Session 08-07 a
meeting of the Transportation Advisory Committee was called to order by Chair
Marquardt at
COMMITTEE MEMBERS: Marquardt, Roberts, Smith, Velsko
STAFF: Planning Technician Engebretsen
Deputy City Clerk Jacobsen
AGENDA APPROVAL
The agenda was
approved by consensus of the Committee.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were no public
comments.
RECONSIDERATION
There were no items
for reconsideration.
SYNOPSIS APPROVAL
A.
Meeting Synopsis from
SMITH/ROBERTS MOVED
TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.
There was brief
discussion.
VOTE: NON OBJECTION:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT
Motion carried.
VISITORS
A. Presentation of
65% Trails Design Criteria Manual and Joint Discussion with Parks and
Recreation Advisory Commission
Commissioner
Dickerson was in attendance from the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission.
Planning Technician
Engebretsen gave an overview of the purpose of the document. She explained that
the Homer Non Motorized Transportation and Trails Plan (HNMTTP) says in order
to move toward having a more connected community is to amend the design
criteria manual to include trail criteria. When property is subdivided, code refers
to the 1987 design criteria manual for streets and storm drainage. The trails
manual will become an article in the design criteria manual. If the City
chooses to adopt this document then the subdivision code, title 11, and title
21 will be amended. In working with City Attorney Tans a few years ago he
recommended the trails document be in place and establishing the criteria,
rather than requiring it and taking what people give.
Point was raised
that this should show up in title 11 and there needs to be some serious
revamping of the design criteria manual. There are discrepancies between the
documents and in discussion with Public Works Director Meyer there is the need
to update the manual and get everything in one place in an effort to get rid of
the conflicting elements.
Planning Technician
Engebretsen further commented that there are different sections in the trails
design criteria manual. It attempts to break down developer’s responsibilities
and the City’s responsibilities. There are trail level design parameters listed
that include level’s 1 through 5 and they are based on volume of use and type
of trail.
It was noted that
there isn’t any reference to sidewalks. Planning Technician Engebretsen
explained this manual refers to trails outside of rights-of-way. Conceptually
it goes with HART policy, if the trail improvement is a separated pathway or
sidewalk; it is considered a road project. If it is a trail that is not within
the right-of-way and has some other purpose, it is a trail. The City already
has rules for sidewalks.
Question was raised
regarding
There was discussion
regarding HART funding to interconnect sidewalks to trails to alleviate the
need to drive to a trail and park to walk it. There has been discussion of
ordinances to have these requirements in the future for north/south and
east/west connectivity, but they haven’t gone anywhere at this point.
Regarding the
determination of the level of criteria for a trail, subdivisions would likely
be looking at a level 3 at the most. There could be a scoring procedure used to
determine the level and there is basis for development in the HNMTTP. The
trails manual is designed to be flexible. The HNMTTP specifies trails
connections in town and shows what areas have a higher level of connection.
Point was raised that it needs to be clarified who makes the determination on
the level of development.
Review of the trails
manual was discussed. Planning Technician Engebretsen commented that a majority
of the plan was developed by a landscape architect and an engineering firm
because staff isn’t necessarily qualified to do it. The trail model is based on
the Forest Service Model. The Forest Service does have good criteria and their
basic concept is to follow the topography to avoid big cuts or big fills. The
City’s target should be to make the process as simple as possible.
In reviewing the
document Planning Technician Engebretsen noted that the contract is up in
January and if the Committee has any red flags they should be brought up before
the 95% plan.
The Committee agreed
to include this on their November agenda to have discussion with Public Works
Director Meyer and also include the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission as
well. It was recommended that the portion of the HART policy that has to do
with trails be reviewed by the preparer of this trails manual to ensure they
tie together.
Discussion ensued
regarding getting the design criteria manual, standard construction
specifications, and chapter 11 in sync. It was noted that it may be something
to consider contracting out and there could be discussion with Public Works
Director Meyer to figure out a timeframe to budget it so there is something for
them to act on. A technical writer could reformat the documents to make them
cleaner without getting into the nuts and bolts of the documents. It is a
matter of making it a priority at the Council level and ensuring there is staff
and funding to make it happen.
Councilmember
Roberts suggested she would report at the next Council meeting that the
Committee has discussed their interest in addressing a technical rewrite of the
design criteria manual. Mr. Smith reiterated the importance of addressing
chapter 11, the design criteria manual, and the standard construction
specifications at the same time. They are all dependant on each other.
Further discussion
included funding allowed by HART and issues with the design criteria manual.
The Committee agreed
to discuss the three documents at their next meeting and requested Chapter 11,
the design criteria manual, and the standard construction specifications be
included in their next packet.
Planning Technician
Engebretsen advised the Committee that the Planning Commission is reviewing the
Draft Comprehensive Plan and they will be working on the transportation chapter
of the plan. She said a copy will be provided to the Committee for them to
review in the near future.
STAFF & COUNCIL REPORT/COMMITTEE REPORT/BOROUGH REPORTS
There were no
reports.
PUBLIC HEARING
There were no public
hearings scheduled.
PENDING BUSINESS
A. HART Policy review.
There was discussion
of the definition of sidewalk in the policy and removing the word “generally”
from the definition. It was explained that it refers to funding. It was noted
that a sidewalk could be address through an LID. Planning Technician
Engebretsen noted that it would probably be cost prohibitive to do a sidewalk
LID on an existing street, but it’s an option.
There was brief
discussion regarding HART funds being used for matching funds for roads and if
it could be applied to state roads.
At their final
review in November they agreed to focus on recommendations regarding the
percentage split between the property owner and the City, sidewalks, matching
funding, and deferred assessments.
NEW BUSINESS
A. 2009
Meeting Schedule
The 2009 meeting
schedule was approved by consensus of the Committee.
INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS
There were no informational materials provided.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
There were no audience comments.
STAFF COMMENTS
There were no staff comments.
COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
Councilmember Roberts thanked prior Committee
member Zak for his work with the Committee.
COMMITTEE COMMENTS
Chair Marquardt thanked Mr. Zak and wishes him
the best on City Council. He appreciates the good discussions with committee
and he agrees that these documents need to come together to be effective.
Mr. Smith said he hopes we focus on the
implementation as the more we add, the harder it gets to understand.
Mr. Velsko had no comments.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further
business to come before the Committee the meeting adjourned at
MELISSA JACOBSEN,
Approved: