John DiBari provided a summary of the project and discussion to date. The last meeting took place on August 14, 2019.
A series of motions have been made by committee members in discussions on a variety of topics related to the project. It is the intent of the members to discuss Safe Routes to School, block length, and road width, and to move the item out of committee.
Deliberations are a way to inform what happens at Council – members do not need to make recommendations today. The Chair proposes the item to be heard November 4, 2019.
Terry Phelan, Transportation Coordinator for MPCS, and Bob Mitchell, Beech Transportation, met on site to discuss bus circulation. The proposed entrance to the development presents a difficult scenario for buses – for stopping safely within traffic, as well as establishing forward momentum going up hill. The established bus stop at Arrowhead and Hillview is the most accessible by students. Circulation in Wapikia neighborhood is tight; residents backing out of driveways and poor weather conditions are a concern.
Potential students living in Hillview would attend Russell Elementary School and Meadow Hill Middle School and Sentinel High School. MCPS prefers students within the walking boundary to walk, but since crossing 39th provides safety concerns, they are offering potential students the opportunity to board the bus at Arrowhead and 39th if there is room. Drivers cannot predict which eligible riders will be on bus or not on a given day. Although council was previously told a bus stop could be utilized at Clearview Way and Hillview Way, there are no sidewalks or lighting fixtures on the west side of Hillview, thus presenting safety issues. Council asked for confirmation of existing bus stops and locations.
The trail proposed for student access is quite steep, it would require modifications and to be maintained during the winter. Neil Minor, Parks noted that the trail was designed to be part of the South Hills Conservation Lands Trail System. It is a single track, less than 40” dirt trail that can go up to 20% max slope. Trail users would need traction devices on their shoes to assist with safe access year round.
Neil Minor also noted that the paved, wide path in Linda Vista was built as part of the development; the area school wasn't involved. This path is an interior connection pedestrian route to neighboring parks and is maintained by the HOA. The Parks Dept. does not maintain interior paths.
MCPS identified the top of Linda Vista as another example of difficult access and circulation. There is no safe place for the bus to turn around and families are asked to meet at a different location to limit the bus from creating safety issues. Bus accessibility within cul de sacs and developments are typically difficult because they are not designed for bus turning radius. Access issues require congregation at safe locations. OPI sets restrictions on the length of distance to a bus stop at 3 miles and they try to avoid situations in which the bus has to back up because of safety concerns. They try not to make special bus considerations in an area that is within the established walking distance unless safety issues are present.
There are established bus stops in the area and the safest location to access the bus is through Wapikia neighborhood, but accessing these areas via an unmaintained dirt path that requires traction and crossing Hillview is problematic. Mary McCrea, Development Services, noted that condition of approval #4 requires the applicant to provide a crosswalk. City engineering reviewed the location of the crosswalk for visibility. Pedestrians have to cross Hillview Way to get to a sidewalk.Safe, accessible pedestrian access to the school bus stop would be challenging. Neil Minor noted that a path would need to be 8% slope in order to be maintained together with a sidewalk. He emphasized the difference between a commuter trail and a recreation trail.
Council members discussed whether it was appropriate to require sidewalks within Hillview when Wapikia doesn’t have them. City staff noted that Wapikia was a County development and wasn’t required to install sidewalks. The City is required to apply regulations that currently exist, and requiring sidewalks and connectivity is part of meeting new city standards.
Staff previously recommended a walkway through the middle of the development that would meet standards for maintenance. There is a relationship between mid-block access and block lengths that could help one another. A central access option may mitigate the need for an eastern trail that cannot be easily maintained. Neil Minor, Parks noted that a central staircase made with metal grates through which snow would pass, similar to the Higgins Bridge staircase, could be desirable and cost-effective, but landings would still require maintenance and it would not be ADA accessible. Council wants to make it more safe for non-mobility impaired people to get to and from school/bus stop and none of the options are perfect. A market driven approach would help draw a line between council responsibility and potential future residents taking all aspects of home site limitation into consideration.
Council members questioned whether a bus pull out would help meet standards for schools and create a more desired situation, but buses need to have enough roadway to gain momentum before pulling out onto Hillview – and the area to the west of Hillview is very steep. Additionally, storm drains, lighting fixtures, all the infrastructure there would have to be moved and redesigned, and the pull out would need to be structurally sound – all of which add a lot of cost to the project.
Jason Rice with Territorial Landworks noted that the current proposal was designed after struggling with integrating stairs in the center of the development. Central stairs will impact water and sewer utilities, wildlife travel, and future maintenance needs. They propose a trail 6' wide at bottom and 4' wide at top. They can work to improve grades and make it more accessible. He believes that families will determine the best way to get their kids to school safely. The development will have plowed roads and sidewalks that get to Hillview. They are concerned about spending money on infrastructure that won't get used. Metal stairs melt faster, but wet snow will accumulate and could be problematic.
Jason Rice also stated that they would prefer to remove a set of stairs and put money into paving a trail to improve access – they could work slope grades to be able to take a snowblower downhill. He suspects the development will attract empty-nesters - not young families. As a TED, they can also make a declaration to future homeowners that the City will not be providing major pedestrian improvements in future. The development has been designed with an 8% maximum slope on the roadway, which is the same slope of ADA ramp (but ADA ramps are only 6 feet long). Jason Rice stated that bulb-outs providing a street crossing have been approved on prior projects to mitigate block length.
Council members were told that the City and HOA would be responsible for winter maintenance on their respective properties. The City is not interested in accepting additional maintenance as part of this development, but would be interested to see if language could be crafted that would effectuate HOA managing maintenance needs on City property. Neil Minor, Parks believes a development agreement could be possible.
Mary McCrea, Development Services provided clarification that bulb-outs and street crossings have only been approved on the Koledich TED loop road. The bulb-out for a street crossing wasn’t used to mitigate block length. Council members discussed putting resources into improving trails and year round maintenance versus developing 134 stairs that won’t appreciably improve block length impacts.
Jason Rice noted that there is an old roadbed near the trail that students may be able to follow. Parks Dept will research whether the city has a public connection traveling west as an action item.
Jason Rice also described the eastern trail as meeting recreation trail standards at 10-12% slope with 15% slope on switchbacks. The trail is approximately 1200’ in length at a more challenging grade than sidewalks along Road B - 1960’ and Road A - 2720’ (half mile) at a flat to 5% slope. The eastern trail being proposed is similar to the BarMeyer Trail that goes over South Hills – erosion is an issue on steep sections.
Public comment was accepted on the Safe Routes to School discussion:
Teresa Jacobs spoke about the potential hazard with crosswalks and the challenges with slope and cars and buses getting stuck. She also noted that Mountain Line needs an efficient route for pedestrians to get to bus stops.
Jeff Stevens spoke about the drawbacks to building on hillsides. Pedestrian access on site needs to be maintained year round – but once kids reach Wapikia, there are no sidewalks or safe routes – necessitating walking on narrow roads. He is concerned that if a staircase isn’t provided, people will create a short cut trail in the utility easement area, creating issues.
MCPS stated that they believed the northernmost trail will address concerns if all design considerations are managed.
Troy Monroe, Engineering, noted that there are financial and physical constraints associated with pull outs for Mountain Line and School buses. The city lacks right of way and would need to acquire land to make it feasible. The Hillview Way crossing was designed for trail connections not school children. Any potential development of a pull out now would impact the trail – and it may not assist MCPS because of their need for momentum.
In conclusion, council members are potentially interested to amend Condition #9 to address the northern part of trails starting from Road A north down the hill to the north. They could require a set of northern stairs and a trail connection together with a development agreement that would stipulate HOA maintainance of connections and the lower two legs of the western trail. This would eliminate the stairs on Road A to Road B south. Mary McCrea, Development Services stated that staff has enough information to work out details of a draft condition to amend condition #9. The eastern trail will remain and stairs to the south could be removed as mitigation. Mary McCrea will craft a draft amendment to condition of approval #9 and send for review.
Council called a 5 minute recess. Meeting called to order again at 11:38 am
John DiBari opened a discussion about block length and TEDs. Mary McCrea noted each project is different based on topography, adjacent property, and infrastructure. There are opportunities for mitigation when block length exceeds 480 feet due to topography. Typically, when block length can’t be shortened, additional access for people walking and biking is critical. Condition #9 provided for connections to help get people to areas such as schools and parks. The eastern trail did not assist with mid-block access, but provided better access for residents at the ends of the block.
Jason Rice stated that no fencing would be allowed in the utility easement area which would benefit the pedestrian experience, as well as wildlife. Mary McCrea added that staff drafted a new condition, which includes a fencing section to be added to the development covenants addressing fencing. The group is interested in adding language that identifies a no-build easement so neighboring residents could not build a shed or otherwise impede the visual break in the corridor.
The typical width that encompasses all right of way improvements is between 47 and 61 feet for a local street in an area without topographical constraints. Roads within the development proposal are longer than the preferred length and do not include any visual break in the mass of homes. A significant break in the mass is of interest.
Jason Rice stated that the longest stretch of road is 590 feet; 61 feet is needed for full road build out. He reviewed the issues experienced when deciding on the design, including regulations for a 40’x40’ requirement for parkland. Council members discussed the opportunity to move houses closer to the edges of the development to widen the central easement area and have that area meet parkland requirement. Jason Rice noted that retaining walls and slope could effect their ability to change the design. Creating a wider block length break through the center of development with a no build easement area through that center may satisfy park needs for common area and open space.
John DiBari opened discussion about road width and noted previous discuss concluded with a recommended road width of 35 feet. Council members requested reconsideration of the 28 foot road width. Troy Monroe, Engineering summarized road width options and requirements and reinforced the fact that enforcement would not fall under City Police jurisdiction. A road width of 35 feet met all requirements by allowing ample access parking on both sides of the street.
Jason Rice shared a plan illustrating existing and proposed grades. He noted that a 35 foot road width would move units back – resulting in less yard and more retaining wall. One of their biggest issues is placing foundations in competent soil.
Council members discussed the issue of access and enforcement – they requested legal review by the City Attorney’s office and a memo from Troy Monroe, Assistant City Engineer, with his comments.
Teresa Jacobs spoke in support of the 35 foot road width to mitigate access and health and safety concerns. She noted that additional pull-off space may be needed during snow and ice events.
Jeff Stevens spoke in support of the 35 foot road width already approved by Council.
Alan McCormick emphasized that the City has the option to accept the street width presented and he noted that a 28 foot road width meets fire code with one side parking, signing, and HOA enforcement.
Joseph Gorsh spoke in support of the 35 foot width, noting that soil disruption can be engineered to mitigate issues.
Jason Rice noted that the 35-foot road width would primarily impact the homes on the north side of Road A – North which would be located 3.5 feet further to the north. All the other rows of homes would be located on cut slopes rather than fill. Council walked through a review of the cut and fill plan, concluding that widening the road does not substantially impact the plan. Jason Rice disagreed, stating that a two foot difference would require a different design.
Jason Rice requested clarification on the interpretation of road widths. Mary McCrea, Development Services noted that when the project was previously reviewed at a Development Review Team meeting, it was not understood that the ‘No Parking’ requirement on private roads would not be enforceable by City Police. Jim Nugent, City Attorney, has confirmed that police enforcement could not occur on a private road and that the HOA would need to be solely responsible to enforce parking. Jason Rice requested another LUP committee session to further discuss road width prior to being reviewed at City Council.
Council members voted to move the item out of the Land Use and Planning (LUP) Committee to a City Council meeting, but also agreed to set one additional discussion at LUP to review final action items and draft conditions of approval.