Traffic and Transportation Committee

TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION February 13, 2018 A meeting of the Committee on Traffic and Transportation was held this date beginning at 3:32 p.m., at The Schoolhouse, 720 Magnolia Road. Notice of this meeting was sent to all local news media. PRESENT Councilmember Seekings, Chair; Councilmember Moody, Councilmember Wagner, Councilwoman Jackson, and Mayor Tecklenburg Staff: Keith Benjamin, Robert Somerville, Janie Borden, and Bethany Whitaker, Council Secretary The meeting was opened with an invocation provided by Councilmember Moody. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On the motion of Councilmember Moody, seconded by Councilmember Wagner, the Committee voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the December 11, 2017 and January 9, 2018 meetings. Application for Original Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity:  Angel Transportation Services, LLC (Limo)  Charleston Signal Taxi, LLC (Taxi) On the motion of Councilmember Moody, seconded by Councilmember Wagner, the Committee voted unanimously to approve the above Applications for Original Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. Director’s Update Mr. Benjamin stated that he had a lot of updates so they could interrupt him at any time and ask questions. During the U.S. Conference of Mayors, they had taken the Mayor up to D.C. and had meetings with all of the congressional delegation and USDOT to talk about the TIGER Grant application and solidifying their support. One of the big issues with BRT was that though they had the dedicated dollars that were coming from localized investment; they wanted to figure out a way to not have to go through the entire environmental review process. They were hoping for an exemption because the vast majority of the project was in the existing right-of-way. Mayor Tecklenburg arrived at 3:34 p.m. Mr. Benjamin said they were able to garner the support of all the congressional delegation for the TIGER grant, and by support they meant getting direct phone calls and/or letters to the Secretary of U.S. Department of Transportation, as well as the Federal Highway Administration. It was encouraging to get that support, especially from Senators Graham, Scott, and Sanford. Councilmember Moody said that one thing that came up was that he didn’t want to slow down the bridge if they got the TIGER grant, but whatever the City match was, he wanted that to come out of the TIF district and not the General Funds. He asked if that had been decided or discussed. Mayor Tecklenburg said when they approved it; they said that the funding source would be from the reimbursement from the TIF district. That’s the way it was approved, but the subsequent realization was that they could pay the general fund back in the future when more TIF money came in. He thought that was a good idea. Councilmember Moody said that was what he didn’t want to get lost. If they needed to bring that item back up to amend that approval, he didn’t want to take it away, but when the money came up, if there wasn’t money in the TIF, then it needed to be paid back into the General Fund. When the TIF was drawn, it came across the bridge, and he wanted to remind everyone that the bridge was in the TIF and he wanted the TIF to pay for the bridge. Mr. Benjamin stated they would have to figure that out because the $3 million from County, the motion they made for the match dollars was specifically to construction. Mayor Tecklenburg stated they could handle this notion formally when they received the grant award. He wanted to report that as they made the rounds at the U.S. Conference of Mayors, everyone knew Mr. Benjamin. Mr. Benjamin had opened some doors for them and made an effective visit. Chairman Seekings asked if they were able to get any sense on the timing for the allocation of the money. Mr. Benjamin said it would be sometime in the spring/summer of 2018. They met with the person who awarded them the TIGER Grant in 2010 and he was very familiar with Charleston and the process. The indication he gave wasn’t about the merits of the application, but the political side of getting to the top of the pile in terms of projects. The meeting with Senator Graham was no more than 12 minutes and he had asked what the City needed and said he would do whatever was needed. Chairman Seekings said the application was impressive and they could make it available. Mr. Benjamin said this was the year that they renewed their signal maintenance agreement. They maintained and operated all of the signals, and SCDOT gave them a chunk of money to maintain, and operate. That got renewed every 5 years, so SCDOT was going through their review of the agreement, and then it would go to the Budget office and Legal and then to Council. They finished Phase 1 of the video traffic monitoring system, so all of the screens were up. Phase 2 would be the upgrading of the computer system, which was already paid for. That would be pivotal in how they could troubleshoot what was happening in real time out on the streets. They needed people to staff it, but it was amazing. He welcomed them to come by the office and take a look at it. Councilmember Moody asked if all the signals had been coordinated or if they were adjusting it as they go. He was thinking specifically about Hwy 17. Mr. Benjamin said for Hwy 61 and 17 and through Bees Ferry, those portions were within plans for SCDOT to upgrade the intersections, so that the City could control those from the management center. They were waiting for those, and the ones in the upper neck portion that had been out for some time because of the port access road would be coming back online as well. They had a lot of intersections that hadn’t been upgraded to fiber systems, and when that upgrade happened, it would allow them to control them in real time. Right now, they had to send crews out to do that directly. Councilmember Moody asked if there was a map they could share that would show them. Mr. Benjamin said they went through a signal re-timing phase last year for all of West Ashley and East Bay. They were putting that information together that was looking at vehicle access, signal timing, and bike/ped safety at intersections. They gave a report in July and then started doing the Crosstown and were now piecing that together, so that report would be brought to them. Councilwoman Jackson asked if Folly Road was on that and Mr. Benjamin said it wasn’t, but they were open to doing more; they just needed the allocations to do so. Mr. Benjamin said that they finished the negotiation with the firm for the parking study, they were waiting on them to sign the contract, and they would be starting in March with a 4 day charrette. Their full scope hadn’t been outlined yet, but they wanted to make sure it was as robust as possible. Councilmember Moody asked if this was for the whole City. Mr. Benjamin said in terms of usage rate of metered and residential parking, it was downtown. However, part of the recommendations they wanted to look at was how they should be approaching parking throughout the City. In terms of taking into account how many spaces they had, how many metered spaces there were, and how they were utilizing them; it was specific to the Peninsula. There would be recommendations for the whole City. Right now, they didn’t have people to do dedicated enforcement throughout the City. Councilmember Moody said he thought it was mostly for the Peninsula; Avondale was a big problem in terms of intrusion into the neighborhoods. That was why he was wondering if that would be included or if it would be later on. There may be other places as well. Mr. Benjamin said in order for them to be able to make those accommodations, they needed to be able to enforce. Chairman Seekings they would get them on Avondale right away. Avondale was important because it was the first place over the bridge where there were no parking districts. Mr. Benjamin said one thing that he had been adamant about was having a maintenance plan and knowing where they were getting things done. On a weekly basis, they would be doing sign work on Mondays and Fridays and all marking work on Tuesday-Thursday. The reason why it was important they set that tone, was so that when they were getting requests in for different work that might be needed, they would have a better aggregated way of making those accommodations and they could be more pro-active in places where maintenance needed to be done. There were a lot of streets that didn’t have things like crosswalks and sidewalks that needed to be there. They were working on how they would dictate different areas of the City. They only had two crews right now, so they wanted to make sure they were using their time efficiently. Councilmember Moody said if they wanted to keep him happy, they should keep Mr. Somerville happy. Mr. Benjamin said he thought he was happy. Mr. Somerville had been a big help to him. Chairwoman Jackson asked if there would be any memos they could give the district members so that they had a heads up. Mr. Benjamin said that was where he wanted to get to. They didn’t have a schedule at all right now, and there needed to be one. Mr. Benjamin said they did get a better bike share grant. The effort was to identify ways to incorporate biking in low-moderate income communities and changing the pricing of the bike share to be more accommodating, and to also hire ambassadors from those communities to be a part of engagement and education about how they should traverse the roads. It was a $75,000 grant that was awarded. They had decided to be a part of the Trident United Way Apprenticeship Program which allowed high school students to work with businesses and get job experience, and then work full time in the summer. The IT department did it a few years ago and hired on their student. They had staff that had been working for a long time and had a lot of institutional knowledge to share to the next crop of work force. Mayor Tecklenburg stated they had shared news about the BRT system and it wasn’t high on their awareness list, so he was glad they did that. They specifically mentioned the upcoming need to try to shorten the environmental review. The BRT route didn’t go through any new territory or wetlands, so there was no need for a two year review of Rivers Avenue. He thought that resonated and hopefully they would get support. Charleston Transportation Plan Update Mr. Benjamin stated that Mike Rutkowski and his team had been working diligently on this process. The Committee had requested that they be kept updated and so they wanted to do an informational update. There was a lot of work that went into making sure they were hearing from the community. Mr. Rutkowski said that the history was what it was all about. He appreciated Mr. Benjamin as he had been wonderful to work with. He wanted to talk about outreach, policy guidelines, and the hot spots which were essential corridors or intersections that were problematic. He quoted from a constituent that they had neglected infrastructure maintenance. Everyone needed to be more mindful and patient. They looked at the data and at the regional standpoint, everyone was driving by themselves (over 80%). Per capita, it cost over $4,000 on each person’s transportation. The average trip rate from home to work and back was 25 minutes within the region because there were a lot of barriers and wetlands. They had over 430 surveys and mapped comments on the online data base. They needed to focus on getting people across the street safely, the maintenance of infrastructure (sidewalks, curbs, gutters, signal systems). There mantra was to look at everything holistically. The number one issue that people expressed concern about was the infrastructure not aligning with growth. The second issue was fixing the intersections at all levels for vehicles, transit, bike, and pedestrian use. They asked a number of questions about specific corridors and they got different levels of interest at each corridor. All across, they heard the need for bike and pedestrian connectivity. At the public meeting, they had over 100 participants followed by a 2-3 day design charrette. It was well attended. The focus groups looked at a multitude of issues including cycling, street scape, connectivity, and transit. The conversations were healthy because it was the first time that people were able to holistically look at this. They also had one on one interviews with the development and business communities. They asked the question ‘what is the trend that would be most impactful for Charleston’s transportation future’, and the answer was a shift in walkable areas and healthy lifestyles. People understood that they wanted to be more healthy, active, and connected. They also asked about John’s Island, James Island, and Daniel Island. There were specific needs for specific areas. Connectivity and providing for all modes rose to the top for Daniel Island, which made sense because they had one way in and one way out. They needed to protect that road. They also looked at physical improvements; they couldn’t do everything. Access management and cleaning up roads that hadn’t been improved in a long time was also important. That was the easiest and lowest hanging fruit to focus on over the next 10-15 years. There were three guiding principles and the first was doing more with less (fixing roads without needing a new right of way). The second was to become multi- modal (getting people across the street was a bare necessity). The third was the need for connectivity for all modes of transportation. There were a number of policies that came out of the first meeting and they told them to slow down. They needed to pick what was most important. Resiliency rose to the top. The number one problem downtown was flooding, and they needed regulatory controls to get people out safely. They needed to look at if they were asking the development communities if they were including better storm water practices. They needed to look at parking standards. There was a lot that could add to resiliency. The second policy was completing streets and looking at how they were repurposing the pavement. The third policy was connectivity. He pointed to a map that was the first attempt at roadway recommendations. They had picked out 13 problematic intersections and corridors. They wanted to show that they could do better at redesigning these. He said there was a perception of speeding along Rutledge Avenue, and neighborhoods were trying to get to the ball park, which led to it becoming congested. There were problems getting across the intersections and sight lines were a problem. In the after picture, they were including healthy sidewalks and on street parking. Everything they saw did not move the curb or gutter unless it went in, so no additional right of way was required. They could apply that all along the corridor, so that people could have predictable intersections that they could cross. Chairman Seekings said that one thing that was assumed in the before and after was underground wiring. Mr. Rutkowski said that was what they could do. Councilmember Moody said that on Hwy 17, they were working to get underground wiring and if they did this wiring down Hwy 17, there would be a grassy strip and a sidewalk. Inside 526, it was all old things that needed to be repurposed so they could connect the bikeway and greenway. Those were great assets, but they couldn’t get to them safely. Mr. Rutkowski said it was all about tradeoffs and what they could do. He referred to Clements Ferry and stated that they needed to protect the corridor. The way to do that was with a 4 lane divided corridor with pockets, medians, and connectivity between adjoining properties. They should be able to connect it all the way through. Councilmember Moody said that connectivity was good in theory, but a lot of times it became a word for short cut or pass through. It needed to keep people from going down roads to just go down them, even when they didn’t really need to. Mr. Rutkowski said that it was the way they designed the connectivity. Mr. Benjamin stated that West Ashley was a little different since it already existed. In West Ashley, the big concern was multi-modal connectivity. Councilmember Moody said it was important, but they had to be careful how they used that word. There needed to be a balance. Mr. Rutkowski stated that the best connected road system was the Peninsula, but they couldn’t build a grid system in a rural area. It was the way they designed it though. Maybank Highway was screaming to be widened because of all the development and they needed to connect the new communities coming through. They could add meandering sidewalks to get around the trees. Pocket medians would be important. Councilmember Wagner asked where that section was and Mr. Rutkowski said it was on the Johns Island side of the river. They didn’t care how developers connected to each other, as long as they got from point A, to point B. They didn’t want to build parallel roads because it would cause cut through and speeding. They just wanted to connect enough so that people could go from A to B. Savannah Hwy and Wappoo Road had a wonderful greenway, but it was being dumped into a dangerous intersection. There was free flow right turn and they were asking to take the free flow right turn away. They needed to control the access points. Councilmember Moody said they needed to put the left turn arrows on the lights. Mr. Benjamin said that the great aspect of the charrette process was that people were bringing plans from 5-10 years ago with these intersections. He referred to Fishburne and Hagood and stated that it should be celebrated because it was a gateway. They could do a traditional intersection or a round-a-bout. He also referred to River Road and Main Road. All of this would be on the City’s website in time Chairman Seekings asked where they would go from there. Mr. Benjamin said he wanted them to get the chance to see where they were. The next day they were having a briefing with City Staff, County Staff, SCDOT, and a few advocacy groups to give them insight to methodology. He wanted everyone to be aware in the front portion, so when they requested dollars and matching funds, the design preferences for the City were in the forefront. They would continue to dig through the process, and bring it before May of 2018. Councilwoman Jackson asked how they would be getting the money to make improvements. Mr. Benjamin stated that was a question for Council. They tried to have all of the projects within the right of way. Councilmember Wagner stated that parts of this were already studied intensively and what came out of the previous study didn’t look anything like what they had seen. Mr. Benjamin stated that they had County in the room and they brought their plan with them. They were making sure that everyone was on the same page, but the emphasis on this plan was what the City wanted. Councilmember Wagner said he just didn’t want to reinvent the wheel. A lot of work had gone into that as well. Having no further business, the Committee adjourned at 4:26 p.m. Bethany Whitaker Council Secretary