WEBVTT 00:00:00.290 --> 00:00:10.080 - Okay, we're good to go. This meeting will come to order. This is a planning session of the 00:00:10.080 --> 00:00:21.053 - City of Bloomington Transportation Commission. Is there someone here to call the roll? I can call the 00:00:21.053 --> 00:00:29.982 - roll if you would. All right. One second. All right. Coppock? Here. Connell? Here. 00:00:30.626 --> 00:00:39.724 - Binder? Present. Bolin? Here. Dromey? Here. And Stostberg? Here. So we have quorum. The sole item on 00:00:39.724 --> 00:00:49.092 - today's agenda is discussion of the Kinzer Madison Rogers corridor study presented by the City and Tool 00:00:49.092 --> 00:00:58.371 - Design. Who will be presenting? So Tool Design will be presenting. I will give a short overview before 00:00:58.371 --> 00:00:59.902 - I hand it off to 00:01:00.130 --> 00:01:06.137 - Could you identify yourself first? Yes, I am Hank Duncan, State Street Program Manager for the City 00:01:06.137 --> 00:01:12.384 - of Bloomington. I brought some friends with me today from Tool Design. We are kicking off workshop week 00:01:12.384 --> 00:01:18.511 - for the Rogers Madison and Kinsey Corridor Study. Just so everyone knows, listening and hear, we have 00:01:18.511 --> 00:01:24.759 - a number of public outreach events throughout the week, some scheduled, some unscheduled. The scheduled 00:01:24.759 --> 00:01:27.582 - events that you all should know about are one, 00:01:28.034 --> 00:01:35.337 - There is a public workshop Wednesday from 530 to 730 at Switchyard Park. That will be a more expansive 00:01:35.337 --> 00:01:42.640 - version of what we're about to do, where we take up role plots and we look at the map and all sections 00:01:42.640 --> 00:01:49.943 - of the corridor and figure out what's working, what's not working, what you all would like to see. And 00:01:49.943 --> 00:01:57.246 - just to be clear, this meeting functions as, or this body is functioning as the steering committee for 00:01:57.442 --> 00:02:04.515 - this project, can you explain briefly the significance of a steering committee? Correct. So as the city, 00:02:04.515 --> 00:02:11.723 - this is a city project, as the city moves along in the study, we want to make sure that whatever decisions 00:02:11.723 --> 00:02:18.526 - are made are representative of the city. And so this transportation commission, which also serves as 00:02:18.526 --> 00:02:21.086 - the steering committee for the study, 00:02:21.666 --> 00:02:28.701 - is a representation of the different transportation interests around the community. And so as we progress 00:02:28.701 --> 00:02:35.471 - in the study, we want to make sure, we want to hear from you all how we're doing. We want you to push 00:02:35.471 --> 00:02:42.175 - us in directions that we might not push ourselves in. We want your feedback and questions as we move 00:02:42.175 --> 00:02:48.414 - forward. So once this study reaches a point to reach formal transportation commission review, 00:02:49.186 --> 00:02:56.460 - us as the steering committee and us as city staff both feel comfortable in where we landed on this project. 00:02:56.460 --> 00:03:03.396 - Very good. With that, if you can begin the presentation. Sure. I will talk about one more event before 00:03:03.396 --> 00:03:10.333 - we begin the presentation. We also have stroll and discuss events. Those are essentially strolls along 00:03:10.333 --> 00:03:17.270 - the corridor to provide on-site feedback about the existing conditions. What are you feeling? What are 00:03:17.270 --> 00:03:18.078 - you seeing? 00:03:18.178 --> 00:03:25.807 - How can those be changed if needed? One of those is tomorrow morning, Tuesday morning at 1030 in the 00:03:25.807 --> 00:03:33.360 - morning. We will be meeting outside of the mill, which is just beyond City Hall, just north of City 00:03:33.360 --> 00:03:41.064 - Hall. We will be traveling the more downtown stretch of the corridor from 11th to 3rd Street and then 00:03:41.064 --> 00:03:42.046 - Wednesday at 00:03:42.178 --> 00:03:48.896 - 1 30 p.m. We will be meeting at the corner of 17th and Kinzer by the Marathon gas station and we will 00:03:48.896 --> 00:03:55.614 - be strolling across the or along the northern section of the corridor on Kinzer Pike up to the bypass 00:03:55.614 --> 00:04:02.266 - and back. And as you can see on the screen there are a number of pop-up events those are unscheduled 00:04:02.266 --> 00:04:05.822 - events to the public so we can attract more than just 00:04:07.362 --> 00:04:13.426 - the folks who want to come to public meetings, the folks who have the time to participate in strolls. 00:04:13.426 --> 00:04:19.668 - Those are the street users along the corridor that a lot of the times don't, that aren't able to provide 00:04:19.668 --> 00:04:25.732 - feedback in these studies. We want to make sure that they are able to provide feedback. So with that, 00:04:25.732 --> 00:04:31.796 - with that said, I will turn it over to Drew Parker, who is the actual design project manager who will 00:04:31.796 --> 00:04:33.758 - present us through this meeting. 00:04:34.114 --> 00:04:38.626 - Hey, everybody. Nice to see you. My name is Drew Parker. I'm a senior planner with Tool Design. I'm 00:04:38.626 --> 00:04:43.138 - here from Ann Arbor. And I'm the consultant project manager for this study. I'm also here joined by 00:04:43.138 --> 00:04:47.740 - a bunch of my colleagues, so Paul Lippins over here, Kishana over here, Joe, and Waleed. So we're all 00:04:47.740 --> 00:04:52.477 - going to be here all week doing a lot of different things, working with the city to come up with concept 00:04:52.477 --> 00:04:57.079 - ideas. But yeah, like Hank said, we really want to hear from you, and we want to hear from members of 00:04:57.079 --> 00:05:01.681 - the public what their concerns are. And then we'll take that and directly filter it into what we look 00:05:01.681 --> 00:05:03.486 - at for actual designs for the corridor. 00:05:04.322 --> 00:05:09.688 - So I've just pulled that up to help Hank kind of talk through some of those events. That'd be helpful 00:05:09.688 --> 00:05:14.950 - to see that visually. The majority of what we wanted to do today was to actually just look at these 00:05:14.950 --> 00:05:20.421 - role plots and get your feedback on issues that you've experienced in the corridor, things you've heard 00:05:20.421 --> 00:05:25.788 - from folks to kind of understand more about existing conditions. I think we talked a little bit about 00:05:25.788 --> 00:05:31.207 - this last time at Transmission Commission, but we only kind of briefly got into it when we were giving 00:05:31.207 --> 00:05:34.206 - an existing conditions presentation. So we brought these 00:05:34.466 --> 00:05:41.496 - aerial roll plots of the whole project extent so we can kind of look at it and talk about it like all 00:05:41.496 --> 00:05:48.527 - the way from the north end bypass down to Country Club. Is a roll plot just a roll of paper? Or is it 00:05:48.527 --> 00:05:55.764 - some fancier term? Yeah, sorry, a roll plot is a roll. When you think of it as like a narrow, long print 00:05:55.764 --> 00:06:02.656 - plot, usually it has an aerial on it. It's a plot map you have to roll up? Exactly, yep. It usually 00:06:02.656 --> 00:06:03.966 - has aerial imagery 00:06:04.738 --> 00:06:11.995 - of a city or street. And like this one has parcel boundaries as well. So you can see where houses are, 00:06:11.995 --> 00:06:19.040 - different parts of the city, where city hall is, the beeline. So it helps us see context. And yeah, 00:06:19.040 --> 00:06:26.156 - we can use it as a conversation piece to talk about issues at specific locations. So that's the main 00:06:26.156 --> 00:06:32.990 - activity that we wanted to have for the meeting tonight. Just as a reminder, this is our overall 00:06:33.570 --> 00:06:39.485 - project schedule. So there's the things in red are the things that the project team is doing. That's 00:06:39.485 --> 00:06:45.399 - the city and the consultant team. So we've done data collection. We've done corridor analysis. We've 00:06:45.399 --> 00:06:51.431 - created the vision and goals. We talked about that with you all last time. We're now in workshop week, 00:06:51.431 --> 00:06:57.346 - which is where we collect even more feedback, existing additions to understand everything we need to 00:06:57.346 --> 00:07:02.558 - know to move to alternatives development. And then ultimately we move to concept design. 00:07:02.978 --> 00:07:09.152 - and a final corridor study that makes a recommendation. It might hurt to remind us what vision and goals 00:07:09.152 --> 00:07:15.032 - we agreed to just briefly. Yes. At a high level, and Hank, feel free to jump in if you want to, but 00:07:15.032 --> 00:07:21.029 - at a high level, the vision, because this is a safe streets for all project, the vision is zero fatal 00:07:21.029 --> 00:07:27.144 - and serious injury crashes on the corridor. And then the goals break down from there further. I do have 00:07:27.144 --> 00:07:31.966 - some design objectives in this presentation I can show for some more specificity. 00:07:33.122 --> 00:07:38.972 - Thank you. So this is our second Transpation Commission meeting. We'll have a couple more tentatively 00:07:38.972 --> 00:07:44.937 - looking at May or July for those next ones. How many total in this process? Four is what we're planning 00:07:44.937 --> 00:07:50.730 - and less in addition. That'll be typical for any kind of corridor study is four. I don't want to say 00:07:50.730 --> 00:07:56.580 - typical for a corridor study because all corridor studies are a little bit different. But in terms of 00:07:56.580 --> 00:08:01.054 - where we are going on this one, we feel that four is enough. Okay, thank you. 00:08:04.642 --> 00:08:10.595 - Concurrent with workshop week, there's also an online survey that's open on the website so people can 00:08:10.595 --> 00:08:16.431 - provide their feedback on the corridor digitally. But we also want to go to people where they're at 00:08:16.431 --> 00:08:22.500 - and get ideas from people in person. So that's why we're here. And it's just helpful to all be together 00:08:22.500 --> 00:08:28.336 - and really understand intensely for a week what's going on on this street. Earlier today, Hank took 00:08:28.336 --> 00:08:30.846 - us on a walk, a long walk of the corridor. 00:08:31.010 --> 00:08:37.099 - a great, I'm not, it was a great long walk. He took us, he took us here from City Hall down to Patterson, 00:08:37.099 --> 00:08:42.901 - and then we walked all the way up to 17th, right, and then on both sides of the street. So we got to 00:08:42.901 --> 00:08:48.645 - see a pretty big stretch of the corridor, which is nice. So it's to help us understand a little bit 00:08:48.645 --> 00:08:54.447 - better what's going on on the street today. And then just lastly, after workshop week, there will be 00:08:54.447 --> 00:09:00.478 - website updates for the public. So there's not gonna be like another big outreach event, but there'll be 00:09:00.834 --> 00:09:07.099 - updates about what's going on, what we're finding, and what the proposed concepts are. Okay, so I had 00:09:07.099 --> 00:09:13.426 - this up when Hank was talking, just to give you a sense, like he was saying, the three blue things are 00:09:13.426 --> 00:09:19.752 - the two transportation commissions to roll and discuss on Tuesday and Wednesday, and then I think Hank 00:09:19.752 --> 00:09:26.017 - also mentioned there's a public workshop, a big open house that anybody from the public is invited to 00:09:26.017 --> 00:09:29.150 - from 5.30 to 7.30 on Wednesday at Switchyard Park. 00:09:30.338 --> 00:09:35.991 - I also wanted to mention we have some internal city design workshops where we get to sit down with city 00:09:35.991 --> 00:09:41.807 - staff and work with them on concepts and hear what they've been hearing over the years about this corridor 00:09:41.807 --> 00:09:47.460 - and issues that they'd like to solve. So we're really here to listen this week. All right. So what we'd 00:09:47.460 --> 00:09:53.005 - like to do, and we talked about this a little bit last week, this is actually an idea with one of the 00:09:53.005 --> 00:09:58.549 - commissioners. Although I believe she's not here today, but she asked if we could weigh the different 00:09:58.549 --> 00:09:59.582 - design objectives. 00:10:00.162 --> 00:10:06.026 - So we have eight design objectives. There's four on this side, but there'll be four on the next slide. 00:10:06.026 --> 00:10:11.720 - And hopefully it works on Hank's computer. If it doesn't, I'll pull it up on my computer. We have a 00:10:11.720 --> 00:10:17.470 - Mentimeter, which is an online survey. We'll ask you to weigh these different design objectives from 00:10:17.470 --> 00:10:23.278 - lower priority to higher priority. So if you have a phone or computer with you, that'll be helpful at 00:10:23.278 --> 00:10:29.028 - that point. It's kind of just a straw poll to get a sense for which you think are the most important 00:10:29.028 --> 00:10:30.110 - design objectives. 00:10:30.914 --> 00:10:37.551 - So as a reminder, we have eight design objectives. The first reflect community values and corridor identity 00:10:37.551 --> 00:10:43.942 - that you can read on the screen. There's a little bit more detail. Each one has kind of a more detailed 00:10:43.942 --> 00:10:50.333 - explanation. But I'll just read the headers for starters. Advanced safety through proven street design. 00:10:50.333 --> 00:10:56.540 - Create a context-sensitive street that calms traffic and build a continuous multi-modal corridor for 00:10:56.540 --> 00:10:58.814 - all users. So that's the first four. 00:11:00.194 --> 00:11:05.582 - We also want to ensure universal accessibility and comfort, support redevelopment and local economic 00:11:05.582 --> 00:11:10.917 - vitality. We know there's redevelopment happening on the corridor, so we want to make sure that the 00:11:10.917 --> 00:11:16.411 - street design is supporting that. Strengthen connections to key destinations in the city-wide network, 00:11:16.411 --> 00:11:21.799 - so understand how the street works overall in the city-wide network. And then support safe routes to 00:11:21.799 --> 00:11:27.187 - school. There's a number of schools along the corridor right within a few blocks of the corridor, so 00:11:27.187 --> 00:11:28.414 - we know that there are 00:11:28.706 --> 00:11:35.264 - lots of students who are walking and biking to school. So those are the eight design objectives. 00:11:35.264 --> 00:11:42.026 - And really, the way we think of design objectives is that any concepts that we come up with need to 00:11:42.026 --> 00:11:48.990 - meet these objectives. And so that's like an evaluation criteria by which we decide whether or not the 00:11:48.990 --> 00:11:55.887 - designs we're creating are successful. So what I would like to do is a metameter activity to have you 00:11:55.887 --> 00:11:57.374 - weigh these, I think, 00:11:58.402 --> 00:12:10.352 - it might not work on Hank's computer so I might have to pull it up on my computer. Let me do that real 00:12:10.352 --> 00:12:22.301 - quick. I'll pull up these again if you want to read through those for a second. I'll pull it up. Okay. 00:12:22.301 --> 00:12:27.870 - Sorry for the delay there. Okay. So if you have 00:12:28.226 --> 00:12:36.519 - phone with you or computer, if you go to menti.com. Once you go to that website, it's gonna ask you 00:12:36.519 --> 00:12:44.978 - for a code, and there's a code at the top of the screen, which is 91917664. And what you'll see is we 00:12:44.978 --> 00:12:53.271 - have all eight of those design objectives loaded in there, and you can rank the priority from lower 00:12:53.271 --> 00:12:57.086 - to higher priority from a scale of one to 10. 00:12:58.082 --> 00:13:09.075 - And once you bring to all eight, then you can submit. And we'll see those pop up live on the screen 00:13:09.075 --> 00:13:21.278 - once you submit. Does anyone have any questions about how to get on to Menti Mentimeter? The code is 91917664. 00:14:47.106 --> 00:14:53.057 - Number two and number eight, advanced safety through proven street design in support of safe houses 00:14:53.057 --> 00:14:59.425 - at school are the highest rankings so far. Followed by number four, build a continuous multimodal corridor 00:14:59.425 --> 00:15:00.318 - for all users. 00:15:23.298 --> 00:15:46.432 - changed it but looks very similar. Does anybody feel like yes I totally agree with this or someone feel 00:15:46.432 --> 00:15:51.326 - like I'm one of these 00:15:52.418 --> 00:16:02.979 - did totally disagree with how it was weighted or? Anybody from the commission want to weigh in? I'll 00:16:02.979 --> 00:16:13.540 - just say that I see a lot of these as complimentary. The Venn diagram in my mind is a lot of overlap 00:16:13.540 --> 00:16:21.278 - between several of these. Safe routes to school, universal accessibility, 00:16:21.698 --> 00:16:30.516 - Traffic calming, safety, I mean, those are all, to me, rolled into the same general idea. So I ranked 00:16:30.516 --> 00:16:39.162 - both. I'll just transparently say I ranked most of these fairly highly. I suspect that number one's 00:16:39.162 --> 00:16:47.807 - somewhat low scoring result is maybe a reflection of people disagreeing about what community values 00:16:47.807 --> 00:16:51.006 - or corridor identity actually means. 00:16:55.330 --> 00:17:02.925 - Anybody else? Yeah, I would just dovetail on the community values and corridor identity. What exactly 00:17:02.925 --> 00:17:10.445 - does that mean? I'm being serious. Yeah, I think... Sounds good. Yeah, I can pull up exactly what we 00:17:10.445 --> 00:17:17.965 - said, or I don't know if we want to pull it up on the PowerPoint, sure. But I understand, yeah, it's 00:17:17.965 --> 00:17:23.326 - a little bit ambiguous. I think what we were thinking is it's more like 00:17:23.778 --> 00:17:32.298 - the design of the street and streetscaping and how it looks. Okay, sorry. So this one is actually more, 00:17:32.298 --> 00:17:40.983 - there's a couple different things there, but informed by community input and lived experience, responding 00:17:40.983 --> 00:17:49.339 - to local concerns, reinforcing neighborhood character and advancing a shared vision for the quarter's 00:17:49.339 --> 00:17:52.862 - future. So it's more about does the street 00:17:53.474 --> 00:18:00.917 - meet the needs of people who live near or along the street, or more broadly in the community, what they 00:18:00.917 --> 00:18:08.073 - want for the street. So I guess that one is actually more about process in some ways than outcomes. 00:18:08.073 --> 00:18:15.444 - Thank you. I know that the high school is to the north. Does someone remind us what other schools that 00:18:15.444 --> 00:18:20.382 - would use this corridor for safety? Sure. Fairview, lots of schools. 00:18:20.514 --> 00:18:28.559 - So you have, just going from north to south here, you have Bloomington North High School, like you mentioned. 00:18:28.559 --> 00:18:36.091 - You have Tri-North Middle School off of 17th Monroe Street, so about less than a half mile west of the 00:18:36.091 --> 00:18:43.624 - corridor. You have Fairview Elementary on the corridor at Rogers and 7th, Rogers and 8th. You have the 00:18:43.624 --> 00:18:49.694 - Project School, which is off of Walnut and Smith. And then further south, you have 00:18:50.050 --> 00:18:55.487 - Monroe County Adult Education, which is where Broadview Elementary used to be. On the southern end of 00:18:55.487 --> 00:19:00.818 - the corridor, near, I forget the exact street, but I think Coolidge maybe is what it is, or Graham. 00:19:00.818 --> 00:19:06.255 - About a quarter mile west of the corridor. Those are the main ones I can think of. And Summit is not, 00:19:06.255 --> 00:19:11.586 - it's like up the hill from. And Summit's in the area too, yeah. In the area, okay, there's really a 00:19:11.586 --> 00:19:17.023 - lot. Bachelor Middle School. I might have, yeah, ranked it, I ranked it high, but I might have ranked 00:19:17.023 --> 00:19:19.422 - it even higher if that was a full inventory. 00:19:21.026 --> 00:19:29.147 - it begs the question of to what extent is a corridor so long really unified? I mean, it's very different 00:19:29.147 --> 00:19:37.346 - functions in different places. I mean, the roll-up maps here aren't even really that much of the corridor 00:19:37.346 --> 00:19:45.389 - that we're talking about, right? So the maps, I believe, are the full corridor. Yeah, they're the whole 00:19:45.389 --> 00:19:50.494 - corridor from Country Club to Bypass. So I think down here, yeah. 00:19:51.234 --> 00:20:00.631 - Country Club up to, I can't quite see from here. Nevertheless, it's very different functions in different 00:20:00.631 --> 00:20:10.027 - places. Absolutely. Anybody else? Did we just get these? Is this the first time we're seeing these design 00:20:10.027 --> 00:20:19.247 - objectives that you've created? They were presented at the previous meeting. OK. Because as others have 00:20:19.247 --> 00:20:20.222 - said, it's 00:20:22.050 --> 00:20:30.464 - They overlap, and it's hard to really vote on them when they're complicated ideas. I mean, I voted five 00:20:30.464 --> 00:20:39.121 - for everything because I couldn't, I didn't have really time to process it, so my vote wasn't very useful. 00:20:39.121 --> 00:20:47.373 - But I hope that you don't take, you don't put too much stock into this initial vote. No, this is more 00:20:47.373 --> 00:20:50.366 - of a, I think, kind of a straw poll. 00:20:50.914 --> 00:20:56.412 - until you know right now in the room what people are thinking. Are you planning to edit the objectives? 00:20:56.412 --> 00:21:01.858 - We can. Yeah, we asked for feedback at the previous meeting if anybody wanted to change anything about 00:21:01.858 --> 00:21:07.198 - the vision statement, the goals, or the design objectives. OK, sure. So we're still taking feedback. 00:21:07.198 --> 00:21:13.014 - Can I offer a little context? Yeah, for sure. I think it's good to see that these are kind of all prioritized 00:21:13.014 --> 00:21:18.142 - to some extent and that there is overlap. The purpose for design objectives in a study like this 00:21:18.530 --> 00:21:24.372 - is that we can look back, as Drew said, through a lens and say, are all of these being met? So we're 00:21:24.372 --> 00:21:30.273 - not creating design objectives with the idea that we're going to do three of these, but not the other 00:21:30.273 --> 00:21:36.115 - five. We want to achieve all of these through a quarter in design. So I think what we're doing here, 00:21:36.115 --> 00:21:41.957 - even in this exercise, is validating that these are all important. And to a certain extent, looking, 00:21:41.957 --> 00:21:47.742 - is there a need to maybe refine some language a bit, but also is there anything that we're missing? 00:21:47.938 --> 00:21:54.637 - So the feedback that we get from you on kind of how your impressions are, whether these are achieving 00:21:54.637 --> 00:22:01.204 - the things that you want to see done on the corridor, that's where we would take it back and revise 00:22:01.204 --> 00:22:07.838 - it. But really what we want to make sure is that we're able to do all of these things, and then when 00:22:07.838 --> 00:22:14.733 - we create a series of recommendations for the corridor, that all of these objectives will be met through 00:22:14.733 --> 00:22:16.638 - the design. Is that helpful? 00:22:17.570 --> 00:22:39.559 - Yeah, I mean, yeah, for now, that's fine. Thank you. OK. Any other feedback or thoughts on design objectives 00:22:39.559 --> 00:22:46.014 - at this time? No. Go ahead. OK. 00:22:47.970 --> 00:22:55.099 - Well, the last thing we wanted to do, the third thing we wanted to do is to get up and look at the robots 00:22:55.099 --> 00:23:01.891 - in the corridor and take any specific location feedback, knowing that you all can come to the events 00:23:01.891 --> 00:23:08.818 - whenever you like. But we figured since we have the time, we can take a look at it. And if people have 00:23:08.818 --> 00:23:16.350 - specific thoughts or feedback, we can just take notes on it right now. Do you want to guide us through, I mean, 00:23:17.186 --> 00:23:22.813 - Yeah, we can start, does anyone have a preference if we start on the southern end of the corridor or 00:23:22.813 --> 00:23:28.552 - the northern end? Do you have it where you put up on the screen? All right. We can put a map up there, 00:23:28.552 --> 00:23:34.290 - yeah. I think that would be useful. That would be helpful. Yeah. You want to put maybe like, or do you 00:23:34.290 --> 00:23:40.140 - want me to pull up the... You can just put Google Maps up. Just look at Street View. Yeah. We also have, 00:23:40.140 --> 00:23:46.046 - I can pull up the presentation from the last meeting, which had maps, if that's helpful. Yeah, go for it. 00:23:47.298 --> 00:23:49.950 - And if we need to, Google Maps will be ready. 00:24:16.898 --> 00:24:22.486 - I'm asking a question not because I have any grand plans, but just a curiosity question. Is, at this 00:24:22.486 --> 00:24:28.294 - point of the process, is basically anything on the table optional? I mean, if it's determined that we're 00:24:28.294 --> 00:24:33.993 - going to put an interstate highway through this corridor, that could be... I mean, I'm sure that would 00:24:33.993 --> 00:24:39.802 - maybe struggle with the vision. It might be safer, but no means that, like, right now we're just talking 00:24:39.802 --> 00:24:44.670 - about anything that's possible. Right now we're talking about anything that's possible. 00:24:45.346 --> 00:24:50.987 - Once we get down to it, once we hear the feedback from not just this commission, but from the public 00:24:50.987 --> 00:24:56.627 - and the stakeholders, then we can begin narrowing down and focusing on what are the priorities, what 00:24:56.627 --> 00:25:02.547 - aligns best with the vision, the goals, the objectives. But right now, we are not looking at constraints. 00:25:02.547 --> 00:25:08.187 - We are looking at what you are experiencing on the corridor, what you would like to see long term in 00:25:08.187 --> 00:25:10.142 - the corridor, and how we can help. 00:25:12.418 --> 00:25:19.782 - So here's a map up on screen, too, if that's more helpful, just to show the extents and kind of the 00:25:19.782 --> 00:25:27.367 - major intersections. So the project's extents are from Country Club Drive up to the backhouse. And you 00:25:27.367 --> 00:25:34.878 - can see some of the more major streets labeled there. I'll just say something, because nobody else is 00:25:34.878 --> 00:25:40.254 - saying anything. I really hope that one of the outcomes of this is that, 00:25:40.962 --> 00:25:51.415 - You know, not just Rogers as a corridor is considered, but that east-west crossings of Rogers improve 00:25:51.415 --> 00:26:01.970 - across the board because I find it difficult to cross Rogers in a lot of places. And that doesn't have 00:26:01.970 --> 00:26:08.734 - much to do with traveling on Rogers itself, but it has to do with 00:26:08.898 --> 00:26:19.660 - I mean, obviously, the design of Rogers, the street factors into that. But I could point to any number 00:26:19.660 --> 00:26:30.318 - of places where they're either not crosswalks or poor visibility or high speeds, high traffic speeds, 00:26:30.318 --> 00:26:37.214 - things like that that I really hope are improved by this project. 00:26:38.242 --> 00:26:45.452 - And if you want, I'm happy to circle probably half a dozen of them on these roll blocks. And Erwan, 00:26:45.452 --> 00:26:53.095 - you mentioned last meeting specifically at that Howe and Rogers cross. You mentioned that Howe and Rogers 00:26:53.095 --> 00:27:00.377 - intersection. Yeah, I live on Howe. And so I cross there at least once or twice per day. And I mean, 00:27:00.377 --> 00:27:04.126 - if you want, I can point that out. Yes. Right here. 00:27:07.170 --> 00:27:14.286 - This is a fairly problematic, especially because one thing you don't see on the old plots is elevation. 00:27:14.286 --> 00:27:21.197 - If you're not familiar with the topography of this neighborhood, could you look at this and say that 00:27:21.197 --> 00:27:28.245 - you know where the hills are? I don't think you could. So that's maybe another thing I would encourage 00:27:28.245 --> 00:27:34.814 - the tool team to look at. In cases where there's a lot of uphill, downhill, that kind of thing, 00:27:36.226 --> 00:27:43.102 - Now, how to deal with that and the core visibility sometimes that's introduced by that. Going off of 00:27:43.102 --> 00:27:50.524 - that for a second, when we were on our walk today, we were talking about how there's an upcoming resurfacing 00:27:50.524 --> 00:27:57.672 - project. So the city was awarded a community crossings grant to resurface a couple of areas of the city. 00:27:57.672 --> 00:28:05.502 - A couple of areas that were chosen were on Roger Street along this corridor area. And this is an imminent project. 00:28:05.986 --> 00:28:11.941 - Right now, a question that we have for you all in the public that we'll be talking about this week is 00:28:11.941 --> 00:28:17.780 - within this Repaving Project, it's not just repaving. It can also be crosswalk improvements. It can 00:28:17.780 --> 00:28:24.086 - also be striped bike lengths, things like that. And so in that area that you're talking about, specifically 00:28:24.086 --> 00:28:30.158 - between Second and Third Street, where right now you have two travel lanes and on-street parking that's 00:28:30.158 --> 00:28:32.318 - not highly utilized, would we rather 00:28:33.026 --> 00:28:39.727 - promote safer east-west crossings across the corridor or promote safer bike facilities along the corridor, 00:28:39.727 --> 00:28:46.178 - which would probably be striped bike lanes or for across the corridor, pedestrian refuge islands, curb 00:28:46.178 --> 00:28:52.628 - extensions, et cetera. Is that an either-or choice? I don't know why that's mutually exclusive. So for 00:28:52.628 --> 00:28:59.016 - a short term, it is an either-or choice with the street width that we have. With the long-term vision 00:28:59.016 --> 00:29:02.398 - of the study, then we can start looking at a yes-and. 00:29:02.786 --> 00:29:11.385 - But if we're talking about a repaving project in 2026, then we do not, this repaving project is more 00:29:11.385 --> 00:29:20.069 - maintenance than street widening and construction. Are you asking us to meaningfully weigh in on this 00:29:20.069 --> 00:29:28.583 - idea? Yes. Absolutely. Well, Hank, I feel like the scope of this discussion is the long-term future 00:29:28.583 --> 00:29:32.414 - of this corridor. Yes. And I appreciate that 00:29:32.898 --> 00:29:41.070 - Obviously, there's a lot of moving parts to this and there's a repaving project scheduled for a few 00:29:41.070 --> 00:29:49.324 - blocks of it this summer. But in my mind, that is almost a completely separate discussion from this. 00:29:49.324 --> 00:29:57.742 - I mean, I don't know. In my mind, paint on the street is not really the kind of outcome I would expect 00:29:57.742 --> 00:30:00.030 - from a long-term, you know, 00:30:00.450 --> 00:30:08.558 - expensive project. So yeah, I mean, if the city wants to paint some lines on the ground, that's fine, 00:30:08.558 --> 00:30:16.667 - but. Yeah, I mean, as a cyclist, I find ways to avoid riding on Rogers, but I do cross it at a number 00:30:16.667 --> 00:30:24.854 - of locations. We heard it from a member of the public, Tim Clower. Seventh and Rogers was his concern. 00:30:24.854 --> 00:30:28.670 - Sixth and Rogers, I think is what he specified. 00:30:28.802 --> 00:30:35.412 - has a crosswalk, I think, because it's right in front. And it's an always stop. So it's pretty 00:30:35.412 --> 00:30:42.371 - straightforward to cross here. But 6th Street, there's no north-south traffic control, nor is there 00:30:42.371 --> 00:30:49.538 - a crosswalk. That's another one that I would circle. It's a little far away for me to circle, I think, 00:30:49.538 --> 00:30:56.635 - but maybe Hank can do it. So there's a lot of crossings like that that are between intersections that 00:30:56.635 --> 00:30:57.470 - have either 00:30:58.050 --> 00:31:05.454 - you know, always stop control or traffic signalization or something that people still want to cross 00:31:05.454 --> 00:31:13.155 - there, especially, you know, if it's a less busy street. That's the irony is the less busy streets are, 00:31:13.155 --> 00:31:20.634 - you know, like how or six, they're very pleasant to walk or bike on because they're low traffic, but 00:31:20.634 --> 00:31:27.742 - they also don't get their own safe crossings of Rogers. So it's the busier streets like second, 00:31:28.130 --> 00:31:34.157 - or 7th Street that have more easy ways to cross. But then, you know, there's generally fewer people 00:31:34.157 --> 00:31:40.304 - walking and cycling on those streets. There's got to be a term for that idea that was first put to me 00:31:40.304 --> 00:31:46.391 - many years ago when I was in college. They were talking about building a new student union. And vice 00:31:46.391 --> 00:31:52.417 - president of facilities said something like, if you give the students something nice, they'll treat 00:31:52.417 --> 00:31:57.118 - it nice. If you give them a bus station, they'll treat it like a bus station. 00:31:57.730 --> 00:32:04.216 - In the same way, if we give people crossings, you're going to see more traffic there, and then you can 00:32:04.216 --> 00:32:10.827 - see there's demand. If it's not there, then how would you know? I'm always reading ignorant social media 00:32:10.827 --> 00:32:17.187 - posts here saying, why are we putting so much stuff up for bikes? The answer is, if you don't put it 00:32:17.187 --> 00:32:23.799 - up for bikes, you're never going to see bicyclists. So it has to be comfortable enough for them to show. 00:32:23.799 --> 00:32:27.262 - So I'm not sure what we're like, are we trying to make 00:32:27.842 --> 00:32:34.276 - intersections that are more comfortable for pedestrians and bicyclists, or are we trying to identify 00:32:34.276 --> 00:32:40.838 - those intersections that we think are already safe and that maybe we want to emulate that? I would say 00:32:40.838 --> 00:32:47.336 - that that's both. That is both. Where you absolutely see, you know, look at the City of Bloomington's 00:32:47.336 --> 00:32:54.280 - transportation plan, where there are prescribed neighborhood greenways. Those are the low-stress, low-volume 00:32:54.280 --> 00:32:56.510 - streets that you're talking about. 00:32:56.642 --> 00:33:03.662 - but many of the greenways across this corridor, the city has not actually done anything infrastructure-wise 00:33:03.662 --> 00:33:10.226 - to improve it for pedestrians or cyclists. So those are the intersections you're talking about where 00:33:10.226 --> 00:33:16.856 - maybe we don't see that amount, that high volume of bike-ped traffic across it because right now it's 00:33:16.856 --> 00:33:23.810 - not that safe. Whereas at, say, 3rd Street or Rockport or 17th, one of the major signalized intersections, 00:33:23.810 --> 00:33:25.630 - we know we are going to see 00:33:25.890 --> 00:33:34.749 - a number of users regardless of transportation mode, and we can also improve it for them. I have a personal 00:33:34.749 --> 00:33:43.361 - focus on intersections that are truly multimodal. Like I don't worry about Rogers and Howe, for example, 00:33:43.361 --> 00:33:51.235 - because it's already relatively safe, although there are issues there. I'm more concerned about 00:33:51.235 --> 00:33:52.958 - an intersection like 00:33:53.634 --> 00:34:02.179 - where the seven line crosses Walden and College, I want that high visibility of pedestrian and bicycle 00:34:02.179 --> 00:34:10.475 - infrastructure so that motor vehicle users get accustomed to it. Do you have any examples like that 00:34:10.475 --> 00:34:18.853 - along the corridor? On Rogers? I think that 17th is just a very important intersection to get right. 00:34:18.853 --> 00:34:23.582 - It's very busy, it's very high traffic, it's got the new 00:34:23.874 --> 00:34:34.142 - side paths that were a big help, and it has the real potential to be an example throughout the city 00:34:34.142 --> 00:34:44.924 - of what good design should be. 17th and Madison, isn't it? Can we rename all the streets to one, please? 00:34:44.924 --> 00:34:50.366 - I just don't know why. What's that? It is. So Steve, 00:34:50.882 --> 00:34:57.970 - 17th and Madison is a great example. That's an intersection that was redone in the last handful of years 00:34:57.970 --> 00:35:04.788 - in the last three years Is there something about that intersection that isn't right now or something 00:35:04.788 --> 00:35:09.918 - that we could do better in the long term? I guess maybe I was thinking that 00:35:10.050 --> 00:35:16.935 - I mean, I don't recall what bicycle infrastructure specifically at that intersection. Right now, you 00:35:16.935 --> 00:35:23.957 - have that side path you're mentioning on the north side of the intersection on 17th crossing. And then 00:35:23.957 --> 00:35:30.774 - for Madison and Kinzer, you have either a striped bike lane for the southbound traffic at Kinzer or 00:35:30.774 --> 00:35:37.182 - a Sharos for the rest. It's nothing low stress. I'm not a fan of Sharos at that intersection. 00:35:37.666 --> 00:35:47.115 - a pretty high speed intersection relative to other ones. People in cars are about to go higher speed 00:35:47.115 --> 00:35:57.219 - in at least three directions there, if they're not already going at a much higher speed than is comfortable 00:35:57.219 --> 00:36:07.230 - for bicyclists. So short of more hardened infrastructure for bicycles, I still think that that's important 00:36:07.554 --> 00:36:17.299 - that we see that we're giving something like fairer, more explicit right of way to non-cars. But that's 00:36:17.299 --> 00:36:27.325 - just one. I'll think about it. I'm not sure if this is another intersection. That's as big as that country 00:36:27.325 --> 00:36:35.102 - club, maybe. I don't know. Here's another one that comes to mind for me, which is, 00:36:35.266 --> 00:36:43.219 - This one is particularly crazy to me. When the city was designing Switchyard Park, which is this, there 00:36:43.219 --> 00:36:51.096 - was originally a crossing. Sorry, Steve, I'm going to displace you here. There was a crossing depicted 00:36:51.096 --> 00:36:58.973 - on all of the designs right here between the side path on Rogers and this path leading to the entrance 00:36:58.973 --> 00:37:04.862 - of Switchyard Park. It was in the plan for the park, and it never got built. 00:37:05.730 --> 00:37:12.013 - I'm just going to put a giant three question marks there because why wasn't it ever built? There's a 00:37:12.013 --> 00:37:18.359 - side path on one side. There's a path leading to the park in the other. It's a perfectly logical spot 00:37:18.359 --> 00:37:24.704 - for a crossing. And there's no crossing there. There should be a crossing there. There should also be 00:37:24.704 --> 00:37:31.485 - a crossing where there's, I think, going to be a future path just to the south of the electrical substation. 00:37:31.485 --> 00:37:34.782 - I believe there's going to be an electrical corridor 00:37:35.330 --> 00:37:43.126 - like a high-voltage corridor path there, east-west. I don't know exactly the design details of that. 00:37:43.126 --> 00:37:50.923 - There will be a raised crosswalk at that new intersection. Well, there should also be one at the end 00:37:50.923 --> 00:37:58.719 - of the path, which I think, because first of all, there was supposed to be one to begin with, and it 00:37:58.719 --> 00:38:03.582 - would also be silly not to put one there. I'll jump in with... 00:38:04.034 --> 00:38:09.997 - Chins are in the bypass. I know that the state controls the bypass. We can talk about it. We also know 00:38:09.997 --> 00:38:15.844 - it is one of our highest crash intersections. I have a parent of high school students there. And I'm 00:38:15.844 --> 00:38:21.634 - surprised that every time I go through the intersection on foot, it feels like there's someone else 00:38:21.634 --> 00:38:27.423 - crossing the road there. Even though it's an unpleasant crossing, I think there's a strong, there's 00:38:27.423 --> 00:38:33.502 - a grocery store on one side and there's housing on the other. And people are walking across that despite 00:38:33.762 --> 00:38:41.523 - Not only is it numerically dangerous, it feels uncomfortable to cross it. We know that the state has 00:38:41.523 --> 00:38:49.207 - planned to move the pedestrian overpass, I think, by 2029. I think we have an opportunity to have a 00:38:49.207 --> 00:38:57.122 - strong vision. Move it or remove it? It doesn't meet some standard that you have, because it's arched. 00:38:57.122 --> 00:39:02.270 - But it's really a bridge to nowhere now, so there's an opportunity 00:39:02.594 --> 00:39:09.587 - ask for it to be relocated to somewhere nearby to be more useful. I think it'd be more useful to have 00:39:09.587 --> 00:39:16.649 - it at the Kinzer in the bypass. With the accessibility ramps, it would sort of go from Kroger's on one 00:39:16.649 --> 00:39:22.957 - side to the gas station on the other. But there's an opportunity here. I would second that. 00:39:22.957 --> 00:39:28.510 - I think that's, you know, just seeing pedestrians waiting across is frightening. 00:39:29.186 --> 00:39:36.502 - Yeah. Yeah. They look for it. Yeah. Every time I'm like, yeah, this is. Having used it as a walker, 00:39:36.502 --> 00:39:43.891 - you can have a truck blocking your view. The one with the super big trucks, and there's a car coming 00:39:43.891 --> 00:39:51.353 - in fast wanting to turn, and they can't see you. So it's kind of harrowing. I want to mention a theme 00:39:51.353 --> 00:39:53.694 - which has been brought up about 00:39:54.914 --> 00:40:02.621 - Neighborhood greenways or low traffic streets crossing busy roads. As the transportation commission, 00:40:02.621 --> 00:40:10.634 - someone has already been here to speak about being hit at the Covenanter Greenway crossing College Mall. 00:40:10.634 --> 00:40:18.799 - And we have an upcoming item about someone hit at Longview crossing Smith. And I think it's an opportunity 00:40:18.799 --> 00:40:21.470 - for the city to have standards for 00:40:22.146 --> 00:40:28.813 - What's our level of service or quality that we provide when we have what we are telling people to use 00:40:28.813 --> 00:40:35.677 - as a facility, low traffic 3, the greenway, but it's crossing a busy road? How do we continue that level 00:40:35.677 --> 00:40:42.540 - of service of comfort from the greenway as they continue across these dangerous crossings? Because those 00:40:42.540 --> 00:40:49.338 - are the places where people are coming because they've been sent to the hospital for using the facility 00:40:49.338 --> 00:40:51.038 - that we told them to use. 00:40:52.066 --> 00:41:00.098 - I mean, obviously, the drivers who blew through stop signs were at fault. But in terms of vision zero, 00:41:00.098 --> 00:41:08.131 - right, we want to do what we need to do to, even when in the face of people not behaving well, we want 00:41:08.131 --> 00:41:15.929 - to still share and have those services. OK, so we're trying to identify places that need attention. 00:41:15.929 --> 00:41:21.310 - Yes. You all got some thoughts? More zoom out a little bit question. 00:41:21.442 --> 00:41:27.381 - a quarter in the city that we, or even a small section where we think we've nailed it. Like this is 00:41:27.381 --> 00:41:33.439 - the model. Or anywhere that, any other intersections that we might generally be familiar with. That's 00:41:33.439 --> 00:41:39.616 - a really good question. That is a great question. And we've absolutely nailed it. I don't know. I think 00:41:39.616 --> 00:41:45.555 - I have an answer. I honestly don't know. From a planning perspective, I mean, we certainly have our 00:41:45.555 --> 00:41:50.782 - thoughts. I honestly don't know. The one that I think of first, but I can also think of 00:41:51.330 --> 00:41:58.211 - a couple of flaws about it is the roundabout at High Street, Rogers, and Winslow, just north of the 00:41:58.211 --> 00:42:05.092 - Goat Farm Park, where you have a multi-use trail on the east side of High, a multi-use trail on the 00:42:05.092 --> 00:42:12.042 - north side of Rogers, and it leads into this wonderful park. It's right by Childs Elementary School. 00:42:12.042 --> 00:42:19.335 - That said, it's not perfect. You have high-speed traffic coming down from the hill. You don't have raised 00:42:19.335 --> 00:42:20.574 - crosswalks there. 00:42:21.218 --> 00:42:26.885 - disconnect in multi-use paths going west up the hill on Winslow towards Sherwood Oaks area, so it's 00:42:26.885 --> 00:42:32.608 - not perfect. That's the first one that comes to mind. I'll try to think of others. Yeah. It's a good 00:42:32.608 --> 00:42:38.331 - example, though. I mean, it is better than it used to be. And for some reason, the way it's designed 00:42:38.331 --> 00:42:44.054 - does make you pay more attention to the pedestrians and see them as they slow down. Having looked at 00:42:44.054 --> 00:42:50.174 - a lot of crash data, the places where we have near-zero crashes are where you completely separate cars from 00:42:50.402 --> 00:42:57.317 - pedestrians, like the middle of campus where there's not car traffic, the crash has dropped to zero. 00:42:57.317 --> 00:43:04.164 - And D-Line is overall works great, but it's a separate facility. But is that necessarily good if it 00:43:04.164 --> 00:43:11.148 - creates a whole lot more traffic on the outskirts by cutting off all the streets in the middle of the 00:43:11.148 --> 00:43:18.679 - campus? I think it speaks to the idea of when you bring it back to a road contact, the protective facilities, 00:43:18.679 --> 00:43:20.254 - the physical barriers. 00:43:20.418 --> 00:43:28.005 - So I wanted to, or do you have a? Oh, I have lots more to say, but go ahead. I want to talk about roundabouts 00:43:28.005 --> 00:43:35.247 - for a second since they came up. I mean, in 2011, the city council hijacked the budget over the proposal 00:43:35.247 --> 00:43:42.145 - to build three roundabouts, Sarah Rogers, 17th and Arlington and Tapp Rockport. The engineer at the 00:43:42.145 --> 00:43:48.766 - time was a drainage engineer and he was highway happy and all the roundabouts had double lanes. 00:43:49.154 --> 00:43:56.791 - and they were meant to move cars, nothing but. Sierra and Rogers got built, and it got built as a double-lane 00:43:56.791 --> 00:44:04.427 - roundabout, but since then, you all have reduced it to one lane, and it's working better. 17th and Arlington, 00:44:04.427 --> 00:44:11.509 - to me, is another intersection that I think has succeeded beyond my expectations. As a roundabout, as 00:44:11.509 --> 00:44:18.590 - an intersection, it's done quite well. And of course, we never built Tapp and Rockport because of the 00:44:19.042 --> 00:44:27.609 - So I wanted to throw out 17 to Arlington as something that seems to get things right, at least we're 00:44:27.609 --> 00:44:36.091 - around about it. But it also makes me think about the intersection of Rogers and Patterson. So ever 00:44:36.091 --> 00:44:44.573 - since the RCA building came down, they stopped building stuff there. I mean, Patterson was built as 00:44:44.573 --> 00:44:47.966 - a truck highway. And this intersection, 00:44:49.218 --> 00:44:56.245 - has to me always seemed a bit too big. Now this is right near also where the bus garage is, but I also 00:44:56.245 --> 00:45:03.612 - know there's a neighborhood right here. City Councilor lives a few houses up from here, and it's remarkable 00:45:03.612 --> 00:45:10.434 - the difference and feeling of this block to this intersection right here. You got thoughts? Yeah, I 00:45:10.434 --> 00:45:16.574 - was just thinking if you travel that corridor, it's like you come in and out of different 00:45:16.962 --> 00:45:23.206 - you know, I don't know if I used the right word, but I mean, it's like, this section has a field and 00:45:23.206 --> 00:45:29.697 - I'm not gonna go above three or four more blocks, it's gonna be completely different, you know, it feels 00:45:29.697 --> 00:45:36.127 - like completely different than you're back into. So there's no continuity to, it just seems like you're 00:45:36.127 --> 00:45:42.680 - in and out of different, and maybe that makes sense why it has 20 different names as you progress across. 00:45:42.680 --> 00:45:46.142 - I don't know if that's part of, you know, but is there, 00:45:46.338 --> 00:45:53.054 - Why is that? Why isn't there consistency in the naming of streets, particularly in a corridor that is 00:45:53.054 --> 00:46:00.099 - continuous in the north-south direction? And you all might be able to help me out with this, but I believe 00:46:00.099 --> 00:46:07.211 - at least one item. So Rogers at 11th Street, you have the bridge of the railroad that goes over to Madison. 00:46:07.211 --> 00:46:13.927 - There used to be an old, rickety wooden bridge that went straight over to Rogers, and then they built 00:46:13.927 --> 00:46:15.902 - the new bridge, I don't know, 00:46:16.226 --> 00:46:22.291 - call it 30 years ago. So you do have a Roger Street north of the bridge. It is just not the connected 00:46:22.291 --> 00:46:28.355 - Roger Street that we know. So it moved over a block to Madison. So that's why the name changes there. 00:46:28.355 --> 00:46:34.480 - And then this is the one where I'm speculating here, but I believe Kinzer Pike used to be fully in the 00:46:34.480 --> 00:46:40.485 - county. And so I'm assuming that at 17th Street, that was the city limits border. And so Kinzer Pike 00:46:40.485 --> 00:46:45.182 - was a county road, got annexed, now it's a city road still called Kinzer Pike. 00:46:45.762 --> 00:46:52.964 - I don't know if we can change it or not, but I want to get back to this intersection. I think 00:46:52.964 --> 00:47:00.702 - this intersection, and frankly, it's fellow intersection at Walnut. It's a little bit better. It's a 00:47:00.702 --> 00:47:08.363 - little bit tamer here. But I've noticed, especially as a car driver, that it does not feel friendly 00:47:08.363 --> 00:47:13.726 - towards non-car users at all. It's big enough that I sometimes wonder 00:47:13.986 --> 00:47:20.019 - What's the smallest roundabout you could put in there? Because there's so much space there, you might 00:47:20.019 --> 00:47:26.289 - as well put a little roundabout in there. And when an intersection is so big that you think about putting 00:47:26.289 --> 00:47:32.441 - a roundabout there, maybe it's too big. Well, just some history on that. So Second and Patterson there, 00:47:32.441 --> 00:47:38.238 - Second Street was supposed to be all four lanes. Supposed to be four lanes. And so they built the 00:47:38.850 --> 00:47:46.569 - the elusive east-west highway across the city. Yeah, so they built the intersection to the four-lane 00:47:46.569 --> 00:47:54.211 - standard, and then they scrapped the idea of the four-lane section, which was from Rogers to out to 00:47:54.211 --> 00:48:02.542 - I-69 and out. That's why it's so big, and it feels uncomfortable. It's funny, because I've had conversations 00:48:02.542 --> 00:48:08.350 - with city engineering about the second street improvement project, which is 00:48:08.450 --> 00:48:16.495 - coming up this summer. I think it's basically underway right now, the utility relocations and so forth. 00:48:16.495 --> 00:48:24.308 - And I was hoping that the second street and Rogers intersection would be redesigned as part of that. 00:48:24.308 --> 00:48:32.431 - I was told that, no, it's fine. So maybe we can do something in the scope of this project. I don't know. 00:48:32.431 --> 00:48:37.150 - Effectively, this corridor is a legacy corridor of industry. 00:48:38.114 --> 00:48:46.950 - The first color television and the last color television in America were manufactured on this corridor. 00:48:46.950 --> 00:48:55.446 - And we haven't really, I mean, some industry has stayed here, but it's not as industrial as it used 00:48:55.446 --> 00:49:03.518 - to be. We have Switchyard Park on it now, so there's a lot more non-industrial urban amenities 00:49:04.322 --> 00:49:13.954 - it's a residential, it's no longer exclusively an industrial corridor, the roads don't reflect that. 00:49:13.954 --> 00:49:23.490 - Again, this intersection is my favorite example of how, you know, what message is this intersection 00:49:23.490 --> 00:49:33.694 - trying to convey, and it conveys I'm going to the RCA plant to, you know, build a TV set, or I'm going to, 00:49:33.954 --> 00:49:43.187 - or whatever, it doesn't say, oh, yeah, you should walk your dog here or ride your bike here. So, I mean, 00:49:43.187 --> 00:49:51.980 - if we did a snow test, will we see how much of the intersection is actually being used? Can we neck 00:49:51.980 --> 00:50:00.510 - it down so that it's, you know, doesn't need to be that big anymore? So I'm going to put it big. 00:50:03.426 --> 00:50:10.489 - We touched on this earlier, but back to the bridge across the CSX rail. You know, I think that's another 00:50:10.489 --> 00:50:17.686 - case where it's a bit of a transition point. You know, there's a little bit of a different feeling between 00:50:17.686 --> 00:50:24.547 - the Maple Heights neighborhood and then we come down into downtown. But it's also a funnel. You know, 00:50:24.547 --> 00:50:31.475 - everything's got to use that bridge right there to cross over. The next crossing of the east isn't all 00:50:31.475 --> 00:50:33.022 - the way until college. 00:50:33.634 --> 00:50:44.011 - And then to the west, it's all the way over at Fairview. And there's the trestle and those tracks. Yeah. 00:50:44.011 --> 00:50:54.190 - So I think there's a real opportunity there to improve the experience, I think, for everybody on that. 00:50:54.190 --> 00:51:02.590 - It's actually Madison Street right there. Because I certainly don't find it pleasant 00:51:02.786 --> 00:51:10.924 - walk along there. The bridge over the CSX track so that's between 11th and 13th Street or whatever. 00:51:10.924 --> 00:51:19.062 - I hope that gets some attention too. The county owns that bridge as we established the last meeting 00:51:19.062 --> 00:51:27.688 - though so that's something that the city would have to work with the county on I guess. Are you concerned 00:51:27.688 --> 00:51:31.838 - about the height of the bridge? The bridge sort of 00:51:32.674 --> 00:51:40.471 - like jumping over and going through it? I mean, Steve, there's no there's no separation from the sidewalk 00:51:40.471 --> 00:51:48.121 - and traffic. There's a bike lane going one direction and a share going the other. Yeah, I don't I don't 00:51:48.121 --> 00:51:55.477 - find it particularly, you know, pleasant in any respect to to use that that bridge. It's just it is 00:51:55.477 --> 00:52:01.950 - kind of what it is. And it was probably designed in the 80s. And that's designed before 00:52:02.562 --> 00:52:09.622 - small wood and that was the place to see downtown Bloomington driving over that bridge. What tiny skyline 00:52:09.622 --> 00:52:16.349 - Bloomington had, you saw it from there until one big building got built and blocked it. That's all I 00:52:16.349 --> 00:52:23.009 - remember about that bridge. Any other thoughts from commissioners since we're just kind of throwing 00:52:23.009 --> 00:52:29.669 - stuff at the wall to see what sticks? Well, one thing you showed last meeting was the typical cross 00:52:29.669 --> 00:52:31.934 - sections or whatever the sections 00:52:32.834 --> 00:52:39.436 - for each segment of the project, that might be good to have some discussion on that. The districts, 00:52:39.436 --> 00:52:45.774 - the contact zones you're talking about? Yeah, I think there were four of them. Let's find them. 00:52:45.774 --> 00:52:52.443 - These ones? Yeah. Yeah. These ones? OK. And then there was actually, you showed, you had diagrams of 00:52:52.443 --> 00:52:56.734 - what you thought four would be, would be bike paths on one side. 00:52:57.442 --> 00:53:03.987 - We didn't propose typical cross-sections, yeah. I thought you had some picture. There were some pictures 00:53:03.987 --> 00:53:10.283 - of something in there. We had an example of other cross-sections from other projects to say we would 00:53:10.283 --> 00:53:16.829 - do it. That's after this week, that's what we'll do. We'll start sketching those ideas during this week. 00:53:16.829 --> 00:53:23.249 - We haven't come up with those yet. But if you have an idea, take no ideas. Oh, I'm sorry. Well, I just 00:53:23.249 --> 00:53:26.366 - think it's going to have to fit the neighborhood. 00:53:26.754 --> 00:53:33.138 - that's in there or whatever, so. Yeah. Do you have any thoughts about this intersection, the Sunoco? 00:53:33.138 --> 00:53:39.586 - What is the, this is Rockport? It's Rockport Rogers. It's unusual. How did it, how did it happen that 00:53:39.586 --> 00:53:45.654 - way? Rockport goes diagonally, I don't know. Where did, I mean, I mean, it just seems, I think, 00:53:45.654 --> 00:53:51.975 - as when I, I don't use it often, it seems like a really good way for people that would even have to 00:53:51.975 --> 00:53:55.262 - go out to Rockport, kind of no reason to slow down, 00:53:55.938 --> 00:54:02.196 - you know, whips light, right? But if you're turning left over there, it's pretty high stress, I think. 00:54:02.196 --> 00:54:08.394 - If you're turning left onto going north on Rogers, there's a lot of things going on. When I'm driving 00:54:08.394 --> 00:54:14.895 - on Rockport, I'm always afraid someone's gonna like pull out right there, or if I'm going north on Rogers. 00:54:14.895 --> 00:54:21.031 - And yet it's better than it used to be. Like there was an improvement made not too long ago. I mean, 00:54:21.031 --> 00:54:25.406 - relatively recently, it's been a few years, but it used to be even more 00:54:25.730 --> 00:54:32.670 - it wasn't a well-designed intersection at all. I think partly because of the design of the gas station 00:54:32.670 --> 00:54:39.611 - too, like it was still kind of decrepit. But that's why I wanted to bring it up. Does anybody have any 00:54:39.611 --> 00:54:46.349 - thoughts about the importance of this intersection? You guys should talk to the people that live in 00:54:46.349 --> 00:54:53.222 - the Broadview neighborhood because they all have to use, they go through there all the time. Is there 00:54:53.222 --> 00:54:54.974 - any non-intersection that 00:54:55.554 --> 00:55:04.981 - people can think of anywhere along this corridor that really ought to get the attention of designers. 00:55:04.981 --> 00:55:14.685 - Non-intersection, somewhere here that is distracting, or a place where people try to cross anyway, or... 00:55:14.685 --> 00:55:22.910 - I don't drive on Rogers often, but when I leave my office to go to dermatologist center, 00:55:23.042 --> 00:55:28.711 - I feel like I go to way more often than I should, but I always find it stressful, like when I drive, 00:55:28.711 --> 00:55:34.548 - so I'll leave, go down 4th Street, take a left on Rogers, or 3rd Street, take a left on Rogers. I think 00:55:34.548 --> 00:55:40.329 - you climb up that hill, is that, what's the name of it? Prospect Hill. Prospect Hill. I feel like it's 00:55:40.329 --> 00:55:45.998 - the trees and the cars, and there's a boat that I've never, that's been parked there the entire time 00:55:45.998 --> 00:55:51.611 - I've lifted this down. It just feels closed in, in a way that makes me feel like, is somebody gonna 00:55:51.611 --> 00:55:52.958 - jump out or walk in it? 00:55:53.058 --> 00:55:58.144 - walking out in front of me, it just seems high stress driving. I mean, and then you get in an open, 00:55:58.144 --> 00:56:03.536 - as someone else has said, you drive down, if you drive this whole quarter, you go from, it's like walking 00:56:03.536 --> 00:56:08.978 - through an amusement park. It's like, this is the neighborhood section, and this is the warehouse section. 00:56:08.978 --> 00:56:14.115 - But it seems really, because of the topography and the trees, and the trees are kind of, if you look 00:56:14.115 --> 00:56:16.862 - at Google Earth, it even like, or Google Street View, 00:56:17.250 --> 00:56:23.069 - The trees seem to be crowded down into the street. Should there be some kind of a signal to drivers 00:56:23.069 --> 00:56:28.945 - saying this is a place to slow down because people might pop out? Well, I say all that and then it's 00:56:28.945 --> 00:56:34.822 - not like I don't feel like I see a lot of people walking around there. It just seems like it's hard. 00:56:34.822 --> 00:56:40.524 - Visibility is limited. Maybe it's maybe sometimes it's a little faster there, although I mean it. 00:56:40.524 --> 00:56:46.110 - It's tight, it feels tight. I'm a subscriber to the notion that jaywalking makes streets safer. 00:56:46.978 --> 00:56:54.269 - So I don't have a problem with it being, if you're afraid that people might walk out, it means you drive 00:56:54.269 --> 00:57:01.351 - slower. We have that and the deer to thank for it. They're everywhere and they don't pay attention to 00:57:01.351 --> 00:57:08.503 - our rules. But do you think that there needs to be some kind of motorist design language that says you 00:57:08.503 --> 00:57:15.516 - need to slow down here? I don't know if I thought about it enough. I think it's dark at night there. 00:57:15.516 --> 00:57:16.766 - Yeah, it is dark. 00:57:17.314 --> 00:57:23.906 - which could feel better. And I don't want it to feel better so I can go faster. I agree with you on 00:57:23.906 --> 00:57:30.696 - that. I just don't know how to, I don't know the, I'm not an expert like you guys. That's why you guys 00:57:30.696 --> 00:57:37.684 - can pay the big bucks. But it just seems, it just is an odd place. I always have found it to be a sensory 00:57:37.684 --> 00:57:44.342 - overload area to drive through. That's a good example. Anybody else got a thought like that anywhere 00:57:44.342 --> 00:57:45.726 - along this corridor? 00:57:45.858 --> 00:57:54.195 - Similarly to that, in that same vicinity, I have noticed that going south on Rogers, drivers who want 00:57:54.195 --> 00:58:02.696 - to turn left on the second street will sometimes just go past the queue of traffic in order to get into 00:58:02.696 --> 00:58:11.278 - the left-hand turn lane. Wait, they're on second or they're on Rogers? On Rogers. Going south on Rogers, 00:58:11.278 --> 00:58:15.038 - turning left on second street, so to go east. 00:58:16.354 --> 00:58:24.300 - They'll just go the wrong way, on the wrong way, on the road, right, the wrong side of the road, briefly, 00:58:24.300 --> 00:58:31.796 - to get to the turn lane. So, you know, you want to talk about hardened turn lanes, not hardened, or 00:58:31.796 --> 00:58:39.516 - hardened center lines, right? That's probably a good occasion to add one there. Is it a protected left 00:58:39.516 --> 00:58:45.438 - turn, like is there a left turn signal there? Yeah. Is it a leading left turn? 00:58:46.050 --> 00:58:52.593 - It's a leading left turn. Some people are trying to get there at the beginning. It's like, oh. Yeah, 00:58:52.593 --> 00:58:59.136 - exactly. Yeah. Well, it's a little short stack, too, in there. It's a short second. I don't remember 00:58:59.136 --> 00:59:05.744 - it being leading. I thought it went at the same time as the... It might be. I don't know. Split bait. 00:59:05.744 --> 00:59:12.352 - OK. No, I'm just curious. All of that intersection, too, fits the same description as Grimes. I mean, 00:59:12.352 --> 00:59:14.878 - second in Rogers is a bit of a blight. 00:59:15.394 --> 00:59:25.097 - for along to the big, God-forsaken mass of concrete, even into the adjoining private properties, especially 00:59:25.097 --> 00:59:34.800 - on the south side of Second Street. Steve, I think you brought up earlier about the 17th and is it Madison, 00:59:34.800 --> 00:59:40.190 - I guess, intersection. I go to the dry cleaner there. Yeah. 00:59:40.834 --> 00:59:46.520 - I agree with everything you said about it. And then also the way those businesses, both the dry cleaner 00:59:46.520 --> 00:59:52.206 - and the marathon, I think it's marathon, have like just basically wide open access to the parking lots. 00:59:52.206 --> 00:59:58.002 - I mean, there's lots of ways that someone could, as a cyclist or pedestrian, there's just lots of, you've 00:59:58.002 --> 01:00:03.688 - got to be head on a swivel the entire time up there. Does the staff have success in persuading property 01:00:03.688 --> 01:00:09.374 - owners to close off certain, like who are on corners to close off certain access points when they have? 01:00:10.242 --> 01:00:17.140 - I would say overall a mixed success. I am not the point person in those discussions, so I don't want 01:00:17.140 --> 01:00:24.037 - to speculate on how those go. But I do know that there are a number of projects that we work on, and 01:00:24.037 --> 01:00:30.867 - this is especially prevalent with gas stations, where they need space for their big tankers to come 01:00:30.867 --> 01:00:32.574 - in and drop off the gas. 01:00:32.866 --> 01:00:40.035 - As we know, wider curb cuts, more curb cuts cause more conflict points. And so hitting that half a medium 01:00:40.035 --> 01:00:46.933 - can be tough sometimes, I will say. So back to your point. It's just, and I'm not suggesting, I mean, 01:00:46.933 --> 01:00:53.696 - I'm sure they don't want to reduce that, but it just is a lot going on there and it would be a good 01:00:53.696 --> 01:00:57.822 - place to get some, a good design would work, would be a nice 01:00:58.594 --> 01:01:03.801 - work well there and I will say what everybody's been on this bridge and I'm not in favor of this bridge 01:01:03.801 --> 01:01:08.859 - but it's it seems pretty on Google Street View I mean there's a lot of space on that I mean it seems 01:01:08.859 --> 01:01:14.016 - like you could do something I keep that car I know it's a small car but it's got plenty of room in the 01:01:14.016 --> 01:01:19.323 - lane the big side welcome both sides so it seems like it could be better without redoing the whole thing. 01:01:19.323 --> 01:01:24.030 - I think that's not only Ayoban's point it's kind of the point of this whole yeah exercises to 01:01:24.706 --> 01:01:30.874 - improved at least make a plan for a quarter that would include an improvement like that taking advantage 01:01:30.874 --> 01:01:37.043 - of that space. I have a question for the group we've been focusing on and rightly so we've been focusing 01:01:37.043 --> 01:01:43.270 - on areas that could use or need some improvement. Are there any areas of the corridor that are archetypes 01:01:43.270 --> 01:01:48.674 - or examples to look off of as we want to do more of that. I know Brian you asked a question 01:01:48.674 --> 01:01:53.374 - about intersections in general but are there any sections of the corridor where 01:01:53.666 --> 01:02:01.093 - you feel comfortable, you feel safe, you feel like you want to be there and stay there. And if not, 01:02:01.093 --> 01:02:08.520 - that's okay. No points or no. Yeah, no. It's never been that kind of street. It was always the edge 01:02:08.520 --> 01:02:16.170 - of town or the wrong side of town for centuries. And now it's the middle of town. We're trying to make 01:02:16.170 --> 01:02:22.334 - it like that. So, no. I've just got gripes. What about the beeline trail crossing? 01:02:23.554 --> 01:02:32.013 - Even that's not great. It's at an angle. The beeline shows at, what, eighth or ninth, something like 01:02:32.013 --> 01:02:40.891 - that. Can you pull it up on Google Maps? And I know that they tried to sort of straighten it to go across 01:02:40.891 --> 01:02:49.769 - at a better angle. But there's also a little bit of elevation change. And it gives everyone pause, except 01:02:49.769 --> 01:02:52.030 - maybe drivers. Here we go. 01:02:54.594 --> 01:03:01.970 - Yeah, I mean, this does not say high comfort to me. Look at that. It's funny, because this check, this 01:03:01.970 --> 01:03:09.489 - ticks a lot of boxes on paper, right? I mean, there's signs, there's the trail, there's a race crossing, 01:03:09.489 --> 01:03:16.722 - there's a bump out on the east side of the intersection. But I agree with Steve. It's not effective. 01:03:16.722 --> 01:03:21.950 - Yeah, I think if you're traveling north and you've got on the east side, 01:03:22.722 --> 01:03:30.682 - somewhat of a blind spot, and if you're coming from traveling south, then you've got it on the west 01:03:30.682 --> 01:03:38.721 - side. I've used that quite a bit, and cyclists will be, it seems like it comes out of nowhere. Yeah, 01:03:38.721 --> 01:03:42.462 - yeah. I mean, that's the trail here, isn't it? 01:03:42.978 --> 01:03:49.023 - Is it coming out here that it turns like that? No, that is going the other way. Exactly. This is the 01:03:49.023 --> 01:03:55.188 - trail? Yeah. That and then just below, I'll scroll down, but just below, that's when it cuts back into 01:03:55.188 --> 01:04:01.532 - the angled B-line. Yeah. The other side, they're kind of hidden until they pop right after you. So here's 01:04:01.532 --> 01:04:07.757 - where the B-line comes out. Then you join with the sidewalk. Then you have that 90 degree. This is part 01:04:07.757 --> 01:04:12.126 - of the problem. The sidewalk is not a side path, so it's kind of narrow. 01:04:12.482 --> 01:04:32.227 - So bicyclists are a little hesitant to go at speed on it. Maybe you're not, I mean, yeah, I'm not a 01:04:32.227 --> 01:04:41.310 - fan. Oh yeah, so this. Yeah, so this is a new 01:04:41.538 --> 01:04:49.298 - of multifamily development. I don't know, I don't know the exact details, but call it about 100 units 01:04:49.298 --> 01:04:57.211 - or so. And that's going through the planning review process right now, but that I think should be built 01:04:57.211 --> 01:05:03.678 - in the next year or so. I mean, can you alter the path and square it up to the road? 01:05:06.242 --> 01:05:12.657 - That's what this crossing attempts to do. I'm not saying that they did it right, but this is what it 01:05:12.657 --> 01:05:19.199 - attempts to do. Yeah, but you don't still, you don't see, you see the blocks of stone there. You don't 01:05:19.199 --> 01:05:25.614 - see anybody until they get to the block of stone. Are you suggesting have it come southwards now the 01:05:25.614 --> 01:05:32.156 - driveway? Come towards the sign, the BIM sign and then square back at it. Kind of just hook it around. 01:05:32.156 --> 01:05:36.094 - There would be more visibility before the intersection? Yeah. 01:05:36.418 --> 01:05:47.278 - would be an improvement if this works for the new apartment? Either way, this is our premier non-automotive 01:05:47.278 --> 01:05:57.736 - path. The first one, the biggest one, the one we were proudest of. And this intersection, yeah, is kind 01:05:57.736 --> 01:06:04.574 - of dumpy. I don't know. It's just not. It doesn't say high comfort. 01:06:05.250 --> 01:06:12.236 - It doesn't say we're proud of this. It says we're accommodating it, but we'd really rather not. Some 01:06:12.236 --> 01:06:19.498 - of that's got to do, I think, with the immediate surrounding context, but yeah, I agree with you, Steve. 01:06:19.498 --> 01:06:26.622 - I wanted to add on that what you said. You mentioned like it ticks all the boxes of design, right? But 01:06:26.622 --> 01:06:28.766 - this is just one race crossing 01:06:29.250 --> 01:06:34.855 - there's no other ones anywhere else on the corridor. And so sometimes if you want traffic calling devices 01:06:34.855 --> 01:06:40.143 - to work effectively, you need to have multiple in succession along a street so people start getting 01:06:40.143 --> 01:06:45.431 - used to, oh, there's traffic calming here and they slow down more systematically as opposed to this 01:06:45.431 --> 01:06:50.825 - is just like you're surprised with a raised crosswalk and there's no other raised crosswalks anywhere 01:06:50.825 --> 01:06:56.219 - else on the corridor. There is one. So isn't a hawk signal at 4th Street? No, that's a rapid flashing 01:06:56.219 --> 01:06:58.334 - beacon and it's not a raised crosswalk. 01:06:58.594 --> 01:07:06.270 - But it's the only other example of a crossing near this that bicyclists and pedestrians are encouraged 01:07:06.270 --> 01:07:13.797 - to use. That has some in mind for that. And it's also not great. It's a recent project, too. I mean, 01:07:13.797 --> 01:07:21.771 - that was most recently worked on maybe five years ago. Yeah. And it doesn't exactly scream comfort either. 01:07:21.771 --> 01:07:28.478 - There you go. One thing that's quite difficult for drivers on 4th Street is to turn left. 01:07:29.058 --> 01:07:37.254 - onto Rogers. So if they're going east on 4th, they're trying to turn left to go north. Or if they're 01:07:37.254 --> 01:07:46.017 - going west on 4th, they're trying to turn left to go south on Rogers. It's difficult. And it's not pleasant 01:07:46.017 --> 01:07:54.294 - to try to cross here either. I remember when this was being redesigned a little bit, I suggested, no, 01:07:54.294 --> 01:07:58.270 - people don't really drive through on 4th Street. 01:07:58.626 --> 01:08:07.769 - They use Kirkwood and 2nd Street and 3rd Street. So why not make 4th Street a less permeable route for 01:08:07.769 --> 01:08:16.734 - motor traffic, and cut down on the left turns and stuff, and make it like a right in, right out, and 01:08:16.734 --> 01:08:25.699 - put an island in the middle? Actually, I don't know if we have any cases of that along Rogers. Well, 01:08:25.699 --> 01:08:26.942 - Allen, right? 01:08:27.394 --> 01:08:33.442 - Nobody, nobody, staff didn't like that idea. So here we are again, five years later, talking about it. 01:08:33.442 --> 01:08:39.431 - And the B-line are, if there's two places that should be working together, it's those two intersects. 01:08:39.431 --> 01:08:45.478 - So this is an example of, I think, a good treatment. This is down in McDowell. This is a little older, 01:08:45.478 --> 01:08:51.409 - I think, maybe seven or eight years ago they put this in. This is Allen? Yeah. I think this is nice. 01:08:51.409 --> 01:08:54.462 - You know, Allen feels like an actual greenway here. 01:08:55.234 --> 01:09:03.022 - Is that something you'd like to see more of along the corridor? Me personally, absolutely. I like these. 01:09:03.022 --> 01:09:10.290 - Speaking of that, the corner of 3rd and Grant. 3rd and Grant? 3rd and Grant, not on the corridor, 01:09:10.290 --> 01:09:18.301 - close to it, but not on the corridor. It's the only... I hated it when it first got put in. It's a diverter 01:09:18.301 --> 01:09:19.710 - right there, okay? 01:09:19.906 --> 01:09:27.439 - Because I was driving. And I couldn't. It was the only place that I couldn't turn left. And I was annoyed. 01:09:27.439 --> 01:09:33.987 - And I was a driver. Then I started using it as a cyclist. And it's my new favorite. It's the 01:09:33.987 --> 01:09:41.169 - only intersection on Third Street between College, Walnut, Washington, Lincoln, Dunn, or Indiana that 01:09:41.169 --> 01:09:49.054 - you can cross easily and not at a light. Everything else is either a light that's one way or it's car friendly. 01:09:49.346 --> 01:09:56.947 - And it's now and cars now stop for me when I'm in the middle of that diverter and if that's what it 01:09:56.947 --> 01:10:04.852 - takes to make 4th Street and the beeline easier to cross I'm a big fan or six or how yeah, yeah, I mean 01:10:04.852 --> 01:10:12.681 - this this this works it works like a charm and the fact that cars like I'll be in the intersection and 01:10:12.681 --> 01:10:16.862 - I'll be looking at cars as they're coming this way and 01:10:17.186 --> 01:10:22.596 - And some of them go through and some of them stop and I'm not the one to stop and I say thank you. Or 01:10:22.596 --> 01:10:28.005 - I point at the sign for the ones who drive through. It's working, like drivers are noticing that. And 01:10:28.005 --> 01:10:33.362 - it at once, it respects everybody. That sign, the way it's designed, it even respects drivers. All I 01:10:33.362 --> 01:10:38.930 - have to do is point at the sign. I don't have to shake my head or, you know, I just like. And the driver 01:10:38.930 --> 01:10:44.393 - stops, at least they know they have the instruction what they're supposed to do. They just have to pay 01:10:44.393 --> 01:10:46.302 - attention to it. So more like this. 01:10:46.594 --> 01:10:53.264 - If there's one thing that's working in the city, it's not on the corridor, but it would work on this 01:10:53.264 --> 01:11:00.066 - corridor. I couldn't agree more, Steve. Hey, Hank. Can I add a question? Yeah, of course. So since you 01:11:00.066 --> 01:11:06.802 - guys are talking about diverters like this, what are your thoughts about doing diverters where people 01:11:06.802 --> 01:11:13.406 - just can't even drive north-south all the way? That's what this is? No. Imagine that this is Rogers 01:11:13.406 --> 01:11:16.510 - going east-west. OK. So Rogers is north-south. 01:11:16.866 --> 01:11:22.643 - What if you were to put diverters periodically along it so that you can't use Rogers as a cut-through 01:11:22.643 --> 01:11:28.307 - route from north all the way to south? You mean actually block Rogers from being a... Yeah, like at 01:11:28.307 --> 01:11:34.198 - a certain point you have to turn right to go off. You can use it for like five blocks, six blocks. It's 01:11:34.198 --> 01:11:39.919 - a good question, but I guess the answer would be, the question would be where. Where would that most 01:11:39.919 --> 01:11:46.206 - be necessary on this corridor? It could be at those, at the borders of the contact zones that we talked about. 01:11:47.938 --> 01:11:57.939 - context. The changes of the use in the context of the court or how people are using them. I mean it 01:11:57.939 --> 01:12:08.141 - could be you know for I'm just I'll tell you the number first place that comes up then is 11th Street 01:12:08.141 --> 01:12:15.742 - at 11th Street. You know there might be a case for diversion. I'm not sure. 01:12:17.250 --> 01:12:25.632 - Like, that's a changing of context. Or maybe it's somewhere maybe north of that. I mean, that bridge 01:12:25.632 --> 01:12:34.263 - was built to make it a thoroughfare. So I guess it depends on, I mean, don't buses go up? I don't know. 01:12:34.263 --> 01:12:43.143 - I'll give you an update. So two is 11 to 17. Yeah, I also had to talk about emergency vehicles, ambulance, 01:12:43.143 --> 01:12:44.222 - fire trucks. 01:12:47.490 --> 01:12:56.350 - I don't know if it's the case for that refuge island, but you can design them so the wheels can track 01:12:56.350 --> 01:13:05.035 - through what those cut-throughs are so they can cut over them. Section four, I don't think of as in 01:13:05.035 --> 01:13:13.895 - need of that, but maybe section two. Would you like an example of what that looks like? No, it's more 01:13:13.895 --> 01:13:15.806 - I'm trying to imagine 01:13:16.546 --> 01:13:27.599 - what you would divert from or to, like who's being diverted. Like I said, on Third and Grant, that diverter 01:13:27.599 --> 01:13:37.935 - is perfect. And it provides that key function for people who are not in a car. But I'm not sure what 01:13:37.935 --> 01:13:45.406 - the destinations are up there. Maybe near the beeline. Maybe 4th Street. 01:13:46.370 --> 01:13:54.071 - Does Rogers have to go through, maybe that's the solution to the two intersections that Aobahn and I 01:13:54.071 --> 01:14:01.848 - were just talking about. I don't know. Of course, the minute you divert, you have to ask where you're 01:14:01.848 --> 01:14:09.701 - diverting them to. Prospect Hill, the near west side, are very sensitive about having traffic diverted 01:14:09.701 --> 01:14:15.038 - to them. So I'd be cautious about that. I wouldn't blame them either. 01:14:17.538 --> 01:14:26.069 - wants traffic. What about, like, at 3rd and Rogers? Again, who are we diverting? Who do we want to divert? 01:14:26.069 --> 01:14:34.042 - 3rd Street. 3rd and Rogers is an interesting example, isn't it? Because 3rd Street is four lanes to 01:14:34.042 --> 01:14:42.095 - the east of Rogers. It begins four lanes there. Yeah. And then it's two lanes into the Prospect Hill 01:14:42.095 --> 01:14:47.038 - neighborhood. And may it flood him over to College or Walnut? 01:14:47.298 --> 01:14:54.281 - Well, if you were coming down Third Street, you're westbound. You'd have to go either right. Yeah, literally 01:14:54.281 --> 01:15:00.815 - Prospect Hill is a giant diverter. Like, they built their neighborhood to be a diverter. They did not 01:15:00.815 --> 01:15:07.349 - want traffic going through there. I have the horror stories to tell you about just how badly they did 01:15:07.349 --> 01:15:13.883 - not want traffic. But it would keep the traffic from not going all the way through. I mean, my guess. 01:15:13.883 --> 01:15:17.150 - And that kind of already functions that way. Yeah. 01:15:17.890 --> 01:15:23.108 - But you're saying a diverter so people can, like, that's a break point at third. So if you're going 01:15:23.108 --> 01:15:28.326 - northbound on third, you would have to turn right on third. And if you're going south on you, you'd 01:15:28.326 --> 01:15:33.910 - also have to turn on third. Like, you can't go through at third. Is that what you're proposing? My thought 01:15:33.910 --> 01:15:39.336 - was if you're going, well, you'd be going westbound on third. Oh, gotcha. You'd get to Rogers and you'd 01:15:39.336 --> 01:15:44.554 - have to go right. Gotcha. The thing is, if you're going south on Rogers from Kirkwood, from fourth, 01:15:44.554 --> 01:15:45.598 - you get past third. 01:15:46.178 --> 01:15:53.032 - Your next opportunity to turn westbound is 2nd Street. You're going, driving past the entirety of the 01:15:53.032 --> 01:15:59.819 - Prospect Hill neighborhood. There's no other practical way to get people, again, the entirety of the 01:15:59.819 --> 01:16:06.673 - neighborhood is designed to prevent cut-through traffic. Remember the chicanes on West 3rd Street? So 01:16:06.673 --> 01:16:13.460 - if we were to divert people away from going south on Rogers, south of 3rd Street, I think that would 01:16:13.460 --> 01:16:15.006 - raise some objections. 01:16:16.930 --> 01:16:23.041 - Does that make sense? I'm not sure what else you divert. Yeah, it wasn't. I was thinking more or less. 01:16:23.041 --> 01:16:29.270 - Diverting them off the 3rd Street onto Rother Street, not diverting Rother Street. Oh yeah, that already 01:16:29.270 --> 01:16:35.203 - does that. Don't you think? Well, I think if you want a crossing and get crossing there for. Lights 01:16:35.203 --> 01:16:41.195 - and pedestrians, I don't know how so you're talking about the western leg of the center section here 01:16:41.195 --> 01:16:45.822 - at that, right? Yeah, so and this is I think what Steve's talking about where 01:16:46.338 --> 01:16:52.611 - Naturally, if the through traffic, if you're wanting to get through the city to the west and get out 01:16:52.611 --> 01:16:58.822 - of there, you have to either go north on Rogers to Kirkwood or go south on Rogers to Second and get 01:16:58.822 --> 01:17:05.095 - out of there. Whereas if you go through Prospect Hill, that's where you have to jog on over to these 01:17:05.095 --> 01:17:11.368 - small neighborhood streets. And then you have the slalom here. Yeah, I know. I think 4th Street, you 01:17:11.368 --> 01:17:14.846 - identified 4th Street as like the practical bike route. 01:17:16.258 --> 01:17:22.485 - So I would say maybe there would be more useful. What if you are you? What what if you block? I'm not 01:17:22.485 --> 01:17:28.652 - saying it's good or bad, but just. If you block Roger Street off at 3rd Street, so if you're coming. 01:17:28.652 --> 01:17:35.123 - North I'm sorry if you're coming south on Rogers into town, you're going to have to turn onto 3rd Street. 01:17:35.123 --> 01:17:41.534 - You can't continue all the way to country club and vice versa. If you're coming, if you're coming north, 01:17:41.534 --> 01:17:45.502 - you have to go over to the main thoroughfare to get out of town. 01:17:46.466 --> 01:17:53.548 - It would change the nature of the road completely. It's an idea. Yeah, I mean, it violates one of our 01:17:53.548 --> 01:18:00.837 - goals, which was to make it connective and whatever that was. But you could connect other people instead 01:18:00.837 --> 01:18:07.850 - of just connecting drivers. If you do that, it would help it to be a better place for people to walk 01:18:07.850 --> 01:18:15.070 - and to bike and connect it without them. I just said we're going to create, let's say we were to block. 01:18:15.714 --> 01:18:22.614 - Rogers from through traffic, through car traffic from third to second street. That's going to force 01:18:22.614 --> 01:18:29.791 - people driving eastbound to Madison and College. And if they're trying to get westbound, they're either 01:18:29.791 --> 01:18:36.967 - going to cut through the neighborhood, because even as slow as it is, it's still faster than going down 01:18:36.967 --> 01:18:43.868 - and around and all the way around to get to Second Street via Madison or College. And it's going to 01:18:43.868 --> 01:18:45.662 - create car traffic there. 01:18:45.986 --> 01:18:54.999 - I can see that backfiring from a motorist privilege perspective, if you know what I mean. Steve, I kind 01:18:54.999 --> 01:19:03.926 - of lost you at the end there. Could you restate what you just said? If you block cars going southbound 01:19:03.926 --> 01:19:12.939 - on Rogers from third, and people who are driving want to get west, but they're already headed that way, 01:19:12.939 --> 01:19:14.846 - they're headed south, 01:19:15.074 --> 01:19:20.937 - and they need to get west. They're going to turn east at Third Street. They're going to be forced to 01:19:20.937 --> 01:19:26.742 - go to Madison or to college. They're going to turn and get to Second Street and then head west, and 01:19:26.742 --> 01:19:32.896 - they're going to be irritated. If they know that that pattern is set up, they might start cutting through 01:19:32.896 --> 01:19:38.759 - Prospect Hill anyway, despite the one-way streets, the narrow streets, the chicanes, everything that 01:19:38.759 --> 01:19:42.590 - they've done to discourage car traffic through that neighborhood. 01:19:44.802 --> 01:19:52.891 - I mean, there's been the fight between, we want an east-west highway across town, and this neighborhood 01:19:52.891 --> 01:20:00.980 - is historic neighborhood, we don't want cars going through it. That's been my entire political history, 01:20:00.980 --> 01:20:08.991 - and we've been doing it for 25 some years now. I think that any consideration in diverting traffic and 01:20:08.991 --> 01:20:13.502 - that kind of thing, I don't think we should categorically 01:20:13.666 --> 01:20:21.719 - you know, rule it out in any particular circumstance. But I do think that it would be helpful to consider 01:20:21.719 --> 01:20:29.316 - it in the context of like, you know, a neighborhood traffic management plan, right? Where a variety 01:20:29.316 --> 01:20:37.216 - of different types of journeys and different directions are being considered in a kind of more holistic 01:20:37.216 --> 01:20:42.686 - way. I'm sure we could talk all night about little scenarios like this. 01:20:43.298 --> 01:20:52.803 - You know, the way that neighborhoods of great cities solve this kind of thing is approaching it from 01:20:52.803 --> 01:21:02.779 - a more holistic way and diverting traffic where you can and where there are straightforward alternatives, 01:21:02.779 --> 01:21:12.190 - I think. What's the safety profile of Rogers between 3rd and 2nd? Are there a lot of crashes there? 01:21:13.026 --> 01:21:20.439 - Also, we've been at it for. Hour and a half almost. Is there a time limit on this area? There is not 01:21:20.439 --> 01:21:27.852 - technically a time limit whenever you are. To see what what's the room's mood. While they're looking 01:21:27.852 --> 01:21:35.485 - at data of any other thoughts, well, I just want to say I wasn't talking about diverting rod of streets 01:21:35.485 --> 01:21:42.238 - up as any you're going to push more traffic to college and all that that that was my point. 01:21:42.338 --> 01:21:50.580 - Yeah, but I was thinking of maybe it's 4th Street, an example like you gave on 3rd Street, maybe the 01:21:50.580 --> 01:21:58.904 - diverter is for the traffic going east-west on 4th Street to make a crossing somewhere. Or maybe look 01:21:58.904 --> 01:22:07.310 - at different points throughout the different segments. Yeah, that's sort of my general point. The cost 01:22:07.310 --> 01:22:11.390 - of diverting traffic anywhere from 3rd and Rogers 01:22:12.002 --> 01:22:20.964 - just from a public relations standpoint would be a challenge. What are these? I mean, I'm already seeing 01:22:20.964 --> 01:22:29.585 - all the people, the motorists who can't understand why we would accommodate bikes at all, because we 01:22:29.585 --> 01:22:38.291 - never see any bicyclists on the road. So what are ways to... I think you underestimate the bottomless 01:22:38.291 --> 01:22:41.278 - desire of trolls to troll. Anyway. 01:22:41.826 --> 01:22:49.163 - Any data on crash data on third between third and second on Rogers on third in the last 10 years that 01:22:49.163 --> 01:22:56.644 - we look, there's no serious injury crashes at second. There were two in the last 10 years. I mean, does 01:22:56.644 --> 01:23:03.837 - that make it harder to argue for diversion of cars? Because it's not strictly safety related. Sure, 01:23:03.837 --> 01:23:10.814 - so I would also talk about so. Just going back to stuff when we talk about making a street safe. 01:23:11.330 --> 01:23:16.810 - One aspect of it is looking at the past crash history. What are the fatal and severe crashes that have 01:23:16.810 --> 01:23:22.184 - already happened? And also, look at the risk of future fatal and severe injury crashes. When we look 01:23:22.184 --> 01:23:27.611 - at the intersection of Third and Rogers, even though nothing has occurred there in the last 10 years, 01:23:27.611 --> 01:23:33.092 - that is not to say it won't occur in future years. So when we look at the profile, it being five lanes 01:23:33.092 --> 01:23:38.732 - at Third Street, long crossings, that has the profile of being a risky intersection. You could absolutely 01:23:38.732 --> 01:23:40.062 - sell it based on safety. 01:23:40.610 --> 01:23:51.740 - Okay, well, this is new to me, and that's saying a lot, the idea that somehow there's a way of quantifying 01:23:51.740 --> 01:24:02.558 - the risk profile of an intersection not based on crash data. Is there some formula that you use to say, 01:24:02.658 --> 01:24:07.660 - this intersection is a textbook unsafe intersection. So I would, and I don't want to pull up the whole 01:24:07.660 --> 01:24:13.002 - formula right now, but I would point you to Bloomington's Safe Streets for All Action Plan that incorporates, 01:24:13.002 --> 01:24:18.004 - so the high priority network incorporates a number of things, one of the factors being risk. And Drew, 01:24:18.004 --> 01:24:23.055 - you might actually be able to talk about it better than I can. Yeah, I mean, well, what Hank is talking 01:24:23.055 --> 01:24:27.134 - about is systemic safety, which is more forward-looking versus crash data, which is 01:24:27.394 --> 01:24:33.550 - Backers looking. So just briefly give us a sense of how you do that. Yeah. So what Hank is talking about 01:24:33.550 --> 01:24:39.412 - is like if a street has a higher speed, has more lanes, larger intersections, no separation between 01:24:39.412 --> 01:24:45.275 - users, no separation in time or in space, those kinds of things that we might say that has a higher 01:24:45.275 --> 01:24:50.727 - risk profile than another street that does have all those things. That makes sense. Am I the 01:24:50.727 --> 01:24:56.062 - only commissioner who would like to see more about how they do that? Cause I'd love to see 01:24:56.962 --> 01:25:02.562 - the details of how you... The, yeah, the Safe Streets for All plan has a whole chapter on it. But is 01:25:02.562 --> 01:25:08.383 - it a chapter or is it like, do you have a formula that you use? I believe the formula is in there. Yeah, 01:25:08.383 --> 01:25:13.983 - it is in there. But it's, I would say that it's, so there's, there's multiple different methods. I'm 01:25:13.983 --> 01:25:19.638 - gonna go do my homework. Yeah, there's something called like a facility profile analysis. What we did 01:25:19.638 --> 01:25:21.246 - is more like systemic safety 01:25:22.114 --> 01:25:27.872 - and it was based on our best judgment of things that we think are risk factors. So you've already scored 01:25:27.872 --> 01:25:33.466 - some intersections this way? Intersections and all the streets. Do you have a list? Yeah, it's in the 01:25:33.466 --> 01:25:39.060 - plan. Is it in the plan? Yes. Am I an idiot? I'm an idiot. You are not an idiot. I would look through 01:25:39.060 --> 01:25:44.654 - the plan. There are corridors and intersections that are rated based on purely the past crash history 01:25:44.654 --> 01:25:50.248 - data. The crash history, that's the high injury network. Then we have the high risk network, which is 01:25:50.248 --> 01:25:51.838 - essentially forward looking. 01:25:52.386 --> 01:25:58.723 - And then we combine all that together, plus the public comment, the public input that we received during 01:25:58.723 --> 01:26:04.880 - safety week. And that is the high priority network, the comprehensive network. OK. I'll just come and 01:26:04.880 --> 01:26:11.338 - get remedial lessons from you after this. Steve, and to any commissioner that wasn't at the first meeting, 01:26:11.338 --> 01:26:17.555 - if you have time, go and watch the recording, or parts of the recording, because we talked about a lot 01:26:17.555 --> 01:26:19.486 - of these things last time also. 01:26:19.682 --> 01:26:28.969 - My apologies. That's why I was not here and I'm very sorry to waste everybody's time. Are there any 01:26:28.969 --> 01:26:38.628 - other last minute comments on this quarter? Or general comments? We talked about roundabouts a bit ago, 01:26:38.628 --> 01:26:48.286 - just taking like a temperature check on you guys or the general public, how much they like roundabouts. 01:26:48.514 --> 01:26:56.027 - dislike them is a mini roundabout something you've seen that could be maybe retrofitted whether that's 01:26:56.027 --> 01:27:03.394 - for access management especially for talking about some deferters or just as traffic calming devices 01:27:03.394 --> 01:27:10.980 - or gateway almost treatments to a corridor commissioners I asked you to answer this question I actually 01:27:10.980 --> 01:27:16.670 - suggested a mini roundabout for fourth and Rogers maybe five or six years ago 01:27:17.090 --> 01:27:23.395 - Where is the mini-roundabout currently compared to, like, is it Curry? This is the director of the bus 01:27:23.395 --> 01:27:29.517 - system asking. What about Renwick, over there, Renwick, and on Moores Park? Well, is it just single 01:27:29.517 --> 01:27:35.638 - lane? Is that what we're talking about? I don't think so. A mini-roundabout is usually smaller, and 01:27:35.638 --> 01:27:42.494 - the island in the middle is fully traversable. So bigger cars, buses, five trucks, they drive straight through. 01:27:42.978 --> 01:27:49.386 - It's more like a neighborhood, but not a neighborhood traffic circle, but somewhere between a neighborhood 01:27:49.386 --> 01:27:55.614 - traffic circle and a conventional sidewalk. When I served on the Bike and Pedestrian Safety Commission, 01:27:55.614 --> 01:28:01.662 - there was a blind woman who was on it, and she highlighted that they're difficult for blind folks to 01:28:01.662 --> 01:28:08.190 - cross because the traffic doesn't come to a complete stop. Otherwise, I'm aware there are a lot of benefits. 01:28:09.698 --> 01:28:16.417 - And our representative from the Council of Community Accessibility is not here today to give us that 01:28:16.417 --> 01:28:23.335 - kind of feedback. But I think you've heard sort of a cross section there. I've asked about why certain, 01:28:23.335 --> 01:28:30.120 - I do love many roundabouts as long as they don't encourage cars to go fast. I don't want us to become 01:28:30.120 --> 01:28:37.438 - caramel. With all due respect, you know, I think that's a whole different kind of city that I don't think is, 01:28:39.042 --> 01:28:46.100 - I don't know if there are any, what you'd really call mini roundabouts in Carmel. Carmel builds huge 01:28:46.100 --> 01:28:53.368 - roundabouts. I think the roundabouts the tool's talking about are very small. Well, there are tiny ones 01:28:53.368 --> 01:28:59.518 - in the near west side. You can't drive over them, but they're really small. That scale. 01:28:59.618 --> 01:29:04.823 - Is that the kind of thing you're talking about? Is it like a local-local street intersection? So that's 01:29:04.823 --> 01:29:09.978 - a neighborhood traffic circle, which is a little bit different than what Wally is talking about. Yeah, 01:29:09.978 --> 01:29:15.333 - OK. But similar scale. Are ones where you could drive over it, there's nothing in the middle? It's usually 01:29:15.333 --> 01:29:20.688 - mountable, so there still is somewhat of a mound. It's either papers or concrete in the middle. So drivers 01:29:20.688 --> 01:29:25.843 - are still just purged from going through, so they're still going around. They're still going down. But 01:29:25.843 --> 01:29:26.494 - fire trucks. 01:29:26.914 --> 01:29:35.300 - No objections. In fact, I can name three or four intersections around the city that I wonder why are 01:29:35.300 --> 01:29:44.101 - these so fat? If we're going to leave them this fat, why don't we make them into a roundabout? Otherwise, 01:29:44.101 --> 01:29:52.487 - let's neck them down. I think you mentioned taking the temperature. I think my view is the community 01:29:52.487 --> 01:29:56.638 - is OK with them. We've gotten over the first few. 01:29:56.866 --> 01:30:13.225 - And that, yeah, they expect them here and there and know how to drive through them. Yeah. OK, let's 01:30:13.225 --> 01:30:25.822 - talk about next steps. So was this helpful? Yes. What next? What's our next? 01:30:26.050 --> 01:30:32.660 - So what next? Steering committee is, I would say, on pause for now. Internally, we need to start taking 01:30:32.660 --> 01:30:39.397 - your comments, putting pen to paper, drawing things up based on what you said, based on what the public's 01:30:39.397 --> 01:30:45.753 - already said. We've gotten about 80 survey respondents. As of today, I'm sure we'll have a lot more 01:30:45.753 --> 01:30:52.236 - comments at the public meetings come this week. So we are going to be doing a lot of work taking what 01:30:52.236 --> 01:30:54.206 - you said, putting it on paper, 01:30:54.818 --> 01:31:00.878 - After that, we'll regroup internally and then come back to you with next steps as of, you know, what 01:31:00.878 --> 01:31:06.998 - is the role for the next meeting? How do we then narrow the focus towards a final quarter study? What 01:31:06.998 --> 01:31:13.058 - is the next meeting going to? I still haven't answered it. What's our next meeting going to be like? 01:31:13.058 --> 01:31:19.358 - What are we going to talk about at the next meeting? I think in the next meeting we'll have some typical 01:31:19.554 --> 01:31:24.891 - sections, cross sections and concepts that we've drawn up during this week and iterated on to show you 01:31:24.891 --> 01:31:30.073 - and say, this is everything that we heard. You could do some actual design. Yeah. Okay. Like sketch 01:31:30.073 --> 01:31:35.254 - level concept design and say, is this doing, is this solving the issues that you've described to us 01:31:35.254 --> 01:31:40.954 - and that we've heard from the public? So that's the goal is like, we're going to compile all the information, 01:31:40.954 --> 01:31:46.136 - say we think these are the issues and here's some, a start at the solution. And this will be in two 01:31:46.136 --> 01:31:48.830 - weeks, two months, two years? In May, likely. Okay. 01:31:49.026 --> 01:31:56.652 - commission meeting. May is what we have. Well, we'll schedule a another what we call planning session. 01:31:56.652 --> 01:32:04.204 - Yeah, like this one. Okay. Okay. Yeah, shooting for me. All right. Um, anything else? Okay. Thank you 01:32:04.204 --> 01:32:11.978 - everyone for being here. Uh, our next meeting is our regular. We don't even have our regular staff here, 01:32:11.978 --> 01:32:15.902 - but I assume it's our next regular meeting in April. 01:32:16.610 --> 01:32:26.050 - You have your regular meeting March 30th at 5.30 PM. That's what I was afraid of. All right, our next 01:32:26.050 --> 01:32:34.750 - meeting is at 5.30 next Monday, I assume, in Chambers. Yes. Great. This meeting is adjourned.