Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Capital Plan topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bicycle advisory committee narrows focus for five‑year capital plan; members to pick top projects

Flagstaff Bicycle Advisory Committee · January 6, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Committee reviewed the city’s pedestrian and bicycle elements of the five‑year capital plan, examined an online project map and agreed to select and return top five projects before January so staff can present priorities to council ahead of the April capital retreat.

City staff walked the Bicycle Advisory Committee through the pedestrian and bicycle categories in the city’s five‑year capital plan and a public-facing project map showing existing and planned trails, bikeways and enhanced crossings.

Staff described how projects are categorized (planning/predesign, year‑1, years 2–5, later concept work) and noted several projects already underway — Cedar Avenue/6th (Safe Routes to School), Fort Valley Road (Transportation Alternatives grant) and Lone Tree Corridor work. Staff asked the committee to identify five priority projects (or otherwise rank projects) and return those choices at the January meeting so staff can compile a short list and provide context for the council at its April capital retreat.

Members requested contextual data (crash layers, timelines, right‑of‑way or railroad constraints) to help weigh difficult tradeoffs between categories such as enhanced crossings, trail connections and bikeways. Staff agreed to provide project context and a simple ballot mechanism for the committee’s January homework.

The committee discussed map usability and maintenance; staff said the web map currently shows planned vs existing facilities and color‑codes projects by priority year but that keeping status up to date is challenging. Members encouraged clearer display of project readiness and construction timelines to improve prioritization.

Next steps: staff will circulate the prioritized project list and contextual data; members will submit their rankings before the January meeting for compilation.