- This is the sidewalk committee for city council, December 9, 2025. So we have an agenda. I think it
- would be good to we're going to start with introductions and then go through our little conflict of
- interest statements, if there are any. And then we'll get into past project updates.
- future project recommendations. That will be a pretty casual conversation like we're used to. Hank Duncan
- will do the presentation and lead us through that. And we kind of do a Q&A as we go, I think, right?
- And we'll talk with the public. And then we'll see about if we're ready to make recommendations and
- do a vote on that at the end and or if we need to schedule another meeting. Sound good?
- Okay, I'll start. Kate Rosenbarger, City Council, District 1. 2. Isabel Piedmont-Smith, City Council,
- District 1. Sydney Solik, City Council, District 6. Duncan, Miami Transportation. Neil Copper, Engineering.
- Sophia? Sophia, Clerk's Office, McDowell.
- go to Andy. Andy? Yeah, okay. I'm Andy Roth, a common council member at large. Kari Bennett,
- council staff. Christine Chang, council staff. Okay, great. Okay, so then we just want to do a city
- council conflict of interest. So this just happens if any project considerations are in anyone's district.
- We like to just
- recognize that and say say whether or not you're able to make an objective decision even though some
- projects are in your district. We can also just do it all at once if you all would like and just acknowledge
- that some of these projects are in our districts and we are able to make objective decisions
- and recommendations here. I'm fairly certain most and not all of the projects are in district six but
- I believe I can be objective. Great. OK, same for me. I am happy to make unbiased objective decisions
- today. Yes, I don't think any of these projects are in district one, but. In general, I view this as
- a as a whole community issue and not per district. So yes, I feel like I can make an unbiased decision.
- Great, thank you. Andy's at large, so he is good to go. Yeah, okay. Rolling through our agenda. Unless
- one of the items is like going by his house or something, I think that. Yeah, true. He's doing fine,
- okay. So then I think Hank, oh, we're doing the next, I'm sorry.
- iPad is so old as a city iPad and sometimes it just spins and I have to turn it off and turn it back
- on. So that's where I am right now. Okay, so the next thing we're doing is actually the renaming of
- the sidewalk committee. I forgot that addition. So what sometime in 2025 council had a deliberation
- session to talk about the goals of the sidewalk committee and if those goals
- have stayed the same or changed from finding connections that are missing and building brand new sidewalks.
- That was like the very limited definition of the sidewalk committee, I would say like 10, eight to 10
- years ago. Or if it is broader now and talking more about pedestrian safety, which is infrastructure,
- like also crosswalks and ramps.
- and other fun stuff, right? Like speed humps and everything. So we had that deliberation session with
- staff, thank you all for coming. And it was decided that it is more of a pedestrian safety committee
- and the fund is the alternative transportation fund, which is broader, is and can be broader than just
- sidewalk connections. And so there is a resolution that will be coming to council about renaming the
- sidewalk committee.
- Isabel is a co-sponsor of that, is that right? And Hopi? I think so. Okay, I think so too and so a draft
- of that was put in the packet and I just thought it would be nice if we talked about that a little bit
- too to say to kind of lay the groundwork for what we're looking at this year as our potential projects and
- I think too, just to go back to council, even though this will be before council in January, to say
- the sidewalk committee did talk about it and we're happy or not happy with the new description and the
- new name proposal. So I just thought it would be kind of nice to talk about it. This is not the latest
- draft that in your packet is not the latest draft. So I don't know if staff could project that or.
- I'll try to know that. Section one has been edited. Yeah. Here's some changes from one of the whereas
- classes in section one. Oh, my laptop is not working. I do. This side of the table is on problems. Yeah,
- I'm a little scared of trying to do something right now because of our technology issues seem to be
- spreading.
- Give me a minute. I think I need to get in on Zoom. Alternatively, I could email it to you, Sophia,
- and have you project it? No? No. OK. Just no. I'll shut down my laptop and then. Yes, that's where I
- am as well. We've started. Are you not able to share? Sorry, I was. I'm not in on Zoom yet. I can.
- I just, I should have done that.
- I think if you click on the Zoom link and the event, it can just make you a post from the council meeting.
- I'm trying to get it switched from the council to me right now. It looks like Andy's line is council.
- I think multiple people can be logged in, at least on our account again. Yeah, I don't have it. I never
- could figure out how to have my own. So I probably just use the common council link.
- Is that okay or should I not be doing that? I think it's all right. It's fine, yeah. Okay. Do you know
- how I can get to it?
- It's cold. It's good though. It was on air conditioning. There's two. People think of only that one,
- but there's one in the back. I have one now. I think you have it posted over here.
- Because I'm logged out. Okay. Also, I'm just logged in because my computer restarted itself, so. If
- he just clicks on the link, he should be able to join just as a participant. I don't know why he would
- log in as a council. So, I'd love someone to send him a note. Yeah, he should be able to just log in
- with his own Google account.
- Send him a quick message. But then he'll only have it for 45 minutes, is that right, if you're the free
- one? No, that's only for the post. Oh, did you say that? Yeah, I don't know why he would use camera.
- Yeah, I know, it was not out of the office. Yeah. Yeah. And then he figured out how to do that, because
- I'm like, I don't know how to do that. That's how it goes. It's much easier. It's much easier than any
- of yourself.
- I'm sorry, this is taking so long. Technical issue. Yeah. I don't know if that's me or if that's Andy.
- Oh, that's me. Oh, I think I got it. Yay. Oh, yeah. And there's another. I think that one's probably Andy.
- in the waiting room. Andy, are you there? We're muted. Oh, there's Andy. I don't know what happened.
- It just went off. I don't know what happened. It might have been when we were
- pull in the getting logged in and pulling things up, but we should be good now. Okay. Is running through
- this for the committee. Sure. So you may have noticed the version that's in your packet also talked
- about bicycle and micro mobility infrastructure and hoping I thought that we should focus on pedestrians.
- But in all the facets, not just sidewalks. So the whereas clause that you see there, the second to last
- one, just takes out bicycle and micromobility. Just to make it more general, the work should include
- broader consideration of pedestrian safety. And then in section one, we do give a few more examples.
- consideration of pedestrian safety, including, but not limited to sidewalk installation and improvements,
- pedestrian access points, traffic calming, and other safety improvements. And then the pedestrian safety
- committee, I think that was in the, that was in the one that we had in the packet. So I think,
- Were you going to co-sponsor it too, Kate? I didn't. I was ambivalent. Okay. Well, I mean, I think as
- a co-sponsor, I wanted feedback, not just like, here it is, you know. So if you all have some tweaking
- you'd like to suggest, please feel free. I think it makes sense to separate pedestrian safety from bike
- infrastructure, if only because like that's very different looking infrastructure and cost.
- So I do think it makes a lot of sense, especially given the limited funds that are available to this
- committee, to focus specifically on pedestrian. That is not to say that I don't want to also prioritize
- bike infrastructure from a different fund. So I will make that clear. Yeah, I agree. Well, there are
- also things that are both, and this fund can still do that.
- Where we don't have sidewalks and things. Staff did look at it and just kind of preferred the pedestrian
- safety committee name as opposed to the other option. Staff, do you have anything to add now? OK. Andy,
- do you have any feedback? No, thanks for checking, but I mean, I guess it makes sense. OK.
- So if we wanted to just recommend this, if you think that would be helpful for us to take a vote and
- recommend it to council, we could do that. We don't have to, but we can. But if you want to move to
- vote, I'll move that this current sidewalk committee recommends this resolution for approval of the
- full common council. Second.
- need to vote on that. Do I call? Do I call? Oh, okay. Isabel? Yes. Sydney? Yes. Andy? Yes. Kate? Yes.
- Okay, so Sidewalk Committee will recommend four to zero that the Common Council approves this resolution.
- Great, thank you. So, doo-doo-doo.
- I guess number three on our agenda, we do have $500,000 in the alternative transportation fund to recommend
- today. This is the same as last year. I think this is our second year at $500,000. Okay. Then now, Hank,
- if you would like to
- My name is Hank Duncan, Safe Streets Program Manager. I will go over an update of previously approved
- projects from 2025 Council Sidewalk Committee and go through staff recommendations for the 2026 Council
- Sidewalk Committee. As always, if you have any questions or comments, don't hesitate to stop me and
- we can have a discussion. I'd much rather this be a back and forth rather than just a monologue.
- A quick status report from 2025 sidewalk projects going through the list. Last year we allocated $300,000
- for repaving coordination projects. Essentially those are projects that we can improve pedestrian safety
- with while coordinating with street department and public works when they're resurfacing the street.
- Those specific sites were bump outs and crosswalk improvements on East 2nd Street at Dunn, Grant and
- Lincoln, those three intersections. And those have not been constructed yet. Street had to move the
- repaving to 2026, so we are still coordinating with them, but that construction will happen this coming
- year. Along with that, and honestly, because this line item was broad enough to allow some flexibility
- with repaving options, we were able to install an additional
- pedestrian refuge island on East Rogers Road by Spicewood and the Sherwood Oaks Church. That was previously
- not really thought about at the time of this meeting, but because of this nine item and the coordination
- efforts we were allowed, we were able to add this in and improve pedestrian safety at this area. So
- that's been constructed? That has been constructed, yes. Pedestrian island? Yes. That's nice. Sorry,
- not part of my district anymore. Absolutely fine.
- The North Union Street crosswalk improvement. This is a raised crosswalk on Union Street between 7th
- and 10th Street. This is connecting the IU campus and some residential buildings over there with a parking
- lot and other residential buildings on the east side. And that has not been constructed yet, but that
- will be constructed in 2026, correct? In the summer while the students are there. Yes.
- And then the North Jefferson Street sidewalk. This was prioritized by both the 2024 and the 2025 council
- sidewalk committees for design and partial construction. We allocated $70,000 for construction of this
- sidewalk, knowing that it would not fully fund the construction. The estimated construction cost was $300,000.
- We actually received bids in the past couple of weeks. We received lower bids than expected, so the
- total actual cost will be $238,000 in change. And because some of the other bids for the repaving came
- in lower than expected, we were able to allocate more funds towards the Jefferson Street sidewalk than
- expected. So we ended up allocating about $180,000 towards this project, which still does not fully
- fund the construction, but gets us most of the way
- and I'll talk more about this project later. And then lastly, we touched on the Fee Lane and Law Lane
- intersection improvements last year. This is a safe streets for all high priority intersection. We've
- received a lot of comments about this and the committee approved design funds for this intersection.
- After the fact, we learned about a street maintenance project that's happening on this corridor in 2027.
- And honestly, there's more opportunity here than just this single intersection project. So there are
- ongoing conversations with both street and Indiana University to partner on a more corridor wide pedestrian
- focused improvement project. Yeah. How has IU been as a partner for this? So far, there's
- been no formal commitment. Those discussions are still ongoing. But there is interest in partnering
- with this project. There is still a lot of details to figure out. There are discussions happening over
- there. But we are hopeful that we can both financially partner in this project. Thank you. There is
- definitely a shared vision of increased pedestrian comfort and safety on this corridor. We both understand
- that thousands of pedestrians use this corridor every single day.
- and just talking about broad scope items that we would like to see, wider sidewalks, better curb,
- tree plots, et cetera. There is a shared vision for those items. Great. Thank you. Yeah. So in general,
- when the allocation was less than what was actually used, how did that work?
- Did we approve like the chair to rearrange the money to match projects? Yes. So last year and in previous
- years, in this meeting, which we will do this meeting as well, if projects are recommended and approved,
- there is a vote that allows the chair to approve minor changes within this item regarding construction
- costs, whether they're above or below the estimates.
- Yeah, so the chair has approved the Union Street increase, but has not yet approved Jefferson. We haven't
- formally said, hey, can we put the rest of the money into Jefferson yet? Yeah, because the Jefferson
- is more than twice what we allocated. So I wouldn't put that in the category of a minor change. But
- I think we knew that that was going to be the case. Did we not?
- Well, because it was partial construction last year, we sort of put what you all recommended toward
- potentially the first phase of Jefferson, knowing that we would most likely fund it more in the next
- year or the next two years. And I don't think there was a I think in the
- Approvals last year. I don't think there was like a limit. It didn't I don't know that ever said minor
- I think it said that share had approval within the approved projects to shift funding around as appropriate.
- I don't think it was like a within a certain percentage Any other questions on the 2025 status report.
- 2026 funding recommendations. I will get into a lot more detail about these line items in a second,
- but broadly, now that we have bids for the Jefferson Street project, we can accurately estimate how
- many funds are needed, how much funds are needed to complete this project, and that's about $60,000
- if approved
- Um, this project would be constructed in the summer of 2026. So very, very soon we're excited about
- this project. The safe streets priority projects. I will go into a lot more detail about this
- one, especially. This is a broad line item to focus on pedestrian centric projects along the safe streets
- for all priority network. That is almost all of the projects that engineering and planning are working
- on are along this
- SS for a priority network. We have an adopted city goal, a vision zero by 2039. We have an adopted six
- streets for all action plan. And so there is a responsibility of city officials, staff elected officials
- included to focus on this network especially. And these projects will focus on pedestrian specific projects,
- that being sidewalk, gap completion, crosswalk improvement, tree plot construction, et cetera. The things
- that we've already talked about
- in this committee, but focused solely on this network. If you need anything for an official document,
- the total is wrong. I believe it should be $500,000. Yes. Good point. Which is OK. I just wanted to
- point it out in case you needed to make changes. Thank you. I appreciate it. Yeah. Good point. And then
- change orders. This was a request from engineering, essentially, with previously approved projects in
- case there are small changes needed in the contract.
- Say, for example, with the union street crosswalk if there are small increases in funding needed. This
- would make it much more efficient and easy for engineering to continue that project without having to
- slow down. It's sort of a placeholder item. Hopefully.
- It's not needed at all. Sometimes change or the positive, sometimes they're negative, but just having
- the item in there and the ability to use it. And then we could go to the chair and say, Hey, it was
- actually $6,000. Will you approve, you know, this change or we don't need it. And we put it into the
- safe streets priority projects. Thank you. So in the safe streets priority projects, I was a little
- confused about the maps.
- So you have the priority corridors map. You have the priority intersections map. Is that for all modes?
- That is for all modes, correct. So I guess I want to just make sure that the funding from this committee
- goes towards the pedestrian safety aspect and to ameliorate places where pedestrians are involved in
- accidents rather than the cars. Yes.
- They're all on the same map. Just wanted to clarify. They are on the same map. I... And we can narrow
- it down more specifically if you would like, but looking at any of these corridors on this map, there
- are absolutely pedestrian challenges and places where pedestrians have been injured or there is a risk
- of them getting injured. I can't think of a single place along this map where that wouldn't be the case,
- and that's why
- we made it as broad as we did because this is the priority network to improve city streets for all users.
- But when you're improving safety for pedestrian users, you are often improving safety for other users
- as well. And so this is the network that doesn't just, we have a high injury network for pedestrians
- specifically, but that is just the retroactive look on where crashes have happened. This priority network
- looks at both
- the high engine networks and the risk, the demographic data of who might be walking or rolling here.
- And then it incorporates public input as well. So this is the one comprehensive map that we have that
- we've been moving forward with. But if there needs to be extra verbiage in whatever approval there is
- that specifies pedestrian projects, we can actually do that because that is the intent here. And I assume
- you would be
- To what extent do you just go with the highest rated ones and work your way down? And to what extent
- is it dependent on what projects are being considered for other improvements? Yeah, that's a great question.
- And honestly, that's why I made this one item so broad, because there is a gray area. The answer is
- it depends. And I have a little bit more information
- on this bullet point here, projects chosen based on efficiency, feasibility, and SS for a priority.
- Obviously, we want to hit the highest priority locations first. That is where the most FSIs have happened.
- That is where the public is saying, I feel unsafe. That said, if an area is on the priority network,
- it is a priority. And if there is an opportunity to coordinate with street, or IU, or other stakeholders,
- If it's low-hanging fruit, then we go into that efficiency aspect of, if we can get a bang for the buck
- here at this location, maybe we just knock off this location and then move on to others. So again, there's
- no perfect science to it, but it is a balance between all of these three things of efficiency, feasibility,
- and actual assets for a priority. What do you mean by efficiency? That is just coordinating with other
- stakeholders that bang for your buck aspect of, say with this,
- Fee Lane project that I'll get into in a second, if we can coordinate with Street and a maintenance
- project and IU and their funds and we can contribute some sidewalk funds as well, that's a bang for
- your buck rather than doing a sidewalk project solely and then maintenance separately and then maybe
- IU wants to do something separately as well. Thank you. What about the, I mean, we're, you know,
- the city's potentially redoing college walnut as a major project. I would not want this going toward
- a project that is in itself improving safety for all road users. I wouldn't want to supplement that
- because I think that money should be coming from just a different budget. Do you see what I'm saying?
- That's going to happen and it should happen in the way that is
- Potentially planned right like we have two designs and one wall, I guess potentially get chosen But
- I don't feel like this I feel like if this budget were to be used there. We're like losing this Budget
- in a way like it's getting absorbed into a place where it should already just that product should be
- funded. I Don't know if I particularly agree with that take But that's not for me to say I I think my
- opinion would be that
- These and again touching based touching on the opportunities there on projects that these funds could
- supplement. There are projects that the city is working on, like East 10th Street or College and Mall
- or other projects that if there's an opportunity for an extra pedestrian aspect to it that may not be
- included in the funding or maybe that maybe the bids came in higher than we expected. This could be
- that source of well,
- we could add a pedestrian refugee island here with these funds or say, and I'll get to this in a second
- with the city's SS for a grant application. We don't know if we've been awarded that grant yet, but
- when we are, there will absolutely be other funding sources used for those grant application projects.
- But if there are bids that come in higher than expected or these variables that we might not encounter
- or may not
- intend on encountering like right-of-way acquisition or topographical challenges, then these funds could
- be used to supplement and actually make these projects real and up to the standards that we'd like.
- I could see that with potential extras, but I think something like right-of-way acquisition topographical,
- I mean, that's engineering stuff, right? And like that's going to get figured out pretty clearly before
- the project
- starts construction right i mean right away acquisition we basically know how that's going to go down
- i think on a like on a bigger project like college and walnut yes we would and i think there's a shared
- intent that on a project like that like we don't staff doesn't want to take the council sidewalk money
- and just bump it into a bigger project already happening and then it's like you're not getting anything
- extra the desire would be
- These bigger projects have their own funding sources, like you're saying, and then the council sidewalk
- funding is going and doing these other kind of standalone things. But there may be a situation where
- a project doesn't, isn't fully funded or bids come in high, or we want to add something in and there's
- not funding for it unless we can supplement.
- With council site, I think that's what I'm saying. There might be opportunities like that. So he doesn't
- want to say, no, we're never going to combine with another project. That might be the best choice.
- And I see, I mean, it is like a gray area. And we did talk about this last year with the repaving
- coordination projects that we didn't want to just be supplementing a project that would happen anyway. And
- releasing funds for that department to do something else that is not pedestrian related. You all understand
- that. Yes. So under what scenario would you use alternative transportation funds for right-of-way acquisition?
- Seems like something you need for roads, not for sidewalks. No, it comes up pretty frequently on sidewalks,
- especially if there's a brand new sidewalk and there's not a sidewalk there. And you're trying to,
- you know, you have an existing road and there's no sidewalk. That might be private property where you
- build that new sidewalk. That's true. You can all that. South High Street. Yes. I stand corrected. Andy,
- we can't see you. So do you have anything?
- Well, I mean, I really follow what Kate's saying. And I was just a little concerned by one thing that
- I believe Hank just said, that with these bigger projects, if it's not this, we might want to be able
- to dip into this source, this fund, if projects aren't fully funded.
- That seems to be a little different than saying, well, there may be associated extra additional aspects
- that we might want to add and use to plan a major project. And then the funding could come from this.
- That sounds seems a little different. I'm a little concerned about that statement a minute ago that
- I thought I heard you say, well, you know, we want to be able to encase this project's not fully funded.
- in reference to one of the bigger projects. I don't know, maybe I misheard that. Sorry, Andy,
- just to clarify, I did not mean if project is not fully funded. This is if a project has another funding
- source and say bids coming higher than expected, or there is an addition that we would like to make
- to the project, say based on public feedback, then that could be an opportunity here. But I am not suggesting
- if this is a funding source for other projects.
- I just wanted clarification on that not fully funded comment that I heard. That's all. And so I'm pretty
- clear. I understand what you're saying, that this would not be used to fund a major project that came
- up short. But it could be used to fund an aspect of a project that was in addition to increase safety
- or increase pedestrian friendliness or pedestrian access.
- it on top of the overall original project? Yes, correct. Okay. Okay. Yeah. And I mean, I know that it
- is hard to think about it as separate when we're saying we also want to make sure that it gets used
- in the best ways because it does become like all this money kind of like in a bucket together a little bit.
- Right? That, um, but you are the safe streets coordinator. And so you just are kind of in this year,
- kind of asking, you know, in a way to like be the steward of these dollars and like decide how they
- get used a little more than normal. Essentially, we don't know fully what opportunities will exist this
- year yet, or what feasibility concerns may arise this year, this coming year.
- It may be that Indiana University doesn't want to commit financially to this field project. So I don't
- want to commit funds from this committee towards a design or towards that project until we know that
- there is a commitment on their side. That's just one example. Also, repaving efforts for 2027 repaving,
- we would like to do something similar that we did last year by adding
- bump outs or raised crosswalks or something else to existing repaving projects. So we can get that thing
- for your buck on the SSRA corridor. But as I'm sure you all know, repaving schedules come and go, and
- there is a lot of variability there. So we don't fully know exactly which streets will be repaved and
- when they will be repaved and how engineering then can coordinate with street when that happens.
- Yeah, it makes sense. And I know we're meeting earlier this year. I mean, this was like the original
- timing of our meetings because you want to finish. You're bidding some things out right on North Jefferson
- or you're getting, and that is for January potentially. And so we're here now. And so then because we're
- here now, we don't know about the safe streets grants yet.
- And so I did want to go into a few specific projects that these funds could be used for. That'd be great.
- Again, this is not all inclusive by any means, but just giving a little bit more insight into what projects
- were included in the Safe Streets for All grant application to give you some idea. So for one, and we've
- talked about this project before, South Walnut Street Pike. This is on the priority corridor.
- are on the priority network. There are intersections that are on the priority intersection network.
- And there was recently in the past year or two, I believe, a fatal or severe injury crash. So it was
- fatal. There are areas on here that do not have a complete sidewalk network. There are intersections
- on here that could absolutely be improved to assist pedestrians better when crossing.
- North Kinser Pike, the cities just began a quarter study on this entire Kinser Madison Rogers corridor.
- But on this corridor, there are sidewalk gaps that absolutely need to be filled. There are intersections
- like Gorley Pike or Rupdale that do not have crosswalks up to the standards that we would like as a
- city that could easily be improved. So those are just a couple of examples in this grant application
- that we applied for, but
- If we don't get this grant, or even if we do, these ones could be used to assist in those projects in
- some way or another. Is that near Kinzer Flats? I'm not sure where Kinzer Flats is. It's like a block
- south of the bypass. Yeah, so I think that building in the lower right corner is Kinzer Flats. OK. And
- that would generate a lot of pedestrians. And then not many. It's interesting that, sorry. No, no, no,
- you're fine. Go ahead.
- This is a highest priority corridor, but South Walnut Street Pike is only medium, right? I will say.
- Probably the number of pedestrians. I imagine that Kinzer Pike, especially at this area of Gorley Pike,
- is at the highest priority level because of the bypass, because of the intersection with the bypass
- and the FSIs that have happened at that particular intersection. Yes, that is Kinzer Place. Thank you.
- Because the bypass intersection is pretty bad, right? Yes. Mostly for cars or for pedestrians? For both.
- Okay. Everyone involved. Everyone. Yes. Okay. Can we do anything at that intersection or is, I mean,
- it's state-owned, right? That is state-owned. I am aware, and Neil can probably talk about this more,
- but I'm aware that there has been some coordination between city and and dot at that intersection. We've
- talked about
- the state-owned. Because I remember the Mark Stostberg data says that's a pretty horrible space to get
- across. I will also add, Isabelle, you were talking about medium-low versus highest priority. There
- is a gray area in terms of where the separations are in the level of priority here.
- There is some level difference, but quite honestly, if it is on the priority list, it is a priority.
- So it goes back to then efficiency and feasibility. If there is a project that we can do at any of these
- locations, regardless of level of priority, we would like to do it. And that intersection doesn't have
- a priority. State Road 4546 and North Kinzer.
- has a blue dot, so it's not on the priority list because it's an in-dot jurisdiction. Yes, that is simply
- saying if it were a city intersection, it would be a priority intersection, but because it is an in-dot
- intersection, it's blue. That is, yeah. Gotcha. So for anyone watching, call your legislators. But I mean,
- The prioritization does mean something. Yes, absolutely does. But I don't want to discount the level
- of priority that Walnut Street podcast has. Cool. Yeah, that one's yellow. And orange.
- And then a bit more on the fee lane project. I've already touched on this a good amount, but some more
- detail. Originally we had talked about the fee and law intersection specifically. The street is planning
- on repaving this corridor from 10th to 17th in 2027 and along with that replacing some curb on the sidewalk
- across parts of the corridor. And so that was what spurred this discussion of, well, if there's already
- concrete work going on,
- What else can or should we do that helps with the efficiency of something here? And then that spurred
- along the conversations with IU saying, hey, this might happen. We have this vision for the corridor
- that might include tree plots, a wider sidewalk, better crosswalks here. What do you think? How can
- we work together on this? And that's where we are right now in the discussions. Does IU own any of those?
- streets. IU owns Law Lane and then if we were to build a tree plot and widen the sidewalk we would almost
- definitely get into IU property and that's especially where that partnership could come into. This is
- the intersection that has a bus stop right across the street from Briscoe that students
- Have quite a long ways to walk before they hit an intersection that would allow them to yes the picture
- the picture on the right there is up by the briscoe quad about a few hundred feet south of 17th Street
- and We've been aware of this This area and there have been student groups who have reached out Advocating
- for a better crosswalk here What about
- intersection of 17th Street and Eagleson. Yeah, that's been an ongoing discussion as well. Absolutely.
- High risk. Sure. Neil might be able to talk more about that, especially for the short term items. I
- know Kindle was the project manager on that, but I don't know if you have anything to add.
- So that intersection was originally, it was part of one of our prioritized intersections and a federally
- funded project.
- which have very long timelines on them. So we're looking at construction in like 20, 29 or something
- like that for the project. So we have, we are moving forward with a short term implementation to use
- temporary materials to install a pedestrian refuge island at that intersection. Has it been considered
- for signalization? It has been considered. I'll say at this point, we're not moving forward
- with signalization, but as part of the discussion.
- Thank you. That was kind of a tangent. How do we let the Change.org organizers know that things are
- being done to 17th and Eagleton? That's exactly what I was thinking. I would say as a representative
- of a lot of IU students, that is something that you absolutely could do. OK, fabulous. Great. It is
- kind of murky over there for sure. OK, so more questions. Andy, anything?
- Okay. What are you all thinking about this kind of new approach? Not super new, you know, but following
- Safe Streets for All priority projects. What is it really?
- change in practical terms compared to what we would have done viewing it without the state streets.
- I say it gives a little more flexibility to staff to fund priority projects as they present themselves
- and to get some things a little more shovel ready that are seem to be in the pipeline like the ones
- you are talking about here as potentials.
- I think it takes away some administrative work, I guess, that engineering and planning have to talk
- with the chair a lot if things are different. So I think it gives flexibility and more of a go ahead
- for you all to just get going on those projects. I think just I answered that question, but I think
- for me, I'm leaning toward like, let's try it.
- see what happens. You know, I think last year was actually pretty great with the repaving coordination.
- I mean, I know we didn't use all that money, but there are some, I think the bump outs and some of those
- intersections are wonderful. You know, it totally changed the crossing length for pedestrians. And I
- think that is just wonderful. And to just get it, get it done as it comes. So I guess I'm leaning toward
- just doing this with, you know,
- Hank and Neil and especially Hank, you know, like understanding the description of the committee and
- the goals and yeah, just moving forward like this. I agree. I think given the timeline and just how
- many things need to be approved by next year, I do think it makes sense to go ahead and allow that leeway.
- Is there any need, does anybody think, to engage the full council on this or? Well, they have to vote
- on it anyway. Yeah, we would report back to council and then council would take their official vote.
- We just recommend. Okay. So we would, I mean, that's a good question, Andy. So we would be
- potentially recommending this and then we would go to council and I would do a report out on this meeting
- and we would say our recommendations and then we would all discuss it and have public comment on it
- before a vote. Yes. Is that on this upcoming December 17th meeting? Not yet. Okay. We'll have to talk about
- getting the report ready. We'll have to talk about getting the report ready. Sorry, I was whispering
- that, but I don't need to whisper anything anyway. Yes. Okay. I have a question about the timing. So
- for the North Jefferson Street sidewalk in your memo, you said that it's going to public works, the
- Board of Public Works on December 16th. We'll award the construction contract on that day and then we
- will encumber
- all of the available 2025 funding with approval from the chair. And then that's enough for us to open
- a purchase order, award the contract with partial funding, and they won't be starting construction in
- December. You know, they're going to construct at some point. They could actually do concrete work over
- the winter. So as early as possible in 2026, we'd like to open the remainder of the funds knowing that
- they're not actually going to spend enough to need that little bit until they get further along in the project.
- But you're going to start a project before the full funding is approved, which is really common, right?
- We would be doing that knowing that we have department funding that we would, we would kind of, uh,
- I don't know if we would actually open a purchase order, but we would set it aside as a, we have the
- full funding. We can, we can say we have it all, but the intent isn't to use that funding. The intent
- is to use the remainder of the council site. Okay. I understand.
- Well, I think that overall, this kind of begs the question of the purpose of this committee. I mean,
- if we have $500,000 and we're giving, what, 80% of it to a big bucket of things, it's like, do you really
- need us anymore? That's what comes to my mind. Which has kind of been a question for a long time too.
- Yeah. Yeah.
- And it's one of the reasons we had the deliberation session, or and some council members really like
- having this committee and didn't see a reason yet to give it up, I think. Go. I would ask for a mid-year
- report from staff just to let us know how
- What projects are being funded with the money that we allocate if the council agrees to allocate it?
- Does that sound reasonable? Yes. Absolutely. Something similar, I think, to just this before council,
- the two charts with some images. I can absolutely do something, say June. Is that fair? We'd go on recess,
- but early June could work. Early June, OK. Actually, early June.
- Because things get hairy after we get back. I would say June just because when we get back, everyone's
- going to be on budget. So y'all might not have time either. It might just depend on funding timing for
- the Safe Streets grants and if there is anything to report yet, really.
- Yes. OK. I have a hard stop at one just to let everyone know. If any more discussion from committee
- members? If not, we could entertain a motion to vote to recommend. Yes, I move. Public comment. Oh,
- public comment. Yes. OK. Thank you so much. I have the agenda right here.
- Let's open it up to public comment. So if anyone is on Zoom, I don't think there's anyone here in person.
- So just raise your hand on Zoom if you would like to talk. OK. Looks like no one.
- the recommendation for the 2026 funding allocation to be recommended to the full Common Council.
- I'll second. Okay, we have a motion and a second. I will call Raul, Andy? Yes. Sydney? Yes. Isabel?
- Yes. Kate? Yes. So we will recommend this funding
- 60,000 for North Jefferson, 435 for Safe Streets for all priority projects. We'll have a discussion
- on that at our council meeting. Two things before we adjourn. Yeah. And I think you're on it. You, yes,
- wanted to. And we might not need it as much this time, right? But OK. We need to also approve the prioritization
- of projects in that list? So within the approved project list, so we have three North Jefferson Street
- sidewalk, Safe Street priority projects and change orders. Approving a priority list of those three
- projects, I would recommend doing it in order of the list of Jefferson one, Safe Street two, change
- order three, in case there are funding changes that are needed. Does that align with your needs?
- Yeah, I think that's fine. And then I don't know if that relates to the chair being able to approve
- any changes. So I think, yes, I think that's right. We could just tackle both of those at once. But
- I think we would like to vote on prioritizing the list in that order and then giving the chair the approval
- to work with staff if funds need to be allocated a little differently.
- And so that would mostly among the three, among the three, among the three. Yes. Okay. Second. Okay.
- I will call all Sydney. Yes. Isabel. Yes. Kate. Yes. Andy. Yes. Okay. Anything else?
- Okay, we are adjourned.