The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06/09/2025 - Regular Agenda Packet - Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board College Station, TX Meeting Agenda Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, TX 77840 Internet: www.microsoft.com/microsoft-teams/join-a-meeting Meeting ID: 258 702 381 255 9 | Passcode: ZP7uJ9QV Phone: +1 979-431-4880 | Phone Conference ID: 347 290 912# The City Council may or may not attend this meeting. June 9, 2025 3:30 PM 1938 Executive Conference Room College Station, TX Page 1 Notice is hereby given that a quorum of the meeting body will be present in the physical location stated above where citizens may also attend in order to view a member(s) participating by video conference call as allowed by 551.127, Texas Government Code. The City uses a third party vendor to host the virtual portion of the meeting; if virtual access is unavailable, meeting access and participation will be in-person only. 1. Call meeting to order and consider absence requests. 2. Hear Visitors. At this time, the Chairperson will open the floor to citizens wishing to address issues not already scheduled on today's agenda. Each citizen’s presentation will be limited to three minutes in order to allow adequate time for the completion of the agenda items. Comments will be received and city staff may be asked to look into the matter, or the matter may be placed on a future agenda for discussion. A recording may be made of the meeting; please give your name and address for the record. 3. Agenda Items 3.1. Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve the meeting minutes. Attachments: 1. May 12, 2025 Minutes 3.2. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the status of existing programs identified in the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan. Sponsors: Carl Ahrens Attachments: 1. Master Plan Programs Not Achieved or in Progress 3.3. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the Corridor Feasibility Study being performed as part of the Active Transportation Master Plan. Sponsors: Jesse Dimeolo Attachments: 1. Poster Boards with Comments and Votes 2. Online Survey Results 3.4. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding an update of grant applications planned to be submitted related to walking and biking. Sponsors: Jason Schubert 3.5. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding considerations of bicycle and pedestrian connections to transit stops and an initial evaluation of existing conditions. Sponsors: Page 1 of 36 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board Page 2 June 9, 2025 Attachments: 1. Public Transit Considerations and Initial Assessment 3.6. Presentation and discussion regarding the following items related to biking, walking, and greenways. a. Public Meetings of Interest b. Capital and Private Project Updates 3.7. Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board calendar of upcoming meetings. a. July 21, 2025 ~ Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board at 3:30pm in the 1938 Executive Conference Room. 4. Discussion and possible action on future agenda items. A member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. 5. Adjourn. Adjournment into Executive Session may occur in order to consider any item listed on the agenda if a matter is raised that is appropriate for Executive Session discussion. I certify that the above Notice of Meeting was posted on the website and at College Station City Hall, 1101 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas, on June 4, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. City Secretary This building is wheelchair accessible. Persons with disabilities who plan to attend this meeting and who may need accommodations, auxiliary aids, or services such as interpreters, readers, or large print are asked to contact the City Secretary’s Office at (979) 764-3541, TDD at 1-800-735-2989, or email adaassistance@cstx.gov at least two business days prior to the meeting so that appropriate arrangements can be made. If the City does not receive notification at least two business days prior to the meeting, the City will make a reasonable attempt to provide the necessary accommodations. Penal Code § 30.07. Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun. "Pursuant to Section 30.07, Penal Code (Trespass by License Holder with an Openly Carried Handgun) A Person Licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (Handgun Licensing Law), may not enter this Property with a Handgun that is Carried Openly." Codigo Penal § 30.07. Traspasar Portando Armas de Mano al Aire Libre con Licencia. “Conforme a la Seccion 30.07 del codigo penal (traspasar portando armas de mano al aire libre con licencia), personas con licencia bajo del Sub-Capitulo H, Capitulo 411, Page 2 of 36 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board Page 3 June 9, 2025 Codigo de Gobierno (Ley de licencias de arma de mano), no deben entrar a esta propiedad portando arma de mano al aire libre.” Page 3 of 36 MINUTES BICYCLE, PEDESTRIAN, AND GREENWAYS ADVISORY BOARD MEETING May 12, 2025 MEMBERS PRESENT:Chairperson Scott Shafer, Board Members Kathy Langlotz, Neo Jang, Joy Chmelar, Matthew Jackson and Thomas Woodfin. MEMBERS ABSENT:Carla Robinson STAFF PRESENT:Director of Planning & Development Services Anthony Armstrong, Assistant Director Molly Hitchcock, Planning Administrator Christine Leal, Principal Planner Heather Wade, Long Range Planner Ashley Klein, Transportation Planning Administrator Jason Schubert, Senior Planner Jesse DiMeolo, Staff Planner Carl Ahrens, Staff Planner Joe Allen, Director of Parks & Recreation Kelsey Heiden, Graduate Traffic Engineer II DeAnna Ordonez, and Staff Assistant II Grecia Fuentes AGENDA ITEM NO. 1: Call to Order, introductions and consider absence requests. Chairperson Schafer called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. AGENDA ITEM NO. 2: Hear Visitors. Robert Rose, former owner of Cycles Etc., commented on the recent weather flooding and how life threatening it could be. He showed a picture of the flooded intersection of George Bush Drive and Wellborn Road. He said that he thinks the Board should focus more on the health and safety of pedestrians moving forward. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3: Agenda Items. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.1: Consideration, discussion, and possible action to approve meeting minutes. Board Member Langlotz motioned to approve the meeting minutes from April, Board Member Woodfin seconded the motion, minutes were approved 6-0. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.2: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the status of the future trail along the Gulf States utility corridor. Administator Schubert presented this item. Page 4 of 36 Board Member Jang asked if any of the two-mile sections would be trespassing. Administrator Schubert said that these are public owned property, and he would not say that just because they were city owned meant that it was for public use or designated that. Chairperson Shafer commented that in his opinion for a potential bike/ped underpass at Harvey Road if there was going to be a shared use path that could connect two large pieces of land, and it could really enhance the experience of cyclist and walkers. Administrator Schubert stated that another alternative would be installing pedestrian HAWK signals, which are basically stop lights for pedestrian crosswalks. Board Member Woodfin requested to be notified when the public meetings about the early concept of the redesigning of Harvey Road would be held so that he could express these ideas. Board Member Langlotz inquired about where the funding for the trail project could come from. Administrator Schubert stated that it could be by City bond funds or by TxDOT grants that have to actually be primarily for transportation purposes and not for recreation. He said that this project would be one of those that is in between. Board Member Jang asked if short segments of it could be built as dirt path to try it out that would be less costly than a 1 million dollars a mile of infrastructures. Administrator Schubert said for transportation purposes they are looking for a paved surface. He said that when it come to all-natural type of stuff that was really for recreational purposes like a park setting. Chairperson Shafer asked a segment of the park could be crushed granite that would be less expensive. Administrator Schubert said that it may be cheaper in the front end, but it would have a maintenance cost in the back end. Chairperson Shafer said it could be done we would just have to look at where we put it. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.3: Presentation, discussion and possible action regarding the Corridor Feasibility Study being performed as part of the Active Transportation Master Plan including upcoming public meetings. Senior Planner DiMeolo presented this item. Board Member Jang asked what the objective for the feasibility study was. Page 5 of 36 Senior Planner DiMeolo clarified that the objective was to look into the existing conditions between the curbs. Staff is looking at what can be done to rework that space to allot more space for bike ped users. We are also looking for feedback on design concepts. Chairperson Shafer said that based on his experience they all seem really important. He said that he personally like the one-way idea and hoped that Fairview Avenue and Montclair Avenue were one way that way it would open up a lot of space for bike ped and electric transportation users. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.4: Presentation and discussion regarding a recap of events for May as National Bike Month and the 2025 Cycle with Council. Chairperson Shafer thanked staff for working hard on making this happen. He said he enjoyed seeing the new multi-use path on Greens Prairie Road and the new four-way stop. Board Member Jang said he thought it was amazing, and it really opened his eyes to a new route. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.5: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the evaluation of programs identified in the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan. Planner Carl Ahrens presented this item. Board Member Woodfin asked what the relationship between some of the items in here and the corridor feasibility study. Senior Planner DiMeolo said that the data being used for the study was vehicular traffic counts. As far as the traffic collision and safety data, that is not a part of the feasibility study. Director Armstrong stated that staff does have some data that they can get from Veo Ride and can provide data for micromobility uses that will help get an idea. Chairperson Shafer asked the Board if they would want to revisit some of the items on the list in months ahead to see what steps are needed to help make them happen. AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.6: Presentation and discussion regarding the following items related to biking, walking, and greenways. a) Public Meetings of Interest – •Administrator Schubert reminded the Board of the upcoming meeting on May 21st at 6:00pm at the Lincoln Center for the Corridor FeasbilityFeasibility Study. •Board Member Langlotz mentioned her participation on the MS 150 and how finishing up at Aggie Park was a popular decision among all the cyclists. •Board Member Jang informed the Board that on May 16 the Public Library would be hosting a Bike to work fueling station off of Hensel Park from 7am to 9am. b) Capital and Private Project Updates – No upcoming updates Page 6 of 36 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3.7: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board calendar of upcoming meetings. a) June 9, 2025 ~ Bicycle, Pedestrian and Greenways Advisory Board Meeting Administrator Schubert informed the Board that we would be polling for summer meetings availability. AGENDA ITEM NO. 4: Discussion and possible action on future agenda items. A Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Advisory Board Member may inquire about a subject for which notice has not been given. A statement of specific factual information or the recitation of existing policy may be given. Any deliberation shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on an agenda for a subsequent meeting. Board Member Jackson inquired about an update on the State Highway 6 construction. Board Member Langlotz pointed out that the Legislative session will be ending in two weeks, and the House Bill 535 safe passing ordinance was languishing in committee. She said she would like to know what happens next once that is over. AGENDA ITEM NO. 5: Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 5:07 p.m. APPROVED: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ Scott Shafer, Chairperson Grecia Fuentes, Board Secretary Page 7 of 36 June 9, 2025 Item No. 3.2. Master Plan Existing Programs Follow-Up Sponsor: Carl Ahrens, Staff Planner Reviewed By CBC: Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Greenways Advisory Board Agenda Caption: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the status of existing programs identified in the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan. Relationship to Strategic Goals: Recommendation(s): Summary: Continuing discussion from the May Board meeting regarding the evaluation of existing programs and reviewing programs that have not been achieved. Budget & Financial Summary: Attachments: 1. Master Plan Programs Not Achieved or in Progress Page 8 of 36 Master Plan Programs Not Achieved or in Progress Education Programs • Encourage the creation of campus tours given by bicycle to new students and staff. Basic bicycle laws and safety tips could be reviewed before the on-bicycle tour. o This has not been done. • Establish a “Share the Road” campaign that educates bicyclists and motorists about their rights and responsibilities in sharing roadway space. “Share the Road” signs should be placed along signed bicycle routes. o We do not currently have a Share the Road campaign. Encouragement Programs • Establish partnerships with health organizations to promote bicycling and walking as healthy modes of transportation. o The City has not made any partnerships with health organizations to promote bicycling and walking as healthy modes of transportation. • National trails day: No • Walking school buses: No Enforcement Programs • Review and modify any local laws that may restrict multi-modal mobility in collaboration with the City of College Station Police Department and City Attorney. o This collaboration has not occurred. • Analyze bicycle and pedestrian crash statistics to determine ways to reduce road hazards. Determine if crash reporting procedures could be improved to capture appropriate information to create change. City staff (transportation, engineering, and police) should meet regularly to discuss crashes, fatalities, and complaints involving bicyclists and pedestrians and recommend appropriate improvements. o Staff currently does not coordinate with other departments on this. • Establish groups of volunteers who can monitor illegal activities such as the disposal of waste on greenways in their neighborhood. o The City does not currently have established groups of volunteers for this. Page 9 of 36 June 9, 2025 Item No. 3.3. Corridor Study Update Sponsor: Jesse Dimeolo Reviewed By CBC: Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Greenways Advisory Board Agenda Caption: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding the Corridor Feasibility Study being performed as part of the Active Transportation Master Plan. Relationship to Strategic Goals: Recommendation(s): Summary: City Staff have been looking at alternative designs to what is proposed in the Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Greenways Master Plan, especially for four corridors near the urban center and leading to campus. They are as follows: » Fairview Ave & Montclair/Eleanor Ave (from George Bush Dr to Holleman Dr) » Timber St (from George Bush Dr to Park Pl) » Anderson St (from George Bush Dr to Bee Creek Park) » Tarrow St (from Autumn Cir to University Dr) The goal is to produce conceptual designs and alternatives to existing street sections to improve safety and usability for active transportation users. Last month, on May 21st, City Staff hosted a neighborhood meeting at the Lincoln Community Center, seeking input on the above-mentioned corridors that have no/limited bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Around twelve residents attended the meeting and provided input on the cross-sections and filled out surveys. These results are attached to the agenda packet. The second and final neighborhood meeting is on June 25th from 6-7:30pm at the Lincoln Community Center. Residents are welcome to attend and view proposed cross-sections for all four corridors. Budget & Financial Summary: Attachments: 1. Poster Boards with Comments and Votes 2. Online Survey Results Page 10 of 36 WELLBORN RDOLD WELLBORN RDSOUTHWEST PKWY E GEORGE BUSH DR SOUTHW E S T P K W Y HARVEY RD UNI V E R S I T Y DR E UNIVERSITY DR GEORGE BUSH DR WELLBORN RDTEXAS AVEHARVEY MITCH E L L PKWY S S P RIN G LO OP CAIN RD OLSENBLVDWALNUTRDHENSE L DR A U TUMN CIR FOSTERAVEASHBURNAVEPURYEARDRAPPOMATTOXDRCARTERCR E E K PKWY N FOREST PKWYMARION PUGH DRAGRONOMY RDCOLLEGE AVENAGLE STKIMBROUGH BLVD MARINERDRPARK PL CENTRALPARKLNTHEWOO D L A NDSDEXTERDRSDARTMOUTHSTNEARLRUDDERFWYS ROSEMARY D R LANGFORDSTN ROSEMARY DR SOUTHWOODDRPENBERTHYBLVDJONES-BUTLERRDRAYMONDSTOTZERPKWY RAYMOND STOTZER PKWY RAINT R EEDRTURK RD MUNSON AVEWALTONDRKRENEK TAP RD NAVARRO D R LUTHER ST W GLADE STLINCOLN AVE NUCLEARSCIENCERDUNIVERSITY OAKS BLVD QUAIL RUN RESEARCHPKWYFRANCIS DR DOMINIK DRJOHNKIMBROUGH N DOWLING RD WELSHAVEEARLRUDDERFWYS0 ½¼MilesELEANOR STWELLBORN RDOLD WELLBORN RDSOUTHWEST PKWY E GEORGE BUSH DR SOUTHW E S T P K W Y HARVEY RD UNI V E R S I T Y DR E UNIVERSITY DR GEORGE BUSH DR WELLBORN RDTEXAS AVEHARVEY MITCH E L L PKWY S S P RIN G L O OP CAIN RD OLSENBLVDWALNUTRDHENSE L DR AU TUMN CIR FOSTERAVEASHBURNAVEPURYEARDRAPPOMATTOXDRCARTERCREEKPKWY N FOREST PKWYMARION PUGH DRAGRONOMY RDCOLLEGE AVENAGLE STKIMBROUGH BLVD MARINERDRPARK PL CENTRALPARKLNTHEWOO D L A NDSDEXTERDRSDARTMOUTHSTNEARLRUDDERFWYS ROSEMARY D R LANGFORDSTN ROSEMARY DR SOUTHWOODDRPENBERTHYBLVDJONES-BUTLERRDRAYMONDSTOTZERPKWY RAYMOND STOTZER P K WY RAINT R EEDRTURK RD MUNSON AVEWALTONDRKRENEK TAP RD NAVARRO D R LUTHER ST W GLADE STLINCOLN AVE NUCLEARSCIENCERDUNIVERSITY OAKS BLVD QUAIL RUN RESEARCHPKWYFRANCIS DR DOMINIK DRJOHNKIMBROUGH N DOWLING RD WELSHAVEEARLRUDDERFWYS0 ½¼MilesELEANOR STActive Transportation Master Plan | Corridor Feasibility Study Montclair Ave Fairview Ave Anderson St Bee Creek Park W.A. Tarrow Park Texas A&M University Timber St Tarrow St 6 6 30 60TEXAS 2154 TEXAS 2154 TEXAS 2818 TEXAS Lemontree Park Anderson Park Study Corridor Signalized Intersection School Greenspace City Limits Lincoln Center Coordinate CSID relieve school traffic promote active transportation Catchment areas and routes, etc. Page 11 of 36 GEORGE BUSH DR WELLBORN RDHOUSTONSTGROVE ST OLD JERSEY ST KERRY ST MARYEM STTHOMPSON ST AYRSHIRE STW DEXTE R D RELEANOR STFIDELITY ST DEXTER DR SHIGHLANDS STMARION PUGH DRPARK PL LUTHER ST HEREFORD STWELSH AVE0 500250Feet HOLLEMAN DR Montclair Ave Fairview Ave Street Section Street Section Montclair Ave Volume: 2,100 vehicles/day Speed Limit: 30 Length: 0.70 miles Right-of-Way (ROW): 50’ Volume: 1,800 vehicles/day Speed Limit: 30 Length: 0.66 miles Right-of-Way (ROW): 50’ Fairview Ave W.A. Tarrow Park Montclair Ave & Fairview Ave INSTRUCTIONS 1. Use green sticker to vote for your favorite street section. 2. Use orange sticker to vote for your second favorite street section. 3. Have an alternative design or additional comments? Please use a general comment card. Study Corridor Signalized Intersection Greenspace Lincoln Center Existing Street Section Alternative 1 Alternative 2 (one-way pair) VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE VOTE Keep Montclair parking. Is this an option? Using parking lane as protected barrier for cyclists will: - Improve safety for cyclists - Prevent cyclist crash into open door Garbage on sidewalk side For Alternative 2 Can the parking lane be used as the buffer for the bike lane? I can be doored by a car from the sidewalk or bike lane Page 12 of 36 GEORGE BUSH DRBIZZELLSTSPENCE STANNA ST LEACREST DR S U F F O L K A V E PAR K P L PARK PL GLADE STLEWIS ST HOLIK STLEE AVEPERSHING AVE0 300150Feet Existing Street Section Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Timber St Study Corridor Signalized Intersection School Timber St Volume: 2,800 vehicles/day Speed Limit: 30 Length: 0.30 miles Right-of-Way (ROW): 50’ VOTE VOTE VOTE INSTRUCTIONS 1. Use green sticker to vote for your favorite street section. 2. Use orange sticker to vote for your second favorite street section. 3. Have an alternative design or additional comments? Please use a general comment card. Street Section 6’ 6’ Shared-use path 6’ Buffer option for between bikes and cars? Car could go into lane 4' Sidewalk us 6' 15 BOST Parking allowed between Park Pl and Anna St Page 13 of 36 SOUTHWEST PKWY E HARVEY RD S O U T H W E S T P K W Y GEORGE BUSH DR TEXAS AVEDOMINIK DR TI MM DR W IN D I NG RD VILLAGE DR BEECREEKDRHAIN E S D R LAWYER STANGE LI N A CIR SOUTHWOODDRCAUDILLSTLEE AVEHOLIKDRPERSHINGAVER E D M ONDDRLAURA LNLANGFORDSTPARK PL GLADE ST0 1,000500Feet HOLLEMAN DR Anderson St Study Corridor Signalized Intersection School Greenspace Bee Creek Park Lemontree Park Anderson Park Anderson St Volume: 7,800 vehicles/day Speed Limit: 35 Length: 1.5 miles Right-of-Way (ROW): 60’-70’ Existing Street Section Alternative 1 Alternative 2 VOTE VOTE VOTE INSTRUCTIONS 1. Use green sticker to vote for your favorite street section. 2. Use orange sticker to vote for your second favorite street section. 3. Have an alternative design or additional comments? Please use a general comment card. Street Section Turn lane along school Implementation of bus island or designated bus lane Facilitate conversation with local church on Sunday morning parking Raised cross walks at bus stop locations Bus stop locations - Indicate Aggie spirit for BVT to ensure passengers do not conflict with bikes - Consider raised cross walks to slow bikers at bus stops Consider a midblock crossing for Lemon Tree Park to Anderson St - No crossing currently exists Turn lane at Brentwood and Park Pl Proposed Lane width Configuration - Bus/bike on both ends of pavement = 12' width - Two travel lanes = 11' width Transit stops on Anderson Make travel lanes smaller I'm concerned about greater car speeds with wider lanes. Maybe install a median or pedestrian island to keep 11' lanes. Also a road diet or landscape buffer for pedestrians Shrink turn lane and add to bike lane. Improve striping on bike lanes Consider dutch style protected intersection at Anderson & Holleman. A bike on the west side needs to be move east Vehicles block visbility. Anderson xxx Page 14 of 36 UNIVERSITYDRE GRAND OAKS CIR PARK LN AUT U MN CIRE29THST S P R I N G L O O P LINCOLN AVE E C H I M N EY HILL DR S ROSEMARY DR N R O S E M A R Y D R LINCOLN AVE 0 500250Feet Tarrow St Tarrow St Volume: 9,600 vehicles/day Speed Limit: 35 Length: 0.50 miles Right-of-Way (ROW): 70’ Existing Street Section Alternative 1 Alternative 2 VOTE VOTE VOTE Study Corridor Signalized Intersection Greenspace City Limits INSTRUCTIONS 1. Use green sticker to vote for your favorite street section. 2. Use orange sticker to vote for your second favorite street section. 3. Have an alternative design or additional comments? Please use a general comment card. Street Section This is nice, but 29th is scary and limits my use It is part of City of Bryan, but wanted to bring it up. Bike ped correctors from Chimney Hill to Park Ln and Cooner Bike lane on each side if possible Page 15 of 36 Powered by Q1: How important is it to provide infrastructure for people walking and biking along each study corridor? Answered: 44 Skipped: 1 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Montclair Ave (from George Bush Dr to Holleman Dr) Fairview Ave (from George Bush Dr to Holleman Dr) Timber St (from George Bush Dr to Park Pl) Anderson St (from George Bush Dr to Bee Creek Park) Tarrow St (from Autumn Cir to University Dr) 1 - Not important 2 - Little importance 3 - Neutral 4 - Important 5 - Very important Page 16 of 36 Powered by Q1: How important is it to provide infrastructure for people walking and biking along each study corridor? Answered: 44 Skipped: 1 1 -NOT IMPORTANT 2 -LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 - NEUTRAL 4 - IMPORTANT 5 -VERY IMPORTANT TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Montclair Ave 2.27% 1 4.55% 2 13.64% 6 15.91% 7 63.64% 28 44 4.34 Fairview Ave 2.27% 1 0.00% 0 13.64% 6 18.18% 8 65.91% 29 44 4.45 Timber St 0.00% 0 2.27% 1 13.64% 6 18.18% 8 65.91% 29 44 4.48 Anderson St 2.27% 1 0.00% 0 11.36% 5 9.09% 4 77.27% 34 44 4.59 Tarrow St 6.82% 3 4.55% 2 11.36% 5 6.82% 3 70.45% 31 44 4.30 Page 17 of 36 Powered by Q2: Along Montclair Ave, where should a sidewalk be provided? Answered: 44 Skipped: 1 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Both sides West side East side Neither side, keep as existing ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Both sides 70.45%31 West side 13.64%6 East side 13.64%6 Neither side, keep as existing 2.27%1 TOTAL 44 Page 18 of 36 Powered by Q3: Along Montclair Ave, to allow space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, are you open to one-way traffic for vehicles? Answered: 44 Skipped: 1 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Yes, if needed to create space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure Maybe, but I'd like more information No, keep as existing ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes, if needed to create space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure 81.82%36 Maybe, but I'd like more information 13.64%6 No, keep as existing 4.55%2 TOTAL 44 Page 19 of 36 Powered by Q4: Along Fairview Ave, where should a sidewalk be provided? Answered: 38 Skipped: 7 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% East side, if the curb is moved in West side Street level, separated from vehicles and shared with bicycles Neither side, keep as existing ANSWER CHOICES RESPONS ES East side, if the curb is moved in 26.32%10 West side 23.68%9 Street level, separated from vehicles and shared with bicycles 44.74%17 Neither side, keep as existing 5.26%2 TOTAL 38 Page 20 of 36 Powered by Q5: Along Fairview Ave, to allow space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, are you open to one-way traffic for vehicles? Answered: 43 Skipped: 2 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Yes, if needed to create space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure Maybe, but I'd like more information No, keep as existing ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes, if needed to create space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure 83.72%36 Maybe, but I'd like more information 11.63%5 No, keep as existing 4.65%2 TOTAL 43 Page 21 of 36 Powered by Q6: Along Fairview Ave, to allow space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, are you open to limiting parking to one side of the street? Answered: 42 Skipped: 3 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Yes, to allow space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure Maybe, but I'd like more information No, keep as existing ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes, to allow space for pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure 88.10%37 Maybe, but I'd like more information 9.52%4 No, keep as existing 2.38%1 TOTAL 42 Page 22 of 36 Powered by Q7: Along Timber St, from George Bush Dr to Park Pl, should bike lanes be provided? Sidewalk is planned on the east side. Answered: 43 Skipped: 2 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Yes Maybe, but I'd like more information No, keep as existing ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Yes 69.77%30 Maybe, but I'd like more information 20.93%9 No, keep as existing 9.30%4 TOTAL 43 Page 23 of 36 Powered by Q8: Along Anderson St, how should the bike lanes be improved? Answered: 44 Skipped: 1 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% On-street, one-way bike lanes with buffer On-street, two-way bike lane with buffer (cycle track) No change, keep as existing (on-street one-way bike lanes) ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES On-street, one- way bike lanes with buffer 27.27%12 On-street, two- way bike lane with buffer (cycle track) 56.82%25 No change, keep as existing (on- street one-way bike lanes) 15.91%7 TOTAL 44 Page 24 of 36 Powered by Q9: Along Tarrow St, where should a sidewalk be provided? Answered: 42 Skipped: 3 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Both sides of Tarrow St West side East side Neither side, keep as existing ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Both sides of Tarrow St 78.57%33 West side 7.14%3 East side 9.52%4 Neither side, keep as existing 4.76%2 TOTAL 42 Page 25 of 36 Powered by Q10: Along Tarrow St, where should bicycle infrastructure be provided? Answered: 41 Skipped: 4 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% On-street, one-way bike lanes with buffer On-street, two-way bike lane with buffer (cycle track) Off-street, shared-use path No change, keep as existing (no separate bicycle infrastructure) ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES On-street, one-way bike lanes with buffer 31.71%13 On-street, two-way bike lane with buffer (cycle track) 41.46%17 Off-street, shared-use path 21.95%9 No change, keep as existing (no separate bicycle infrastructure) 4.88%2 TOTAL 41 Page 26 of 36 Any additional feedback regarding the study corridors or other roadways? Open-Ended Response Putting bike infrastructure on Tarrow is a priority for me! Let’s make bicycling safe in CS! No parking in Fairview or Monrclair. Fairview and Montclaire do not both need sidewalks: put on Montclair next to highest student density. Extend Montclair/Fairview paths over and down Welsh to SW Pkwy with only a stripe to separate the path on the Welsh section. It's essentially to connect Welsh down to Consol. The timing of this work needs to be coordinated with the Bush exchange. If it can't be completed before, then there needs to be a temporary plan because the extreme traffic load bypassing the Exchange will make both streets unsafe for cycles/peds. Go ahead and make both one-way, remove all parking, and paint lanes on both streets- but do not put in barriers until Exchange is done and major work can be done on Montclair/Holleman. Major construction should not be done on these streets during exchange work. Install light at Eleanor/Holleman and time it to flow southbound vehicle traffic from Eleanor to Welsh, and south on Welsh. Also, consider buying properties on Holleman to allow Montclare to be extended to Holleman, rather than jog over to Eleanor. It's the right long- term answer to freeing up the southbound traffic flow from the campus. I don't have strong opinions on other These are the wrong streets for bike lanes in the southside. Most bicyclists and pedestrians use Dexter and sometimes Timber and Pershing. Dexter is too small for traffic. It should be turned into a bike/pedestrian only I feel like Dexter is more important than Timber to pedestrianize since that's the best way to get from South Cstat Cooperate with Bryan to create a reasonable pedestrian-safe corridor from Carter Creek to University as it is extre Tarrow is one way, so two-way means your engineers did not proof this survey. There are not many bikes. They can't cross to Lincoln because the street has been closed so long. Highway 30 E/W AKA Harvey road, going East from Highway 6 and meeting Highway 30 N/S, should have a safe bike lane added for folks wanting to cycle to work on Highway 30 N/S. If you're going to add a bike lane, please make sure there is a buffer between the cars and the bikers. Too many people will clip bikers with their cars or get too close and it makes it dangerous. I bike Anderson/Timber daily, I could not approve more of my tax dollars going to those streets. Existing slip lanes on roads such as Texas Ave and Wellborn Road should be reconsidered, as they are incredibly da Pedestrian and bicycle improvements are needed to address the Serge in density on all Northgate Street. Additionally, the sidewalk along university Drive in front of Century Square and through that property would benefit greatly from being widened because there’s a significant amount of pedestrian and cyclist traffic The curbs along the sidewalks make it hard to navigate. Having ramps on the sidewalks would be ideal. Parking, mail delivery, trash/recycling/bulk pickup are currently issues related to this proposal. More info required What are you doing about parking, trash pickup and mail delivery. Page 27 of 36 I know this bleeds into Bryan, but if Tarrow could be cycled all the way to Carter Creek and a safe turn onto that would be allowed, that would almost single-handedly connect many houses to Tanglewood Park, Tejas shopping Center, and Ross elementary school. Also if the backs of the parking lots of some Texas Avenue facing stores Thank you for bringing awareness to the necessity of increasing active transportation infrastructure. On Tarrow, do not put bike lanes on-street. With the vehicle traffic on Tarrow, you would just be asking for more accidents/injuries/deaths. People already use Chimney Hill parking lot to traverse through, as well as The protected one way bicycle lanes on George Bush are a welcome change. Consideration needs to be given to how lanes like that are marked for traffic that includes electric scooters and other micro trans. Lane markings that clearly indicate one way traffic and that suggest slower and faster traffic designations can help facilitate passing when width allows. This would mimic a "slower traffic keep right" sign on a four lane highway. Bike/micro trans lane use behavior postings (signage) that encourage verbal or bell warnings prior to passing on left would help. Please add the GB Bike lane to the street sweeper maintenance regime. The lane is dirty and cluttered in places and bicycle tires are more prone to flat tires than car tires. Street sweeper width should be Please avoid two-way cycle tracks. We are a transient town and many people do not have any exposure or experience with them. Houston St has had a similar counter-flow lane for years but most drivers and few cyclist Page 28 of 36 June 9, 2025 Item No. 3.5. Assessment of Bicycle and Pedestrian Connection to Public Transit Sponsor: Reviewed By CBC: Bicycle, Pedestrian, & Greenways Advisory Board Agenda Caption: Presentation, discussion, and possible action regarding considerations of bicycle and pedestrian connections to transit stops and an initial evaluation of existing conditions. Relationship to Strategic Goals: Recommendation(s): Summary: This item provides an overview of bicycle and pedestrian connections to existing transit facilities in College Station and is being assessed as part of the development of the new Active Transportation Master Plan. The attached overview includes data asserting the importance that active transportation and transit play in supporting one another as complimentary modes of transportation for daily travel. The document also presents information on the services provided by local transit agencies (Brazos Transit District and Texas A&M Transportation Services) within City limits. This includes data indicating any overlap or gaps between transit routes and the City’s active transportation network. Lastly, the document touches on best practices that could guide further integration of these networks as the City works towards a more efficient, connected, and safe multi- modal transportation system. Budget & Financial Summary: Attachments: 1. Public Transit Considerations and Initial Assessment Page 29 of 36 Public Transit Rationale for Considering Public Transit Within the Active Transportation Master Plan • Most public transport trips start and end with a walk. In fact, walking can constitute half of the time spent on multimodal trips and can be the main element of the experience that people remember afterwards. • The National Household Travel Survey showed that 80% of US public transportation users walk to or from public transport as part of their trip on transit. • Between 65% and 70% of freely reported memories were derived from the time that individuals spent as pedestrians (time spent waiting, transferring, and walking to/from stops or stations). • The distance that an individual is willing to walk in order to utilize a public transit stop can be significantly increased through the control of external factors. o Conversely, negative external factors can significantly reduce the distance an individual is willing to walk in order to utilize a public transit stop. o Knowing what factors can increase/decrease the reach and effectiveness of public transportation can help the city expand the reach of the active transportation network.  Expanding the reach of the active transportation network via transit makes walking and biking more viable modes of travel for local trips. External Factors Average variation of walking distance Map Example Positive walking experience resulting from attractive urban environment Up to 30% Possibilities to access shops and services +15% to +25% Time delays when crossing streets with high traffic -5% to -15% Incomplete footpath networks around stops -10% to -20% Unsuited public space layout and location of street crossing facilities -10% to -20% Sloping terrain -30% to -50% Page 30 of 36 Condition of Existing Public Transit in College Station The Brazos Transit District (BTD) • BTD is the federally designated public transportation provider for the College Station-Bryan Transportation Management Area (TMA). ο A Transportation Management Area (TMA) is a designation given by the Secretary of Transportation to each urbanized area with a population of more than 200,000 people. • BTD has a funding agreement with Brazos County as well as the cities of College Station and Bryan to provide public transportation within the B/CS urbanized area. ο Has 8 different bus transit routes based out of 3 different terminals in the Bryan/College Station Urbanize Area. Of the 8 routes in the urbanized area, 5 of the routes are fully or partially within the City of College Station specifically.  Route 7 (Pink) and Route 8 (Grey) operate exclusively in College Station and are based out of the C.S./South Terminal located at 300 Krenek Tap Road.  Route 3 (Green), Route 4 (Maroon), and Route 5/6 (Yellow) operate in both College Station as well as Bryan and are based out of the Midtown Terminal located at 3350 S. Texas Avenue in Bryan.  Figure 1 below shows the path that each of these routes takes within the City of College Station. ο Transportation services are provided on weekdays from 5 am to 7 pm ο BTD does not operate on certain recognized holidays, including:  New Year’s Day  Martin Luther King Day  Presidents Day  Good Friday  Memorial Day  Independence Day  Labor Day  Thanksgiving Day and the Friday following Thanksgiving  Christmas Eve and Christmas Day • BTD does not currently have fixed transit stops along its transit routes. ο Users must flag down BTD buses as the travel along their planned route. ο Fixed stops along BTD’s routes have been proposed in the past and the organization recently released an RFQ for the project.  Part of the project will include the reassessment of the proposed routes prior to their implementation . • BTD currently has plans to install bike racks on all fixed route buses to better support multi- modal integration. Page 31 of 36 Figure 1 Page 32 of 36 BTD Connectivity Data In order to understand the level of integration between the City of College Station’s active transportation network and BTD’s transit network, we measured the overlap between both systems and created the table shown below in figure 2. • The table showcases what proportion of each route has adjacent bicycle and pedestrian facilities that riders would need to utilize in order to flag down a BTD bus for a ride. • The table also indicates whether or not the city has proposed plans for additional bicycle and pedestrian facilities that could assist riders in accessing BTD services. • Lastly, the table indicates what percentage of each routes has neither existing nor proposed facilities for BTD riders to make use of during their transit journey. Brazos Transit District Connectivity Assessment Connection Type Route 3: Green/Verde Route 4: Maroon/Marron Route 5/6: Yellow/Amarillo Route 7: Pink/Rosa Route 8: Grey/Gris Total mileage Percent of route Total mileage Percent of route Total mileage Percent of route Total mileage Percent of route Total mileage Percent of route Route Total 9.5 n/a 8.9 n/a 10 n/a 15.3 n/a 13.5 n/a Bicycle Connections 5.2 55% 2.0 23% 2.3 23% 9.7 64% 8.1 61% Pedestrian Connections 6.6 69% 7.5 84% 8.5 88% 12.5 82% 9.1 69% Proposed Bicycle Connections 3.3 35% 1.1 13% 5.1 53% 3.5 23% 3.9 29% Proposed Pedestrian Connections 2.6 27% 1.1 13% 1.4 14% 1.6 11% 3.9 29% No existing or proposed bicycle connections 1.0 11% 5.8 65% 2.6 26% 2.1 14% 1.5 11% No existing or proposed pedestrian connections 0.3 3% 0.3 3% 0.1 1% 1.2 8% 0.5 4% Figure 2 Texas A&M University Transit Services (Aggie Spirit Bus) • Operates for longer hours that BTD, including weekends and provides service more frequently on its routes. o Aggie Spirit Transit has a smaller service area with a higher concentration of students, faculty, and staff. • Operates a fleet of 33 buses traveling along 13 different transit routes with fixed stops within College Station city limits. • Members of the general public with a Brazos Transit District annual pass can use the Aggie Spirit transit system for no fare. Aggie Spirit Connectivity Data • Unlike the Brazos Transit District, The Aggie Spirit transit network has fixed stop locations for pick up and drop off. Page 33 of 36 • By performing a similar assessment of transit stops along each of the Aggie Spirit transit routes and cross-referencing that information with the cities GIS layers indicating locations for future active transportation facilities, we have created a table to showcase gaps in the network. o The existing connections columns indicate what proportion of transit stops can currently be reach by bicyclists and pedestrians who are utilizing the dedicated facilities for each mode of transportation. o The bicyclist columns show how many transit stops have proposed bicycle facilities that will further integrate the active transportation and transit networks. o The Pedestrians columns show how many transit stops have proposed. pedestrian facilities to further integrate the active transportation and transit networks.  Both the bicyclists and pedestrian columns have sections indicated how many transit stops have neither existing nor proposed facilities, representing gaps in the network. Aggie Spirit Existing and Proposed connections Route Name total number of stops Existing Connections Bicyclists Pedestrians Bicyclists can access transit stop Pedestrians can access transit stop Proposed bike route Proposed bike lane no existing or proposed bicycle connections Proposed sidewalk Proposed shared-use path no existing or proposed pedestrian connections Route 04: Gig Em Inbound: 3 stops 0% 100% 0 2 1 0 0 0 Outbound: 0 stops n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Route 07: Airport Inbound: 3 stops 0% 0% 0 0 3 0 0 3 Outbound: 0 stops n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Route 08: Howdy Inbound: 1 stop 0% 100% 0 0 1 0 0 0 Outbound: 0 stops n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Route 12: Reveille Inbound: 3 stops 0% 100% 1 1 0 0 1 0 Outbound: 3 stops 0% 100% 0 2 0 0 1 0 Route 15: Old Army Inbound: 2 stops 100% 100% 0 0 0 0 0 0 Outbound: 2 stops 100% 100% 0 0 0 0 0 0 Route 22: Excel Inbound: 5 stops 0% 60% 1 4 0 1 0 1 Outbound: 5 stops 0% 0% 0 5 0 2 0 3 Route 26: Rudder Inbound: 6 Stops 50% 67% 1 3 0 1 0 1 Outbound: 8 stops 38% 88% 0 4 0 0 4 0 Route 27: Ring Dance Inbound: 7 stops 86% 100% 2 1 1 0 0 1 Outbound: 5 stops 100% 100% 0 0 0 0 4 0 Route 31: Elephant Walk Inbound: 4 stops 25% 75% 0 0 1 0 3 1 Outbound: 3 stops 33% 100% 0 0 0 0 3 0 Route 34: Fish Camp Inbound: 5 stops 80% 100% 0 0 1 0 0 0 Outbound: 3 stops 100% 100% 0 0 0 0 0 0 Route 35: Hullabaloo Inbound: 4 stops 25% 100% 0 3 0 0 0 0 Outbound: 3 stops 67% 100% 0 1 0 0 0 0 Route 36: Mattew Gaines Inbound: 3 stops 67% 100% 0 1 1 0 0 0 Page 34 of 36 Outbound: 4 stops 100% 100% 0 3 0 0 0 0 Route 40: Century Tree Inbound: 6 stops 83% 83% 0 0 1 0 0 1 Outbound: 2 stops 33% 100% 0 1 3 0 0 0 Total Inbound 52 stops 46% 83% 5 15 10 2 4 8 Outbound: 41 Stops 59% 93% 0 16 3 2 12 3 Page 35 of 36 Best Practices for Integrating Public Transit and Active Transportation Beyond assessing whether or not a transit route has the proper facilities for potential riders to utilize during their trip to and from a transit stop. We further investigated what additional facilities or features could help further integrate these transportation networks. Integrating walking • Bolster existing pedestrian facilities with features that provide greater safety from vehicle traffic and protection from adverse weather, especially for individuals with reduced mobility, children, older persons, and women. o Install canopies or shelters to shield users from hazardous weather conditions. o Provide proper lighting at fixed stops as well as along transit corridors to keep bicyclist and pedestrians illuminated in the early morning or late evening. o Mitigate the impact of irregular terrain along transit corridors that can act as barriers to users with reduced mobility. • Promote the physical and mental health benefits and cost savings of walking and public transit as convenient transportation modes for daily travel through educational materials and public engagement campaigns. • Coordinate with transit providers and community stakeholders on public outreach/surveying, organization policies, infrastructure projects, and funding mechanisms. Integrating bicycles and other micromobility devices • Provide clear guidance/education on how bicyclists and other micromobility users can safely and easily bring devices onto transit vehicles without disrupting other users. o It is not always clear how a bicyclist is supposed to secure their device to the racks on transit buses. o Providing guidance alleviates concerns that bicyclists might have and could result in greater use of both the transit system as well as the active transportation network by individuals that would otherwise avoid both systems out of a lack of knowledge. • Create clear wayfinding for bicyclists and micromobility users to help direct individuals to transit stops and facilities. o Similar to how education on securing devices could lead to greater use, providing clear wayfinding help bicyclists identify new commuting routes that utilize both transportation networks. • Create highly visible bicycle facilities at transit stops to support safe and secure modal transfer. o Similar to how a proper lighting and weather protection can support pedestrian’s use of transit, the same features can have a similar benefit for bicyclists. o Providing a variety of bike rack designs at transit stops could benefit users that choose to secure their bicycle at the transit stop before continuing their journey without it. Page 36 of 36