Transportation Commission Minutes 1.17.2024

City of Chandler — Regular Meeting (2024-04-17)

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 43728 characters

MINUTES OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING
City of Chandler, Webex Meeting

Wednesday, January 17, 2024, at 4:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Chair Repar called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. Ms. Sheri Passey completed
roll call. Quorum present.

Members in Attendance:
Chair John Repar
Vice Chair David Heineking
Commissioner Dean Brennan
Commissioner Dan Henderson
Commissioner David Lucas
Commissioner Molly Olsen

Members Absent:
Commissioner Luis Heredia

Staff Members Present:
Jason Crampton, Transportation Planning Manager
Nancy Jackson, Transportation Planning Program Coordinator
Raistlin Snow, Intern, Transportation Policy
Sheri Passey, Recording Secretary, Management Assistant
John Knudson, Public Works Director
Daniel Haskins, Principal Engineer
John McFarland, Transportation Manager

Others Present
Sanjay Paul, Presenter

SCHEDULED/UNSCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES
None

Chair Repar Called the meeting to order but before Roll Call he reminded
commission members that in order to speak you must be recognized by the chair.
He asked that the commissioner requesting to speak to state their name and

proceed with their comments. He reminded commissioners not to interrupt the
individual speaking and to wait to be recognized. Commissioners should stick to
the agenda, and we will be talking about possible agenda items for 2024. Some
suggestions will be allowed but keep it to the item/topic. It is the sole responsibility
of city staff to determine whether the item/topic is going to be addressed, to assign
staff and resources to projects. The input being provided is appreciated. He
proceeded to request Roll Call.

CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of the Minutes of the Transportation Commission Regular
Meeting of December 6, 2023.

Chair Repar The first agenda item is the approval of the previous
meetings minutes. Has everyone had a chance to review those? Can I
have a motion to approve the minutes?

Commissioner Lucas I So moved.

Vice Chair Heineking I seconded the motion.

Chair Repar Are there any other comments about the minutes from the
last meeting?

Chair Repar All in favor say I. Any opposed? None.

Motion passes 6-0 by all Commissioner members present. Minutes
approved.

ACTION AGENDA

No items.

BRIEFINGS

Chair Repar Introduced the briefing on the Hunt Highway Traffic Calming
and Separated Bike Lane Study.

2. Hunt Highway Traffic Calming and Separated Bike Lane Study

Mr. Jason Crampton Thank you Mr. Chairman. Members of the commission we
have presented this study previously and are close to wrapping this study up. There
will be one more presentation for you. I will be presenting some of the slides and
our consultant Sanjay Paul from HDR will be presenting with me.

Background information: This study stemmed from our Transportation Master Plan,
which was updated in 2019. The study area is Hunt Highway between Val Vista and
Cooper Rd. The Transportation Master Plan called out this area to look at the
potential for traffic calming and bicycle improvements. We received a grant through
MAG to conduct this study and have been exploring solutions over the past couple
of years. The project was slowed down multiple times to allow for the casino
construction and to analyze traffic patterns post casino. We needed to plan for the
different traffic operations that were going to be seen in the future. We were able to
complete traffic counts after the casino opened and we believe our numbers are
more reliable.

A closer look at the study area. This is a three-mile project with the casino and
agricultural land to the south and residential on the north side of Hunt Highway.
Important notes. First, this is a study only. We do not have funding in the CIP for
final design or construction. The pavement condition is not great and may have to
be addressed which could become a future CIP. This may present an opportunity to
incorporate some of these elements, but again this is a study with no funding at this
time. These are important elements that we are analyzing with this study. Public
outreach was done to get feedback from the neighborhood communities and people
who use the corridor, with a lot of good progress. Grants might be pursued. If we
have the opportunity to advance this project through grants we will do so. It is
challenging in this area to get grant funding because the population densities are so
low on the south side. We will continue to seek grants as we see the opportunity.
Finally, I wanted to highlight the fact that these are concepts only. To advance any of
the concepts we would have to go through a greater level of detail, and we may find
issues with some of the concepts, particularly at intersections where we have limited
space. The concepts are great and a lot of interest from the public. There are details
that will have to be worked out which can complicate things if the project moves
forward into design. I will turn it over to our consultant Sanjay Paul to continue the
presentation.

Mr. Paul Thank you Jason. Before discussing the findings, I wanted to discuss our
existing conditions. Hunt Highway is on the border of the City of Chandler and the
Gila River Indian Community (south). The corridor goes east to west. Along the north

side we have Chandler subdivisions and on the south side there is nothing other than
the casino. Even though it is somewhat of a suburban area when people drive, they
feel that rural environment because there is nothing there (south side). Traffic
calming was one of the objectives of the study. We have one lane in each direction
and two-way left-hand center turn lanes. At the major intersection (lighted traffic
control) there are two dedicated left-hand turn lanes. On the east side of the
corridor, it bends at 90 degrees which turns into the Town of Gilbert.

We delayed the project until after the casino was constructed. We collected traffic
data before and after the casino. We collected speed data before and after the casino
to see the effect of how alcohol and gambling contributed to our speed on the
corridor. Before the casino we had around maximum of weekday of 6,400 vehicles
per day. After the casino it went up to 7,200 vehicles per day. Depending on the
location overall traffic increased around 1,000 to1,300 on a daily based. When we
received the traffic data from Gila River Indian Community consultant, we saw the
traffic magnitude higher. In terms of speed, we didn’t see a significant difference.
However, existing conditions is a major issue. Those are the parameters traffic
engineers used. Fifty-five miles per hour is the 85th percentile speed. The posted
speed limit on that corridor is 45 miles per hour. Digging harder into the data, we
found 8 to 9% of people are driving over 65 miles per hour on a 45 mile per hour
corridor. Speeding is a big issue. The crash data was also extracted from Arizona
Department of Transportation database and saw there were 18 crashed in the last
five years on that small corridor and two fatalities. Bicyclist were involved in those
fatal crashes.

Objectives are traffic calming and to enhance or improve bicycle and pedestrian
experience and safety. A list of potential treatments was developed. After meeting
with Jason’s team and city traffic engineering team we narrowed it down to three
measures that could potentially be considered to fulfill our objectives.

Design Alternatives: First, was Protected Shared Use Path. Details of each alternative
are in the following slides. Second was the Cycle Track which is a little bit of a new
concept in the East Valley area. The last one was Protected Bike Lanes along both
sides. For the major intersections we wanted to see if roundabouts could be an
option without acquiring a lot of right-away. Whatever existing area there is was
there any way we can fit in a roundabout. Maybe the big delivery truck may not be
able to make a U-turn but can at least make a left turn. The nature of a roundabout
forces drivers to slow down so we wanted to explore that option. We ran it by the
public to determine interest. Some of the low-cost emerging technology, for

example, the Dynamic Switch Feedback Sign have been in the valley for a while. We
wanted to check if people like that. That’s another proven option by the federal
government, that does help slow down drivers.

Option 1- Shared Use Path: There is one lane in each direction and center two-way
left turn lane. Along the north side we have a sidewalk. All the solutions are available
on our side. This option explored expanding or widen the existing sidewalk from 5
feet to 10 feet, creating side friction to slow drivers down by installing a physical
median with vegetation and narrowing the lanes. At the major intersection areas, we
would provide a dedicated left hand turn lane.

Option 2 – Protected Cycle Track: We had the community engagement/public
outreach. Almost 200 people from the neighborhood responded to the online
survey. People are engaged and the community wants to see changes that improves
safety for them to either bike or walk. A good blend of people who are occasional or
casual bikers and very confident bikers. This option works really well to
accommodate both of those markets because we have the bike track that is a
dedicated place where both directional bikers can use and there is the physical
median with vegetation from the high-speed vehicles. The bicycle is totally protected
from the high-speed vehicles and that gives them the confidence for biking.

Option 3 – Protected Bike Lanes: The existing condition is a single vehicle lane in
each direction with a single solid white line separating the bike lanes. The thought is
to narrow the vehicle lanes to create side friction to slow drivers and using the extra
space to provide some type of physical median with paver or vegetation to provide
the physical separation between bicyclists and drivers.

Alternatives’ Relative Performance: As the three options were narrowed down, we
met with Jason and the traffic team to discuss the pros and cons and identified a list
of performance indicators because we needed to rank the design alternatives. The
last three columns include the Community Acceptance (perception), Score W/O
Community Input and Score W/ Community Input. The rankings were close in terms
of safety, construction costs and all the other factors but with the community input
the Protected Cycle Track received the higher score. However, this is not the final
decision. We will need to go through all the details and parameters because the
conceptual plans were evaluated from a very high planning level.

Planning Level Budgetary Costs: The next level of the planning is the budgetary costs.
How much it will cost to plan accordingly. This is a very high priority corridor even

though it is only three miles. There is not enough traffic compared to a major arterial,
however the community wants to see changes to feel confident to go biking or
walking. When we talked with the stakeholders, the Town of Gilbert mentioned they
have a CIP project to improve their portion of Hunt Highway. Mr. Paul then turned
the time back over to Mr. Crampton.

Mr. Crampton Mr. Chairman, members of the commission I will go through the
feedback received on the survey and our public meeting. We received over 200
responses (238). The first question - “What is your connection to Hunt Highway?”
The overwhelming majority are residents who live in the area. Others who
responded are recreational bicyclist and to a smaller extent commuters that drive in
the area. Question 2 - respondents were asked to rate their bicycling confidence.
The average rating was 2.6 out of four. Question 3 – asked what they like best about
the Hunt Highway corridor. The neighborhoods and easy drive are the most
common as well as great corridor to bike. Questions 4 – “What issues do you perceive
about the Hunt Highway corridor (choose up to 3)?” The most common was high
speeding, next unsafe biking and then distracted driving. Those were the three most
important issues around safety. The least prevalent answer was none – there are no
issues on Hunt Highway. Most respondents do see some issues and other issues
brought up had to do with lighting, poor pavement conditions, inadequate crossings
for pedestrian or cyclists and drainage.

Question 5 – “What improvements would you like to see added to the Hunt Highway
corridor (check all that apply)?” The top three responses had to do with bicycling
improvements. The most popular was the Cycling Track option with bikes going in
two different directions behind one protective median barrier on one side of the
road. The second most popular was the Shared Use Path which would widen the
sidewalk on the north side of the road. And the third most popular was the Protected
Bike Lanes, which would have a protected bike lane on both north and south side of
the road. Behind the most popular suggestions was traffic calming and then lighting.
The least popular response was making no improvements to the area. The question
asking for the primary mode of transportation along the corridor was car, but a larger
segment of the survey population that bikes being their primary mode of
transportation on this corridor.

Public Meeting: A public meeting was held on November 2, and didn’t get great public
attendance. The three people who attended took an interest in the bike
improvements and the traffic circle (roundabout). Their overall feedback was
consistent with what we heard on this survey.

Project Timelines/Upcoming Milestones: We are wrapping up the study and close to
finalizing it. We wanted to share what we had received so far with the commission
and receive any last feedback from the commission so it can be included into the
report. We are looking at finalizing the report by the end of this month, if not, then
in early February. I will turn the time back over to the chair and will be happy to
answer any questions or comments.

Chair Repar Commented. That’s my area of town and I drive that on a regular basis.
I think the open reservation on the one side is what makes the area attractive to walk
and to ride bikes because the open view. Why doesn’t it extend all the way to Arizona
Ave.? Why isn’t this project going all the way through if it’s a feeder road for the
freeway. Anything you make good up here isn’t going to be good if you are choking
it down here. Why doesn’t it extend to Arizona Ave?

Mr. Crampton Responded. Mr. Chairman, members of the commission, the
Transportation Master Plan called for Cooper Road to Val Vista to be analyzed so that
is why the study looked at that area. You are not the first person to ask that question.
So as this study advances, or if the study advances into something beyond just a
study we can look at extending that to the west. However, once you get west of
McQueen you run into a lot of Maricopa County unincorporated area, which would
be a challenge getting all the way to Arizona Ave. But we could certainly extend this
a little further to the west.

Chair Repar Commented. If it could be connected with the canal it would make a
loop for bicycle riding. That would encourage more people to use it.

Commissioner Lucas Asked. What is the timeframe for the Town of Gilbert to push
through on Hunt Highway to connect to Higley?

Mr. Crampton Responded. Through the chairman, Commissioner Lucas they have
not pushed that forward within their ten (10) year CIP, so not within the next ten
years. It is included in their CIP, so they believe it is an important project, but it’s an
expensive and challenging project.

Commissioner Lucas Requested a follow-up question. Looking at figure 21 and 22
it is showing the number of accidents at Gilbert Rd and Hunt Highway. It is now
signalized. What about at Val Vista and Hunt Highway? Are there any plans for that
to be signalized or does it meet any of the signal warrants to make that a signaled
intersection to potentially address those issues?

Mr. Crampton Responded. Through the Chair, Commissioner Lucas. Right now, it
would not meet the warrants. If Gilbert (town) extends that roadway to the east that
could change things. But I suspect it wouldn’t because Gilbert Rd extends south past
Hunt Highway and didn’t warrant a signal until the casino was built. Once the casino
was built it warranted a signal. At Val Vista I don’t think there is enough activity that
would warrant a signal, maybe a four-way stop or something like that.

Commissioner Brennan Commented. I have been a planner all my life and I’ve seen
a lot of land use plans and transportation plans. This is one of the best transportation
plans I have seen. First of all, it’s based on the quality of what’s been included. It’s
actually a fun read and very interesting. I thought the public process made a lot of
sense. I did have a question about the online survey. How did you notify and get
people involved in responding to the survey?

Mr. Crampton Responded. Through the Chair, Commissioner Brennan. We utilized
social media, primarily Next Door to target a certain area. We did not do direct
mailers for this particular survey, but Next Door and some additional outreach to
stakeholders.

Commissioner Brennan Asked. How many meetings did you have with G.R.I.C. (Gila
River Indian Community) as far as what their plans are, or did you even get into that
as it relates to their side of Hunt Highway?

Mr. Crampton Responded. Mr. Chair, Commissioner Brennan. We met with G.R.I.C.
one-time regarding this study. However, when the casino was being developed the
city met with the casino multiple times, so we had a very good base to begin the
study. But as far as this particular study it was one-time. We got their feedback. They
appreciated what we were trying to do, and shared concerns about speeding on the
corridor and were very interested in what we were doing.

Commissioner Brennan Asked. In the report it mentioned they are going to build a
hotel; I assume that is east of the casino. Do they have any other plans for the area
on the south side of Hunt Highway? Or maybe they have other plans they just didn’t
discuss them.

Mr. Crampton Responded. Through the Chairman, Commissioner Brennan. I do not
believe they have other expansion plans besides the hotel. Maybe a restaurant or
something to go with the hotel, but it would be a smaller area and not intended to

be a larger casino and development. John (Knudson), have you heard anything
beyond that?

Mr. John Knudson Responded. They are keeping things pretty close to the vest.
They aren’t talking a lot so it’s hard to know what they have in mind. They are
perfectly content keeping things quiet. They did choose to build their own
wastewater plant and provide their own water. That tells you they have bigger plans
than just a wastewater connection to the city, which is how it started.

Commissioner Brennan Commented on public meetings. I don’t know whether I’m
the only person to help at public meetings, but in the future, I would like to be advised
and invited because I think they are interesting. The people you see at public
meetings have a pretty good sense of what’s going on.

Chair Repar asked if there are any other comments or questions?

Commissioner Henderson Commented through the chair. As I was reading the
report, I thought it was really well done. Right-of way was looked at. From the lens
of right-of-way or rather round-abouts was it and-or-issue of use? Do they work
together? Do they work separately? Given the restraints that right-of-way has in this
area. I was curious about that.

Mr. Paul Responded. The round-about options are mainly for the intersections to
physically make an obstacle for drivers. They can go with any of the three options
we discussed and are for the entire corridor and they can go together or separately.

Commissioner Henderson Asked. Are you looking for feedback from this group as
to what direction in regard to those three options we prefer or is that essentially a
staff call, a financial call? What role can we play?

Mr. Crampton Responded. With this study we are not looking at identifying which
options is the option that we will advance. Future analysis needs to be done. We
have shown at a high level that the three options are all feasible. We need to dig
deeper to see the feasibility of all of them. It’s going to be more of an engineering
effort to look at those. The public outreach was very important to gauge if one of
these options was not acceptable by the community, we could throw that option out.
All three passed the test. We certainly would like to hear feedback from the
commission if there’s a thought that one of these options is no good and shouldn’t
be continued forward. But we are not looking for a consensus on one option.

Commissioner Henderson Asked. In the report it looks like right-of-way acquisition
can be sort of a sticky wicket. Is that right-of-way acquisition and given the ownership
along that southern boarder going to persuade you in one way or another in terms
of the three options?

Mr. Crampton Responded. Commissioner Henderson that will be a factor. We
cannot expand to the south at all. The Gila River Indian Community property is right
up against the curve line and the ownership of that property is complicated. It’s not
general public land owned by the tribe there are interesting ownership patterns. The
Gila River Community does not have the ability to manage that property if they
wanted to partner with us. We can look at the right-a-way on the northern side
because there is a wide area with landscaping but obtaining right-of-way adds to
the cost, complexity, and duration of the project. Right-of-way is a consideration.

Commissioner Henderson Commented. Feedback perspective, I like the comments
made on connecting over to Arizona Ave and the further you can go west to create
that bicycle connection and continuity it’s worth it from my perspective.

Commissioner Brennan Questioned. I-10 is being designed for widening. Do you
know if ADOT is planning on having an interchange at Huint Highway? Obviously,
Hunt Highway could continue over I-10.

Mr. Crampton Responded. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Brennan. Not as part of
this current project that is going on. As far as I’m aware of. It would take an extension
of Hunt Highway, but I haven’t heard of any plans.

Commissioner Brennan Comment. I know in North Phoenix they built a couple of
interchanges and one of them is still waiting to be constructed to the connecting
street(s). It may be an opportunity and maybe they are talking to G.R.I.C. about that
now.

Mr. Paul Commented. Commissioner Brennan, HD is the general engineering
consultant for HDR to ADOT on the I-10 project. For I-10 we are talking with the
reservation on the Germann Rd only. ADOT did not receive the grant application, so
funding is coming out of the state fund. There is no federal fund.

Commissioner Lucas Commented. One more vote in favor for that connection to
the west with Arizona Ave and the canal. I think it’s definitely something that could

be considered, especially given that it is more than ten years in the future. But
eventually it will be continued further into Gilbert. It makes sense that we aren’t
creating a gap.

One other question. What follow-up is going to be done? We had a great outreach
with the public in support for the survey. Is there going to be any outreach done to
provide them with the results? There might be some expectations from those that
something is going to happen in the near future and provide a realistic deadline and
some of the issues involved.

Mr. Crampton Responded. One of the questions on the survey was to provide
contact information, if you would like for the follow-up information about this. We
can share the final study with those people who took that and update the website so
they can have information about some of the next steps.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

3. 2024 Transportation Projects/Potential Discussion Items

Chair Repar Next is item #3 - The 2024 Transportation Projects/Potential Discussions
of upcoming topics for this year’s meetings.

Mr. Crampton Mr. Chairman, thank you. We have prepared a list of potential items
for calendar year 2024. These are transportation projects that the city is working on
or being worked on in the region that could become discussion items for the
commission. Some items will be commission agenda items over the next year. I want
to note that just because an item is on this list it is not necessarily guaranteed to
become an agenda item to be discussed. Items have been placed into categories.
Roadways/General
Transportation
Projects/Topic,
Active
Transportation
Projects/Topics, and Transit Projects/Topics.

Roadway/General Transportation. Proposition 479. This has been discussed as
Proposition 400 Extension the past several years. This is moving forward to the ballot
as Proposition 479 and is a half-cent sales tax extension. As it gets closer to the
public vote, we will likely discuss this again.

Diamond Grind Treatment for Freeways. Historically, the region has used rubberized
asphalt to mitigate noise. The region is now moving towards diamond grind to
reduce lifecycle cost and improve the longevity of the sound reduction treatment.

Loop 202 Widening: Price Road to Val Vista Drive. This project is adding two new
lanes in each direction on the 202 from Price Rd to Val Vista. ADOT has presented to
us once. Construction is potentially scheduled later this year.

Lindsay Road and Chandler Heights Roadway Projects are currently in design or may
have moved to the right-of-way acquisition stage but are getting closer to
construction. Both projects are in southeast Chandler and are scheduled for
construction in calendar year 2025/2026.

Finally, the Roadway Safety Action Plan. There is an opportunity for a federal grant
called Safe Streets for All. To be eligible for this funding we need a roadway safety
action plan. The grant could finance some infrastructure improvements for active
transportation projects and/or other transportation projects. The safe streets
program can provide funding for the city to develop that plan.

Active Transportation topics. Hunt Highway has been added to the list. Protected
Bike Lanes Study was completed last year and being finalized, but it could come back
to the commission.

Kyrene Branch and Highline Canal Shared Use Paths. We are in final design now
which will add a path along some canal banks in west Chandler. It was discussed as
a study and public outreach is complete.

Ashley Trail and Paseo Trail connection, which was shared with the commission last
year. This project is in final design. We have not reached the public outreach phase
but will sometime this year and bring it back to the commission.

Frye Road Protected Bike Lanes. We had hoped the project would be under
construction, but the market was not great when we put it out to bid. With our design
consultant we are looking at some revisions to make it more cost efficient and
attractive to construction firms.

These two projects are studies that are just getting started and are likely to be
brought to the commission this year. The Arizona Ave Shared Use Path Study on
Arizona Ave from Ray Rd. to Elliot Rd. is looking at pedestrian and bicycle
improvements for that section on Arizona Ave. The Citywide Pedestrian
Infrastructure Study will look to identify and inventory areas with missing sidewalks
throughout the city and develop a strategy to address this issue. These two separate

studies are being conducted simultaneously but are using the same consultant as a
citywide administrative infrastructure study.

Transit Projects/Topics. Chandler Flex has been in operation for about a year and a
half. The grant is expiring this year, but we hope to continue the service. Chandler
Airpark Area Flexible Transit Study. This has been presented to the commission a
couple of times and will come back sometime this year.

The Valley Metro IGA Amendment is the agreement with VM where we set our transit
service level for the year and our costs. Will come back to the commission sometime
this summer.

Short Range Transit Program is a five year plan that Valley Metro maintains for the
region on behalf of the cities. The city provides input if we wish to make changes to
our transit service over the next five year.

Finally, Transit Title VI Plan, 2024 Update. Historically, an update is required every
three years. The last update was in 2021. We have not been notified by the City of
Phoenix it will be required but we are anticipating it will. The update will require
action from the commission before we take it to Council.

That wraps of the projects to be considered before the commission for agenda items.
Mr. Crampton turned the time back over to the chair.

Chair Repar Are there any comments or questions?

Commissioner Brennan Asked about the Arizona Ave Shared Use Path Study. You
mentioned this is from Ray to Elliot. Why not continue it all the way to the Western
Canal? There is a shared use path along the western canal that I believe was
constructed by the city in collaboration with SRP. It goes along the Western Canal
east to downtown Gilbert and connects to the west across – if it doesn’t cross the
freeway now, eventually it will. It’s just another half mile. There’s an opportunity to
consider.

Mr. Crampton Responded. Commissioner Brennan we can look at that and discuss
it with our consultant to see if there is an opportunity.

Chair Repar Asked if there were any other comments?

Commissioner Brennan Commented. I have my list mentioned at the last meeting.
My intent was not to absolutely have 12 meeting but to mention there were a number
of projects/ideas/discussions I had asked staff about. I would like to go through
those quickly, so the commissioners are aware. I have copies.

The first item is the Downtown Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan. It was presented to the
transportation commission in 2022 by John. That was taking a look at the pedestrian
environment and the need for Wayfinding in downtown Chandler. Some
improvements were going to be completed at the end of the year, but those have
been put off until sometime this spring. Is that correct? It’s just for information and
to know what is going on.

The second is Complete Streets. This is a concept, if that is the right terminology. I
believe this is a requirement of the Safe Street for All federal legislation. Maybe that
would be incorporated into the Roadway Safety Action Plan. Commonly used in a lot
of great communities. The real focus is on making streets comfortable environments
for all users, not just for cars. I think the Hunt Highway design is looking in that
direction with the landscaping, shared use path, and separation of vehicles from the
pedestrian environment.

Vision Zero is another concept/program to reduce traffic incidents and traffic
fatalities.

The Chandler Protected Bike Lane Study, which Jason mentioned.

The Bike and Trail Master Plan. This was a recommendation of the Parks Strategic
Master Plan, which was adopted by city council about a year and a half ago. I asked
city staff who was going to do this bike and trail master plan and they responded
public works or whatever the name of your department is now. I don’t know the
status of that - If it is somewhere down the road. It relates to the pedestrian and
shared use path study and would be useful from the perspective of linking everything
together in completing the system.

The Unified Development Code for the City of Chandler. It’s just to take a look at it
from the transportation standpoint, not that doesn’t occur now, but maybe gets back
to the Complete Street and Safe Streets idea and having some input from the
transportation commission.

Arizona Avenue Alternative Analysis. This was a study conducted by Valley Metro
regarding service along Arizona Ave whether it would be light rail or bus lanes. We
took action or we made a recommendation, but I don’t know whether that ever went
to city council for final action. To me, if it hasn’t been formally adopted by city council
it’s not formally adopted.

MAG Active Transportation Plan. The Active Transportation Plan is part of, as I
identify it as Prop 400E, which is 400 extended. A lot of work was done over the last
five or six years. The focus of active transportation is how do we use transportation
to get people out riding their bikes, walking, and hiking as part of the investment in
the overall transportation system. It has a lot of good ideas as far as what could be
done in the Metro areas with regards to connecting various cities as far as trails and
shared use paths.

Lindsay Road Street Improvements – Jason mentioned.

Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. City projects which receive federal funding
must comply with federal requirements to be in compliance. That’s one of the
reasons the transportation commission exists is to make recommendations to the
city council as part of that process. I think it would be helpful for city staff whether it
be from the legal department or who would be involve giving a presentation as to
the requirements of Title VI to the transportation commission on how we comply
with Title VI and what is the role of the transportation commission in that process.
Those are the ten items that I have identified.

Chair Repar Thank you for your effort. You put quite a bit of time into this over an
extended period of time.

Commissioner Brennan Commented. Of those ten items I think the Title VI would
be the most helpful to the transportation commission…and some of the others.
Thank you.

Chair Repar Any other comments from the other commissioners? Very complete
and comprehensive list to look at.

Vice Chair Heineking Commented. I agree. There is definitely a lot of overlap on a
number of these. If you are looking for agenda items there is some great background
information that I personally could benefit from and probably all of us in terms of
helping us make informed decisions and being good commissioners.

Chair Repar That covers the Potential Discussion Status Update. Any further
member comments?

Mr. Crampton Responded. Mr. Chairman I would like to pause on the January
Project Status. We have Dan Haskins, our new Capital Projects Manager. If it is okay
with the Chairman, he will walk through the list.

Mr. Haskins Presented. Through the chair, Dan Haskins. ST1614 Chandler Heights
Road us currently under construction and will be completed in the spring 2024.

ST1616 Ocotillo Rd is Gilbert Rd to 148th St, construction finishing up and is punch list
phase.

ST1804 Chandler Heights Rd. This is Phase 3, Gilbert Rd to Val Vista and is in the
design process. Possibly obligated in May and going to construction this summer.

ST2001 Lindsay Road Improvements. Ocotillo to Hunt Highway. We are in the design
phase and construction scheduled winter of 2024.

ST2007 Hamilton Rd Improvements. Design finished and will be going out to bid
soon.

ST2009 Dobson Rd at Intel Driveways. Construction is complete and working on as-
builts.

ST2012 Arterial Congestion Monitoring. Construction is complete and working on
the integration system and should be complete in about 90-days.

ST2103 Ray Rd and Dobson Rd Intersection Imp. Study is complete with the design
phase starting this winter.

ST2112 Alley Rehab. Project design complete. It will open for bids and construction
should start in March.

ST2110 Chandler Video Detection Cameras. Construction is complete and working
on punch list items.

ST2209 Chandler Local Detection and Communication Systems. Construction in
progress.

ST2210 Chandler ICM Detection and Communication Systems. Construction in
progress.

ST2301 Armstrong Way and Hamilton Street Improvement. Design underway.
Construction tentatively scheduled for fall 2024.

ST2303 Cooper Rd – Insight Loop Extension. Pre-design completed and trying to get
a NTP (Notice to Proceed) in February.

That is all the roadway projects. I will turn it back over to Jason for the transit projects.

Mr. Crampton Commented. Mr. Chair before I go through the Pedestrian, Bicycle
and Transit Projects I wanted to see if you wanted more information.

Chair Repar Asked. Lindsay Road there is that section that didn’t go through the
widen right above Ocotillo. There is one section where it hasn’t’ been widened. What
happened there? Not sure who’s jurisdiction it belongs to.

Mr. Crampton Responded. I think the section you are referring to may belong to the
Town of Gilbert. Within the vicinity of this project there are multiple areas that have
not been widened.

Chair Repar Commented. It’s the area that has four lanes, down to two lanes and
back again to four lanes for 200-300 yards. I don’t know where the boarder is in that
area. Is this a Gilbert project?

Mr. Crampton Responded. The City of Chandler - a lot of development quarters is
depending on private development. As subdivisions build, they might widen the
roadway and there could be land that is built out where the roadway hasn’t been
widened.

Mr. Knudson Responded. Look for street signs. If they are brown, it’s Chandler. If
they aren’t brown it belongs to another city.

Commissioner Lucas Asked. About the closed-out Cooper Rd Widening Project. The
project looked great, but I noticed over the past several months there is no

maintenance being done on the medians. A lot of trees are dead, there are
tumbleweeds and weeds. It has become very unsightly. Is that a responsibility of
the contractor for a certain amount of time or is it handed over to city or has
something been lost in between.

Mr. MacFarland Responded. We are working on that. We had some trouble with
the way the trees were planted, it fell out of warranty, and we were going back and
forth with contractor.

Chair Repar Asked. Where is this street again…Cooper and…?

Commissioner Lucas Responded. This is Cooper just north of Riggs.

Chair Repar Responded. Yes, I agree. That is in my neighborhood.

Mr. Crampton Mr. Chairman, if there are no further questions on the roadway
projects I will talk briefly on the Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Projects. Frye Road
the design contract is being revised to make it a more cost effective and competitive
project. We hope to move into construction towards the end of this calendar year.
Additional grant funding is being pursued to help with the bike part of the project
but also to repave the entire roadway.

Kyrene Branch and Highline Canal. We have gone through the initial public process,
but more public outreach will be done. We are at 30% of the design level and working
towards 60% design plan. Project has construction and grant funding in 2025.

Ashley and Paseo Trails Connection. This is a locally funded project so no restrictions
to the timeline by any federal grant. We are moving to 60% design plans. This project
will add a pedestrian traffic signal to help people get across Cooper Rd when using
Ashley Train and connect to the Paseo Trail.

Finalizing the Protected Bike Lanes Study.

Chandler Flex has six months left on the initial grant. An extension on the contract
with Via (contractor) is required to continue the service. The one-year extension will
carry us from July 2024 through June 2025. Other grant funds are being pursued.
That concludes the Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Projects.

Commissioner Brennan Asked. On the street projects where there is no funding
indicated are those federal funds? There are federal funds for almost every project
but there are three that having nothing indicated. One has grant funds. Is it all
federal dollars?

Mr. Crampton Responded. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner Brennan, those three
without funding sources are collector streets. Typically grant funding may be pursued
for roadways that have a regional impact, which collector streets are not.

Commissioner Brennan Asked. Ray and Dobson Road it says the design work has
begun as far as the intersection design? That was supposed to start the winter of
2023. Is that a reality?

Mr. Haskins Responded. Mr. Chairman, Commissioner, yes, we have a designer and
design in underway.

Mr. Crampton Responded. They are in the early stages of design.

Commissioner Brennan Asked. If I have any questions, I should ask you (Mr.
Haskins)?

Chair Repar Asked. Any further comments? That is our January 2024 Project Status.
Thank you, Jason. Member Comments and Announcements.

Commissioner Brennan Stated. I do have questions about…

Chair Repar Recognized Commissioner Brennan.

Commissioner Brennan Asked. This is about legislation. I was hoping to ask Ryan.
Maybe I could send it to him and asked about the wacko things in the legislature to
prevent certain activities with regards to communities and what they can do to
reduce the level…oh I’m not going to go through this I will just contact. If anyone is
interested and wants to address all these issues of the legislature, let me know. I will
get you the information.

MEMBER COMMENTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS

Mr. Crampton Mr. Chairman, members of the commission in your packet is a flyer
for a bike giveaway project occurring in Chandler. There is an opportunity to
volunteer in February.

Commissioner Lucas Announced. There is a major event coming up. Phoenix will
host the Intelligent Transportation Society of America Conference at the Phoenix
Convention Center April 22 – 25th. Its focus is on technology. They will talk about a
lot of ITS devices connected vehicles and automated vehicles. My employer is MCDOT
and we will be doing some demos in Anthem, touring ADOT traffic
operations/management center. On the first day, April 22 there is an exhibited hall
with different manufacturers. Discounted registration is available to local agencies
and staff. If you would like more information, you can reach out to me.

CALENDAR

Chair Repar The next scheduled meeting?

Mr. Crampton Responded. The next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, April 17,
2024.

Chair Repar Any other comments or new items? No, I adjourn this meeting.

Meeting was adjourned.

________________________________________ _____________________________________
John Repar, Chairman

Sheri Passey, City of Chandler