Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPAC-2009-03-19BPAC Minutes for March 19, 2009 In attendance: Josh Carlsen (Chair), David Kay (Planning Board liaison), Matt Freedman, David McElrath (DAC liaison), Andy Goodell, Renee Brutvan, Dave Nutter, Tim L. (Traffic Engineer liaison -- joined us later). Guest visitors: Fernando de Aragn (Tompkins County), and Molly Futterman (working on Cornell's "Big Red Bikes" initiative). Meeting commenced at 7:06 pm. Josh presented the agenda: 1) Approve minutes from January and February BPAC meetings; 2) liaison reports and updates; 3) Transportation Plan update; 4) Tompkins County Safety Committee; 5) Goals & Duties of BPAC 6) Exploring BPW & Park Commission liaisons 7) New business 1) Approve minutes. Josh noted that since we did not have a quorum, we could not vote to approve the minutes. Attendance is sometimes below quorum, and he questioned whether it would be worth changing the quorum requirement. Suggestions and discussion followed. David said we would need to investigate the parameters before voting on any decision. The meeting minutes themselves were approved at the end of the meeting, see below. 2) Liaison reports and updates. Fernando said Tim was doing the cost estimates for the Bike Boulevards. There are guidelines from Berkeley that would be useful for Ithaca because the work has already been done there. We want the Long Range Transportation Plan (county -wide, broad policy plan) recommendations for Council to reflect a strong bicycle policy and to tap into "green" resources. Fernando said that signage, on -road treatments, strong public participation and education are critical along with infrastructure changes. Renee asked if there are other places besides Berkeley that we could look to as an example, and Portland, Vancouver, Seattle, Europe were mentioned. It might be worth an internet search to inform ourselves better. Josh wanted to know what is coming up in the BPW plan. Tim said there is an actual list that he could forward to Josh. 3) Ithaca Transportation Plan update. David reminded us that Tim is working on the City Transportation Plan which would incorporate all of the items mentioned in item 2). Fernando said we need support from the City Council, and that the municipalities actually lead the efforts, and he helps to facilitate them. David K. brought up the College Ave. and that during the Collegetown Planning Process, he tried to improve the bicycle /pedestrian language. The term "Bicycle Boulevard" hasn't been brought up. There has been talk about widening the sidewalks, maybe doing an analysis on a bus traffic lane on certain blocks, etc., Question as to whether a bike blvd. would fit in Collegetown. More discussion followed. David K said the the Planning Board can offer limited incentive zoning for some smaller areas if a developer provides certain funding or benefits, e.g., shuttle service, public spaces like parks, etc., but that the request needs to be very specific, and that research should be done for feasibility. Mollie and Andy G. said that Cornell already uses a alternative, incentive pricing structure for parking on campus. There needs to be more research on techniques and feasibility to try and reduce on- street parking, and Fernando suggested changing the current metering system to flexible metering. Dave said that the residential parking permits will most likely remain as they are, as it is a hot issue for Collegetown residents. Dave continued that it's easy to change the policy, the fundamental idea of using pricing policies to redistribute the parking, but that enforcing the policy is harder to do for the City. Dave Nutter explained that there are many police departments (Cornell, Ithaca College, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County Sheriff, etc.), but they all seem to have their own territories. Fernando has been encouraging Ithaca Car -Share memberships to the Transportation Board. David K. commented that an updated parking study should be done in a comprehensive way. Renee asked if a time - lapse camera could be installed at busy locations to study pedestrian and other traffic patterns, and suggested that someone in the community might want to do it voluntarily on our behalf. David K. said it might be good to integrate that data into the study, to see if there is any excess capacity within certain blocks, or at certain times, to see how much parking there is, the capacity, and how it could be made more efficient. He added that there is a problem with the first Collegetown Plan because the Planning Board said it was for pedestrians, but the Plan didn't actually challenge anything to make improvements for them. Fernando asked about the history of the Bike Plan, and whether it included pilot applications. Fernando reiterated that the Berkeley model would fit our plan, and thinks we should put in a plan as a pilot, and added that it would need public outreach, etc. Dave N. pointed out that this spring we'll be getting the sharrows paint strip on the entire length of Cayuga St. Fernando said a boulevard is more prominent. But he agreed that just making an effort, making any kind of improvement is good. Josh brought up the fact that any improvement will use paint, and this might make a good connecting point for the group to come to a consensus. We'll need public participation, an environment for bikes, shifts in mindsets. Might it be a good idea to remove the center line from State St. so that cars will slow down upon realizing that they must pay closer attention to the road? It might make them more cautious. David K. said the City is committed to developing a large new neighborhood behind Wa1Mart, and it is likely to become a part of any streetscape plan with regard to connectivity. There will be 600 new residential units, so how are these people going to move in and out without using their cars? State St. will become a large part of that plan. It's going to be a big planning process. 4) Tompkins County Safety Committee. Andy G. related that on his daily commute, the day that the cars were cleared from State St. recently for street sweeping was the worst day he has ever had to ride his bike. He described the route he took and said that everyone drove faster in the right lane because there was more room, and stayed farther from the center yellow stripe because they could, and Andy was cut off by a car near the Stewart Ave. light. Fernando suggested flexible bollards at the starting point to the bike lane, to make it more visible for motorists, or to accentuate it in some other way. Everyone agreed that space is the critical issue for a bike lane, to prevent motor traffic from cutting off bikers. Renee asked if there was a telephone number to call if a motorist does cut off a biker, or to report any traffic/ pedestrian/biker altercation, for situations that don't necessarily warrant a call to the police. Tim offered that they are welcome to call the City, and that depending on which jurisdiction the matter falls under, their call would be routed to the most appropriate department. Josh said that he knew of a group that collects just such calls and complaints, and that they compile the data and distribute the software as shareware. Josh didn't have the link with him, but said he would post it on the listserv. David suggested it might be good to promote the number on the Ithaca Bike website, and that it would be good to build on that, to find ways of tracking and reporting problems to law enforcement, or to collect information on what works, and that the private sector could get it started by posting comments on the site. If we can get the shareware and attach it to the Ithaca Bike site, we could monitor the comments and advocate for change, as a way to arm ourselves with information and lobby for change. Andy G. suggested that in this scenario, if we identify a hot spot for problems, we could deal with it on the next scheduled stenciling or maintenance from BPW, or see if there's a significant safety issue that has to do with a faulty design. We discussed circulating a press release for the website and feedback contact info., as well as public outreach. 5) Goals & Duties. Josh bought up the BPAC's Quarterly Report to Common Council, and wanted to know if it would be useful or appropriate to advocate for pending items, resolutions and recommendations from BPAC. Tim and The Daves also suggested the monthly Common Council meeting to do so, and recommended communicating such to the City Clerk two weeks in advance of the meeting in order to have it included on the Agenda. David K. said that the Common Council members do read the BPAC minutes as well to keep up -to -date on our progress. Josh proposed that we obtain a copy of the timeline schedule for proposed roadwork, in order to possibly plan on implementing Phase I of the already adopted Bike Plan. He stressed that we should know whenever the BPW does anything with the roads, anytime it happens, we should be adding bike stripes in every possible instance. Tim replied that the Common Council isn't really responsible for striping, that he is, so it depends on the situation. David K. assured Josh that no decisions are made about streets without first taking into that into consideration. Fernando continued that indeed they would have to justify why they hadn't. Tim went on that what he does need to consider is the budget, and whether there is enough money for in the budget for improvements, so that Common Council's role is funding. Tim said that parking changes go through the BPW, and that there will be repairs from Green St. to Cascadilla St. on Cayuga St. soon. So if we want to advocate for a sharrows -type shared lane to be striped or for parking to be consolidated on one side of Cayuga St. from Gimme to the High School to make a bike lane, to do it now before the repairs start. David K. said that if it was adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan, it should have more force if it is brought before CC. 6. Exploring BPW and Park Commission liasions. Ron Chapman`s membership as the Board of Public Works liaison vs. a Park Commission Liaison. The term expired on 12/31/08. 7. New Business. More discussion followed. 1. (revisited) Approve minutes from January and February BPAC meetings: With a quorum now present, David K. moved that we approve the January minutes, Matt seconded, motion was approved by unanimous consent. With a quorum now present, Josh moved that we approve the February minutes, David N. seconded, motion was approved by unanimous consent. David K. moved to adjourn, Matt seconded, and by unanimous consent, the meeting was ended at 9:02 pm.