Meeting #7 Minutes: March 4

Franklin Street Arterial Study Group

Meeting #7, March 4, 2008

Notes

Com. Members present: Alex Landry, Greg Martin, Liz Hoglund, Markos Miller, Katie Brown,  Mark Adelson, Cathi Debo, Ethan Boxer-Macomber, Mike Langehella, Laura Thibideau
Staff: Mike Bobinsky, Kathi Earley, Alex Jagerman, Bill Needelman,Greg Mitchell

Consultant: Mitch Rasor
1. Welcome and Introductions      

2. Introductory Presentation to invited Business and Property Owners  

• Markos Miller introduces Study Committee and Scope of Study
• Mike Bobinsky reviews data studied by Committee to date: Historical Franklin, acreage, traffic counts compared to High/State, Volumes along corridor, crash areas, Franklin crashes compared to High/State,
• Bill Needelmand reviews relevant development plans: Eastern Waterfront/Maine State Pier, Bayside Plan, Peninsula Traffic Study
• Mike Bobinsky follows up with new data uncovered by Study: Traffic Count Projection comparison, Transit Study recommendations, Travel time/consistency and predictability, Speeds and Ped safety, Traffic Calming/Economic Development/Sales
• Markos Miller presents Study Vision Statement, opens floor to questions and comments from public.

3. Input from Business and Property Owners       

• What opportunities do you see for your business or property given a redesigned Franklin Street?

     Comments:

• Please improve pedestrian crossing opportunities/safety
• Transportation Hub at Exit 7; park car, transit for peninsula
• Importance of Gateway Quality
• Don’t forget Tracot Trucks and other Commercial Vehicles; volume has tripled since 1970’s
• overhead pedestrian bridges are unsightly and unsafe, tunnels are not safe
• center lane as transit lane
• Original plan was to submerge road; should still pursue, lease space above
• can traffic signals be adjusted for better dlow?
• sinking the road may be worse than what you already have; cost projections do not include capping submerged road
• Would Eminent Domain be considered?  Response- highly unlikely, on contrary, land may be made available for purchase/development
• How do you evaluate the impacts on the neighborhoods
• choose 3 radically different concepts, be innovative
• consider funadability
• selling parcels may be a funding mechanism
• what is the process from here? planning board? city council? etc
• Could there be another way to get northbound traffic off of 295 to take load off of Exit 7?
• What is relationship to lack of North bound options and high number of left hand turns at Fox St?
• Get trafic count at Fox St.

4. Committee Continues Work on Performance Criteria.

• 9 Performance Criteria include: Motor Vehicles, Public Transportation, Pedestrians and Bicycles, Economic, Environmental Quality, Design, Land Use, Neighborhood Impacts, Implementation

5. Update on Public Workshop   

• Consultant Lucy Gibson has been called as an expert witness for a court case on April 1 and 2 and will not be able to attend Public Workshop planned for April 1. Committee decides to reschedule due to importance of having Lucy present at workshop. April 29th is choosen as best date; April 15 is 29th does not work. (Maine State Pier Workshop on April 11 is too clse to April 15th- seen as unnecessary burden on staff and community.

6. Homework: Choose 2-3 of your favorite Performance Standards and begin to flesh these out. 
7. Comments- reflections on public comments

• want a design that Ray xxx of VIP will be satisfied with
• keep trucks in mind
• 3 very different options
• traffic follows path of least resistance, be aware of it’s desire to redirect
• Importance of connecting neighborhoods; safe crossings for kids and seniors
• casts and practicality, funding solutions
• transit hub, parking garage at 295, not waterfront
• reality that ‘Tunnel’ concept is still alive
• self-funding is a possibility
• Business development on Franklin
• danger of shifting traffic to other streets
• what is data on economic impact?
• what is the cost?

Public Comment

• PSA is interested in helping to plan workshop: clear objectives, focus, structure, usable end products
• check in with Vision Statement; performance criteria should be rooted in Vision Statement, don’t get to detailed, can be qualitative
• provide some context for traffic numbers, compare to other streets
• Connect MSP to Franklin in discussion
• Don’t let fundability limit creativity

Next Mtg  Preparation for Public Workshop

Mar 18  Performance Criteria

Discussion Points