highway, with Lexington road a cycle before that (Derek will double-check). iii. Carol requested the public comments mentioned above. [Need to follow up?] 6. Jefferson River Road Concept Review (Hillary) a. Carol admonished us to “put on our thinking caps and focus in” on this. b. Hillary presented the 5 concepts. [See Youtube link above for full presentation.] i. This was one of the 5 ped high priority projects approved to go into concept design. ii. There was a public forum; M&C instructed TPW to look at it with more of a Complete Street lens. There was a walk audit on 1/13/20; 100 mailers sent (6 participants including Commissioner Tim Denson, 2 AiMC members, 1 local resident, 2 other community members). Overall feedback very positive for a sidewalk. Concerns over curve at Vincent Drive, railroad crossing, poor drainage (walk audit was day after a heavy rain).  iii. Features: bus stops, one small existing sidewalk in front of Family Dollar. Hillary got phone calls about intersection more so than the sidewalk. iv. Hillary wanted to present more on the context of the road and what is surrounding it, and potential projects that may provide connectivity. 1. Vincent drive just got funding for a sidewalk 2. Gap on Newton Bridge is being considered for TAD 3. Barber St. is one of the high priority projects for bike/ped 4. Chase street has the TAP grant which will include bike facilities through the roundabout being built 5. If all of these are built, we could have a continuous 5-mile bikeable loop with connectivity to downtown. v. Two mid-block crossing studies needed. Improvement of Vincent Drive intersection is included as well. vi. 1st alternative: cheapest sidewalk at $1.1 million, but does not fix the drainage problems. Rural shoulder with 8-12-foot cleared zone; 5-foot sidewalk. Low cost; no improvements to drainage; sidewalk is very weavy/windy. vii. 2nd alternative: Preferred sidewalk option. Would improve drainage, rural sidewalk but would allow for future bike facilities. $1.7 million. viii. 3rd alternative: Urban shoulder (curb and gutter). Most effective for drainage, but limits the ability for future bike facilities. More tree impact, more utility conflicts. $1.8 million ix. 4th alternative: 1st Multi-use path, Preferred option. $2 million. Curbed and shouldered with urban gutter. Will accommodate bike traffic. Will also have major tree impact (as all our projects will). x. 5th alternative: Multi-use but rural section, with drainage improvement. Not recommended. More tree impact and right of way impact. $2.3 million. c. Work session will be 8/11, public engagement will be Aug/Sept (TBD), Concept approval will be Oct 6. d. Discussion i. Mark: Potential 5-mile loop – to what extent is there or is there not funding? [Hillary went through the “Athens in Motion Context” slide in more detail.] Mark: part of it would be going through the Terrapin property. ii. Jake: proposed multiuse greenway trail through SCNC to Holland Youth Sports Complex could also provide connectivity (was part of ORGC TSPLOST proposal that was rejected). This multiuse path could be part of a loop with potential off- street connectivity. More connectivity is also proposed in the Greenway Network Plan. We should strongly consider multiuse path here (unlike with Cherokee). Mark: This seems like a critical stretch of linkages. Pushes Mark toward favoring a MU path. Teresa loves the idea of the MU path, which solves many problems and provides the greatest benefit to residents and commuters. There are currently a lot of bikes and peds on the road already. Having a bike facility here is important. iii. Carol: back to the 5-mile loop, the money for Vincent Drive is for a sidewalk, not a MU trail. Hillary: Yes, we would have to do a similar analysis for an MU trail. Would not take place until they have collected some of the SPLOST funds. Carol: This is only for a sidewalk, so we should be aware of that. iv. Jake: What about the tree thing? Are these really old trees? How much of a concern is this? If they are really awesome trees, that might affect  considerations about MU path. Carol agreed. What would the before and after look like? Teresa: it would be pretty barren of trees. Mostly water oaks; would be a hard loss to take them out. But for Teresa that won’t make or break the decision. Hillary: If you want bike facilities on the road, there will be tree loss regardless. This is the reality of construction. Jake: will cutting down people’s trees engender a lot of opposition to the project? Hillary: regardless of whether there is a sidewalk or MU path, trees will be destroyed. v. Teresa moved that we vote up or down on whether to pursue the MU path over the sidewalk. Carol: Is this a yes or no on #4? Craig seconded Teresa’s motion. vi. Mark is sensitive to the issue of trees but worries that this will be something that we deal with every time. Jake looked on Google street view all the way down the road and was less impressed that he thought he would be. Aaron supports MU path. Roswell supports MU path. Carol: does Rani have any thoughts about trees? Rani: Engineers are always accused of not being sympathetic to trees, especially in the cleared zone. The reality is, a lot of the trees are within the existing right-of-way, and are distressed or aging, with power lines running through them. (Rani stresses that he is making these observations as a citizen and not an engineer.) The preferred sidewalk and preferred MU path may have almost identical tree impact. But water oaks do not do well with traffic. James: can attest that water oaks that are 100 years old are at the end of their lifespans. Aaron: having worked with an arborist in town, water oaks also drop a lot of branches and cause other problems. vii. Teresa: can we offer homeowners replacement trees? Rani: placing the trees can be problematic, but there will be requirements for tree replacement from Planning – but would not be 1:1 tree replacement. Would depend on budget and also what TSPLOST funds can be spent on. Can AiM make additional recommendations to plant trees when possible? We can add this to our recommendations, dependent on budget and footprint of project, with considerations of public and private trees. viii. Carol: There is a tree council in Athens, and people have donated money to tree planting as carbon offsets. Could we collaborate with them in some way? Craig agrees that partnerships would be advantageous and would demonstrate our commitment and sensitivity. Carol: this might be something for the policy committee to take up and make a recommendation for all projects. Teresa agrees. e. A vote was taken on Teresa’s motion to recommend Alternative #4, the preferred multi- use option. It passed 8-0. 7. Bike/Pedestrian Coordinator Report (Hillary) a. M&C Cherokee Rd work session: Jake: M&C is keen on MU paths, so they will like this recommendation, and this is good to know going forward. [We really need to explain why we are not choosing a multi-use path when we do so.] In terms of process, it was helpful to have Hillary and Stephen in the room to play the role of the notes we would have given them. Carol agrees – it was helpful that Stephen provided funding concepts – reminding the M&C that there are another 18-20 Tier 1 projects. Jake: my other thought was that last meeting we discussed whether to add a rider to our recommendation asking the M&C to consider potential connectivity based on the outcome of the Lexington Corridor Committee project. M&C need to be thinking about the big picture of how to hook up discrete chunks of MU path into a network. In some cases, building a  stretch of path will provide momentum for connectivity, but Cherokee Road does not seem to be a great case for this. Carol: there are projects in the area, but they are further out in the tiering. In a miracle world, an MU trail would connect. [Teresa added up all of the projects, and the total is $300m - $500m.] Hillary was impressed with the work session and thought that the M&C asked very good questions, feeling confident about the next couple of presentations. Stephen: we need to continually point out the limitations on funding and all of the projects that need to be funded. They need to consider the big picture every time and not focus on a single project. Hillary: it’s not just about the quality of the infrastructure; it is about the quality of the connectivity. How to equalize these? Carol is off this commission in 5 months, but we will stay connected and Carol will be a conduit to the M&C. b. Todd’s report: Firefly trail in Winterville should be wrapping up at the end of August. The bridge over Trail Creek: bids due on 9/24. Phase 3 of FFT (behind RaceTrac) – they have been meeting about this and construction will begin soon. Mark: what about the final connecting gap? Todd: the piece from RaceTrac to Hancock has a 12-15 month completion time from construction initiation. Carol: Derek will talk to us about FFT next month. Mark: I can wait. c. Summer repavement: Lumpkin is getting repaved and milled. She will show us the plans in August and will send them out to us as soon as they get put on an agenda. Internal response has been positive. Will include Rocksprings and Hull. d. Hillary is LEAVING for ATL. Jake, speaking for the group: “NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!” Hillary will be part-time starting 8/24 but will be involved at least through September. Carol: Hillary has done a wonderful job and has full faith in everything she is doing. [Everyone tries to deal with their shock.] Carol is sure they will get someone who is as wonderful as Hillary. [Everyone looks sad and stunned.] 8. AiMC Committee Work Update (Carol) a. Carol didn’t get to all of her tasks; focused on prioritization review process. b. Subcommittees need to get back on track. Teresa will take the lead on Education and Community Outreach. Mark will be lead for Grants & Data. Lauren leads policy. Carol: Steve Decker says that we can have $12,000 for community outreach. Carol will follow up. c. Bulldawg Bike people will be attending our meeting in August. d. Prioritization process. Carol: we need to keep this a living document as AiM moves forward without Carol. Jake and Teresa provided feedback. i. A process where we can add new projects already in AiM – e.g., Kathwood, which is a connector between Old Jefferson and Newton Bridge and has no shoulder, let alone bike and ped facilities. There may be other places as well. ii. A modification/deletion/reprioritization process. iii. Will happen once per year. How will people submit suggestions, and who can submit them? We don’t want to spend staff time on projects that will never be considered. So, pre-analysis and analysis using prioritization factors in the AiM Plan. This will help when we have staff turnover as well. iv. Comments: Aaron: we could use this for the Timothy Forward request, e.g.? Carol: That project is currently being looked at through the Atl Highway corridor project. But could be a tiering change (these projects are in AiM Plan at lower tiers). There could be a request for re-prioritization; they could also put in a TSPLOST proposal.  v. It would be good to have an explainer for the public so that they understand what their options are. Teresa will work on this -- we need a gateway function, a rubric for how we would evaluate a citizen-proposed project. We can add TSPLOST procedure, etc. Carol: this could be supplemental information. vi. Aaron volunteered to work with Carol and Teresa on this. Jake volunteered Lauren to work on it as well. � 9. AiMC Education Committee OLLI Course Update a. Teresa developed a PowerPoint presentation for the OLLI class about AiM. Carol has reviewed and they are revising to make it more interesting and fun. They will jointly deliver the class on August 18th. We can use this as a template to build other community presentations. 10. AIMC Grants and Data Committee Update a. We will apply for at least one grant by the end of the year. We have identified non- profits and discussed federal funding. These will be small projects involving safe routes to school, education, wayfinding, etc. b. G&D Committee will be meeting before the next general meeting. 11. Announcements a. Next meeting will be 8/25 and will involve Bulldawg Bikes and possibly the Equity office. 12. Meeting Adjourned at 5:43. a. Teresa moved and Mark seconded. All voted to adjourn.