Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 10/16/2002REGULAR MEETING MINUTES of the TRANSPORTATION BOARD October 16, 2002 5:45 p.m. City of Fort Collins - Community Room 215 N. Mason Street FOR REFERENCE: CHAIR: Christophe Ricord 472.8769 VICE CHAIR: Bruce Henderson 898.4625 STAFF LIAISON: Don Bachman 224.6049 ADMIN SUPPORT: Cynthia Cass 224.6058 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Dan Gould Neil Grigg Bruce Henderson Edward Jakubauskas Tim Johnson Brad Miller Ray Moe Christophe Ricord Heather Trantham CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Don Bachman Cynthia Cass Gary Diede Randy Hensley Mark Jackson Cam McNair Ron Phillips Kathleen Reavis ABSENT: Tom Kramer Brent Thordarson GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE: Bruce Meighen - EDAW Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes October 16, 2002 Page 2 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Ricord called the meeting to order at 5:55 p.m. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There was a motion and a second to approve the September 2002 Transportation Board minutes as presented. Discussion: Johnson requested the following amendment: Page3, Johnson would like the minutes to include something to the effect that "with the exception of College Avenue where Nis forbidden, that the board wants to maintain bicycle lanes on arterial and major arterial roadways: With the above stated clarification, the minutes were approved unanimously. 4. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT None. 5. MASON STREET TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR UPDATE — K. Reavis Reavis stated that a major accomplishment was completed last Friday when staff was able to send the latest update to the Federal Transit Administration that included all the modeling information, cost information and their new transportation system user benefit measures. If anyone is interested in getting copies of that report, they will be available soon. 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS a) CITY PLAN UPDATE — M. Jackson Jackson introduced Bruce Meighen with EDAW who presented in-depth information that included the following: • Comments from Stakeholder meetings in August and September • Historic Population Trends • Population Projections • Historic Employment Trends • Employment Projections • Opportunities and constraints of future growth in the City of Fort Collins that influence the planning process • Scenario 1 —"What if" we maintain the current size of our GMA? • Scenario 2 —What if" we strategically adjust the GMA to accomplish some key goals? • Scenario 3 — "What if" we enlarge the GMA to accommodate 20 years of anticipated growth? Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes October 16, 2002 Page 3 Johnson: There was something in the paper that said something about the City having a policy that says that we should keep a 20-year supply of buildable land. Where did that policy come from? Staff. That's a perfect time to discuss that. We're not just talking about demographics, we're really talking about size and character and how it relates to ... I mentioned that there were only 12-15 years left. Traditionally when you look at a GMA, this is your 20 year planning ... This doesn't always mean that there are 20 years worth of growth. The GMA that they had back then for the previous City Plan was in fad a 20-year... There was a policy in there that said we plan that or size that for 20 years worth of growth. People questioned that policy recently asking if that's what we're trying to do. It is actually pretty standard for plans to say that. Johnson: When you start thinking about a city having some finite size, a policy like that points to perpetual growth. My suggestion is that as City Plan goes forward, we can't have a policy that directs perpetual growth. Meighen: What we're trying to do now is preserve the multiple choices laid out for the community and for them to look at the trade offs. Then look at the goals of City Plan and evaluate those three scenarios based on the goals of City Plan. From there, with the CAC and City Council and others, we're going to hopefully decide on what size and character we want. That discussion about trade offs and size happens all the time within our groups. Moe: Are there any statistics you've been looking at in terms of what is natural growth? You know, kids being raised and wanting to stay in their community rather than migrate. I think a lot of things from the early to mid 90's have drastically changed in this state. I guess another way of asking this is, out of the growth, is there any estimate of what is in migration versus natural growth? Meighen: No we don't have that information, but we can get it. That would be a good one. Chair Ricord: Are we going to have this data when we're finished tonight? Meighen: There is a packet that Jackson can distribute that has all this info. Jackson: Actually, I will send it out with the minutes and such in your next packet. Chair Ricon±. I think is real important for us to have this kind of a basis as we go forward in discussions. We're a numbers driven group as a rule, so if we have this kind of data, i would be helpful. Chair Ricord: As the ratio of population increases, so do the lane miles. Tying transportation issues into this kind of a scenario is key for us. Also we need to think about funding deficits. If we talk about the expansion to the GMA for example, what kind of implications does that have for us economically in terms of our ability to build this kind of capital construction? Jackson: Conversely, if you don't grow the GMA those mobility issues don't go away, they just change their stripes so to speak. Gould: Do you have any knowledge of the communities around Fort Collins that are growth areas as well — do any of them have plans for trying to promote primary job development in addition to residential growth? Meighen: I did the Comp Plan for Windsor and I've worked on the Greeley Plan. I do know that they all want that. That is always a priority for everyone. Grigg: I know that regional planning is really hard to do, but it seems a little artificial for us to talk about what kind of community, what size do we want to be given that certain Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes October 16, 2002 Page 4 things are going to happen in the region. My question is, is anything happening to make regional planning work out? Meighen: That's a great question. Are you just running through the motions here or not. No, there is not a regional planning organization with the exception of the Metropolitan Planning Organization. What you have here is interactions between the cities and counties and it's more of a face to face deal. The fact is, we need to do a better job and I think that is coming out of this. We do talk about regional growth more. Fort Collins is also looked at by others as a model — what has worked here and what hasn't, etc. Moe: One other area that needs to be looked at strongly is the jobs, population and the balances which are almost as ... as the retail population. Retail land uses are the ones that generate the sales tax. That's where you see a lot of land trying to be gobbled up by the different surrounding communities competing for that retail and tax dollar. We need to look at how we fare in that and are we keeping our competitive edge. Meighen: That's part of it. The stakeholder interviews showed both sides. One of them was we don't have a place for a new regional retail center. The next question is, are we giving up tax dollars that would in fact help support some of the things we're doing? Then there is the other side, the idea of perpetuating growth and where does it end and so on. Economics are fully integrated with this process, more so than normal because of the economy. Henderson: Getting back to the regional question, is there any way in the overall regional planning process some way to define some margin for error in this or to look at the other regional plans and somehow modulate the result so that we don't come up with this completely insular plan that is "Fort Collins' irrespective of what everybody else is assuming we're doing? Meighen: We definitely acknowledge it. It's not going to be a hard science. We know that there is a bunch of people going somewhere else. Johnson: What constraints do you guys look at with regard to water availability? Meighen: It's a little like economics. Water was here a year ago, now it's up here. People have said that that we do need to address water in City Plan. There are things we need to do to promote more water conservation. Jackson: In the interest of time, we need to wrap things up here. This group has expressed an interest in helping and being more involved. One of the things that we would like to offer to you is we know that many of you are very interested in cycling and we need to do some update of facilities, facility conditions, problem areas, and get a better handle on those types of things. To that end, we would like to see if the board is interested in forming a subcommittee to help us figure these things out. Volunteers to form a bicycling subcommittee were: Chair Ricord, Johnson, Gould and Henderson. They will be called upon to assist the project team with bicycling related issues. Jackson distributed the latest copies of the Master Street Plan and secondly he passed around copies of an article. Jackson stated that he plans to be back next month. The Board thanked Jackson and Meighen for their presentation. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes October 16, 2002 5 MINUTE BREAK Page 5 b) DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PLAN (DSP) — R. Hensley Hensley introduced Timothy Wilder, one of the project managers for the DSP. Hensley distributed materials to go along with the PowerPoint presentation. The information provided in the presentation included all the basics such as the various consultants who are working on this project; reasons why the project is needed in the first place; how Transportation fits into the project (rides "shotgun"); and the four Transportation elements, which are: • Access and Circulation (Bikes, pods, transit, auto, other) • Trucks and Freight Deliveries • Infrastructure Assessment and Analysis • Parking Hensley stated that the objectives for tonight's meeting are: 1. Parking principles and philosophy 2. Parking issues identification 3. Present baseline parking data 4. Feedback and input from the Transportation Board Parking is the only topic that Hensley will be addressing tonight. There are many others that will eventually be brought to the board. The general Parking Plan Objective is: to produce a plan for a parking system and parking management strategies that supports and complements the goals and vision for Downtown Fort Collins, both now and in the future. Other objectives of the plan are: • Values Classification and Goal Setting • Document Existing Parking Conditions • Management & Operating Plans • Alternatives Development • Financial Plan & Capital Improvement Program • Implementation Plan Hensley went over the parking principles and philosophy; Municipal Parking System Issues; Parking Issues Survey Questions (the board was asked to answer the questions and get them back to Hensley); Current Conditions from the Downtown Parking Supply/Demand Study; Preliminary observations; Next Steps for the Parking Plan; and how success will be measured. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes October 16, 2002 Page 6 It was reported that currently the Civic Center Parking Structure is running at 66% capacity and at 75% at the Old Town Structure. Hensley said that staff is thinking of some innovative ways to fill them up. For example, there has been a lot of feedback from business owners in the downtown that their part-time and evening workers need a cheaper access to the structure. Currently the charge is $36 per month. Staff is looking into a way to allow part-time people to share a permit or do something cheaper for after hours users. Johnson: When you look at the time maps that Hensley displayed, ft is my impression that very few people in Fort Collins know that you can get to that new parking structure. We need to introduce the community to ft. Hensley. Tim is right. The average visitor to the downtown doesn't know where the structure is or how close ft is. This goes back to the purpose of the structure. We need to decide as a community how we want to use those structures. Half or more of the users are permit holders. One potential use that I have emphasized in the past is to get our long-term parkers into the structures- get them off street. If we do that, ft isn't as critical to educate the general public about the structures and how inexpensive or convenient they are. The decision we make determines how we market ourselves. This is the sort of decision that will be made as part of this parking plan. Johnson: I think one other element too is that you think of the experience of people going to a mall or the Wal-Mart, they still have to slog through a parking lot that is often not very nice. When the weather is bad, ft can be even worse. On the other hand, if we think of ways to sell the structure to folks, you think of parking in the structure, going through Opera Galleria, getting a cup of coffee on your way to go someplace downtown all where you're under cover. It's an entirely different and much friendlier situation if we really look at what we can do to help the pedestrian feel good about making the choice to be on College Avenue — ft's friendly and a much better place to be. It could be a much better experience that will beat any mall parking lot. Moe: In looking at the scope and target, ft looks like you'll get a good standard parking study addressing your parking management issues and I was wondering how much could be done to look at parking as a transportation tool to look at travel behavior. It's probably the most important TDM type factor. As you look at the supply of parking and the cost of parking and you look at other sorts of things we are trying to promote like Mason Corridor, those are the trade offs as a community that we are grappling with. If there is plenty of parking and ft is available versus being constrained and more expensive, that decision has an effect on some of those factors. How much of that are you going to be looking at? Hensley. The answer is more of a long-term answer than a short-term answer and we're looking at both in this plan. We're looking at what we need to do today as well as what we need to do 5-10 years down the road. There are three teams that are looking at the MSTC right now. The Downtown Strategic Plan team, the Mason Team and the Transportation Master Plan team are all considering various aspects of the MSTC and how these things relate to each other. The way I think the whole decision relates to parking pricing and TDM measures is that there are two sides to this issue. You can't just put the parking pricing incentives in place without having the supporting infrastructure, the supporting transit system to make ft work. We don't have that right now. We don't have a bus system that takes people where they want to go when they Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes October 16, 2002 Page 7 want to go and that's what's required before TOM pricing parking mechanisms will work. That's why the MSTC is so critical to this whole discussion and why those three teams are integrating. Gould: Is it generally considered by the business people in downtown that lf there is a charge for on -street parking, that that is the "kiss of death" and distinguishes it from the mail type of parking experience? Hensley: Let me point out that we have two distinct kinds of businesses downtown. The first floor is entertainment and retail and those people thrive on customers. They want turnover. Those people are in favor of having some sort of incentive for spaces to turnover, be it increased enforcement (nights and weekends) or paid parking as an incentive to be self enforcing. We've also got the second story professionals. The architects, the graphic artists, the attorneys, the people that pretty much do their work without a lot of customers dropping in and they want to park right in front of their building. There is this dichotomy of interest. We have a user problem and a balance issue downtown that we need to address and it won't be real easy. At our last citizen advisory group meeting, we asked the question — would you be willing to consider pay parking on the street? In the past that has been the "kiss of death" as everyone said we can't compete with the mall if we do that. After Bob Gibbs came in the spring, this issue has been talked about for about six months now and about half the hands went up saying they'd be willing to consider that. Gould: What are the policies or constraints on fee generated revenue from these City parking facilities? Are there specific constraints on those? Hensley: There are several issues involved in that. First, there is the mechanics of it. The City Manager is empowered to impose fees administratively. As a matter of practice, we've always run our fees through the budgeting process. But, If the CM wanted to, he could impose a fee or allow us to raise or lower a fee mid -stream, so we have a fair amount of flexibility there. As a practical matter, this thing needs to be processed because there are so many different affected interests. We need to figure out the pros and cons and all these things we've been discussing and make sure we make a decision as a community for how we want things to work. It has to be integrated into the parking system as a whole. Gould: Is there any kind of policy in place now that requires a certain percent, you know what has to pay for itself and what is just going to be subsidized out from other places? Hensley. No, there isn't. As a matter of fact, one of our big questions is: Should Parking Operations be self supporting? Right now it's not. Currently we make about 50% of our operating budget through revenues and the rest of it is subsidized either from the General Fund or the Transportation Fund. Like I said, one of the questions is whether or not we should change that arrangement. In 1987, Council passed what they called a "parker -friendly policy" and by that they wanted to decriminalize parking tickets and they wanted a softer image. We aren't emphasizing collecting revenues in our enforcement program, so we void a lot of tickets. We use parking enforcement as an educational opportunity more than a revenue generating opportunity. Johnson: The public/private options - - with all the private parking lots that are off-street, might there be an opportunity to use some of that capacity so there might be a revenue source for that? Hensley. Absolutely. This is one of my pet programs. Something I've noticed over the past couple of years. First of all, we have a lot of eye sores. If you go over into the Oki Town triangle, look at the alley that runs from Pine Street down to Linden between Walnut and Riverside, that's a real eye sore. There are dumpsters, Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes October 16, 2002 Page 8 gravel, no markings, everyone parks every which way, there is another lot right on College avenue as well as about 20 others that are either eye sores or very inefficient. I'd love to have the opportunity to do some improvement, put some kind of management program in place, do some kind of partnership where both the City and the property owner benefit for that and provide an opportunity to get a lot more of those employees off street. This is definitely one that I am trying to focus one. Johnson: We use cards to go to Kinko's to do transactions for copying. Are you looking at something like that for parking or for the parking garages or for transit? Hensley. Yes. The potential is there. There is marvelous technology out there to have these "smart cards" where you can load money into them, kind of like what you get at the casinos. We are looking into it. In closing, Wilder reiterated Hensley's comments about the Parking Issues Survey questions and noted the importance of collecting data from everyone. He requested that members fill out the form and send it in to Hensley. c) SPECIAL MEETING FOR 2003 WORK PLAN — D. Bachman It was agreed that the board would hold a special meeting on Saturday, November 9 from 8:30 a.m. until approximately noon in order to develop the 2003 Board Work Plan. Cass will reserve the Community Room and breakfast will be provided. 7. REPORTS a) BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Trantham: Trail along RR. The trail along the RR tracks between Horsetooth to Drake, the section from Drake to where Edora Park is done, and has been done for some time. But now the section from Drake to Horsetooth is supposed to be completed this fall. I run along that section about three times a week and recently they've constructed a fence. The problem is that they put up the fence but never provided an alternate trail. It's a pretty well used corridor and it's not as simple as just going on the other side of the fence because there are some drainage problems and you really just can't get through. I emailed Cynthia and she forwarded it on to Craig Foreman with Parks. He replied that as long as you are on the other side of the fence you can still use the area, but like I said, there's really not a good trail thereto use. He also mentioned that the 10' concrete trail will be installed this fall as weather permits and there will also be a 5' gravel path. I know it will be a nicefacility once it's completed, but I was a little put off with the fact that they didn't provide a trail before they took away the old one and they also left a lot of trash, which I told him about. Jakabauskas: Letters to the Editor. I have some hand-outs to give everyone. They are articles from the newspaper. It is very easy to send a letter to the editor via e-mail. It limits you to 200 words. I suggest that if you are so moved get a letter out as soon as you can. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes October 16, 2002 Page 9 Gould: Transportation Campaign Efforts. The citizen group has been getting together to promote the ballot initiative and doing a lot of things. One was the recent Homecoming parade. We also interviewed with the Editorial Board of the Co/oradoan. I agree with Edward's comment about getting a letter out to the Editor. Even just a paragraph would help give it more visibility. Articles. Intersection safety related articles were distributed. Johnson: Good Job Dan! Dan did a really nice job helping with the Coloradoan and his letters as well. I have some sample letters if you'd like to use them as a template to write your own. b) STAFF REPORTS Bachman: ITEMS FOR NEXT AGENDA: Mason Street Transportation Corridor Update - Reavis Transportation Master Plan — Jackson Traffic Enforcement/Safety — Chief Harrison 2003 Work Plan Approval - All 8. OTHER BUSINESS None 9. ADJOURN Chair Ricord adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Cass, Executive Administrative Assistant City of Fort Collins — Transportation Services