20260218 [Active Transportation] Long-Range Transportation Plan Focus Group Discussion

All right, Michelle, are we ready? Uh, I believe we are. Um, hello everyone. Welcome to the active transportation focus group meeting for the long-range transportation plan. Thank you for joining us.

I'd like to take a minute to introduce our team here. Uh, I am Michelle Duncan. I do mapping and data for statewide planning. Uh, on the phone we also have Sarah Lucy. She's our statewide planning chief.

She'll be our co-host and note-taker today. We also have Angelica Stobbs, who is our Zoom expert, and Justin Shelby, who will be monitoring the chat. So our agenda for today is we're first going to go over an LRTP overview of what even is the LRTP. Then we'll dive into a topic specific overview of just talking about what we are covering with the active transportation section. And then we'll jump into a facilitated discussion.

There'll be a few prompts and feel free to take the time to join as a panelist and use your microphone, or if you're uncomfortable with that, feel free to drop things in the chat or the question and answer box. Then at the very end, we'll do a summary and some next steps.

So, uh, getting in a little bit of background on the LRTP. The LRTP must have at least a 20-year planning horizon, and our commissioner, Commissioner Anderson, has challenged us to provide vision through 2025, uh, 2025. '55. With this effort, we're making it a 30-year plan. Uh, the LRT is a multimodal effort.

You'll see that encompassing all of the transportation modes to study Alaska's transportation system as an entire network. The plan looks holistically at all parts of the transportation network, not just what DOT and PF manages. The regulations and statutes noted here emphasize a thorough public involvement process and a multi— multimodal performance-based planning approach, consultation with Metro and tribal governments, cooperation with non-Metro officials, a system performance report, and a description of the performance measures and performance targets used in assessing the performance of the transportation system.

The LRTP is the state's transportation policy plan. It aligns limited resources with Alaska's transportation future, making tough choices on what to preserve, build, and how to connect our communities. The LRTP shapes the direction and policy for modal statewide plans such as the AMHS Long Range Plan and the Statewide Aviation System Plan. This creates a feedback loop. Because Alaska is so vast, we use the L RTP to give a consistent foundation for the area and regional plans to study particular regions more in-depth based on, like, terrain, population, and values.

The area and regional plans produce a list of vetted transportation needs within that particular region of the state. You may have had the opportunity in the last year to be involved in the ongoing Southeast Alaska Transportation Plan. The LRT is the umbrella document that shapes which direction the department will go, then filters down to what projects we will fund or when the ferry operator will see ports maintained. The policies in the LRT will impact your day-to-day commute.

This planned development kicked off in August with initial outreach encouraging all Alaskans to submit their unique experiences with the transportation system using a user story. Some of you may have already done that. The project team has just finished the draft of the transportation assessment, also known as the existing conditions memo. This is available on the Alaska LRT 2055 website for for review and comment. Using the feedback from the transportation assessment, this week's focus group meetings, the user stories, and many other sources, we'll begin to develop the vision, goals, and objectives.

We hope to have a draft strategies and actions by late summer and a final draft ready for your review by the fall. Our timeline will have the plan finalized by the end of the calendar year.

So for those of you who haven't submitted a user story, these stories help DOT and PF understand how transportation connects Alaskans to work, family, healthcare, and daily life. Whether you live here, own a business, visit, or face mobility challenges, your story can help shape meaningful improvements. So a few examples of these user stories. Are like saying, as a resident of Palmer, I want safer DOT intersections so that I don't get hit when I cross the road on my bike. Or another example, as a bicyclist in Fairbanks, I want to, I want to see more separated bicyclist pedestrian lanes, bike paths.

So that we have safer transportation. So as you can see, there's 3 key parts to these statements. You want to state who you are as a so-and-so. I'm a bicyclist. I'm a pedestrian.

I live in Juneau, such like that, followed up with what you want. What are you trying to get out of this statement? And then you want to insert what the benefit is to you. With a so that statement at the very end.

So far we have received 307 of these user stories, which is a great start. Feel free to enter more. Going through these, we have been sorting them into themes. Themes were derived from the dataset using content-based thematic coding. So that means overlapping themes are allowed.

Uh, the counts reflect the number of user stories in which a theme appears as a primary or a secondary theme. So for example, we have 145 mentions of road connectivity and capacity improvements as the primary or secondary theme. We also have 104 different user stories with road safety and speed management. 79 Mention access, affordability, and equity, and 64 already mentioned active transportation, which is a huge chunk of the 307 that we've looked at, which is awesome.

Our transportation assessment, which is also known as the existing conditions memo. This is a draft of the transportation assessment and you are able to view it. You can view it less as something to discuss the statewide backdrop that sets expectations for consistency, performance alignment. Data assumptions, and coordination.

Uh, this document serves as a foundational piece for upcoming the LRTP vision, goals, and performance measures and conversations.

I see, uh, Angelica has dropped in the chat where to submit those user stories. You can go ahead and use that link to put in your own personal story. So the next section, we're going to be opening up to a, um, guided feedback. So I'm going to lay down a little bit of Zoom etiquette for those of you who are not used to Zoom. I want to remind you guys, as we stated at the beginning, you might see a notification asking you if you'd like to be a panelist.

That just means that it will allow you to use your camera and your microphone. So feel free to accept that if you want to use those things. Feel free to decline if you're more comfortable using the chat or the question and answers box.

We would like to request that you limit your public comments to about 2 minutes to respect the time of the other people who want to make comments today. If you're using the call-in feature. You can use *9 to raise your hand if you'd like to speak, but please mute your microphone when you're not speaking. This meeting will be recorded and posted on the website, just so you know.

So we're going to dive into our focus group. Mission and scope. Setting the stage for our conversations today, here is the mission and scope for our discussions. As a reminder, we do not include specific project listings in the LRTP, but instead we just discuss policy and strategy on how to address system-wide challenges, issues, and gaps. Using the transportation assessment draft, the next 3 slides provide a condensed version of the outlook Discussion used in the LRTP of the system's trends, risks, opportunities in the context of active transportation.

We'd like to see your feedback on all of these items, and we'll pause for each one to give you time to state your comments and your questions.

Go ahead and think about how do they represent the system and are we missing items. So, well, I'm going to read through the scope and mission, and then feel free to jump in with any comments you have. So our mission is for the active transportation section is to engage the—. Engage on the integration of walking, biking, rolling, and trail-based travel into Alaska's LRT to support safe access, health, tourism, quality of life, and Alaska's identity as an outdoor state for urban, rural, and remote communities. And then the scope of the section is safety and accessibility of pedestrian, bicycle, and trail networks across urban, rural, and remote contexts, with consideration for users of all ages and abilities.

Connectivity of active transportation facilities to key destinations such as schools, transit services, employment centers, and community hubs. Integration of active transportation into broader multimodal transportation system through planning travel strategies that support seamless connections between modes. Contribution of active transportation to community health, resistance, resilience, and overall livability, including its role in supporting sustainable and connected communities. Go ahead. I'm already seeing some things pop up in the chat.

So Alan says, use a multimodal level of service metric within the major urban areas.

Yeah, we are always looking at multimodal. That's a good point.

Alexa, go ahead and—. I see your hands up. Hi, yeah, I actually have a question. What does engage on the integration mean? That is a confusing combination of words.

It doesn't sound like it is very strongly oriented toward active, you know, construction of things.

Yeah, let me—. Okay, which bullet point is engage on integration? It's the first words of the mission. Oh, that's right, gotcha. Yeah, I guess that could be better worded.

And I think, I think it was engage as in, like, engage the group, engage the focus group, on integration of walking, biking, rolling. Oh, okay. So it's the mission of— yeah, yeah. Like, it's the mission of the, of the group itself, not necessarily the mode within our transportation system, if that makes sense. Yes, that is my bad for not understanding that.

Thank you for clarifying. Yeah, and thanks, Alexa, for bringing that up. Sorry for the confusion. Yeah.

I'm also seeing a few things in the chat. We have from William, add parks and recreation facilities as a destination. That's great. Yeah. Yeah, we have community hubs in there.

But yeah, that's a good point too.

Jeanette says, State of Alaska must include "Active transportation infrastructure funding in both build budgets and maintenance budgets." Also a good point. Um, yeah, this is more of a policy thing. Um, but yeah, that's really good to include. Um, Alan says, "May look at multimodal, but the Design Criteria Manual and other detailed guidance documents to project managers mandates the the standard vehicular level of service metric? Okay.

Um, it's a little more specific. That's, that's really great. Um, I don't know if that's something that would be in the LRTP, but that is something to look into for sure.

Lots of things coming through the chat. I'm going to take a second and let Colin jump in. He's got his hand up. Hi, can you hear me okay? Yep, we got you.

I was wondering if it makes sense to bump quality of life ahead of tourism. I know that's probably not an intentional ordering, but kind of That might be significant for some people, just to say that we're prioritizing for Alaska residents and then also accommodating tourism. So, totally. Yeah, we were just talking about—. This is just an overview of what we're talking about today.

This is not going to be language that goes in the document. So, yeah, this is more of just a scope of what we're talking about. Um, in our focus group today, uh, if we were going to put it into the document, that's a good point. And yeah, we would definitely want to switch those around. Otherwise, it, it, I think you're capturing a lot of things here.

So looks great. Great.

Um, Alexa has in the chat, adopt Anchorage's long-range transportation strategy and use it to inform your development of this plan. Yeah, um, I think it's always good to look at those smaller, um, more regional policies and documents as well when, um, working on an umbrella plan like this. It's a feedback loop. I think we were talking about that, um, the way that all the plans kind of intersect.

There are a few of those smaller plans linked in the long-range plan as well. Um, Jesse said, I appreciate that health is woven into that last bullet. Oh yeah, health is a huge part of active transportation.

Uh, we have Eric says we need more safe infrastructure for non-motorized users. The more people feel safe, the more they will use Non-motorized transportation, which is important for our physical, mental, and environmental health. Here's another, um, about the health, which is great. Um, existing infrastructure needs to be maintained properly. Especially needed are safe routes to school.

Yeah, and I believe we do talk about safe routes to school in this. Um, and yes, uh, those are all really, really great points, Eric.

Uh, William says safe routes to school and parks. Alan says planning must shape the design rather than something that is ignored by design project managers who actually implement policies. Yes. Um, Jeanette says the LRT must acknowledge the latent demand that exists for active transportation infrastructure. Um, yeah, that's why active transportation is part of the LRT.

Um, we, we We recognize that that is something that we want to focus on as a state of Alaska, and we want to focus our efforts on improving our systems and making everything safer and healthier. Shane says, in western Alaska, ATV and snow machine trails are main transportation routes, not recreational. How can we ensure that this is acknowledged in the plan? Yeah, we do have in here safe accessibility to remote context with consideration for views— users of all ages and abilities. We have specified that it's schools and community hubs and connections.

Yeah, we absolutely recognize as DOT that those trails are not just for fun. They are a livelihood. They're a way to get to health centers. They are a way to connect those communities, um, even in places where those connections may not even exist in the summer. Um, yeah, those are huge.

Um, Alan adds, L RTP should explicitly direct that design and construction guidance documents be amended to conform to L RTP policies. Um, yeah, I think that that's a great point. I'm not entirely sure, maybe Sarah can speak to this, um, on how, what the power of the LRTP is to make that sort of policy change.

It is something that we could consider as part of a policy or a strategy under the LRTP. I think we start with our goals, like our vision, goals, and objectives. Um, part of the objectives could be to design, address design and construction guidance as part of building a safe and complete system. So, Alan, that's a great, great point and a great suggestion. Taking note of it.

Great. Um, I am going to take a minute to move to the next slide. Um, we have some trends that we want to discuss.

So we have a few key trends here that are— we have discussed in the LRTP document, and I just want to state, uh, that these are more of a condensed version of what's in the main document. So these are a few bullet points. It probably doesn't cover absolutely everything in the document, um, but it's what'll fit on the slide. So these are a few good ones to talk about. If you're concerned that something may be missed, please shout it out.

But there is a possibility that it was just not in the condensed version. And so it's good to just check that major document and see if that thing that you wanna talk about is actually in there. So I'm just gonna go over these really quick and then I'll get to Alexa who's got her hand up. Um, so the first point is growing interest in active transportation and recreation. Um, then we have increasing micro mobility use, particularly e-bikes.

We also have a few Alaska DOT and PF AMATS and FAST planning that they maintain updated active transportation plans reflecting current design guidance and local priorities. Uh, we also have rural residents continue walking and biking to access services, jobs, and air or ferry connections. And pedestrian and bicyclist safety is a statewide plan focus area as well.

Um, go ahead, Alexa. Yeah, I just wanted to tease out a little bit more specificity in that last line. Certainly pedestrian and bicycle, bicyclist safety are stated to be focus areas in the Strategic Highway Safety Plan, but I do think that it is important for us to remember that as of 2024, Vehicle fatalities or road fatalities of all kinds in Anchorage were at a 20-year high, and the past several years have been particularly bad, like on, again, you know, highest in decades for pedestrians and bicyclists, and that almost all of those pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities occurred on DOT-owned and operated roads. And the response that we've gotten from DOT so far has been extremely unsatisfying. It appears to mostly involve building anti-pedestrian barriers and victim blaming.

So I think that we need to be honest about the state of affairs right now so that we can have a clear-eyed view into what we're going to do to make that better. I really appreciate you calling that out. Um, that's a really good, um, statement. And yeah, um, we need to be able to address a lot of those issues, uh, that are popping up in the last few years. Uh, I, I did work in crash data at one point and completely understand the concern.

I really appreciate you bringing that up. I'm going to jump in. I see there's a question box. The LRTP should center the trend about pedestrian fatalities in Anchorage. This is largely on state, so this is what was just stated.

Yeah, I agree. We need to focus on those high incident areas. Those are a big issue.

Jeanette says, "There appears to be a bias for urban active transportation needs over rural, and to even dismiss rural needs. This is an error, and rural active transportation needs should be level with those in urban areas." I think that this is maybe— A little bit of an error in the way that the condensed version is reading. We do focus a lot on those rural areas in the LRTP. Obviously, those high-use areas in those urban areas do have a lot more of those fatalities. But they also are reported more in those areas.

So that is another thing that I believe we cover is that there is an underreporting of rural area issues. And so I think that might be covered on a later slide. But yes, we, we do recognize that rural areas are also in need and we do not want to minimize that at all.

Shane recommended trend rural residents need for well-marked trails for the intercommunity travel. That's great. I appreciate that one. Yeah, Angelica dropped the full draft in there, and then Alan says road facilities are being asked to accommodate all user groups, but oftentimes due to right-of-way acquisition costs, the department will minimize non-motorized facilities and just focus on vehicular movement. Yeah, I think that that's one of those things that we have to right-size the solution to a problem.

So when we are working on a roadway project, if there is a high amount of non-motorized use, then those things need to be taken into consideration. If they're on a corridor that's not maybe used as much, then yeah, vehicles will be absolutely prioritized in those situations. So yeah, it's up to design on those things. But yes, we, when we are designing a road, we do like to keep a multimodal outlook on those things.

Hey Michelle, we have a question from one of the attendees. Morgan Berry, I'm going to—. Morgan, I'm going to go ahead and allow you to talk. So you should be able to do that now. Go ahead and unmute.

Oh, okay. Excellent. The one thing that I was noticing this is that active transportation is an opportunity to provide system redundancy. Particularly in communities that have narrow, limited roadway corridors without paralleling roadways.

Trails and other, you know, biking access, those can provide emergency routes in the case of an emergency. Yeah, totally. Yeah, I think I was— visited Sitka last year and they were talking about how they built up this really great trail system that goes alongside and they, they have used it for like they can get an ambulance up it. And so things like that, that could be super helpful if you have those really great established trail systems and maybe not an ambulance on everyone, but like a four-wheeler that can make a difference if somebody has really injured themselves. And they can't get through like a normal way.

Even supporting the development of roads because— or of trails. I know that RTP was recently rolled into DOT's Active Transportation Program, if I'm not mistaken. And that program, when it was routed through DNR, was intended to support the construction of trails.

So at least acknowledging that the development of new trails can provide vital linkages for emergency access is— would be pretty helpful. Yeah, totally.

Two more and then we're going to switch to risks and then opportunities because I want to move through these and get to some of these great ideas because I feel like we're getting a little muddled up. In between all of these things. I'm going to read— Alan's got a few more things in the chat. The trend not mentioned is that increasing non-motorized use is not measured by the department. Data collection does not produce non-motorized traffic counts within the state.

Right-of-way, for example. Again, the LRT must establish a policy of multimodal level of service as a primary metric. Particularly in urban areas. The LRTB should also promote moving transit planning out of Juneau to the regional offices. Doing this would allow regional offices to craft true multimodal approaches.

These are some good ideas. I know we're trying to expand, um, our counts, um, for non-motorized, but that's obviously a challenge when we have the infrastructure to be able to do the, um, the other ones, the vehicle counts, because we've been doing that for years. So that is definitely a challenge. I will give Colin a couple minutes to speak, and then we're going to switch to risks. Yeah, just wanted to say, um, one of the things I'm seeing in the trends and hearing from the previous comment from Jeanette is that, um, Highlighting that active transportation, maybe in the past, has often been viewed as like a, a recreational thing.

And I think what we're trying to really make sure comes across is that both in rural and in urban areas, it's an essential part of people's lives. And if they're not able to safely do that, then we're keeping people from going about their day-to-day and living their lives to the fullest. So that's where I see the commonality of some of these bullets. Yeah, definitely.

I appreciate that.

Yeah. All right. So let's move on to risks. And I know we're kind of touching on this a little bit throughout. I'll read through a couple of these bullet points and then we'll jump into some questions.

DOT's pedestrian bicycle inventory is incomplete and lacks volume data. Just like we were just saying, that's kind of why I wanted to move on to this slide because we were already kind of getting into some of these things. We are limited in our informed planning and prioritization. Cyclists and pedestrian crashes are likely underreported, particularly in remote areas that don't have consistent law enforcement. Harsh weather and inconsistent winter maintenance hinder walking and biking with declining state funds and increasing maintenance challenges.

Heavy reliance on federal funding creates vulnerability to changes in federal programs and allocations. Disconnected facilities reduce network usability, safe access, and overall walking and biking participation. And Chapter 12 of HPCM, Non-Motor Transportation, has not been updated since 2005 and needs revision to reflect the current FHWA and AASHTO guidance. So does anyone have any comments about risk? I know we've already been throwing a few out of the—.

Out in the chats, but—.

Comment, not question, from Hillary: "LRTP should hold focus groups at senior centers and with people with mobility challenges because if we can get transportation facilities that accommodate their needs, they will accommodate everybody's needs." That's a super good point. I think that we— that would be great for opportunities as well.

Jeanette has in the chat: "We don't build a bridge when we see how many people are swimming the river." There is late latent demand that cannot be counted? Yes, that is absolutely one of the risks that we're worried about because we don't have those consistent counts.

Uh, we have William, lack of good GIS is the number one problem, and I appreciate that as a GIS person. I like that you called that out. It is very hard to collect that data right now. Our most consistent counts are from the roadway because you can drive a car down it, and that's not going to be helpful for all of our facilities. It definitely gives us an idea of what we have running along the side of the road, But there are a lot of trail systems that are not being recorded.

So I really appreciate that. Uh, yes, lack of good GIS. I'll just say that out loud. Uh, Colin said this list of risks seems like a good start, and I appreciate that.

Um, Alan says we are experiencing a period of rapid and disruptive change in multiple areas. Such dynamics produce a great deal of uncertainty and risk. The LRTP can address this by using scenario planning and laying out the issues. Uh, yeah, that's why we're trying to address these risks and opportunities. Yeah, to get an idea of what those scenarios might be.

All right, um, Jeanette also says, many locations in Alaska experience multiple levels of risk and need, including ecological, historical, cultural, as well as economic, health, connectivity, and linkage. Yes, I would have a hard time coming up with a place that does not experience some sort of risk or need along those lines. Yeah.

Um, last chance to weigh in on risks and we'll move on to opportunities.

Jesse would like to consider adding near misses to this list. They often go unreported and could help identify problem areas. Absolutely. Yeah, that's something that surveys can cover a lot better because a lot of our crash data comes from police reporting and they're not going to come to the scene of a near-miss all the time. They're already stretched thin on crashes as it is and have a hard time reporting some of those rural areas even when there is a crash.

So yeah, near misses are absolutely being underreported.

Um, says one scenario should be a highly likely feature where we exceed 2.0 degrees centigrade temps in the 2030s. This will be a big deal with significant negative impacts to DOT and PF facilities. Yeah, that would be, um, absolutely, um, those things like that can absolutely change the way that we address our maintenance, and that will also affect things like active transportation. Eric says there are private efforts to collect crashes and near misses. Can they be included in the data collection?

We would— if you have links to data, I'll take it. We would love for you to send those in. Anything that gives us a better of our transportation systems. We love to see it. So yeah.

Um, great, let's move on to opportunities. That's the flip side of the risks and a little more happy. Where can we go next? The ASATP outlines policies to improve road user safety.

That's our active transportation plan, including Complete Streets, Safe Passing, and Vulnerable User laws, with statewide groups advocating for adoption. The transportation—. Active transportation plan initiated a statewide active transportation coalition that meets monthly and operates 4 working groups focused on safer networks. DOT NPF participates in regional winter maintenance working groups informing MNO practices, expanding these efforts could begin— benefit other regions. Outreach and education to promote walking, biking can be strengthened, and expanding the active transportation inventory will better identify network gaps, needs, and priorities.

So yeah, all that data again, I'll reiterate. Uh, yeah, let's see, anybody want to drop any more things in the chat that we are missing here? Or jump on and state your ideas. Alexis says, "Just. Period.

Build. Period. Things. Period." Like that. Um, Jesse said, "I'm the co-lead for Alaska Active Transportation Coalition.

Send me an email and I'll get you on our listserv." Um, Jesse, [email protected]. Make sure that we can copy that so all of the people in the chat can see that one.

Alan says the department should take a more aggressive role in upgrading local streets and roads to Complete Streets design standards with local assumption of ownership. Yeah, I think that a lot of the times we are limited with funding. I think you made that point earlier that when it comes to roadway projects, sometimes vehicles take precedent, and I think that does happen when we are strapped for that right-of-way and things, but I think it is really important to keep that in mind and have a complete streets focus as much as we can. Stephanie, standardized forms of data collection to be able to inform BCA and BCR for federal grants. Also, for all reconstruction projects, reach out to local community and local government for design.

We have two opportunities to incorporate ped infrastructure that we were— that were missed on the highway and bridge reconstruction project. Um, wow, I really appreciate calling that out. Uh, yes, uh, it is really important that we work together in order to cover those things. Uh, yeah, that's a great way to, um, bring up things like the, um, TAP, um, things like that where you can add, or other grants. Um, it's really good to advocate for your community as much as possible.

If we're not hearing from you, then we may not know always what the issues are. Um, and we can reach out where possible, but yeah, those squeaky wheels They do help.

So, uh, William says inventory what we have and put into GIS. Thank you, William. Yes, that would be great. We're doing what we can, uh, as far as that goes. Uh, we last summer went through a lot of our roadway data collection and had our contractors look at the camera data and pull a lot of those assets out of that, like I was saying earlier, we were able to get a lot of those bike lanes and pedestrian features that are along the side of the road.

So that was a really good start. It's a publicly available data set that we have online, um, and it covers a lot of our public roads. It does not cover everything in the state, and I know there's a lot of really good local data sets that we're trying to pull in. I believe We've been working on one for winter trails that pulls a lot of local data together. But yeah, anytime we can find those datasets and get them pulled together, it really, really helps us recognize where our issues are.

Eric says, "Data collection is vital, but so is real-world follow-up to use that data." Yep. Mm-hmm. I could not have said that better myself. I appreciate that.

Alan says, DOT and PF should be using its national networks to document changes in trip patterns due to society's transition to a digital economy. More trips are now online, and this results in less long vehicle trips and more local— or non-motorized trips.

Do you have some of those data links? I've heard of a few where people are posting their trips online and things.

But are you talking about something specific there, Alan?

Um, we have Eric in the chat saying the Fairbanks Cycle Club recent— oh, uh, yeah, Ellen will share links later. Thanks. Um, Eric says the Fairbanks Cycle Club recently commented on a project in Fairbanks and was able to make substantive changes to a project, making it safer for non-motorized users. Public engagement is so important. Yes, it is, and that's why we're doing these meetings so we can hear from you guys.

Yes, that public engagement is really, really crucial. Lindsay says strategy should include quick build improvements and pilot projects to improve pedestrian safety, implement proven design solutions to slow speeds and increase attentiveness, and include better winter maintenance and design and operations. Coordination. Yes.

I think that's a good point to include.

And William says also, wide lanes generally are not used as much as protected pathways. This is an opportunity. Yes. All right. So I think we are going to wrap up this section of the talk and move on to the survey data.

We do have a survey posted online. It is still open. You can write your thoughts and opinions into that. Angelica has added it to the chat. Feel free to fill that out.

We're going to go over a little bit of the data we've received so far, but it is limited because not all of you have responded yet. And feel free to put your thoughts into that survey, and that will really help us get to know exactly where our problem areas are. So here's the first slide of survey data results. So the first slide is what factors most affect your ability to travel safely in your community, and you can select up to 2. And 16 people have said that there are conflicts between vehicles and non-vehicle users.

That's really crucial to avoid those things in our design.

6 People said lack of sidewalks or boardwalks. 5 People said safety concerns, traffic speed, animals, and remoteness. 4 People said other, please describe. We also had poor trail conditions such as mud, ice, erosion, and permafrost. We also have weather or seasonal changes, limited lighting or visibility, and long distances between places.

Yes, the survey is still open, Shane, through March 8th. Yeah, you've got some time and feel free to share it. You can send that to anybody you know who has any thoughts or opinions about active transportation. There are also surveys for all of the other sections of the LRTB that we'll be talking about this week, and those are all open until March 8th, so feel free to just go nuts on there and share all of your thoughts.

We have a second question on our survey: In your region, which destinations most need safer and more reliable non-vehicle travel access? Select up to 2. And we have a few responses here. Stores and groceries is the biggest one. Schools, followed by regional trails to other communities, and then community buildings such as tribal halls, city offices, or rec centers, and then other, which some of those responses we got for other were restaurants, and people wanted to address aggressive driving.

We also have clinics and health services, airport, And nobody has said harbor or riverside access, but I'm sure that's a big one as well. As somebody who fishes, I would like access to that.

And feel free throughout this going through the survey results if you want to jump in and you have something to say, this is a public meeting and you are welcome to do that. We love to hear it. So, we also have kind of an open comment sort of section in the survey. The LRTP sets long-term direction and priorities, not specific projects. What are your priorities should the LRTP focus on to improve safe walking, biking, rolling, and rural travel in your community?

So a few of those things that people have said are connectivity. I should be able to go door-to-door between any two points by foot or bike that I can also do by motor vehicle. We also have increasing the number of separated bike paths and widening shoulders to improve connectivity of safe routes. So there's another connectivity one. Um, and then we also have more protected and/or separated infrastructure for non-motorized transportation and more funding for maintenance for that infrastructure so that non-motorized transportation is dealt with on par with motorized transportation.

Another response we got was priority to meet need of infrastructure that sets rural communities apart while meeting region and state plans.

We also have non-motorized connectivity from approach roads and to and between modes of interest, nodes of interest, transit stops, schools, etc., and from areas of significant population density to the highway, thereby allowing for non-motorists to safely access any area of the community. And we have separated pathways along high-speed corridors where there is no alternative route. Especially connecting neighborhoods to town. So these are all really, really great responses, and I appreciate everyone who's submitted one so far and everyone who's about to.

Um, Hillary says, once you have sufficient results, it'd be interesting to see these data separated into respondents from rural versus urban communities. Um, yeah, that would be great. Uh, question for Sarah, uh, are we collecting that data, um, on where people are from?

Um, we have a demographic data, some demographic data questions at the end of the survey, but I believe they're optional, but we would love it. Okay, great. Um, yeah, so if people are filling that out, then yeah, we will be able to see that.

So, uh, yeah, we have a few more survey questions on there, um, but I think we should probably start wrapping up this. If we have any last comments or questions, feel free to shout those out now. I see one from Corey. Does the LRT speak to roadway classification and how does designing for active users interact with current and future classifications?

Um, what a great, great question. Sarah, do you have an answer to that?

I'm sorry, I was answering questions in the chat. Oh, sure. I'll reread it. Does the LRTP speak to roadway classification, and how does designing for active users interact with current and future classifications? Uh, so our roadway classification, our functional classification update just got approved.

So I know that's posted. We do incorporate like the 30,000-foot view as part of our transportation assessment. Um, but I don't think we did a deep dive into how designing for active users interacts with the individual classifications, but that's, um, that might be a good study. I wonder if that's maybe in the active transportation, um, modal plan more so than the LRT. But, uh, Corey, we'll have to look into that and get back to you.

Um, and we have a comment from Eric. Um, For non-motorized users, wide shoulders and separated paths are needed for different types of users. Studies show fast cyclists are typically safer when they are in a part of this flow of traffic, but others such as dog walkers and kids learning to bike need separated paths. On separated paths, fast cyclists and slow walkers don't mix well unless the paths are very wide. Really great statement there, and you should enter it into our survey so we can record that as well.

Um, yes, that's great. Uh, feel free to fill out that survey with any further questions and that you have, um, or other statements you'd like included in our data. Uh, I would like to go over a few things post-meeting that we'll get to. We will deliver meeting summaries posted online. Meeting recordings will also be posted online.

What we'll ask of you to do is attend our other focus focus groups. On the next slide, I'll show you where those are, what those are. You can also complete the focus group surveys by March 8th, review the transportation assessment draft by March 8th, and provide your user story. And then you can also sign up for the public review group. And you'll be contacted when we are ready for public review with things.

Um, and then we have our next focus group discussions. Our next one is actually this afternoon at 2:00, and it focuses on transit. And I know a few people brought up some transit points, so yeah, bring those to the next meeting at 2:00 PM today. Um, we've got a couple more tomorrow and Friday. We have rural parts— ports and barges at 11:00 AM tomorrow and winter roads and trails at 2:00 PM.

And I know we kind of got into that one as well, so Definitely bring those topics of discussion to Winter Roads and Trails. Friday we have Community Connectivity and Frontier Access, another one that has come up in this meeting that we'll want to cover, and we have International Airports at 2:00. So feel free to come into any of those. Scan that QR code for more meeting details or visit our website at publicinput.com/alaskalrtp 2-1-T-55. I really appreciate everyone coming to this and sharing your thoughts and opinions and your questions.

Your voice really, really makes a difference.