Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesBICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES APRIL 16, 2015 PRESENT: Tom Otto, Vicky Redlin, Caroline Panske, Jay Stengel, Adam Bellcorelli, and James Michelson STAFF: David Buck, Principal Planner and Alexa Naudziunas, Assistant Planner 1. Call To Order Being that a quorum was present, Chairman James Michelson called the meeting to order at 4:04 p.m. 2. Approval Of March 2015 Meeting Minutes Ms. Panske moved to approve the meeting minutes of March 19, 2015. Mr. Bellcorelli seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. 3. Curb Ramp Discussion Mr. Buck explained that the curb ramp discussion was on the agenda in the past and Steve Gohde from Public Works attended the April meeting to answer any final questions. Mr. Bellcorelli asked how often the Type 1 or Type 1A curb ramp is used and in what instance is a different type of curb ramp used. Mr. Gohde explained that when Public Works has a full reconstruct project on a street they try to use the Type 2 curb ramps, but there are some areas that have a narrow terrace where they cannot fit the Type 2 curb ramps. Mr. Otto explained that the most problematic crossing occurred on Witzel Avenue. Mr. Gohde requested a list of the problematic crossings, so that he can review the areas. With the help of other members of the committee, Mr. Otto agreed that he could make a list of areas that could use improvements. 4. Potential Amendment to Municipal Code Section 27 – Bike Registration Fee Increase and Group Package Mr. Buck gave the committee the background for the potential amendment to Municipal Code Section 27. Mr. Buck explained that while the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee has previously made motions to amend the Municipal Code in order to increase the bike registration fee from $3 to $5 and the inclusion of a “Family Registration Package” (members of the same family residing in the same household), further details must be determined before moving forward. Mr. Buck explained on April 8th 2015, Planning Division staff Alexa Naudziunas and David Buck, Police Department staff Matt Kroening and Chief Greuel, and City Attorney Lynn Lorenson met to discuss the proposed change and to determine a joint staff recommendation. Mr. Buck explained that there was continued opposition to the amendment from the Police Department, who are of the opinion that it would be counterproductive assuming the goal is to increase the number of registrations. Ms. Lorenson from the City Attorney’s office explained that before a proposed amendment can go before the City Council, the language used to describe the “Family Registration Package” ($10 group fee) must be examined from legal and administrative function standpoints. Ms. Lorenson explained the need to clarify the definition of “family” and further define the context that the Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee intend for the “Family Registration Package”. The committee eventually agreed that their intention was to increase bike registrations. The committee agreed to keep the single registration to three dollars and two or more bicycles from the same household/address will receive a group registration and license fee of ten dollars. Mr. Bellcorelli made a motion to approve this amendment and Mr. Stengel seconded. Mr. Michelson requested that the committee take roll call in order to record the votes on this motion. The motion to amend Municipal Code Section 27 was moved unanimously. 5. Ordinance 14-523: Ordinance pertaining to Bicycle Lane Restriction – Amendment to allow the use of mobility devices designed for physically disabled persons within bike lanes Mr. Buck gave the committee the background about the interest in amending Ordinance 14-523, which pertains to bicycle lane use restrictions. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee proposed an amendment to allow the use of mobility devices designed for physically disabled persons within bike lanes. It was determined that Ordinance 14-523 cannot be amended in such a broad way because it would be in conflict with State Statute: Statute 346.28(1) (1) states that any pedestrian traveling along and upon a highway other than upon a sidewalk shall travel on and along the left side of the highway and upon meeting a vehicle shall, if practicable, move to the extreme outer limit of the traveled portion of the highway.” Mr. Buck explained that mobility devices designed for physically disabled persons are considered pedestrians; they would be permitted by Statute and local ordinance to use the bike lane on the far left side of the roadway when there are no sidewalks present. Ms. Lorenson explained that state laws are in place to allow consistent traffic laws throughout the state. Ms. Lorenson explained that there is no room for variance in State Statute 346.28(1). 6. Murdock Road Diet – Update Mr. Collins updated the committee that there was a public meeting held on Tuesday, March 31st to present the proposal of a road diet on Murdock Avenue from Jackson Street to Algoma Blvd. Mr. Collins explained that the majority of the feedback received regarding the road diet on Murdock Ave. was positive, but there were two individuals who were against the road diet. One was the owner of Pizza King and the other was the owner of the small office building directly to the west of him. Mr. Collins explained that they were concerned with the ingress and egress to their properties and a main concern is exiting their driveways as they can currently nose out into the near east lane and traffic goes around them in the center eastbound lane. Mr. Collins stated that the property owners expressed concerns with trucks turning from northbound Algoma Blvd. to eastbound Murdock and whether they will have enough room with one eastbound lane. Mr. Collins said that there was a test performed on the intersection, they coned off the road at the intersection of Algoma Blvd. and Murdock Avenue to simulate an eastbound road diet for a short period of time to evaluate if the concerns are warranted. Mr. Collins explained that a truck turning right from the south side of Murdock would not have enough room to make the turn. Mr. Collins anticipated bringing the bike lanes on Murdock back to the Traffic Review Board for approval in May. Mr. Buck told the committee about the various alternative routes for the bike lanes. The committee discussed intersection safety for bicyclists and functionality. 7. Bike Connection Priorities for Existing Facilities Mr. Buck warned the committee that the budget is only $50,000 and there are only two employees who do the painting for bike routes. Mr. Michelson had the idea of only using the money for signs and eventually getting lanes/sharrows painted another year. The committee discussed the concept of using the money for signage only; however Mr. Bellcorelli pointed out that a large function of bike lanes or sharrows is to educate the driver that they must share the road with a bicyclist. David Buck explained each bike connection area to the committee. The committee discussed the advantages of each connection area and ranked them in order of importance. The committee decided that completing the connection from Murdock Avenue to the Wiouwash Trail via Sheridan Street to Bent Avenue is their number one priority. The committee decided the second priority was connecting South Park to Sawyer Street. The committee decided the third priority was connecting Taft Avenue and Campbell Road from Koeller Street to the Fox Valley Technical College area. The committee decided the fourth priority was connecting High Avenue and Algoma Boulevard to the Downtown area. The committee decided the fifth priority was connecting West Irving Avenue from Elmwood Avenue to Main Street. The committee decided the sixth priority connection was completing parts of East New York Avenue and parts of West New York Avenue. The committee decided the seventh priority connection was Highway 41 to the Sawyer Bridge Trail and around the golf course area. 8. Yearly Work Plan Schedule – Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee Goal List/Work Plan for 2015 Mr. Buck read the goal list/work plan to the committee and explained that there are only eight meetings left. 9. Agenda Items for the Future Meetings The committee agreed that they would discuss crosswalks that need improvement. Mr. Buck explained that at the May meeting staff will have more information on the bike lane prioritization budget. Ms. Panske agreed to have a grants update at the next meeting. 10. Adjournment Ms. Panske made a motion to adjourn and was seconded by Ms. Redlin. The meeting adjourned unanimously at 5:56 p.m. Recorded by Alexa Naudziunas – Assistant Planner