HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 03/10/2021 - Special/Joint MeetingSPECIAL CITY COUNCIL/JOINT COMMITTEES 10 MARCH 2021
The South Burlington City Council held a joint meeting with members of standing
committees on Wednesday 10 March 2021, at 5 p.m., via Go to Meeting remote technology.
THOSE PRESENT – City Council members: H. Riehle, T. Barritt, M. Emery members of the
Bike/Ped Committee, Natural Resources Committee, Energy Committee, Planning Commission,
Affordable Housing Committee, and Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission:
including: P. Conner, E. Vaughn, B. Davis, M. Ostby, C. Trombly, J. Carest, M. Mittag, D.
Leban, H. Gagne, S. Dooley, R. Gonda, A. Chalnick, J. Louisos, D. Shatzer, K. Seritoff, A.
Guyette, N. Anderson, D. MacDonald, P. Engels, T. Riehle, J-S Chaulot, L. Yankowski, J. Weber,
A. Churchill, J. Wilking, L. Kupferman, B. Britt, C. Frank D. Farr, M. Cota, A. Jensen-Vargas; C.
Baker, D. Saladino; and other members of the community
Mr. Baker explained that following the presentation to the full group, attendees will meet by
committee in “breakout rooms” for committee discussions.
Ms. Baker then noted that 70% of the funding for the Interstate system goes into maintaining the
system. He then showed a map indicating the future over-capacity of the system. He stressed
that this particular part of the study is to address interchanges, but that is not the whole focus of
the study.
CCRPC wants to determined which interchange options to focus on in the future. These options
could lead to 3 types of investments: minor, operational, and major. They must also address the
study’s 6 goals:
a.Safety
b.Livable communities
c.Mobility efficiency
d.Environmental stewardship
e.Economic access
f.System preservation
At this point, the study is down to 3 interchanges, all of which are located in the City of South
Burlington. The focus of tonight’s presentation is to determine whether there are additional
metrics to be evaluated, metrics to be changed, metrics to be scored differently, and whether all
goals should be scored equally. Meetings such as this will determine which interchanges to keep
in the study. The process will include outreach to underserved populations, public input
meetings, meetings with the South Burlington City Council, etc.
Mr. Saladino then presented the conceptual plan. He noted the three interchanges being
considered are: Exits 14, 13, and 12B. Concepts for Exit 14 are a diverging diamond interchange
and an enhanced cloverleaf. For Exit 13, options are a “hybrid” (northbound off-ramp,
northbound on-ramp, U-turn) plus a bike/ped overpass and a new single-point urban interchange.
Exit 12B would be a totally new interchange.
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
10 MARCH 2021
PAGE 2
Ms. Jensen-Vargas asked about considerations for wildlife crossings, either over or under the
Interstate. Mr. Saladino said that will be considered when they get to the Interstate itself.
For proposed Exit 12B, Mr. Saladino showed a map and indicated Tilley Drive and other area
roads. The off-ramps would be offset from the interchange, and there would be full access in all
directions. The plans would include an additional lane on Route 116.
The two options for Exit 13 each provide full service. Mr. Saladino showed a map and indicated
the limited access potential today. The “hybrid” plan would include a new northbound on- and
off-ramps as well as a U-turn in the median leading to South Burlington. The plan would also
include a shared use path. The optional plan would “declassify” I-189 to a State Highway to
create a 4-lane boulevard (similar to Kennedy Drive today). Mr. Saladino showed a map
indicating all the potential movements.
The diverging diamond alternative for Exit 14 would include a new I-189 overpass. It would
remove the existing cloverleaf ramps. There would be 2 10-foot shared-use paths on Williston
Road. The enhanced cloverleaf plan would reduce the radii so vehicles will have to slow down.
Mr. Saladino noted that today there is an unsafe high-speed merge. There would be 10-foot
shared use paths on both sides and a new overpass. There would also be collector/distributor
lanes on the Interstate. This would eliminate the “weave” that has resulted in crashes.
Mr. Mittag asked which Exit 14 alternative provides the better flow. Mr. Saladino said the
cloverleaf provides the most continuous flow.
Mr. Saladino then reviewed the evaluation metrics that attendees will be considering and how to
rank the options. Each goal has its own set of concerns and metrics.
a. Safety: Considerations include ramp spacing, safety impact, bike/ped safety, etc.
b. Livable community: directing 90% of growth directed to growth areas, consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan, right-of-way impacts, addressing the underserved
population, etc.
A committee member asked how it can be assumed safety increases when so much traffic is
being added with Exit 12B. Mr. Saladino said they consider not only crashes at the interchange
but potential crashes because of traffic elsewhere (e.g. Williston Rd. has a future potential for
more crashes which could be reduced by the building of 12B).
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
10 MARCH 2021
PAGE 3
Mr. Baker noted that there is anticipated additional housing included for all 3 projects, above
what is now anticipated.
c. Mobility/Efficiency: vehicle miles and vehicle hours of travel, I-89 volume-to-
capacity ratio, average delay at Exit 14, bike/ped connectivity (a significant
improvement at Exit 13 where it is not possible today)
d. Environmental stewardship: wetlands, river corridors, flood zones, natural habitat,
resilience, fuel consumption (goes down except for 12B)
e. Economic Access: connectivity to planned growth areas, job access (including new
jobs added between 202-2050
Mr. Mittag asked how they determine the numbers for economic growth. Mr. Saladino said they
had a panel of experts who were led through the discussion. A median of their thoughts was then
used. Mr. Baker noted the estimates are on top of the original estimates and are based on what is
being seen in Chittenden County.
A committee member asked if the study looked at the potential bike/ped bridge at Exit 14. Mr.
Saladino said they did not. He stressed that doesn’t mean the bridge shouldn’t happen. The
study just said safety measures are needed.
A committee member asked if there was any consideration given for the kinds of jobs 9e.g., retail
would have a hard time finding housing in South Burlington and would have to commute). Mr.
Saladino said they don’t have data on that but would be interested in some input so they could
think differently about different kinds of jobs.
Ms. Leban questioned how the metrics meet South Burlington’s goals. Exit 12B is not in an area
planned for growth and could have a negative impact.
Mr. Gonda asked if there was consideration given to noise mitigation at interchanges, such as
barriers. Mr. Saladino said that would happen in the design phase. There might, however, be a
metric on how an interchange adds noise. Mr. Gonda said 12B is a rural spot, and an interchange
would add noise.
Ms. Ostby said there is also a difference between residential and commercial traffic (e.g. trucks
impact not only the Interstate but also nearby local roads).
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
10 MARCH 2021
PAGE 4
Mr. Chalnick asked about weighting. Mr. Saladino said that is a policy discussion. Goals would
be weighted equally.
f.System preservation: asset maintenance cost, construction costs, how this would
affect maintenance along the Interstate. Mr. Saladino noted it will cost $94,000,000
to maintain these 3 locations over the next 30 years if nothing is done. If 12B is built,
the old bridge would no longer need to be maintained. Exit 13 would be the most
expensive, but it would eliminate maintaining so much old infrastructure, so the
$94,000,000 cost is reduced to $88,000,000.
A committee member asked if I-189 is no longer a federal road, does the city have to maintain it
at a cost to taxpayers. Mr. Saladino said that is still to be decided. He said it is not a shifting of
costs because of less maintenance.
Mr. Baker said the “unknown” is when these projects will happen. He noted that the existing
interchanges were built at about the same time.
Attendees were then invited to meet in breakout rooms to discuss the metrics.
Mr. Baker noted there will be a South Burlington public meeting on 18 March, 7 p.m.
The meeting disbanded for breakout rooms at 6:15 p.m.