Transportation Commission minutes 5.17.2023

MINUTES OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING 
City of Chandler, Webex Meeting  
 
Wednesday, May 17, 2023, at 4:00 p.m.  Meeting 20230517 2255-1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL  
Chair Henderson called the meeting to order at approximately 4:01 p.m.  Mrs. 
Nancy Jackson completed roll call. Quorum present. 
 
Members in Attendance: 
Chair Dan Henderson 
Vice Chair John Repar 
Commissioner Dean Brennan 
Commissioner David Heineking 
Commissioner Luis Heredia – absent at roll call.  Arrived 4:17 pm 
Commissioner David Lucas 
Commissioner Molly Pendergast 
 
Members Absent: 
 
 
Staff Members Present: 
Ryan Peters, Strategic Initiatives Director 
Kimberly Moon, Capital Projects Manager, Public Works & Utilities (call-in) 
Dan Haskins, Principal Engineer, Public Works & Utilities (call-in) 
Jason Crampton, Transportation Planning Manager 
Nancy Jackson, /Transportation Planning Program Coordinator 
Sasha Pachito, Transportation Planning Program Coordinator 
Raistlin Snow, Intern, Transportation Policy 
Richard Becker, Transit Service Analyst 
Sheri Passey, Recording Secretary, Administrative Assistant, Transportation 
Policy 
 
Others Present 
Aaron Xaevier, Planner III, Valley Metro 
Eileen Yazzie, Y2K Engineering (call-in) 
 
 
SCHEDULED/UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES

None 
 
 
CONSENT AGENDA 
1. Approval of the Minutes of the Transportation Commission Regular 
Meeting of January 18, 2023. 
 
Chair Henderson asked for a motion to approve the minutes from 
January 18. 
 
Commissioner Lucas so moved to approve the minutes.  Commissioner 
Pendergast seconded the motion.  
 
The minutes were approved 6-0 by all Commissioners members present.  
 
Action Agenda 
 
2.  Election of Officers 
 
As Vice Chair, Commissioner Repar nominated himself for Chair.  Chair 
Henderson asked for a motion.  Commissioner Pendergast motioned.  
Commissioner Heineking seconded. Motion carried unanimously 6-0 by all 
Commissioners’ present.   
 
Chair Henderson recommended Commissioner Heineking as Vice Chair.  
Commissioner Pendergast motioned for approval, with a second by 
Commissioner Lucas.  Motion carried unanimously 6-0 by all Commissioners’ 
present.   
 
BRIEFINGS  
Chair Henderson We are switching briefing items and placing Chandler 
Airpark Flexible Transit Study Update first.  
 
3.  CHANDLER AIRPARK FLEXIBLE TRANSIT STUDY UDPATE 
 
Mr. Jason Crampton introduced Aaron Xaevier with Valley Metro and 
proceeded with a brief overview and introduction of the Study.

Mr. Xaevier Began his briefing with an Overview.  This slide discussed the 
Chandler Flex Background, Study Scope and Purpose, Existing Conditions 
and the Next Steps.   
 
The next slide discusses the Chandler Flex Background.  In September 2021 
we completed the Price Road Study – the Flexible Transit Study aimed to 
figure out a problem serving that area with a fixed route.  There were a lot 
of big business parks with some peak transit service that was doing okay.  
We had some land use challenges for the fixed routes related to 
productivity, and we wanted to make sure we invested dollars to the best 
use possible. So, through that study we were able to target in on the service 
fee, service hours, what would be needed to roll out the service.  In early 
2022, Chandler was awarded a grant to implement service, which is 
currently running throughout the Price Corridor area.  The service was 
rolled out last summer, July 2022 and in March 2023 we initiated this study 
to see what other potential to the area around the airpark.    
  
Mr. Xaevier continued his briefing with the Study, Scope & Purpose. The 
slide shows the planning boundaries. He discusses the extent of the study.  
The study is east of the current service area of Flex and explores the 
prospects for flexible transit within that area.  There is a lot of good land 
use that will be reviewed later in the Destinations Map.  But it is anchored 
at the Chandler Airpark area and is being done in coordination with Gilbert.  
The study will also look at the cost, fleet and ridership. 
 
Commissioner Brennan  I can’t make out the street names and asked Mr. 
Xaevier to identify the major arterials?   
 
Mr. Xaevier identified the Study Area - Arizona Ave. to Riggs Rd to 
Greenfield Rd to Ray Rd. 
 
Mr. Crampton injected that it is a pretty wide study area much larger than 
the current Chandler Flex area.  The idea is to start with a wider area and 
to look at what the needs are within and whittle that down throughout the 
study.  
 
Mr. Xaevier Agreed that once we get into things like travel demand, 
ridership, where the paratransit folks get dropped off most, we can start to 
chisel away at some of the most likely routes in those areas.

Mr. Xaevier discussed ridership and the transit network (Local Transit 
Overview slide) of the current service area. There is a heat map super 
imposed over the line and shows the highest ridership around downtown 
Chandler and then peters off as you go south.   
 
Commissioner Lucas asked about the development and growth that is 
happening around the airpark and I am assuming that information and 
projections are being factored in as part of the study? 
 
Mr. Xaevier Confirmed growth is being considered with the GIS folks, 
gathering all the existing, current and future projections for land use.  MAG 
has a lot of the projections as well.  We are working very closely with them 
in terms of getting their modeling data, so we have their projections.  When 
we plan for something that is a moving target, it is important to keep on 
top of it.     
 
Commissioner Repar asked for an explanation on the ridership again, so 
he understands the coding. This is ridership for actual bicycle travel or is 
this traffic?   
 
Mr. Xaevier This is ridership on the current fixed route transit numbers.  
These are the bus route ridership and are only boardings - essentially 
where riders are getting on to the buses.  
 
Commissioner Repar asked if this was Flex?  
 
Mr. Xaevier this is not ridership for Flex just the fixed route, but that data 
is available.   
 
Mr. Xaevier continued with an overview of Demographic: Population and 
Density slide which analyzed car ownership, income and age.  These 
demographics are based on the 2020 census.  The next slide, Employment 
Distribution & Concentration gets into population and employment not 
only existing but projecting.   Employment peaks at almost 3,000 jobs per 
square mile largely centered around 202 and downtown Chandler and then 
peters off as you go south. When we start thinking about whittling the study 
area down that make the most sense the higher density employment areas 
are going to affect the area largely.  Depending on the sector you in are

working in, or doing a hybrid working situation, that will impact ridership.  
We are just finishing up an Origin Destination Study to get a better handle 
on that.  About 17,000 surveys were administered throughout the region 
to get a better handle on where people are going to and coming from and 
work patterns.  First look since before Covid.   
 
The Workforce Statistic slide showed the magnitude of people going in and 
going out.  About 30,000 coming in and about 45,000 going out and 3,600 
live in the area. This is based LEHD or the Longitudinal Employer-
Household Dynamics data from the most recent 2020 census.  Also shows 
other demographics on employees such as age, earnings, race and top 
employment sector being retail, health care and accommodations.   
 
 
Mr. Xaevier concluded his presentation with the Next Steps. Getting a 
better handle on the background of the study area and travel demand 
analysis which develops MAG’s travel demand model.  This will include 
some peer service reviews and service elements that other cities are 
incorporating into their service. 
 
He completed his presentation and opened it up for questions.  Mr. 
Crampton addressed the Chair and Commissioners.  We are very early on 
in the study.  We wanted to bring it to you now as a first glance at the study 
so you can be informed of it early on.  Any points, questions, thoughts you 
may have are welcome to receive those to influence study.  This study will 
be included in our transportation project update agenda item that we take 
to the Commission every time.  There will be an opportunity at future 
meetings, and we will have updates as a stand-alone agenda item.   
 
Commissioner Lucas asked will future grant funding opportunities look at 
potentially funding this new area, funding the existing area, or splitting it?  
 
Mr. Crampton We will look at both options.  Currently Chandler Flex has 
funding for about one more year.  We are looking at options to get funding 
that would last a few years beyond that.  Additionally, once the study is 
complete, I think we would look at opportunities to provide funding for this.  
The key thing to keep in mind is if we get grant funding for this expanded 
area, what’s likely to happen is we get one, two or three years of funding 
and then after that ultimately it would be on the city to cover all on-going

in operations, so we have to be very mindful of that.  We don’t want to over 
expand and then not have the local funding to be able to continue.  That is 
something we are always cognizant of.  We don’t want to put the service 
out there, people get dependent on it, build their lifestyles around the 
transportation that is available and then have it pulled back.  So, any grant 
opportunities we do pursue we always have that in the back of our mind; 
what are we going to do for that on-going funding situations?  So, we are 
looking at a number of solutions for that locally, regionally and then federal 
and state grant opportunities.   
 
Commissioner Heineking Stated/asked Valley Metro is obviously invested 
in this program, they are helping out with the studies.  Are there other 
programs throughout the valley that are similar and is Valley Metro looking 
to support these sorts of programs as adjacent to the regular transit?   Is 
this the future of transit that we are seeing or is this an experiment right 
now?  
 
Mr. Xaevier  We have seen a real big boom of these services come out in 
the last year, two years.  Ridership numbers have come back a little bit but 
not quite where we want them to be, but we think in part that doing stuff 
like this will help feed the regional network. Your question about other 
services out there:  We have Glendale, which currently their entire 
jurisdiction is covered by Via the same contractor as Chandler.  Avondale 
and Goodyear partnered initially on service.  They had their own two zones.  
And now in October Avondale is going to be adding another zone that is 
adjacent to that zone.  We also had Surprise just start one up this spring.  
And the Pogos which are our sister circulators in the west Peoria are getting 
cut and they are very seriously considering replacing them with micro 
transit.  Buckeye is also trying to piggyback on that contract from Avondale 
and Goodyear.  And as a last note we had our First Mile, Last Mile in 
Tolleson that had a contract with Uber and Lyft that subsidized the first 
eight dollars of every trip with the origin or destination within Tolleson.  
Definitely a lot of interest.  We are still waiting to see how long this lasts or 
if it is going to be sustainable.  It’s going to come down to funding.  The 
ridership is shown to be there but when areas, for example in Avondale 
where they had Zoom, and tweaked the service trying to get the route to 
perform, it just never came to fruition.  Now they have replaced it with 
microtransit.  We are seeing the success and are hoping to see if it’s 
sustainable one or two years from now.

Mr. Crampton There is a role, but I don’t foresee it to replace all transit.  If 
you look at the efficiency and carrying capacity of a bus versus microtransit, 
it does not have the same carrying capacity.  When there is higher density 
and more demand for transit, buses are far more cost effective to provide 
transit trips.  In south Chandler, it is especially a great, great service.  But 
it’s not going to replace all transit.   
 
Commissioner Lucas Given this is a partnership with Gilbert, it’s going to 
involve both jurisdictions, and as you mentioned we might be able to get 
some initial grant funding to do the initial pilot but after that it’s going to 
be incorporated into operations. Is the discussion already done with the 
town of Gilbert about that next phase?  What does the future look for that?  
 
Mr. Crampton That is part of the study looking at how this can operate 
jointly between Chandler and Gilbert.  We have not gotten in-depth on 
those discussion yet because we don’t know the details of the 
recommendations.  As we advance in the study we will get cost estimates, 
service area analysis and then we can kind get a better picture of what is 
recommended in Gilbert, what is recommended in Chandler.  And then at 
that point we will have to see if both communities are on board with such 
recommendations. Maybe it transitions back to just Chandler.   
 
Commissioner Lucas Because the study area is in both, but it could 
eventually be in Chandler only?  
 
Mr. Crampton It could be yes. 
 
Commissioner Brennan Asked of either Jason or Aaron - what are the 
current numbers as far as employment around the airport? And what is the 
projections for employment numbers at build out around the airport?   
 
 
Mr. Crampton We are looking at it.  Our city planning staff has that 
information and has put together those projections but off the top of my 
head I do not know.    Mr. Crampton thanked Aaron for coming out to 
present.

Chair Henderson Next item we will move on to the Protected Bike Lane 
Study Update. 
 
4. PROTECTED BIKE LANE STUDY UPDATE 
Mr. Crampton This study update will be provided by Eileen Yazzie, 
Transportation Planning Practice Manager with Y2K out of Colorado.  Used 
to be out of Arizona working with MAG.   This Protected Bike Lane Study we 
have been working on for several months and now we are getting at a point 
where we are getting closer to having some recommendations and bike 
lanes, we can advance for consideration to add protective features.    We 
are looking, based on the results from our Transportation Master Plan 
feedback looking city wide to advance protected bike lanes, provide more 
separation in bike lanes as requested by Chandler residents. This study is 
looking city wide to see where good opportunities would be to place more 
protected lanes.   
 
Consultant Yazzi The last time Jason, myself and Sasha were here was at 
the end of January.  We want to give you an update of all the work we have 
been doing. We’ve had a lot of public involvement opportunities, which.  
has been complimentary of the data analysis.   
 
Consultant Yazzi reviewed the goals of the Protected Bike Lane Feasibility 
Study. The overall goal is to increase the number of protected bike lanes.  
The project outcome is looking for quicker to build and lower costs 
protected bike lane options, different from the Frye Rd Protected Bike Lane 
project, which is over $5 million.  And understanding the feasibility of 
converting existing and planned bike lanes to protected ones.  While lanes 
are kept as is- as in the number of lanes are not reduced and/or streets are 
not expanded.  Hopefully at the end of this developing/recommending or 
prioritize a list of projects or roadway locations that we can do in kind of 
groups of recommended tier one, tier two and tier three.  
 
Scope of Work slide –  How much room and space are needed for protected 
bike lanes as well as understanding the cross-section of the needs of the 
vehicle travel lanes and keeping medians in place.  Really understanding 
the parameters of how protected bike lanes in Chandler are going to work 
as well as doing the data collection analysis for the feasibility and 
prioritization and then looking forward to implementation.

Project Schedule slide - We started this in the winter, and we think we will 
be wrapped up by July and we will be back to see you again to go over 
results and final recommendations.   
 
Starting off the study she reviewed Community Engagement.  We have 
concluded the majority of our activities:   project websites, emails, 
newsletters, social media, engage with the public at the Family Bike Ride, 
and conduct an online survey. We were able to use the Family Bike Ride as 
a center focus of our engagement activity.  We were able to ask questions 
during the registration and really understand the community that was 
registering - so this was focused on bicycle riders.  
 
The Family Bike Ride Registration survey slide showed that the majority of 
people, eighty-one percent are recreation bicyclist.  Twelve percent use it 
for transportation to get to places.   Respondents feeling that safety and 
comfort diminishes as they get to larger roads. 
 
Family Bike Ride In-Person Engagement – we were able to be at the 
Chandler Family Bike Ride and we did two things there. We did a show and 
tell.  We were able to have these out for people to touch, feel and ride 
through and understand what they are.  We had a show and tell with 
Chandler staff that included operations and management, engineering and 
planning teammates so we could do a dive down.  We also did preference 
activities.  These preference activities were mirrored on the online survey.  
I believe there was over a 150 people registered for the event.   
 
Top 3 Factors You Would Consider for PBL Location Prioritization slide.  We 
asked them what top three factors they would consider the of prioritization 
of locations.  The big theme came out of this exercise came to connectivity.  
Connectivity and safety were the big things people wanted to see. 
 
Top 3 Preferences of the Proposed Types of Vertical Barriers slide – 
Delineator Posts, Rubber Parking Stops and Steel Barriers came up as top 
three.  
 
Online Survey slide – there was almost 500 responses.  The same questions 
were asked and more on the online survey. But when it came to the 
prioritization about location, connectivity came in high as well as with bike 
lanes and paths with current usage and then safety also ranked very high.

Preference was slightly different for Top 3 Preferences of Propose Types of 
Vertical Barriers.  One of the options while we displayed at the bike ride, 
we asked the question here – the combination, so more than one vertical 
element, that ranked the highest.  And then Pre-Cast Concrete and 
Delineators Posts came in second to that.   
 
Commissioner Brennan asked on the slide - Agreement On Feeling Safe 
and Comfortable Biking on Different Types of Roads.  The bottom numbers 
0, 50, 100, 150 are those the number of responses? 
 
Consultant Yazzi l have to double checked but she believes they are.  
 
Commissioner Brennan Are these from the Family Bike Ride?  
 
Consultant Yazzi Yes, correct. We were allowed through the registration, 
the online registration form, we added these questions in.  
 
Commissioner Brennan Going onto the page where it has Top 3 Factors 
You Would Consider for PBL Location Prioritization, again we have 
numbers going on the left from 0 – 60.  Again, are those the number of 
responses?   
 
Consultant Yazzi Yes, these are the number of responses.  I will note on 
this one, this slide is, the information here the numbers relate to the 
attendees that attended the Family Bike Ride in person and stopped by and 
responded to the boards.  And on that they were asked to rank numbers – 
we had sticky dots with numbers 1, 2 or 3 on them so they were able to say 
their first, second and third choice.  So, on that we would have to do a total 
of say the first choice would be the total number of people that stopped by 
the board to participate.   
 
Commissioner Brennan So these are people who were at the bike ride?     
 
Consultant Yazzi Yes, so doing a quick total about 75 people came and 
stopped by the boards and participated.    
 
Commissioner Brennan And the next page is the same situation.  Those 
are the people who registered?

Consultant Yazzi To clarify – these are actually people who attended and 
stopped by the boards. 
 
Commissioner Brennan The Top 3 Factors You Would Consider for the 
PBL Location Prioritization - are those responses from the people who 
attended the bike ride or those responses from the survey?   
 
Consultant Yazzi These are from the online survey, and it is in gray 
underneath the question, there were 457 responses.  
 
Commissioner Brennan I see that, but it doesn’t indicate who is 
responding.  And if we answered the online survey, are we supposed to be 
receiving notification about the study?  You mentioned, I think you said 
there is an email list of people who responded to the online survey.  Are 
you using that to communicate with the community, people in the 
community?  
 
Consultant Yazzi I don’t think I mentioned we have email lists.  That said – 
I believe we do.  Having the registration, I believe city of Chandler has those 
emails. Related to the online survey I believe it was optional to add your 
email.  We can go back and check.  City of Chandler just closed that survey 
about 16 days ago, two weeks ago so, we have not communicated back 
with anyone.  
 
Commissioner Brennan Okay, it does mention your email and existing 
lists.  I was just wondering what lists those are and if it includes people who 
attended the family fun ride and also includes people who responded to 
the survey? 
 
Commissioner Repar  It would be helpful for the source of the information 
at the bottom of the slides.  It’s easily to confuse.   
 
Mr.  Crampton It’s a good point that we will take back and look at those 
email addresses to see what kind of follow-up we can do.  We have some 
contact information, not everybody provided their information.

Commissioner Lucas Agreed that to have the citizen’s taking the time to 
participate in a survey, it’s good to provide that natural follow-up and keep 
them engaged.  
 
 
Commissioner Repar The people who show up for that event, the mayor’s 
bike ride, I have been watching that for years. I’m with Kiwanis and we’re 
sitting in Tibshraeny Park handing out water.  The numbers have kind of 
decreased over the last few years as far as the number of people. A lot of 
those people are not recreational bike riders they are there for the event 
for the mayor.  So, you have to kind of understand that is sort of an 
unqualified opinion of people that are out for the first time, second time or 
once or twice a year.  Knowing the source of the data is pretty important to 
recognize the overall weight you want to give to it.  
 
Mr. Crampton Good point which is why we have multiple surveys out 
there.  Some of the data is coming from the Family Bike Ride registrants 
and participants.  We also did the citywide survey that didn’t target 
necessarily the Family Bike Ride participants but was more of a citywide 
push that had a lot of outreach including a couple of news channels that 
did stories on it to try and get more people aware of it. 
 
Commissioner Repar The information is comingled in the report here.  So, 
I would like to have the source identified.  
 
Commissioner Brennan Agreed.  There are two sources, and it is not very 
clear of who’s who.  And again, it is really critical to have those email lists 
and use those to continue to communicate with the public, so they know 
what it is going on.  
 
Chairman Henderson Really appreciates the comment that “we are going 
where the people are”.  And while I don’t disagree that people are going on 
that bike ride to support the mayor, I think that’s just another segment of 
the population that is clearly on bicycles regardless of the reason.   
 
Commissioner Repar he just wanted the sources distinguished. 
 
Commissioner Lucas asked about the protected bike lanes show and tell. 
I think it’s a great idea.  What involvement was there with Chandler staff to

kind of make sure we limit it to only the things that are under consideration 
by the city?  That we are not providing an option out there and people say 
oh, I really like this, but we are not even going to look at that as far as 
implementation.  I guess I would like a little more information on that.   
 
Consultant Yazzi If I can hop to a couple of these slides, I think it will also 
help the discussion and shape the discussion a little bit.     
 
Consultant Yazzi One of the things we have been working very closely not 
only with Jason and Sasha but the greater transportation team, particularly 
their engineering team is determining the envelope of what is needed for 
protected bike lanes.  Understanding the gutter pan, looking at the width 
of the bike lane – the buffer, and also part of the envelop is the vertical 
options.  We have gone through and worked with Chandler staff again 
including engineer, operations and maintenance team to ensure that with 
our show and tell was inclusive and understood city preference.  I’m going 
to leave this up (slide Task 2 – PBL Design Guidelines) and Jason can talk 
about – we did an additional show and tell and kind of more to touch and 
feel with these vertical options with the staff too.   
 
Mr. Crampton The Family Bike Ride happened first and then we did a show 
and tell with city staff, engineering staff so we could see all these options 
in person.  So, chandler staff did work with Y2K in coming up with the 
elements to add to the show and tell.  This is kind of informational to 
residents in trying to get their feedback mainly for aesthetics, level of 
comfort and things like that.  Not necessarily a guarantee that just because 
residents like this particular item it’s not going to be appropriate on every 
roadway.  Some of the items might be very appropriate for very low speed 
streets, low traffic streets.   Others might be more appropriate for higher 
traffic, higher speeds.  This was more just trying to get that information out 
to residents and seeing what their preference was.   
 
Commissioner Lucas - Because O & M is a big consideration, I’m sure.  Mr. 
Crampton Yes, absolutely.  That is part of the mind with a lot of our staff.   
 
Consultant Yazzi And two, if I can note with this slide here these are the 
four types of barriers of these vertical elements that are recommended 
from the Chandler project management team.  While we had about seven 
different types of vertical elements out for show and tell.  These are the

four that Chandler staff is recommending that do coincide with public 
input.  But also make the most sense to start moving forward to cost out.  
Again, not fully commit to say this one is going here, and this option is the 
only option.  But these four seem to make the most sense and so we will 
be moving forward with cost estimating.  To allow those options when 
those locations are prioritized and then furthermore in the future 
implemented.  And one for instance, it’s the last bullet, in the bottom two 
pictures is Tuff Curb.  While that necessarily was not presented at the show 
and tell we borrowed the green Tuff Curb in city of Tempe.  City of Chandler 
staff have seen those also understand they are putting those out in their 
protected bike lane and see that as a good fit as an option.  
 
Commissioner Heineking Which one is the Tuff Curb? 
 
Consultant Yazzi It’s the bottom two.  So, it does not have a delineator 
post in the middle.  The middle of if is the rolled and then you have the 
harder edges on the side.  If you want to see it out on the street, it’s on Ash 
Ave in Tempe.  
 
Commissioner Brennan I apologize for this question.  When you are 
talking about protected lanes, I’m trying to understand how any of those 
items are going to protect anybody if there is a car driving down the street 
at 45 mph and they lose control.  Are these improvements to protect the 
physical lane or identify the lane because it certainly isn’t going to protect 
the rider.  Safety through the Transportation Master Plan and then also 
discussion in the survey - safety is really what we have heard people talk 
about and that’s why people won’t ride in the lanes on the arterial streets 
because they don’t feel safe.  I’m not sure any of those will make me feel 
safe.  And I certainly wouldn’t allow my grandchildren to go out and ride on 
a street that had any one of those improvements and pretend it is a 
protected lane.  It’s not going to protect anybody.  
 
Commissioner Brennan I think it’s a concern and we are going to continue 
to hear that concern from the community.  I don’t know what kind of 
comments you had at the ride day but once you start thinking about putting 
those in place and thinking that’s going to protect somebody from a car 
where the driver is talking on the phone and goes off and over those little 
bumps, I’m not sure that is protecting anyone.

Mr. Crampton With these particular approaches we are looking at lower 
cost, quicker build types of approaches that we can put in more places.  We 
do have a more capital-intensive project on Frye Road that they are aware 
of that provides that higher level of separation.  And often times in cities 
what happens is these types of installations occur and then transition into 
a more capital intensive - constructing a median or broader separation.  In 
some of the streets we are looking at there might not be space for a 
median, but there is space for this type of protection.  Which you are right 
it’s not going to stop a car from drifting but there is a much higher sense of 
visual separation between a bike lane and a vehicular lane and there’s 
physical objects that will stand in between a car and a bike lane.  So rather 
than drifting over a line with nothing to notify the driver they are in a bike 
lane now there are items.  Of course, it’s not going to stop every situation 
from a car entering a bike lane but it’s going to result in a higher level of 
safety.  So good point and it’s not going to solve every issue but it’s certainly 
an advancement.   
 
Consultant Yazzi If I can also add - I echo everything with what Jason said, 
and I wanted to focus on a few points.  One, a lot of cities across the country 
are using these types of vertical elements as an initial implementation – 
let’s get out there, let’s put something up and let’s see if we can get funding 
to permanently install protection.  One thing I will note related to the Tuff 
Curb on the bottom.  The first options that Chandler is still looking at is the 
Pre-cast concrete, the Parking Stops and Delineator Posts. One thing that 
is not mentioned in this slide is a combination of these.  A lot of agencies 
in cities across the country they have been using two parking stops and 
then a delineator post for a continuous feel.  So, things like that where you 
start combining these.  The other thing about protection that is proven is 
these types of elements make the overall street safer.  Because it is also a 
visual and a vertical que for drivers.  That is some of the results of studies 
across the country. Recognizing it’s not a wall.  It’s not a hard curb that is 
continuous.  Yet the safety benefits of having these elements is a visual que 
for the driver like a lot of signs that we experience on a daily basis.  Again, 
it’s that vertical element that will jolt the driver so it’s two-fold.  And that 
kind of collectively makes that street safer in general for all users.  A lot of 
cities are using this as an interim approach recognizing they want to put in 
permanent installation of median or continuous curbs for that full 
protection.

Chairman Henderson What I’m encouraged by as someone who rides a 
bike to work, I’m not necessarily looking for that absolute safety. I am 
appreciative as a bicyclist of the awareness that things like this begin to 
create, and the behavior change that subsequently follows that.   
 
Commissioner Brennan I understand.  But let’s not call them protected 
bike lanes.  I mean we are pretending something it’s not.  We should come 
up with a different name.   
 
Mr. Crampton Some cities call these separated bike lanes.  Is that right 
Eileen?   
 
Consultant Yazzi Yes. 
 
Commissioner Brennan That is another question I have.  Because in doing 
some background reading, I encountered articles where they used 
separated and protected interchangeably.  And I was going to ask Eileen 
what the difference is?  It sounds like the only difference is who uses the 
word whether it be protected.  I would say that separated is more 
appropriate, then protected.   
 
Chairman Henderson The other thing I might add is through that 
awareness and through that behavior change I can appreciate the 
approach of considering these sorts of solutions as a pilot that allows data 
to be collected.  And if the data suggests that more capital improvement 
dollars dedicated to these things are warranted those are things I’m looking 
at. 
 
Commissioner Brennan I would challenge pilots to test various 
approaches before they spend money on something that is going to be 
permanent.   
 
Commissioner Heredia Is there any technology, like with our cars and 
looking to advance with a lot of these curbs have embedded or if there is 
any technology that could integrate future protections with smart cars?  Is 
there any technology out there that is integrating technology with these 
curbs that allows you to advance – just start thinking about future 
enhancements.

Consultant Yazzi We can research that question.  So going back a few 
slides (pulled up slide Task 2- PBL Design Guidelines) is understanding the 
protected bike lane is the buffer.  The buffer always has two stripes on it.  
And the vertical element sits in those strips. A lot of cars right now 
recognize the stripping as that lane and will give you that protection when 
you are going over into a stripped lane.  Regardless, if it is a bike lane 
another vehicle lane that type of warning is in cars right now.  Verses the 
vertical elements I can research more about.  But having that stripe is going 
to be that warning.  Does that make sense or answer your question? 
 
Commissioner Heredia I think it’s worthy to look into technology to detect 
there’s actually bike lanes in the area with these added curbs.  Just 
something to research if there is any enhanced technology that could be 
installed that could give further protection.   
  
 
Commissioner Lucas The vertical delineators show up as traffic cones but 
also depending on the type of modern vehicle you have it will actually show 
a visualization of a bike or pedestrian.  Those capabilities are continuing to 
evolve. Having more awareness, it’s actually in use.  And in the connected 
vehicle space there is more and more work being done about MRU - 
Multiple Road Users.  Coming up to an intersection or another location just 
to provide that awareness that someone is actively using this crosswalk and 
that alert can be sent out to the vehicle.  I think that’s more align of what 
you are thinking.   
 
Commissioner Heredia I think we have to look at the roads of what’s 
coming up.  If we are going to install any barrier, look to advance it as much 
as you can. 
 
Consultant Yazzi Task 3 – Data Collection & Analysis slide.  We have GIS 
files that we are handing off to Chandler, so they have all the data we 
collected and analyzed.  We are doing three steps.  One is the inventory 
and screening.  Two is the feasibility.  And three is allowing the PBL design 
guideline options.  Step 1 – Inventory & Screening  - Arterial and collectors 
with existing and planned bike lanes.  we came up with cross sections 
minimum and maximum number of feet for vehicular and bicycle lanes for 
each type of road configuration. That helped identify and helped us start 
this evaluation process.

Two hundred and ten (210) of the three hundred and four (304) miles of 
arterials and collectors have a striped bike lane.  About seventy percent of 
your roads have existing bike lanes.  It is noted the constraints that this 
study is working within it not removing a vehicle lane.  Not widening the 
roadway and no removal of concrete medians.  And that goes back to 
implementing lower cost options.  If Chandler wanted to look at removing 
a lane and adding a protected bike lane all that data is there and will be 
from the study. 
 
Seven foot is the minimum that the team collectively thought that is needed 
for a protected bike lane.  The preferred is eight feet.  The total number for 
seven feet there is now 81 miles available on each side for protected bike 
lanes.  For eight feet is drops down to 66.    
 
Task 3 - Step 2- Feasibility: we looked at the remaining quarters that came 
out of Step 1.  Starting with the 81 miles that have 7 feet available on both 
sides of the roadway – is it feasible, does it make sense to actually put in a 
protected bike lane. We looked at the factors or elements of the existing 
conditions.  Are there front facing houses or a high number of residential 
driveways that face that road.  Think of the spacing of these -is it valuable 
enough to get there if we have to put in a break every 100 feet to have that 
space or consistency and understanding.  Is there existing curb and gutter.   
And that is related to some of the streets that are not built out to full curb 
and gutter.  We don’t think putting in a protected bike lane would be helpful 
or it’s not the right time.  Street lighting presence as well as looking at the 
number of signalized and unsignalized intersections, commercial 
driveways and we put these. Adding in these factors, the seven-foot bike 
lane goes from 81 miles of roadways available and drops to 53 that are 
feasible. And when it comes down to the room for an eight-foot protected 
bike lane down it drops down to 42 miles.  We also added in the off street 
and multi-use paths.  These maps were shared with the community at the 
Family Bike Ride.   
 
Task 4 – Evaluation for Prioritization – staff will be evaluating those 53 miles 
for prioritization.  Which ones make sense in the first Tier and while we can 
number but we think there is value in taking the top 15 ten locations and 
then grouping them in a Tier one and then Tier two and Tier three are 
category one, two and three.  That can allow for flexibility in the location.

For example, if number eight was upcoming in a paving schedule that 
allowed for the coordination of current stripping efforts to change that 
roadway.  That could be prioritized if that it was in Tier one.  We are looking 
at prioritize them into Tiers.   
 
Task 5 – final study will be in Executive Summary in a Regional Significant 
report.  That does conclude the presentation and overall information.     
 
Commissioner Lucas I think a big consideration needs to be connectivity 
improvement.  From the survey and the people in person that was their 
ultimate concern was providing improved connectivity.  That needs to be a 
consideration when providing that prioritized list.   
 
When I was at the city of Tempe there was a comprehensive plan, they 
provided a lot of different bike routes and connectivity was a big part of 
tying into the east valley bike plan, the trail plan with Mesa and other 
jurisdictions.  I think that is something whether people are using for 
recreation or for commuting they want to be able move between 
jurisdictions.  Each of our jurisdictions don’t operate as an island.  You want 
to be able to move around.  Connectivity needs to be a big piece of that.  
 
Consultant Yazzi Yes and one of the things we have already starting 
drafting, so we have started doing an initial review of these factors.  And 
one of the things that you just said we brought in all of the surrounding 
communities off street trails as well as their regional routes.   
 
Commissioner Pendergast I agree that connectivity’s is a key player but 
something the citizens that you are surveying may not list real high on their 
list of importance is deaths.  Arizona as a whole is not a safe place for 
pedestrians.  The average Joe might not be concerned about that but as a 
government as a municipality that should be a top priority is minimizing 
deaths and injuries.   
 
Commissioner Brennan Eileen did you map crashes – vehicle/bicycle 
crashes? 
 
Consultant Yazzi That is what we are planning to do for this task.  Is the 
bicycle crash data.  One thing we can look at – going back to my earlier 
comments about putting in protected bike lanes or these physical barriers

actually makes the collective streets safer.  We were planning to look at just 
the bicycle crash data, but we have all the crash information.  We can look 
at it in two ways - is the collective fatalities and then the pedestrians crashes 
and fatalities.  We think the bike fatalities will be a low number because 
there is not that many.  But we can also look at the vehicle fatality 
information as a well kind of as a compliment.   
 
Commissioner Brennan Are you doing any counts of ridership on some 
of the arterials?  
 
Consultant Yazzi One thing we are doing is fourth bullet down Bicycle 
Activity we are using Strava data. When it comes to transportation and 
planning evaluation, we look at Strava data not from actual counts but 
understanding where people are riding – that route information. If you are 
an active cyclist where you’re that high speed road user you will still look 
for that path that has good connectivity, maybe feel safer. So, we look for 
that activity level and we are bringing that in. The nice thing we learned 
from this project is that MAG, the regional agency, has all that data available 
for any city in the region to use and understand.   
 
Commissioner Lucas I think the safety aspect is big and what Dean was 
talking about earlier that it isn’t necessarily a wall that is going to keep 
someone from crossing over.  We have all driven down the road where it’s 
just a painted bike lane and people are using it as part of the road.  
Personally, even though it’s not an ultimate solution, something like this 
that provides some type of barriers or notification to the driver that they 
have strayed to far over will improve overall safety. I think this is a good 
step forward.   
 
Commissioner Brennan Is there any consideration with regards to taking 
a look at speed limits and lowering speed limits to increase safety and 
reduce potential for serious collision?  Maybe there is an opportunity there 
to think about how we might be able to reduce the speed and save some 
lives.  
 
Mr. Crampton As a part of this study, it will not be analyzed but I think 
there are future opportunities with some of the other things we are looking 
at where that topic could be considered. But it is a valid question.

Chairman Henderson Are there any other questions? 
 
Commissioner Heredia Process wise - these studies take a long time, and 
it is hard to find the capital or resources for that.  If there is a segment or 
bike lane that needs to be enhanced because of the data analysis, if it can 
be elevated to a quicker improvement - we should not wait for a study to 
focus on the safety corridor if we can improve it quicker.  
 
Mr. Crampton We do have a capital improvements program associated 
with this study. Once the study finishes, we have funding that will allow us 
to build about a half mile to a mile every two years.  So, we do have 
implementation money behind this.  But it is a tenured plan to start adding 
this in.   
 
Chairman Henderson I was looking at some of the percentages of the 
kinds of bicycling.  Transportation is about 12% and then I look at the 
Upcoming Tasks and some of the prioritization for the corridors for the 
protected bike lanes.   I noticed that connections to schools and parks – 
love that. Connection to canals and off-street trails – love that.  Some of the 
other activity element will probably bring in some of this but I was curious 
if prioritization for commuting to work as a by-product of this?  I know it’s 
a small sub-set when you have eighty-one percent in the recreation base it 
might not be the priority. 
 
Mr. Crampton asked Eileen  - Remind me - I think we have activity centers 
as one of the prioritization elements.  It wasn’t scored very high with the 
public outreach.  But I believe connection to activity centers which could be 
a job center I think is one of the considerations.  
 
Consultant Yazzie We can add that and expand it to the job centers.  We 
would have to figure out the boundary, but we can’t exclude the region and 
that connectivity with what you are noting the commute to work.  We have 
to figure out that boundary is from the job centers or job hot spots areas 
about how far outside of Chandler to go.  That information is available. 
 
Commissioner Lucas To follow up on that. There is definitely outreach that 
you can do with community development or with the major employers.  
They can provide bike lockers, shower facilities things like that.  If we have 
a major employer some of these employers can have a significant impact.

Chairman Henderson As I think about how close in many instances in 
Chandler those neighborhoods are and some of those residents.  Think 
Price Road Corridor, Intel, in and around the airpark.  You have residential 
pockets fairly close, a relatively short commute.  This is an area is near and 
dear to my heart.  I appreciate that.   
 
Commissioner Brennan What are the next steps and what are the plans 
for a follow-up public meeting?   
 
Consultant Yazzie The next step is to start the prioritization and 
evaluation and to come back to the Transportation Commission at the July 
meeting to present the results. 
 
Commissioner Brennan Will there be a public meeting so residents in 
Chandler can come to the meeting to provide feedback or react to 
whatever the recommendations are?   
 
Mr. Crampton Through the Chair and Commissioner Brennan there are no 
plans for another public meeting with this study.   The public outreach that 
we conducted with the Family Bike Ride survey was critical in developing 
this.  
 
Commissioner Brennan They should have an opportunity to review and 
make comments. That is what the open meeting law is all about.  It’s 
providing an opportunity to the public to come to a meeting to talk about 
or listen to us - what comes out of this study.  
 
Mr. Crampton - I hear your point.  It is beyond of the scope of this current 
study.  
 
Commissioner Brennan Well then, we may be in violation of the Open 
Meeting Laws.   
 
Consultant Yazzie The parameter of this scope as well as the budget for 
this work effort – there could be value after the final recommendations is 
to post them on the project webpage.  Also, use the data base of emails 
and communicate with people – “hey, the recommendations are on the 
website for your review.  If you have questions or comments to respond

back”.  While it is not in the consultant’s scope of work wrapping it up, using 
the robust email list we have from the registration as well as people who 
responded to the survey to communicate that with them.  
 
Commissioner Brennan Will your Power Point presentation be on the 
website?   
 
Consultant Yazzie We can post that, yes. 
 
Chairman Henderson Any other questions?  Great thank you.   
 
INFORMATIONAL ITEMS  
 
Chairman Henderson next we will go to the May 22 Project Status Update. 
 
Mr. Crampton provided brief update:  
 
Cooper Road is completed.  
 
Chandler Heights and Ocotillo those projects are underway.  Completion 
scheduled for the winter of 2023 for Chandler Heights and fall of 2023 for 
Ocotillo Road.   
 
Chandler Heights Road Phase II - Gilbert to Val Vista is a project that will be 
under construction probably through the middle of 2024.  
 
Lindsay Road down in south Chandler.  That project will probably begin in 
the summer of 2024. 
 
These other projects are minor, and we have had updates on these so I will 
skip those.  Some of our projects for pedestrian, bicycle and transit projects 
– Frye Road Protected Bike Lanes is advancing and is close to finalizing the 
design.  The hope is to go out to bid later this year with construction to 
occur in 2024. 
 
Kyrene-Branch and Highline Canal Shared Use Path hope is to begin design 
this summer with construction in 24-25.

Ashley and Paseo Trails we plan to begin design and kickoff meeting 
tomorrow with construction is 24-25. 
 
Hunt Highway Bicycle Improvements we are in a hold with that study to 
allow the casino to finish their process of open so we can do some renewed 
analysis after the casino is open and traffic patterns have evolved to that 
open casino. 
 
Chandler Flex is continuing to operate and move people. At the next 
meeting we will have more of an update on that. 
 
Chairman Henderson Any questions about any of those projects? 
 
Commissioner Lucas I have a question Hunt Highway.  You mentioned the 
study has been delayed due to the delayed casino opening?  What is the 
date for the casino opening? 
 
Ms. Pachito responded it keeps being pushed from first quarter of 2023 
till later because it’s past the first quarter.  Do you know, Ryan? 
 
Mr. Peters It’s late summer.  Same issue that we are all facing with supply 
chain issue and construction crews.  It’s about ten months behind schedule. 
 
Chairman Henderson Any other questions? 
 
Commissioner Brennan On Lindsay Road I see the design is in progress.  
Will there be another meeting with the residence in that area once the 
design is completed?   
 
Mr. Crampton asked Kim Moon to address this.   
 
Mrs. Moon We do not have any other additional public meetings in the 
format I think you are referring to until we get closer to construction.  We 
do have other types of public meetings.  We’re meeting with property 
owners during right-a-way acquisitions individually as we acquire property. 
And then any opportunities when we take contracts to Council, we give 
them an update at that time as well.  We do not currently have additional 
public meetings scheduled individually at this time.

Commissioner Brennan Thank you.  Then the Ray Road and Dobson Road.  
You say the study is complete. Were there any public meetings in 
conjunction with that project?  
 
Mr. Crampton Not that I’m aware of. Kim you can correct me if I am wrong.  
It was more of a technical study.  
 
Commissioner Brennan Isn’t this the improvement of the intersection?  
 
Mrs. Moon That is correct.  It was a very small study.  Mostly to help identify 
the constraints being that we have significant overhead utilities lines on 
either side - north and south and understanding the traffic counts at a very 
high level are for turning movements.  And if we are going to propose to 
shift the alignment a little bit to the east or west or north or south.  So, it is 
very preliminary and used to prepare the application for some HSIP safety 
funding.  The city was successful in getting some grant funds to help 
supplement the project.  But when the design process begins there will be 
additional efforts at that time.  But not part of the pre-design.   
 
Commissioner Brennan Okay. So, there will be public meetings?  
 
Mrs. Moon To be clear we don’t have anything scheduled at this time. 
 
Commissioner Brennan I understand.  But you said there will be when 
you start work on the design?   
 
Mrs. Moon We usually have a public meeting during the design phase.  
That is the typical process.  I just don’t have confirmation or a date at this 
time.   
 
Commissioner Brennan That’s fine.  Thank you.    
 
MEMBER COMMENTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS - none 
 
CALENDAR 
Chairman Henderson The next scheduled meeting will be held on 
Wednesday, July 19, 2023.  
 
Meeting was adjourned.

________________________________________            _____________________________________ 
Dan Henderson, Chairman 
 
 
Sheri Passey, City of Chandler