Traffic and Transportation Committee

TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION August 21, 2018 A meeting of the Committee on Traffic and Transportation was held this date beginning at 2:03 p.m., at City Hall, 80 Broad Street, First Floor Conference Room. 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 Also Present: Councilmember Shealy, Eric Adams, and Taylor Hall The meeting was opened with an invocation provided by Councilwoman Jackson. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On the motion of Councilmember Moody, seconded by Councilmember Wagner, the Committee voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the July 17, 2018 meeting. County Transportation Projects Update Mr. Benjamin said he was grateful that the County made the time to come out. They had been trying their best to be as coordinated as possible with the City priorities. They had monthly meetings with County staff and the SCDOT District Office. Eric Adams thanked the Committee for having them there. They had been ramping up their efforts of coordination. The boundaries didn’t just stop with lines on a map. They used to be part of the County’s Public Works Department. In 2009, they had separated when the first sales tax was being implemented. They had 23 staff members and 7 professional engineers. Taylor Hall worked as the Public Administration liaison. They wouldn’t be talking about all of the projects they were working on in the City, because they were numerous, but they would pin down on the 26 team projects. Ms. Hall stated that she would give a brief overview of the half-cent sales tax and talk about the projects. The first half-cent sales tax passed in 2004 and it would run for 25 years and generate $1.3 billion. Collections for the first half-cent began in May of 2005 and so far, it had funded the completion of 225 annual allocation projects, as well as 11 featured projects. Featured projects were large infrastructure and improvement projects that affected Charleston both locally and regionally. In 2016, they passed the second half-cent sales tax and collections began in May 2017. It would fund 12 additional featured projects and would also run for 25 years, or until $2.1 billion had been collected. The first annual allocation program started in 2005. Charleston County Council allocated about $10.5 million to be divided into different categories. These were smaller infrastructure projects. That included bike/pedestrian, intersection improvements, drainage improvements, paving, resurfacing, and County Council/Public Works projects. The 2004 Transportation Sales Tax Annual Allocation Program would run until 2030, and in 2031, the 2016 Annual Allocation Program would begin. Their department also managed projects funded through the Gas Tax, called C-funds. Every gallon of 1 gas was taxed, and a portion of that (2.66 cents) was set aside in to a pot of money called C-funds. The C- funds were then distributed to all of the counties within South Carolina, depending on how much money was put in, and then each County had a Transportation Committee, which decided how to allocate the funds. In 2016, the South Carolina Legislature voted to increase the tax to 28.75 cents per gallon. That would take place in 2 cent increments, which would also affect the C-funds. The C-funds would increase to 3.99 cents per gallon, which would also take place in small increments over four years, beginning in fiscal year 2019 and ending in in fiscal year 2022. Chairman Seekings asked how much in absolute dollars did that account for. Ms. Hall said that in 2016, typically, they received about $5 million and about 75% of that went to local paving and the rest went into smaller annual allocation projects. They received requests from any entity that could provide maintenance once the projects were approved. With the increase, she thought the SCDOT expected about $8.5 million in 2022. Ms. Hall stated that the only featured project they had in construction currently was the Maybank Highway improvement project. That was the last featured project from the 2004 half-cent sales tax. Phase 1 was the resurfacing of Maybank Highway from River Road to Main Road and it included the addition of the four foot shoulders. Phase 2 was the additional west-bound lane to River Road and it would add an additional bike/pedestrian facility. The project was on schedule to be completed in September of this year. The next phase would be the northern pitchfork. County Council had requested that staff go back and update the traffic study, so in July, they had received an updated traffic study, that showed that, with the construction of the northern pitchfork, travelers, at rush hour on Maybank Highway, would save three minutes of time. With that information, staff had gone back to County Council with the recommendation to approve funding for the project. Ms. Hall continued and said that the rest of the projects she would talk about were from the 2016 half-cent sales tax. The first one was US 17 at Main Road Intersection Improvements, and Main Road Widening from Bees Ferry to Betsy Kerrison Parkway. All of their featured projects had to go through the National Environmental Policy Act process, which could be very time-consuming. For projects like this, it could take up to eight years. In an effort to expedite the project, they had split it into three different segments. Segment A ran from Bees Ferry Road to River Road. Segment B ran from River Road to Maybank Highway and Segment C was Betsy Kerrison Parkway from Maybank Highway to River Road. They had also done a traffic study based on each segment and the study showed that Segment A was already exceeding capacity. Segment C, by 2040, would be exceeding capacity, and Segment B would be beginning to experience traffic issues by 2040. So, staff recommended segmenting the road and doing Segment A first, followed by Segment C, and Segment B. For Segment A, they were in the midst of scope and fee negotiations for design. They hoped to have the NEPA process completed in three years, and then move into design/building negotiations. The next project was the Glenn McConnell Parkway Widening. They would be adding additional lanes on both sides from Magwood to Bees Ferry. That included bike/ped improvements as well. Right now, they were doing field surveys and traffic analyses. They also had the James Island Intersection and Bike/Pedestrian Improvement projects. That had been split into four different projects. They ended up with Fort Johnson Road/Secessionville Road and Fort Johnson at Camp Road Intersection improvements. They were working on the design phase for final improvements, but they were also working to implement some short-term improvements such as tree trimming and re-striking the road. The next two projects within the James Island piece were Central Park Road/Riverland Drive and the Folly Road Bike/ped improvements. The project manager for that had been working in tandem with the Rethink Folly Road committee and they hoped to 2 bring concepts, with associated fees, to them in September. Ms. Hall continued and said the next project was the US17 Corridor Study, which was looking to improve mobility for both traffic and pedestrians through Savannah Highway, over the Ashley River Bridge, and into the Septima Clark Parkway. The design team was working through public involvement currently. The last project was the Savannah Highway Intersection Improvements which was looking to improve mobility throughout the corridor. The project manager had identified 13 intersections to consider and they also hoped to connect the Greenway with the Bikeway. All of the improvements would be taking place within the current road. The projects all had a staggered start date. Their department was looking at a pay-as-you-go approach. The hope was to pay for the projects up front with current dollars, instead of looking for future money. Councilmember Moody said he wanted to be sure he understood what they said and stated they were talking about not bonding it and using the half-cent tax to pay back the bonds. Eric Adams stated that with the first half-cent tax, they had bonded a lot of money up front. They would delay the bonding. Councilmember Moody asked if they could get bond anticipation notes to get some of the things going and Mr. Adams said they were looking at that. When the referendum was passed, they had approval to bond for up to five years. If they went outside of that, they had to take it back to voters. Councilmember Moody referred to the Savannah Highway piece and said that he heard them say that they weren’t expecting to shrink the road. It seemed like they had an opportunity to put the wiring underground and pave the strip of grass to create a bike/ped path out of the roadway. It would be interesting to see what they could come up with for the center piece. That was normally the emergency vehicle route because the road was so heavily used. Mr. Adams stated that they thought they could improve safety by Magnolia Road by realigning the road, so that the intersections would function together better. Councilmember Moody stated they the problems were all the way down such as at Savannah Highway and Wapoo Road. Mr. Adams stated that they were still in the data collection phase. They had looked at the accident data over the last five years, and in that corridor it averaged more than an accident per day, which was high. Councilmember Moody said that didn’t surprise him and that I-526 was a whole different issue. That would create a lot more capacity and take the traffic off that area. Mr. Adams said they were not looking at that area. Mayor Tecklenburg referred to the allocation slide and said that was an annual $500,000 for drainage. This was confirmed. Mayor Tecklenburg said that the City had been applying for various projects through that over the years. There was some talk in the community to ask the County for more money for drainage. He asked if there would be available funds through the half-cent tax other than the $500,000. Ms. Hall stated that it wouldn’t be through the half-cent tax, but Public Works was starting to take on a lot more of those projects, so she believed people had been negotiating with them to get bigger projects completed. Mr. Adams said that this was all that was allocated for drainage for the annual allocation program. County Council could change that distribution, if they elected to. They had increased it a few years back. They received the most requests in the bike/ped category. They only had 10 drainage requests in the last year. The issue with drainage was that everyone wanted to study it, and County Council stated they wanted to fund projects, not studies. He was speaking with Frank Newham in the City’s Public Service Department about the tide-flex valve gates they were putting in, and that would be a great project for application for that funding. Councilmember Wagner asked how the section of Savannah Highway was tying into what the City had done with Stantec and where the overlaps would be. Mr. Benjamin stated that Wappoo and Hwy 17 was an intersection the City had looked at. They had been talking back and forth. Mr. Adams said that their consultant on the project was Stantec. Councilmember Wagner stated that with Maybank Highway, they had 3 one additional lane leaving the City and one coming back. They were bringing in a pitchfork on the north side and asked if that was one or two lanes each way and Mr. Adams said it would be one lane, each way. Councilmember Wagner said it would stop short of the marsh, where they would now have four lanes going across the bridge. It would be easier to come from the City, but asked how someone would get to the City in the morning. Mr. Adams said that there was a signal planned at the intersection. It would be the one lane up to the bridge. They did have another project at River Road and Maybank Highway, where they would have dual lefts going towards the City. Councilmember Wagner said there would still be a choke point. Mr. Adams said it would still be one lane and the main constricting factor along that area was the trees. They were hopeful that the dual lefts and intersection improvements would help. That project was just a continuation of something the City had started. Councilmember Wagner asked if there were any plans for the extra lane leaving the Island. Mr. Adams said that there was no funding identified for that piece. They were taking, to County Council that night, the additional funding they needed to get the northern pitchfork constructed. They were increasing that budget. Planning and future projects took everyone coming together. Mayor Tecklenburg asked what the delta was for the northern pitchfork. Mr. Adams said that the estimate was $4.2 million and there was some set aside. They were short $1.5 million, which would be the increase. TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE CITY OF CHARLESTON, SOUTH CAROLINA, CHAPTER 19, TO ADD A NEW SECTION 93 TO PROHIBIT THE USE AND THE RENTAL OF MOTOR SCOOTERS ON THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND TO PROVIDE AUTHORITY TO THE CHARLESTON POLICE DEPARTMENT TO REMOVE ANY UNATTENDED MOTOR SCOOTERS LEFT PHYSICALLY UNATTENDED ON PUBLIC PROPERTY. Ms. Borden stated that the City asked them to draft an ordinance that would prohibit the use of motor scooters throughout the City. This referred to things like the Bird Scooters that had appeared. This would prohibit the use for a one-year period, to allow the City to study the use of the scooters and determine if and how they could fit in the City’s infrastructure. Councilwoman Jackson stated that she had only heard about this through the news reports. If they were only talking about a temporary ordinance change, what had given them the authority to round up the scooters and fine the business? Ms. Borden said that from a Legal standpoint, they would advise to tighten down the language that was originally used to authorize that, and that was Section 19-133, which was more of a general prohibition on what vehicles were allowed, whereas this was specific to the scooters. That way, if there were any questions or pushback, they had something specific. Councilwoman Jackson asked if it was out of the norm for them to pass an Ordinance that they expected to go away and Ms. Borden said they had done it in the past. Chairman Seekings said especially when it was something new that they hadn’t seen before. They wanted some time to figure out if there were parameters under which the scooters could operate and to talk to the industry. Councilmember Moody said that they would be prohibited on the Greenway now and that was confirmed. On the motion of Councilmember Moody, seconded by Councilmember Wagner, the Committee voted unanimously to approve the above item. SCDOT Roadway Turnback Program Mr. Benjamin stated that for the last few months, SCDOT had been trying to think through what ownership looked like. The Secretary had pitched, to a number of cities, about the possibility for a pilot program for local municipalities to take back ownership of roads with a check of their calculations of a 40 year buyout, a one 4 time-payment. When they made this proposal to the Commission, they used Louisiana as an example, where they gave about 40-50 miles of road back per year to local cities and had a program that funded about $25 million per year. The program that they were piloting was $10 million, which was small for the entirety of the State. The universal thought process with other cities and counties was to show interest in the program. Before the Committee, they potentially had some roads to offer up in a letter of intent, which was due by the end of August to SCDOT. It was 5.8 miles of roadways. There was a calculation from the Secretary for the amounts per mile. If they were to get all the roads they were asking for in the list, it would be close to $4 million. With the small pot, the City wouldn’t get all of the roads. The Secretary had indicated that her intention was to go to the State Legislature and request between $40-50 million more for the program to expand it. There had been varying ways in which roadway ownership questions and movements had occurred in the City, but because there were dollar amounts attached, it was a whole new program that SCDOT was piloting and they wanted to bring it before T&T and get approval before moving forward. Chairman Seekings asked if the request was to bring it to Council and say that the Committee had approved the Pilot Program and Mr. Benjamin said they wanted approval for a letter of intent for the roadways that were outlined. Councilmember Moody said to beware of people bearing gifts. He knew they did potholes and if they got these roads they would have to maintain the whole thing. He asked what the estimated cost was for maintenance. It could get very expensive. There were a lot of costs and $10 million wouldn’t go very far. He was a little cautious and concerned. Mr. Benjamin stated that if they looked through the list, a lot of the roads chosen are for completion of ownership such as Johnson Street. They owned the majority of Johnson Street, except for one block. The original list was much longer. There was credence to thinking about Year 41, but that was a long way away. There were many areas that they maintained anyway, despite the ownership still being with the State, such as King Street. Councilmember Moody asked how they were maintained and Mr. Benjamin stated they kept up the sidewalks and markings. The City didn’t do the paving, unless it was patch work. Their dependency had been through the County and some preservation funds from SCDOT, such as with Brigade Street. Councilmember Wagner asked where it would end on Cane Slash Road. Mr. Benjamin said that that one was a suggestion from Planning because it was parallel to Maybank Highway. As development was going through, and they had complaints about connectivity, it may not make sense to leave it to whatever came. It might make sense for the City to have some control over what was happening. It didn’t have a specific end. Councilmember Wagner said that within the last six months, Zelasko Road was an intersecting road and he would have thought it would have said to Zelasko Road. Mr. Benjamin said that the main reason was the development coming in. Councilwoman Jackson stated that she was also a little skeptical, but thought that if it was something that the Secretary was energized to introduce, that they should be willing, as long as they could back out at any point if they didn’t like the way it was going. Mr. Benjamin stated that the process was they would send a letter of intent, they could choose what roads, and then had to negotiate with the City. Councilmember Moody said that he knew the County had a fair process in repaving streets. How that was going to be impacted was his biggest concern at first, and he thought, from what was said, that would continue the way it was. His experience was that the sidewalk was maintained by each owner. Mayor Tecklenburg stated that he would recommend that they proceed with the letter of intent and if they didn’t like the contract that came back, they wouldn’t have to accept it. They were conservative in selecting the few streets. They either owned part of the street already, or they were in a TIF district, so that improvements 5 could be made from other funding, or they had plans for the Pedal People Plan, and could get them out from SCDOT. They should try it and see if they liked it. Chairman Seekings said he was highly skeptical of this program in the big picture, because there was only one reason the State wanted to do it, and that was to save money. He suspected the deal was better for SCDOT in the long run, but piloting it out could be a good thing. It was expensive to maintain roads, and there was a reason that SCDOT was doing this. He was willing to vote for it, but they needed to keep a close eye on it to see how it would look in the end. Councilmember Moody said his first thought was whether there were other roads in bad shape that they needed them to bring up to standard before accepting them and Mr. Benjamin said that the Secretary had said that in front of the entire SC State Legislative Delegation, that they would do that. Chairman Seekings said that he thought all of them were operating under the same optimistic skepticism, as they all would, when this was put on them. It would be a burden on all cities. Councilmember Moody said that if they looked at the State, the problem would be with the rural roads, if the SCDOT wanted to get rid of those. Chairman Seekings said that it would be interesting to follow, and they needed to be the gatekeepers of this, because their SCDOT was the fourth largest in the country, in terms of linear miles and roads owned. Mayor Tecklenburg said that he shared everyone’s concern and what would happen after year 40. Long term, unless they received some funding source, it would be appropriate to ask for a piece of the gas tax. It might be a good time to have the conversation that if cities were taking over roads, they needed to get some of the tax. On the motion of Councilwoman Jackson, seconded by Mayor Tecklenburg, the Committee voted unanimously to allow the City to send a Letter of Intent for the SCDOT Roadway Turnback Pilot Program. SCDOT Committee on Urban Design Update Mr. Benjamin stated that one of the other reasons why this conversation about ownership was coming up and would come up more and more was the struggle with SCDOT moving the needle in a progressive way of what they allowed in the public right-of-way and what they were obligated to. SCDOT formed the Committee on Urban Design to talk through how they approved projects, what the gaps were in design, etc. The Committee members were talking to the State Representatives and County counterparts on a regular basis and if they, as a City, were going to continue depending on SCDOT to give them approval, there was a gap they wanted to bring awareness to. In front of them, was the Design Reference page of all of the documents that SCDOT and the District Offices used, as reference for design guidelines for the public right-of-way, stormwater, etc. On the third page, was a section of the Federal Transportation Law, which dictated how they were supposed to be thinking about transportation, how design guidelines were supposed to be, etc. In this portion of the law, it iterated that the National Association of City Transportation Officials Urban Street Guidelines should be readily used at the State and Local level for design standards and what happened in the public right-of-way. That was one of the most progressive urban design guidelines that was out there, but it was acknowledged in federal law as something that should be followed, and it wasn’t on the list of documents that the SCDOT and District Offices used. When the City made requests of everything they wanted to see, from crossing, re-timing signals, to the influx of other modes of transportation, they ran into this wall on a regular basis. That wall would come down a little bit if the Design Guideline was added to the list. It had been iterated to him, from the District Office, that they only went by what Columbia said they could reference, and if that was the case, 6 they needed to make sure that the Design Guidelines were in line with what Federal law said. He would argue that they weren’t. He would be bringing that to the Secretary’s office the following day. The second thing was a few reference sheets from a report that SCDOT did in 2014 to look at multi- modalism. If they looked at the goals that were outlined, there were a lot of things that SCDOT wasn’t doing and they needed to hold SCDOT accountable. There were a lot of things that SCDOT was being helpful with, but there were some things that needed to be corrected. They wouldn’t be able to get things done in the name of safety and accessibility if things weren’t corrected. Councilwoman Jackson asked if there were particular things that were the hot button issues. Mr. Benjamin said that design and infrastructure, transportation, non-motorized uses, and safety were important. They needed to cut down the number of people that were dying and being injured in the public right-of-ways. It shouldn’t be acceptable that they were number one for bike/ped injuries, number two for speed fatalities, and number five for DUI and impairment fatalities. Having no further business, the Committee adjourned at 2:55 p.m. Bethany Whitaker Council Secretary 7