HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee - 01/13/2021 1. Welcome and directions on emergency evacuation procedures - S. Goddard (5:30 p.m.)
2. Changes or additions to the agenda (5:32 p.m.)
3. Comments from the public not related to the agenda (5:35 p.m.)
4. Consideration of minutes from the previous meeting(s) (11/30/2020; 12/9/2020) (5:40 p.m)
5. Infrastructure connections between Burlington and South Burlington - Cindi Wight - Burlington
Director of Parks, Recreation and Waterfront (5:45 p.m. - 30min)
6. Updates from the City - Ashley (6:15 p.m. - 10min)
7. O’Brien Eastview Development - All (6:25 p.m. - 20min)
8. Crosswalk Priorities - Crosswalk Subgroup (6:45 p.m. - 20min)
9. Facilitation of improved bike/auto/ped interaction - multiple (7:05 p.m. - 20min)
a. Proposed language for response to council - Shawn
b. Sub-group input on what actions their groups propose to improve these
interactions (Communication - Cathy, Engagement - Havaleh, Safety - Bob,
Signage - Donna)
10. Neighborhood Schools Greenway Update - Nic (7:25 p.m. - 10min)
11. Updates: Ongoing Committee Work - Any/All (7:35 p.m. - ~3-5min per person)
12. Confirmation: Next meeting Wednesday, February 10, 2020 @ 5:30pm
13. Adjourn (by 8:00 p.m.)
South Burlington Bike & Pedestrian Committee
Meeting Agenda
Wednesday, January 13, 2021 @ 5:30 p.m.
This will be a fully electronic meeting, consistent with recent legislation.
Presenters and members of the public are invited to participate either
by interactive online meeting or by telephone. There will be no physical site at
which to attend the meeting.
Participation Options -
Interactive Online Meeting (audio & video): https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/830033285
By telephone (audio only): 1-872-240-3412; Access Code: 830-033-285
JOINT COMMITTEES MEETING 30 NOVEMBER 2020
Members of the Bike and Pedestrian, Recreation and Parks, Natural Resources and Energy
Committees held a joint meeting to hear a presentation from O’Brien Brothers on a proposed
new development, on Monday 30 November 2020, at 6:00 p.m., via Go to Meeting remote
participation.
Those Present: A. Parker, City Project Manager; M. Keene, Development Review Planner; H.
Rees, Recreation Director; A. Gill, E. Langfeldt, O’Brien Brothers; Committee Members: R.
Gonda, Acting Chair; D. Shelter, L. Kupferman, D. Crawford, J. Challot, C. Frank, B. Britt, S.
Goddard, N. Anderson, D. Farr, H. Gagne, D. Leban, M. Simoneau, J. Kochman, E. Goldman, M.
Murray, J. Pence, A. Chalnick
Mr. Langfeldt said that the property being developed is the Old Farm Road property which has
been owned by O’Brien Brothers since 1942. The entire property is 140 acres, part of which is
already being developed as the Hillside Project. The proposed new development will be about
100 acres bordering on Old Farm Road, over the crest, and down to Potash Brook. The proposal
is for a large mixed use development, continuing the Hillside neighborhood with more
residential, some mixed residential and commercial, and then some commercial/industrial. The
mixed use will allow people to live and work in the same area and will result in efficient use of
the land with higher density.
Mr. Gill then provided an overview of the proposed development. He identified the main
arteries and existing Hillside area on a plan and identified the zoning districts and their
allowable uses. He then showed an aerial rendering of what the project could look like at full
buildout. He noted that no residential uses are allowed in the commercially zoned area.
Mr. Gill noted that the site was reviewed by Gilman and Briggs, environmental scientists. They
found no impact on irreplaceable communities. The Class 2 wetland will not be impacted. A
slide of the City’s natural resource areas showed that these lined up with what the scientists
had found. Mr. Gill said the large stands of trees near the brook and the riparian area will
remain untouched. Two wildlife areas will be incorporated into the plan, and the corridor will
remain intact.
The entire residential area proposed is in the R-1 district which allows for 25% coverage. 25%
will also remain as open space. Mr. Langfeldt noted that the residential area includes
additional housing to achieve affordable housing and the density bonus that goes with it.
Mr. Gill then identified the “green building” practices from the Hillside project that will
continue in this neighborhood. These are in excess of current regulations. Mr. Langfeldt added
that they will add conduits for solar paneling. “HERS” scores will be in the 20-25 range.
JOINT MEETING OF COMMITTEES
30 NOVEMBER 2020
PAGE 2
Mr. Gill noted there is an area adjacent to Kimball Avenue with about 95% ledge. They will
remove and process that material for sidewalks and buildings. This can save 18,000 truck trips
to and from the quarry, about 102,000 miles of trucking.
Regarding connectivity, Mr. Gill showed how the site connects with existing neighborhoods. He
also indicated surface paths and walkways.
There will be 6 green spaces around the development equaling 17 acres of useable open space.
Mr. Gill indicated the park spaces including access and parking capability. He also showed a
rendering of the park spaces and indicated a playing field large enough for a small soccer field.
He also pointed out the historic barn which will be preserved. They are proposing a community
garden and a pool for the community. Mr. Gill showed a rendering of that area and noted its
event capability. Another flat area could serve as a seasonal skating rink. There is also a
“natural play area” which will be maintained for children. Mr. Langfeldt noted that a private
residence on the site will remain private.
Mr. Gill identified the largest open space which will contain a fenced-in dog park. There will be
parking adjacent to it. He also indicated the location of a “fitness loop” with workout stations.
In response to a question of whether the green space with be maintained by the development
or by the City, Mr. Langfeldt said the barn and one other area will be maintained by the HOA
dues. The other green spaces would be given to the City at some point, similar to what is being
done with the Hillside project. These spaces would be open to the public. Ms. Kochman asked
whether the fitness trail and natural play area would be open to the public. Mr. Langfeldt said
they would be.
Mr. Langfeldt said they still haven’t come up with a use for the 2-story barn. It has a
challenging interior structure. They are open to suggestions.
Mr. Anderson asked about a rec path on Old Farm Road. Mr. Langfeldt said there will be a
sidewalk on the west side of the road, and they would like one on the east side as well. Mr.
Anderson noted there are a lot of “crossing points” and suggested measures so the road
doesn’t get used as a cut-through. Mr. Langfeldt said that is a big discussion. It is now a
dangerous situation. They have some ideas for traffic calming (e.g., narrowing street widths, no
long/clear stretches, etc.) and would be open to any suggestions.
JOINT MEETING OF COMMITTEES
30 NOVEMBER 2020
PAGE 3
Mr. Gill showed another potential site for a rec path. He also noted there will be more
intersections on Old Farm Road and possibly STOP signs to slow things down and make it less
attractive for a cut-through.
Ms. Kochman asked if there would be restrooms around the barn. Mr. Gill said there would be.
Mr. Langfelt described the connection to Tilley Drive as a more desirable commuter option
from Hinesburg Road to Kimball Ave. Mr. Gill said they would consider a recreation path on the
I/C road.
Mr. Chalnick of the Energy Committee noted that the “stretch code” has been updated and
asked if they will try to orient buildings to take advantage of solar. Mr. Langfeldt said they are
looking into that. Sun Commons helped them with the Hillside development, and a lot of the
proposed homes in the new development will be similar, probably with the same capacity. Mr.
Gill added that homes with a southwest exposure have worked will at Hillside.
Mr. Chalnick asked about considering electric heat instead of running gas lines. Mr. Gill said
they have not considered not running gas lines. They will continue to offer heat pump furnaces
as an alternative.
Ms. Leban asked about the grade down Old Farm Road to Kimball Avenue. Mr. Langfeldt said
they are “killing” some of the topography by doing it that way they are. He felt it will be safer.
The grade is 8%, and they have leveled it where they can.
Mr. Kupferman asked if the playground will be to city standards. Mr. Gill said they will meet the
city standards. They have a consultant and will be using a local vendor.
Ms. Keene asked to see where the development was improving intersections. Mr. Gill indicated
there would be pedestrian beacons at Eldridge and Hinesburg Road as part of the Hillside
Development. they are working on a design for the Old Farm Road/Hinesburg Road
intersection. They’re planning a signal and turn lanes onto the IC Road. At Old Farm Road,
they’re proposing new right and left turn lanes, a signal, and crosswalks. At Two Brothers and
Kennedy, they’re proposing a signal and a rec path crossing. In general, at the external touch
points, they’re proposing to widen the intersections.
A committee member asked about night lighting. Mr. Gill said they are not proposing many
lights except in the commercial area. He showed the location of lights at the intersections.
Homes will have front porch lights.
JOINT MEETING OF COMMITTEES
30 NOVEMBER 2020
PAGE 4
In response to a question about the nature of businesses in the commercial area, Mr. Langfeldt
said they don’t have any proposed business uses yet. They would like a community-scale
grocery store, a bank, possibly a pharmacy, but not a “strip mall.”
A committee member asked about the number of people expected to live in the development.
Mr. Gill said with 450 dwelling units, there would be 800-1000 people. When the issue of traffic
was raised, Mr. Gill said there will be a traffic study done.
With regard to tree removal, Mr. Gill said the area where they will be removing ledge does have
a lot of trees but they are neither large nor mature, consisting predominantly of 6-8” white
pines and buckthorn. Most of the mature trees are around Potash Brook. They are planning on
saving trees around the barn and along Old Farm Road, but there are a lot of trees being lost to
grading.
Ms. Keene noted that a memo has been prepared for each committee with questions and
asking for feedback to the DRB. She noted that plans are available for review. The DRB will
likely hear the application in mid-January, so comments should get to staff by early January to
be incorporated into the process. Ms. Rees noted that staff can send out a recording of this
meeting to the committees.
A committee member asked how to ensure the landscape management plan is adhered to. Mr.
Langfeldt said if it is a permit condition, it is required by the City. Other than that, it is up to the
Homeowners’ Association.
Ms. Leban expressed concern for 10 houses with driveways on Old Farm Road and felt it could
be dangerous and could change the character of that road. Mr. Langfeldt said the character of
the road will change, and that is a good thing. There is a challenge re: rear-loading garages.
They can’t add an alley without going over coverage ratios. They are looking at different
options.
When all questions and comments had been heard, the meeting was adjourned by common
consent at 7:40 p.m.
_________________________________
South Burlington Bike & Pedestrian Committee
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, December 9, 2020 @ 5:30 p.m.
Meeting was held virtually
Committee Attendees: Shawn Goddard, Cathy Frank, Bob Britt, Eric Silverman, Donna Leban, Nic
Anderson, Amanda Holland, Havaleh Gagne
Other Attendees: Ashley Parker (City Liaison), Paul Conner (City Planning & Zoning), Alan Luzzatto
(Public), Jonathon Weber (Local Motion)
1. Welcome and review of process for virtual meetings - S. Goddard (5:30 p.m.)
a. Dana given role of timekeeper
2. Changes or additions to the agenda
a. Will not review item 14 as there has not been a meeting with Justin yet. Will push to
January.
3. Comments from the public not related to the agenda
a. Alan Luzzatto – Contacted about crosswalk on Dorset St. They are at Nicklaus Circle and
want to cross. This is item 12 on the agenda. Cathy offered to move it up to the agenda.
Concerned about crossing to path on other side of the road. To get to that path, they
have to cross busy Dorset St. Development made up of older folks who enjoy walking
and biking. With the new development coming there could be an opportunity. Cannot
figure out a simple way to install a crosswalk. Its difficult. There are guardrails and no
sidewalks. Currently cross the street and cut through the small path through the line of
trees. Physically cannot get across safely. Asking for help solving the problem. Cathy
sympathizes due to her current house location too. Asked if there was a crosswalk right
there could it be easy to get from road to path. There looks like a ditch. Alan, yes there
is a ditch that would need to be crossed somehow. Will be getting a whole bunch more
traffic from future development. Cathy asked who owned the property in the small
triangle. Alan – The organization owns the front grass area. It’s a raised buffer zone to
keep the noise out. Could talk about that. Shawn – If we decided on a crosswalk at Park
Rd, how could they get to it. Alan – Thinks crosswalk at Park Rd would be the best
solution compared to a crosswalk further down opposite street. Donna asked if
association would be willing to install a gravel path or sidewalk to a crosswalk. Alan – No
sidewalks or curbs in the association. Difficult to figure out so would appreciate the
committees help. Shawn – Will be creating a sub group to talk about crosswalks. Asked
if Alan would be the primary contact. Yes, the association has given him the power to be
the contact. Nic asked if the depression between the mounds is a ditch. Alan – yes.
b. Jonathon Weber from Local Motion in attendance just to listen in.
4. Consideration of minutes from the previous meeting
a. Bob sent his comments on the minutes through to committee. Clarifying pieces. Motion
to approve November Minutes as amended by Donna. Second by Cathy. Dana abstains.
Vote: All in favor. Minutes approved.
5. Minor - Scoping Study Discussion (cont. from October Meeting) - Paul (5:45 p.m. - 15min)
a. Williston Road at Kennedy Dr/Airport Dr. Would have some additional delay from
vehicles. Recommendation is pursued as shown. The delay costs are outweighed by the
benefits. Reducing all lanes to just one, more consistent instead of branching into two
for just the intersection. Shawn thinks this is significantly safer because it will stop
people using the double lanes to zoom past people. Paul – When it comes to Council
there could be a lot of folks who disagree. Asked if we could have a strong statement of
support from the committee. Nic – I think this should be primarily focused on safety and
how its better for all, not just bike ped. Could we get Police Department to support on
that front instead of it being a bike project. Shawn – Making sure it is prioritized to
connect bike resources. Donna asked about crosswalk painting. Paul – Not a specific
painting plan, that would be at implementation. This study would create legal
foundation to be able to get it done. Bob – Asked if bollards to be installed at the
intersection to stop right turners using the bike lane. Paul noted that there are not
bollards in other parts of Williston Road. Shawn noted that the other work on Williston
Road has green paint etc. The latest standards should be implemented like at Farrell.
Paul – Primary purpose of the study was to look at feasibility of changes. Design
specifics will come later.
b. Hinesburg Rd intersection – Median creates challenges. Recommendation is to keep
western median and remove eastern median to keep the left turn lane. Garden St
proposal has bicycle accommodations with a shared use path on the south side of the
street. Challenging transitions and will need coordination with Garden St plan. Bob –
Asked about timing of Williston Road rec path? Paul – City Council will be looking at it in
the coming weeks. Bob – May be better to do this than wait. Paul – Can’t really do one
without the other. Shawn – Asked what was needed. Paul – A motion would be good.
c. Motion to approve recommendations above by Bob, seconded by Cathy. Vote:
Approved unanimously.
d. West Allen Rd – Interested in ensuring it would work best for pedestrians. Would
sidewalk be cheaper. Talked with Justin, and topography is bad enough that narrowing
would provide substantial savings but could manage 6-8ft instead of all the way to 5ft.
Best of both worlds would be paved because it would indicate to a cyclist that it could
be used. Bob asked if it was a sidewalk or rec path. Discussion of the options.
6. Updates from the City - Ashley (6:00 p.m. - 10min)
a. Nothing major to share. VTrans grant submitted for Spear St and should hear back in
February.
7. Major - CIP Impact Fee Discussion - Ashley/Bob (6:10 p.m. - 25min)
a. Ashley – Paul and Justin have been looking at revising the various Impact Fee
ordinances. They are considering moving bike & ped projects to be funded, in part,
through the Transportation Impact Fee instead of Recreation Impact Fees. Looking at
how much money that would be in Rec Impact Fees. There is a lot of money in there.
Paul brought up some points about the following. Listed on CIP and committee priority
list for a bit. Paul asked what bike ped infrastructure needs are for those areas.
i. Spear Street Sidewalk
1. In current scoping project it talks about sidewalk but also bike lanes. But
the recommendation we did was not for sidewalks.
2. Bob – Mention of sidewalks on Spear in CIP is just grandfathered. What
it outstanding in CIP is widening Spear heading south to Shelburne Line.
Has been pushed to 2027. Path between South Village to South Pointe is
a gap. About $250K. Other path projects are in CIP. North Jefferson Rd
to Upswept Rd.
3. Shawn asked for how we clarify the details in the CIP. Ashley said she
can just do an easy update. S. Jefferson to Parkside Drive is used now as
a dirt path. Nic – Noted that last meeting we talked about S. Pointe to
Pheasant and a crosswalk. Need to keep that on the table. Amanda –
Concerned about staying thoughtful in the wording of that piece that
has a definite start and end. Cathy – Not a long distance. Shawn asked if
there are concerns about adding the sidewalk language about
connection. Path from S. Jefferson is all C. Longs property. Ashley can
update without any more discussion or motions needed.
ii. Shelburne Road Bike/Ped infrastructure
1. Ashley - Developers have done some good work lately and need to
make sure we know what else needs to be done in that area to be bike
ped friendly. Bob – Noted existing conditions. Doesn’t think the street
mentions make sense. Should update. Shawn – Agreed that it doesn’t
make sense. Still need something. From Fayette down to Uno are the
important parts. Amanda would like to make it a priority for people
crossing the interstate there. Working with VTRANS for lighting and all
other safety needs. Hard for pedestrian crossing. Cathy – There is a right
of way somewhere at the end of Fayette that should have a path on it.
There is a UVMMC parking lot proposed and should have a better
connection through to Queen City Park. Ashley – Need to ensure this is
a priority project and wants happening. Feel like Fayette information is
part of scoping study that may get worked out. Bob – Think VTRANS
should do bike lanes all the way to shopping centers at Market 32 and
Shaws. Donna – Historically have always advocated to just get to
McIntosh. Have not ever advocated for bike lanes straight up Shelburne
Rd to Burlington. This would be new. Shawn – Need to make adjustment
to CIP and need to decide. Would need something feasible by January.
Nic – Fayette to Imperial is the most important work that could be done
easily. Still keep the other thoughts of going further north. Bob – that is
what the CIP says now but is shared use paths not just bike lanes.
Havaleh asked about scoping study and what they get you. Ashley –
Scoping studies are really valuable to have for grant funding requests
and get good public input. Shawn – In the next month, if anyone can get
out there in the next month that would be good. Look at number of
crossings and we can discuss in January.
b. Shawn asked for a summary of Impact Fees and how they work. Needs to be projects
that we want to do and know that they will happen.
c. Bob – New news on the change from Rec Path fees to Transportation fee. Ashley – Think
its going to be at City Council next. Showed the committee how to find the Impact Fee
ordinance online. Items in CIP need to be truly what the committee want, hence the
reason we are doing this project.
8. Minor - Consideration of City Council's question about improving bike/auto/ped interaction - All
(6:35 p.m. - 15min)
a. Dana – Email from a member of public about being harassed while cycling. Could there
be education and other things to help change behavior and interactions. Should make a
statement to pass back to council. Ashley – Could be a memo. Nic – Asked if City
Council asked for any other entities to give recommendations. Don’t think this is just for
our committee to try to adjust. Ashley – I don’t think so. It’s a cultural thing. Does the
committee want to be advocates for that. Need to work out how we could respond.
Could be information in a newsletter about being kind and courtesy. Donna – Two
pieces. 1. There are good places where lines are striped well and they really help people
with expectations. Having better marking is super important and would be much
clearer. Good opportunity to make out pitch to City Council the importance of updating
road markings each year. 2. Local Motion has some wonderful information for “Sharing
the Road” and a tri-fold brochure. Jonathon Weber – Have done mailings in the past of
brochure which could happen. Also have the “Rides a Bike” lawn signs that could be
distributed and could connect with Mary-Catherine. It is an all or nothing information.
Should come from other places such as the Police as certain people listen to the police
and no-one else. Shawn – Doing some feelgood stuff that does not have the impact. Like
the concept of our design of the streets and paint. Burlington does a great job of good
design of sharrows and paint. This helps people understand their rights. Could say some
words to City Council but need more actions. Cathy – Agree with comments. Local
Motion has great stuff. The more signs and paint showing where people belong is
important. Stencils are awesome. The right messaging in the right places. Nic – Would
like to write the letter to City asking for better funding. Ashley – Need to be careful of
the budget and current challenges we have. Shawn – Would just like the city to
recognize that this is a major issue that needs to be addressed and will require a
systemic change in how its addressed. Could the sub-groups meet and discuss, showing
what the things are we each recommend to address all of these components. Shawn –
Could we write to City Council to indicate that we are discussing it and hope to get
something to them after the January meeting. Havaleh – Culture change is a very hard
thing. Are there examples out there where we aren’t reinventing the wheel? These
could be people from other towns too. Need to focus on Drivers Ed too. Jonathon – LM
do Drivers Ed connections and other DMV interaction. Shawn – Asked if committees can
make a point to discuss before next meeting. Dana to send short comment telling the
City Council we are addressing their request.
9. Minor - Committee Zoom picture (if all present) - All (6:50 p.m. - 5min)
a. Moved to End. Snipped screen shot of meeting.
10. Minor - Spear St to Spear Meadow Rec Path Change Review - Cathy (6:55 p.m. - 10min)
a. Cathy – Previous planning showed rec path along property boundary has now been
moved to be in front of houses and having to cross lots of curb cuts. Nic agrees that they
should keep it. Havaleh asked if this is part of a larger plan. Nic – this is an arterial bike
ped route to get people off Spear St that is on the City’s Official Map. Donna – Vale
Drive doesn’t have rec paths. Also may not be desirable for selling houses. Concerned
about tree removal for a path and going through close to backs of houses. Shawn –
Asked if we would be concerned about that. Bob – Not worried about that. More
concerned about connecting to Spear St and connecting to Swift. Cathy – UVM has given
verbal approval for a right of way through it for a path. Would need to be city to do it.
Havaleh asked if there were reasons given for moving the path in the first place.
Amanda – If its for connectivity, the back, but if we are thinking of evenings and having
lighting then it might be better closer to the street. Bob – Asked if it went around the
back, would it still connect down proposed Elm Street to Spear. Cathy – Yes, go around
the last house. Shawn – How about we just go to them with our safety concerns instead
of trying it to design it for them. They should be able to work this out. Donna – They are
saving a ton of money by being able to do just one rec path instead of a sidewalk and
path. Maybe we can ask them to pay for the path to connect along Spear St to the light
instead of dumping out onto Spear. Cathy – May have been to the DRB twice already so
not sure of the timing. Jonathon – Cars backing out of driveway are dangerous for bikes
and peds. Would recommend path being in the back. Straw vote to recommend moving
path to back. All in favor except Bob who voted against. Cathy to go back to DRB to give
our thoughts.
11. Minor – Crosswalks Project Planning - All (7:05 p.m. – 10 min)
a. Define sub-group to work on location & priorities for January discussion (Williston
Rd/Hinesburg Rd/Kennedy Dr)
i. Shawn – Seems like its important to create sub-group. Bob – Would be on it.
Important to get moving. Scoped and ready to go. Cathy – Important to have
crosswalks as part of any development when its being done. Eric would like to
be on sub group. Nic too. No others and need to have no more than 4 to be
quorum. For now, sub-committee members are Nic, Eric, Dana and Bob. Discuss
and come back to Committee in January with prioritization.
12. Minor – New Crosswalk Request – Dorset St. @ Nicklaus Circle (across from new Park Rd.
Development – Cathy (7:15 p.m. – 10 min)
a. Discussed in Public Comment above
13. Major - O’Brien Eastview Development - All (7:25 p.m. - 20min)
a. Ashley - Earliest the DRB could review is the 20th so could be safe to skip for time
purposes. Shawn proposed to move to January. All agreed.
14. Minor - DPW Quarterly Meeting Summary - Shawn/Bob (7:45 p.m. - 10min)
a. Bumped to January per discussion in item 2 above.
15. Confirmation: Next meeting Wednesday, January 13, 2021 @ 5:30pm
a. Nic – Would love to have crosswalks be higher up on the agenda in January. Shawn –
Asked sub-committee to think about and discuss the actual process for planning and
installing a crosswalk and how we can streamline the process in the longer term.
16. Adjourn (by 8:00 p.m.)
a. Move to Adjourn by Havaleh. Approved. Adjourned at 8.05PM
Bike/Ped Staff Update – 1/13/2021
• Council CIP/Budget Meeting: The City Council reviewed and approved the proposed CIP &
Budget at their meeting on Monday, January 4, 2021.
• UPWP Scoping: Staff and Bob met with representatives from the CCRPC and the City of
Burlington to discuss the nature of the proposed Queen City Park Road project. After that
meeting, the project proposal was adjusted to include the project area extending from
Hannaford Drive, along Queen City Park Road and Austin Drive to the Burlington Bike Path at
Oakledge Park. This would be done as a regional project and would start as soon as CCRPC can
get it going with the existing funding in the UPWP and supplemented with additional funds next
year.
Penny for Paths Projects Updates – 1/13/2021
• Jug Handle Sidewalk: Construction on hold for the season. Additional lighting work and
landscaping will take place in the spring of 2021.
• Allen Road Rec Path: City staff is working to get the easements signed and notarized. Staff is
working with our consultant to prepare construction bid documents for this project, which
would be released in December. Work has also been done to coordinate with utilities regarding
a pole that needs to have a guy wire relocated. The utility work needed to be completed before
bid documents could be drafted. We still hope to select a contractor in spring/early summer of
2021.
• Airport Parkway Sidewalk & On-Road Bike Lanes: Our engineers have been continuing design
work on this project, and are working with the CWD to incorporate suggested revisions and
notes for the final plan set. Bid documents for this project are still being drafted. Construction
would be slated for late spring/early summer.
• South Dorset Street Shared Use Path: The project team has been working to coordinate and
plan the public forum in February. Letters will be sent to adjacent property owners to invite
them to this meeting, and an ad will go in The Other Paper. The project is still going through the
NEPA permitting process.
• Underwood Parcel Shared Use Path: Staff are reviewing proposals for the Viewing Area,
parking, and other related pedestrian connections. Staff hope to select a consultant in January
and get them up and running by February. The goal is to line the permitting up for both the
shared use path and the viewing area components, so that they go through the process at the
same time as one project.
• Kimball Culvert & Bike/Ped Infrastructure: This project is in the final permitting stages. The
team is still hoping that construction of this project can begin in the spring/early summer.
• RRFB Upgrades & Dorset Street Barriers: Public Works has indicated that these projects will not
begin until the spring.
Difficulty and Speed Ranking
Quick and Easy (Possibly could be done by DPW Crew?)Notes
1 Prouty Parkway On Route 116. In 4 Project Scoping Study. Should be contracted out and done at same time as top 6.
2 Ruth Street On Route 116. In 4 Project Scoping Study. Should be contracted out and done at same time as top 6.
3 Wright Court On Route 116. In 4 Project Scoping Study. Should be contracted out and done at same time as top 6.
4 Awasiwi Trail On Route 116. In 4 Project Scoping Study. Should be contracted out and done at same time as top 6.
5 St John Vianney On Route 116. In 4 Project Scoping Study. RRFB's Only. Should be contracted out and done at same time as top 6.
6 Songbird Rd Would need small sidewalk connection to street. See prelim assessment by SBBPC. Should be contracted out and done at same time as top 6.
7 Dorset Street & UMall & Garden St. Intersection Need North/South facing pedestrian-activated, crosswalk lights to cross from Healthy Living to Trader Joe's on east side and from
Sears Auto to Xfinity/Comcast on west side. Need crossing lights and traffic light timing (?).
8 Brewer Parkway & New Hannaford Entrance Need East/West crosswalk across Shelburne Road. Distances between nearby crosswalks are too far. Need crossing lights and
traffic light timing (?).
9 Laurel Hill Dr & Hannaford Drive Need East/West crosswalk across Shelburne Road. Distances between nearby crosswalks are too far. Needs engineering, paint,
crossing lights and traffic light timing (?).
10 Dubois Dr/Butler Dr Already has sidewalks on both sides. Easy in terms of engineering but 45MPH. Needs state review and RRFB at least!
11 Cider Mill Dr Where rec path terminates beside mail boxes. Start with just paint like the rest of them
12 Ascension on Allen Phase 2 - Install 500ft of sidewalk to connect to Pillsbury and rec path
Harder and Longer Needs Engineering plans? Bigger price tag
1 W Twin Oaks In Williston Kennedy Scoping Study. Needs median. Anticipate doing at same time as Williston Rd
2 Elsom Parkway In Williston Rd Scoping Study. Needs median. Anticipate doing at same time as Kennedy
3 Mills Avenue In Williston Rd Scoping Study. Needs median. Anticipate doing at same time as Kennedy
4 S. Pointe Dr To connect to new sidewalk to Pheasant Way. Will need to have 350ft if sidewalk at same time
5 Park Rd/Nicklaus Circle Needs path or sidewalk to connect with Nicklaus. Would require partnership with association for possibly them intalling sidewalk
6 Pine Tree Terrace In Williston Rd Scoping Study. Needs median
Allen Rd Will be done as part of Allen Rd Rec Path Connection
Van Sicklen Rd Really? Speed issue, connecting to what?
Out of our hands Needs Engineering, Developers, State
1 Lindenwood/Queen City Parkway When Developer does upgrades?
2 Tilley Drive Already in process due to development
PRELIMINARY Songbird Crosswalk Analysis
Data, photographs and analysis done by South Burlington Bike Ped Committee members. December 2020 and
January 2021. Would need further analysis by professional and/or SB DPW as next steps.
DATA:
Street speed limit = 35 MPH
Required stopping sight distance = 250ft (*downgrades require longer stopping distances)
Clear sight distance heading North - Approx 800ft
Clear sight distance heading South - Approx 685ft
Height of RRFB’s = 6-8ft (likely similar to Songbird Road sign)
Point where Songbird Rd sign is clearly visible Taken from
View of proposed crosswalk location:
NOTES FROM DANA:
Is there significant traffic and can it be difficult to navigate this intersection?
●Yes. There is pedestrian, cyclist and car traffic at this intersection. School children cross regularly,
and Songbird is also a much-used shortcut for cyclists looking for a safer path between Burlington
and South Burlington. Motorists also use this cut through to avoid the traffic of northern Dorset St.
Of all the competing priorities SBBPC is considering, should this be a top priority?
●I think this is a contender for our top priority list because of its traffic volume, and its difficulty to
navigate.
●Additionally, this could be a significant east-west passage for school-aged children to be able to
bike/walk to school. So, if that is one of our top priorities, then this intersection may also be
considered toward that goal.
I've made several trips both during the AM and PM along Dorset St to test the visibility of the area immediate to
Songbird Lane. Coming from either direction on Dorset St, the visibility does not seem like it would be a
problem.
You do momentarily lose sight of that small section. As you head south on Dorset, the overpass does block
visibility for a couple of seconds, but since the speed limit is 35, drivers should still have plenty of time to
interact appropriately. Without RRFB assistance, we are putting the onus on cyclists and pedestrians to cross
a busy section of road. Both before and after the overpass, line of sight is not interrupted.
As a side note, I think the last time we looked at the reflective beacons, we found that they were set to the
minimum time prescribed by the standards (8 seconds?). I think we may want to consider suggesting that this
crossing be set to a longer crossing time so that cars can see the blinking lights at the crossing well before
they are in the 'blind spot" of the overpass and will have ample opportunity to react appropriately.
I could see that for someone on Songbird preparing to cross Dorset, looking north, the 89 overpass does
visually block a small part of the road. People are going to cross at that intersection, regardless of what we do.
There are no good alternatives. And, at one time we were told that the school bus stops there, because it can't
make it through the winding and somewhat narrow Songbird Lane. If that is still the case, then it seems that
the City is supporting crossing at this juncture, in which case it also needs to ensure that it is safe.
An additional concern is that over the years, numerous members of the community have contacted the SBBPC
to report the dangers approximate to this intersection. Over the summer months, bollards were added to this
general vicinity to prevent cars from driving up onto the recreation path, and treating it as a separate car lane.
The nearby intersection of Kennedy and Dorset often gets backed up in both the North and South lanes.
Calculating when it is safe to cross here shouldn't be something left to the pedestrians and cyclists. The City
should provide a safe crossing.
Other Views from Songbird intersection:
Neighborhood-Schools Greenway
The Concept
Create a Neighborhood Greenway from Elsom Parkway to Dorset St to create a "Safe Route to School" for
middle and high schoolers. This could involve pavement markings and signs. Also would involve installing a
key crosswalk on Hinesburg Rd at Prouty Parkway (already planned but not executed) which is technically a
state-controlled road. For safety, pleasantness, placemaking, neighborhood calming. Could have 20mph speed
limit? Art?
The Route
Essentially following a 1 mile route from Williston Road
●Down Elsom Parkway,
●through the City Owned woods at the end through to Prouty Parkway,
●crosswalk over Hinesburg Rd,
●Up Hinesburg a little on the West Side path,
●Down Sunset Ct (lilac has a path at the end but it is private property. People use it now but likely would
not be able to have a sanctioned route on it),
●through the official city ROW path from Birch St to O’Brien,
●along O’Brien Dr on the street and then
●through the cut at the end of Barrett to the Middle School.
The Need:
Planning help. Use of the LM Demonstration Trailer. Expertise. Signs
Timing:
Would be awesome to spend the winter planning and do a two month pilot from April 15-June 15. Could do a
bunch of promotion in colab with the two schools to encourage kids to walk and ride the route to school
especially during May Bike Month. May and June, could gather feedback from users to find out if they have
walked or biked to school before, if this encouraged them to, if they felt safer etc. Late June, could gather
additional feedback and hope to do permanent installation during August.
Outreach/Engagement
●State - Demonstration project permit - Jonathon
●Neighbors - Getting buy in and excitement
●School Community - Nic to ask if school can provide list of where students are located? No names etc?
Have bike-ped committee to ask
●Metrics if it helped - before and after surveys
●Current users
Other thoughts
Middle of the day activities - walking groups - Could there be some connectivity there. Dana to concept.
Connection with Rec and Parks on greenway to camps. Dana to reach out to Ben McShane
Review
Concept approved by SBBPC on Nov 2019 to explore and plan. Emailed Local Motion Nov 15, 2019 to ask for
their support.
Signs
Should design and install lawn signs along the route (with the hope that it becomes permanent signage after
that). This would help be a visual reminder to walk and bike to school. Could use a design like this…(total hack
job but you get the idea)
Phase 2:
If successful, could expand the greenway to connect the Chamberlin Neighborhood across Williston Road
(crosswalks planned there too) through to the schools as well as south down Dorset St with signage
Phase 3:
Do the same at Orchard to get kids from that neighborhood to bike to HS/MS and to elementary school. Lots of
neighborhood streets and some great path connections too. See orange lines for greenway connectors