HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee - 05/12/2021
South Burlington Bike & Pedestrian Committee
Meeting Agenda
Wednesday, May 12, 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/946150349
By telephone (audio only): 1-872-240-3212; Access Code: 946-150-349
1. Welcome and online meeting guidelines - 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 (5:40 p.m)
5. Updates from the City - Ashley (5:45 p.m. - 10min)
6. Review results from DPW quarterly meeting on 4/27/21 - Bob (5:55 p.m. - 15min)
7. Discussion of Long Property development - bike/ped design input - All (6:10 p.m. - 20min)
8. I-89 Interchange discussion - any additional actions while Council contemplates
recommendations? - All (6:30 p.m. - 20min)
9. Maintenance issues - Bob (6:50 p.m. - 20min)
a. Presentation to Update City Council on Safety and Maintenance issues and P4P Projects
b. Potential group ride to assess the condition of our paths and other bike/ped
infrastructure.
10. Discussion of potential E-bike speed limits and signage on rec paths - All (7:10 p.m. - 15min)
11. Revise Bike/Ped Committee Charge - Bob (7:25 p.m. - 15min)
12. General comments/updates from Committee members - All (7:40 p.m. - ~2-3min/person)
13. Confirmation: Next meeting Wednesday, June 9, 2021 @ 5:30pm
14. Adjourn (by 8:00 p.m.)
South Burlington Bike & Pedestrian Committee
Special Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, April 14, 2021 @ 5:30 p.m.
Meeting was held virtually
Committee Attendees: Shawn Goddard (Chair), Cathy Frank (Vice-Chair), Nic Anderson (Clerk), Bob Britt,
Donna Leban, Dana Farr, Amanda Holland, Havaleh Gagne
Other Attendees: Ashley Parker (City Liaison)
1. Welcome and clarification of meeting procedures
2. Changes or additions to the agenda.
a. None
3. Comments from the public not related to the agenda.
a. None
4. Consideration of minutes from the previous meeting(s):
a. February 10, 2021
b. March 17, 2021
c. Both approved unanimously. No discussion
5. Updates from the City
a. In packet. Ashley read updates
b. Bob asked when Underwood would be done.
c. Ashley hoping for next summer 2022
6. Discussion on improving Bike/Ped/Auto interactions-Chief Shawn Burke - South Burlington
Police Department
a. Three main topics:
i. Current training/standards for South Burlington Police officers
ii. Potential recommended updates to our standards
iii. How can the Bike/Ped Committee best assist in this effort?
b. Chief Burke – Philosophy of SB Police. Noted traffic stop numbers versus crash metrics.
50% drop in stops lead to no change in crashes. Noted complaint numbers and detailed
perennial locations. Detailed how engineering strategies may be more effective long
term. When at Burlington PD they had Local Motion doing education of officers. Could
do this in SB if needed, but most important is awareness for motorists and cyclists to
understand and operate correctly. Don’t want to be monitoring areas. Most important is
engineering and education of the public.
c. Shawn asked if bikers are policed.
d. CB – low on list of things to do. Officer Schwartz is dedicated to traffic safety. A lot of
communication with departments and others. Engineering is important. Examining
speed limits is important. Lots of speeding on south Dorset at City boundaries and don’t
seem to respond to data trailer.
e. Bob – Notice people not stopping at beacons for crossing. Asked for suggestions to
suggest to DPW?
f. CB – Suggest enforcement of lack of stopping at crosswalks could be good use of time.
Could have Officer Schwartz focus on that components. People do odd things on divided
highways and extra lanes such as Kennedy.
g. Shawn – Close passes are prevalent to and a key contact point that can be extremely
dangerous. Lot of opportunity to go wrong. Need to focus on the most egregious
behaviors. Maybe partner at SoBu Nite Out with Officer Schwartz for outreach.
h. CB – Haven’t used social media to have public information campaign but could be
effective.
i. Cathy – Sometimes bike groups also need to be informed about how their actions can
impact.
j. Shawn – Need all kinds of education.
k. Cathy wondered if creative signs may be good on certain routes. Maybe even signs that
can be moved around.
l. CB – For signs they typically rely on Justin and engineers to ensure things are well
understood.
m. Ashley – Have a whole box of share the road brochures from VTrans.
n. CB asked if they have a social media kit? Ashley can ask Jon Kaplan.
o. Shawn – The design piece is being worked on, its just slow going. Have a situation where
we have non-optimal shared spaces still.
p. Dana – Asked about crash reports and public portal so that we can look.
q. CB – All data goes through to the state. Provided crash data to Nic and Ashley recently.
Police data can get pretty messy. Classification can be hard depending on the situation.
r. Shawn – May be any number of near misses or complaints which may not get into crash
database very well.
s. Nic asked about the signs for crossing that state “it’s the law” style signs along with the
normal crosswalk signs.
t. Shawn suggested adding that topic to the agenda for Justin.
u. Cathy noted that new Midland Ave has a lot more people going through.
v. Dana – Its so narrow that it seems like people go slower and don’t use it for cut through.
w. Donna – is SB police force ready for community e-bikes?
x. CB – Will it be used in places that they aren’t allowed, yes. Will stand by and be ready
for anything.
y. Shawn – Happy to provide ways we can collaborate further. Can do articles in paper.
May be better for this coming from the police
z. CB – Excited to see share the road messaging and happy to do campaign to get things
moving. Keep connecting through CB for the time being while Officer Schwartz is coming
up to speed.
aa. Shawn – Asked for committee members to work on this component. Super critical to
continue working with Police and build relationship.
bb. Amanda – Should we connect with Local Motion, Burlington or VTrans on what they are
already doing? Cathy will do.
cc. Havaleh - Asked if SoBu Nite Out is happening this year? Ashley suggested asking. Not
sure what other things are planned. Will dig out notes.
dd. Dana asked if we had police on bikes?
ee. Ashley – Used to
ff. Nic – Reiterated that its important to use language well. Posted link
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-11/don-t-say-cyclists-say-people-
on-bikes
gg. Ashley noted this could be a good article for the paper in itself.
7. O’Brien Development Prep for next DRB meeting on 4/20/21
a. Objective: Review latest materials & define feedback for upcoming DRB
b. Cathy talked about colored plan from VHB. Obrien is fighting need for off road path. Bob
and Cathy spent a lot of time talking about it. Obrien are proposing advisory bike lanes.
Noted City supports Advisory lanes but not in this situation. Huge residential population.
c. Shawn asked if there is enough ROW for a shared use path.
d. Cathy – Not sure but Paul and Marla leaning towards shared use path.
e. Bob emailed photographs. Concerned if we push them too hard, they may not do the
path on Kimball.
f. Shawn – Asked if we are being asked to endorse something?
g. Nic – Usually advisory bike lanes are only for low traffic streets. Was there more info
from VHB to meet this proposal?
h. Cathy – No. City was concerned.
i. Shawn – Does the committee think we should NOT endorse a shared use path?
j. Bob – Concerned about losing path on Kimball. Don’t want to do trading. Thinks Kimball
is more important.
k. Havaleh – Path makes sense here and want to understand what the challenges are.
l. Nic – If a rec path is not possible, then Advisory Bike lanes could be OK.
m. Motion by Shawn that the committee support and recommend a shared use path on
this section. Seconded by Donna. Approved unanimously.
n. Cathy will attend and speak on behalf of committee. Shawn will try to attend too.
8. P4P & Bike/Ped Priority List Discussion
a. Airport Parkway Sidewalk Project Update
b. Ashley – Project cost is significantly more than estimate in CIP (186K). Mainly for cost of
retaining walls. Over 500K. Just the section from Kirby to Bedard. Phase 2 for Airport
Pkwy is the roundabout and narrow bridge.
c. Nic asked who would use this sidewalk. Seems like a long section in the middle that
people may not want to walk.
d. Shawn – Should it be pushed to a later date.
e. Amanda – Would be good to know the other facilities it could connect with such as Rt
15 path.
f. Nic – Could it be pushed to FY26 when Phase 2 would be done.
g. Ashley – Cost also includes protecting gas lines etc.
h. Shawn – Is there a benefit of doing phase 1 well before 2?
i. Ashley – There are things lined up with plans etc. Would be good sell to grant funding
with “shovel ready” project. Would be good to find out if there has been movement or
obstacles on the phase 2.
j. Shawn – Seems like many other projects are more important.
k. Bob – Suggests doing the Williston Road crosswalks first. Need to do something in
Chamberlin neighborhood.
l. Shawn asked if there is a problem pushing it out to obtain grants first?
m. Ashley – Think the landowner easements would last and the plans etc. are done at
reasonable cost so we have not sunk too much at the moment. Not a reason to not push
it back.
n. Motion by Shawn to move airport parkway out in CIP to FY23 and bring Williston road
up the list to our next highest priority. Bob seconded. All in favor.
o. Nic asked Ashley about paving of Airport parkway and repainting.
p. Shawn and Bob will talk with Justin about making sure stencils and signs are done
whenever lines are done.
q. Bob wanted to talk impact fees. Noted errors and omissions of Queen City. Should be
there in place of Allen Rd. Does committee have any issue with that? Concerned that
Kimball Ave takes priority funds from potential to get over Potash Brook.
r. Amanda asked for more information on the impact fee document. Normally these are
specific to a location and doesn’t know if we can move the locations.
s. Bob – Just want to get a sense from committee how we feel.
t. Nic – Could there be impact fees from Kmart redevelopment.
u. Shawn – If Bob discusses with Paul, would the committee support the Allen Road vs
Queen City Pkwy. Committee were ok with Bob asking Paul.
v. Ashley – FYI Paul about to have a baby so may not be quick to respond.
9. Swift &Spear Intersection Feasibility Study
a. Input from Bike/Ped to Planning Commission
b. Not sure who asked for this on the agenda.
c. Nic – Think there could be same design improvements but not sure when there is a
chance actually have discussions on design. Definitely need better north south
connectivity on road.
d. Ashley – Suggested committee members completing Local Concerns survey on the story
map.
e. Shawn suggested Ashley reach out to the Planning Commission Chair to ask when we
will have time to comment on design elements. Just don’t want to miss the boat.
10. Committee membership outlook
a. Havaleh, Bob and Amanda up for appointment. All three have put their name in.
b. Shawn noted another person interested who works for a development company and
had concerns about possible conflict of interest.
c. Ashley – They would just need to recuse themselves at times but wouldn’t be an issue.
11. Confirmation: Next meeting Wednesday, May 12, 2021 @ 5:30pm
12. Other items
a. Bob and Shawn meeting with Justin. Asked for comments.
b. Nic – Paint, paint, 10ft lanes, paint.
c. Havaleh asked where list of things is kept in the drive.
d. Nic mentioned using the report web page
e. Ashley mentioned Hinesburg Rd from Kennedy to Cheesefactory. Been getting a lot of
questions. Seems like we need to be focusing on there more.
f. Lots of free ranging discussion.
g. Shawn – Does warrant a scoping study. Should follow up.
h. Donna – Listened in on Planning Commission last night. Unanimously supported 13
Single diamond over 12B. Instead of 14, should leave and do bike/ped bridge instead.
Other item, they recommend Swift St extension be taken off the official Map and
planning maps.
i. Shawn asked if Donna attends regularly. Would be nice to have a SB Bike Ped rep attend
the planning commission. Can do.
j. Donna also noted that a rec path was suggested to connect over to Oak Creek from
there.
k. Nic would love comments on the SB Art Hunt. Sent email.
13. Adjourned at 7.55p.m.
Bike/Ped Staff Update – 5/12/2021
• DPW removed the problem tree along the rec path at the intersection of Nowland/Dorset.
• Quorum Questions: In response to a question related to the number of Committee members
interested in attending recent I-89 public meetings, staff wanted to relay information provided
by the City Attorney. He relayed that it is Council’s policy that whenever a quorum of
Committee members gather that it is warned. Council does this regularly. The posting for
something like this needs to happen 24 hours in advance of the special meeting, but
traditionally Committees are asked to get these requests on the weekly warning. Other
Committees assign members to participate in these kinds of meetings so that a quorum is not an
issue.
• I-89 Bike/Ped Crossing Project: Ilona shared that the City will be working on another grant
application for the Bike/Ped Crossing project over I-89. She is getting some help from Local
Motion this year, as well as others. She let me know that Local Motion is going to be gathering
letters of support, and may contact the Bike/Ped Committee to assist them in gathering these
kinds of letters.
Penny for Paths Projects Updates – 5/12/2021
• Jug Handle Sidewalk: Additional lighting work and landscaping still need to be completed. DPW
has moved this project to the bottom of their 20+ project to-do list. It should still be completed
this FY.
• Allen Road Rec Path: A pre-bid meeting was held April 26th and bids were due May 4th. Staff
hope to have Council approve a contract for signature at their May 17th meeting.
• South Dorset Street Shared Use Path: The project team was notified that this project received
its Categorical Exclusion (CE) designation through the NEPA process at the end of April. The
project is now moving into the Preliminary Plan stage and will soon move into the Right-of-Way
stage.
• Underwood Parcel Shared Use Path: The SE Group has agreed to a revised agreement and that
should be signed soon. A kick-off meeting will be held shortly after signature. Once we officially
kick off that portion of the work, we will have a better idea of when we can begin the permitting
process for these elements in conjunction with the shared use path.
• Kimball Culvert & Bike/Ped Infrastructure: Bids for this project were open and staff made a
request for Council authorization to award the project to a contractor at their May 3rd meeting.
• RRFB Upgrades & Dorset Street Barriers: DPW is still moving both of these projects forward.
Justin did relay that they double-sided the East Terrace RRFB. DPW is ordering more materials
to outfit all other RRFBs in the same manner.
• Twin Oaks/Kennedy Drive Crosswalk: Staff is still waiting to receive the grant agreement from
VTrans, but we have been able to get the engineering work started and recently reviewed the
first conceptual drawings that are based on the scoping project.
• Spear Street Phase 1: Staff is still waiting to receive the grant agreement from VTrans. We
cannot begin work on this project until we get the agreement in place. Once the agreement is
signed, staff will move forward to work on bringing a consultant on board to do the
engineering/design work.
• Hinesburg Road Crosswalks: Staff brought on a consultant to assist in the engineering/design
work required to get the crosswalks through the state’s 1111 permit process. This shouldn’t
take very long, and could possibly mean implementation by the end of summer/early fall. A
kickoff meeting was held recently to get the project moving.
Follow up issues from meeting with Justin to discuss with the Committee:
1. Should the Committee insist that Justin come up with a permanent barrier solution for
the sections of Dorset Street where the rec path is not protected from vehicles driving
up on it during the winter?
2. Should we recommend funding the 2 Williston Road crosswalks 100% with Penny for
Path monies if the State/VTrans will not partially fund it with a State small project grant?
3. Bob is seeking help with coming up with a list of all the crosswalks in the City and their
painting status and whether they appear to be ones that normally need to be painted:
every year, every 3 years or every 5 years.
4. Any other questions related to the Justin meeting minutes that Committee members
have.
5. If we have time, what does the Committee want to see for Bicycle & Pedestrian facilities
on Shelburne Road now that bike lanes from Imperial to Swift cannot be done?
6. If we have time, what does the Committee want to see for B Bicycle & Pedestrian
facilities on Spear Street south of Swift Street to the Shelburne town line? Just 5’ bike
lanes? A sidewalk and 5” bike lanes?
Agenda for Meeting with Justin Rabidoux &
Bike & Ped Committee – 04/27/2021
Attendees: Dana Farr, Bob Britt, Justin Rabidoux, Shawn Goddard, Ashley Parker
1. Discuss status of P4P projects scheduled for the 2021 construction season:
a. RRFB upgrades (two-sided beacons)
i. DPW just installed new upgraded RRFB (2-sided) at Chamberlin School & White
Street near Airport Parkway as a test.
ii. DPW testing a 2nd one at East Terrace & Spear near the new sidewalk where a
visually impaired child lives.
iii. Need to get installation timeline plan from Justin when we meet again.
b. Dorset Street fencing ( including discussion on length)
i. Have fence on order to install the short section north to Grandview.
ii. DPW not replacing existing fence even though it is getting worn. Justin will repair
as needed.
iii. Still searching for adequate options for the remainder north up to One Kennedy Dr.
driveway. Worried that there isn’t enough room for snow removal – the fence
would take a beating and wouldn’t last. Looking into bollards, but there are already
bollards there in the summer. Perhaps Justin will use planters as a winter barrier.
(Need to clarify again with Justin when we meet again.)
iv. DPW has not found a solution for a winter barrier across from Songbird south of
the driveway of the “trunk seller.” This problem remains.
c. Kennedy Road crosswalk
i. Grant awarded. Final design work active (which isn’t funded by the grant).
ii. Must be completed by September 30, 2021 to get grant funds.
d. 3 Hinesburg Road crosswalks
i. Working on the conceptual plan to submit to the state to get permit. Using same
design firm as the one doing Kennedy Road
ii. Looks likely to be able to be completed this summer.
e. 2 Williston Road crosswalks
i. Working on grant application in preparation for June 4th deadline
ii. Ashley, Justin, & Bob taking a webinar today with state on Grant Applications.
iii. Post Meeting: Learned that grant selection is planned for September with
construction not doable until summer 2022 assuming State small grant funding
used. If Federal large grant funding used, construction would likely not occur until
summer 2024.
f. Kimball Ave bridge & related rec path
i. Getting bids on Wednesday or Thursday, April 28th or 29th & the recommendations
must be presented by May 3rd to the Council.
ii. Includes rec path section to connect to Technology Park rec path
iii. Construction to start in July and is due to be “substantially complete” by the end of
this construction season.
g. Airport Parkway
i. SB sidewalk project looks very expensive as Ashley reported. Holding off on this for
now.
ii. Path along Rt 15 near St Michaels & the hospital is under construction, which
makes it important to ultimately have a solution to connect the Rt 15 path to the
South Burlington path system.
iii. Justin & team are looking at alternatives to get some improvements in this area.
iv. Committee recommends restriping bike lanes to fix east side vendor error & using
bike lane stencils
h. Upper Allen Road Rec Path – will there be a crosswalk across Spear?
i. Yes, it is part of the project per Ashley
ii. Project includes crosswalk, bike boxes, signals, etc…
i. South Dorset Street – any action items for Justin, next summer construction?
i. Working on design – focused on staying in the City ROW (if we can, it’ll minimize
ROW delays).
ii. New left-turn lane heading south at Cider Mill Dr. is the biggest design challenge.
iii. Need to review the timeline coming out of the NEPA (National Environmental
Protection Act) phase. Coming out of that we’ll have a better understanding of
what’s required in the design.
1. Ashley was notified during meeting that we got the CE (Categorical
Exclusion) so the ROW process can move forward.
iv. Justin & Ashley will review timeline. May slip into 2023 for completion.
j. Spear Street Phase1 – widening Spear Street in meantime?
i. Waiting on the grant agreement from the state before this can move forward.
ii. Need to get the design work started as soon as that is done.
iii. Justin not planning to do anything in the interim – no road widening as
recommended in Scoping Report as Phase 1.
iv. Expecting this to take ~3-5 years, due to the federal grant process. Justin thought it
could be done in 3 years.
2. Clarify Justin’s understanding of the scope of the Spear Street Phase 2 project from Swift Street to
the Shelburne town line. Does it include a sidewalk? If so, what side of the road, east or west?
a. Based on the description in the proposed new Transportation Impact Fee presentation to
City Council, this project includes a sidewalk for the entire length.
b. The widening of Spear Street is a road project in the FY22 CIP to start in FY25, but Justin
wants to transition this to a bike/ped improvement effort. Justin stated he hasn’t gotten to
the point where he’s seriously looked at design ideas.
c. Bob expressed that development is continuing in this area, and has urged for at least a
sidewalk in the newly developed area (east side of road). Regarding the Long Family
Development, Bob urged that small developers not be exempted from making necessary
bike/ped infrastructure improvements. He shared that walking from South Village to
Pheasant Way is effectively not safe for pedestrians.
d. Justin has not studied this question, and is not ready to make recommendations.
e. Shawn likes the flexibility of not deciding on east/west side of street now for a sidewalk.
3. Review Crosswalk Priority List for status and opportunities
a. North/South crosswalks at Traders Joe’s and Xfinity – were considered imminent at January
meeting
i. Hardware is ordered, but Justin needs to check on the status.
ii. Expect this to be done in 2021 construction season
b. Review for “low hanging fruit”
i. Justin will review the list to see if there is any crossings that wouldn’t require
significant design work.
c. What is required in Justin’s mind for installation for those listed like the one at Song Bird
and Dorset?
i. Justin hasn’t seen the output of the Crosswalk Subgroup. Dana will send the citizen
study over to Justin.
ii. Justin has concerns with a crossing at this section due to sight lines.
1. Justin says he wants a UPWP scoping study before he can know if this is an
issue.
4. Review Maintenance workbook:
a. The cracking on the rec path from Butler Farms to Golf Course Road is very serious. A road
bike’s tires could be swallowed by cracks with serious injury resulting.
i. Justin is hoping to have some paving money (~$300k remaining that he hasn’t been
allowed to dip into yet). Crack filler is paid for out of the paving budget
ii. Also working on a grant to repave a portion of Spear. If we get that grant, it would
free up funds to do some crack repair & rec path resurfacing.
iii. Justin plans to use some paving money to re-pave the two areas that were
identified in the re-paving tab of the Committee’s Maintenance Workbook at
Nowland Farm Rd and Stonehedge Drive.
iv. Justin thinks the best effort for Bike/Ped is to identify large sections of the path
that need full resurfacing. If the City gets stimulus money, the City could
potentially consider doing large sections of the path. (The Committee should get
back to Justin sooner than later with our recommendations.)
b. Crosswalk painting
i. No city-wide crosswalk listing/database that lists all the crosswalks and their paving
status. Bob suggested that we create one – if the Bike/Ped committee creates a
priority list, Justin said that would help him lobby for more resources in the future.
c. Etc.
i. Bob asked whether the City or VTrans was responsible for painting the north/south
crosswalks along Shelburne Road as they appear to not have been painted in some
time. Justin said that VTrans was responsible.
5. Review Fog Line Striping workbook including:
a. Timing and funding available for long lines and crosswalks – how do we get additional funds
and get them painted in May/June?
i. Didn’t fully discuss as we ran out of time, but Justin has a contract out (to a new
contractor) that expends the FY21 budget entirely (~$9k).
ii. Phase 2 (FY22 after July 1, 2021) will attack more of the Bike/Ped priorities. Bob
stated that we need to get to the point where the full striping budget is available in
the spring at the start of the heavy bicycle and pedestrian season.
iii. Bike/Ped encourages SB DPW to use bike-lane stencils and sharrows more often to
help reinforce that bikes belong on our roads. Justin stated that our painting
budget/bandwidth is fixed, so any time/money spent adding features will reduce
the amount of area that can be repainted every year. So, we need to be strategic
and place stencils in high-priority areas.
iv. Justin will communicate when we can meet again to finish the fog line/bike lane
discussion and the balance of the agenda.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Williston Road I-89 bridge crossing
c. Airport Parkway – fixing width of east side bike lane & painting bike stencils
d. Painting bike lanes on White Street as approved by Council
e. Queen City Park Road
f. Balance of priority list
6. Review Safety Issues listing:
a. Add “No Right on Red” sign at Dorset & Swift at southbound lane on Dorset – other
directions would be great also
b. Replace vertical in road Pedestrian Crosswalk signs at Dorset & Midland, Spear & Nowland
Farm, Spear Crosswalk at UVM new sidewalk, out at first crosswalk entering SB on Lime Kiln
c. Add more street signs stating that “State Law: Stop for Pedestrians in Crosswalk” either on
RRFB poles or along roads ahead of crosswalks
7. Discuss future cooperation and alignment of goals between the DPW and the Bicycle & Pedestrian
Committee
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: SD-21-10 1720 & 1730 Spear Street
Marla Keene <mkeene@sburl.com>
Mon 5/3/2021 9:22 AM
To: 'Bob Britt' <brittvtbiz@msn.com>
Hi Bob, received. I will share your comments with the Board.
Marla Keene, PE
Development Review Planner
City of South Burlington
(802) 846-4106
From: Bob BriƩ <briƩvtbiz@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 4:42 PM
To: Marla Keene <mkeene@sburl.com>
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: SD-21-10 1720 & 1730 Spear Street
This message has originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution
when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
Marla,
Unfortunately, I will be in Boston and most likely will need to miss the May 4th DRB meeƟng. I will
aƩempt to aƩend if possible. Please forward this email to the DRB so that they consider my
addiƟonal thoughts on the Long Family development. I am wriƟng this personally and not in my role
on the Bicycle and Pedestrian CommiƩee. The CommiƩee intends to take up discussion of this
project at its May 12th meeƟng.
The applicant agreed to provide a traffic study for the development at last month's meeƟng. I think
that the traffic study should include the impact of the development on pedestrians. This secƟon of
Spear Street is very narrow and a sidewalk would serve to connect neighborhoods. To help miƟgate
the traffic impact of this project, I recommend that the developer provide a sidewalk on the east side
of the Spear Street along the length of the property from South Pointe Drive to Preserve Road in
South Village. Bicycle and pedestrian faciliƟes are called out in the City's FY22-31 Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) for Spear Street from SwiŌ Street to the Shelburne Town Line. This is an
opportunity to get a porƟon of such faciliƟes built when the property is already going to be dug up.
The Long's may even be able to use their RecreaƟon Impact Fees to help fund the sidewalk's
construcƟon. Perhaps the City would fund a sidewalk in front of the houses at 1680 and 1690 Spear
Street to also connect the neighbors on or off Pheasant Way to South Point Drive and beyond.
The traffic study should also consider the need for the addiƟon of 4-way stop signs or a traffic light at
the intersecƟon of Nowland Farm Road, Deerfield Road and Spear Street to help slow the added
traffic that will be caused in part by the development and to provide breaks for vehicles trying to turn
leŌ/northbound from side streets onto Spear Street. Perhaps there are other means to slow down
traffic on this road so that pass-through vehicles choose to use Shelburne Road instead. I am not
sure if the DRB has any jurisdicƟon in such a request.
Firefox https://outlook.live.com/mail/0/id/AQMkADAwATczZmYBLTgxY2Y...
1 of 2 5/5/2021, 11:56 AM
The applicant asked at the last meeƟng if the public would prefer a "bridge" over the great swamp to
get to the forest on the other side. I wholeheartedly support such a bridge. Hopefully, a crude
bridge or raise plaƞorm would be sufficient. A bridge would provide all City residents another access
to this very valuable recreaƟon area. I am very appreciaƟve of the Long Family for this very generous
donaƟon.
Thanks for listening.
Best regards,
Bob BriƩ
3 Adams Court
802-338-6334 (cell)
Firefox https://outlook.live.com/mail/0/id/AQMkADAwATczZmYBLTgxY2Y...
2 of 2 5/5/2021, 11:56 AM
SOUTH BURLINGTON RECREATION & PARKS
BIKE & PEDESTRIAN COMMITTEE
MISSION AND DUTIES
1. The South Burlington Recreation & Parks Bike & Pedestrian Committee shall
consist of seven to nine members, duly appointed by the City Council for three
year renewable terms, with the appointments staggered so that not more than three
appointed terms expire in any one year.
2. The Mission of the Bike & Pedestrian Committee is to oversee the general
operation of the City’s many recreational paths, including field trails, and
sidewalks, and crosswalks, and to advise the City Council of bicycle and
pedestrian policy and safety issues and operational needs and future development
plans for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure including the path network.
3. The City’s Recreation & Parks Department shall be the coordinating office for the
Recreation Path Committee.
4. The Recreation & Parks Bike and Pedestrian Committee shall annually elect a
Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, and Clerk.
5. Meetings shall be held at the discretion of the Committee. The Committee shall
establish a regular meeting schedule, and when a deviation from the regular
schedule is required, shall post public notice of the meeting in accordance with
general City procedures.
6. Meetings shall be held in a public facility. Meetings shall have a proposed agenda
published in advance of each meeting. Minutes of each meeting shall be recorded
and maintained. A representative of the Recreation & Parks Department shall
attend each meeting of the Committee; other City staff shall attend as requested
by the Committee.
7. Duties of the Recreation & Parks Bike & Pedestrian Committee are:
a. Develop and recommend to the City Council rules and regulations for the
operation of all of the City’s Recreation Path system in accordance with
existing ordinances and policies. The Committee shall develop and
propose new and/or revised ordinances and regulations as needed.
b. Keep the City Council informed on the operation of the Recreation Path
system through published minutes and attendance at appropriate meetings.
c. Make recommendations to the Public Works Department of the City for
Recreation Path system maintenance needs, and meet quarterly with the
Director of Public Works.
d. Make recommendations to the Police Department of the City for
Recreation Path system security needs, and meet annually with Police
Youth Services.
e. Prepare and submit to the Recreation & Parks Department an annual
operations budget for the Recreation Path system.
f. Prepare and submit to the Recreation & Parks Department an annual
operations report suitable for inclusion in the Annual City Report.
g. Recommend to the City Council future development of the Recreation
Path system, including routes, approximate costs, and time frame for
development.
h. Review all proposed developments and zoning changes which come
before the Development Review Board and/or the Planning Commission
for the impact upon the Recreation Path system; meeting with developers
and City staff as is appropriate. Ensure that opportunities for the gaining
of additional Recreation Path system resources, including completed
facilities and the attainment of easements and rights of way are
considered. Review proposed changes for impact upon and the protection
of existing easements and rights of way. The conclusions reached by the
recreation Path Committee in its review of proposed development and
change shall be (i) formally adopted by vote of the Committee, (ii)
reflected in the minutes of the meeting of the Committee, and (iii)
appropriately communicated, in writing, to the City Council, the
Development Review Board and/or the Planning Commission, and the
impacted developer.
Adopted January 18, 2005 by City Council
Notation: Updated by Recreation & Parks Director of Committee Name Change 7-29-15