WEBVTT 00:00:00.642 --> 00:00:08.409 - So we can go ahead and get started, Ryan. We need to, because Mark and Steve aren't here, we need to 00:00:08.409 --> 00:00:16.098 - choose a chair for this meeting, correct? Yeah, just temporary. Somebody has to technically run the 00:00:16.098 --> 00:00:24.019 - meeting from membership on the board. So staff, until you nominate and elect a chair, we can only help 00:00:24.019 --> 00:00:27.710 - you elect a chair. So I accept any nominations. 00:00:31.522 --> 00:00:46.112 - Nominate Brian. OK. Second. Second? OK. And then everyone's in person, so we can do this. I'll just, 00:00:46.112 --> 00:01:00.414 - all in favor, say aye. Aye. And I'll post. Aye. Sounds like you won your chairmanship four to one. 00:01:01.122 --> 00:01:08.207 - Uh, so, oh, I actually, we forgot to recall that, so did that really play, drummy? I've called it roll, 00:01:08.207 --> 00:01:15.291 - sorry. I'm going out of order. Attendance or? Yes. Okay, here. Copic. Here. Oh. I can read myself. Yes, 00:01:15.291 --> 00:01:22.580 - please, sorry. Let's go, let's go. Yes. Okay, I'll learn that for next time. Davis. Yes, here. And binder. 00:01:22.580 --> 00:01:28.030 - Here. Okay, sorry about that, I went out of order. I'll now hand it off to you. 00:01:29.890 --> 00:01:37.120 - I will thank you for allowing me to chair. I'll be honest, I'm not exactly sure what we're doing today. 00:01:37.120 --> 00:01:44.281 - So I will look to staff to help guide me through that process. Thank you. Sure. Thanks. So I will give 00:01:44.281 --> 00:01:51.789 - a quick background on why we're here, what are we doing, and then I'll throw it off to our project manager, 00:01:51.789 --> 00:01:58.046 - Drew Parker, to go into the more nitty gritty of what this project is, what the study is. 00:01:58.594 --> 00:02:05.973 - So essentially we are here to talk about the Roger Street, Madison Street and Kinser Pike corridors 00:02:05.973 --> 00:02:13.352 - from on the south side, Country Club Drive to the north side at the bypass. Why are we here? So the 00:02:13.352 --> 00:02:20.731 - background is in 2024, the city adopted a goal of Vision Zero 2039. That is essentially eliminating 00:02:20.731 --> 00:02:26.782 - all fatal and serious roadway crashes on city roads by the year 2039. From there, 00:02:27.106 --> 00:02:34.657 - months later in that year, the city also adopted the Safe Streets for All Action Plan. That describes 00:02:34.657 --> 00:02:42.503 - the various action items and needs from the city to reach that goal of Vision Zero. That includes program 00:02:42.503 --> 00:02:49.980 - and infrastructure investments, employees in the departments, et cetera. In that plan, there are, we 00:02:49.980 --> 00:02:57.086 - prioritized various intersections and corridors based on fatal and severe injury crash history, 00:02:57.474 --> 00:03:05.721 - demographic information of folks in the area, and then public comment. That turned into the high priority 00:03:05.721 --> 00:03:13.580 - network for the city, the streets and corridors that the city needs to work on as we reach that goal 00:03:13.580 --> 00:03:21.438 - of Vision Zero. On that list are a handful of very long corridors, College and Walnut, Roger Street, 00:03:21.826 --> 00:03:29.213 - College Mall Road, West Third Street, Third and Atwater, etc. These are the main arterials through town 00:03:29.213 --> 00:03:36.316 - that unsurprisingly land on this list. Because this Roger Street corridor is so long and so much of 00:03:36.316 --> 00:03:43.845 - it is on that high priority network, we decided to take a more comprehensive look at this corridor itself 00:03:43.845 --> 00:03:46.686 - and look not just at the transportation 00:03:47.202 --> 00:03:54.691 - the streetscape aspect of it, but the land use around it, get more community focus on how we can improve 00:03:54.691 --> 00:04:01.966 - our community's experiences along and across this corridor. So we partnered with Tool Design Group to 00:04:01.966 --> 00:04:09.098 - help us do that. And so over the past few months, they have been working on this corridor analysis, 00:04:09.098 --> 00:04:16.301 - looking at the crash history, the gaps analysis, the pedestrian quality, and looking at the existing 00:04:16.301 --> 00:04:17.086 - conditions 00:04:17.506 --> 00:04:24.551 - so we can then move forward and look at what could be on this corridor. Now, you're all's role in this 00:04:24.551 --> 00:04:31.459 - study. You all are the steering committee for the study. This is the first meeting we've had for the 00:04:31.459 --> 00:04:38.435 - study. We will have a handful of more meetings throughout the spring and summer as we eventually form 00:04:38.435 --> 00:04:45.822 - a short-term and long-term concept of what this corridor could look like, both on the street and around it. 00:04:47.266 --> 00:04:53.909 - What we need from you all is one, use your position in the community to talk to your friends, talk to 00:04:53.909 --> 00:05:00.552 - your coworkers, your colleagues, your people who you know to be that bridge between the community and 00:05:00.552 --> 00:05:07.390 - staff. But also, you all are on this commission for a reason. You have different expertises in the field 00:05:07.390 --> 00:05:13.903 - of transportation and so what we need from you is to ask those deep questions. Push us when we need 00:05:13.903 --> 00:05:16.638 - to be pushed because this should not be a 00:05:17.410 --> 00:05:24.279 - staff project, this should be a city project, a community project, and this is where we need you. There 00:05:24.279 --> 00:05:31.083 - are a few events coming up that I've requested your attendance, there will be more as well, but again, 00:05:31.083 --> 00:05:37.754 - this is what we want from you is to push us, help us make this a community-centric project. Before I 00:05:37.754 --> 00:05:44.359 - turn this over to Drew for the more long-form presentation on what we're doing, do you all have any 00:05:44.359 --> 00:05:45.086 - questions? 00:05:47.842 --> 00:05:54.386 - Did you start the recording? Yes. The second question is, you have events scheduled, so that will be 00:05:54.386 --> 00:06:01.059 - more in the public who lives in that area? When are we planning to talk to the people who live in that 00:06:01.059 --> 00:06:07.603 - area? Oh, yeah. Great question. So I'm not sure if we're going to get into this much tonight, so I'm 00:06:07.603 --> 00:06:14.341 - glad you asked this. The week of March 23rd, that Monday through Friday in the last full week of March, 00:06:14.341 --> 00:06:16.414 - is what we're calling workshop. 00:06:17.186 --> 00:06:23.847 - That is when we are doing a full press public outreach event for the entire week. We will have various 00:06:23.847 --> 00:06:30.378 - small pop-up events on the corridor to just get street users' opinions and thoughts as they're going 00:06:30.378 --> 00:06:36.845 - to work, as they're going to their friends' houses, et cetera. Those are unscheduled events to very 00:06:36.845 --> 00:06:43.377 - much get the true street user of the corridor. Who's walking, who's rolling, who's driving along it? 00:06:43.377 --> 00:06:44.670 - Let's talk to them. 00:06:45.154 --> 00:06:51.073 - There will be a formal public meeting that Wednesday at 5.30 p.m. at Switchyard Park. There will be 00:06:51.073 --> 00:06:57.052 - a lot of promotion about this coming up next week. There will be press releases, social media posts, 00:06:57.052 --> 00:07:03.267 - flyers, mailers, the whole sort. So public meeting, we will be hosting a few strolls and discusses along 00:07:03.267 --> 00:07:09.246 - the corridor that you all have been emailed about. Those are essentially strolls along the corridor. 00:07:09.346 --> 00:07:15.367 - to focus on not necessarily what could be, but more of what is. What are you feeling in the moment? 00:07:15.367 --> 00:07:20.847 - What are you hearing? What are you seeing? What makes you feel comfortable? What makes you 00:07:20.847 --> 00:07:26.928 - feel uncomfortable? Let's talk about that. Let's essentially balance that crash data, that hard data 00:07:26.928 --> 00:07:33.130 - that we have and that tool design came up with, balance that with the qualitative feedback that we get 00:07:33.130 --> 00:07:34.334 - from the community. 00:07:34.434 --> 00:07:40.601 - Because there's so much feedback that we can't put into data. We can't put in the near misses. We can't 00:07:40.601 --> 00:07:46.650 - put in those situations that we hear and we've experienced where, ooh, that felt a little jumpy here. 00:07:46.650 --> 00:07:52.995 - We can't do that. So that's why we need you all to help us with that. Clear. Thank you. OK. Two questions. 00:07:52.995 --> 00:07:58.984 - Yeah. Can you go more slowly this time, go through what are the parameters and what's the definition 00:07:58.984 --> 00:08:03.550 - of the corridor than where they came from? Yes. So this is the Roger Street. 00:08:03.874 --> 00:08:12.901 - Madison Street and Kinser Pike corridors on the south side starting at city limits at Country Club Drive. 00:08:12.901 --> 00:08:21.503 - Okay. And then going all the way north up to the State Road 45-46 bypass. Oh wow, okay. And when you 00:08:21.503 --> 00:08:30.019 - name those three streets, those are all north-south streets? Yeah. Do we focus on offshoots of that 00:08:30.019 --> 00:08:32.574 - or is it just mainly the main 00:08:32.834 --> 00:08:39.588 - We are so that is a great question We are mainly focusing on this particular thoroughfare here here 00:08:39.588 --> 00:08:46.477 - because it is the one of the main north-south connecting streets through the city that said We we are 00:08:46.477 --> 00:08:53.298 - focusing on intersections along that corridor. And so that's where you might find That that question 00:08:53.298 --> 00:09:00.052 - of offshoots we could talk about one one that I'm very interested in is third street that third and 00:09:00.052 --> 00:09:02.686 - Rogers intersection so we are actually 00:09:02.786 --> 00:09:11.308 - analyzing specifically that section of 3rd Street between Rogers and College because a lot of that goes 00:09:11.308 --> 00:09:20.158 - together and then I can name other intersections too along with that but for the most part the thoroughfare 00:09:20.158 --> 00:09:28.844 - plus a little bit of 3rd Street. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. So what exactly are we looking at? Are we looking 00:09:28.844 --> 00:09:32.286 - at pedestrian? Are we looking at signals? 00:09:33.186 --> 00:09:40.274 - side paths or bicycle paths or what? We're looking at everything, quite frankly. Um, that is one reason 00:09:40.274 --> 00:09:47.090 - why we wanted to have this broad corridor study because there is not just one answer. It's not just 00:09:47.090 --> 00:09:53.906 - about signal re timing or protected left turns or bicycle lanes or crosswalks. It's about all of it 00:09:53.906 --> 00:10:00.926 - and maybe more. And so we are starting off with the approach that it is a blank slate. We are looking, 00:10:01.058 --> 00:10:06.525 - maybe 10 years into the future, 15 years into the future of what could be, what could we do here within 00:10:06.525 --> 00:10:11.992 - the given parameters, and then going from there. We don't want to propose anything proactively and then 00:10:11.992 --> 00:10:17.617 - ask the public to give feedback. We want to get the feedback, look at the data, and then propose something 00:10:17.617 --> 00:10:23.084 - from there. So there are two prongs we're looking at. One is long-term vision that I just talked about, 00:10:23.084 --> 00:10:28.341 - and then one is short-term improvements. That's something that we haven't done as much of. I talked 00:10:28.341 --> 00:10:29.918 - to you all last meeting about 00:10:30.498 --> 00:10:37.090 - temporary and quick build improvements, we would like to do a lot of that along this corridor. Things 00:10:37.090 --> 00:10:43.940 - that we can do more cost effectively in a shorter time frame that we might not be able to do in concrete. 00:10:43.940 --> 00:10:50.466 - And the long term is 2030, right? Or like, how long is long term? Yeah, for this particular corridor 00:10:50.466 --> 00:10:56.993 - study, we're looking at about 10 years. That would be when we would come up with a plan and it would 00:10:56.993 --> 00:10:59.966 - be implemented and completed within 10 years. 00:11:00.674 --> 00:11:06.795 - I mean, in a perfect world. In a perfect world, yes. That's the goal, not come up with whatever's starting 00:11:06.795 --> 00:11:12.515 - tonight in 10 years. Yeah. I hope not. That would be a long lot of study. I agree. Hank, what about 00:11:12.515 --> 00:11:18.407 - the section of Kinser Pike north of 45, 46, but that is still within city limits? Yeah, that's a great 00:11:18.407 --> 00:11:24.299 - question. And that was honestly a discussion we had before beginning this corridor study. Essentially, 00:11:24.299 --> 00:11:29.790 - we looked at that section as a different context zone, just the characteristics of that street. 00:11:29.954 --> 00:11:36.801 - are different than what you get south of the bypass. And I would also say that the answer or the potential 00:11:36.801 --> 00:11:43.456 - improvements for that section are a little bit more straightforward than you get further south. So that 00:11:43.456 --> 00:11:50.175 - honestly is something we've talked about as a separate project and we almost definitely will study that. 00:11:50.175 --> 00:11:56.766 - I will also say that is not as high on the Safe Streets priority network. And so that was just another 00:11:56.766 --> 00:11:59.902 - reason why we focused within this current scope. 00:12:01.506 --> 00:12:08.283 - And to the point you just made about how these get ranked, is that effectively just how many injuries 00:12:08.283 --> 00:12:15.392 - there have been? So some of it is, yes, we look at the past five years of fatal and severe injury crashes. 00:12:15.392 --> 00:12:22.168 - And then we look at, so LATERB, what was it? About a year and a half ago, we went around the city and 00:12:22.168 --> 00:12:26.686 - did a similar public outreach campaign called Safety Week, where we 00:12:26.914 --> 00:12:32.105 - essentially talk to street users and residents all over the city. We had this grand old map of where 00:12:32.105 --> 00:12:37.707 - do you feel safe? Where do you not feel safe? That got incorporated too. And then we look at the demographic 00:12:37.707 --> 00:12:42.898 - information of folks in the area. What's the percentage of folks who own a motor vehicle? What's the 00:12:42.898 --> 00:12:48.295 - percentage of folks experiencing disabilities? What's the percentage of folks over 65 or under 18? Those 00:12:48.295 --> 00:12:52.766 - more vulnerable street users, those are the folks that we want to focus on especially. 00:12:56.098 --> 00:13:03.059 - My question could be more basic knowledge, but I'm relatively new, so I'm just curious. That scale, 00:13:03.059 --> 00:13:10.090 - that part, whole part, is it the size we usually work with, or it's much longer than you would chunk 00:13:10.090 --> 00:13:17.121 - it into? It feels like it's a long part of the city, a huge part of the city. Why would you approach 00:13:17.121 --> 00:13:24.221 - that on that scale? Yeah, so good question. I will say this is the second full corridor study of this 00:13:24.221 --> 00:13:25.822 - scope that we've done. 00:13:26.146 --> 00:13:33.348 - Most of what we do is more short-term infrastructure projects and for those projects we do work on a 00:13:33.348 --> 00:13:40.622 - smaller scale more so because of funding For this because we're looking at such a long-term vision it 00:13:40.622 --> 00:13:47.824 - all goes together and so There there wasn't outside of what a obon mentioned of north of the bypass. 00:13:47.824 --> 00:13:50.462 - There wasn't a clear cutoff of where 00:13:51.010 --> 00:13:57.095 - the problem starts and where the problem ends, or where we should look at and shouldn't look at, and 00:13:57.095 --> 00:14:03.481 - so we didn't want to say negate the north side of the corridor, or negate the south side of the corridor, 00:14:03.481 --> 00:14:09.626 - or the downtown part of the corridor. It's all one corridor with similar usages. Now we'll talk about 00:14:09.626 --> 00:14:15.651 - different characteristic zones of the corridor, we'll get into that, but for this we wanted to look 00:14:15.651 --> 00:14:18.302 - at it more comprehensively, quite honestly. 00:14:23.362 --> 00:14:30.625 - Any other questions before I pass it over to Drew? All right. I will pass it over to Drew Parker. He 00:14:30.625 --> 00:14:37.888 - is the project manager from Tool Design. And he will tell us a little bit more about the visions and 00:14:37.888 --> 00:14:45.223 - goals and project overview of the study. Thanks, Hank. I appreciate it. Can you all hear me OK? Yeah. 00:14:45.223 --> 00:14:52.414 - Yeah. Awesome. I'm going to share a presentation here. I'll just confirm. You can see that as well. 00:14:55.266 --> 00:15:01.019 - that showing up in the room now. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Awesome. Well, yeah. Thanks for the introduction and 00:15:01.019 --> 00:15:06.829 - thanks for the great instructions. Me. My name is Drew Parker. I'm a senior planner of tools. I'm based 00:15:06.829 --> 00:15:12.470 - in Ann Arbor. And thanks for the great introduction to the project. I feel like you covered a lot of 00:15:12.470 --> 00:15:18.447 - stuff in the first slide that I had here and it was great for me to hear that context as well. I'm excited 00:15:18.447 --> 00:15:24.200 - to be here with you all for the Transition Commission. I think I have maybe 20 to 30 minutes of slides 00:15:24.200 --> 00:15:25.150 - here. It's about 00:15:25.602 --> 00:15:31.183 - 30 some odd slides, and we've kind of broken this down to three different sections. So I'll provide 00:15:31.183 --> 00:15:36.931 - a project overview and schedule. Then we'll talk a little bit about the vision for the project, goals, 00:15:36.931 --> 00:15:42.568 - and then also design objectives. So I think we can cover those two sections because they're a little 00:15:42.568 --> 00:15:48.205 - bit smaller than we can pause for questions at that time. And then I have an analysis summary that's 00:15:48.205 --> 00:15:53.953 - maybe 20 slides. And so I think we go through that as sort of the second chunk of the meeting and then 00:15:53.953 --> 00:15:54.846 - break again for 00:15:55.298 --> 00:16:01.734 - questions at the end of that, if that sounds good for everybody. So probably five, 10 minutes presentation, 00:16:01.734 --> 00:16:08.111 - break again for questions, then maybe 20 minutes presentation on analysis, then break again for questions. 00:16:08.111 --> 00:16:14.130 - So starting with the project overview, Hank covered this verbally, but yeah, the project extent that 00:16:14.130 --> 00:16:20.268 - we're looking at is the Kinser Pike, Roger Street, and Madison Street corridor from the bypass all the 00:16:20.268 --> 00:16:23.486 - way down to Country Club Drive. So you can see just a 00:16:23.938 --> 00:16:29.887 - corridor extends map here on the right. And really the way that it's been communicated to us, you know, 00:16:29.887 --> 00:16:35.778 - the purpose of the project is to evaluate existing conditions and then make recommendations for design 00:16:35.778 --> 00:16:41.727 - changes to improve safety along this corridor. So this is to us really a safety project. It may achieve 00:16:41.727 --> 00:16:48.190 - other goals, but first and foremost, this is a safety project that's housed under the Safe Streets for All plan. 00:16:48.930 --> 00:16:54.532 - And I think Hank mentioned this as well, you know, you really want to focus on what's the long term 00:16:54.532 --> 00:17:00.359 - vision for design recommendations that like 10 year window, but then also thinking of in the short term 00:17:00.359 --> 00:17:05.961 - or the rapid implementation projects that can do with with quick build materials to achieve some of 00:17:05.961 --> 00:17:11.955 - those same goals that the long term design is intended to achieve. Like Hank said, so you all have adopted 00:17:11.955 --> 00:17:17.782 - Vision Zero for 2039. So that means we're trying to eliminate serious injury and fatal crashes by then. 00:17:17.782 --> 00:17:18.398 - So this is 00:17:18.786 --> 00:17:24.787 - one corridor within the overall citywide street network where we were starting for this study. And then 00:17:24.787 --> 00:17:30.557 - Hank mentioned this as well. So on the left side here, you can see this is the citywide high injury 00:17:30.557 --> 00:17:36.443 - networks. That's where those serious injury and fatal injury crashes occur most frequently across the 00:17:36.443 --> 00:17:42.387 - city. So especially along the northern end of this corridor, there's a higher frequency of those types 00:17:42.387 --> 00:17:48.734 - of crashes. And then when you look at the priority and kind of some of the other factors that Hank mentioned, 00:17:49.154 --> 00:17:56.798 - This corridor, especially the northern end, really rose to the top as the highest priority or highest 00:17:56.798 --> 00:18:04.292 - tier of priority. So yeah, to give you a sense of the project overview, we started work in October, 00:18:04.292 --> 00:18:12.011 - and that started with kind of data collection and doing this corridor analysis, which we just recently 00:18:12.011 --> 00:18:17.182 - completed in a draft form, also coming up with the vision and goals. 00:18:17.538 --> 00:18:23.914 - Our next steps as the project advances is to develop some alternatives for design and then move ultimately 00:18:23.914 --> 00:18:29.873 - into a concept design and then compiling that into a final corridor study. So yeah, like Hank said, 00:18:29.873 --> 00:18:35.952 - this is our first Transformation Commission meeting. We will have a meeting during workshop week that 00:18:35.952 --> 00:18:41.971 - we give March 23rd to 27th, and then we expect to have a few more Transformation Commission meetings 00:18:41.971 --> 00:18:46.142 - later in the spring and summer. And our public engagement is gonna be 00:18:46.242 --> 00:18:51.759 - like Hank said, really focused on that workshop week to just really get as much engagement as you can 00:18:51.759 --> 00:18:57.222 - all at once. But we'll also have an online survey that will be open for a month. So if people aren't 00:18:57.222 --> 00:19:02.901 - able to attend those events during that week, they'll be able to engage with the project via the project 00:19:02.901 --> 00:19:08.310 - website as well. So I feel like I'm repeating some of the things that Hank said, but sometimes it's 00:19:08.310 --> 00:19:13.989 - good to hear things all the time, at least for me. So the corridor analysis, like Hank said, it includes 00:19:13.989 --> 00:19:15.774 - crash analysis and traffic data. 00:19:16.354 --> 00:19:22.536 - a gaps analysis parking utilization data, as well as future land use review. So we'll go through that 00:19:22.536 --> 00:19:28.657 - in the second half of this presentation. Alternative development. So our goal is to come up with two 00:19:28.657 --> 00:19:34.777 - alternative design ideas, and that could vary depending on different context zones, like people have 00:19:34.777 --> 00:19:40.959 - mentioned in the meeting so far that it's a really large corridor that's city-wide, and so it differs 00:19:40.959 --> 00:19:43.262 - depending on which section you're in. 00:19:44.002 --> 00:19:50.585 - But as we develop those alternatives, what we'll do is develop some sort of cross-section. You can see 00:19:50.585 --> 00:19:57.041 - this example on the right. This is just from a different tool design project. But we'll come up with 00:19:57.041 --> 00:20:03.816 - something like that and have multiple alternatives and plan new concepts to show. And we'll then evaluate 00:20:03.816 --> 00:20:10.399 - which alternative we think meets the project goals and design objectives the best. So then from there, 00:20:10.399 --> 00:20:11.358 - when we pick a 00:20:11.970 --> 00:20:18.015 - Alternative that we want to move forward with, we'll develop plan view concepts up to 10 intersections. 00:20:18.015 --> 00:20:24.003 - As you can see, an example right here, this is just a typical from another project of what our concept 00:20:24.003 --> 00:20:29.932 - designs generally look like in plan view. So looking at how we can reconfigure intersections and what 00:20:29.932 --> 00:20:36.268 - kind of safety improvement elements we can add there. And then our public engagement approach, as mentioned, 00:20:36.268 --> 00:20:41.790 - it's really focused on the workshop week. You can see these couple of photos from safety week. 00:20:42.370 --> 00:20:48.720 - the safe streets for all find where we had struggle discuss activities and pop-up activities where we're 00:20:48.720 --> 00:20:54.889 - just trying to meet people were there they're at do a quick you know 30 second activity and give them 00:20:54.889 --> 00:21:00.998 - a snack and send them on their way it's a nice way to get quick feedback of people that have time to 00:21:00.998 --> 00:21:07.046 - come to a public meeting for an hour. All right so that kind of covers the overall project overview 00:21:07.046 --> 00:21:11.582 - at a very high level of what we will be doing from now through the summer. 00:21:12.258 --> 00:21:18.713 - The next section I want to move into is the project vision statement, goals, and design objectives. 00:21:18.713 --> 00:21:25.233 - So these are in draft form. These are statements that we've come up with working with city staff. So 00:21:25.233 --> 00:21:31.753 - we're really looking for you all as commissioners to provide feedback on if you think this is headed 00:21:31.753 --> 00:21:38.273 - in the right direction, if you agree with the vision statement, goals, and design objectives. So the 00:21:38.273 --> 00:21:41.630 - vision statement that we've come up with is to say, 00:21:42.018 --> 00:21:48.242 - The Rogers Street, Madison Street, and Kinser Pike corridor will become a safe, accessible, and connected 00:21:48.242 --> 00:21:54.114 - multi-mobile street that supports existing neighborhoods, advances Bloomington's values, and guides 00:21:54.114 --> 00:22:00.044 - future growth towards walkable, people-centered places. So you can see it's really focused on safety 00:22:00.044 --> 00:22:05.974 - first, but there's all these other goals that we're trying to achieve with the corridor study, which 00:22:05.974 --> 00:22:08.734 - is really taking a broad look at the corridor. 00:22:10.242 --> 00:22:16.370 - So I think I'll run through the goals and design objectives as well and then we can pause and I'm happy 00:22:16.370 --> 00:22:22.261 - to kind of move back and forth between these slides to talk about each of these with you all. So as 00:22:22.261 --> 00:22:28.271 - far as goals, we have six goals that are intended to support this vision. So the first one is we have 00:22:28.271 --> 00:22:34.163 - a goal to eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes. So we'll do that through really street design 00:22:34.163 --> 00:22:39.230 - changes that we know can help reduce the chances of fatal and serious injury crashes. 00:22:40.482 --> 00:22:46.363 - We also want to support multimodal travel for all ages and abilities. We know this is an important 00:22:46.363 --> 00:22:52.481 - north-south corridor that connects all throughout the city, and so we need to ensure that our concepts 00:22:52.481 --> 00:22:58.480 - support travel for all modes and for all ages and abilities. We also want to align the street design 00:22:58.480 --> 00:23:04.717 - with existing and planned development and make sure that any changes are supporting existing development 00:23:04.717 --> 00:23:07.390 - as well as known future planned development. 00:23:08.802 --> 00:23:14.583 - We also want to deliver cost-effective and implementable improvements of our concepts to be feasible. 00:23:14.583 --> 00:23:20.250 - And we also want to look for opportunities to have short-term options that can be installed soon to 00:23:20.250 --> 00:23:25.917 - make those types of safety improvements sooner than the long-term improvements may be when they may 00:23:25.917 --> 00:23:31.811 - be feasible. We also want to build community consensus through inclusive engagement. So we want to make 00:23:31.811 --> 00:23:36.798 - sure that we're reaching a broad cross-section of folks that use Roger Street depending 00:23:37.506 --> 00:23:44.711 - on how they may use it and how they interact with it, whether they live, work, visit this corridor. 00:23:44.711 --> 00:23:52.277 - And then lastly, we want to support economic vitality and community development. So in addition to those 00:23:52.277 --> 00:23:59.914 - project goals, we also have eight design objectives. And design objectives are really intended to support 00:23:59.914 --> 00:24:05.246 - the goals and the goals support the vision. But the design objectives are 00:24:05.442 --> 00:24:12.078 - In my mind, the way that you evaluate the different designs to say, is this achieving the things that 00:24:12.078 --> 00:24:19.105 - we're trying to do with this project? So the first one of these is to reflect community values and corridor 00:24:19.105 --> 00:24:25.676 - identity. The second one is to advance safety through proven street design. The third is to create a 00:24:25.676 --> 00:24:32.247 - context-sensitive street that calms traffic. The fourth is to build a continuous multimodal corridor 00:24:32.247 --> 00:24:34.654 - for all users. And then the fifth is 00:24:34.818 --> 00:24:41.547 - ensure universal accessibility and comfort. The sixth design objective is to support redevelopment and 00:24:41.547 --> 00:24:48.341 - local economic vitality. The seventh is to strengthen connections to key destinations and the city-wide 00:24:48.341 --> 00:24:55.200 - network. And then the last design objective is to support safe routes to school. So each of these design 00:24:55.200 --> 00:25:02.190 - objectives can be evaluated, and we can say whether or not alternatives that we're proposing are achieving 00:25:02.190 --> 00:25:04.542 - one or all of these eight different 00:25:05.122 --> 00:25:11.735 - objectives. The next thing I wanted to mention is that staff have also kind of already, oops, did not 00:25:11.735 --> 00:25:18.673 - mean to advance, sorry, staff have already taken a cut at splitting the corridor up into different contact 00:25:18.673 --> 00:25:25.545 - zones. As people have mentioned, it's very different along the corridor depending on where you're looking 00:25:25.545 --> 00:25:32.288 - at. And so city staff have already at a draft level said these are what we think are the four different 00:25:32.288 --> 00:25:34.622 - contact zones within this corridor. 00:25:36.290 --> 00:25:43.227 - The first section is the area north of 17th Street to the bypass. And then the second area is from 11th 00:25:43.227 --> 00:25:49.897 - Street to 17th Street. The third area is from Wiley Street to 11th Street. And then the fourth area 00:25:49.897 --> 00:25:56.767 - is south of Wiley Street, down the country road drive. So I know there's a lot of information to throw 00:25:56.767 --> 00:26:03.437 - at you all. But I want to pause there and see if folks have initial thoughts on any of those things 00:26:03.437 --> 00:26:06.238 - that we just presented, and we can start. 00:26:06.466 --> 00:26:14.875 - for overflow 20. May I jump in? Yeah. Thank you so much, Drew, for this presentation. Would you mind 00:26:14.875 --> 00:26:23.535 - going back to your previous slide where you showed the four segments? I think commissioners would maybe 00:26:23.535 --> 00:26:32.277 - just like a moment to take a look at these four context zones for just a second. Absolutely. As a follow 00:26:32.277 --> 00:26:35.358 - up, I think I would ask maybe we can 00:26:35.586 --> 00:26:43.645 - give more context on how they were originated? What is the reason behind them being like that? So there's 00:26:43.645 --> 00:26:51.476 - no perfect answer here. And also, this is very much a back and forth. These are the contact zones, and 00:26:51.476 --> 00:26:59.156 - this is what we're going with. If you have other feedback, please give it to us. Essentially, how we 00:26:59.156 --> 00:27:05.086 - defined it. So I'll start south and go north from there. From Country Club up 00:27:05.186 --> 00:27:14.143 - to Wiley. It is almost primarily residential. There are some businesses over there, but it's residential. 00:27:14.143 --> 00:27:23.354 - And that's where you see less of that downtown, more urban context. And it feels a little bit more suburban. 00:27:23.354 --> 00:27:32.734 - You have long stretches without crossings in there or major intersections. You have a couple with Patterson or 00:27:33.826 --> 00:27:41.437 - What is it? Rockport, thank you. But it's not too many. But then once you get into that third section, 00:27:41.437 --> 00:27:49.048 - the Wiley to 11th Street, that is your downtown area. Wiley is where you have, is the beginning of the 00:27:49.048 --> 00:27:56.585 - Hopewell development where you have the new police station, where you have these businesses coming up 00:27:56.585 --> 00:28:01.758 - and you have just a much denser urban context going through downtown. 00:28:01.986 --> 00:28:10.255 - And then 11th Street, to me, is that barrier of, OK, you are leaving downtown, and you're entering more 00:28:10.255 --> 00:28:18.444 - of a residential space again. 11th to 17th, this is a smaller contact zone. But to me, that is an area 00:28:18.444 --> 00:28:26.713 - that is delineated on both sides by 17th and 11th, where it feels different south of 11th than it feels 00:28:26.713 --> 00:28:31.006 - different north of 17th. And then 17th to the bypass. 00:28:31.714 --> 00:28:39.548 - is, again, you could arguably combine those top two, one and two, into one. But to me, they just feel 00:28:39.548 --> 00:28:47.767 - a little bit different than each other. There is no perfect science to this, I do want to say. But looking 00:28:47.767 --> 00:28:55.985 - at the aerial view, looking at the land use, and looking at the street as a whole, that's how we initially 00:28:55.985 --> 00:29:00.670 - defined it. All right. Thanks. Yeah. Does the network system 00:29:00.866 --> 00:29:07.289 - relate to anything or I mean is one the top priority or? No it's just north and south that's all. Okay. 00:29:07.289 --> 00:29:13.466 - I think it would be also interesting to see how the slide about the injury ranking or something and 00:29:13.466 --> 00:29:19.828 - like it would be interesting to see it once again after we have we see it move so this zoning. Are you 00:29:19.828 --> 00:29:21.310 - talking about this one? 00:29:28.738 --> 00:29:38.931 - would you say that the bottom part it's like it's different shade right so it's it's less right yes 00:29:38.931 --> 00:29:49.533 - it's so the from second to Country Club that's southern half of the corridor that is high and then from 00:29:49.533 --> 00:29:53.406 - second north to the bypass is highest 00:29:54.082 --> 00:30:00.360 - Those two, first and second, they have no difference, and injury is basically the same, even though, 00:30:00.360 --> 00:30:06.575 - yeah, interesting. But as you can see... Oh, sorry, Andrew, go ahead. I would say when I get to the 00:30:06.575 --> 00:30:12.853 - analysis summary too, we have much more detailed crash data to show as well, if you're interested in 00:30:12.853 --> 00:30:19.131 - that. Like the actual locations of crashes by mode and severity. I'll show a few more maps, but this 00:30:19.131 --> 00:30:21.182 - is just comparison to city-wide. 00:30:23.138 --> 00:30:30.264 - Also, I think I have more general question. In general, when did we do anything to that corridor or 00:30:30.264 --> 00:30:37.461 - to those parts last time? Great question. I don't have that information on me right now, but that is 00:30:37.461 --> 00:30:44.587 - a part of what we in tool talked about over the past couple of months of where are projects that we 00:30:44.587 --> 00:30:51.998 - have done recently? What might skew the data in one way or another or has anything improved after we've 00:30:52.354 --> 00:31:00.471 - completed something. And the answer is we've done some things, I will say. Rogers and 17th is an intersection 00:31:00.471 --> 00:31:08.071 - that we improved in the past few years. We installed a pedestrian island at Allen and Rogers. So there 00:31:08.071 --> 00:31:15.745 - have been a handful, but nothing really to change the entire scope of the corridor. Yeah. So basically, 00:31:15.745 --> 00:31:22.238 - like recent years, we've done some work. It's not like decades in the past. OK. Thanks. 00:31:23.938 --> 00:31:29.841 - It's going to be too high an elevation question, but has the city council weighed in on this and said, 00:31:29.841 --> 00:31:35.572 - we want you to look at this? Or is this something where we could come up with a plan and say, yeah, 00:31:35.572 --> 00:31:41.532 - it's a great plan, guys, but we're not doing that? This is something that right now we are not planning 00:31:41.532 --> 00:31:47.321 - on going to council with. This is not going to be an adoption into the transportation plan. Whatever 00:31:47.321 --> 00:31:53.052 - this final study is, this would be reviewed by the Transportation Commission. That is the body that 00:31:53.052 --> 00:31:53.854 - we would like 00:31:54.050 --> 00:32:01.240 - review and approval from once we get to that point. But from our end, the initial council approval of 00:32:01.240 --> 00:32:08.430 - the impetus for the study was the approval of the Safe Streets for All action plan, which listed this 00:32:08.430 --> 00:32:14.985 - as one of the highest priority streets in the city. And then eventually presumably come from 00:32:14.985 --> 00:32:21.470 - the Transportation Commission as a recommendation to further the Safe Streets for All plan. 00:32:21.922 --> 00:32:29.075 - So when it says weighted scores, corridors, how are those scores weighted? Yeah, great question. I won't 00:32:29.075 --> 00:32:36.092 - get into the full scoring methodology of it. That is available on the full Safe Streets for All Action 00:32:36.092 --> 00:32:42.973 - plan. It's there, and it's honestly quite interesting to look at. But in a short sentence or two, it 00:32:42.973 --> 00:32:49.854 - goes back to fatal and severe injury crashes over the past five years of when we included this data. 00:32:50.274 --> 00:32:57.225 - demographic information of nearby residents, and then public comment. Those are the three main categories 00:32:57.225 --> 00:33:03.980 - of data that we used. And then weighted is essentially standardizing those different data sets to make 00:33:03.980 --> 00:33:10.735 - them weighted. I forget what we weighted them. Call it 33, 33, 33. That's not what we weighted it, but 00:33:10.735 --> 00:33:18.014 - it's an example. And then that is the standardized data set. What about traffic volume? Is that in part of the 00:33:18.626 --> 00:33:23.927 - I mean, traffic and pedestrian, because the north part of Kins or wherever you get those apartments 00:33:23.927 --> 00:33:29.227 - up there, you're going to have a lot more people walking through there. Yeah, for sure. And so that 00:33:29.227 --> 00:33:34.740 - is one reason why we're studying this in the first place, of looking at oncoming or future developments 00:33:34.740 --> 00:33:40.093 - that we'll get into actually in a few minutes here. But the methodology, I would have to go back and 00:33:40.093 --> 00:33:45.606 - look to give you a for sure answer. But it does talk about the profile of streets and the risk profile, 00:33:45.606 --> 00:33:48.574 - that being number of lanes, traffic volumes, et cetera. 00:33:50.690 --> 00:34:00.523 - But also, then you're getting into compounding variables of, well, the risk profile aligns with the 00:34:00.523 --> 00:34:10.454 - fatal and severe injury, the crash data. And so maybe we're double weighting this part of it. Should 00:34:10.454 --> 00:34:18.910 - we jump back to the vision statement? Do folks have thoughts on the vision statement? 00:34:26.338 --> 00:34:35.242 - My reaction is just that this seems fine. I mean, it seems to align with the state streets for all action 00:34:35.242 --> 00:34:43.978 - plan as well as the transportation plan. I mean, I assume that that's most of the inspiration and where 00:34:43.978 --> 00:34:52.126 - you kind of borrowed the language for the vision statement from. Yes. Yeah. I think my reaction. 00:34:52.290 --> 00:34:58.287 - that it's aligned with everything pretty well, but it covers so many different things. So it's phrased 00:34:58.287 --> 00:35:04.109 - pretty nicely, but then you will have a priority when you will be deciding on things. So I think if 00:35:04.109 --> 00:35:10.106 - it's important to highlight it at this stage, maybe it's something we should do. But otherwise, we can 00:35:10.106 --> 00:35:16.103 - keep it that general, trying to fulfill all the goals we have. But I don't think it's always possible. 00:35:16.103 --> 00:35:20.702 - That's why we'll end up prioritizing something over another. Is that something 00:35:21.442 --> 00:35:29.253 - you'd like to get into when we talk about the goals of this project? Because the goals go into this 00:35:29.253 --> 00:35:37.298 - vision even more. Would you like to prioritize or create some kind of prioritization list of these six 00:35:37.298 --> 00:35:43.390 - goals? I think, in a way, it's a question also based on the past experiences. 00:35:43.554 --> 00:35:49.777 - the way other projects work. Maybe my assumption is wrong. Maybe we can't achieve all the goals when 00:35:49.777 --> 00:35:56.246 - we work on any project or research. If that's not true, then I think we may want to explore the priority 00:35:56.246 --> 00:36:02.593 - of it and decide what's more important. That's a great question. I don't have a good answer right now. 00:36:02.593 --> 00:36:08.446 - I'll be honest, but I'd like to look into this more. Maybe that's something we can talk about. 00:36:08.706 --> 00:36:15.053 - from now between this and our next steering committee meeting, and maybe we could come to you with something 00:36:15.053 --> 00:36:20.992 - more then? OK. And also, maybe we'll have more data, like more information. And once we are more into 00:36:20.992 --> 00:36:27.048 - the process, we'll see where it will be leaning towards. And that's it. More naturally. I'm really glad 00:36:27.048 --> 00:36:32.929 - you brought that up. I think our goal is to align design objectives with evaluation criteria to look 00:36:32.929 --> 00:36:36.830 - at the two different alternatives or different alternative designs 00:36:37.090 --> 00:36:42.747 - And I think we would definitely want your input on both goals and design objectives of which of these 00:36:42.747 --> 00:36:48.404 - are higher priorities should be weighted higher when we're evaluating those things. Because right now 00:36:48.404 --> 00:36:54.006 - we're just sort of saying these are the eight design objectives, the six goals, and it's kind of all 00:36:54.006 --> 00:36:59.830 - being equal, knowing that overall the vision is eliminating serious and fatal injury, excuse me, serious 00:36:59.830 --> 00:37:04.766 - injury and fatal crashes. But I think we'll definitely want that kind of weighting input 00:37:06.210 --> 00:37:19.059 - So yeah, we can bring that back from the next meeting. So would you give us your design options? You'll 00:37:19.059 --> 00:37:32.032 - give us the why you chose that design. Yeah, of course. Are there any design objectives missing at books 00:37:32.032 --> 00:37:34.750 - that we need covered? 00:37:37.058 --> 00:37:44.758 - I think we have plenty for now. I think we will decide on whether it's achievable. OK. And also, 00:37:44.758 --> 00:37:52.855 - if you, after this meeting, if you all think of anything, I'll be sending this out to you all. If you 00:37:52.855 --> 00:38:01.031 - think of anything, anything you want to combine, add, prioritize, please let me know. This is not just 00:38:01.031 --> 00:38:06.270 - a one-time question by any means. OK. Any other sections on this? 00:38:06.722 --> 00:38:14.345 - front matter in the first section or are we ready to move into more analysis content? Let's go for analysis. 00:38:14.345 --> 00:38:21.479 - I will make one comment. Driving down Roger Street is one of my least favorite. It is very stressful. 00:38:21.479 --> 00:38:28.543 - Why? It's just every every section of it has its own like like today I went to the cleaners before I 00:38:28.543 --> 00:38:34.558 - came here and so that it's just I feel like there's lots of things coming at you from 00:38:35.106 --> 00:38:44.332 - Lots of intersections, lots of pedestrians. It seems, feels narrow, but not in a designed way, but just, 00:38:44.332 --> 00:38:53.382 - yeah, it's just not, it could definitely use some improvement. Okay, that's fair. Any other? Is there, 00:38:53.382 --> 00:39:02.432 - are all things on the table in terms of like acquiring property to make the road wider and things like 00:39:02.432 --> 00:39:03.838 - that, or is it, 00:39:04.290 --> 00:39:10.732 - Limited in we are not you know, we need to work within the right away. We currently have I would say 00:39:10.732 --> 00:39:17.301 - right now all thing all things are open obviously once we get into that phase of Conceptual design and 00:39:17.301 --> 00:39:23.934 - even maybe a full full design Things will get narrowed down. But right now I don't want to say no to it 00:39:32.770 --> 00:39:39.553 - then I'll move into the analysis summary. This is about the 20th slide, so I think maybe it'll take 00:39:39.553 --> 00:39:46.540 - about 15 minutes to get through these, and then we can ask our questions at the end and then jump back 00:39:46.540 --> 00:39:53.595 - to any slides that we want to jump back to. So there's quite a bit of information here, but we'll start 00:39:53.595 --> 00:40:00.446 - with safety, because that's our number one priority, just being a safe streets for all type project. 00:40:01.186 --> 00:40:07.642 - So to start with safety analysis, what we did is looked in more detail at 10 years of crash data. And 00:40:07.642 --> 00:40:14.161 - in that 10 year period, there were 80 crashes that resulted in serious injuries. There were no crashes 00:40:14.161 --> 00:40:20.616 - resulting in fatalities along the project corridor extents. So that's a good thing. But there were 80 00:40:20.616 --> 00:40:27.135 - crashes that resulted in serious injuries. And what you can see from some of these charts here is that 00:40:27.135 --> 00:40:30.110 - where there are crashes involving pedestrians, 00:40:30.594 --> 00:40:37.442 - much more frequently result in serious injury type crashes. Whereas crashes with bicyclists a little 00:40:37.442 --> 00:40:44.291 - less so as a percentage and same with motor vehicle only crashes. And then you can see from that map 00:40:44.291 --> 00:40:51.139 - on the right, the highest serious injury crash intersection is the bypass intersection. I think that 00:40:51.139 --> 00:40:58.462 - probably comes no surprise to anybody. But then the sort of tie for second is 17th Street and Country Club. 00:41:03.650 --> 00:41:10.627 - We also looked at it just year by year to see how our total crashes and serious injury crashes trending 00:41:10.627 --> 00:41:17.469 - over that time period. And you can see that there's a big dip in 2020 for COVID. That's just the case 00:41:17.469 --> 00:41:24.245 - across the board of all crash analysis. I think what's interesting is that the number of minor or no 00:41:24.245 --> 00:41:31.155 - injury crashes almost dropped in half, but the serious injury crashes didn't drop quite as much as you 00:41:31.155 --> 00:41:32.094 - would expect. 00:41:32.706 --> 00:41:39.399 - Some of that is just a very small sample size, but some of that could also be attributed to when there 00:41:39.399 --> 00:41:46.353 - were lower traffic volumes during COVID. We know just from nationwide studies that there was more speeding 00:41:46.353 --> 00:41:52.916 - and more risky driving behavior happening in 2020 during COVID. So, but, you know, generally looking 00:41:52.916 --> 00:41:59.740 - at that yellow line, serious injury crashes are slightly trending downward in that 10-year study period. 00:41:59.740 --> 00:42:02.014 - And then there was a slight uptick 00:42:02.242 --> 00:42:10.163 - in 2024. The most common serious injury crash types are right angle crashes. So when someone drives 00:42:10.163 --> 00:42:18.163 - into the side of another car, so typically at an intersection that could be from running a red light 00:42:18.163 --> 00:42:26.162 - or other types of failure to yield type behaviors that result in those more severe type crashes. The 00:42:26.162 --> 00:42:31.390 - second most common serious injury crash that was rear end crashes 00:42:31.842 --> 00:42:41.073 - And then the third most common was pedestrian-involved crashes. Oh, sorry. Can I just interrupt for 00:42:41.073 --> 00:42:50.673 - the quick question? Could you briefly explain the items that are labeled non-collision as well as other 00:42:50.673 --> 00:42:59.904 - explain in narrative? Yeah. I can't speak directly to that, knowing the in-dot crash data sometimes 00:42:59.904 --> 00:43:01.566 - has some of these 00:43:01.858 --> 00:43:07.919 - you know, categories where it's not clear exactly what happened. Non-collision, I am not exactly sure 00:43:07.919 --> 00:43:14.099 - what that is. It could be, like sometimes that's something like a medical emergency or it could be just 00:43:14.099 --> 00:43:20.278 - things that kind of like don't fit into another category based upon how things work in other crash data 00:43:20.278 --> 00:43:26.339 - sets. Other explained narrative is just, you know, it didn't fit into one of the standard crash types 00:43:26.339 --> 00:43:29.726 - that are on the form. So then there would be more detail 00:43:30.146 --> 00:43:35.763 - And again, those tend to be ones that are more obscure types of crashes, like maybe a vehicle caught 00:43:35.763 --> 00:43:41.713 - on fire or something. Sometimes that happens and can cause serious injuries. So those are my best guesses. 00:43:41.713 --> 00:43:47.497 - I don't know exactly about looking in detail at those three crashes. I think those are just check boxes 00:43:47.497 --> 00:43:53.170 - on the police report. Yeah, it could be. It's just a couple of them out of a whole list, so not a big 00:43:53.170 --> 00:43:57.118 - deal. But just figured I'd ask. Thanks. Yeah, thanks for the question. 00:44:00.258 --> 00:44:08.121 - Looking at, so this map shows just the crashes involving pedestrians. So 11 of these resulted in a serious 00:44:08.121 --> 00:44:15.469 - injury. It's a small sample size for 10 years. So there's not necessarily like a clear pattern, but 00:44:15.469 --> 00:44:22.891 - there were two at the bypass. So that was the one that had the most serious injury crashes. And just 00:44:22.891 --> 00:44:27.006 - in generally kind of see where crashes, whether they be 00:44:27.362 --> 00:44:34.348 - minor or no injury or serious injury are clustered and they're counter more clustered. North of First 00:44:34.348 --> 00:44:41.471 - Street, which is why in the safe streets for all plan that was that area was. Higher priority. And some 00:44:41.471 --> 00:44:48.662 - of that also has to do with just more people walking around in that area. I started around that question 00:44:48.662 --> 00:44:53.182 - about so. Is there a reason that the data is limited to 10 years? 00:44:54.850 --> 00:45:01.610 - And the reason I ask is I have a memory of at least two fatalities at 46 in Kinzer, maybe as in the 00:45:01.610 --> 00:45:08.437 - last 15 years. But I thought they were relatively, I mean, that's a bad intersection. But if we know 00:45:08.437 --> 00:45:15.738 - of it, does this only include what's listed in police reports? Or if we have information of other injuries, 00:45:15.738 --> 00:45:21.822 - do we include that data? So that's two compound questions for you to answer. I apologize. 00:45:22.722 --> 00:45:28.941 - No, no need to apologize. Yeah, this is just crash data from police reports. So if it's not there, 00:45:28.941 --> 00:45:35.662 - then yeah, we didn't have access to that data. And as for why we would be looking at 10 years, we actually 00:45:35.662 --> 00:45:41.944 - typically look at a five-year window. We try to look at the last five full years of data. We looked 00:45:41.944 --> 00:45:48.226 - at 10 years just to have a bigger sample size, honestly, to try to draw more conclusions. So that's 00:45:48.226 --> 00:45:50.110 - why we did that in this case. 00:45:55.362 --> 00:46:03.310 - Any other questions on this one? So crashes involving bicyclists are 18 in that 10-year period, one 00:46:03.310 --> 00:46:11.734 - of which resulted in a serious injury. And that was on the south end of the corridor. So this is a pretty 00:46:11.734 --> 00:46:19.682 - limited data set, a pretty small sample size to really draw a lot of conclusions from, I think. But 00:46:19.682 --> 00:46:25.086 - our goal is to have no crashes where a pedestrian bicyclist is hit. 00:46:27.458 --> 00:46:36.436 - crashes involving only motor vehicle drivers. 68 of these resulted in a serious injury. You can see 00:46:36.436 --> 00:46:45.593 - similarly, you know, the bypass had the most serious injury type crashes and 5% of the crashes during 00:46:45.593 --> 00:46:51.070 - the study period resulted in serious injuries. So looking in 00:46:51.170 --> 00:46:57.211 - more in-depth at safety, kind of getting to the systemic safety and priority analysis that Hank was 00:46:57.211 --> 00:47:03.372 - talking about previously in Safe Streets for All. When we don't have tons of crash data or very clear 00:47:03.372 --> 00:47:09.594 - conclusions on where we think there are safety problems based upon looking historically at crash data, 00:47:09.594 --> 00:47:15.755 - we can also look at speed data, because we know speed is a factor in the potential for severe crashes 00:47:15.755 --> 00:47:19.742 - to occur. So in this case for the corridor, we have two different 00:47:19.842 --> 00:47:25.689 - traffic counts that had speed data recorded. And so the map we're showing here shows what the speed 00:47:25.689 --> 00:47:31.653 - limits are in the corridor. So north of 17th Street and south of Patterson, currently the speed limit 00:47:31.653 --> 00:47:37.500 - is 30 miles an hour. And then in that middle segment, the speed limit is 25 miles an hour. So there 00:47:37.500 --> 00:47:43.815 - were two previous traffic counts done and the city plans to collect additional traffic counts to supplement 00:47:43.815 --> 00:47:49.662 - this. But of the two that we have, currently traffic volumes are, motor vehicle traffic volumes are 00:47:50.210 --> 00:47:57.587 - between 9 and 11,000 vehicles per day. In the section between 8th and 9th Street, the 85th percentile 00:47:57.587 --> 00:48:04.820 - speed was 33 miles per hour. And the 85th percentile speed is the speed at which 85% of the drivers 00:48:04.820 --> 00:48:12.197 - are driving at or below that speed. And it is typically used as the speed to set the speed limit. The 00:48:12.197 --> 00:48:19.646 - other count we have, the speeds are a little bit higher. So down between Hittleside and Wilson Street, 00:48:19.778 --> 00:48:27.495 - south of Patterson, the 85th percentile speed was 38 miles an hour. So from a safety perspective, these 00:48:27.495 --> 00:48:35.213 - are pretty high speeds for areas where there's pedestrians and bicyclists crossing. And so those higher 00:48:35.213 --> 00:48:42.707 - speeds create the potential for more severe crash outcomes should a crash occur. And looking more in 00:48:42.707 --> 00:48:49.534 - depth at the motor vehicle traffic volume. So we like to look at kind of hourly capacity of 00:48:49.954 --> 00:48:57.602 - of streets to understand how existing traffic volume is compared to the capacity of the street. So what 00:48:57.602 --> 00:49:05.398 - this chart shows you is at that location where the traffic volume is a little bit higher between Hillside 00:49:05.398 --> 00:49:13.488 - Drive and Wilson Street, the capacity of a signalized two-lane street is 720 vehicles per hour per direction. 00:49:13.488 --> 00:49:19.518 - Because there's turn lanes, we really consider this to be a three-lane signalized 00:49:20.034 --> 00:49:26.329 - corridor, which is that green line versus 864 vehicles per hour for direction. So breaking down that 00:49:26.329 --> 00:49:32.748 - traffic out that we have, we just wanted to show that the traffic volumes are well below the capacity, 00:49:32.748 --> 00:49:39.167 - carrying capacity of the street. And typically we say with a two lane street that has left turn lanes, 00:49:39.167 --> 00:49:45.524 - usually the upper limit of motor vehicle traffic lines is about 25,000 vehicles per day. So even with 00:49:45.524 --> 00:49:47.518 - that higher volume being 11,000 00:49:48.066 --> 00:49:54.755 - significantly below the capacity of a two-lane stream of left-term lanes at intersections. And one reason 00:49:54.755 --> 00:50:01.443 - we like to bring this up sometimes is because when there's excess capacity or the volume is significantly 00:50:01.443 --> 00:50:07.753 - below the carrying capacity, that means that in off-peak periods, people can actually speed because 00:50:07.753 --> 00:50:14.127 - there's no other cars to get in their way. And we know that can be an issue in some communities. But 00:50:14.127 --> 00:50:17.534 - the takeaway point here is that the carrying capacity 00:50:17.954 --> 00:50:25.323 - The traffic volume is significantly below the carrying capacity of the street. So we also mapped existing 00:50:25.323 --> 00:50:32.622 - sidewalks and missing sidewalks along the corridor. And for the most part, there are sidewalks all along 00:50:32.622 --> 00:50:40.129 - the corridor. But when you get north of 17th Street, there's a couple stretches that have missing sidewalks 00:50:40.129 --> 00:50:42.910 - on one side of the street or the other. 00:50:46.114 --> 00:50:53.120 - We also mapped all of the existing bicycle facilities. So south of Patterson, there's a multi-use path 00:50:53.120 --> 00:51:00.194 - on the west side of the street. But north of there, there's not really any bike infrastructure. There's 00:51:00.194 --> 00:51:07.132 - occasional bicycle lanes, which are sometimes only on one side of the street. And there's no bicycle, 00:51:07.132 --> 00:51:13.662 - all ages and abilities bicycle connected that goes across the railroad tracks on the north end. 00:51:17.442 --> 00:51:23.494 - We also mapped the existing pedestrian and bicyclist crossings. So this map here, you can see we showed 00:51:23.494 --> 00:51:29.313 - all the locations of crosswalks on the corridor as these dots, and they're color-coded by what type 00:51:29.313 --> 00:51:35.190 - of crossing infrastructure there is at that crosswalk. So either rectangular rapid flashing beacons, 00:51:35.190 --> 00:51:41.126 - I think there's one of those at fourth, and I think one other location on the corridor. Or if there's 00:51:41.126 --> 00:51:46.014 - a crosswalk with a crossing warning sign, just the orange pedestrian crossing sign, 00:51:46.242 --> 00:51:53.224 - if there's a crosswalk and an always stop or if there's a traffic signal. So looking at all those crossing 00:51:53.224 --> 00:51:59.880 - opportunities, we also mapped the distance between those crossing opportunities and then divided that 00:51:59.880 --> 00:52:06.797 - distance by two to say, you know, if you were halfway between one of these crossing opportunities, what's 00:52:06.797 --> 00:52:13.649 - the maximum distance you would have to walk to get to a pedestrian crosswalk? And so you can see there's 00:52:13.649 --> 00:52:15.998 - a couple of locations where there's 00:52:16.162 --> 00:52:23.173 - pretty long stretches between pedestrian crossing opportunities. And we picked that threshold of 900 00:52:23.173 --> 00:52:30.114 - feet as the top threshold because that's about a five minute walk for a typical walk speed. We also 00:52:30.114 --> 00:52:37.264 - mapped all the streetlights along the corridor. So there are two different types of streetlights along 00:52:37.264 --> 00:52:44.205 - the corridor. There's standard streetlights, which are those red dots. And that's kind of more of a 00:52:44.205 --> 00:52:45.246 - large overhead 00:52:45.506 --> 00:52:50.904 - street light that's intended to illuminate the whole roadway. And then there's also yellow 00:52:50.904 --> 00:52:57.132 - pedestrian-oriented lights, which exist in a couple of different stretches along the corridor, one being 00:52:57.132 --> 00:53:03.063 - between Switchyard Park and 1st Street, and the other being between Kirkwood and the Beeline Trail. 00:53:03.063 --> 00:53:09.232 - And there's a couple of intersections that don't have any lighting at all. So those three intersections 00:53:09.232 --> 00:53:13.918 - listed, Howe Street, Smith Ave, and 3rd Street. And so as part of our proposed 00:53:14.082 --> 00:53:20.638 - alternatives, we propose adding additional lighting at those intersections. We also map the bus routes 00:53:20.638 --> 00:53:27.003 - along the corridor. So most of the Lillington Transit routes that run along the corridor, they just 00:53:27.003 --> 00:53:33.431 - run for a couple of blocks and, you know, cross the corridor so they're not exactly running or south 00:53:33.431 --> 00:53:40.051 - along the corridor. The exception is Route 2, which does run along Rogers from 1st and 2nd Streets down 00:53:40.051 --> 00:53:43.870 - to Graham Drive and Rockport Road. It kind of makes a loop. 00:53:44.354 --> 00:53:52.417 - and then comes back up. We also looked at existing parking restrictions and on-street parking opportunities 00:53:52.417 --> 00:53:59.957 - along the corridor. There's a very limited amount of on-street parking allowed on the corridor. Most 00:53:59.957 --> 00:54:07.945 - stretches of the corridor don't allow on-street parking, but there's these handful of pockets of on-street 00:54:07.945 --> 00:54:11.902 - parking where parking is allowed along the corridor. 00:54:13.122 --> 00:54:19.977 - And then we also did a parking utilization survey just to see how much is this on street parking being 00:54:19.977 --> 00:54:26.700 - used along the corridor. And the answer we found is that it's very underutilized, almost not used at 00:54:26.700 --> 00:54:33.488 - all. We looked at three different periods of morning, a midday, and an evening survey period. And the 00:54:33.488 --> 00:54:40.277 - maximum number of cars that were ever parked along the corridor for the entire stretch was seven cars 00:54:40.277 --> 00:54:43.006 - in the evening period. And there was one 00:54:43.682 --> 00:54:50.044 - one block between University and First Street in one period where there are three cars parked there. 00:54:50.044 --> 00:54:56.344 - So overall, the takeaway is that though there's a little bit of parking permitted on this corridor, 00:54:56.344 --> 00:55:02.643 - people aren't really using it partly at all. We also mapped the existing land use, and I think Hank 00:55:02.643 --> 00:55:09.194 - talked about this a little bit as this is a way to think about those contact zones. So there's a really 00:55:09.194 --> 00:55:11.966 - wide range of land uses along the corridor. 00:55:12.642 --> 00:55:19.818 - Single dwelling housing, multi-dwelling housing, mixed-use areas, institutional and civic areas, and 00:55:19.818 --> 00:55:27.279 - park areas. And it's a real mix depending on where you are along the corridor, which makes sense because 00:55:27.279 --> 00:55:34.526 - we're looking at a whole city cross-section in this study. The future land use plan includes proposed 00:55:34.526 --> 00:55:39.358 - urban corridor on the northern end, downtown, in the downtown area. 00:55:39.650 --> 00:55:46.713 - And then most of it is mixed urban residential, but then there's also pockets of institutional and civic 00:55:46.713 --> 00:55:53.440 - employment center in parks and open spaces. And then the last land use thing that we mapped is just 00:55:53.440 --> 00:56:00.166 - known ongoing and future development areas. So there's really three major ones, which are the Aspen 00:56:00.166 --> 00:56:06.893 - Heights redevelopment, the trades district and the Hopewell redevelopment. So those are three major 00:56:06.893 --> 00:56:07.902 - areas that are 00:56:08.226 --> 00:56:15.494 - redeveloping currently and in the future. And so we just want to keep that in mind as part of the study 00:56:15.494 --> 00:56:22.483 - and how the street design can support those developments. So all that being said, what we did is we 00:56:22.483 --> 00:56:29.472 - pulled together seven key findings that we think are important to take away from all this analysis. 00:56:29.472 --> 00:56:35.902 - And so the first one is that the Rogers corridor is a top priority for safety improvements. 00:56:36.226 --> 00:56:42.240 - In the last 10 years, there were 80 serious injury crashes, and 11 of these serious injury crashes involved 00:56:42.240 --> 00:56:47.975 - the person walking. So it makes sense that it was a high priority corridor in the Safe Streets for All 00:56:47.975 --> 00:56:53.655 - plan. We also think that speed is likely a contributing factor to some of these safety concerns, with 00:56:53.655 --> 00:56:59.391 - those 85th percentile travel speeds being 33 and 38 miles an hour, which are significantly higher than 00:56:59.391 --> 00:57:05.182 - the posted speed. And we know at that upper end, 38 miles per hour becomes a pretty dangerous speed for 00:57:05.506 --> 00:57:12.137 - crossing pedestrians. Another finding is that some areas of the corridor are really comfortable and 00:57:12.137 --> 00:57:18.767 - walkable, but outside of those pockets of nice areas with street lighting and really multi-path and 00:57:18.767 --> 00:57:25.464 - nice sidewalks, there are quite a few sections that are less pleasant to walk along and have missing 00:57:25.464 --> 00:57:30.238 - sidewalks or deteriorating sidewalks and not great pedestrian lighting. 00:57:34.210 --> 00:57:40.389 - Our fourth key finding is that the southern portion of the corridor has a nice multi-use path on the 00:57:40.389 --> 00:57:46.568 - west side, but moving north of there, there's gaps in the bicycle network, and there's no low-stress 00:57:46.568 --> 00:57:52.685 - bicycle option to connect over or under the road or tracks in this stretch. Our next key finding is 00:57:52.685 --> 00:57:58.864 - that on-street parking is allowed only along several blocks of the corridor, and utilization of this 00:57:58.864 --> 00:58:02.718 - very minimal on-street parking is very low. In most cases, 0%. 00:58:04.930 --> 00:58:10.100 - are six key findings that there are these key redevelopments happening and improving the streetscape 00:58:10.100 --> 00:58:15.578 - design can support the city's goal for these new developments to support safe streets and walkable access. 00:58:15.578 --> 00:58:21.107 - And then lastly, one thing we think was a key finding is just that this quarter is an important north-south 00:58:21.107 --> 00:58:26.226 - connection across the length of the entire city for all modes. So this is one of those streets that 00:58:26.226 --> 00:58:31.038 - everybody has to use no matter how they travel to get through the entire city north to south. 00:58:33.730 --> 00:58:42.838 - So that's a summary of our analysis findings thus far. And yeah, I'll open up to questions, and I'm 00:58:42.838 --> 00:58:52.584 - happy to jump back to any slides as needed. Mr. Chair. Oh, yes. Thanks very much, Drew. A couple comments, 00:58:52.584 --> 00:59:02.147 - questions, corrections. The slide about street lighting was interesting to me. I just want to note there 00:59:02.147 --> 00:59:03.422 - are, in fact, 00:59:04.162 --> 00:59:12.445 - intersection streetlights at Howe Street and Smith and Third Street. I know that because I spent a long 00:59:12.445 --> 00:59:20.648 - time trying to get Duke Energy to reinstall the streetlight at how it was improperly removed when Duke 00:59:20.648 --> 00:59:28.851 - replaced a utility pole, and they did not install a new streetlight until I filed a report to get that 00:59:28.851 --> 00:59:29.886 - reinstalled. 00:59:30.018 --> 00:59:36.905 - There's one at Smith, but it is frequently burnt out. So it was probably just not illuminated when somebody 00:59:36.905 --> 00:59:43.282 - was looking at that one. And then third street, there is now a streetlight there, but there used to 00:59:43.282 --> 00:59:49.149 - not be one. And then another comment on the third street intersection. So that's gonna be a 00:59:49.149 --> 00:59:55.590 - major intersection because that's a high pedestrian volume, that's a high vehicle volume. There is a 00:59:55.590 --> 00:59:57.758 - streetlight there thankfully now. 00:59:58.114 --> 01:00:05.566 - I think it's at the southeast corner. But someone crossing the street on the north side or the east 01:00:05.566 --> 01:00:13.540 - side of that intersection, I mean, they're crossing five lanes of traffic. And so it's a big intersection. 01:00:13.540 --> 01:00:21.514 - There's just one streetlight there. I would suggest that when considering streetlights along this corridor 01:00:21.514 --> 01:00:27.998 - that we get a little bit more detailed than just whether there is a streetlight there. 01:00:28.258 --> 01:00:36.757 - because I think its exact placement is pertinent, especially for larger intersections or wider cross 01:00:36.757 --> 01:00:45.172 - sections of this corridor, whether or not more than one streetlight would be appropriate for larger 01:00:45.172 --> 01:00:53.586 - intersections and that sort of thing. I was pleased to see that there's at least a distinct, you're 01:00:53.586 --> 01:00:58.046 - distinguishing between, I guess what you're labeling 01:00:58.338 --> 01:01:05.231 - a standard streetlight versus a pedestrian-oriented light. But I would be curious as to know what that 01:01:05.231 --> 01:01:11.924 - actually means, what the definitions of those are. So I'll stop there, though, because that's a few 01:01:11.924 --> 01:01:19.018 - different comments and questions. Yeah, first of all, thanks for the feedback on there being streetlights 01:01:19.018 --> 01:01:25.912 - there. I think we were provided data from Duke Energy, so I'm guessing their data is just out of date. 01:01:25.912 --> 01:01:27.518 - Yeah, it's no surprise. 01:01:29.186 --> 01:01:37.048 - Yeah, and as far as the definition of standard versus pedestrian-oriented, I think the pedestrian-oriented 01:01:37.048 --> 01:01:44.764 - ones are the ones that are lower, kind of more decorative streetlights. But they illuminate the sidewalk 01:01:44.764 --> 01:01:52.406 - much better than the overhead streetlights, and they're more frequent, as you can see on the map. Yeah. 01:01:52.406 --> 01:01:57.182 - I live in the neighborhood, and a common complaint, I would say, 01:01:58.018 --> 01:02:05.692 - from neighbors and from the Prospect Hill Neighborhood Association is the lack of pedestrian scale street 01:02:05.692 --> 01:02:13.077 - lighting along Rogers between Kirkwood and First Street. For sure. And I can say, I mean, you can see 01:02:13.077 --> 01:02:20.823 - it right there that that's, it's kind of ironic because that section is, you know, the closest to downtown 01:02:20.823 --> 01:02:26.398 - and yet it has the most poor lighting of most of the middle of the corridor. 01:02:29.570 --> 01:02:36.765 - Thanks for that comment. Yeah. Since we're looking at this slide, I think I'm just curious. So we can 01:02:36.765 --> 01:02:43.818 - see that there are plenty of pedestrian-oriented lights in those two sections. What can we conclude 01:02:43.818 --> 01:02:50.943 - from that? Can you elaborate more? Is it good? Is it working? Or do we need that many? Or do we need 01:02:50.943 --> 01:02:57.150 - more? For me, out of context, it's interesting. Yeah. So the question of is it working, 01:02:57.442 --> 01:03:02.506 - I think that would be more based on qualitative feedback that we would get in a few weeks. 01:03:02.506 --> 01:03:08.181 - But like with data, if we compare it with any other data you mentioned before. Right. I'm interested, 01:03:08.181 --> 01:03:13.746 - especially when we have either events in that area, either pop-ups or public meetings in that area, 01:03:13.746 --> 01:03:19.477 - or strolls and discusses on those sections of the corridor. What people think about, and these strolls 01:03:19.477 --> 01:03:23.038 - are going to be in the middle of the day, but I'm curious about 01:03:23.138 --> 01:03:29.520 - local residents of, how do you feel walking here versus south or north of this area without lighting? 01:03:29.520 --> 01:03:35.839 - And I don't think it's that hard to come to the conclusion of you feel a little bit more comfortable 01:03:35.839 --> 01:03:42.346 - with pedestrian lighting than without pedestrian-scale lighting. But that is one piece of feedback that 01:03:42.346 --> 01:03:48.727 - I am especially interested in in terms of pedestrian comfort. Can I say something else not pedestrian 01:03:48.727 --> 01:03:51.230 - lighting related? Drew, would you mind? 01:03:51.426 --> 01:03:58.646 - I'm jumping to the slide about land use. Does that exist anymore here? I guess either one. I'm not a 01:03:58.646 --> 01:04:05.866 - parent, but I think if I were, I would probably want to point out that there are a number of schools 01:04:05.866 --> 01:04:13.515 - along this corridor. And I recall that one of the, I can't remember if it was one of the design objectives 01:04:13.515 --> 01:04:19.806 - or the project goals, but it had something to do with supporting safe routes to school. 01:04:19.970 --> 01:04:27.315 - And so I think highlighting the locations of schools, so we're talking Arlington Heights, Fairview, 01:04:27.315 --> 01:04:34.807 - Tri-North, et cetera, the fact that there's many schools along this corridor, I don't really see that 01:04:34.807 --> 01:04:42.445 - highlighted in either the land use. Maybe it's on a different slide and I missed it, but I think that's 01:04:42.445 --> 01:04:49.790 - important to consider where those schools are along this corridor and that those should probably be 01:04:50.146 --> 01:04:57.736 - fairly high priority sections if, in fact, we are wanting to support a safer outstreet school when looking 01:04:57.736 --> 01:05:04.972 - at this corridor. Because I see a lot about housing and mixed use and parks and things. 8th Street is 01:05:04.972 --> 01:05:12.208 - quite tricky, Fairview School. Yeah. Crossing there. Same with 6th. And in fact, at this commission's 01:05:12.208 --> 01:05:16.606 - last meeting, we heard from a member of the public about 6th. 01:05:16.898 --> 01:05:23.385 - who pointed out specifically Sixth Street and how difficult it is to cross there. I appreciate that 01:05:23.385 --> 01:05:29.936 - feedback. I think what we can do is just add the schools to all the maps as a destination to make it 01:05:29.936 --> 01:05:36.552 - clear where they are and so it's not getting lost in the noise and other things. Appreciate that. Can 01:05:36.552 --> 01:05:42.974 - you jump to the future land use slide? I think it's one over. So we can look at this for a minute. 01:05:44.546 --> 01:05:51.445 - I think it's kind of interesting to have a bit different categories. You can map them back, but it looks 01:05:51.445 --> 01:05:58.015 - a little bit different, not exactly one-to-one correlation. That's why it takes a minute to compare 01:05:58.015 --> 01:06:05.046 - and see the differences. Not all of them, but some of them, I think. Yeah, so I think just kind of getting 01:06:05.046 --> 01:06:10.302 - more detailed here, I think that Fairview Elementary is labeled on here as just 01:06:10.530 --> 01:06:18.279 - institutional slash civic, which doesn't really tell you about how frequently people are accessing that, 01:06:18.279 --> 01:06:25.658 - or when, like what times of day, and the fact that it's children walking to school and so forth. So 01:06:25.658 --> 01:06:32.743 - definitely would encourage a little bit more detail around looking at the locations of schools. 01:06:32.743 --> 01:06:38.942 - And also, I think that maybe in some cases, there are nearby schools that are maybe 01:06:39.618 --> 01:06:49.601 - You know, it may be more than a block or two away from the quarter, but that are obviously still important. 01:06:49.601 --> 01:06:59.121 - You know, I'm looking at that map where it says employment center down there to the south of Patterson 01:06:59.121 --> 01:07:07.902 - and Long Rogers. The city had a study or some guidelines or something like that years ago that 01:07:09.218 --> 01:07:16.734 - It had to be developed in a certain way to the street, in the streetscape. And that's where a lot of 01:07:16.734 --> 01:07:24.548 - those pedestrian lights are, which I assume are the ACOR style of lights, instead of the overhead lights 01:07:24.548 --> 01:07:32.139 - with the mast arm. And so I think that was a requirement for that area. So that might be something to 01:07:32.139 --> 01:07:36.158 - look at in there. What is that? Or is it just vacant? 01:07:36.514 --> 01:07:43.598 - What's that? Is that area vacant currently? That's where Novo Nordes Catalan is. OK. Yeah, it's across 01:07:43.598 --> 01:07:50.751 - from the warehouse. Yeah, the dermatology center, and then there's some kind of data place there that's 01:07:50.751 --> 01:07:58.179 - just south of dermatology. I was also curious, is there any way you mentioned that there were some projects 01:07:58.179 --> 01:08:05.470 - from the past years? Yeah. And also, there was the chart about injuries, and there was the trend of going 01:08:05.890 --> 01:08:12.680 - down with time over years? Any correlation with those projects and the data? It would be interesting 01:08:12.680 --> 01:08:19.806 - to hear. That's a good question. We don't have that yet. That is something that I'm interested in looking 01:08:19.806 --> 01:08:26.730 - at. The projects that I'm thinking of, since I've been at the city, I wouldn't necessarily want to use 01:08:26.730 --> 01:08:29.822 - before and after data because we don't have a 01:08:29.986 --> 01:08:36.820 - full five-year sample size of data yet, but I'm sure there are some projects along the corridor where 01:08:36.820 --> 01:08:43.588 - we could look at it before and after. I think it would be interesting what worked basically and what 01:08:43.588 --> 01:08:50.489 - didn't. We don't want to have more lights or something if it didn't work. Another thing, I was perhaps 01:08:50.489 --> 01:08:57.190 - in this slide deck and I missed it, but in case it's not in here, I would also say that considering 01:08:57.190 --> 01:08:59.870 - we don't have any representative today, 01:08:59.970 --> 01:09:06.230 - here from Bloomington Transit, but if John or Shelley were here, they would say, what about Bloomington 01:09:06.230 --> 01:09:12.310 - Transit? That's, I think, something important to consider here as well. Oh, OK, we do have it. OK, I 01:09:12.310 --> 01:09:18.450 - missed it. Thank you. Yeah, we have the routes mapped, but I mean, you know. But not the stops. Yeah, 01:09:18.450 --> 01:09:24.229 - if there's anything else that we need to know, yeah, I would appreciate that direction as well. 01:09:24.229 --> 01:09:29.406 - The stops. Yeah, stops and, you know, perhaps future transit service. I mean, BT has. 01:09:29.762 --> 01:09:41.313 - a number of different projects they're dreaming up for future bus service. So I think considering how 01:09:41.313 --> 01:09:52.751 - a future design of this corridor would support the long-term Bloomington Transit goals I think would 01:09:52.751 --> 01:09:58.526 - be also important to consider, useful to consider. 01:09:59.138 --> 01:10:09.970 - I don't know if this is the right place for this, but pedestrian versus vehicle accidents that happen 01:10:09.970 --> 01:10:20.589 - at crosswalks that are poorly illuminated. I'm sure they happen here just as much as they happen in 01:10:20.589 --> 01:10:26.430 - some of these other high injury or fatality corridors. 01:10:26.530 --> 01:10:36.931 - Bloomington has a couple of hawk signals, but there are other technologies, like the in-roadway warning 01:10:36.931 --> 01:10:47.033 - lights, but other things that alert cars with lighting that the crosswalk is going to be used. And I 01:10:47.033 --> 01:10:55.934 - just think that there are so many ways to do crosswalks better in terms of illumination. 01:10:56.610 --> 01:11:05.768 - But also from an accessibility point of view, the United States does not do much except truncated domes 01:11:05.768 --> 01:11:15.191 - for warnings. And it's going to be a long time before the United States has a true tactile paving network, 01:11:15.191 --> 01:11:24.085 - if it ever even does. But we should be thinking about the fact that there are plenty of blind people 01:11:24.085 --> 01:11:26.110 - who do use fixed route 01:11:26.850 --> 01:11:38.377 - transit and making sure that there are at least tactile. We could do minimal tactile indicators that 01:11:38.377 --> 01:11:50.589 - are more directional than just warning. So this is a bus stop. And of course, making sure that the warning 01:11:50.589 --> 01:11:53.214 - indicators on one side 01:11:53.602 --> 01:12:00.381 - line up with the crosswalk on the other side, which is not always the case. So I don't know how much 01:12:00.381 --> 01:12:07.294 - renovation we're doing in the future of this or remodeling of this corridor we're doing, but those are 01:12:07.294 --> 01:12:14.141 - things that are not always required, but could really help with the safety of our citizens. No, these 01:12:14.141 --> 01:12:18.302 - are the comments that we want. This is great, quite honestly. 01:12:18.594 --> 01:12:24.265 - I will also add just on the BT front, I've been communicating with their transportation planner to get 01:12:24.265 --> 01:12:29.771 - stop data, future service data, frequency data, some of the things that you've already talked about 01:12:29.771 --> 01:12:35.276 - because these are the things that people want to know. We want to make this a more transit friendly 01:12:35.276 --> 01:12:38.910 - city and this is a key corridor to make it more transit friendly. 01:12:47.074 --> 01:12:56.434 - You know, one of the big elephants of the room here is that a lot of those vehicle crashes are at the 01:12:56.434 --> 01:13:05.886 - 45, 46 bypass, which, of course, is INDOT jurisdiction. I'm wondering if either of you, I guess, would 01:13:05.886 --> 01:13:15.063 - care to comment about if Tool or if the city has had any discussions with INDOT recently about that 01:13:15.063 --> 01:13:16.990 - intersection and how 01:13:17.410 --> 01:13:27.100 - Hopefully, INDOT realizes that that's a problem also. I don't know if INDOT themselves have any concrete 01:13:27.100 --> 01:13:36.328 - plans to do improvements of their own about that intersection. Because I also understand that being 01:13:36.328 --> 01:13:46.110 - an INDOT intersection, I suspect the city has a lot of limitations that we have to work within or around. 01:13:46.626 --> 01:13:53.098 - there's probably a few things we just simply can't do anything about because of jurisdictional issues. 01:13:53.098 --> 01:13:59.193 - So I don't know if you guys would maybe comment on that a little bit. Yeah, I can do that. Yeah. 01:13:59.193 --> 01:14:05.917 - So yeah, for the city at least, we know that this intersection is a problem. This was, if not the highest, 01:14:05.917 --> 01:14:12.200 - one of the highest priority intersections noted in the Safe Streets for All action plan. Which one? 01:14:12.200 --> 01:14:16.222 - Oh, that one. The Kinser and the Bypass. The 23. Yeah, exactly. 01:14:17.026 --> 01:14:22.633 - This is an intersection that we hear about all the time. We see things happen all the time, and we have 01:14:22.633 --> 01:14:28.240 - the data to support that there needs to be improvements. That's that, A.O. Bond, as you mentioned. This 01:14:28.240 --> 01:14:33.632 - is an in-dot intersection. We do not own or maintain this intersection, and we rely on the state to 01:14:33.632 --> 01:14:39.077 - proactively do something. We have had talks with them. Mainly, our engineering department with their 01:14:39.077 --> 01:14:44.469 - engineering department have talked with each other, and I know that there is a common understanding 01:14:44.469 --> 01:14:46.302 - that improvements need to happen. 01:14:46.786 --> 01:14:53.412 - In terms of timeline, I'm not too familiar about that I have a note to follow up with you all about 01:14:53.412 --> 01:15:00.170 - that because this is something that I'm Interested in as well. I know they've talked about it. I know 01:15:00.170 --> 01:15:06.861 - that in dot has put in a couple of Temporary improvements at that northwest corner some I think some 01:15:06.861 --> 01:15:13.487 - delineator posts to help the turn turning movements a little bit but that is a small small fix in a 01:15:13.487 --> 01:15:15.806 - big problem of an intersection and 01:15:15.938 --> 01:15:24.481 - We are limited on what we can do, quite honestly. We rely on Indut to fund improvements at this intersection. 01:15:24.481 --> 01:15:32.714 - Now, once they do, then there will be talks about what we want, what they want, how we can work together. 01:15:32.714 --> 01:15:40.636 - But this is just one of those intersections that, as a city, we are incredibly limited at what we can 01:15:40.636 --> 01:15:44.286 - proactively do. Did that answer your question? 01:15:44.450 --> 01:15:52.185 - Yeah, I mean it's just it's too bad Let's just say because I think you know this I mean, it's it's it's 01:15:52.185 --> 01:15:59.772 - actually skewing the data, you know, you know in a big way here I mean, that's it's that intersection 01:15:59.772 --> 01:16:07.582 - is I think we would all agree is is terrible and There's a grocery store is an elementary school there's 01:16:07.582 --> 01:16:13.086 - this is yeah, I don't want to focus on this intersection too too much but 01:16:13.602 --> 01:16:20.354 - This is the dividing point for a lot of folks who not just want to go to this grocery store, but that 01:16:20.354 --> 01:16:27.041 - need to get to Bloomington North High School about a mile north of here. And Aobahn, you were asking 01:16:27.041 --> 01:16:33.727 - at the beginning of this meeting of why not include the north side of this corridor in this project? 01:16:33.727 --> 01:16:40.744 - And quite honestly, without improving this intersection, no matter what we do north of this intersection, 01:16:40.744 --> 01:16:43.326 - there can still be major improvements. 01:16:43.586 --> 01:16:51.831 - you are still dividing south of the bypass from north of the bypass, and whatever benefit we would like 01:16:51.831 --> 01:16:59.917 - to see from any kind of project is limited because of this dividing line right here. Okay. Different, 01:16:59.917 --> 01:17:07.845 - but kind of similar question. The bridge, the Madison Street Bridge over the CSX tracks. Yeah. Does 01:17:07.845 --> 01:17:12.126 - the city own this bridge? Does CSX own it? Let's say, 01:17:13.538 --> 01:17:22.027 - there need to be some changes made to the configuration of the street that's running on the bridge. 01:17:22.027 --> 01:17:30.602 - What kind of constraints or I guess leeway do we have there? That is a good question. I don't have a 01:17:30.602 --> 01:17:39.261 - good answer for you. The county would own the bridge. The county owns all bridges over 20 feet. Okay. 01:17:39.261 --> 01:17:43.166 - So Monroe County would need to be involved in 01:17:43.458 --> 01:17:49.156 - Right, yeah. That Madison Street section. That is an interesting section, and this goes before my time 01:17:49.156 --> 01:17:55.076 - in Bloomington, but, and some of you all might know this, but Rogers used to go straight north and connect 01:17:55.076 --> 01:18:00.165 - with each other instead of swerve over and connect with Madison. That was a project, maybe, 01:18:00.165 --> 01:18:05.919 - I don't know. I think it was the 90s or something. 30 years ago or so. So there have been changes there 01:18:05.919 --> 01:18:11.838 - in the past, you know, half century, but you're right, this is another dividing line for folks who live in 01:18:12.034 --> 01:18:18.651 - the Maple Heights neighborhood and north of 14th Street versus coming down to the downtown trades district 01:18:18.651 --> 01:18:25.206 - area. That would be a tough project, quite honestly. So it used to be at one time it was a wooden bridge, 01:18:25.206 --> 01:18:31.390 - one line wooden bridge before they replaced it. But probably the only thing you could look at there 01:18:31.390 --> 01:18:38.192 - would be some type of pedestrian bridge because I would doubt that the county would want to hang a pedestrian 01:18:38.192 --> 01:18:40.542 - sidewalk on the side of their bridge. 01:18:40.706 --> 01:18:50.328 - Because it creates some other issues, but you know there are pedestrian bridges that you can like at 01:18:50.328 --> 01:19:00.046 - Country Club down there something like that might work Just something to factor in yep I just want to 01:19:00.046 --> 01:19:10.430 - say this is a great start and appreciate the The work that's already gone into this initial presentation and 01:19:10.914 --> 01:19:18.567 - Definitely excited to learn more and see how this progresses. Any other questions from the group? I 01:19:18.567 --> 01:19:26.373 - had a general question. So we talked about our responsibilities in the beginning. So I'm curious when 01:19:26.373 --> 01:19:33.950 - we will be voting or approving anything. Will they be short and long term? Will they be different? 01:19:34.306 --> 01:19:40.512 - or it will be like a package of things to approve different initiatives as well, like how granular it's 01:19:40.512 --> 01:19:46.539 - gonna be. Yeah, that's a good question. I don't have an answer for you yet. Again, this is the first 01:19:46.539 --> 01:19:52.924 - quarter study in which we have combined those short-term immediate improvements with the long-term vision. 01:19:52.924 --> 01:19:58.952 - I would imagine most of this study will be one package, one final document of a study, but there are 01:19:58.952 --> 01:20:02.174 - also points that we would like to include in there of 01:20:02.786 --> 01:20:09.116 - temporary improvements at this intersection or along this part of the corridor, something like that. 01:20:09.116 --> 01:20:15.821 - And I imagine those are items that you will have questions and comments about and want to possibly approve 01:20:15.821 --> 01:20:22.088 - one by one. And so I think it all depends on what we end up proposing. Again, as we go through this 01:20:22.088 --> 01:20:28.481 - process, the timeline that we're looking at right now is, Drew did a good job of lining out or laying 01:20:28.481 --> 01:20:31.614 - out what steps need to happen. I think right now, 01:20:31.842 --> 01:20:38.314 - for a final study to be reviewed and approved by the Transportation Commission, we would be looking 01:20:38.314 --> 01:20:44.981 - at about mid-summer. Let's say around July, I think is the goal, things change, but summer's the goal. 01:20:44.981 --> 01:20:51.647 - And so as we move forward in this process, and especially after we get this public outreach data, then 01:20:51.647 --> 01:20:58.314 - that'll give us a much better direction of where we need to go both short-term and long-term, and then 01:20:58.314 --> 01:21:00.126 - we all might have some more 01:21:00.482 --> 01:21:07.659 - I would say clarity on what you all will be reviewing come summer. Along the same lines, are we going 01:21:07.659 --> 01:21:14.765 - to see it in one big report, or are we going to see like one, two, three, and four like the sections 01:21:14.765 --> 01:21:21.801 - that they had up on the screen? So it will be eventually in one long report, but the final concepts 01:21:21.801 --> 01:21:29.470 - that you will be seeing will be different sections of the corridor. It will not be the full corridor itself. 01:21:29.794 --> 01:21:36.404 - So we'll be looking at, call it 10 different cross sections along the corridor. I forget what the exact 01:21:36.404 --> 01:21:42.569 - number is, but 10 different cross sections that essentially are the characteristic of that area. 01:21:42.569 --> 01:21:49.053 - So one, maybe one between Country Club and Rockport, because that is an area. Maybe one for a certain 01:21:49.053 --> 01:21:55.790 - intersection. So it won't be the entire corridor laid out, but it will be representative of the corridor. 01:21:55.790 --> 01:21:58.078 - But will that be presented to us as 01:21:58.178 --> 01:22:04.729 - in the sections or are we going to get everything submitted to us all at once? Like here's the preliminary 01:22:04.729 --> 01:22:10.973 - report for country club to 45465. Everything will be submitted in one report. You also mentioned like 01:22:10.973 --> 01:22:17.095 - two versions of designs, like two alternatives. Yeah. So does it mean like for each section or like 01:22:17.095 --> 01:22:20.830 - even for each smaller components? I think it depends on what 01:22:21.314 --> 01:22:27.971 - What feedback we get? I know a lot of my answers are, it depends, but right now it very much does depend. 01:22:27.971 --> 01:22:34.376 - If you have any assumptions, it's all right. I mean, if it turns out that there is one direction that 01:22:34.376 --> 01:22:40.782 - the public wants to go and that aligns with the planners and project managers' visions, then we don't 01:22:40.782 --> 01:22:46.622 - need to do two concepts. Usually, there comes, I think you were talking about earlier, those 01:22:47.202 --> 01:22:54.476 - dividing points where we might prioritize one goal over another, one objective over another, that's 01:22:54.476 --> 01:23:01.750 - usually what these concepts try to entail. But they will be per segment, right? Just to add to that 01:23:01.750 --> 01:23:09.534 - a little more context, what we said we would do is in the alternatives phase, we'd look at three different 01:23:09.534 --> 01:23:11.934 - locations and come up with these 01:23:12.546 --> 01:23:17.797 - typical sections like high level plan view concepts and before and after bug renderings. And then once 01:23:17.797 --> 01:23:22.997 - we decide on, you know, this is the approach we want to move forward with, then we would look at plan 01:23:22.997 --> 01:23:28.553 - view concepts at 10 locations. So that, which is what Hank said, you know, 10 places we would draw something 01:23:28.553 --> 01:23:33.753 - up like this to say this kind of represents this area generally. Something scalable as well, I guess, 01:23:33.753 --> 01:23:37.118 - right? You don't really want to decide, design one item per case. 01:23:43.906 --> 01:23:50.948 - Thanks, everybody. We're two minutes early, so I'd like to end my meetings early. So is there anybody 01:23:50.948 --> 01:23:58.129 - have any other input, questions, thoughts, concerns? Anyone want to move to adjourn the meeting? I move 01:23:58.129 --> 01:24:05.033 - to adjourn. Any seconds? Second. All in favor? All right. You guys have it, unless you need to poll 01:24:05.033 --> 01:24:08.830 - everybody. All right. Adjourned. Thank you, everybody.