Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BPAC-2009-12-17REVISED MINUTES BPAC 12/17/09 7:10 p.m. 2nd floor conference room, City Hall. Present: Josh Carlsen (Chair) Dave Nutter Andy Goodell Renee Brutvan Kent Johnson (Liaison, Engineering) Will Kay (guest) Agenda: BPAC December 17, 2009 1. Review of Agenda 2. Approval of Minutes 3. Reports from Liaisons and Chair 4. Bike Plan - the next step(s) 5. Clinton St. Bridge - follow -up and discussion 6. Construction Worker Safety Laws - creating a safe passing zone 7. BPAC in 2010 - priorities and goals 8. New Business 9. Guests 10. Adjourn 1) Josh read the agenda. 2) Minutes from November meeting were not circulated with enough time to go over, so they were not approved. 3) Reports from Liaison and Chair. Josh: Regarding the city committees survey which originally went to wrong person, Josh filled it in and returned it to the City Clerk for Maria Coles (who sent it out). Maria plans to meet with the various committee chairs in February to go over the results and take any actions needed. BPAC needs to look at a different configuration for achieving quorum, perhaps readdress the number of voting members required, or use a percentage of filled seats, or perhaps recruit more active members. Currently there are 11 voting seats and 4 liaison seats. Kent: Regarding the Clinton St. (Agenda item #5) the bridge signs are up, on both sides. The Department of Public Works (DPW) Sign Shop still needs to switch the 96B sign on the west side, heading east, with the Steel Deck Bridge sign that is right as you come around the corner. Kent: Regarding the bike parking ordinance, Kent attended the Planning and Economic Development subcommittee (of the Common Council) meeting last night. The subcommittee adopted the recommendations, which will go before the full Common Council in January and will most likely be passed. Previously, when a business did have bike parking, there were no specifications for quantity, placement, square footage per number of employees, characteristics of use, the design, etc. The bike parking ordinance has those specifications. Kent's expectation is that this will improve the design of future bike parking facilities and increase the number of bike parking spaces that are required for any project which triggers a site plan review. Andy was curious how many spaces it will increase, but Kent said it would be hard to say exactly how many at this point. Kent will email out the final version that they agreed on last night (see attached). Kent: The FHWAs Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) was just updated, and sharrow markings were included so our new markings on Cayuga St. are official. They are a part of a City studey that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) had to authorize. The feedback we've gotten on them is positive, but this spring, we'll have to get more feedback on where else they might be used, what applications (e.g., East State St. and part of Hudson St. now each have a climbing bike lane, and Hector St. could get a climbing bike lane, so all of these streets would be examples of where sharrows might be used going downhill. Also a very short stretch of Hector St. below the bottom house might be apt for sharrows as a connector going uphill unless or until the road is widened slightly). Getting the sharrows markings costs approximately $300 each marking (we have to contract them out) so we want to make sure we put them in deliberately. Also, there are maintenance and resource issues so it would possibly be better to try and use them on smaller segments, e.g., as a linkage connecting two bike lane roads in targeted locations, rather than on long stretches of a single road. We could do it in house for less cost, but they'd be less durable, and would possibly have to get re- striped every year. Kent: There might be, at some point in the near future, perhaps even this year, a repaving project due on NYS Rte. 89 going through Cass Park. As far as we know, only the travel lanes are scheduled for repair, and the shoulders will not be repaved even though they are badly in need of repair, for a total paved width of around 24 feet. Also, at a minimum, we'd like the travel lanes to be widened to 14 ft. but for every extra sq. foot of pavement added, you need the money to do it. Dave asked who pays for the project and who he could talk with about the cost and the work (Ray Benjamin who is in charge of maintenance at DPWs Streets & Facilities office). Dave recounted that a few years back a part of NYS 89's paved shoulder width was cut in half from 6' to 3' by a NYSDOT maintenance project which did not have to go through the same public review or meet the same standards of accommodating bicycle or pedestrian travel as other categories of road work. Kent warned that the budget for the repair may not allow it. If it is the case that just the standard travel lanes have been budgeted for repaving, additional money will need to come from somewhere if additional pavement width is desired. Should we recommend that they wait for a year to get enough funding to do the job correctly? Should we make the Rt. 89 repair a priority now? The cycling club survey of last month did mention complaints about that shoulder; it is definitely a hazard. Dave Nutter believes it should be City policy that DPW maintain bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the roadway, including paved shoulders (sidewalks are a separate issue), and that if a road is being repaired, shoulders should be included in the cost of the work, and not be considered as an extra or additional option. We should make a resolution for BPAC that we think funds should be allocated for bike and pedestrian conditions for every BPW repair. Josh will call Ray Benjamin to ask what he is planning for NYS Rt. 89, whether plans currently include shoulders, and if not, to ask that they be included; and also to learn where funding is coming from, what the road dimensions are. Dave will measure the road at various spots in the City and report on the width of the lanes and shoulders (see 12/20/09 BPAC email). Kent suggested an option of 14 foot shared lanes, but Dave N. objected to this because it would be the abandonment of the previously usable and far preferable paved shoulders. Josh will draft resolution which we can consider at the next meeting regarding Dave's suggestion. Kent adds a final note: Whenever this section of street is repaved, he does not think it will be that difficult to secure the money necessary to pave some portion of the shoulders, but that the bigger question for BPAC is how wide should it be -- 28 ft., 30 ft., 32 ft. of pavement or more? Of course, at some point it will just get too expensive. Kent: Barbara Lifton applied for and received $250K funding allocated for multi -modal improvements. Maria Coles suggested a good site to improve /redesign would be the State/ Floral/Elm /Hector Sts. intersection in the West End. The funds can be used up to 500 ft away from the intersection. Consultants Fisher Assoc. from Rochester were hired to provide different concepts for intersection rearrangement, and the City Engineering office came up with some others. Kent showed us the 4 Fischer plans. There were positive general aspects to widening the end of Floral or to creating a traffic circle, but both plans would be expensive - perhaps beyond the budget - because of the grading involved. We also noted issues of turning radius for large vehicles (e.g. firetrucks an schoolbuses) in some drawings. There were positive features for pedestrian and bicycle accommodation in several drawings, including restriping the bridge as 3 lanes plus bike lanes, adding crosswalks, making raised crosswalks, and making median islands which might be used as pedestrian refuges. We discussed other features not shown in the drawings, including crosswalks in additional locations, and connecting the westbound bike lane on the bridge to a climbing bike lane on Hector St. We also discussed two ways of addressing the conflicts at this intersection which were not reflected in Fisher's work: using traffic signals or using an all- way -stop. Noting the many benefits of an all- way -stop I asked Kent that this approach be given equal consideration to the other potential solutions. Josh further noted that an all -way stop would be easy to test in advance temporarily. Kent said the decision - making process was still in its early stages. The Fisher plans will be shown to Board of Public works along with our comments and recommendations, then we'll get the Board's feedback. Pedestrian issues are main focus of the project. We must ensure that BPAC is involved. At 9:00 p.m. we did not have time to finish our agenda items. The meeting was adjourned.