Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 07/20/2022 TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR July 20, 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 6:02 PM. 2. ROLL CALL BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Indy Hart, Chair Cari Brown, Vice Chair York Jerry Gavaldon Nathalie Rachline Rob Owens Stephanie Blochowiak BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None CITY STAFF PRESENT: Noah Beals Ryan Mounce Cortney Geary PUBLIC PRESENT: None 3. AGENDA REVIEW Geary stated there were no changes to the published agenda. 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION None. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – JUNE 2022 York made a motion, seconded by Rachline, to approve the minutes of the June 2022 meeting as written. The motion was adopted unanimously with Owens abstaining. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 2 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Land Use Code Update – Noah Beals/Ryan Mounce Ryan Mounce, Planning Department, stated this phase of Land Use Code changes is primarily being driven by the recent update to the Housing Strategic Plan; however, there are changes related to other plans as well, including the Transit Master Plan. He stated this phase of Land Use Code changes will completely reorganize the document and its name will now be the Land Development Code. He detailed the housing related changes, including housing choices and compatibility, housing diversity, housing capacity, and housing affordability. Mounce noted the current standards do not incentivize capaci ty in transit corridors and that is proposed to be changed with this phase. Additionally, parking requirement reductions are proposed to be included for certain multi-family units. Mounce discussed the changes that are proposed related to incentivizing affordable housing. He outlined the forthcoming public participation opportunities that will occur after the initial draft is released and stated the plan is to present the changes to Council in the fall. Gavaldon asked if there will be changes to the minimum lot sizes for allowing carriage houses. Mounce replied in the affirmative and stated staff is looking at allowing additional dwelling units in multiple zone districts with lower minimum lot sizes. Gavaldon asked how the proposed parking changes would affect on-street parking. Mounce replied the proposed parking reductions relate only to multi-family developments that may or may not be adjacent to on -street parking. Gavaldon asked if the reduced parking will be offset with landscaping or more units. Mounce replied all parking area landscaping requirements would still apply; however, the hope is that the decreased parking requirements will help to provide additional attainable units and promote housing capacity. Gavaldon expressed concern about decreasing parking requirements and increasing unit numbers. He asked if shading and shadow studies will be completed for buildings with additional height allotments. Mounce replied the existing shadow analysis and shading requirements will remain. York suggested a language change may be necessary related to affordable housing on transit corridors. He asked if the 4,300 acres with proposed incentives number includes acreage that is currently under development review. Noah Beals, Planning Department, replied only 670 of those acres are vacant or still considered buildable and the remaining acreage could be redeveloped or include infill projects. York suggested making that information clearer for future presentations. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 3 Blochowiak asked if the height bonus would only apply to projects proposing affordable units. Mounce replied in the affirmative and stated at least 10% of the units in a project must be affordable in order for the height bonus to be applicable. Blochowiak asked if the height bonus will make enough of a difference to increase affordable housing unit numbers. Beals replied the analysis completed shows this will be enough of an incentive. Blochowiak asked if the City ever looks at redeveloping existing multi-family developments for affordable housing. Mounce replied existing affordable developments are usually deed restricted for a certain number of years and as those restrictions fall away, the units are sometimes remodeled and become market-rate housing; therefore, this phase of changes is contemplating increasing the length of deed restrictions. He noted the Housing Strategic Plan also discusses other options that are not necessarily related to the Land Use Code. Owens asked if there are any incentives to increase density by removing parking. Mounce replied in the affirmative and noted parking is part of the cost of housing. Owens asked about the reasoning for parking reductions not applying to three- and four- bedroom units. Mounce replied those units, particularly in a college town, tend to draw unrelated residents, each of which is likely to have their own vehicle. Additionally, he noted the units with fewer bedrooms tend to see more parking availability. Chair Hart supported building up and not out in a sprawl fashion, particularly in the realm of encouraging public transit and walkability. Additionally, he stated that will also help with decreasing the need for parking. He supported adding more development to areas where development already exists. York asked if the new plan will impact the block-by-block building height plan. Mounce replied the proposed height changes currently do not apply to the Downtown zone district as the Downtown Plan was recently updated and the height map was refined. Additionally, there are policy goals around the preservation and protection of the Downtown historic buildings. He also noted the second phase of Land Use Code updates will be focused on commercial zone districts. York suggested expanding the height plan to other areas of the city so people would know what to expect. Vice Chair Brown commented on whether the level of affordability represented is truly affordable. Mounce noted one of the other changes being considered is to have different rates of affordability between for sale and for rent units. Chair Hart suggested adding information regarding living wage data. Owens asked if it is fair to say housing capacity is lacking across the price spectrum. Mounce replied in the affirmative. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 4 Owens asked if the incentive to provide affordable housing is going to be enough to meet the demand or if a better solution would be to allow the market to determine how much capacity there should be. Mounce replied the affordable housing incentives in this phase are targeting having 10% of households as being deed-restricted affordable and that number has remained stuck at 5%. Beals noted this is one step and incentives can always be updated in the future. Chair Hart commended staff on the proactive approach being used . He stated the market is constrained when it comes to real estate, in certain ways, because of the development standards that are in place, and ensuring plans are ahead of rather than behind trends is important. Gavaldon commented on changes in technology, products, and methods that will cause plans to be behind. He specifically cited water availability as being a barrier to future development. Mounce noted a public draft of the phase one changes will be released in the next few weeks. b. 15 Minute City Analysis Study – Cortney Geary Cortney Geary, FC Moves, stated there are three simultaneous planning efforts underway that are contributing to supporting active modes of transportation : the Active Modes Plan which looks at improving and expanding the active modes networks, policies, and programs, the 15-Minute City Analysis which is focused on identifying gaps in the active modes network and land use patterns that are barriers to a 15-minute city, and the Vision Zero Action Plan which looks at all modes of transportation and the goal of zero traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries. Geary stated a 15-minute city is described as a place where everyone can get to the daily goods and services they need to live and thrive within a 15-minute walk, bicycle ride, or transit stop. She discussed the existing City goals that support this effort, noting it is also a Council priority and is referenced in existing plans such as Our Climate Future and Nature in the City. Geary outlined the steps in the 15-minute city analysis: establishing a definition and goals specific to Fort Collins, conducting the analysis, developing strategies, and issuing a final report. She stated the definition and goals are based on public input received from the Active Modes Plan outreach and the definition for Fort Collins is: a place where every resident can walk, bike, or roll within 15 minutes of their home to their daily needs and services. She stated associated goals include strengthening historically underserved communities, ensuring equity, reducing automobile trips, and enhancing resiliency. Geary outlined the methodology utilized in the analysis. She noted the walking scores are overall higher than bicycling, likely because there are more high-stress bicycling TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 5 segments that affect connectivity. She outlined the next steps in the process and stated the plan is to return to the Transportation Board and other Board and Commissions in September and October. Rachline stated that while the 15-minute city is a commendable goal, she questioned how it could be realistic when bus routes are hourly. She stated continuing to have studies on things that are not realistically implementable seems unnecessary. She stated it is more important to have goals that can be quickly and realistically met. Geary noted the definition for Fort Collins includes walking, biking, and micro-mobility and does not include bus routes; however, bus stops are considered a destination and high- frequency routes are being considered differently from low-frequency routes. Rachline commented on people with mobility issues not being able to utilize active modes. York asked how this will move forward with changing the Land Use Code to promote appropriate development to implement the 15-minute city. Geary replied this effort is not yet at that stage and the next time staff comes before the Board, more specific strategies on the land use side will be presented. York commented on the transit stops rather than the final destination of a trip being the 15-minute goal. He suggested that information needs to be more clearly outlined in the presentation. Additionally, he commented on the cycling miles per hour estimate used and noted time is added to trips depending on when traffic signals are approached. Geary replied the study factors in the use of electronic micro-mobility devices and concurred the average timing may not be feasible for everyone. Chair Hart stated the survey asking people where they walk, bike, or roll is inviting a specific answer and receiving answers from the people who are already walking, biking, or rolling to the destinations is not going to help create a 15-minute city that will make people choose to use active modes or transit. He suggested the survey should b e looking at destinations to which people choose not to walk, bike, or roll. Additionally, Chair Hart agreed with staff’s use of a 12 mile per hour travel time for bikes given E- bikes can be used. He also suggested leaning into the low-stress network is important and stated making the destinations accessible from the low-stress network within 15 minutes could be a valuable goal. Geary noted the survey did ask respondents for destinations to which they would like to be able to walk, bike, or roll. Chair Hart stated it is important the Board and the City organization use language that make it apparent how easy it is to make a choice to do something. York noted people will need to believe changes can work and be able to relate to them in order to vote for tax dollars to make improvements. Blochowiak noted Fort Collins development pattern is spread out. She agreed this is an TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 6 aspirational goal and questioned whether there is enough support to make it happen. Geary noted the concept of a 15-minute city is a current Council priority; however, she agreed the strategies and implementation will require additional conversations. Gavaldon suggested this be shared with Transfort and Traffic Operations. He stated he would support this moving forward; however, he expressed concern about some of the assumptions used. Owens commented on this being a first look at what Fort Collins could be, and if Council wants this to be a priority, it will make the necessary decisions for it to occur. He also suggested there is little benefit to having low-frequency transit stops be 15-minute destinations. Vice Chair Brown noted the Board will have an opportunity to have its voice heard on finding some of these items as part of the budgeting process. York stated it may help with clarity on the map to bold the overall score and include some additional detail on what the scoring means. Chair Hart commented on the area at Ziegler and Horsetooth as it is represented on the map. Geary noted informal paths and HOA trails are not included in the scoring. Chair Hart encouraged work to continue on this noting change will never occur if processes never start. York asked if the map only takes into account amenities that are within the city limits. Geary replied in the affirmative. Blochowiak also encouraged work to continue on this but noted there are still people who do not want development to occur. 8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Blochowiak commented on the appeal of the Sanctuary on the Green project noting neighbors have appealed the project. She suggested the Board may want to offer input on the Land Use Code changes to Council once they are presented. She stated the traffic backing up onto College at Raising Cane’s seems to have improved. Gavaldon noted he went to Council as a citizen and shared his concerns about the Raising Cane’s issue and they were responsive to using available tools to address it. He stated the Planning and Zoning Commission heard Geary’s report on the 15-minute City Analysis Study, discussed changes to the Fort Collins Kia and Nissan dealerships, and discussed a storage facility project for the movie theater at Shields and Drake. He stated the Commission has requested the Transportation Board look into the new Amazon distribution center facility near the Northern Colorado Regional Airport to see if there is any traffic impact information. Gavaldon commented on his experience cycling around town lately and asked Geary to TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 7 send a link to the safety study being done by the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization. York commented on the Power Trail south of Drake being blocked off by some cell equipment being removed and the lack of detour signs early enough on the trail. He also commented on the fence placed across sidewalks near the new Bucking Horse Park which had the same lack of detour signage. He commented on drivers running red lights at Timberline and Caribou and at the Power Trail crossing on Horsetooth. He mentioned the new underpass north of Suniga on Lemay and stated it has already been tagged with graffiti. He questioned why it is not part of the design requirements that underpass structures have surface treatments that inhibit tagging. He stated he heard from a resident of the Sunflower Clydesdale Park neighborhood east of I-25 regarding difficulties being able to exit onto west bound Mulberry from Carriage Way due to a long stoplight . He discussed his experience riding Transfort and a mislabeled stop location. He asked if there are plans for buses to start to accommodate child- and cargo-carrying bicycles. Rachline commented on the importance of budget dollars going toward alleviating the climate emergency. Additionally, she stated she will not be in attendance at the August meeting. Vice Chair Brown commented on seeing a number of Spin scooters and bikes blocking rights-of-way and sidewalks. Chair Hart stated he has noticed arterial bike lanes are relatively clear and also commented on observing issues similar to those mentioned by York. He also stated he will likely not be in attendance at the August meeting. 9. OTHER BUSINESS a. Bicycle Advisory Committee Report Chair Hart stated Owens had to leave the meeting, but provided an update on the previous BAC meeting during which E-bike usage on trails was discussed and an update on the Spin program was presented, including possible Code changes regarding parking the devices on the streets rather than sidewalks. Gavaldon discussed issues with the Spin program devices and requested the Board receive an update prior to the new contract with the company. Geary provided the contact information for Spin and provided a link to the public data portal. She stated the Board will be receiving a report next month. Chair Hart and Gavaldon both stated they believe Spin should be proactively collecting the devices that are improperly parked. b. City Council 6-Month Calendar Review Geary noted Council will be taking a break until August 16th and she outlined upcoming TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 6 /1 5 /202 2 – MINUTES Page 8 Council items including the Sanctuary on the Green appeal, Housing Strategic Plan, budget hearings, Our Climate Future, Land Use Code updates, the 15-minute city discussion, and adoption of the Active Modes Plan. York commented on the traffic that will be generated by the Amazon distribution center. Chair Hart noted air quality will also be impacted. c. Staff Liaison Report Geary noted the City Manager’s recommended budget is anticipated to be published September 2nd. Chair Hart asked if the Board would like to conduct its August meeting at the Traffic Operations Center. Members replied in the affirmative. Members discussed the meeting format regarding questions raised in the chat. 10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:49 p.m. by unanimous consent.