Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee - 01/12/2022 South Burlington Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee Wednesday, January 12, 2022 @ 5:30 p.m. City Hall, 180 Market Street, Room 301 or Online Interactive Online Meeting (audio & video): https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/563348253 By telephone (audio only): 1-571-317-3122; Access Code: 563-348-253 In all cases, you will have the opportunity to both listen AND speak. AGENDA 1. Welcome, Virtual Meeting Instructions, and Emergency Evacuation Procedure – Bob (5:30) 2. Discussion: I-89 Bike/Ped Bridge Project Status Update – Ilona Blanchard (5:35 pm) 3. Changes or additions to the agenda – Bob (6:00 pm) 4. Comments from the public not related to the agenda - Bob (6:05 pm) 5. Consideration of minutes from the December 8, 2021 meeting – Bob (6:15 pm) 6. Discussion: Beta Technologies New Facility at the BTV Airport – Art Klugo, Beta (6:25 pm) 7. Discussion: Planning for Future Council Presentation – Bob (6:55 pm) 8. Updates from the City – A. Parker (7:15 pm) 9. Updates Ongoing Committee Work – (7:30 p.m.) a. Monthly DPW Meeting – Bob b. Climate Action - Donna c. DRB Update – Cathy d. Communications/Outreach – Cathy e. Safety – Bob f. Mapping – Amanda/Nic g. Signs – Nic h. Bike Friendly Community Planning - Nic 10. Confirmation: Next meeting Wednesday, February 9, 2022 @ 5:30pm 11. Adjourn (by 8:00 p.m.) 1 South Burlington Bike & Pedestrian Committee DRAFT Special Public Forum and Regular Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 8, 2021 @ 5:30 p.m. City Hall Room 301 Committee In-Person Attendees: Havaleh Gagne (Chair), Nic Anderson (Clerk), Amanda Holland, Bob Britt (Vice-Chair), Donna Leban Committee Remote: Dana Farr, Cathy Frank, Matty Larkspur Committee Absent: None Other Attendees: Ashley Parker (City Liaison), Audrey Beaulac, Nicole Centerbar (Consultants); Chief Shawn Burke, South Burlington Police Department Public in Person: Shawn Goddard, Linda Bradley, Jim Keosian, Linda Norris, Betsy Bahrenburg, Public Remote: Monica Ostby, Tim Riley, Terry Brennan, Juli Bonanno, Doug Goodman, Ravi Venkataraman, Dorothy Pumo, Lani Ravin, Avalon Styles-Ashley (The Other Paper), Laurie Smith, Robert McDonald, Ariel Jensen-Vargas, Kris Steppennuck 1. Welcome, Virtual Meeting Instructions, and Emergency Evacuation Procedure 2. Public Forum: Spear Street Bike/Ped Improvements a. Ashley introduced and followed presentation from the Meeting Packet b. Audrey Beaulac and Nicole Centerbar From Hoyle Tanner consultants c. Linda asked if project would continue further south. She lives off Spear St. Encourage to look at the rest of Spear Street. d. Appreciate the ability to provide public comment e. Audrey walked through presentation in Meeting Packet. f. Linda Bradley asked about crossing points. Seems logical to have on the west. g. Bob noted that there will be a development just north of the Forest Service at 600 Spear Street and there will be a crosswalk with an RRFB installed across Spear Street h. Betsy Barenberg asked about potential development. i. Kris Steppennuck asked if traffic light would be installed at Songbird j. Audrey noted it would be a RRFB, not a traffic light. k. Linda B asked how to connect at Swift and Spear. l. Bob mentioned it could connect on the East side. m. Amanda mentioned that with the proposed alternatives for Swift and Spear there would be all way crossings n. Bob asked about terrain on the west side due to the embankment and old growth trees. o. Audrey – Bank on west side would be difficult. May need to move the road to accommodate a path. p. Doug Goodman commented that the west side would connect well with the existing paths. q. Kris mentioned that people don’t stop for flashing lights r. Lani Ravin – UVM and was commute to work route for a number of years. Maps could be north/south. Would also like photos to be notated. Asked if on the west, would it be a two way path? Would there need to be a road realignment at the underpass? Concerned about conflict points at Songbird. Could be pinch point and wouldn’t want bike crashes. Could bike lanes on either side be considered. s. Audrey – Would be shared use path. SB typically 10 ft wide so would try to fit 10ft. Will still have some cyclists on the road who want to go fast. A shared use path gives a safer 2 space for those that wanted to use it. Bike lanes are typically within roadway but this project is more looking at a path. t. Linda B asked about bike lanes and possible configuration of path u. Donna noted that sometimes the buffer between the road and path gets used by cars to pass when someone is turning or parking. Wondering what strategies to prevent cars going onto shared use path. v. Audrey – Can look into options to make sure this is kept in mind when designing. w. Shawn Goddard – Used to commute a lot, and would like to make sure there is efficient connection to the 189 path. People will continue to use that grass so need to make it safe there. x. Monica – Clarified it would be a separated path. Question on safety. Blind curve on west near songbird, is it safer on west or east? y. Audrey – Would need to look into this. If we moved the roadway, there could be better side distances. We will look into all those when we make the assessment. z. Monica – Asking to make safest design. Could it be better to have safe permanent barrier instead of just path. aa. Doug asked about discussion of existing lanes on Songbird bb. Robert asked for motion activated or push button warning lights. cc. Kris made comment about lights going into your eyes so maybe paths on both sides would be good. dd. Lani asked about the crossing and making sure there is safe stopping area. ee. Linda commented on plowing and making sure its taken into consideration. ff. Lani noted the white line is gone on the curve on west side, showing that people don’t stay in the lane and cut the corner. gg. Monica wants to make sure that it connects well with the possible roundabout. There could be more things on that corner of the UVM property in the NW corner of the intersection. hh. Doug noted there are good videos on roundabouts from the Netherlands. Section proposed is really beautiful. Some sections of existing path are disconnected and wanting to help connect these neighborhoods near Farrell St. One of the most direct paths to connect between the two. Queen City Park Road project is important to this. Doing good jobs with striping lately. If trying to get to Burlington, is the goal to go down to QCP or to use the 189 Path? Need to consider connectivity. ii. Linda does get concerned with multi use paths and the lack of delineation. Is it possible to delineate it? jj. Dorothy Pumo – Commute that stretch all the time. Used to riding in road. Uses paths all over the place. If there is a person with a kid or dog trailer, the divider makes it very difficult to get around things. Much better to have an occasional situation than it is to have to deal with a barrier. Please make it a standard path like all over town. kk. Linda – Maybe just on the higher speed hill section. ll. Dorothy – the dangerous part will be trying to cross Spear. The curve is nothing to worry about. mm. Nic asked if pricing would be included in conceptual plans. Could be much more expensive to do the “road shift”. nn. Lani asked if we are staying within the ROW. oo. Ashley – That’s the plan but don’t have the layout just yet. 3. Changes or additions to the agenda a. One small agenda item from Havaleh. Gift to Shawn, outgoing Chair. Presented with gift 3 4. Comments from the public not related to the agenda a. Monica O – Here as resident. A request coming our way soon from Planning Commission. Friend of Family who was part of the crash. Seeing all over the city just how dark the city is. Far too dark in certain places. Noticed street lights light roads, not sidewalks. Lots of hot spots in the City that are much too dark. Noted that there was previously a decision by the City Council to turn off every second light. b. Nic asked for Monica to provide her list of Hot Spots. c. Monica – Dorset Street is number one. d. Nic agreed. Shocked that Kennedy Drive has ZERO lights and is a corridor beside the High School and a nice rec path which is very dark. e. Linda Norris – Hubbard Park is a park that is a great interest to her and her neighborhood. Concerned about paving a path right through a nice field. Thinks there are other ways to connect through than going through Hubbard. Would hate to see a path put through there. f. Havaleh – Commented on history and took comments g. Linda Norris – Could be better on west side at bottom of hill near Spear Street h. Ashley – There are water issues in that area as well. i. Other Linda –Concerned about cars coming up hill on Nowland. Raised sidewalk or speed bumps at entrance crosswalk. j. Cathy Frank – Lives in South Point – No safe way to go to Noland Farm without using Spear St. South Village has the same problem. So important that the inland route be available. No way to weave through neighborhoods on the east side. 5. Consideration of minutes from the November 10,2021 meeting a. Moved by Bob to approve b. Seconded by Amanda c. Approved unanimously. 6. Discussion with Chief Shawn Burke, SBPD: Recent Car/Bike Accidents a. Havaleh introduced. Crashes from October. b. Chief Burke – Two different incidents. One on Williston Road. Person on stolen bike, had a warrant for arrested, crossed against the law. Was arrested. Doesn’t align with a normal scenario. Dorset Street one was unfortunate. Emerged from High School against light, was hit by car. No helmet. Agrees that that section of Dorset St is rather dark. Time of year where people are adjusting to daylight changes. From an infrastructure scenario, perhaps lighting was a factor. But bicyclists entered traffic when they shouldn’t have. The City has built a lot of thoroughfares that are wide and encourage high speed. Noland Farm was built wide, has little traffic calming. Have speed trailer out a lot. Could do enforcement but as soon as officer is gone, it would go back to the same problem. Like to rely on engineering strategies and education. Speed radar captures great data. The Department is lean on human resources right now. Can have 39 officers and now only have 34. Stretched thin. Happy to talk with how police can intersect with committee work. c. Matty – On Safety working group. Wondering if there is data on hotspots for speeding, collisions or near misses. At some point it’s clear that it’s an infrastructure problem. Would love it if they could share data with the committee. d. Chief Burke – Data on Motor Vehicle Complaints could be provided. Would the crosswalk data be helpful. e. Mattie – Would like to pinpoint the infrastructure issues that allow crashes to happen. A series of choices made by City could possibly be undone. 4 f. Chief Burke – Wanted to remind that the problem here is that the individual crossed against the signal and was their fault. Maybe lighting could have been a factor. This case is less about infrastructure and more operator error. Would prioritize enforcement on areas where there are more incidents that could be changed and would work with DPW on possible improvements. g. Bob – Encouraged Matty to look into the VTrans Crash Reporting Tool. h. Chief Burke – We upload crash reports directly into that tool. i. Amanda – How could we use the other data to look into potential problems or challenges j. Chief Burke – Raw data that may be hard to go through as it’s a lift. Can get it to you but the devil may be more in the detail. Does not see any correlation between the number of traffic stops and crash reduction. k. Monica – Accident was 6:45pm, across from a school and was with a number of other kids the same age. Driver was also a young driver. Point is that it was so dark at 6:45 that this happened. Too dark for anyone to make another better judgement. Too damn dark. l. Havaleh – Agree that better lighting is needed there. It is dark. m. Nic asked for feedback on school zones n. Chief Burke – School Zone is 25 so Market St is ok and would get slower when built out. Has not had discussions with School about Dorset St. If the committee would want to go down that front, would need to discuss with the school and DPW. o. Havaleh asked if it could be something the safety committee could discuss. p. Bob said it could be on the list. The subcommittee will meet sometime soon. q. Donna – Difficult thing with lighting is the trees. The fixtures without trees would provide a lot more light. r. Monica – The lights are too high and point at the road, and could not physically light sidewalk if it tried. s. Donna – Trees will block more. On Kennedy Drive the shared use path is on the north and not many trees could be a good solar powered light location. Need to think of street lighting costs to operate when we think of Climate action. There are some interesting illumination techniques that could be used. t. Nic mentioned bollards might be good on Kennedy. u. Donna mentioned that the biggest cost is the underground wiring. v. Amanda noted that education and outreach is still important and the committee is trying to work out ways to track and discuss with Public Works on infrastructure needs etc. Trying to work out how we can assist on safety concerns. w. Chief Burke – As places like south Dorset St get built out, there could be additional considerations on things like speed. Happy to come and talk anytime and happy to be a support as needed. 7. Updates from the City a. Bob asked recreation and parks department money for maintenance. Asked if Committee would be ok for Bob to write to Jesse and Council to make them aware that we asked for 3-5% of the paving budget to be assigned to paths in the Committee’s 2018 presentation or safety and policy issues without authorization being made at that meeting. Maybe we can go back and ask for 2-3% and make it mandatory to be dedicated to paths to keep the infrastructure up unless it was not needed in a particular year. b. Amanda – Curious about this too. Seems like the rec department is trying to close this gap in another way but it will be pushed. Would like to have a line item for maintenance or replacements, but doesn’t want it to be a percentage of the paving budget because if 5 that got cut then it would also cut maintenance for paths. We keep kicking this can and needs a line item. c. Matty – If the city plan is to make the city walkable and bikeable it should be maintained to continue to meet the plan goal. d. Havaleh – I think the committee should recommend an annual commitment for upkeep. e. Ashley noted this came about from Adam in DPW going to Parks based on needs at Stonehedge path. There is an awareness at all levels that we don’t have this funding piece in place. f. Bob – Doesn’t think the Council is aware of the problem. Staff maybe but need to help them be aware. g. Amanda – Excited for UPWP project to assess the condition of our paths. h. Havaleh – Seems that the collaboration with Parks and DPW may be more effective to get the issue addressed. i. Matty – Should we do a motion to go to City Council. j. Havaleh – Still seems like we are all in line if we deal with Parks and DPW. A unified group that helps show it fits with City plan. Agrees with % concept. Seems like Jesse is trying to get more collaboration between city entities. k. Bob asked on Hubbard Path if there were big changes to the path. l. Ashley – nothing significant m. Bob asked about Kimball Ave phase 2 ongoing scoping project . What is the scope and how long has it been going on? n. Ashley - No update. Check on CCRPC o. Nic – Hinesburg Road crosswalks are NOT painted. Asked if it’s possible to paint if there is a nice weather day or if the paint has temp constraints. Asked if Ashley could ask Justin. p. Ashley – Want committee to review City Priorities and make sure they understand the needs. There is reporting requirements. q. Havaleh – Sounds like we need to have this on the January agenda r. Amanda – Asked if the FY22 Policy Priorities and Strategies document is set in stone. There are some components where there is a role for the committee but we are not designated as the “Role”. Things like the Parks Master Plan and the TDM study, we are secondary and would like to make sure that we are noted where they are missing. s. Ashley – Would be worthwhile to request that we are added to those pieces. t. Havaleh will make sure to include those in the January report. 8. Review/Update subcommittee assignments a. Dana was supposed to be on Safety committee and Cathy was not. Update. 9. Updates Ongoing Committee Work a. Havaleh asked if there were any pressing updates as we are running out of time. b. Monthly DPW Meeting –Bob c. CCRPC Update –Amanda i. Bob - Queen City Parkway study received over 400 comments. At Dattilo’s, there were comments and a concept path that was very interesting which included path widening, button updates etc. One recommendation had a rec path all the way to Central Ave. Recommends going to public participation and second meeting on the web page for the mapping which was really interesting. d. Interim Zoning –Amanda & Donna e. DRB Update –Cathy f. Communication –Cathy 6 g. Safety –Bob h. Way to Go Schools –Donna i. City Bike/Ped Rankings (People for Bikes/League of American Cyclists) –Nic j. General Business -Havaleh 10. Confirmation: Next meeting Wednesday, January 12, 2021 @ 5:30pm a. Bob Britt to run meeting. Havaleh possibly out. b. Committee to consider setting alternate meeting day. When there are holidays, sometimes the DRB or City Council get bumped which will impact space. Will need to make a plan. c. Bob noted budget with CIP will go to City before next meeting. Noted Spear Street widening has continued to be bumped another two years when it jumped from Bike/Ped CIP to Road CIP. Wonders if we should be advocating for it to be pulled back to help possibly using infrastructure funding coming through from new infrastructure bill. d. Ashley AARPA funds can only be used for roads if it combines with other infrastructure improvements such as sewer lines etc. e. Bob – Will likely go to City Council meeting on January 3rd and just comment as a citizen. 11. Adjourned 8.09pm “Clean Version” Reflecting Changes Made at from August 11, 2021 Meeting SOUTH BURLINGTON BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN COMMITTEE MISSION AND DUTIES 1. The South Burlington Bicycle & 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 Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee is to advocate for the City’s bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure including new and existing shared-use paths, sidewalks, bike lanes, crosswalks and trails and advise the City of bicycle and pedestrian policy and safety issues, operational needs and future development plans for the City’s bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. 3. The Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee shall annually elect a Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, and Clerk. 4. 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. 5. Meetings are subject to the Open Meeting Law. Meetings shall have a proposed agenda published in advance of each meeting. Minutes of each meeting shall be recorded and maintained. A representative from City staff shall attend each meeting of the Committee; other City staff shall attend as requested by the Committee. 6. Duties of the Bicycle & Pedestrian Committee are: a. Develop and recommend to the City Council rules and regulations for the operation of the City’s bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure 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 bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure through published minutes and attendance at appropriate meetings. c. Make recommendations to the Public Works Department of the City for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure maintenance needs, and meet quarterly with the Director of Public Works. “Clean Version” Reflecting Changes Made at from August 11, 2021 Meeting d. Make recommendations to the Police Department of the City for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure security and safety needs. e. Make recommendations concerning the annual Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget for bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. f. Prepare and submit to the City an annual operations report suitable for inclusion in the Annual City Report. g. Provide support for studies related to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure as requested. 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 City’s bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Meet with developers and City staff and make recommendations as is appropriate in accordance with City Council, Development Review Board and Planning Commission policy. Adopted XX/XX/2022 by City Council Bike/Ped Staff Update – 1/12/2022 • Penny for Paths (Bike/Ped Improvements) CIP: The Council reviewed this CIP on January 3rd. The first public hearing on the next budget & CIP is January 10th. • Recreation & Parks Department Rec Path Maintenance Funding: City staff have been working on building out the paving budget for FY 2023 to specifically call out a monetary amount that would be allocated to maintenance of the shared use path. The amount might be minimal at first, but it will give us a place to start and build from. The DPW budget and CIP was also presented on January 3rd. • DPW Director Transition: Justin’s final day is January 7th, and the City Manager has decided that Tom DiPietro will be the acting Interim Director of Public Works, with Adam Cate supporting him, as the City continues to work to bring on a new Director of Public Works. There is a lot of transition and changes in roles, so please be patient with staff as we work through this period. • Shared Use Path Maintenance Costs Scoping Study: The project team is reviewing the initial results being provided by this study. The consultant is providing costs and timing for maintenance over a ten year period, to mesh with the City’s CIP process. Penny for Paths Projects Updates – 1/12/2022 • South Dorset Street Shared Use Path: The team has been waiting to receive abstracts for the ROW process, but hope to be able to submit the full ROW plans to VTrans for review soon. If those are approved, we can begin contacting landowners to discuss ROW, which could take a significant amount of time. • Underwood Parcel Shared Use Path: The Project Team continues its work to incorporate the public comments into the 30% design. The overall design has been reduced to a more modest design with lower impact. An archaeology team completed its study of the site and it revealed the need to do a follow-up study to determine extent of possible archaeological artefacts on- site. This work can’t happen until the spring of 2022, so much of the project will be on hold until the archaeology work can be completed. • Kimball Culvert & Bike/Ped Infrastructure: The road was paved and open for cars on November 29th. That will be it for construction this season. The rec path work will take place spring 2022. • RRFB Upgrades & Dorset Street Barriers: DPW completed its ordering for all RRFB locations in the City. Previously, RRFBs were purchased for a handful of locations to test the new products. The team was happy with them and moved forward with the remainder of the order. Staff will continue install/upgrade of all RRFBs for completion in FY22. DPW is still moving the Dorset Barrier project for completion in FY22. • Twin Oaks/Kennedy Drive Crosswalk: The City is about to put this project out to bid, with the expectation that it is built in the spring/summer of next year. We have until October to complete this project. • Spear Street Phase 1: The Public Forum went well and the project team is incorporating the feedback received into the initial design for this project. All materials from the forum have been placed on the project page. • Hinesburg Road Crosswalks: DPW has relayed that striping will not occur until the spring. They are now in winter mode. • Williston Road Crosswalk Project: A project kick off meeting was held in December. The team is getting ready to conduct a survey of the crosswalk areas and a notice of survey will be sent out to any adjacent property owners. Hoping to have the survey completed by the end of January. • Queen City Park Scoping Study: The study is moving along. There is an online survey that folks are being asked to complete. You can find the story map, online survey, and other project information at this link. • Kimball Ave (Phase 2) Scoping Study: The Project Team is reviewing a draft report and drawings associated with this project, and will provide the consultant with questions to consider. Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee & DPW Coordination Meeting Q4 2021 TOPIC: INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENTS & MAINTENANCE 1. The Committee would like input from DPW on the Department’s use of the infrastructure assessment tracking databases (lists, workbooks, etc.) compiled by Committee listed below. We would also like to confirm these systems are not duplicating efforts of City staff and provide information that aid staff decision-making. a. Striping Workbook – Each spring the Committee assesses fog lines/bike lanes and ranks 33 bike corridors based on condition and system priority. Purpose to aid DPW prioritization of resources and direct fog line painting to areas of highest need. o Does the DPW track this information internally in a current system? ▪ If yes, discuss at the spring coordination meeting how Committee can support the City’s system. ▪ If no, does DPW support the Committee in collecting this information? o Please provide feedback on how this tool could better aid use by DPW staff (format, rating system, etc.) b. Crosswalk and Rec Path Maintenance & Repaving Priority List – Running list of safety and maintenance items based on Committee or public feedback. Areas of concern are recorded by category: potholes & tree root, brush & tree overgrowth, cracking, crosswalk striping condition, and path areas needing repaving. o Does the DPW track this information internally in a current system? ▪ If yes, discuss at the spring coordination meeting how Committee can support the City’s system. ▪ If no, does DPW support the Committee in collecting this information? o Please provide feedback on how this tool could better aid use by DPW staff (format, rating system, etc.) 2. The Committee has a strong interest in supporting City Staff in maintaining infrastructure and prioritizing resources to areas of greatest need. To aid coordination of efforts, we are requesting the Committee be represented in the FY22 CCRPC UPWP Mapping Phase 2 project. Committee participation in Phase 2 would aid the continuity of data being collected and coordination between the Committee and DPW on how the volunteers can assist in updating the data. The Committee played a large role in Mapping Phase 1; Amanda Holland facilitated Committee input and is willing to participate in Phase 2. FY22 UPWP: South Burlington Bike/Ped Mapping Phase II: The City & CCRPC recently completed a mapping inventory of the city’s bicycle path segments, including type, side of the street, and location of existing & anticipated connections. Phase II of this project would add data fields and catalogue existing conditions in preparation for future infrastructure improvement projects. Specifically, data fields and field assessment of bridge condition, recreation path width and condition, and street/path integration would be collected. 3. What level of repair should be planned for the rec path between Butler Farm Drive and Golf Course Road? Could crack filler be used or has the surface deteriorated to a state of replacement? 4. The Committee believes that the 3 new crosswalks on Hinesburg Road are incomplete without, at minimum, the paint and present a safety concern. Vehicle drivers have no visual cue that the new crosswalks are there except for the signs. Would it be possible to paint these crosswalks on a warm, dry day sooner than later this winter? 5. Has staff determined how the cost to repair the damage to the rec path at the Nowland Farm/Dorset Street and Stonehedge Drive/Szymanski Park intersections will be covered? A prior communication noted “Highway Paving” could cover it in calendar year 2022. TOPIC: STATUS OF FY22/23 EFFORTS & PRIORITIES To better manage expectations between the Committee and City Staff, it would be helpful to review the status and anticipated timeline of existing efforts for safety, maintenance and new infrastructure installation. 6. Please provide the status and anticipated timeline for completion of the improvements listed below. Project/Location Status & Timeline RRFP Upgrades for the list of priority locations citywide including all those rated as priority 1- 4 by the Committee last June. Crosswalk signals at Dorset St, the UMall entrance and Garden St upgrade to install north/south pedestrian activated signal on both. At April 2021 meeting, staff noted equipment was ordered and expected installation in 2021. Installation of solid barrier along rec path at Dorset St. (Note – Committee has continually observed vehicle tracks on rec path. On 12/8/21, 3 sets of vehicle tire tracks were visible on the rec path during the snowfall). Dorset St and Swift St “No Right on Red” traffic signal to protect crossing phase for south bound on Dorset and west bound on Swift St Extension. Kennedy Drive Crosswalk Williston Road Crosswalks Repair Rec Path Cracking locations (see maintenance workbook) Paint crosswalks identified as critical/priority locations (see maintenance workbook) Project/Location Status & Timeline 7. What is the outcome of the VTrans Traffic Committee’s August 23rd meeting and review of speed limits on Hinesburg Road? Did VTrans provide a timeframe for when the new speed limit signs will be installed? 8. How much of the FY 2022 Striping budget remains for spring striping efforts? a. Is there a date the Committee should target sending DPW an updated version of the Striping Workbook to inform the Department’s spring/summer efforts? 9. The Committee is partnering with Local Motion and the School District to identify and promote safe routes for high school and middle school students to get to school by foot or bike. The pilot program, Neighborhoods to Schools Greenway, is coordinating a route to connect the Mayfair Park and surrounding neighborhoods to school. a. Is the DPW aware of and able to support the Committee’s Neighborhoods to Schools Greenway project? 10. What are next steps with VTrans related to locating RRFBs at the 3 new Hinesburg Road crosswalks? TOPIC: POLICY & EDUCATION 11. The Committee and DPW have discussed narrowing vehicle lanes to 10’ where appropriate to calm traffic and maximize shoulder facilities. a. How does the DPW identify which roads can be narrowed? b. How is information on vehicle lane width conveyed to paint contractors for roadways where the existing fog/shoulder line will get shifted? 12. The Committee would like to have bike lane stencils painted on road shoulders wide enough to be categorized as bike lanes. Does the DPW have the capacity to paint stencils and/or could Committee members work with DPW staff to stencil? 13. An emerging issue for the Committee is that of safety concerns and adequate lighting along shared-use paths. Residents have conveyed concerns at specific locations and as a topic to evaluate system wide (shared-use paths, sidewalks, crosswalks). a. For location specific requests, is there an existing process to follow for documenting and evaluating requests for the installation of new street lighting? b. If the Committee would like to discuss lighting for the safety of the bike/ped system, who would be a point person to initiate that discussion? i. As a first step the Committee will reach out to the Energy Committee to identify past or future efforts on City lighting infrastructure and energy efficiency. ii. A potential second step would be to evaluate the existing system in terms of documenting whether fixtures illuminate the pedestrian infrastructure (angle of illumination).