Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 04/24/2001MINUTES CITY OF FORT COLLINS AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD REGULAR MEETING 281 N. COLLEGE AVE. April 24, 2001 For Reference: Eric Levine, Chair 229-5225 Scott Mason, Council Liaison 226-4824 Brian Woodruff, Staff Liaison 221-6604 Board Members Present Nancy York, John Schroeer, Eric Levine, Jim Dennison, Mandar Sunthankar, Linda Stanley Board Members Absent Chris Kavanaugh, Harry Edwards, Dan Voss Staff Present Natural Resources Department Brian Woodruff, Terry Klahn, Lucinda Smith, and Sarah Fox Guests Kevin Gurney, Larimer County Environmental Advisory Board, Liaison to AQAB Suzette Thieman, MPO The meeting was called to order at 4:35 Minutes The minutes of the March 27, 2001 meeting were unanimously approved as written. Review Action Loe 1. When the radon program is reviewed by City Council, put a copy of their packet materials in the Board's packet — when available 2. Arrange for distribution to AQAB members of minutes and memos to City Council from the Transportation Board, Planning & Zoning Board, and Natural Resources Advisory Board — Woodruff and Levine will talk about this Election of Officers Eric Levine was nominated for another term as chair. Voting was postponed until May since only six of nine members were present. CO Redesianation, Brian Woodruff Suzette Thieman, from the MPO, is here to answer questions. Kevin Gurney, a member of the Latimer County Environmental Advisory Board is here to represent Larimer County citizens. When recommendations are made to the MPO from the AQAB, Gurney will be a voting and contributing member. Woodruff said the maintenance level is set by the base year emissions of carbon monoxide. The maintenance level is around half the violation level. Suzette and I learned yesterday that Fort Collins' emissions are expected to increase. When the staff people from USEPA saw this, they said they can't approve a maintenance plan for air quality with emissions getting worse, unless you can prove, using a more -refined technical analysis, that the standard would not be violated. • Dennison: Would they approve the deletion of I&M and oxy fuels? USEPA would approve a plan that withdrew those strategies, as long as we prove the standard will not be violated. • Dennison: What's the point, they potentially would approve a maintenance plan that omitted I&M and oxy fuels. Let's try to keep below the maintenance level. The maintenance level is tied to a simplified method of analysis — ifyou're able to show that emissions will stay below the maintenance level, that is an approvable Air Quality Advisory Board April 24, 2001 Page 2 plan. But in our case, emissions will rise above the maintenance level, so we can't rely on simple analysis methods. We will have to prove to the EPA that we will not have violations of the air quality standards at "hot spots. "Meanwhile, the Legislature has a separate requirement — we need to prove that I&M and oxy fuels are still required to maintain the standards, else they may be deleted. • Levine: Is that the result of specific legislation? Yes. Can we see the legislation? • Thieman: The analyses of tons per year for Longmont and Colorado Springs are going down. Our question is why is Fort Collins rising — is it something in the modeling? • Woodruff: There's a chance there's a mistake, but don't count on it. The modeling we're looking at doing calls for detailed analysis of six intersections. Those six are expected to give a good idea of the worst intersection. The "hot spot" gives the concentration you would experience at the roadside. The other half of the exercise is the background contribution of vehicles throughout the City. The state expects this work will add three or four months of calendar time. There's still a chance we can get the job done this year, i.e., the Air Quality Control Commission could adopt the plan in December and the Legislature could receive it in January of 2002. • Woodruff: The population and VMT projections in the 2025 Regional Transportation Plan could be improved upon. There's a plan to redo the population projections. Ken Waido thinks that those numbers may come out by spring, 2002. Are we concerned that the population projections are too low — yes, we want them to as good as they can be. The data in the pipeline won't be available till next spring; that won't help for this year. We're going to eventually amend the maintenance plan that's adopted by the federal government. It will become necessary to incorporate the new number. • Levine: I would like to see the legislation. • Dennison: Would the other board members like to see something? A report, or some kind or printout of the model they run in Denver. I'd like to see what assumptions they use, and have a sense of if they're using realistic assumptions. I'm curious how it deals with VMT growth as opposed to population growth. The population growth is only a piece of the riddle. Is that obtainable? Yes. • Levine: The problem is, are the main inputs into the model right. The model is not good. • Stanley: I've heard people say, how do we get through this so our plan is accepted. Maybe we can do this simpler model, the rollback. Rather, what we should be searching for is the truth, instead of worrying about getting the plan passed and through the legislature. • Levine: I couldn't agree more. The correction has to be made now, eight years from now it will be too late. • Woodruff: Remember we have two types of air quality plans. The maintenance plan, part of the CO redesignation, goes through the Air Quality Control Commission. The content is constrained by minimum federal requirements, while the Legislature says it can't be any stricter than minimum federal requirements. Second is the Fort Collins Air Quality Action Plan. It is not constrained and the City Council can change it at will. We could work with the state to come up with strategies that will improve local air quality. Thus we could have a federal plan that does not include I&M, and a local plan that continues I&M in Fort Collins under a cooperative agreement with the state. • Stanley: Why such time pressure? It's largely political — the legislature mandated that eligible areas are to be redesignated expeditiously, and the Commission made it a goal to complete all redesignations this year. • Stanley: This whole thing is "so -what". What's the point from our community's view? • Levine: The more we flunk the model, the more the federal government would have the option of holding our feet to the fire. The better our report card, the less we have to do, and the more our air will deteriorate. • Stanley: We should be seeking the truth, not just redesignation. • Levine: The problem lies with the state. The federal government sets minimum standards, that the business the feds are in. It's up to the local entities to set requirements above and beyond. The problem here is the standards let us get dirtier than we are, rather than try to maintain or improve. • Woodruff: The most significant issue we have is that the local goal of continually improvement is different from the federal goal of maintaining the standard. The legislature wouldn't mind seeing the pollution get worse, as long as it didn't violate the federal standard. The City of Fort Collins' goal is to continually improve; rising emissions is not acceptable. But programs like I&M can't be in the SIP if they are not strictly needed, the legislature won't allow it. Yet we can still work with the State to maintain and enhance programs to help us meet local goals. That's a partnership we need to try to generate. • Dennison: If they want to write a SIP, can they do what they want, or do they take our opinion into account? The City has some lobbying power. The politicians should be taken to task. It seems like this board might recommend to the City that they push the State to back off their insistence of letting the air get worse. We need Air Quality Advisory Board April 24, 2001 Page 3 to point out that we want to maintain or improve air quality. We could consider a recommendation to the City and MPO simultaneously. First of all we feel it's urgent that realistic, contemporary assumptions are used. Woodruff; Do you want to work on this in committee? Levine: It's too important for committee, the whole board needs to look at it. What is the time frame? It won't go to the MPO for at least three months. We can keep you appraised of the technical work. Dennison: 1 wouldn't put off the recommendation to the last minute, it might be too late to revise the models. Transportation Capital Improvement Projects, Randy Hensley, and Cam McNair Woodruff introduced Randy Hensley and Cam McNair. • Stanley: Could you explain how this would be funded? Would it be a new sales tax, extension, or go into the existing budget? • Hensley: That hasn't been decided. The discussion is about a possible initiative. It's important the public be educated about what transportation needs are out there. The community needs to know there's a choice to be made. • Stanley: Funding is a big piece. I don't want to see any new sales taxes that go to roads and transportation. Raise impact fees to make growth pay for it's own way. • Hensley: That can be part of the feedback that you provide. • Schroeer: Most of the road improvements seem to be on the East Side of town. There's hardly anything for the West Side. • Hensley: That's probably because we already have projects in place. • McNair: The Harmony widening from College to beyond Shields would be one project on the West Side of town. Some of the other ones would spread throughout the City. We didn't look at this in that context. We look where we have safety and level of service problems. • York: Does the rate of accidents factor in? • McNair: Basically the criterion is on a basis of the number accidents per million vehicles. A lot of accidents are focused around intersections. • York: Could we get a copy of traffic counts and accident counts? • Hensley: Yes, it would help if we could narrow the request down some. We could show you the volume and you could request copies. • York: Is there a map that shows traffic counts? • McNair: Maybe on the web. • Levine: There are a couple things that jump out. Such as the SH 14 relocation for $85 million. • Hensley: 'There are a lot of questions as to why that's on the list. As you know, we had a ballot initiative, the citizens of this city mandated us to study the prospects of an alternative to Highway 14 that would be 2 miles north. One of my planners is the project manager. Since the voters mandated this, we felt it was hypocritical to not have it on the project list. The viability will be determined by the study, but it needed a placeholder • Levine: The Lemay/Vine intersection, what's the importance of that? • Hensley: We feel a big part of our mission is to support City Plan. The projects we put in contribute to things City Plan calls for. There must be public facilities in place before we can approve development. There's a lot more involved than the intersection. It calls for realignment of Vine Drive. That entire project will be required for the Mountain Vista plan. • McNair: The high price tag is because of grade separation. • Sunthankar: I didn't think Mountain Vista was going to develop for the next fifteen to twenty years. • Hensley: We've already gotten development requests. • York: I was greatly impacted by the Walkable Cities presentation. One of the things mentioned was the road diet. It slows cars down a bit, so it's safer for other modes. He said you could have a two-lane road carry 22,000 cars a day. The economic conservative in me says if we can avoid creating more lanes, we reduce the operating and maintenance costs forever. • Hensley: He's comparing 22,000 a day to a four -lane through the middle of town. There are lots of driveways and side streets. The secret to making it work as a two-lane is access control. We can make a very attractive four -lane that's bike/ped friendly, and also make intersection improvements. • York: I'm talking about taking a 4 lane and stripping it down to two lanes, and at the intersections restoring it to the original number. What about roundabouts? Air Quality Advisory Board April 24, 2001 Page 4 • McNair: We will include roundabouts as an option when we rebuild intersections, we're persistent. It's going to take some harder salesmanship. We need to get one built on an arterial intersection and get people past their stigma. • Levine: It was the budget overruns that killed it. • Stanley: Isn't it true that if you compare that budget to what has to be done, the roundabout still ends up cheaper? • McNair: The conventional is cheaper in the short term. This drew so much attention because it was a state highway. It had to be a federally contracted project. • Stanley: So those things would happen at other intersections? • McNair: On city streets we don't have quite the problem. • Levine: Unless I'm behind, there's funding for a new bus fleet, complete replacement. I'm very concerned that they be the cleanest fuel vehicles. • McNair: Transit is funded through the Federal Transit Authority. • York: It's the most cost effective option on this whole plan. When we widen lanes, and add lanes and roads it only contributes to more miles traveled and more air pollution. Those figures are going way up. I wish someone could justify adding more lanes. • McNair: Constructing arterial streets is more than adding lanes. It's adding bike lanes, sidewalks, and putting in the bus stops so the transit system will function. Without these we wouldn't have a chance of achieving mode shifts. • York: I think you should leave it two lanes, add bus pullouts, and put in the sidewalks and bike lanes. • McNair: The lanes are established through modeling. Those models help us predict how many lanes we'll need. • Levine: Overall it looks pretty good to me. How much of the secondary list is a wish list, and how much will happen? • Hensley: They are projects we need to do, it's not a wish list. • McNair: This list is an amalgamation, some funded through development impact fees, federal money. There are more funding sources than city capital dollars. When it's whittled down to the top ten we focus on the things the City needs to pay for. Bike/pedestrian improvements have other funding sources. • Stanley: I see $75 million related to Timberline/Prospect and Harmony/Lemay. That's $75 out of $80 million. We have to improve those intersections mainly because of growth. Growth is not paying it's own way. There's no way I could support new sales taxes going to these projects. It's not going to improve the air quality for the most part; it could worsen it. When you build more roads, they fill back up. • Levine: Some modeling studies show that when you get congestion, stops and starts aren't what hurt the air quality. Some new studies show the opposite. Should try to shift attention to alternative modes, and let traffic congestion increase. • Stanley: If you build it, it will come. This isn't going to help air quality. • Woodruff: So, to summarize, don't spend money on auto access. Is that really a choice that you have? I'm thinking that you're following a Master Streets Plan, adopted by the City Council. What sort of direction would you have to get to cut back on the lane miles? Can you do that within the current master plan? • Hensley: That would be very difficult. The projects are multi -modal. They include bike/ped/transit, not just automobile. Dan Burton is talking about 22,000 vehicles. Most of our arterials carry more than that. The two- lane just doesn't work. • Dennison: Any rough idea of the percent of cost for the bike paths? • McNair: The bike lanes are about 20%. The sidewalk ends up being quite a bit more than you might think too. • Stanley: So if you took out the street widening and just did the bike lanes and sidewalks that would lower the cost by maybe 50%. • McNair: It would probably cut it in half, there are a lot of costs to acquiring right of way. These are fairly high - sided numbers. They are padded and account for inflation. All of these costs are not what the taxpayers would need to bear; there's the street over -sizing fund from development. • Levine: Regardless if the numbers are padded, those numbers are so high there's sticker shock. We've seen projections of the level of service on the roads going down at the major intersections. You're not getting what you've already had, even with the funding. • Hensley: There are more factors than growth. We have existing deficiencies. There's the fact that all of us are driving more. VMT is increasing faster than the rate of population growth. Air Quality Advisory Board April 24, 2001 Page 5 • York: If the capacity is there, there will be people there. At the last meeting the statement was made that TransFort follows growth. Mass transit should be the leading edge. This is accommodating autos. The thinking is years behind. There has to be philosophical changes. I don't know why we need the parking garages. • Hensley: The parking structures are in there because when you look at the Downtown Development Plan, there's recognition of things like the library, and the performing arts center. We are going to be updating our downtown parking plan within the next year. One of the critical questions is fee -based parking. It's an incentive to use alternative modes. • Levine: The alternatives have to be in place. • Sunthankar: I've done some biking. Sometimes I see sidewalks that aren't used by anyone. Couldn't we combine them together and make them level. • McNair: There are two types of bike riders, recreational and commuter. Commuters prefer to ride on the streets. There are a whole host of safety issues. • Stanley: I agree with alternative transportation, biking being easier, and growth paying it's own way. Hensley requested a transcription of the comments be sent to the City Manager in memo form. Short Discussion Items Review Council six-month planning calendar — No discussion. Agenda planning • A.Q. survey results (May) • ClimateWise campaign results (May) • Inter -Board coordination... beyond "minutes & memos" (May?) • Update on truck mobility study (May?) • Which matters should the Board review in order to meet its charge? (Jun?) • North College Corridor Project (Summer) Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 7:25 p.m. ACTION LIST — from April 24 meeting ACTION ITEM WHO BY... DONE 1. When the radon program is reviewed by City Council, Sarah When put a copy of their packet materials in the Board's available packet. 2. Arrange for distribution to AQAB members of minutes Brian & Eric continuing and memos to City Council from the Transportation Board, Planning and Zoning Board, and Natural Resources Advisory Board. 3. Write memo to City Manager commenting on Brian & Eric May transportation Capital Improvement Project priorities. 4. Provide info in packet about the CO redesignation: Brian May • Socio-economic data inputs to the transportation model • Assumptions used in modeling vehicle emission rates