Mayor & Commission Meetings

LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE Thursday, June 1, 2023 City Hall Conference Room 301B Committee Members Present: Committee Members Absent: Commissioner Carol Myers, Chair Commissioner Ovita Thornton Commissioner John Culpepper Commissioner Jesse Houle Commissioner Allison Wright1 Staff: Niki Jones, Assistant Manager Brad Griffin, Planning Sherrie Hines, Deputy Chief Attorney Sarah George, Manager’s Office Stephen Bailey, Transportation & Public Works Shirelle Hallum, Transportation & Public Works Commissioner Myers called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. A. Approval of Minutes: Commissioner Houle made a motion to approve the May 16, 2023 minutes. Commissioner Culpepper seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. B. Public Input: There was none. Commissioner Houle made a motion to amend the agenda to discuss the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program topic first. Commissioner Wright seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously. Commission Identified Items of Interest: C. Review and update Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) Assistant Manager Jones provided a quick introduction to the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) topic, which the Mayor has asked the Commission to review and update. Transportation & Public Works Director Stephen Bailey and Vision Zero Safety Specialist Shirelle Hallum presented key points of the NTMP. Current NTMP Director Bailey reviewed some of the NTMP material presented to the Commission in February, including:  Purpose is to reduce crashes, vehicle volumes, speed and to improve pedestrian safety and create more pleasant neighborhoods; and  Current criteria was updated in 2021 for participation in the NTMP. Vision Zero Specialist Shirelle Hallum reviewed the types of calming measures: speed tables, curb extensions, traffic diverters, and traffic circles. 1 Arrived at 1:02 p.m.  Per the Commission’s request that Transportation & Public Works put money toward pilot materials for traffic calming, Director Bailey explained that they are looking at vendors who supply temporary versions of these calming measures. These products can be epoxied or bolted into place and easily removed later, with little damage to asphalt, making them ideal to use as pilots for future project. Reusability is one of the criteria they are considering in vetting vendors. The proposed budget includes these types of materials. Director Bailey reviewed the Commission Defined Option (CDO) from May 2, 2023 focusing on the authorization of staff to develop policies that provide a process for publicly funded neighborhood traffic calming utilizing ACCGov funding and a process for neighborhoods to self- fund traffic calming projects (these policies to be presented before the next programmatic year 2024). He updated the Committee on the NTMP status from 1999 to present, explaining that expanded eligibility results in rapidly decreasing available funds. $400,000 lasted 13 years, but $1M will not last us a year or two. Discussion arose clarifying that the process has not changed, but the threshold has been lowered resulting in more funding being used more quickly. The mitigating factors were the reduction of vehicle volume requirement 500 to 300 per day; and the 85th percentile speed requirement from 32.5 down to 30 mph. Assistant Manager Jones added that in 2016 the requirement of 750 vehicles per day was reduced to 500 vehicles per day. The speed requirement was also reduced from 35 mph to 32.5 mph. Director Bailey presented a list of projects, which were approved in May, listed by NTMP prioritized rank, neighborhood, speed control devices, and estimated cost (funding breakdown). The average cost of a permanent installation is $75,000 if installed by ACCGov, based on prevalence of public petitions for speed tables. He noted that costs would rise if we have massive amounts to install, because those installations would have to be done through a change order with our paving company. There would be cost efficiencies when it is bundled as an annual program with the paving company, but it would not be less than $8-9k per installation. Both SPLOST and TSPLOST provide funding for the NTMP. Director Bailey explained challenges related to limited funding including:  Currently have $303,000 between SPLOST 2011 and general capital.  We were approved for $1M in funding for TSPLOST 2023 – funding will be made available starting in FY2024 with an average of $200K per year through FY28. o $100,000 of this will be available as of July 1, 2023.  Mayor Girtz’s recommended FY24 budget includes an additional $300K in general capital for NTMP.  With an average cost of $75,000 per neighborhood, staff would be able to implement 8 permanent projects and 2-3 temporary pilot projects with the next fiscal year and thereafter 1-2 per year for the remainder of TSPLOST. He also described challenges associated with the program scope:  Collectors have been identified as needing traffic calming; however, they are not currently eligible for the NTMP. A possible solution noted was the Mayor and Commission designating exceptions to allow specific collectors into the program & speed management toolkit for non-residential (zoning) and non-local (roadway classification) roads. Further challenges are associated with staff capacity with the increase in demand of NTMP. They include the several steps to an NTMP study:  Setting up the counter, collecting the data, and processing it;  Marking proposed speed control locations (adjusting if needed); and Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 2 060123   Correspond w/residence. Each neighborhood takes 15-20 hours of staff time. (2 staff per study) Director Bailey explained the operationalizing of the policy in relation to the different criteria and how it would be ranked. These included: speed percentile, volume greater than 25mph percentile, crash history, infrastructure, % minority, and economic average. Referring to the list of “Approved Projects,” the Committee then discussed examples of how this policy was applied to rank the projects. Funding discussion clarified what projects were going to require future funding. Director Bailey summarized what they are authorized to do under the current policy with the following timeline for implementation.  Recently approved permanent projects will be installed during Summer 2023 as funding allows. This includes the 10 permanent installations that will likely be handled through a change order with our paving company.  Staff are currently gathering price quotes for quick-build pilot materials for use in the 7 neighborhoods approved for temporary NTMP projects  Post-implementation studies in areas where improvement have been installed will be performed 1 year post installation. New applications will be administratively put on hold for 2024 excepting quick-build pilot neighborhoods that subsequently reach consensus on permanent infrastructure. This is in consideration of lack of funding and that the Commission may be revamping the program. New Policy Discussion Director Bailey highlighted the following points that the Committee will need to determine in creating a new policy.  Data-driven vs. request-based. Moving toward a data-driven, systematic approach that is not based on ground traffic studies but on connected vehicle data across the entire county. Traffic studies would be replaced by volume and speed data from across the full network of residential local roads. They are currently using a pilot system that provides static data from 2021-22, but, ultimately, this would require an investment in a live subscription. As the Committee considers the new policy, they will have to determine whether to use a data-driven or request based policy.  Opt-out vs. opt-in. The current NTMP requires neighborhoods to opt-in by petition of 65% of the neighborhood, easily resulting in inequities. The alternative to this would be an opt-out program. This would be based on a data-driven study that notifies the residents their neighborhood is eligible for calming measures, but allows a method to opt-out, or choose alternate calming measures.  Equity in application. An element of equity in application would be ameliorated by taking the vote out of the equation. There may be other elements the Committee will want to consider.  Government-funded vs. neighborhood funded. The Committee has an opportunity to address equity in application here, too. The current policy allows neighborhoods to self- fund traffic calming measures. The commission-defined option stated the Commission wanted to consider creating two policies: 1) government-funded, and 2) a self-funded neighborhood program. ACCGov has an existing program for sidewalks using special tax fund district or funding through HOA’s. Director Bailey emphasized caution developing a self-funded program to avoid inequities by neighborhood. It should not take government resources away from other neighborhoods. Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 3 060123  Further discussion on this topic will take place at future LRC Meetings. The Committee requested examples of the available data used to prioritize streets. Commissioner Houle asked that they include information on how the data is collected. D. Updating sign ordinance to consider digital signage and billboards and sending a related recommendation to the Planning Commission Assistant Manager Jones introduced the topic and explained that the Mayor’s charge was for the Commission to review the sign ordinance and consider digital signage or billboards and send a related recommendation to the Planning Commission. A draft ordinance, created by a former ACC attorney, was submitted to the Mayor. Assistant Manager Jones asked Planning Director Brad Griffin and Deputy Chief Attorney Sherrie Hines to brief the Commissioners on history of billboards in Athens Clarke County and some of the legal ramifications associated with them. History Brad Griffin described changes in the ordinance from the early 1990’s. These included significant restrictions on automatic changeable copy signs, with text changes limited to every 10 minutes, and imposition of a cap on billboards within Athens-Clarke County. These stayed in place, with some amendments, for several years. In 2008, a consultant rewrote the ordinance to accommodate some legal challenges and to include a prohibition of automatic changeable copy, with grandfathering for existing signs allowing maintaining but not replacements. Director Griffin explained that litigation has not posed a problem up to this point, because the current limitations to automatic changeable copy signs are based upon motor and driver safety. He posited that now the Committee needs to determine if the community wants automatic changeable copy signage or not. He cautioned that allowing billboards to have changeable copy will defeat the safety precedent established for existing signage. The ordinance has to be all inclusive. This was confirmed by Deputy Chief Attorney Hines. The draft ordinance, which was authored by Bill Berryman and submitted to the Mayor & Commission for consideration, is supportive of outdoor advertisers and automatic changeable copy installations. The draft increases the allowable size of the billboards from 600 to 672 feet, and it includes a 2 to 1 reduction in sign faces, resulting in much bigger billboard installations. For the sake of reduction, Director Griffin recommends that it should be two billboard structures removed for one new digital, rather than two billboard faces. Also, the Committee will need to determine if we want to allow automatic changeable copy everywhere. Assistant Manager Niki Jones pointed out that this draft only contemplates the digital signage portion of the ordinance, not visual signage throughout the community. The original ordinance did not contemplate a digital sign with lights. The Committee will also need to take into consideration light pollution from digital signs and effects on residential neighborhoods. Commissioner Wright made a motion to pass this item out of Committee with no action. Commissioner Houle seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. E. Schedule/Agenda Changes The next LRC meeting is scheduled for August 2, 2023 at 1:00 p.m. Commissioner Wright made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Houle seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 4 060123  The meeting adjourned at 2:29 p.m. Legislative Review Committee Meeting Minutes Page 5 060123