Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6th Street Design Ad Hoc Committee Minutes revised 12.1.166th Street Design Ad Hoc Committee December 1, 2016 Minutes (Unapproved) A meeting of the 6th Street Design Ad Hoc Committee was held on Thursday, December 1, 2016 at 11:00 a.m. in the Brookings City and County Government Center. Members present: Gregg Jorgenson, Shayn Damm, Jamison Lamp, Matthew Weiss, John Howard, and Skip Webster. Joanie Holm was absent. Jackie Lanning - City Engineer, Kevin Catlin – Assistant to the City Manager, Mike Struck-Community Development Director, and Brandon Riss – SDDOT, were also in attendance. Jorgenson called the meeting to order at 11:00 a.m. 2. Approval of the Agenda. A motion was made by Howard, seconded by Webster to approve the agenda. All present voted yes; motion carried. 3. Approval of the Minutes. A motion was made by Howard to approve the minutes with the following correction: In the 3rd to last paragraph, Weiss indicated that he felt the “outside” 14-foot lanes might be better for flexibility in the future (replacing the word “five” with “outside”), seconded by Webster. All present voted yes on the minutes as amended; motion carried. 4. Discussion on possible action on width of 5-lane street design and safety of bicyclists and pedestrians. Webster said there was good discussion at the last meeting and he said the committee was not moving quickly, but knows SDDOT is waiting for a vote on the lane widths. Webster said his biggest concern is still the safety aspect and he didn’t feel 6th Street was ideal for a bike path. He said he felt that 5th Street and 7th Street should be looked at. Webster said he also agreed that the 14 foot outside lanes seemed to be the best option for the lane widths. Weiss said the 14 foot outside lanes could be lined up with the area west of Main Avenue and the street east of Medary Avenue could be done later. Webster stated he recommended no bicycle paths on the sidewalk area on 6th Street. Weiss stated he was concerned that no matter what route was decided on, all the trees were going to be removed and it would destroy the aesthetics. He questioned “for some flexibility, should a bike lane be incorporated in the outside lanes?” Lamp reminded everyone that the bike master plan study showed that the community wants the bike path on 6th Street and are they doing their due diligence with taking their recommendation? Webster stated he felt that the Bike Committee/Bike Study didn’t look at the safety aspect during their study with traffic turning. Damm questioned “wouldn’t there be a safety issue on any street?” Webster said that there are 17,000 vehicles a day that travel 6th Street and the number of vehicles on 5th Street and 7th Street is significantly less. Howard stated that based on all the concerns that have been brought forward regarding traffic safety and the proper alignment of the section from Main Avenue to Medary Avenue, everyone probably already had their mind made up and didn’t think any more discussion would change anyone’s mind. Howard made a motion to recommend to the City Council that the expansion include 14-foot outside lanes without a bike path. Lanning questioned if he recommended striping the outside lanes and he stated no striping for the bike lanes. There was discussion that the sidewalks would be standard width on both sides of 6th Street. Weiss stated that people are going to bike on 6th Street only if they feel comfortable to do so. He said if they are going to ride on the street, they should know the rules and follow them and people are only going to ride where they feel comfortable. Damm asked if it would be a safer route to have a bike path up off of the street behind the curb. Weiss stated that wasn’t necessarily safer and was concerned about turning vehicles not seeing the bikes and vehicles were more apt to watch for bikers that are at street level. Webster stated in the interest of Holm not being in attendance, he recalled that she commented at the last meeting that she didn’t feel a bike path on 6th Street was the best option. Lanning said she had not received any information from Holm since the last meeting regarding Holm’s preferred design. Webster seconded Howards motion to recommend to the City Council that the expansion include 14-foot outside lanes without a bike path. All presented voted - 4 members in favor, 2 members against. MOTION CARRIED. 5. Discussion and possible action on lighting design recommendation. Lanning provided examples of two styles of lights proposed for 6th Street, east of 20th Avenue. One option would be a pole with an acorn shaped lamp and the other would be a pole with a banner that would have the same acorn shaped lamp. Struck explained that the poles would be 20 to 30 feet in height unlike others that have been used on 6th Street that measure 50 to 60 feet high. Struck also explained that they were working with the lighting company to get the light with the best “light spread.” Howard inquired about the color of the light poles. Struck believed they would be a dark brown or bronze color. Jorgenson wondered what kind of light bulbs would be installed east of 22nd Avenue. Struck and Riss weren’t sure if they would be LED or not. It would be dependent upon if they could get the light distribution they need from LED lighting. Weiss stated they should keep the historical feel in mind when making a decision, and wondered if the brown poles with the acorn lamp would be the best fit. Lamp stated that the lights should be black to match the downtown lights since they will be joining up with the lights at the intersection of Main Ave and 6th Street. Jorgenson stated he would also like to see the bulbs be the same color as downtown. Riss stated that DOT had standards that had to be met for lighting, so spacing of poles and the type of bulb would be considered. Lanning stated any lighting or landscaping upgrades would need to be decided by the City Council and they would determine if there were funds available to budget for those items. Lamp made a motion to recommend that the lighting be the acorn style lamp on a black pole with a yellowish color bulb to match the lighting on 6th Street east of 20th Avenue. Howard seconded the motion. All present voted - 6 members in favor, 0 against. MOTION CARRIED. 6. Discussion on possible action on landscaping design recommendation. Riss stated that if the boulevard width was 4 foot or less in any section, then he would recommend a colored concrete and they could also add a design to the concrete. He said that 4 foot of boulevard or less just wasn’t a sufficient width for tree plantings. Riss also explained that there would be some sections near the west end of the project that would allow for grass but the east end would be all or mostly concrete. Lanning showed the drawings to the committee with the boulevard widths. Riss explained that 6th Street west of Main Avenue has a wider boulevard on the south side, and the street is not centered in the right-of-way. Struck recalled that DOT had stated that if there were areas that the boulevard was wide enough for trees, they would need to request tree plantings to DOT with a “right to occupy” permit. DOT would have to determine if it would be possible and approve the permit and tree plantings. Lanning stated that on other City streets, the City determines if trees can be planted in the boulevard and what type can be planted. Jorgenson asked if the City could work with the property owners to decide what type of trees could be planted. Howard wondered if recommending a “right to occupy” permit would be the best route to go right now. He said then a decision wouldn’t need to be made on the landscaping at this time. Jorgenson asked if this item could be tabled until a later date. Riss stated that that would be fine as the DOT wouldn’t move forward with design until after the City Council approved the recommendations of the 14-foot outside lanes with no bike path or made a different decision. Webster made a motion to table this item to a future meeting. Howard seconded the motion. All members present voted - 6 members in favor, 0 against. MOTION CARRIED. 7. Next scheduled meeting will be January 5th, 2017 at 11:00 a.m. Meeting adjourned at 12:10 p.m.