2001-01-16 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

281 As there were no further speakers, the public hearing was closed. Responding to questions from Mr. Toscano, Ms. Hughes said that in most cases the traffic lane size will be reduced from 12 feet to 11 feet, and the consultants did not have any safety concerns about doing this. Mr. Toscano asked if the removal of the ten parking spaces will occur in Phase I, and Ms. Hughes said that three spaces will be removed in Phase II and the remainder in Phase I. Mr. Toscano asked what the cost was to make the West Main Street/Jefferson Park Avenue intersection improvements when they were last done. Mr. Caravati asked about the rationale for only a nine car turning lanes, and Ms. Hughes said the consultants say that is all that is needed. Ms. Richards said that emergency vehicles now use the continuous turn lanes, and asked what impact eliminating them will have. Mr. Cox said that to him the projects include issues of compelling interests, and raised the question of how to establish criteria. Mr. Cox said that leveraging of other funds is part of the criteria, and it has some appeal to have the University share .the match. Mr. Cox said he sees the projects as having equal merit. He said he supports Phase I for the Jefferson Park Avenue project and then looking at other funding. Mr. Cox asked if the City has been successful in receiving more than one grant in one year. Mr. Tolbert said that to his knowledge the City has not received more than one grant in a single year, but has been asked to prioritize when two grants were submitted. Mr. Cox recommended that Council consider allowing a formal presentation of the grant requests to the City's Commonwealth Transportation Board's representative. Mr. Lynch said the intent of TEA-21 funding is for alternative transportation projects, and he thinks the Jefferson Park Avenue project is a good project for these funds. Mr. Lynch said that Jefferson Park Avenue is difficult for bicyclists. Mr. Lynch said that TEA-21 fimds are not really for economic development projects. Mr. Lynch expressed concern that 80% of the Court Square budget is for undergrounding of utilities, which he feels is very expensive. Ms. Vest noted that utility poles impede pedestrian travel on sidewalks. Mr. Toscano questioned why the Court Square project goes all the way to Water Street, and suggested that just the first two phases be done. Mr. Tolbert said that could be done. Mr. O'ConneI1 asked if the alternative funding possibilities would apply only to the Jefferson Park Avenue project, or if they could be used for the Court Square project, and Ms. Thomas said her understanding is that the other funding is only available for transportation and land use and to provide a model to other communities. Ms. Richards said she does not feel there is a need to do the Water Street phase of the Court Square project, but noted that the first two phases are part of the Court Square master plan and are integral to that plan. Ms. Richards said that Albemarle County is also being asked to partner with this project. Ms. Richards said she is aware of safety issues on Jefferson Park Avenue, but said she does not see why bike lanes cannot be done in Phase I. Ms. Richards expressed concern about launching into Phase I of the Jefferson Park Avenue project without knowing where we are going with it. Ms. Richards said she thinks that when a project is started we need to sustain and complete it. Ms. Richards said she has reservations about the procedure for the Jefferson Park Avenue project.