City Council - workshop

Thank you. you you you you do do you do do

I hear.

Mr. Bailey.

I hear. I hear. Here. I is here. Here.

Mr. Brennan. Oh, boy. Mr. McDowell.

Yes.

Here.

Reverend McDowell, did I say a word?

That's my head. Creator God, for all that you've done for us, You've allowed several weeks of rest and relaxation, and now we're back to business. Touch us with your finger of love and strength. Allow faith and grace to move around this table so that we are sensitized to your will. We ask it. We claim it in your name. Amen. Amen.

WE CAN ADOPT THE AGENDA WITH A COUPLE OF AMENDMENTS WHICH INCLUDE ADD IN BOARD PLAZA AS WELL AS AMENDING, I'LL JUST READ IT. I WAS GOING TO SAY IN GENERAL WHAT THEY ARE, BUT I CAN JUST READ THEM FULLY. AT BOYD PLAZA AND ORDINANCE NUMBER 2026-039, AMENDING THE 1998 CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA, CHAPTER 17, ARTICLE 7, NONCONFORMITY, SECTION 17, 7.2, NONCONFORMING USES TO ITEM 2, RECEIPT OF LEGAL ADVICE RELATING TO MATTERS COVERED BY ATTORNEY into SD code section 3470A2.

Second.

We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, seeing none, Madam Clerk.

OKAY. THANK YOU. WE HAVE FOR CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION ONE ITEM TODAY, TAYLOR STREET AND LAUREL STREET ROAD DIET, MR. MARTIN, THE CITY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND NICOLE, THE MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES. SO JOINT TEAM EFFORT AND WE'RE EXCITED TO HEAR FROM YOU BOTH. I KNOW AS WE OPEN, MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL OUR STAFF HAD ALWAYS BEEN LOOKING AT OPTIONS FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING, ROAD DIET CALMING MECHANISMS. WE'VE OBVIOUSLY HAD A REALLY SUCCESSFUL OPENING IN MONTHS AFTER WHERE A LOT OF ATTENDANCE REALLY DOES REQUIRE THAT WE TRY TO Establish a journey to get this done, and I know that Todd and Nicole will talk about NCDOT's participation in this. All right.

Well, good afternoon, Mayor Rickerman, members of council, Ms. Wilson and staff. Thank you for having us today as we go over preliminary concepts for a road diet along Taylor and Laurel Street. PER THE MASTER PLAN OF FINLEY PARK, THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE NEXT LAYER THAT WE WANT TO IMPLEMENT, AND I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT AS WE CONTINUE TO HAVE FINLEY PARK EVOLVE. TODAY, YOU KNOW, THE STREETS ARE VERY WIDE, AND THEY CREATE A BARRIER BETWEEN THE PARK AND THE COMMUNITY, AND WE BELIEVE A ROAD DIET IS THE APPROPRIATE STEP TO CREATE A MUCH SAFER, A MORE CONNECTED STREETSCAPE AND ALSO MORE FUNCTIONAL, AS WE CAN ADD PARKING FOR THE PARK AND THE SURROUNDING AREA. NICOLE HAS BEEN WORKING VERY HARD ON CONCEPTS. AGAIN, THESE ARE VERY PRELIMINARY, AND OUR GOAL TODAY IS TO GET YOUR FEEDBACK SO WE CAN SHAPE THE DESIGN AND CONTINUE TO HAVE IT EVOLVE. WE'VE HAD PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS WITH SCDOT AND LAURIE ABOUT THIS CONCEPT AND FEEL VERY POSITIVE THAT WE CAN MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD. BUT TODAY AGAIN IS VERY PRELIMINARY. WE JUST WANT TO HEAR YOUR FEEDBACK SO WE CAN SHAPE IT AS WE CONTINUE TO SHAPE THE PLAN. WITH THAT I'LL HAVE NICOLE COME UP AND GO THROUGH HER CONCEPTS.

GOOD AFTERNOON. So before we begin on, my apologies.

It doesn't sound like it's on actually, Nicole. It doesn't.

Don't ask me. I don't touch any remotes in this business.

Nicole is soft-spoken, but not that soft-spoken.

I don't think so.

I know she's got it.

I can project if need be. All right. Awesome. Perfect.

We're going to get you that mic.

OKAY. SO AS PART OF THE CONCEPTS BEFORE YOU AND THE MEMO, WE WILL BE LOOKING AT THE TAYLOR STREET ROAD DIETS AND WE WILL ALSO BE LOOKING AT TWO CONFIGURATIONS FOR LAUREL STREET. THE REASON THERE ARE TWO IS BECAUSE IT WILL BE DEPENDENT UPON WHO OWNS THAT STRETCH OF ROAD. AS WE KNOW, PART OF US OR PART OF LAUREL STREET IS OWNED BY US, THE CITY, AND THE OTHER PART IS OWNED BY DOT. and we are currently working to see whether the full section will be owned by DOT or by the city. So back in 2025, we were given some preliminary concepts for Taylor Street from SCDOT and they would like to have our input in how we could possibly make this a little bit safer for both pedestrians and cyclists that come through the Vista Greenway and go and visit Findlay Park as well as visitors that may be visiting Findlay Park via buses or school groups. So part of that initial concept was creating a chute for 45 degree angled parking as well as extensions to the sidewalks and curb bump outs in order to have traffic calming down the corridor. For Laurel Street, that was presented to us earlier this year as part of the upfit. Part of that was to see if we could even have angled parking going along Assembly and down Laurel Street. So while we focus on the comprehensive plan and our Walk by Columbia master plan, we were able to make recommendations and look at strategies that would both benefit Laurel Street and Taylor Street. So the first concept we'll look at is Taylor Street. So some of the revisions that you can see for Taylor Street, we will be right-sizing the lanes to 11 feet wide. We will be extending the sidewalks on both the north and south side of the corridor in order to make it a shared use path for both pedestrians and cyclists.

Can I ask a question about that?

Yes, sir.

Does it make sense to do that on both sides? Because the flow of traffic's not changing, right? I know at one time DOT had talked about making it a two-way street again, and that's now, I believe, because of potentials of what we're talking about, it's not on the table. But that means that bikers will be going against the traffic. Is there a way to not do that? I have concerns, safety concerns about that, because it's insane.

UNDERSTOOD. SO WITH THE WAY THAT WE DO HAVE IT LAID OUT, WE DO HAVE THE BIKE LANES ON BOTH SIDES. WE DO HAVE THE BIKE LANE ON THE NORTH SIDE GOING DOWN TAYLOR STREET WHILE THE SOUTH SIDE WE DO HAVE IT GOING UP. So I understand that may look like it's counterflow to traffic, but with the addition of the parking on both sides of the street, that does provide a type of barrier that will not interfere with any of the through traffic. That's on both sides.

I get what you're saying, but it doesn't make sense to me is where I'm struggling is the purpose of having these lanes is, with how that works across the city. So that's just my personal outlook and concern about that and how that plays into it because I would assume that we would want traffic to go the same way. So if you go down Taylor Street, you'd have to come back up Hampton, correct?

Typically, yes. However, because we are focusing our efforts on Taylor Street, this is something that we want to ensure Taylor Street can handle until we do have the funds and means to handle Hampton.

Do we have this anywhere else? Just out of curiosity.

Not that I can point to directly. I don't think so. Thank you. Yeah.

So what are you saying, Mayor, exactly? I mean, what's your biggest concern is what?

The bike traffic is going up against traffic. So you've got a bike lane on one side, but on the far side, so closer to that.

Okay, your big concern is just the bike lane. Yeah. Okay, I get it. Yeah, so safety.

On the other side.

When y'all get to the diagram with the parking, will it be, can you point it out a little bit better?

Absolutely.

I will say, for those, maybe some folks who aren't as experienced with riding bikes and a bike lane, some of those folks like to see the cars coming.

I'm also looking at, I'm just looking at this, and I'm going, there's opportunity to create more parking by not having a bike lane that's going against traffic, which is against the, I mean, one of the struggles we have with a lot of the cyclists is not abiding by the law, right? I mean, they're not doing the things that should be done. I mean, I got a thousand pictures. They run through every red light in front of our cars, this and that. I WORRY ABOUT CREATING THIS FALSE NARRATIVE THAT THAT'S SAFE AGAINST TRAFFIC. SO I JUST WANT US TO CONSIDER IT.

THAT MAKES SENSE. BUT IN GENERAL, YOU'RE FOR THE CONTENT. YOU'RE JUST AGAINST THE BIKE LANE.

ON THIS SIDE. I LOVE IT GOING WITH THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. I DON'T LIKE IT GOING AGAINST THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC.

ARE WE TALKING ABOUT GOING UP THE HILL THAT'S ON TAYLOR STREET? YES.

OKAY.

Y'all are going to get to that visual, right? And when you get to that visual, let's revisit it so everyone kind of maybe can understand. Absolutely.

So... As part of the plan as well, we were looking at a separate facility for parking. We call them parking chutes, not necessarily parking lots. It will separate through traffic from the parking spaces, both 45 degree or 60 degree and parallel parking. Those chutes are just for people that are entering those spaces and for people exiting so they can then reenter the flow of traffic.

IT'S NOT JUST FOR PARKING. IT'S FOR TEMPORARY, IS IT TEMPORARY PARKING?

NO, IT'S NOT TEMPORARY PARKING. IF WE LOOK CLOSER TOWARDS THE SECOND PAGE ON TAYLOR You will see the 45 degree angled parking and parallel parking on the south side. Those parking chutes are just for those who are entering the 45 degree angled parking area. So they can enter, they can unload, they can enjoy the park, and then when they back out or pull out, whichever, THEY CAN THEN EXIT AND THEN REJOIN THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC. IT'S JUST TO KEEP PEOPLE THAT ARE EXITING THEIR CARS SAFE FROM PEOPLE WHO DO TEND TO SPEED DOWN TAYLOR STREET. AND SAME GOES ON THE SOUTH SIDE AS WELL.

I was gonna say it's also an SCDOT requirement when we had parking on a main road like that to separate it with these type of islands that we created.

SO IN ADDITION TO SOME OF THOSE REVISIONS, WE DID WANT TO ADD UNPATCHED CURB BUMP-OUTS. THESE ARE TO ENSURE THAT WE DO NOT IMPEDE ANY OF THE DRAINAGE THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE ON TAYLOR. HOWEVER, WE STILL GET THAT SAFETY AND TRAFFIC CALMING THAT A REGULAR CURB BUMP-OUT WOULD BE WITHOUT HAVING TO DO TOO MUCH REWORKING OF OUR WATER SYSTEM.

The green area is supposed to signify the curb bump outs. So if it is like a light pavement color with some green, that's for the curb bump outs.

They are typically separated by some sort of grading so people can cross it, both pedestrians and being ADA accessible, without interfering with stormwater flow. We also included the Flex Zone, which is a transit shelter or with a transit shelter for bikes and any sort of school trips that may require some bus parking when they visit, as well as ride share for people that may need to be dropped off or picked up from there. INITIALLY WHEN WE PUT THESE CONCEPTS TOGETHER, WE SAW THAT THERE WAS GOING TO BE SOME BICYCLE PARKING, BUT IT WASN'T THERE YET. BUT NOW THAT THERE'S BICYCLE PARKING, THE ADDITION OF HAVING THEM COVERED SO THEY'RE OUT OF THE SUN, OUT OF THE RAIN FOR OUR CYCLISTS GOING DOWN THE VISTA GREENWAY OR VISITING FINLEY PARK CAN BE USED. So currently, Finley Park already has some bike parking. This would just go and cover that. So it wouldn't be adding additional bike parking there. It's already present. SO NOW WE ARE GOING TO MOVE TO LAUREL STREET. SO LIKE I SAID EARLIER, LAUREL STREET WILL DEPEND ON THE STREETS OWNERSHIP BETWEEN DOT AND THE CITY AND THAT'S MOSTLY DUE TO WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE ABLE TO HAVE ANGLED PARKING OR NOT. What we currently have recommended for Walk by Columbia is a two-way cycle track, which will allow connectivity from Assembly Street all the way down, hopefully, to the Riverfront Park once we get that connectivity mapped out. WE ARE CONSIDERING THAT ONCE THIS GOES IN PLACE, THIS WILL ENHANCE THE CONNECTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF COLUMBIA, AND THIS CAN BE A MAIN CORRIDOR FOR CYCLISTS IF WE MAKE THE PROPER STRATEGIES SUCH AS SEPARATION OF BIKE FACILITIES WITH EITHER THE FLEX POST OR THE DECORATIVE WHEEL STOPS.

WHAT'S THE WIDTH OF LIKE THE ONE THAT'S PAINTED IS THAT 8 FEET OR 7 FEET? JUST FOR A REFERENCE POINT.

SO DECORATIVE ONE?

YES, MA'AM.

THAT CAN RANGE BETWEEN TWO TO THREE FEET.

The green path. I'm sorry. I didn't mean the barrier. I'm sorry. Oh, the path. What is that typically, 7, 8 feet?

For a cycle track, we recommend between 10 to 12 feet.

10 to 12. So two lanes would be roughly 12. So six each, roughly?

Yes.

Of course, there's 12 inches we've got on Trenum Road.

First of all, I'm pro this concept. Yes. My question would be, when we do this on Taylor Street, is that going to reroute traffic to other streets? Do we think that'll reroute traffic to other streets like Lady Street? So Taylor Street is... It's the most underutilized stretch in the city. 100%. But it's also, when people cross town, there's three streets that people cross town on. It's Blossom, Gervais, and Taylor. That's it. Okay. So what I'm wondering, though, is will this detour traffic onto other streets that I would just as soon down the road limit traffic on anyway? We become a log jam when you divert. Well, I'm just worried about people being able to go on to Lady Street or other streets. So I don't know how many cars a day are on Taylor Street this stretch. So again, I'm pro what we're doing. I'm just wondering, is there going to be some negative mental aspect to this to make people say, I need to stay away from Taylor Street from now on? Gotcha.

SO WHEN WE DID BRING THIS TO DOT, THEY DID SAY WE ARE ABLE TO GET IT DOWN TO TWO LANES WITH HOW MANY DAILY TRAFFIC OR HOW MUCH DAILY TRAFFIC IS UTILIZED ON TAYLOR. THEY DID SAY WE CAN EVEN GO UP TO THREE IF NEED BE. AND THAT'S JUST TO ENSURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH LANES FOR PEOPLE GOING TO THE PARK AS THE PARK IS MORE POPULAR.

Okay, so you guys have already addressed that question, right?

Yes.

Let's just slow people down going down Taylor Street, too, because people are going pretty fast down there right now.

Yes. the streets and I know that we talked about trying it in other places like between the historical mansions and some other places painting does I mean Nashville will tell you that it makes a big difference it slows down the traffic the painting along with the bump outs and then if you go over to Laurel Street and go down past Benedict you see where they took out they created those bump outs and made them stormwater with swells as well so they've got They use plants and everything to absorb water, but decorative will play the role. It's pretty proven everywhere. Just painting it makes a difference.

It also should help the eventual development of the area and make it more user-friendly for people to live there and make it not so like an F1 track versus just a road. Yeah, that would be nice.

Let me answer this question. Yes, sir. And I know it's primarily a business district, but we look at road diets. Some years ago, we had a road diet in Farrow Road. It was not done well, and the community sort of lift their heads above mediocrity. And I really thought that thing.

Yeah. I'm not sure. I think they just didn't want it, but now they want it.

The question now is, most of the persons that were riding bicycles on the sidewalk wants to diet now. Will there be any pushback when we look at tailing it off?

So from some of our cyclist community members and pedestrian community members, they have shown a lot of support for what we are currently proposing because a lot of them use this to either get to and from work. like most of the week, or they use this with their kids. A lot of the pushback that we would probably see are people that may not understand exactly what strategies we're implementing, and this is where the public comment session would be very helpful. But since this is something around Findlay Park, A lot of people are going to be walking around Finley Park, and as someone who walks from Main Street to Finley Park some afternoons, I can honestly attest to wanting to have something that's very walk and biking friendly.

We still do have people who don't want speed limits, so...

Get in line. Conceptually, I like that idea. I like the concept. No question about that. My interest and my concern would be, how does others feel about the community? How do they feel about that? Yes. And I want it to look good. I think, conceptually, I like this. but we've got a community that will raise its head very, very violently. We want to make sure we've got all those questions asked and all the answers provided.

Yes, so... Don't put a gas station there.

Yeah, don't put a murderous gas station there. Too soon.

Oh, no.

I'm sorry.

Go ahead. No, it's okay. Well, one of the main... What was I saying?

I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.

IT LOOKS LIKE YOU GUYS HAVE FUN, THOUGH. WE DO.

BUT ONE OF THE MAIN THINGS THAT WE DO... CAN YOU PUT THE PICTURES UP?

YES, TAYLOR. OKAY. SO BACK ON TAYLOR. THE REVISIONS THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED TO SCDOT INCLUDE THE SHARED USE PATHS ON BOTH THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDE, THE ANGLED PARKING, WHETHER THAT'S ANGLED IN OR REVERSE IN, as well as the addition of a flex zone for bus parking and ride share pickup. And we also want to cover the existing bicycle storage.

So according to this, you're talking about, so let's go from assembly down.

Yes.

And that first area will be your flex spaces, right? which would be right in front of the park, would be the angled parking, depending on, and then the third block would be the next, that's all the way to Wayne Street.

Yes, both angled and parallel, angled on the north and parallel on the south.

I'm going to make sure I have my map here correct. Yeah.

Okay. So, any questions regarding Taylor Street?

Just, I do, looking at the map, there's on the Laurel Street side, has anybody talked to the building folks who are talking about

Okay, yeah. So they have, initially they wanted angled parking down Laurel Street. However, with it being an SCDOT road, they will not allow angled parking. So they were going to have it along Assembly. Now that we are seeing that assembly is removing some of that parking, the people that are going in that 1801 assembly, is that the address? They will be removing their angled parking on assembly and they're going to see if they can have it on Laurel.

I feel like there was a plan at some point when somebody was looking at that for the valet lane and other stuff, and that not being on assembly. You think that would be on assembly now if you had a desk based on this drawing?

No.

Oh, they're going to come for a valet.

They would do that?

You think they're going to?

Because they're going to have to valet the cars to the parking beds, right? There's just no parking around there. You're saying it'd be on assembly, not law. Well, originally when the first proposal was on Laurel Street, I mean, that would be better. Yeah. But that's why I just want to make sure as we're going through this that we've taken some of that into consideration.

Yes, Greg Williams, he has been in talks with them about the parking and about the valet lane. So we are currently waiting to see what that update will look like from them.

And just to add to it, let's say they got parents. So right now we're making the assumption that DOT would not allow them to park on Laurel. But let's say they got a variance and they were to allow it. Most likely for this plan, we would have to flip our multi-use path to the park side to make it work. So we have thought about that scenario if they were to get a variance.

There was some discussion at some point with DOT and others because I think that stretch is not ours, ours. to open up some more opportunities as well. I think conceptually, I think, I mean, what I'm hearing from everybody, I just think there's some logistic details we need to think about.

Okay, and we'll continue to work through that.

And how, if you don't have on Taylor Street, if we have bike lane going with the flow of traffic only, does that open up the ability to create more parking on that other side?

Mm-hmm.

and utilize the existing sidewalk that's there as the connectivity point to the tunnel and other places. Because obviously, when we do something like this, we want to maximize. Because the park is not going to stop getting used, right? And now that the federal government's decided that they want to own the post office, that took that out of play for us. Now, long term, I'm hoping that the state will look at one of these lots down here and decide they're ready to move and we can do something there, right? But conceptually, you know, there's some tweaking and some discussing, but overall concept, I mean, I feel pretty good about it.

One quick question. So to Ed's point, THEY'LL EVENTUALLY BE A PUBLIC PRESENTATION.

CAN YOU ALL HIGHLIGHT A LITTLE BIT, NICOLE, ABOUT THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT'S CREATED? IS THAT OBVIOUSLY WHAT IS ONE THING THE PUBLIC IS VERY INTERESTED IN AS WELL? AND TALK ABOUT THE BACK END ANGLE. up in Columbia although in different cities I was looking at it like hmm I've seen our drivers I'm not backing in I'll just tell you that well when we met I think we kind of got a little bit more in depth on that and what that

So these are some of the estimates taken based off of the curb usage on Taylor Street. So I do want to say based off of those measurements, these are still estimates and they don't necessarily account for municipal operations where we can and cannot put parking. SO ALONG TAYLOR STREET WE DID HAVE PARALLEL PARKING AND WE WERE GOING TO DECIDE BETWEEN 45 AND 60 DEGREE PARKING. SO WITH 45 DEGREE PARKING, THAT WILL ALLOW FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE LIKE USER ERROR. SO WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

DOES THAT MEAN A RATE? NO.

Yes, so with 45 degree angled parking that is more user friendly as you You don't have to back in as As hard to try to make it into the space it is more so like a not even a full one-point turn you just Well So I, yeah, so the best way I can describe it is you have your typical parking space, like straight 45 degree and then 60 degree. The 45 degree allows for any sort of driver to just pull forward and gently back in where if you are 65 or 60 degrees, you have to turn a little harder. And depending on how people use their mirrors, they may scratch or hit others. 45 degrees allows for slightly wider spaces so that doesn't happen.

Okay, thank you. Yes.

But of course you're going to get fewer spaces if you do that.

Yes. So along Laurel Street, if we are to go with city ownership, we run into the same type of parking, 45 degree versus 60 degree if we were to do angled parking. And if we did DOT, it's a flat 40 plus or minus for parallel parking. At the bottom, you'll see the different types of configurations where we have both Taylor Street, parallel and 45, parallel and 60, with the Laurel Street, 45 angled, 60 degree angled, and parallel parking as well.

And do you have a visual of the back end? Or is that just on these here? That would just be on those. I did not get them in the presentation.

I do apologize.

Which page would it be? Is that the same one? Okay. So...

THESE CONCEPTS ARE FOR FRONT END, OR FRONT END PARKING, BUT THEY CAN BE TURNED TO BACK END IF NEED BE. When you say improve appearance.

Not necessarily.

Adherence. Adherence.

What I've heard from folks is they'll hit the hot signal and a car will still be traversing or We're doing a road guide across what is now Taylor Street, three lanes. If one lane adheres and additional lanes of traffic don't, then the pedestrian has no line of sight.

So the... One of the strategies we used with the right-sizing and the curb bump-outs is to make it appear like the through lanes are a little narrower, even though they are not. They are right-sized to about 11 feet. That will already prompt drivers to slow down as they're passing Findlay Park, which will allow them to react to the hot signal being pressed sooner rather than later.

And then the only other thing I know from when we talked about it before to see if there was any particular council preference about the barriers, the high profile versus the wheel stops, I guess.

Yes, that was back here. So that would be on figure two. Those wheel stop barriers are low profile. They are sometimes used to delineate between cycle tracks or in this case our parking chutes. We also have the decorative jersey barriers which can also be a more vertical barrier for traffic going through Taylor Street in order for traffic to slow down. And it also provides like a more intense safety measure for those that are going to park down the chute.

With you in mind, would you reach out to DeKalb County in Georgia? So downtown Decatur did a barrier, but it's very low, right? And it's just a concrete chute, but it has that. I forgot what grass they planted in it. So you got the wheel barrier, but you also got the decorative, and it looked really nice and clean. And they're doing exactly what they did in their whole downtown. Yeah, no, it's worth a trip looking at. It's aesthetically very pleasing, but the grasses they had at the time, I don't know if it still has been five years since I've seen it, but it also was similar to what they had in Charlotte and other places that also deter trash, right? from collecting in it. Easy, low maintenance. Because then it's almost like, it really looks like from a landscaping it fits in. Because the one thing I don't, I mean, painting the barrier is great, but they chip, they look very institutional. We're doing so much to make our downtown and our communities look good. I just want to make sure we don't lose that. And I think we still can get From the bike safety standpoint, right?

Yes. So this barrier would actually be for those that are going to park at Finley Park. So there is already wheel stop barriers for the shared use path to stop cars from getting too close or any sort of overhang if they were to back in. What is that?

That's somebody's music. I'll give you a free gift certificate if you can name that tune. I apologize.

I live up in Irmo. There have been plenty of earthquakes recently. So I'm like, oh, it's now here.

That's just a cutlery.

So if we are looking at Taylor Street, it would be right under the 45 angled parking in the wheel stop barrier

Okay.

So we currently have that allocated at three feet. We can, like since these are concepts, they are subject to change and we can amend them as we go.

Got it. Okay. So this is more of

like aesthetics for our cycle track and shared use path. We do have wayfinding signage, which can and has been implemented down the Lincoln Corridor on Green Street and on South Main. Thanks in collaboration with Coaltown Bike Collective and the Whole Spire Grant. We were able to design these types of wayfinding signs so cyclists can maneuver around the city to get to key points of interest, one of which is at Finley Park. So as we go and create these shared use paths, these cycle tracks, we can start navigating people down towards the riverfront in the future, towards Finley Park, towards the State House, et cetera.

Robert, are you producing these? Do you produce these? Yes. So it's the same green that we have, right? And the only reason I'm bringing that up is one of the things that really, when you go to the university, the university has got different colored signs than we do. And that drives me crazy. Does it? No, it's actually a concrete trough that goes down the river. They have brown signs and all of ours are green. So I love that we're doing things to be consistent.

I would like to hand this back over to Todd to talk about our cost estimate.

So we put together a cost estimate to show the magnitude. This will change. These plans are very preliminary and they're still being shaped. So expect them to change, but we at least wanted to show it for planning and for planning purposes. But for both Taylor and Laurel Street, we're at about 6 million. For Taylor Street only, that's about 3.5 million. And then for Laurel Street, 2.5 million. You can see Taylor here. All the associated items.

I was going to ask that. Does Laurel Street really need a diet? I don't think I've driven on Laurel Street in a decade.

It's got four lanes now. I mean, it's underutilized. I was going to say, but nobody drives on Laurel Street.

People walk.

there's more traffic now because of the park but it would be if there were less lanes it would help slow down traffic down there coming across our officers are parked in the middle of it now because of them in and out of the park which also There is no bike lane or anything on there. We got to think about what's coming. And it creates parking.

There's no comparison between Taylor Street and Laurel Street.

I was just going to say that we've gotten lots of feedback from the community in terms of traveling down Laurel Street because a lot of our Parkers now parking in Arsenal Hill and they'll cross Laurel to get to the park. Same thing on the Taylor Street side. So anything we can do is slow it down a little bit. The community is very interested in that because there's lots of traffic coming from that Arsenal Hill parking garage as well as the Lincoln Street Tunnel. So there's a lot of foot traffic. Coming across both streets. So to your point, yes, it's coming up the hill, coming back towards Assembly and going down. There's lots of traffic there. And we've had many discussions with Governors Hill, Arsenal Hill about some of that as well.

We need to get on the negotiating train. 12% for design fees, 15 conditions, 10 for general, and 5 for mobilization.

We need to get some more. We're also being conservative since we're so early into it. And another thing, you know, with Wall Street and the master plan for Findlay, it's a barrier right now, so anything we can do to create a road diet would also help not make it a barrier, make it more safe and more connected, and also get us to the river, which is what we want to do

I know when we had a conversation with Secretary Powell two years ago, maybe it's three now, about Taylor Street, he was very supportive, which we didn't have that before. So they see it as underutilized. I think this is probably better than turning into two-way traffic, right? This really helps us enhance the park and the visitation and the safety around it. With some tweaking and public hearings and all that, I think this would be a great project.

Okay. Which leads us to questions. we need to continue tweaking the design based off the comments we heard today we want to get with Robert and his team more get with David Brewer all of us get together and really continue to evolve the plan and then once we have it to a place we really like it meet with Lori again she'll take it to SCDOT make sure they support it and if they do we'll have a public meeting which is required that if that goes well then we're talking about technical drawings and all that so

I also think it would be, from a long-term planning, we should incorporate this thinking for the rest of downtown as well and kind of work our way through. I find it intriguing that we've got those two streets that are one way, and would it make a difference? bit and made one way just to try to help divert traffic around some of the what's going to be down the road more congested areas of this.

The reason the DOT originally brought up looking at Taylor Street to put it back to two-way is to take some relief off Gervais, right? But if you look at some of the other corridors, you know, Hampton and others, you know, is that a better choice Right. I don't know.

I mean, but I think about lady street and to me, lady street, you know what, if I'm on lady street, lady street seems dangerous. Then it really shouldn't be because it's really, it's really should be more. You're one block away from Gervais. It should not be as busy as, as it is. So I think, I think we just have to get our mind right. That, that over time and based on how the Vista and downtown develop, that we should think about traffic patterns and have an ongoing conversation about about how we more pedestrianize Columbia. Are you concretizing that word? Concretize the pedestrian as we go forward. Pedestrianize. Pedestrianize is the new word of the day.

I think Nicole has some updates, too, on the comprehensive plan.

So, yeah, I can. So as part of our comprehensive plan, we do have Taylor and Hampton Street, instead of being the singular one-way pairs, going back to two-way. While these current plans are showing Taylor Street just being the one-way, it was done in a way to allow for two-way traffic to happen again, if that makes sense. Yes.

All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you both. Great job.

Madam Mayor Fraytown.

I would like to make a motion that we go into executive session to discuss the following items. Number two, receipt of legal advice related to matters COVERED BY ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE PURSUANT TO S.C. CODE 3470. REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 4 ANIMALS OF THE 1998 CODE ORDINANCES, FOREST ACRES FRANCHISITY, PFAS, USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND CITY OPERATIONS, RELOCATION OF Municipal Court, Boyd Plaza, and ordinance number 2026-039, amending SECTION 17.72. AND THEN ALSO UNDER ITEM NUMBER 3, DISCUSSION AND NEGOTIATIONS INCIDENT, TO PROPOSE CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENTS PURSUANT TO SC CODE 3470, BUSTED PLUG, COLUMBIA RICHLAND 911 COMMUNICATIONS, AND 1112.

Yes. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.