Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 09/15/2021 TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR September 15, 2021, 6:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting Via Zoom 9/15/2021 – MINUTES Page 1  FOR REFERENCE: Chair: Nathalie Rachline Vice Chair: Council Liaison: Cari Brown Emily Gorgol Staff Liaison: Aaron Iverson 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Rachline called the meeting to order at 6:03 PM. 2. ROLL CALL BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Nathalie Rachline, Chair Cari Brown, Vice Chair Indy Hart York Kevin Borchert Jerry Gavaldon Diego Lopez BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Rob Owens CITY STAFF PRESENT: PUBLIC PRESENT: None 3. AGENDA REVIEW Iverson stated there were no changes to the published agenda. 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION None. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – AUGUST 2021 Gavaldon made a motion, seconded by York, to approve the August 2021 minutes as written. The motion was adopted unanimously. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 9/15/2021 – MINUTES Page 2  6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Raising Cane’s/Starbucks Back-up Issues on College Avenue Gavaldon stated the plan at Raising Cane’s is acceptable; however, he has more of an issue with the Starbucks location as he has had several encounters with being stuck in traffic there. Borchert commented on other cities’ moratoriums on drive-through restaurants and suggested that may be a conversation to have in Fort Collins. Iverson noted the banning of drive-throughs is on Council’s priority list. York questioned what the City’s plan may be for the short-term issue when something changes and a use becomes a hazard. He stated it is difficult to determine whether the Raising Cane’s proposal is beneficial as he does not know to what extent it impacts the problem. He stated any letter to Council should mention how these short-term issues should be addressed quickly when public safety is a factor. Gavaldon concurred with York’s comments and discussed historical issues with drive- throughs in the community. Vice Chair Brown stated the proposed new drive through lane appears to be a good ultimate solution; however, it seems as though the current situation is dire. Hart commented on concern about this issue in the short term and stated it is positive there is some movement around making changes at Raising Cane’s; however, he stated he would like to see any letter sent to Council involve future planning. Chair Rachline reiterated the need to focus on short-term issues; however, the main goal should be on prevention. Hart agreed and stated proactive solutions for issues similar to these are important as are retroactive responses to problems. Vice Chair Brown asked if having police-directed traffic could be a short-term solution at the expense of the businesses. Iverson replied he was unsure if that option has been explored. Vice Chair Brown suggest that could be included as a possible solution in the letter. York noted another consideration could be a temporary reroute of traffic. He also commented on using the update to the Land Use Code as a way to address this issue on a more long-term basis. Chair Rachline suggested she will work on a draft letter to Council with Iverson and circulate it to members for review. Borchert stated it would be interesting to know if Raising Cane’s anticipated the College Avenue backups when it first developed. He suggested a moratorium on drive-throughs TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 9/15/2021 – MINUTES Page 3  might be necessary until this issue is resolved. Gavaldon commented on the value of incentivizing businesses to use tools to resolve the issue rather than disincentivizing. He suggested getting the letter to Council sooner rather than later to express the urgency of the situation. York made a motion, seconded by Gavaldon, to write a letter to City Council containing two points: one that a toolbox of options should be created to address emergency situations that cause safety issues when something changes, and two, that the Land Use Code as it relates to drive-throughs should be reviewed for how to prevent back-ups on major transportation corridors. Chair Rachline requested a friendly amendment to add suggestions for the tool box including stationing police to direct traffic, et cetera. Hart expressed support for the motion as described by York; however, he did not support the addition mentioned by Chair Rachline stating the letter should not contain minutiae about actions that could be taken. He suggested the inclusion of language that ‘many suggestions have been discussed at Transportation Board meetings.’ Chair Rachline agreed. The vote on the motion was as follows: Yeas: Borchert, Brown, Lopez, Hart, York, Gavaldon and Rachline. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) - Review of City Manager’s Recommended Budget Iverson provided a table summarizing the items specifically discussed by the Board and noted only a couple of the items are unfunded in the recommended budget. He stated the travel survey, though unfunded, is approved for under spend, which means the project can be funded by savings from 2021 and it will move forward. Iverson stated the main unfunded item identified by the Board is the Neighborhood Traffic Mitigation Program expansion. Iverson noted the BAC also sent a letter regarding the budget. Vice Chair Brown stated she reached out to Transfort staff to ask about offer 19.11 noting the recommended funding level is not enough to purchase necessary easements and the current plan is to request the remaining funding next year. She stated she would like to see the entire amount funded for those purchases for bus stops. Hart concurred the ADA compliance for bus stops should be a priority for full funding. He stated he would be interested in having a discussion with the Board regarding the neighborhood traffic mitigation and Arthur’s Ditch design not being fully funded versus expressing support for the items that were funded, many of which were supported by the Board. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 9/15/2021 – MINUTES Page 4  Borchert noted the BAC expressed support for restoring funding for offers 9.7-13.7 and he concurred. Gavaldon stated offer 19.11 should be funded and should have automatically occurred given ADA requirements. He stated there are higher priorities than the Arthur’s Ditch design and offer 11.13 as it is redundant. York asked if Gavaldon would support funding for offer 11.13 if it were scaled. Gavaldon replied he would rather let it go and stated it is too late for him to support it. York supported scaling the offer so that it could potentially be funded if dollars become available. He asked about funding for offers mentioned by the BAC. Iverson replied offer 13.10 for Safe Routes to School is funded, 13.8 for the Shift Your Ride travel options program is unfunded, and all restore offers were funded. York stated he would support funding for offer 13.8 and agreed the Arthur’s Ditch design may be out of the purview of the Board, with the exception of bridges. He stated he was glad to see the travel survey moving forward. Hart expressed overall support for the direction of the budget and stated he remains on the fence regarding offer 11.13. He stated he would like additional information regarding the Arthur’s Ditch design to determine whether it is worth expressing support. Vice Chair Brown noted Fort Collins is doing much better than most communities regarding ADA compliance at bus stops; however, she stated Transfort has been working hard to get grants and she would support making the funding available for easement purchase. She stated all of the BAC’s supported offers were funded except 13.8. Gavaldon reiterated his feeling that bus stops should all be ADA compliant. Vice Chair Brown concurred and stated that while Fort Collins is doing better than most communities, it can still do more. Gavaldon stated he would like to see the BAC’s recommendations be more integrated with the Transportation Board’s. Chair Rachline opposed funding for offer 11.13 as it does not do anything to encourage the use of transportation modes other than cars. Hart concurred but noted the Board should be divided as the community is also divided; therefore, that may be a good thing to include in the letter. York stated he would not support funding for speed bumps as they do not work. He stated speed dips would be more beneficial. He expressed support for having better facilities for human-powered transportation and transit, which is one of the things funded by 11.13. Chair Rachline stated the offer is ambiguous in that it does not specifically support transit. York stated it would open up non-arterial streets for human-powered transportation with various improvements. Chair Rachline stated the offer still does not TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 9/15/2021 – MINUTES Page 5  decrease cars or traffic and stated she would still not support funding the offer. Hart asked when the letter related to the budget needs to be sent. Iverson replied it could be sent anytime as Council is in the midst of the budget hearing process. Vice Chair Brown suggested sending the letter as soon as possible. Vice Chair Brown presented language related to the history of funding ADA-compliant bus stops and in support of that offer. Members discussed the way in which they would like to present their recommendations to Council. Chair Rachline asked if members support the language as suggested by Vice Chair Brown. All members expressed support. Chair Rachline asked members to state their opinions on offer 11.13. Vice Chair Brown suggested the Board either advocate for its funding or say nothing. Chair Rachline asked who wanted to include support for offer 11.13 in the letter. York and Hart were the only members who replied in the affirmative. Hart stated he would like mention members were divided. Chair Rachline asked members about the Arthur’s Ditch offer. No members supported including the offer in their letter. Chair Rachline asked members if they support including funding for offer 13.8. All members except Gavaldon replied in the affirmative. Borchert replied in the affirmative but questioned how the program’s success will be measured. Gavaldon stated he opposed supporting funding the offer due to questions around metrics, what the program will do, and whether it will have tangible results. He noted he resoundingly opposes the offer. Chair Rachline stated the metrics may not be as important as starting programs that focus on issues and the City’s priorities. Hart proposed the letter includes language that recognizes offer 13.8 is in strong keeping with the mission of the Transportation Board. Gavaldon disagreed. Chair Rachline asked members if they agree to including the BAC letter as an attachment and support its content. All members replied in the affirmative. b. Mountain Avenue Reshaping Project – Aaron Iverson Iverson noted Seth Lorson is the project manager on this project. He discussed the history of the project noting it was set to originally begin just before the pandemic but was consequently put on hold until a couple months ago. He stated some of the goals of the project have changed as a result of COVID, including outdoor dining. He outlined the project schedule and focus area. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 9/15/2021 – MINUTES Page 6  Iverson noted there are currently no dedicated bicycle lanes on this portion of Mountain Avenue. He discussed traffic counts and results of the public survey noting the landscaping, outdoor dining, and space for pedestrians were among the top priorities. Hart noted other priorities included having outdoor space for social gatherings and ample space for scootering and biking. Iverson noted the survey results also show a desire for increased bicycle and pedestrian facilities. He announced the open studio charette on the project tomorrow at the Elevations Credit Union building. He stated the outcome of the work will be to develop a vision and toolkit for addressing desired outcomes. York asked how the low-stress network overlays on this section of Mountain Avenue. Iverson replied plans identify a bike facility on Mountain; however, he was unsure of the recommended facility type as it is not part of the low-stress network. York requested additional information on how the plans would align particularly given Mountain Avenue connects pieces of the low-stress network. Borchert commented on the section of Mountain between Riverside and the improved Lincoln area needing improvements and expressed support for the connections this plan will provide. York noted access to the Udall Natural Area should also be part of the project. Iverson replied he would ensure staff connects with Natural Areas on that. Iverson stated Owens had asked, via email, if there are counts of the percentage of people going through on Mountain who are just trying to find parking. Iverson stated he was unsure that analysis had been done. Iverson stated Owens also commented on Transfort route 14 travelling on Mountain. c. Bicycle Advisory Committee Liaison Selection Gavaldon stated his term on the BAC will be up in November and noted Owens had previously attended a meeting in his stead. Gavaldon clarified he was to attend that meeting; however, he was never notified of the meeting and therefore did not attend. Gavaldon stated the BAC meetings are the 4th Mondays of each month. He suggested this item could be put on unfinished business for next month. Hart noted Iverson had previously sent an email to all members asking if anyone was interested in the position. Iverson stated he did not receive an comments from anyone expressing interest. Hart nominated Borchert for the BAC liaison position. York stated his term on the Transportation Board will end at the end of 2022 and suggested he may be willing to take the BAC liaison position if someone else were to TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 9/15/2021 – MINUTES Page 7  take the Planning and Zoning Commission liaison position. Gavaldon stated York’s name came up as a possible candidate from the BAC Chair and stated he would be willing to take the Planning and Zoning Commission liaison role. York stated he would be amenable to that switch. Chair Rachline suggested putting this item on the next agenda for determination. Members agreed. 8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Lopez reported there are some grants opening up from the Colorado Energy Office for charging stations and busses. Borchert reported he is sending an email summarizing the last North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization meeting. Hart discussed his positive experiences with buffered bike lanes throughout the city, noting they are easy to fit into lanes that may not previously have had those double-painted lines. He stated he is disappointed by the number of people he has seen using devices while driving. Gavaldon asked if Iverson could provide some information on the Enlighten system previously discussed by Joe Olson. Iverson replied he would research the topic. Gavaldon commented on seeing E-scooters and E-bikes from the share program being left in rights-of-way and HOA green belts. He asked if the Board could receive a report in the next few meetings. Borchert concurred with the comments about the scooters being left in various places and stated he has also noticed gas-powered bicycles around the city. York reported on seeing people riding E-scooters on sidewalks in the dismount zones of the downtown area which are supposed to be geofenced. He stated there is a sidewalk going in between HP and the Transit Center on the east end of Harmony which will provide a good connection for human-powered modes. Borchert asked if there are bike cages at the Harmony Transit Center. York replied there are bike boxes. York stated there are still openings for volunteers for the bike and pedestrian counts. He asked if it would be possible to put up digital signs around town to warn drivers about the dangers of looking at devices while driving. He also commented on an email related to promised sidewalks and crosswalks near The Standard housing development. Iverson asked if York would forward that email to ensure it gets passed on to the proper staff. York reported on the recent Planning and Zoning Commission work session during which the Wireless Telecommunications Master Plan and new a new development at College and TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 9/15/2021 – MINUTES Page 8  Skyway was discussed. He questioned how that development might impact the frontage road that goes north from Skyway to Saturn on the west side of College particularly as related to human-powered transportation. He stated the Commission also discussed the East Mulberry Corridor Plan update. He asked if the grants mentioned by Lopez are only for municipalities. 9. OTHER BUSINESS a. Bicycle Advisory Committee Report Gavaldon reported Mayor Arndt and Mayor Pro Tem Francis attended the last BAC meeting and Seth Lorson discussed the Mountain Avenue Reshaping Project. Additionally, Nancy Nichols gave a presentation on Safe Routes to School. b. City Council 6-Month Calendar Review Iverson reported the next several Council meetings and work sessions are on the budget. Additionally, Council will be discussing the East Mulberry Corridor Plan in October. c. Staff Liaison Report Iverson discussed the term expirations for each member and noted the Clerk’s Office is working on filling vacancies. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:28 p.m. by unanimous consent.