Council Study Session

MINUTES OF THE GILBERT TOWN COUNCIL, IN SPECIAL MEETING FOR A STUDY SESSION, TUESDAY, AUGUST 9, 2022, AT 5:15 P.M., GILBERT PUBLIC SAFETY TRAINING FACILITY, ATLAS AUDITORIUM, 6860 SOUTH POWER ROAD, GILBERT, ARIZONA COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Brigette Peterson, Vice Mayor Aimee Yentes, Councilmembers Scott Anderson, Yung Koprowski, Laurin Hendrix (attended virtually), Scott September, and Kathy Tilque COUNCIL ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Town Manager Patrick Banger, Town Clerk Chaveli Herrera, Town Attorney Chris Payne, Deputy Clerk Judy Martinez, Economic Development Director Dan Henderson, Development Services Director Kyle Mieras, and Project Supervisor Ryan Blair CALL TO ORDER OF SPECIAL MEETING Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 5:17 p.m. AGENDA ITEM 1. Discussion on the Heritage District Parking Master Plan. Economic Development Director Henderson provided an update on the Heritage District Master Parking Plan. He stated it was an informative overview that provided background and context of the project. He said the plan was to forward some of the draft plan documents to the Council, as well as to meet with them in individual briefings to ultimately seek their thoughts on how to proceed. He provided background, stating that parking served as an initial first and last impression of a location. He said it was an ongoing effort to initiate and support the buildout and redevelopment of the Heritage District. Director Henderson said the first ever Parking Master Plan or Parking Study was conducted in 2015, then staff provided an update to the Council in 2016 and were asked to continue to assess, seek data and information, and understand the parking requirements to bring back that data some five to six years later. He said that was really the purpose of the item, to pick up that conversation and utilize that body of work and share information with the Council. He said the information overview would be led by Walker Consultants who had been working with the Town and the Heritage District to really understand parking today, tomorrow, and well into the future. Andrew Vidor, Director of Studies at Walker Consultants, provided a high-level briefing. He said they intended to meet with the Council on several other occasions to discuss more details. He summarized the topics of: Project Overview, Current Conditions, Future Conditions, Engagement, Why Is This Important, and Questions from the Council. He said that it was a holistic vision of a parking system that supported economic development and equitable access through proven management solutions, experience and data-driven analyses, and function and form. He provided a project timeline and discussed the nine-month course that included a comprehensive needs assessment for the existing parking need in the Heritage District, future parking need, field data, a technical committee, an online questionnaire, a steering committee, parking management strategies, and the draft Parking Plan for future discussion. He provided a summary of the results of the 1,099 survey responses, noting the themes heard included that parking and mobility were heavily impacted by rideshare activities and that people wanted to park close to their destination. He defined priorities identified by stakeholders including passenger loading, micromobility, parking and curb cafes, and expanding outdoor seating. He reiterated the key points, stating there was currently an adequate parking supply, but there would be a point when more public parking would need to be provided; that active parking  management was key to business vitality; and to explore methods for funding new projects. He said the next steps would be to come back to the Council with a toolbox of strategies and to discuss funding strategies to help pay for a managed parking program. Councilmember Tilque thanked Andrew Vidor for his presentation and stated she was not in support of paid parking in the Heritage District. Councilmember Anderson stated he was not certain he agreed and maybe it could be part of the funding strategies discussion, but at the time he leaned toward not supporting paid parking in the Heritage District. Mayor Peterson stated she never had an issue with parking down in the Heritage District, which she said she visited very often, adding she would also start at “no” regarding paid parking but looked forward to more discussion. Mayor Peterson asked about past conversations regarding Heritage District employees using the top floor of the parking structures and if it had come to fruition. Director Henderson replied that a program was instituted with the merchants and employees to encourage utilization of the top floors of the parking structures using a badge program, adding it was meant as a pilot program to collect data and the feedback received had been positive. Mayor Peterson stated it would become more apparent as the 9.1+ acres in the area on the next block began construction and more people would be looking for parking, as that lot was currently used for parking. 2. Discussion on the Transportation Master Plan. Vice Mayor Yentes asked if staff would highlight the differences with the last iteration and the one being presented during the meeting. Development Services Director Mieras confirmed. Development Services Director Mieras introduced the panel of consultants and staff who would be part of the presentation including new Transportation Planning Manager Jason Hafner. Director Mieras stated the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) was first introduced at the Study Session of May 15, 2022. He stated in mid-July 2022 they had the opportunity to re-engage with the Council and clarify and address certain items in preparation for the current Study Session and for the agenda item for voting that was scheduled for the August 23, 2022 Council meeting. He said the clarifications included illustrating the predominance of the automobile in the Town and the importance of planning for vehicles. He said the significance of such items such as capacity and congestion had been noted, which was one thing they heard loud and clear from citizen surveys. He said the safety and efficiency of the system had been highlighted, and the updated plan also clarified how the TMP related to the other documents in the Town. He clarified text was added to illustrate in several areas that the projects and recommendations in the updated plan were not being approved, but provided for further staff and Council action as implementation occurred. He reiterated the plan was being adopted, not the projects which would be further vetted. Vamshi Yellisetty, Senior Principal Planner of Kittelson & Associates, Inc., thanked the Council for the feedback from a previous Study Session that was incorporated into this update. He said the TMP was a guiding document for the Town and would lay out the transportation blueprint for what the Town could look for as a vision going forward and identify and prioritize projects and programs for the Town to consider. He said they were organized as short, mid- term, and long-term with a focus on micromobility as a clear concern. He discussed where the TMP fit in with the General and Capital Improvement Plans and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, as well as the transportation bond efforts and other documents. Mr. Yellisetty discussed the 2014 Gilbert TMP and said it was based on the 2011 General Plan, then highlighted many changes since them, including a 22% increase in population. He highlighted how the plan was developed, including multi-phased community and stakeholder feedback, and how the evaluation and prioritization was done. He said they also developed a trails master plan and toolbox with the assistance of Valley Metro on the transit end to develop the Transit Master Plan as part of the Transportation Master Plan. He summarized key input including intersection and safety improvements and vehicle mobility, as well as bicycle and pedestrian modes. He said it included identifying technology- related improvements, programs to consider, street and trail design guidance, next steps and plans, and a roadmap to assist Town staff with carrying forward any recommendations. Director Mieras highlighted the clarifications that were made since the last update. He said the intent was to bring the Transportation Master Plan before the Council at the August 23, 2022 meeting for adoption. Councilmember Koprowski said she appreciated the update and modifications made on the TMP based on the Council’s feedback and it was comprehensive with the multiple transportation modes. She said the flexibility in design was forward-thinking and aligned with industry best practices, as well as National guidance, which would set Gilbert up for success. She said she was impressed by the stakeholder engagement and amount of responses, stressing the importance of it to the community. Vice Mayor Yentes thanked the group for the opportunity to provide feedback, stating she tried to decipher where the changes were made but was disappointed that the changes were mostly surface level. She said it did not change her initial criticism that substantially the policies reflected were not automobile oriented, which was what 99% of the community used to get around. She said another area that was insufficient was the lack of data, that she saw very little sourcing for the information, such as the crash data, while some data seemed “cherry picked”. She said if it was about making the streets safer and improving congestion, it should be data informed, then requested more crash-related and safety data. She said she would not be supporting the item when it came forward to vote and that these were the kinds of decisions that made people either love or hate living in Gilbert. Councilmember September stated he was critical too of the original TMP draft that acknowledged that 95% percentage of people in Gilbert used cars as the primary form of transportation, then said their focus went to moving people. He said he agreed that the language changed but not the content, and he would like to see 95% of the TMP focus on moving cars. He discussed prioritizing the investments including improving roadway conditions and moving the cars safely, then agreed that the improvements would be made with innovation and technology. He said it was important to address multi-modal and multi-use networks, but he would like to see it prioritized accordingly and proportionately with Gilbert’s priorities. Councilmember Tilque thanked the team for their time with her and for incorporating her suggestions. She said she did not see what Vice Mayor Yentes and Councilmember September mentioned, that she came from a different perspective. She said the TMP took the entire transportation system and overlaid it based on what could happen in the future, listing options for Gilbert should the Town come upon a certain situation. She did not see anything that said they would not focus on streets, in fact, she felt it was clear the majority focused on streets. She said the fact that it incorporated gaps and inconsistencies for trail systems and other aspects made it safe for those who were interested in other modes of transportation, then noted the prior discussions about Bird scooters. She said from the business side of things, the term “moving people” did not mean walking people, it meant getting consumers to businesses. She said once they got people there, it needed to be looked at if they would be safe on the rest of their route. She said she did not have a problem with the TMP; she had a concerns with by approving the TMP, did it approve all of the projects listed therein. She said it had been clearly stated that it was not the case; it was approving the TMP as a guideline for the future and it would be filtered and decided upon by future Council based on the information in the TMP. Councilmember Anderson thanked staff for the incorporation of his feedback, but said he still struggled with health/wellness and safety/efficiency in the TMP. He said he did not know if the two concepts were compatible in the same plan for Gilbert, but maybe were compatible in cities with a different climate. He said it was difficult to imagine making those investments to accommodate users who may not be in Gilbert for six months of the year. He said when it came to trails and bicycle use, there needed to be a cost/benefit analysis and it should be known who were the users and was it worth the investment to have those facilities there. He said one way to focus on the users, the people in the cars, would be to focus on safety/efficiency and to leave the wellness/recreation aspects in a plan such as the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. He reiterated that it needed to be known if the facilities would not be used during certain times of the year, and if there was a return. Councilmember Anderson read the following statement from the TMP at the end of the Improving Bicycle Facilities section: “Improving bicycle facilities to be more comfortable and protected will require the Town to balance tradeoffs to vehicle mobility. These tradeoffs may result in reducing the number of travel lanes, reducing lane widths, restricting turning movements, reducing vehicle speeds, drivers frequently having to stop at traffic signals, and reduction of the availability of on street parking.” He said that gave the wrong message if they were trying to make a statement that the plan was oriented towards those in vehicles. Councilmember Koprowski stated it was a Transportation Master Plan, not a road safety action plan, but agreed that safety should be the priority. She said she did not agree that safety and Gilbert’s trail systems were disconnected from transportation and spoke of a recent incident resulting in a death mid-block. She said 20% of Gilbert’s fatalities came from pedestrians and bicyclists getting hit by cars and 50% of Gilbert’s fatalities were motorcyclists. She said for every fatality, the cost of a life was $9 million when you do a cost/benefit ratio, adding installing a crossing at a trail was not a huge investment in that. She said she thought the proposed TMP was focused on safety congestion and roadways, but said she did not think one could forget about the other choices that residents wanted. Councilmember Tilque said one of the items on Page 157 of the TMP talked about the pop-up, flexible, temporary testing. She said it was unique and she requested pop-ups be utilized before spending money, similar to how staff had previously painted bike lanes green as a trial. Mayor Peterson stated she liked Vice Mayor Yentes’ comments about crash data and if there was a deep dive into data. She said she disagreed that the Town should not be looking at the trail crossings and trails as part of the Plan, stating that was where Gilbert had the fatalities. She said vehicles were No. 1 in the community, but the Plan was trying to show that residents wanted other transportation options and it addressed how to use them safely. She reiterated that nothing got adopted from the TMP without coming before the Council, then reminded staff to inform the Council with any updates and when trials were taking place. Vice Mayor Yentes said she hoped her colleagues would look at the difference between Level of Service (LOS) standards and street typologies. She said it was about how to calculate comfort and was not data-focused, discussing Williams Field Road as a “planning disaster”. She said the deviation from the LOS standards was a mistake and asked the Council to take a look at it. Director Mieras stated staff would take the feedback and clarify where the data came from, and he said the plan included background data on the first few chapters of the document. He said over 70 projects in the TMP were street-  related and it was a heavily focused plan on streets, congestion, and safety. He said, to his knowledge, the Town was not ditching the LOS characteristics at all, that it was a best practice standard across the Country. He thanked the Council for their feedback. 3. Discussion on the Ocotillo Bridge Design Concept. Project Supervisor Blair provided a brief project overview and introduced David Rutkowski, Project Manager at Kimley-Horn. Mr. Rutkowski reviewed the theme of Desert Oasis and said they just completed their last public outreach effort. He said they received less comments this time, adding that was a good sign they were going in the right direction. He discussed virtual outreach efforts and said the last virtual survey had nearly 3,500 participants. He said previously Palo Verde was the top theme, while the other themes were combined into a new theme. He said this time, there were still 2,878 participants, and Palo Verde was still in the lead. He said the Palo Verde theme was the preferred concept, and there were changes made since, but it was still early. He provided visuals of the concepts which would still be refined. Mr. Rutkowski discussed the possibility of changing the colors of the arches and bridge itself. He said they were considering the number and materials of the columns, arches, railing heights, and other technical details of the project. He discussed safety considerations and shade structures and placement. He said they were approaching the 30% submittal for the project assessment and the next steps including a public meeting in November 2022. He said he hoped construction of the project would begin at the end of 2023. There were no comments from the Council. Mayor Peterson thanked everyone and stated she appreciated the information. ADJOURN Mayor Peterson adjourned the meeting at 6:37 p.m. ATTEST: ___________________________ ___________________________________ Brigette Peterson, Mayor Chaveli Herrera, MMC, Town Clerk CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Study Session of the Town Council of the Town of Gilbert held on the 9th day of August, 2022. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and held and that a quorum was present. Dated this __________ day of ______________, 2022. ___________________________________ Chaveli Herrera, MMC, Town Clerk