Athens in Motion Commission

Athens in Motion Commission Tuesday, October 27, 2020 – 4:00-6:00 pm Online via ACC WebEx: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DE74KvdMKnA&feature=youtu.be PRESENT Carol Myers Aaron Redman Mark Ebell Teresa Friedlander Jake Maas Craig Topple Lauren Blais James Barlament Roswell Lawrence GUESTS Hillary Essig (TPW, Bike and Pedestrian Coordinator) Stephen Bailey (TPW) Rani Katreeb (TPW) Todd Miller (LS) 1. Call to Order a. Carol called the meeting to order at 4:03pm. 2. Agenda Additions and Approval a. Jake asked to add MLK day of service to the agenda. Carol agreed. Mark moved to approve amended agenda, Aaron seconded. 3. Public Comment a. No public comments. 4. Approval of Minutes a. Per Carol, we have the best minutes of any Commission. b. Lauren moved to approve; Aaron seconded. Minutes approved. 5. Riverbend Road Tier 1 Project Recommendation a. Hillary introduced the context. i. Tier 1 funded pedestrian project. The bike part is unfunded. College Station and Riverbend have bike lanes; Milledge does not. S Milledge is a Tier 1 Bike project.  Intersection of S Milledge and Riverbend Rd: bike lanes disappear. There is an (inactive?) RR crossing as well. ii. There was a sidewalk concept review and public forum a year ago; Walk Audit was January 16 2020, with 7 attendees including James Barlament. Most attendees were UGA-affiliated. Shoulders were particularly muddy that day, demonstrating need for sidewalks. Most active ped activity of walk audits – students walking back and forth. Concerns about lack of streetlights and safe crossings. iii. Divided into two segments due to high cost and different priorities for sections: 1. Riverbend Parkway to Milledge is SEGMENT 1. 2. College Station to Riverbend Parkway is SEGMENT 2. 3. There is some overlap between segments. 4. There is potential to add bike facilities afterward. b. Rani’s Presentation i. [See Youtube link above for full presentation.] ii. Total cost estimates address the overlap. iii. The slides Rani is presenting will mostly be what is presented to M&C. iv. Existing bike lands are substandard – not 5’. v. Total is 7300 feet; Segment 1 is 4400, Segment 2 is 3100, with 200 feet of overlap at Riverbend Parkway. vi. Ped access and improvements are proposed at multiple points with accessibility ramps, improved crosswalks, etc. vii. UGA has expressed interest in funding 600 feet of sidewalk from College Station to the greenhouses. viii. Cost estimates for entire segment range from $2.7M to $6.3M. 1. First Sidewalk Alternative: 5’ rural sidewalk. Segment 1: $1.3M; Segment 2: $1.4M. Lowest construction cost; few retaining walls; separate bike facilities possible. Larger footprint and requires more right of way and easements. a. [James: Segment 2 is much more heavily used. Mark: Segment 2 seems like the priority; it would be appropriate to pursue Segment 1 when Milledge bike/ped infrastructure is built out.] 2. Second Sidewalk Alternative: $1.66M seg 1 $1.8 seg 2. Some retaining walls and some drainage management. High right-of-way and property impact. UGA is not in favor of these two alternatives due to the heavy impact on UGA properties. 3. Third Sidewalk Alternative: UGA is in favor. Additional retaining walls to limit impact. $4.1M seg 1 $1.8M seg 2. (Segment 2 did not increase much in cost because retaining walls were already necessary.) 4. Fourth Sidewalk Alternative: requested by M&C, cost estimate derived from Alt 3. Increases width of sidewalk to 7’ while retaining 3’ buffer. $4.27M for seg 1, $2.17 for seg 2. Flexible design that optimizes field conditions; reduces property impact; separate facilities for bikes. a. [Carol: why did they want 7’? Rani: Because heavy traffic and students often walk in groups. Jake: god forbid students should walk single file. Mark: or two at a time; it’s plenty wide enough.] 5. MU Path Alternative One. [UGA has not provided any feedback on MU paths.] Mark asked about the location of the RRFBs – seems like  students in apartment complexes would not use them to cross back and forth across the street here. Rural shoulder with no bike lane; would eliminate existing bike lane. $2.78M for seg 1; $2.1M for seg 2. Separate shared facilities for bikes. Larger footprint and drainage management. A lot of impact on properties. UGA wants retaining walls and low impact. a. [Jake: when you say UGA you are talking about the Architect’s Office? Lara Mathes? Rani: through Lara Mathes, yes. Mark: It’s their faculty and students who are the primary beneficiaries of this. Jake: and for some reason they are not willing to go all the way down to the CCRC? Stephen: I think there’s some internal struggle there between all of the UGA facilities. Big push from the North side; big pushback from UGA transportation and golf course.] 6. MU Alternative 2. Urban shoulder with curb and gutter, retains current bike lanes. Higher cost, requires some retaining walls, large footprint with high impact. Needs drainage. $4.3M for seg 1, $2.7 for seg 2. 7. MU Alternative 3. Utilizes retaining walls. $4.4M seg 1, $2.4M on seg 2. Low property impact, greater ped comfort. ix. [Jake: if we choose to do this, can we mix and match between segment 1 and segment 2? Pick one alternative for one and one for the other? Rani: You can make an argument for it in your recommendation at your discretion.] x. Rani presented comparison slide. xi. Teresa: We don’t have much of a dialog going with UGA at this point. Rani: we received the concepts on Friday, so we haven’t had much time. We will also have a survey, and we hope to have a conversation with UGA before this goes to M&C. Teresa: I am troubled by UGA insisting on retaining walls even though it will cost ACC a lot more. Mark, Lauren, Craig all agreed. Mark noted how heavily used segment 2 is, especially opposed to segment 1, which is lightly used especially by peds, and would be good for a MU path. xii. Rani: There are a lot of challenges with regard to terrain on segment 2. Have to use walls, which is why there is not much difference between SW alternatives 2 and 3. xiii. Rani went through our remaining budget. 1. Ped budget: $7.9M remaining. 2. Bike budget: $2.78M remaining. a. [Mark: Ped program is for sidewalks. MU paths includes both peds and bikes. Can we share funding between the two pots of money in the case of MU paths? Rani: On Jefferson River Road, MU paths are split 50/50 between ped and bike. Carol: It looks like more came from the bike budget on the slide. Rani: there are additional costs besides the concepts. Cherokee was approved via commission-defined option; the 50/50 strategy started with JRR and TPW is moving forward with it. Stephen: there is a $300k-ish difference; the majority is because of the CDO that more greatly utilized bike funds. Carol: Are these MU paths going to count for the Tiered bike projects listed in the AIM Plan? Stephen: Yes.]  xiv. Next Steps 1. Public Engagement in December 2020 2. TSPLOST Committee Review November 24 3. Concept Approval Review January 5 xv. Barber St. Concept Approval will be March 2, 2021. xvi. [Lauren: what comes after Barber St.? Rani: We will have to look at TPW priorities and look at the Tier 1 projects in AiM Plan. Stephen: We are almost all the way through the first five AiM projects. The bike projects have slowed us down. Milledge will be a much bigger struggle to get through; timing issues with Cedar Shoals. What will probably happen next is for AiMC to reassess Tier 1 ped projects and provide recommendations for the next few to go forward. We will have additional ped money, but no additional bike money.] xvii. [Carol: would the 7’ path be concrete or asphalt? Rani: all concrete.] xviii. [Jake: When we talk about impact to property, we are usually talking about reducing the size of people’s front yards. When we’re talking about UGA properties, it’s a large strip of green space in front of giant parking lots. What is the concern with impact to property? Rani: we didn’t ask UGA specific questions about their reasoning. In the case of the pecan farm [which is on segment 1], there would be impact to the pecan trees. On segment 2 we have to use walls due to the difficult topography. [Secretary’s note: later we determine that UGA mainly cares about property impact on Segment 1, not Segment 2.] xix. Mark: its striking how small the difference is between 2 and 5, and how much more we get as a community with option 5 or even 6. If UGA considers these, they may see it that way as well. Jake: That option 6 keeps the bike lane seems redundant. Mark: I agree. Carol: I would find it confusing as a bicyclist – switching from bike lane to MU path. In terms of safety, it’s unlikely that cyclists would do that. Aaron agreed with Carol. Mark: there’s not much traffic between the Parkway and Milledge. Lauren and Aaron: there are cyclists. James: I don’t know if we need to even worry about segment 1 at all. Hillary: removing bike lanes with no transition is not a good thing to do. Bicyclists have to be willing to make inconvenient transitions, and they will not be likely to do that. Taking away a bike lane has to happen from one signalized transition to another. In Austin (and on the Beltline in ATL) they try to always retain the bike lane to give bicyclists a choice. Mark: I am convinced. xx. Carol: do we know that UGA is giving us the $600k? Rani: It’s $125k that they offered back in 2018 when we were putting AiM together, and there is no MOU. It’s 600 feet that they are willing to pay for. Stephen: we did not talk to UGA about splitting this into two sections. UGA’s biggest preference is not to encroach on their property in segment 1. They would like to keep the trees that screen the CCRC parking lot, but that was not as big of a deal to them as the golf course and pecan farm. Mark: that’s more understandable.] xxi. Hillary: I would not recommend the 7’ sidewalk. I’m not sure why that was included as an option. Rani: you have the option of exploring beyond what we are presenting here today. Riverbend road is on the deficit paving list. It will likely go through what Lumpkin did – there is an opportunity to increase the bike lanes by 2’ along the entire corridor as part of the repaving project.  xxii. Roswell: I’m interested in getting an up-to-date perspective from UGA and have already reached out to them through email. Some of the dialog was from 2018 and we need a complete picture. xxiii. Lauren: there’s a part of me that thinks this is eating too much into our budget, and I’m disappointed that UGA’s interest in contributing appears to be lukewarm. But on the other hand, we might as well spend the money because what else do we have ready? I think we should go for the sidewalk option, and keep it consistent between segments. I am excited about the potential for improving bike lanes with repavement. Teresa: I agree with everything you just said. Aaron: I agree as well. As much as I love MU paths, they are not always great for cyclists. James: I am still weighing the options, but I am leaning towards sidewalks and repaving bike lanes. In walking the audit, Segment 2 was very dangerous for pedestrians, who have to walk in mud and in places are driven onto the road. We shouldn’t push this along; it needs to be addressed. But I think we should just focus on segment 2 – it doesn’t make sense to build a sidewalk all the way down to Milledge. Mark agreed: Segment 2 has a much stronger use-case. I would rather spend the money on other Tier 1 projects. xxiv. Lauren: is there a sidewalk under the loop on Milledge: James: yes. Lauren: there is a shopping center there. Mark: We’re talking about walking all the way from the apartments on Parkway, and it seems unlikely that students would walk that far. That is an Italian or Irish level of walking. Lauren: I hear you, but I want to fill in that connectivity. Jake: Is there undeveloped property in that segment? Will it be built up in the future? Mark: it’s mostly UGA property. The segment from the apartments on Lakeside to Milledge need pedestrian infrastructure, but not the segment from Lakeside to Parkway. Aaron: but if we need that sidewalk, maybe we should just complete the whole thing. Mark: Or maybe go from the golf course to where those houses are. Carol: I’m with Lauren; I don’t want to create a gap there. It doesn’t make sense logically with our mission. James: It’s incredibly expensive and not supported by UGA. Rani: For the record, UGA did express interest in supporting the Sidewalk Alternative 3 in segment 2. xxv. Lauren: do we have to vote today? Staff, what do you need from us? Stephen: We can delay the vote if need be; it would mean pushing the agenda back, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing – maybe Carol will be on the Commission when this comes to the agenda and she can help explain it to the rest of the group. Carol: It might be helpful, because every time we suggest something other than a MU path, we have to heavily justify it. xxvi. Jake: We do need to talk to UGA, as a lot changes there in two years. The budget situation is not great. Mark: It sounds like we can come to agreement on Segment 2; it’s Segment 1 where we might need more information. Teresa: I would like to see us take advantage of the repavement, with bike lanes that will go end to end. Can I make a motion that we recommend that TPW put Riverbend Road on the schedule and in that process approve the bike lanes? Hillary: Repavement is a completely different process; you can recommend improving bike lanes when this road is on the repavement schedule. xxvii. Carol: I think we should postpone voting on this for another month, when we will have more information. We need to put together a complete proposal to the M&C. Rani: we won’t start the public input until we go to a work session,  and we won’t go to a work session until we have a vote from AiM. Lauren: I will make the motion that we delay the vote. Mark seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Carol: Jake, make sure we get the minutes a little bit earlier so we can review this. [Secretary’s note: SORRY CAROL] 6. Leisure Services Updates (Todd Miller) a. Ribbon cutting for Winterville segment of Firefly Trail happened two weeks ago. b. FF trail phase 2: clearing is done; they are doing dirt work for the budget that will go over the on-ramp for the Loop c. Greenway Network Plan full map update: online public input sessions 11/10/ and 11/12, and in-person event 11/14. Online comment will run into mid-November. d. Greenway Trail expansion: Oconee Hills Cemetery segment: bids due 11/15. Will start construction early next year. e. Firefly Trail Bridge: bids are in, but quite high due to COVID and hurricanes. We are in discussions with the apparent low bidder to work on ways to bring the price down. 7. Bike/Pedestrian Coordinator Report (Hillary) a. This is her last meeting. =( b. Stephen will be our primary contact but will have less availability than Hillary. c. Hillary will give us her personal email and cell. d. Jake: we are all devastated. But best of luck. I think Lauren’s crying a little. Lauren: I kind of am. Carol: You’ll probably be wanting to listen to all of these meetings on Youtube now. Hillary: Oh, definitely, I’ll be watching. e. Stephen: we are in a hiring freeze, so the process of hiring Hillary’s replacement will be slow. But could be as soon as December 15th. 8. AiMC Commission Update -- Chair’s Report a. Carol is also leaving for Commission. b. Next meeting has to be an Annual Meeting and we need to generate an annual report, including a summary (Carol) and budget numbers for next year (Teresa). c. M&C will fill the vacancy; Vice Chair will perform the duties of the Chair. Election in January. Carol: Lauren would be great at being chair. d. Carol was accepted to the Champions Institute, which has a real focus on complete streets and smart growth, and funding from the CDC. e. MLK Day of Service – could we do a bike lane cleanup? Jake: Deadline for registering is 11/18, which is before our next meeting. 9. Project Revision Process a. Carol: we are looking for a vote on this. If we need to spend a lot of time on it, we will need to do so at the next meeting. b. Teresa went through the proposed flow chart. c. Lauren: this is really clear and I love this chart. Lauren made a motion that we adopt the flow chart as is. Jake seconded. Motion passed unanimously. d. Lauren: this was one of our goals for this year. Jake: not only did we come up with a plan; we came up with a plan to make a plan, because we didn’t realize we needed a plan until we started talking about it. So double kudos to us. e. Teresa: Toole Design Group will provide us with the scoring criteria. f. Jake made a motion to adopt the process as written. Aaron[?] seconded. Motion passed unanimously. 10. Grants and Data Committee Update a. Mark noted that he sent around a report to everyone.  b. We’ve been striking out in terms of identifying funding opportunities, but we are making progress in terms of support from LS; we will reach out to Tracie Sanchez. c. We met with LS to talk through wayfinding TO the trails, which LS does not have the budget for. There’s a lack of knowledge in the community about parks and trails; this would make them aware of them and show them how to get there safely. 11. Policy Committee Update a. Complete Streets update – Carol found a number of wining examples, and this committee has constructed a new 9-section Complete Streets policy. Hillary and Eliot from Georgia Bikes have been helping. Equity section needs input from ACC Equity Officer. 12. Education and Communication Committee Update a. Budget i. We are requesting $10-12k. Teresa went through the draft proposed budget ii. Lamar will do a free billboard for us in a vacant location. iii. We need help with graphic design and copywriting, because those are special skills. iv. We really need mapping – printed and online. The map in the middle of the AiM Plan never got corrected. v. We can so T-shirts, safety vests. Lauren wants a safety vest. vi. Carol: let’s put this budget out there for some feedback amongst ourselves and see if any other the other committees want to add anything. b. Communication i. This committee created a first draft of a communications strategy. ii. We have lots of avenues for getting the message out, but we need to decide what the message is. iii. Physical media, interactive media (e.g., pop-ups); Open Streets events; social media; broadcast media (press releases, radio) iv. Craig: what about pop-up projects like the Barnett Shoals bike lanes? This might fit within this committee’s agenda. v. Teresa has made contact with various media organizations. But we need to refine our strategy and our messaging. vi. Carol: Teresa and I participated in an Open Streets planning session with LS, Bike Athens, Envision Athens. They will report on this next month. 13. Meeting Adjourned at 6:13 pm.