HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee - 05/12/2021
South Burlington Bike & Pedestrian Committee
Regular Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 12, 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), Jonathon Weber (Local Motion), Lou Breese
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. Jonathon would love to talk about outreach to help Ilona Blanchard with grant
application for Exit 14 grant funding. Maybe committee members connecting with
businesses.
4. Consideration of minutes from the previous meeting(s):
a. April 14, 2021
b. Edits submitted to group by Bob
c. Nic motion to accept edited minutes. Cathy seconded. Edited minutes approved
unanimously.
5. Review results from DPW quarterly meeting on 4/27/21 -Bob (5:55 p.m. -15min)
a. Couple of questions from meeting that they wanted committee input on. In packet.
b. Dorset St barrier
i. Want to talk about the three sections not just Existing to Grandview.
ii. Nic would suggest an actual guardrail instead of chain link fencing. Would solve
snow issues and provide a better barrier for safety too. Im sure the cost would
be really high but would be a better long-term solution.
c. Crosswalk painting
i. Amanda helping with list of all crosswalks using mapping database
ii. Currently do crosswalks closest to schools first and then out. Some never get
done
iii. Suggesting ranking system to prioritize annually, biannually or more.
iv. Amanda – Do have crosswalks on map and got them into an excel database
from Pam at CCRPC
v. Bob – having a list of the ones that get worn away quicker and using that for the
prioritization.
vi. Break up city into quadrants and have a committee member do each for
assessment
vii. Lots of volunteers
viii. Havaleh – Did you discuss having a speed limit on paths.
ix. On agenda today.
d. Spear Street
i. Are we looking for a sidewalk on Spear along with bike lanes (not a rec path).
ii. Nic thinks that there is demand for a sidewalk. With bike lanes. Provided rec
path happens as the “alternate” along the east.
iii. Lou asked if it sets us up but leaves us wanting a rec-path in 10 years anyway
iv. Amanda – Do we need sidewalks on just sections or all the way down? There
was a previous scoping study that did not recommend a sidewalk the entire
length.
v. Bob – Paul and Justin were discussing a need for sidewalk in Transportation
Impact fee discussions
vi. Ashley – this may be stemmed from the discussion from a couple of meetings
ago
vii. Shawn – Spear is good for bike lanes, has rec path to the west and eventually to
the east. All about priorities.
viii. Bob – There are sections that are too narrow for bike lanes on one side.
ix. Cathy – Another section that is bad is close to Spear.
x. Shawn – More a priority on spending issue.
xi. Cathy – Could target primary connections. Don’t see recreational cyclists using
Spear as much.
xii. Donna – Is a recreational cyclist and uses it all the time
xiii. Shawn – Agree we could piecemeal it and not do the whole section.
xiv. Amanda – Been a while since we looked at the map and prioritized. Maybe that
could be a summer project. Need to figure out what our immediate needs are.
xv. Shawn – Meeting with Justin again to talk about the other items they didn’t get
to.
6. Updates from the City
a. In agenda packet. Ashley read updates
b. Attending meetings as a quorum
i. Shawn – Asked Ashley can the City have a blanket warning that there may be
committee members present to cover those who may attend as a member of
the public
ii. Cathy – One of the meetings, Bob and I were there as members of my
neighborhood and it didn’t even occur to me that I was a bike ped member
iii. Dana – Ashley can you ask about signing petitions too? We aren’t supposed to
post on Facebook at the same time.
iv. Donna – Should not forgo your rights as a citizen because you are part of a
committee
v. Dana – If we could get some clarification if possible.
vi. Ashley – Can take items to City Attorney. Know that if speaking at a meeting you
need to make it known that you are speaking as either a member of public or
representing committee
c. Continued reading updates
d. Underwood – Have agreement. Will have staff and consultant kickoff meeting in the
near future.
e. RRFBs
i. Bob asked if it will be done this year
ii. Ashley – Think he wants to get it done this fiscal year
iii. Shawn asked if CCRPC info had RRFB data to see which crosswalks have lights.
f. Williston Rd Crosswalks – Bob asked for update. Ashley noted small scale program grant
application would work. Council should be reviewing that grant application soon.
7. Discussion of Long Property development -bike/ped design input -All (6:10 p.m. -20min)
a. Cathy recused herself because she lives in South Point. Happy to answer any factual
information on layout etc. but will not provide comment.
b. Shawn understands that it is still in sketch plan review and is changing daily
c. Cathy – Cleared sketch recently.
d. Ashley brought up plans
e. Cathy detailed history. Anticipated Parkside drive would connect to developments north
and south.
f. Bob asked what was proposed.
g. Cathy - Would connect south to South Village at North Jefferson. No plans for recreation
path. Green walking path shown on plans (East-West).
h. Shawn asked if pedestrian infrastructure matches between north and south to connect
seamlessly.
i. Donna – We have 150 houses at Dorset Park and people use road instead of sidewalk.
People would probably use the road anyway.
j. Bob thinks that a road and sidewalk is sufficient along the east. More concerned about
fronting on Spear Street.
k. Bob detailed the section along Spear Street in front of the longs property. Would be
great while it was all dug up it would be ideal to have a sidewalk.
l. Cathy – In Planning departments initial comments about the proposal, one of the
suggestions or recommendations that a ROW is made to have a path in the future.
m. Donna – There is a full rec path that comes out of Preserve Rd that stops there. Seems
like there is an intention to have a shared use path along Spear St. That is what the
south section of South Village has. Seems like it is not a good place to drop people. Road
is too narrow. South Village did a lot of work to widen the road and make it good.
n. Bob – Do we want the ROW or to ask them to build the infrastructure.
o. Shawn – Without a plan for Spear it could be hard to ask them for a path.
p. Nic – I think we very much need to ask them for a rec path to connect Preserve to S.
Pointe. If we do a ROW it will take forever to fund and build it from a City front.
q. Cathy – If I was a parent, I would be doing the other connection to be built at Parkside
over going out to Spear. Would suggest people look at it.
r. Bob – Today our walking group had to walk on Spear Street to be able to do their walk
and it would be nice to have this potential gap filled. We kick ourselves for allowing
developers to not do paths.
s. Nic – Agrees that we need to advocate for the path and if we don’t get it, at least we
tried and can say that we did our best.
t. Donna – There are other locations where we advocated and they have done more to set
up the basecourse to do it later.
u. Shawn – The compelling point is that there is an existing path that just ends at the end
of Preserve Rd and could go further.
v. Nic – The potential sidewalk from Pheasant Way on the West side of Spear Street is an
easy win as there is sufficient ROW to do it.
w. Shawn – So are we simply suggesting that a rec path be installed on the west side of the
Long property (east side of Spear Street) and the rest is OK?
x. Bob happy to second that if that was a motion
y. Cathy - Should there be wayfinding signage suggested by the committee.
z. Amanda – Would suggest wayfinding for the entire north south route through.
aa. Motion by Shawn to request shared-use path along Spear from Preserve through to
South Pointe.
bb. Second by Bob
cc. Vote – All in favor. Cathy abstained
dd. Shawn to email recommendation to Marla for the DRB
ee. Remembered that Alan Long reached out to meet with committee sometime. Should
connect with him. Ashley will follow up.
8. I-89 Interchange discussion -any additional actions while Council contemplates
recommendations?
a. Shawn introduced
b. Jonathon sent the group a draft of what we could use to weigh in and push back.
c. Shawn had discussed with Tim Barritt. Sounds like CCRPC may study all three and maybe
our only recourse is to keep pushing about bike ped.
d. Havaleh – At first was OK but that was based on what Hinesburg Rd will look like now,
but will be more like Exit 14.
e. Nic – Agreed, the ramps will be just as bad as exit 14. If it was straight it would be fine,
but it wouldn’t be.
f. Bob – Would like to include that it would make another impenetrable connection that
only the most fearless would use.
g. Shawn – Does anybody feel they disagree with this second recommendation.
h. Nic – Would like to add that this is too narrow a scope of just the interchange, not the
whole corridor.
i. Shawn – I think Tim gets it but maybe doesn’t quite understand the overall bike ped
challenges.
j. Motion by Shawn to forward letter that has been drafted to City and CCRPC (through
Ashley)
k. Seconded by Donna
l. Bob – Would just want in that second bullet to mention Exit 14 and Shelburne Rd I-89
intersection. To illustrate the problems, we would be creating. Bob will send edits to
Jonathon to add that language. Shawn will submit.
m. Vote – All in favor.
9. Maintenance issues-Bob
a. Presentation to Update City Council on Safety and Maintenance issues and P4P Projects
i. Time to do an update to the City Council?
ii. Shawn – Could be good to talk about next meeting.
b. Potential group ride to assess the condition of our paths and other bike/ped
infrastructure.
i. Justin wants to know longer stretches of the path that need to be replaced so he
can budget for it. Such as Butler Farms to Golf Course which may be too far
gone to patch. Justin is hoping there may be federal infrastructure injection
where the City could do significant work, so wants to be primed.
ii. Shawn – Liking the focus on this maintenance component instead of just new.
Glad to hear him asking for this.
iii. Amanda – This would be great if we already had an inventory of all sidewalks
and recreation paths. Broken record. Lots of work. Should be something that
DPW does or hiring an intern to do. Or CCRPC. Big task for a volunteer
committee. They need to have someone assessing this infrastructure annually.
iv. Havaleh noted in chat: “Dorset street from Kennedy Drive to Williston Road is a
mess.” And “Shared use path, Szymanski Park to Stonehedge.”
v. Shawn thinks this is something that should be done and not necessarily the
committee’s responsibility.
vi. Bob – Would like to hear from other committee members.
10. Discussion of potential E-bike speed limits and signage on rec paths
a. Shawn – Not sure where this came up.
b. Bob – Since E-bikes were coming to Greenride Bikeshare. Has had issues with E-bikes
whizzing by. Should we be limiting speeds.
c. Nic – I would love to disassociate the conversation of E-bikes and speed limits. Anyone
can go 20 on a bike. Its more about courtesy. This is the future. We should not be
limiting it.
d. Havaleh – I agree that its more about courtesy. All users.
e. Donna – They are so silent. Need to get more people to call out or bell.
f. Havaleh – Need to do a bell giveaway. Much better than talking. Its all about courtesy.
g. Bob – Asked Jonathon what is happening in other places
h. Jonathon – Burlington waterfront had this same challenges and leant more towards
courtesy and slow zones than having speed limits. Maybe a signage campaign and
markings would be good.
i. Shawn asked if there are any other towns that have speed limits already?
j. Jonathon – Not really heard of any.
k. Shawn – Agree on decoupling from E-bikes. More about courtesy, even with dogs etc.
Concerned if we made rules that were inconsistent with other towns. If Burlington had
limits then maybe we could do that.
l. Jonathon – Burlington may have a speed limit that is an ordinance but not signed and
not enforced.
m. Donna – Another point that needs to be addressed is use of sidewalks by bikes.
Generally make way when young kids but when adults it’s a problem.
n. Nic – That’s indicative of a larger problem. Need to have better road infrastructure so
people feel safe. Saw some amazing etiquette sign on the Lamoille Valley Rail trail on
the weekend and they were big and clear for all users.
o. Jonathon could get a copy for us to see.
p. Nic put link in chat https://www.lvrt.org/faq
q. Asked who does this?
r. Ashley – This falls within the wayfinding package discussions and should be part of what
was proposed.
s. Shawn – Asked if it was within the scope of the Penny for Paths
t. Bob – Yes, is part of the CIP.
u. Havaleh – Could we use Justin’s infrastructure money for signs instead of P4P?
v. Ashley – Depends on the restrictions that may be in place.
w. Nic – Suggests doing Other Paper article and the Sub-Committee get together to work
through the other stuff.
11. Revise Bike/Ped Committee Charge-Bob (7:25 p.m. -15min)
a. Bob happy to write up the other changes that he suggests
b. Ashley suggests making sure the committee agreed with changing it in the first place.
c. Bob – The reason it seemed necessary because we do more than just rec-path oversite.
Cover all bike lanes, crosswalks and other bike ped infrastructure.
d. Nic – Agree. Needs an upgrade.
e. Donna – Agreed
f. Bob to do the first brush and send to Donna before coming back to the committee
12. Exit 14 Bike Ped Bridge
a. Jonathon – Ilona reached out to Local Motion to get support for a grant application to
get comments from individuals to use in any application. Also want to get letters of
support from businesses and hoping to enlist committee on working on getting
businesses to be on board. Happy to draft a letter together or happy to have people just
contact people directly.
b. Bob – Happy to go to South Burlington Business Association but concerned that it may
be confused with current Envision 89 study. Would want it to be clear why.
c. Jonathon can write something up as talking points to differentiate and the benefits of
connecting other places such as East Terrace, Quarry Hill and UMall. Some businesses
have noted that the current route is a barrier for employees to get to work.
d. Havaleh would like talking points as she has people she could connect with.
e. Cathy – Knows UVM provost and may be able to help UVM from the top to help support
the bridge.
f. Jonathon – Would love any and all contacts or just ideas for businesses you may not
have contact with. Will send out a spreadsheet to add businesses.
g. Nic – Asked what format it needs to be to ensure open meeting law is complied with.
Cannot work in a shared document.
13. General comments/updates from Committee members
a. Designated a Bicycle Friendly Community today!
i. Nic – Excited about the report that will help us focus on what we can do to
improve more. Maybe we do some sort of promotion near the end of the
month. Will work with Ashley and Coralee on a plan.
14. Confirmation: Next meeting Wednesday, June 9, 2021 @ 5:30pm
15. Adjourned at 8.00p.m.