Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Energy Committee - 07/30/2013JOINT MEETING OF COMMITTEES RE: MARKET ST. 30 JULY 2013 A joint meeting of South Burlington Interim Zoning, Planning Commission, Recreation and Energy Committees was held on Tuesday, 30 July 2013, at 6:30 p.m., in the Conference Room, City Hall, 575 Dorset Street. Committee Members Present: Jessica Louisos, B. Benton, T. Harrington , S. Quest, A. Germain, S. Dopp, R. Neuer, E. Pomerleau, T. McKenzie, M. Simoneau, D. Leban, L. Bresee, C. Shaw, D. Cummings, T. Duff, J. Van Driesche, C. Frank, D. Bell, L. Walter, D. Jacobowitz, M.Connor, D. Farr, M. Janswold, L. Michael Also Present: K. Dorn, Interim City Manager; P. Conner, Director of Planning & Zoning; I. Blanchard, Project Manager 1. Meeting Overview: Mr. Dorn reviewed the previous meeting and noted that attendees came to some consensus on a design for Market Street. He directed attention to the cross-section proposal which will be presented to the City Council on 5 August. 2. Market Street Cross Section Proposal: Ms. Louisos reviewed the various cross-section proposals as follows: 1. From Hinesburg Road to Potash Brook: There would be two 11-foot travel lanes. Both sides of the street would have a 9-foot shared use path with landscaping strips (the width of these to be determined by the consultant to best accommodate stormwater design). There would be parallel parking on the south side of the street. Ms. Leban suggested a possible differentiation in paving materials between the pedestrian and bike use, or signage. Ms. Blanchard noted that both landscaping areas would have stormwater benefit. 2. Potash Tributary Crossing: The 11-foot travel lanes and 9' shares use paths would continue. There would be no parking or landscaping. Mr. Bresee suggested two feet of landscaping for safety. Mr. Blanchard said they will comply with state standards for a shared use path. JOINT MEETING RE: MARKET STREET 30 JULY 2013 PAGE 2 3.. Potash Brook Tributary to “Street A”: The design would be the same as #1 but with parking on both sides and narrower landscaping width. There will be “bumpouts” for pedestrian crossings. Members asked to add a line indicating that there will be bump outs at all points where there are parking and pedestrian crossing. Ms. Leban asked about the speed limit. Ms. Blanchard said it would be 25 mph throughout. Mr. Conner said this is the lowest allowed under Vermont law. 4. “Street A” to Dorset Street: There would be a 14-foot shared use path, a 7-foot amenity area, 8 feet of parking, 11-foot travel lanes. The 14-foot paths would allow bikes at slow speed. Amenities include street lights, trees, benches, etc., where appropriate. Mr. Cummings asked if the surface of the 14-foot area would allow for drainage as part of stormwater treatment. Ms. Louisos said it would. Ms. Dopp asked if older people will comfortable in this environment and how they can be accommodated. Ms. Leban said everyone has to be courteous and use caution as they do on the Rec Path. Some signage may be needed. Mr. Bresee said this configuration works in other places. Ms. Louisos suggested the designer consider putting sharrows on the travel lanes to signal that bikes are allowed on the road. She noted the path can also curve in amongst the amenities, which would slow people down. Mr. Cummings suggested bike parking at the ends of the bicycle areas for those coming to, rather than through, the area. He also noted that for a number of years there won’t be buildings, and there can be changes made when there are buildings. Ms. Leban said it would be helpful if the Form Based Codes Committee addressed outdoor uses for businesses being set back a bit. Mr. Conner said the Form Based Codes draft contemplates that possibility. 5. Festival Section: Ms. Louisos said this would have the same general dimensions as the previous section. It would be toward Dorset Street but not at turning lanes. It would connect to the Mary Street area. The street would not be curbed and would have higher quality materials (this would result in higher JOINT MEETING RE: MARKET STREET 30 JULY 2013 PAGE 3 maintenance costs). Mr. McKenzie suggested differentiating vehicle traffic by bollards, etc. Mr. Engels said he didn’t feel this would be more expensive. Members agreed to strike “additional” from costs. Mr. McKenzie added the street can be designed for 15 mph, even if it can’t be signed for that. Ms. Quest then moved that the Planning Commission accept the design report with amendments to include bump outs at all pedestrian crossings and to delete “additional” from costs in the festival section. Ms. Benton seconded. Motion passed 5-0. Ms. Leban moved that the Recreation Path Committee accept the design report with amendments to include bump outs at all pedestrian crossings and to delete “additional” from costs in the festival section. The motion was seconded and approved 5-1 with Mr. Neuer voting against. Mr. Simoneau moved that the Form Based Codes Committee accept the design report with amendments to include bump outs at all pedestrian crossings and to delete “additional” from costs in the festival section. The motion passed 9-0. It was noted that the Energy Committee will meet on Thursday and will vote on the motion then as there was not a quorum of that committee present. Mr. Shaw suggested the possibility of a green strip in the middle of the section from Hinesburg Rd. to Potash Brook. Ms. Blanchard said they had looked at a park in the center with islands, but not for that section of the road. Mr. Conner said the issue there was stormwater treatment maximizing. They do not want water being absorbed in the center of a road. Regarding safety for older citizens, skateboards, etc., decisions can be made. Mr. Conner said there can be a local ordinance covering those concerns. Mr. Dorn thanked attendees for sticking with the process. As there was no further business to be conducted, the meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. _______________________________ _____________________________ Energy Committee, Clerk Form Based Codes, Clerk _______________________________ _____________________________ Planning Commission, Clerk Recreation Path Committee, Clerk