HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 06/15/2022
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
June 15, 2022, 6:00 p.m.
Virtual Meeting Via Zoom
6 /1 5 /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 Hart called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
2. ROLL CALL
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Indy Hart, Chair
York
Jerry Gavaldon
Nathalie Rachline
Stephanie Blochowiak
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT:
Cari Brown, Vice Chair
Rob Owens
CITY STAFF PRESENT:
Ginny Sawyer
Dana Hornkohl
Lauren Nagel
Amy Gage
PUBLIC PRESENT:
3. AGENDA REVIEW
Iverson stated there were no changes to the published agenda.
4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
None.
5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – MAY 2022
Gavaldon made a motion, seconded by Rachline, to approve the minutes of the May 2022
meeting as amended to clarify a reference to the south and east of a map shown rather
than Fort Collins as a whole. The motion was adopted unanimously.
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 2
6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
7. NEW BUSINESS
a. Outdoor Dining/Downtown Parking Space Use – Ginny Sawyer
Ginny Sawyer, discussed the emergency ordinances that went into effect during the
pandemic that allowed for restaurants to utilize additional sidewalk space and on-street
parking spaces for dining service. She stated there has been a general positive
response to these changes in the community and a desire to maintain those uses has
emerged. She stated the question is how to move forward and regulate these uses in a
fair and operational manner.
Sawyer commented on staff’s effort toward developing a definition of a ‘pa rklet’ for this
type of use in the street and on creating design standards. She stated next steps
identified with Council are bringing minor Code changes forward, working on a design
guide document, and staying in a learning-flexible space. She discussed the permit
process.
Chair Hart noted this topic was discussed among Parking Board members pre-pandemic
and members at the time were largely in favor of utilizing parking spaces for these types
of uses.
Gavaldon asked how many parking spaces have been lost to this use to date. Eric
Keselburg, Parking Services Manager, replied about 100 spaces were dedicated to
curbside pick-up during the height of the pandemic and about 77 spaces were used for
outdoor dining in the downtown area during the same time. Currently, about 10 to 12
spaces are being used as demand has decreased.
Gavaldon asked how businesses are located in a basement level not adjacent to a street
can utilize spaces. Sawyer replied any business that fronts on a sidewalk or street can
apply for a permit for that frontage with permission from the building owner.
Rachline supported any idea that limits single-car traffic and supported this program
given its public support. She suggested mirroring other successful programs to make
the program happen more quickly and efficiently.
York asked about the cost of permits and where funds from those permits are allocated.
Sawyer replied there are still questions around whether the City wants to subsidize the
use or just cover the cost of the program, which would including plan review,
inspections, and other administrative costs. She stated the cost of a parking space
related to customer turnover in Old Town is being discussed. As an example, Sawyer
noted the Armstrong Hotel has a permanent valet parking space lease for $720
annually.
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 3
York stated his concern with utilizing parking spaces is that they are public amenities
that have value and dedicating them to private businesses leads to the question of how
the balance of the city collects some of the value. He suggested the fees should be paid
monthly or annually, somewhat equivalent to a rental use.
Gavaldon stated the basis for cost seems to be established with the Armstrong example.
He stated he does not believe these uses should be subsidized as the businesses are
gaining profit from the space. Additionally, he stated design standards will be important
and the program should either operate on a neutral financial basis or at a small gain for
the City.
Keselburg noted the cost per space for renting for construction activities is about $820
per year.
Chair Hart outlined the questions for which Sawyer is seeking feedback. The first being,
how much parking should be maintained on a street face? Chair Hart stated there will
be a varying degree of feedback on that issue. Sawyer clarified her questions were
meant to be more thought-provoking and related to determining what considerations are
important moving forward.
York stated he would like to ensure there is a consideration for individuals usin g the
sidewalks between these spaces and the businesses with which they are associated.
Rachline also mentioned ensuring ADA accessibility.
Sawyer agreed pedestrian passageways are critical to be maintained.
Blochowiak asked about the impact of removing parking spaces on emergency services.
Sawyer replied staff has been working very closely with Poudre Fire Authority as they
are in charge of inspections for any type of heating element. She noted there will be
differing Code standards for temporary versus year-round uses.
York commented on the use of inefficient heating elements for year -round uses and,
given the Climate Action Plan, suggested that should be a consideration. Additionally,
he asked how the use of parking spaces will be addressed on Linden Street during times
of festivals. Sawyer clarified the sidewalks on Linden Street will be 24 -27 feet wide, and
parking will be parallel; therefore, staff has determined giving up parking spaces on
Linden is not a good idea and restaurants can instead utilize extended sidewalk patios.
York stated that consideration should be in place for other areas as well.
b. Transportation Capital Projects Prioritization Study (TCPPS) – Dana Hornkohl
Dana Hornkohl, Planning, Development, and Transportation and Enginee ring, stated the
Transportation Capital Projects Prioritization Study (TCPPS) is an effort to prioritize the
arterial corridor transportation needs and projects and the study is a collaborative effort
between Traffic Operations, FC Moves, and Engineering. He stated Olsson has been
engaged to conduct the majority of the effort and Chris Rolling with Olsson will be
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 4
providing a detailed update.
Chris Rolling, Olsson, stated this item is intended to be a proactive look at the next list of
capital projects that can begin to be programmed into the City’s plan, including
identifying funding and partnership opportunities. He stated another part of this effort
will be the development of a GIS-based management tool for City staff to be able to
actively manage the list of projects and react to things that come up in the next ten years
or so.
Rolling outlined the three-phase process to first provide a high-level analysis and
screening, which has already been completed, to take a comprehensive look at all
arterial intersections and segments throughout the city to help identify areas where
congestion or safety issues exist or where there may be an opportunity to partner with
other projects. The second phase includes identifying projects and treatments and what
impact they can have on safety and other aspects. The third phase will be the
development of the prioritized list of projects to be carried forward into concept and
design.
Rolling provided information on the public outreach process which was primarily
completed during the pandemic. He discussed the survey results and input received
and the resulting two groupings of criteria, one being quantitative, and the other being
qualitative. He discussed the coordination of this effort with the Active Modes Plan
formation, including the use of an equity index.
Rolling stated the draft report and final scoring methods should be complete this
summer with phase three, concept development, occurring in July and August with the
project being complete by September.
York asked about grade-separated crossings. Hornkohl replied the prioritization for
grade-separated crossings was performed in 2018 and those projects do factor into
prioritization of projects as part of the TCPPS effort.
Gavaldon asked about the percentage of consultant cost to each of the projects and
about the value add of using consultants for many of the projects. He stated it would be
beneficial to see that type of information in more detail during presentations related to
these types of projects. Hornkohl replied the project delivery method for transportation
capital projects has typically involved project managers overseeing consultants who
design projects and those costs typically range between 8 and 12% for large projects,
which is a nationally-recognized percentage for design based on transportation capital
projects. Smaller projects are more frequently designed in-house and consultants are
used only when technical expertise is needed.
Gavaldon commented on a project on Riverside that was incorrectly built due to a
consultant error and suggested better using in-house resources to lower costs.
Hornkohl replied staff does its best to be good stewards of tax dollars.
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 5
Chair Hart stated there is a time and place for consultants who can offer expertise and
tools that would be prohibitively expensive for the City to try to maintain.
York questioned the definition of congestion that was used for this process and Chair
Hart asked how peak hour delay relates to the definition of congestion . Rolling replied
the peak hour delay was the metric used to look at congestion and it was determined
keeping the network safe as a whole is more important than alleviating congestion at
certain places for certain times of the day.
York expressed concern the definition of congestion only relates to motor vehicle traffic.
He stated other modes, such as cycling and transit, need to be elevated in the
consideration of some of the intersections as the goal is to promote those modes of
transportation over motor vehicle transportation. He stated the only way to encourage
other modes is to make them more efficient than motor vehicles. Rolling replied that has
been addressed in the methodology of the project by identifying projects that have more
of a focus on safety improvements across all modes and then giving more weight to th e
criteria around things that were deemed more important in the public engagement
process.
York commented on frequently experiencing congestion as a cyclist because motor
vehicles do not know how to properly deal with bicyclists.
Chair Hart noted there are still members of the public who will use motor vehicles and
would like that congestion alleviated as well. York replied the majority of members of
the public will only use motor vehicles and therefore, that will be the primary type of
feedback received in public outreach efforts. He stated encouraging other modes will
require staff and consultants to weight input and projects differently.
Rolling summarized the 1,000 overall comments received noting 780 of those were
related to biking and walking with the remainder being transit and vehicular oriented.
Blochowiak asked if there is a possibility of including the Institute for Sustainable
Infrastructure envisioned framework into projects. Hornkohl replied staff has started
looking at the different accreditation systems for civil infrastructure, particularly related to
transportation civil infrastructure. Additionally, the Institute for the Built Environment at
CSU has been engaged because of the research it has done into the different
accreditation systems for civil projects.
Gavaldon asked about plans for the Trilby and College intersection given the recent
pedestrian death there. Rolling replied there is a project in design currently for
improvements at that intersection. Hornkohl noted the design has reached the 60%
level and the project is about to be advertised for a contractor, though it is not fully
funded at this point. He stated the earliest it will go to construction would be late spring
of 2023, which is contingent on receiving some grant funds and funds through th e
current City’s budget process.
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 6
York asked if there was consideration of a grade-separated crossing at Trilby and
College. Hornkohl replied there was not consideration of that as the location was not
identified as part of the 2018 grade-separated crossing study.
Chair Hart suggested the possibility of using technology to integrate into the prioritization
and feedback process. Rolling replied the map survey tool does have a mobile version
and there was some consideration of the tool being used long -term by the City to help
field comments in a map-based, organized way. Chair Hart suggested QR codes or
other electronic feedback measures could be placed near crossing signals at
intersections.
Blochowiak asked what software was used for the engagement map. Rolling replied the
City’s public engagement platform is Bang the Table, which includes a map feature.
York stated the 2018 study may have missed an opportunity for a grade -separated
crossing at Trilby and College given the slope of the land on either side of College that
would lend itself to an underpass.
c. Annual Bike/Ped Counts Report – Lauren Nagel/Amy Gage
Amy Gage, FC Moves, introduced herself and stated she will be taking over the annual
bike and pedestrian counts moving forward.
Lauren Nagel, FC Moves, provided an overview of the reasons for the counts, primarily
to understand traveler behavior, document trends, justify infrastructure and improvement
investments, and to generate data to support planning and project prioritization. She
outlined what items are tracked during the counts on both roadways and trails and
discussed the timing of the counts.
Gage provided a map of count locations noting they are currently not uniformly
geographically distributed, which may be something to change over time. Chair Hart
stated it should be important to set that as a goal.
York asked if extra data provided by volunteer counters is captured and recorded
somewhere. Nagel replied there is a field for it in the tracking spreadsheet; however, the
data is not aggregated.
Gage discussed the trend data and noted environmental factors significantly affect data
given the fact the counts only occur one or two days per year.
Rachline suggested the trends over the last two years should be noted as having
occurred during the pandemic which therefore skews the data compared to previous
years. Chair Hart suggested other factors, such as wildfire smoke in 2020, that heavily
impact data should also be noted.
York also suggested including an icon about the weather on the count days.
Gage commented on data showing a decrease in helmet use in 2021. Chair Hart
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 7
suggested, anecdotally, that could be due to new users from 2020 or possibly due to the
added expense. He suggested additional education around helmet use or having a
helmet giveaway.
York commented on riders in Europe not wearing helmets because the infrastructure
there has been developed to make riders safe. Members discussed their various
outlooks on wearing helmets.
Gavaldon asked if there is any data related to the new safety stop law. Gage replied
there has yet to be any data collected given the law was just passed. She stated staff
has yet to determine how that data will be collected.
Nagel noted the City does have a free helmet program for any user at any time.
Gage discussed the significant increase in E-bike use noting the manual counts are
critical in capturing these numbers. She noted it is challenging to expect counters to
identify the various classes of E-bikes. York stated it can be identified when riders are
not pedaling.
Nagel discussed limitations of manual counts, including the fact that it is no longer the
gold standard for observing these data. She also noted volunteer capacity has been an
issue for this project from the beginning; however, volunteers continue to return once
they start.
Gage discussed other count methods used in the city currently and outlined newer
methods, including Bluetooth, Strava, and travel diaries. She also discussed the desire
to count pedestrians at intersections and noted that will require a simplification of the
data collected.
York noted Bluetooth data could be inaccurate given the number of cell phones or
tablets people may carry. Gage acknowledged it can be problematic; however, other
cities have begun to incorporate Bluetooth data into their modeling.
Chair Hart asked if data from traffic operations videos could be used for counts as it
would allow volunteers to watch video, and play and pause, from home. Gage replied
bike ambassadors have been used to view some of the camera data and conversations
around using it in that way are just beginning.
Nagel discussed the expectations for the future of the project, including combining
different forms of counting, counting pedestrians at intersections, and determining what
Fort Collins’ gold standard will be. She stated the annual count will occur this year in
September. She requested feedback from Board members.
Chair Hart stated he would like to see manual counts occur not just in September,
particularly if there are ways to make it more feasible, such as by using traffic operations
videos.
York suggested counts could be provided 24 hours a day by the adaptive traffic
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 8
cameras.
Blochowiak questioned how the data is used. Nagel replied the data is not used as
much as it could or should be however, it was used to help made decisions about E-
bikes and can help inform decisions based on users at an area. Gage noted the data
does not yet inform road improvement projects as more pointed counts would be
required.
Gage noted this data is not yet available online and having that information available
could be helpful for project decisions in and out of Fort Collins. She also noted the data
provided by the Spin bikes could be another source of information.
York suggested one data point that may be interesting is the number of volunteers
participating over the years. Chair Hart also suggested including volunteer hours.
8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
Blochowiak commented on seeing fewer issues at Raising Cane’s. Chair Hart noted
there is currently a seasonal decrease in the population given the lack of students.
Rachline stated she has seen times recently when the traffic stacking at Raising Cane’s
is quite bad.
York concurred with Rachline and stated even one car stacking on the road could lead
to an injury crash. He commented on possibly including an infrastructure improvement
of a roundabout at Highway 1 and Spaulding Lane or Highway 1 and Country Club Road
which could be used for a high-frequency bus turnaround. He also commented on utility
trucks parking in bike lanes.
Gavaldon commented on the Raising Cane’s issue being discussed at the Chief of
Police Advisory Task Force meeting. He stated Police will issue citations if there are
behavior issues or traffic violations; however, it is viewed by the Police as a traffic
operations issue. He asked if Code enforcement could be used to shut down drive -
throughs for continued violations. Iverson replied that is an item in the tool box;
however, he is currently unsure if it is being considered.
Gavaldon reported on the recent Planning and Zoning Commission work session during
which the Land Use Code updates and 1041 regulations were discussed. He
specifically mentioned potential multi-family parking changes that could impact
neighborhood streets. Iverson noted the Land Use Code team will be coming before the
Transportation Board likely next month.
Chair Hart reported Bike to Work (or wherever) Day is June 22nd. He also stated bike
lanes around town still need attention in terms of street sweeping. He reported on
observations made regarding multi-modal transit during a recent trip to Paris. He also
stated he observed quite a bit of bike helmet use there.
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR
6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 9
9. OTHER BUSINESS
Chair Hart reported on the letter he wrote to the Mayor and Council regarding traffic
issues around businesses on College Avenue. He stated a reply was received from the
Mayor thanking the Board for the input and stating it is an interesting suggestion to
investigate whether nuisance laws could be used to help mitigate some of the issues.
Chair Hart noted any member could, as an individual, make comments regarding the
issue at Council meetings.
a. Bicycle Advisory Committee Report
(**Secretary’s Note: Owens was not present at the meeting to provide a BAC report.)
b. City Council 6-Month Calendar Review
Iverson outlined upcoming Council items including those related to the budget, the 15 -
minute city discussion, the Vision Zero plan, and adoption of the Active Modes Plan.
c. Staff Liaison Report
Iverson stated Bike to Work Day has a record 80 stations and the forecast is good.
Additionally, he stated FC Moves has relocated to 200 West Mountain.
10. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m. by unanimous consent.