Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates downtown revitalization plan; asks staff for phased two‑ and five‑year options and targeted low‑cost wins
Summary
Council spent an extended session reviewing a downtown revitalization update, including a high‑level traffic analysis that modeled about 700 diverted daily trips (roughly 5% of capacity) if a 4‑lane Road were reduced to 2. Council asked staff to return with phased options (2‑ and 5‑year plans), focused 'hub' strategies, and lower‑cost 'low‑hanging‑fruit' projects such as wayfinding and targeted street improvements.
Staff presented the downtown revitalization accounting and a high‑level traffic analysis prepared by the consultant Fair and Peers. The consultant reported an estimated diversion of about 700 daily trips if the four‑lane roadway were reduced to two lanes, describing that number as roughly 5% of capacity and within normal day‑to‑day fluctuation.
Council members expressed a range of views. Several members (including Council member Laura and Council member Finn) emphasized concern about traffic impacts on Pennsylvania Street, 1st Street and nearby corridors, asking for a more detailed traffic assessment that examines parallel corridors, peak periods and future regional projects (for example, new freeway ramp connections). Laura stressed the council’s desire to maintain acceptable levels of service and asked what additional improvements (turn lanes, phased mitigation) would be necessary to prevent backups.
Other members, including Mayor Pro Tem White, argued for continued commitment to the long‑term vision while also pursuing a measured, phased approach. White suggested focusing early efforts on a “gateway” or hub around properties the city already owns (the Grama/Grace Street area referenced in staff materials), pursuing smaller, attainable projects to build momentum, and returning with a 2‑ and 5‑year plan and cost estimates.
Staff and the consultant recommended further, more detailed traffic forecasting and suggested targeted, lower‑cost improvements such as updated wayfinding signage, more market‑night events in key blocks and focused streetscape improvements that would create early wins. The council generally agreed to direct staff to develop phased options with cost estimates, identify potential funding strategies, and return for further discussion during budget development.
What happens next: staff will prepare a series of phased implementation options (2‑year and 5‑year), refine traffic analysis for priority corridors and present targeted low‑cost measures (wayfinding, market events and focused streetscape improvements) with cost estimates for council consideration.
