HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee - 01/08/2014
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN COMMITTEE
MINUTES 01-08-2014
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee held its regular monthly meeting on Wednesday, January
8, 2013 at 5:30 pm in the small conference room at the city office building.
Members Present: Matthew Boulanger, Chair; Michelle Connor, Vice Chair, Dana Farr, Clerk;
Cathy Frank, David Jacobowitz, Donna Leban, Miranda Voegeli, Roy Neuer
Members Absent: None
City Representative: Todd Goodwin, Director of Recreation & Parks
Also Present: Paul Conner, S Burlington Director of Planning & Zoning
Meeting began at 5:37 pm.
1. Changes or additions to the agenda
None
2. Comments from the public not related to the agenda
None
3. Accept & approve Minutes of November 13, 2013 meeting
Michelle requested that the date be corrected to 12/11/2013.
Cathy: Moved to approve the minutes as amended
Michelle: Second
Vote: Unanimous
4. FBCC Recommendations:
Matt gave an overview of the committee’s recommendations to the FBCC (Form Based Codes
Committee), and asked how our committee would like to proceed.
Todd informed the committee that the first round of street typing concentrated on City Center to
get that moving. The FBCC is going to change the process of how the next round of streets will
be typed. The FBC draft for City Center has been moved to the Planning Commission. There
are 200+ comments from public that need to be considered.
After discussion, the committee determined to invite Paul Conner to its next meeting, and drafted
some preliminary questions and observations to share with him:
· What will happen with the recommendations SBBPC made?
· What is the most effective way for us to participate and insure that our work is presented
in the right place, at the right time?
· We would like to know when the Planning Commission is meeting to discuss these
issues. We need sufficient notice so that we are able to produce complete
recommendations.
Paul Connor was in the building, and stepped into the meeting at this point. He accepted the
committee’s invitation to join us for an impromptu discussion of Form Based Codes.
He shared that the Planning Commission is working through the draft. At least one more work
session will be scheduled. There are 200+ comments to review and work through piece by piece.
They will work through these and, if necessary, host a meeting to gather input on things they are
uncertain about before producing a draft. There will be a period in which community members
can comment on this draft. After input is received, the draft will be refined, and then presented
to City Council.
Michelle asked for clarification on the Street Types descriptions and on the map of what City
Center will look like. Paul shared that the committee has not gotten into Street Types yet, but it
will be part of the draft.
Roy asked if the city knows the width of all streets that will be in City Center. Paul responded
that several streets on the map are potential/theoretical streets. Market Street and Garden Street,
are going to be built, but all other streets are theoretical at this point. Maximum block lengths
and maximum block perimeters are set. For all existing streets, street width
maximum/minimums are established. The only part that is set in stone at this point is in front of
Healthy Living/Trader Joe’s. Garden Street, by itself, will have its own project.
Roy voiced the committee’s request that we are able to review the drafts with sufficient time to
make sure that we can argue our points if they differ from the draft. Paul will make sure that the
committee is informed duly. He continued that, whether streets are built by the private sector, or
by the city, guidelines will be used to inform street types, dimensions and facilities. For
privately build streets, a negotiation between the city and the developer determines the street
which is built. When a street is built by the city, the process is public. In both cases, the
guidelines are still used. Garden Street will probably be a combination of both private and city
built streets.
Michelle clarified, “We give our recommendations, and then watch to see what is approved
within those streets types.” Paul confirmed this, and furthered that either way there needs to be
clarity on what is expected of both the private sector and the city.
Matt shared that the town of Williston has fairly strict rules, but allows the possibility of a waiver
under qualifying conditions. For instance, all new streets are required to have sidewalks on both
sides, but there is the possibility of a waiver for one side of the street. Paul shared that the
process is new for the city, and they are working to achieve a balance between strict rules and
general guidelines.
Paul thanked the committee for its input, and left to attend an Open Space meeting.
Matt summarized the impromptu meeting, commenting that more clarity will be coming our way
which will give us time to review and comment prior to implementation.
5. Future priorities for the Committee
Matt ask if there was anything new to add to what was previously discussed and submitted. He
is in the process of compiling everyone’s input and is putting together a working set of priorities.
Roy indicated that he would like to insure that adequate consideration is given to the walking
trails. He also asked if we will be adding a new committee member during the next round of
appointments. If so, he would like to recommend that the city look for someone who is
specifically interested in the walking trails.
Todd shared that there will be no mid-term appointments, and that there is a possible
restructuring of committees in the near future. Liaisons, may change. Committee interests
sometimes overlap, and there may be some re-ordering and consolidation of committees.
Preliminary discussion suggests that committee interests may be broadened.
6. Letter of Support for SBHS bike trails
Todd and Matt received a request from John Painter on behalf of Fellowship of the Wheel
(FOTW). He asked if our committee would be willing to draft a letter to support the proposed
FOTW trails behind the high school.
Cathy reminded the committee that we had asked for some clarifications in the FOTW proposal,
especially with regard to how current pedestrian use would be protected. She would like to see
an updated proposal from FOTW to see if our concern was addressed.
The committee agreed and asked for further clarification on how bicycle/pedestrian conflict
would be managed along the proposed bike trail. The committee’s preference is that
bicycle/pedestrian conflict be managed through signage and proper trail development and
maintenance.
Roy asked about the section of trail from Hinesburg Rd to the SBHS football field, and urged the
committee to request that this path be improved since it will receive more traffic. David
suggested that we ask FOTW to draft a letter of support for the committee to review. The
committee agreed.
Matt will work with John to get this draft, and to ask how FOTW plans to meet committee
concerns.
Cathy put forth:
Move to support the FOTW proposal. As long as it protects our current pedestrian uses,
and is in accord with our wants, we allow Matt to sign the recommendation letter on the
committee’s behalf.
Cathy: Moved
David: Second
Vote: Unanimous
7. General matters
Autumn Hill Road
The committee reviewed plans for Autumn Hill Road, and determined:
· A sidewalk should be built all along the way, and it should connect to the existing path.
· There should be a bike path connection to Black Dog Lane.
· The path should connect through the end of Autumn Hill Rd toward Cheese Factory Rd,
and the Bread & Butter Farm.
· From Summerfield Avenue in Cider Mill, toward Autumn Hill Rd, a Rec Path connection
should be established.
· We request a cut across/easement for access across the property.
· We recommend that the applicant explore an eastern connection.
· In the area of the proposed cul-de-sac, we would like a gravel area which allows parking
for up to four vehicles, allowing ease of access to the path. (SE end of the Scott property)
David put forth:
The committee is interested in getting access to the Scott property, now owned by the
City, and requests that the developer review our suggestions to determine what would
work with their plans in order to provide multi-use path access.
David: Moved
Cathy: Second
Vote: Unanimous
South Village, Phase 2
South Village is proposing a second entrance into the neighborhood north of the current
entrance. The committee reviewed plans for South Village, Phase 2, and determined:
· Sidewalks on Churchill St and March Rd should connect.
· The Rec path should proceed through the new phase of the neighborhood, and eventually,
along Parkside Drive (eat end of South Point) through the conserved Nowland Farm
Property and connect to Nowland Farm Rd.
· Paths along Jefferson Rd and March Rd should connect through to Nowland Farm Rd.
· Jefferson Rd and March Rd should have a multi-use path behind the houses that line the
eastside of all roads which will connect toward Nowland Farm Rd. This is much safer
than a path which crosses driveways at the front of the houses.
We have further questions and concerns:
· Currently, there is a “trail” designated in the plan. Is this a multi-use path?
· We would like to draw the developer’s attention to the existing Rec Path
recommendation for this area.
Cathy informed the committee that Carolyn Long owns part of the land in question, and suggests
that we talk to her about preserving this land and possible ways to incorporate paths through it.
Hinesburg Rd.
Regarding an area adjacent to Wesley Grove, Senior Center where O’Brien Brothers wants to
build a 7-unit residential area. Should sidewalks be built?
The committee reviewed plans for this area, and determined:
· We need an irrevocable ROW for a sidewalk. The committee will work to fill the
resulting gap between this area and Kennedy Drive, and also toward Tilley Drive.
· The area has a nice line of sight. There is an existing sidewalk on the other side of the
street, but crossing Route 116 to the existing sidewalk should be given serious attention.
· At minimum, there needs to be a striped crosswalk, with a push-button and yellow
flashing lights signal for this crossing.
· All new development along Route 116 should have a sidewalk/multi-use path built by the
developer.
· We need to see more detailed plans before we can make a final determination.
Committee Meetings with Justin Rabidoux, DPW Director
Todd saw Justin today, and Justin asked that the committee determine an agenda with specific
discussion items prior to scheduling a meeting with him. He also requests that we provide him
with a drafted statement (or standard) or our proposals that he can take into City Council. He
requests that it be a stated standard on behalf of the committee which indicates the committee’s
stance on whether developers are responsible for creating sidewalks/multi-use paths during
development.
The committee discussed whether we would prefer that developers build paths in lieu of impact
fees and determined that: SBBPC recommends that the developer build the facility.
Miranda put forth that the official SBBPC stance be:
If a facility (sidewalk, multi-use path, etc…) is shown on an official city map as
desirable, then the developer shall grant the ROW for the facility, and will be required to
build it.
Miranda: Moved
Donna: Second
Vote: Unanimous
8. Adjourn
David: Motion to Adjourn
Cathy: Second
Vote: Unanimous
Meeting ended at 7:34 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Dana Farr, Clerk