HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 04/19/2022
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
April 19, 2022, 6:00 p.m.
Virtual Meeting Via Zoom
4 /1 9 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 1
FOR REFERENCE:
Chair: Indy Hart
Vice Chair:
Council Liaison:
Cari Brown
Emily Francis
Staff Liaison: Aaron Iverson
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Rachline called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
2. ROLL CALL
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Indy Hart, Chair
Cari Brown, Vice Chair (arrived late)
York
Jerry Gavaldon
Rob Owens
Nathalie Rachline
Stephanie Blochowiak
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT:
None
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
Drew Brooks
Tyler Stamey
PUBLIC PRESENT:
Jason Miller (Fehr and Peers)
3. AGENDA REVIEW
Iverson stated there were no changes to the published agenda.
4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
None.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – MARCH 2022
York made a motion, seconded by Owens, to approve the minutes of the March 2022
meeting as amended to change a name. The motion was adopted unanimously with Hart
abstaining.
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
4 /1 9 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 2
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Iverson congratulated Hart on being elected as Chair.
7. NEW BUSINESS
a. Transit Funding Study – Drew Brooks, Jason Miller (Fehr and Peers)
Drew Brooks, Director of Transfort and Parking Services, stated one of the primary next
steps after adoption of the Transit Master Plan in April of 2019 was to complete a
funding study to address the build out of the Plan. He stated Fehr and Peers was hired
as the consultant to complete that study.
(**Secretary’s Note: Brown arrived at this point in the meeting.)
Jason Miller, Fehr and Peers Transit Planner, stated the funding study examined what
sources of funding are available to support operations, se rvice expansions, and capital
projects for the duration of the Master Plan, through 2040. He noted the fare structure is
also part of the study. Regarding the study’s timeline, Mr. Miller stated the historic and
current cost structure was examined, operating and capital costs were updated, and
historic and current revenue sources were examined. He stated the study is now
transitioning into development of new potential funding sources and strategies . He
stated a full implementation plan would set the stage for any possible ballot initiatives for
voter-approved taxation mechanisms in 2023 or beyond.
Mr. Miller discussed the changes to transit service and ridership since 2019 given the
pandemic. He noted equity and access has always been important in the City
organization and for Transfort and that will come into play when fare structure and policy
is examined. He discussed the current funding sources for Transfort and stated a new
local funding mechanism that could be counted upon annual to be dedicated to transit
would be the ideal situation. He stated the examination of future funding options will
continue through early June and the far structure analysis will continue through the
summer with the plan completed by the end of the year.
Gavaldon asked how making all fares free would impact the CSU funding contribution
and asked if Transfort has any partnerships with Poudre School District or other
organizations. Brooks replied Transfort does not have any financial relationship with the
School District; however, they do work with the District on scheduling around bell times
and some maintenance resources are shared. He noted another study will begin later
this year regarding different collaboration options with the District. He stated there is
currently an ongoing conversation with CSU regarding the possibility of a fare free
option.
York asked why a property tax possibility has not been considered as it may be a more
stable solution than sales tax. Mr. Miller replied it is a possibility.
Gavaldon asked if there has been any benchmarking with other transit systems in terms
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
4 /1 9 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 3
of fare structures. Mr. Miller replied in the negative noting that will occur once that piece
of the project begins. Chair Hart noted Long Beach, California has at least one fare free
route.
Mr. Miller discussed the pillars of the project and the public outreach that has been
completed. He discussed the envisioned routes and service that are part of the Master
Plan.
York asked if the maintenance projections are reflective of the electric buses which
require less maintenance. Mr. Miller replied that is not captured well in the draft
numbers, which are conservative on the high side.
Mr. Miller outlined the projected costs for future service and capital projects, including
and expanded or new transit center to support maintenance and operations.
Gavaldon asked if operations and maintenance costs are figured into the capital projects
estimates. Mr. Miller replied growth in operations and maintenance relative to the
service and facility needs has been factored in. Gavaldon discussed the importance of
keeping those costs included so as to not have shortfalls in the future.
Mr. Miller stated the expectation is that transit ridership will begin to rebound, particularly
based on inflation and economic factors.
Gavaldon noted any type of package tax needs to be carefully considered as they have
been voted down in the past.
Rachline asked if the small electric driverless buses, such as those made by the brand
EasyMile, have been considered. Mr. Miller noted there are limitations on capacity;
however, those types of vehicles could lend themselves well to micro -transit zones.
Owens asked about the 1.5% inflation assumption . Brooks replied there is another
model with a higher inflation forecast of 3% and both are being considered.
Gavaldon suggested expansion of Transfort may not be the best path forward,
particularly given increased costs. He asked if staff has considered restructuring
Transfort to provide only critical services. Brooks replied the Transit Master Plan sets
the expectation from Council and the community that the build out will continue along
with continuing to watch trends and reevaluating as appropriate. He noted Council will
need to make decisions regarding funding its main initiatives.
York asked if Campus West or Harmony Road business groups have been involved in
discussions. Mr. Miller replied Campus West businesses have been engaged as part of
the West Elizabeth project outreach and he is unaware of any outreach to Harmony
businesses. Brooks concurred and stated Harmony outreach should occur.
York noted buses are only one mechanism for mass public transportation and asked if
other more forward-looking options have been considered. Mr. Miller replied options
were considered as part of the Transit Master Plan; however, he was unsure how
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
4 /1 9 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 4
innovative they may have been. He stated the adopted plan does capture autonomous
smaller vehicles and more flexible service; however, it is more of a rubber-tire system.
York discussed the importance of flexibility moving forward in terms of innovation. Mr.
Miller noted the adopted 2019 Transit Master Plan is the guiding document for this study
of funding options.
Iverson noted a study looking at the transit system along Harmony was conducted
several years ago. He stated he was unaware of an organized business association, but
stated businesses were engaged as part of that 2013 discussion.
Blochowiak asked when this study is slated to be completed and whether it will be
adopted by Council. Mr. Miller replied the plan is to have this completed by the end of
the year and Council is having ongoing funding discussions.
b. Traffic Compliance – Tyler Stamey
Iverson introduced Tyler Stamey as the new Traffic Engineer.
Stamey discussed his background and noted traffic compliance has been identified as a
Council priority and he is seeking input from the Board regarding an upcoming Council
work session. He outlined the alignment of the overall topic of traffic compliance with
the Strategic Plan. He provided details regarding vision and guidance, including new
and updated plans, policies, and regulations.
Chair Hart noted the chat has mentioned traffic stacking at drive-through restaurants on
College Avenue and York mentioned various compliance issues related to education.
Rachline mentioned adapting traffic control to pollution levels.
Stamey discussed traffic compliance as it relates to livability, including the neighborhood
traffic mitigation program. He also discussed the shift toward prioritizing modes other
than single-occupancy vehicles, a greater focus on equity, and Fort Collins’ data-driven
approach to traffic safety. He went on to mention opportunities for improvement,
including the development of the transportation capital prioritization project.
Gavaldon asked Stamey if he has any best practices from his prior experience in
Longmont or elsewhere. Stamey replied he had success with the Police Department
partnership in Longmont.
York stated all Fort Collins Police seem to mention is speeding when discussing safety
and he stated all other aspects, such as using turn signals and stopping properly at stop
walks, should also be emphasized. He also mentioned an article from Strong Towns.
Blochowiak discussed planning and design that can help increase conditions that help to
decrease crime, such as strategic lighting, and possible ways that could be used to
address traffic compliance.
Gavaldon asked Stamey about his thoughts on the state’s new safety stop law for
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
4 /1 9 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 5
bicyclists and if he has a plan to coordinate with Police Services to ensure minimal
impacts. Stamey replied there has not been significant evidence of increased safety
concerns and noted bicyclists can be cited if they cause a crash as the law is written that
cyclists can proceed ‘if it is safe to do so.’
Gavaldon asked how education efforts with the public and Police Services will occur.
Stamey replied staff has been having discussions about proactive messaging to the
community.
Chair Hart noted the ongoing unresolved stacking of traffic at certain drive-through
restaurants has been a large part of the chat.
Chair Hart noted the previous comments by Blochowiak related to the crime prevention
through environmental design model.
Chair Hart commented on the value of the Board being able to provide feedback prior to
this item going before Council. He noted this Board appreciates seeing data and asked
if this Council is data-oriented. Dean Klinger, Planning, Development, and
Transportation Deputy Director, replied Council always appreciates data as an effective
method to provide information.
Chair Hart encouraged Stamey to include additional data and numbers in his
presentation to Council.
York cited the example of the new Trilby and 287 intersection and questioned how data
was used to make that intersection safer for all transportation modes.
c. BFO 2023/24 Updates – Aaron Iverson
Iverson stated he would like to have the budget as a standing agenda item. He outlined
the overall timeline for the budget process and noted there are about 150 planning,
development, and transportation related offers in development.
Rachline asked why staff has not been given direction to provide more realistic budget
offers given the likelihood of budget shortages. Iverson replied staff formulates offers
based on direction from leadership and the budget team and that direction has been to
assume a certain level of growth. He noted inflation is causing some challenges and
stated revenue projections will be coming forward as the budget teams begin to evaluate
the first round of offers. Klinger agreed the process is challenging in terms of
determining the right number of offers to put forward. He stated staff tends to err on the
side of having more offers go forward to provide Council options.
York asked if the budget teams still include citizen members and, if so, how that person
has been selected for the transportation offers. Klinger replied he was unsure; however,
he would find out.
Chair Hart commented on the benefits of creating ‘wish list’ offers and then prioritizing.
He suggested this is a healthy exercise regardless of the economic circumstances.
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
4 /1 9 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 6
Rachline agreed the formation of offers is not a black and white issue.
Vice Chair Brown commented on the benefits of this type of budgeting. She asked if a
micro-transit offer is included. Iverson replied in the affirmative and stated it will be
coming through Transfort.
Vice Chair Brown stated micro-transit could provide great opportunities to bring transit
access to people with disabilities who otherwise would not have access to transit. She
commented on the timing of advocating for offers and discussed the way the Board has
historically provided input.
8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
York reported on witnessing several City utility vehicles blocking bike lanes and paths
without warning. He also stated he has witnessed the same behavior with Platte River
Power Authority trucks. He mentioned the ClimateWise program is sunsettin g and stated
businesses cannot encourage employees and customers to bike, bus, or walk to their
location if there is not safe infrastructure to do so. He suggested the new iteration of
ClimateWise should consider that information.
Owens reported on new advisory bike lanes in San Diego that were removed two weeks
later due to a lack of public outreach. He encouraged staff to ensure the Pitkin advisory
bike lane goes through appropriate public outreach. He also commented on an experience
walking and beating the MAX bus to his destination by five or six minutes.
Blochowiak commented on having good infrastructure for emergency service vehicles. She
asked if data exists on time of travel through the city. She also reported on seeing an
articulated MAX bus being towed.
Chair Hart commented on the staging areas for ambulances around the city.
Gavaldon reported on the recent Planning and Zoning Commission work session during
which Mayor Pro Tem Francis spoke and the Commission discussed a site plan advisory
review for a pipeline project. The Commission also discussed the Land Use Code update
with Noah Beals, the CSU Master Plan update, and the East Mulberry Plan. He reported he
will be attending a conference on Latina Heritage Conservation at the History Colorado
Museum.
Vice Chair Brown reported on a small grass fire near her business and the quick response
time of Poudre Fire Authority. She also reported on hearing Raising Cane’s has purchased
a second location on North College.
Rachline commented on the importance of ensuring bike lanes are clear and clean and she
stated changing modes of transportation away from single-occupancy vehicles does not
seem to come up often enough in the conversation around the climate emergency. She
also agreed with Owens about the MAX service not being timely.
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
4 /1 9 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 7
Chair Hart reported on a friend having a bike tire slashed open by glass while traveling in a
bike lane. He also reported on debris in bike lanes on his commute and stated he is
avoiding riding the bus as it is not reliable or timely. He stated he was made aware of a
petition circulating regarding the Stuart and Stover intersections and the challenges in
crossing Stuart to get to school. He suggested the City should look into the issues and
suggested a flashing red pedestrian signal could be helpful. Gavaldon concurred and
requested the Board receive an update.
9. OTHER BUSINESS
a. Bicycle Advisory Committee Report
Owens reported the BAC discussed the Active Modes Plan update and BFO at its
last meeting. He provided information on the website for outreach for the Active
Modes Plan.
b. City Council 6-Month Calendar Review
Iverson noted the following items on Council’s 6-Month calendar: the Boards and
Commissions discussion, the traffic compliance discussion, an update to the County’s
Regional Transportation Plan, Land Use Code updates, and budget hearings.
York noted May 4th is the last day to sign up to host a Bike to Work Day station.
c. Staff Liaison Report
None.
10. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:34 p.m. by unanimous consent.