Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 04/17/2002REGULAR MEETING MINUTES of the TRANSPORTATION BOARD April 17, 2002 5:45 p.m. City of Fort Collins - 215 N. Mason Street Community Room FOR REFERENCE: CHAIR: Christophe Ricord 472.8769 VICE CHAIR: Bruce Henderson 282.1319 STAFF LIAISON: Don Bachman 224.6049 ADMIN SUPPORT: Cynthia Scott 224.6058 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Dan Gould Neil Grigg Bruce Henderson Edward Jakubauskas Tim Johnson Tom Kramer Brad Miller Ray Moe Christophe Ricord Brent Thordarson Heather Trantham CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Don Bachman Matt Baker Eileen Bayens Eric Bracke Tom Frazier Randy Hensley GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE: James Henderson - CSU Student Shelby Faulk - CSU Student George Watson Wendy Shumucker 1. CALL TO ORDER Cam McNair Ron Phillips Cynthia Scott Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes April 17, 2002 Page 2 Chair Ricord called the meeting to order at 5:50 p.m. Introductions were made for new board member Edward Jakubauskas. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There was a motion and a second to approve the March 2002 Transportation Board minutes as presented. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. 4. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT None. 5. DISCUSSION ITEMS a) FARE STRUCTURE STUDY Et DIAL -A -RIDE CLIENT ELIGIBILITY STUDY - G. Rossiter Ms. Rossiter introduced Hugh Kierig and Judy Hoza with KA Associates, consultants doing said study. Mr. Kierig stated that his firm has been hired by Transfort to assist the transit system in a review of two specific tasks. One is dealing with eligibility for the DAR Program and the second one deals with the fare structure of the Transfort system including the DAR system. Mr. Kierig gave a Power Point presentation that included the following highlights: Introduction of KA Associates - Based out of Kansas City, Missouri - 40 Years combined transit and land planning experience - Understand the dynamics of transit systems operating in University communities Community Transit System Analysis and Development - CSU/Transfort Transit Center Design Team - City of Lawrence, Kansas - Reno County Kansas - Oconee County First Steps, South Carolina - Spartanburg County First Steps, South Carolina - National Park Service, Denver - Rocky Mountain National Park, Colorado - Price Waterhouse Coopers - Denali National Park, Alaska - Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes April 17, 2002 Project Focus - Gather Community Stakeholder Input - Compare Peer Communities - Conduct On -Board Fare Survey - Review Existing Transfort and DAR Services • Eligibility Requirements • Fare Structure - Develop Recommendations and Alternatives Community Input - City Boards and Commissions • Youth Advisory Board • DAR Advisory Board • Senior Advisory Board • Commission on Disability - Community Interest Groups • Foothills Gateway Case Workers • Larimer County Office on Aging Board • Disability Community Leadership • Northern Colorado Cross Disabilities Coalition - Transfort/DAR and City Staff • Transfort Administration • Transfort Operators • DAR Operators • Senior Center Staff - Conducting On -Board Survey - Community Open House Page 3 Mr. Kierig said that what he has learned to date from the community input relative to the DAR eligibility are two major points. One of which is the seniors consider DAR (paratransit, door-to-door service) system as a valued community asset for their ability to get around town. While they see it as a value, one of the things they need to keep in mind and is being reviewed is that the DAR system is considered an ADA complimentary paratransit service which has specific issues of performance measures relative to providing service to individuals in this community that have a mobility impairment. There is a legal obligation on the part of DAR to provide the service to the mobility impaired, and understanding also that unrestricted senior access to the DAR system may overexpose the ADA performance measures that DAR is obligated to provide. Relative to fare issues that we have identified and will be addressing, there are two major areas. One is the unrestricted access to the annual pass system for elderly and disabled may be resulting in some abuse within the community. We will be looking at that in more detail as we move forward through this project. The second issue is that currently, youth ages up to 17 can access the Transfort system for free. While we understand and have learned that youth access to Transfort is important for getting to school, getting to jobs, getting to the mall and to the youth center, we also understand that unlimited access may be contributing to some disruptive behavior on the bus routes. We'll be looking into that area as well. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes April 17,2002 Page 4 In addition, the pass system that is available to elderly disabled which is $19 per year is considered a great value to those who use those passes, but by the same token, the annual pass may be under priced, so we'll look at that issue. Mr. Kierig said that he couldn't say anything in terms of recommendations at this point, but he is interested in hearing any issues the board may have relative to eligibility and fares for Transfort and DAR. Chair Ricord stated that with the permission of the board, one of the members of the public had a question/comment and he would like to open the floor to her. Wendy Shumucher stated that she is with the National Park Service located at Harmony and Lemay. Cancellation of the Southside Shuttle has probably led to an increase in DAR applications because that bus service is no longer provided. There are persons who formerly took that bus, including herself, who were disabled but not so disabled that they could not take a regular bus service, but disabled enough such that they couldn't use other forms of transportation. She said that she wanted the board to be aware that some of that increase has come about because of the elimination of regular bus service. Mr. Kierig commented that he has heard the same comment from many others in the community as well. Board Comments/Questions: Grige: How long has it been since the last Transfort fare study? Kierig: There was a study done in 1994 that implemented the youth no fare policy. Frazier: 1995/96 was the last Transit Development Plan when we reviewed the fares and considered changes. Kramer: How similar is your peer city Lawrence, Kansas in the way of the same amount buses and miles traveled? Kierig: Very similar. Johnson: With regard to the comments about Harmony Road, will you be quantifying the number of rides that been shifted from Transfort to DAR? Can you get a handle on that? Kieri : Yes, we can do that. We don't have a handle on that right now, but we do know that there has been an increase. As Wendy mentioned, there has been an increase in applications for the DAR Program and what we've heard from the elderly and the disabled community is that those people that would have or have had in the past accessed at least the Poudre Valley hospital's south campus for medical services are now having to use DAR. We know that there has been some increase in the amount of DAR activity. We haven't gone through the quantitative process, but we will. Our investigation will revolve around elimination of service areas, but the continuation of service for DAR and what impact that has in terms of those people that are not ADA eligible, but are eligible for DAR, meaning elderly primarily. Henderson: In terms of what you're delivering with this study, will you be delivering a series of alternatives or options that would show different fares or options that show different structures or strategies with regards to passes, DAR, coverage and then what the correlation is in terms of ridership corresponding to each of those different alternatives? Kierig: Yes. That is the primary purpose of our on -board survey. One of the things we want to investigate is there is a national standard out there, an issue of Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes April 17, 2002 Page 5 elasticity dealing with if you increase fares by certain percentages you should have a corresponding decrease in ridership. One of the things we wanted to look at in doing this on -board survey is to determine whether that national standard is applicable to the Fort Collins community. The questions we'll be asking will be things like, "If your fare is increased on Transfort by a certain level what is your ridership pattern going to be?" And then an incremental question such as, "If it's raised by this much, what would it be?" and so on. Miller: In the community input part of your presentation, like any city service, there are always people who are in favor of it and people not and so forth. It seems like most of the groups in the slides you have would be a shoe -in to lower the fares and raise the service level. Is there a way to balance some of this? I'm not advocating that we don't want the program, but I would expect input from these people to primarily say that we need broader coverage and lower fares. Kierig: To a certain degree, that is what we did hear. Although there were people that buy the annual elderly and disabled pass which is $19 and they recognize that that is a little low and they would like to see that if it did increase that there would be some corresponding or at least some incremental increase of services provided. Overall, they saw that $19 was low. Trantham: I don't see where you got any input from CSU students. Kierig: As part of the disability leadership group, we did meet with the director of the Disability Services Office to discuss transportation issues for CSU students that have disabilities, mobility impairments in particular. Trantham: Did you have any insights from the operators that you talked to? Anything interesting that you'd like to share with us? Kieri : Yes, youth behavior at certain times of day is an issue. They don't like to be put in the position of policeman. Gould: On the bullet of unrestricted senior access to DAR may overexpose ADA requirements, does this mean that the more seniors that are not disabled, they would tend to dilute out the performance for the ADA people. Kierist: Right. b) MASON STREET TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR UPDATE - D. Bachman Bachman stated that grant application efforts are still underway with help from the Carmen Group. More locally, staff has been working with Region 8 FTA staff to help narrow the scope of the PE phase. We're expecting an RFP for the preliminary engineering consultant to be out in May with a quick turnaround. Right-of-way acquisition for the South Transit Center is proceeding. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes April 17, 2002 fi. ACTION ITEMS Page 6 a) SHIELDS/HARMONY INTERSECTION ANALYSIS - E. Bracke Bracke reminded the board that back in July or August of 2001, Traffic staff came to the board with a resolution that was later adopted by the Council stating that anytime there is to be a major intersection improvements, a roundabout evaluation will be conducted as well as the usual traditional improvements. As you're probably aware, the City has given Transportation Services the money to proceed with the engineering of the Harmony Road project which goes from Seneca to about the RR tracks. The intersection that needs to be reconstructed in there is Harmony and Shields. Using Power Point slides, Bracke showed the Board an aerial view of the current intersection with an overlay of what the traditional intersection improvements would look like and what a modern roundabout would look like there. Mr. Bracke explained the different components of the intersection analysis including emissions comparisons, accident analysis, public perception/acceptance, cost, alternative mobility and spatial requirements. In conclusion, Mr. Bracke stated that Transportation Services staff recommends that the City proceed with the modern roundabout alternative at the intersection of Shields and Harmony Road. Board Comments/Questions: Henderson: Are you more confident now with this cost estimate than with the Mulberry/Lemay estimate? Bracke: Definitely. Phillips: CDOT had a lot to do with escalating costs and there were a lot of things at work that made it fail. I don't see where these things exist in this situation. The construction climate is different now as well. Johnson: I think it would be beneficial to show the public what it would take to get an "A" LOS. If you can estimate the cost it would take to get there, it would help. Diede: I think we could do that, but we do allow a LOS D. Miller: I think another angle on what Johnson is saying is really the perception angle and that's what really scares me. I was in favor of the other roundabout from the get go, but I wonder if it would be better to place one at a more minor intersection such as City Park and Elizabeth as an example rather than diving into a major intersection at Shields and Harmony. Gould: I agree that it's a good idea to show a LOS A. Moe: I have concerns about the bypass lane. Bracke: Both Barry Crown and I designed it and are okay with it. Jakubauskas: Having seen how well roundabouts work in other countries, it's really puzzling to me as to why people are so opposed to it. It seems to me what will be required would be a tremendous public relations program to sell the public to at least get a model pilot roundabout going, show it's effectiveness so people can identify it. nmi Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes April 17, 2002 Page 7 Otherwise, I think there is intrepidation by a lot of people in driving that sort of thing. They're not used to it and it seems scary to them. Gould: In terms of the marketing strategy, it seemed to me that there is value in what Johnson suggested because just by comparing A service to A LOS you showing the high value of that design at a relatively low price to get that LOS. The other potential marketing angle is pedestrian friendliness for one to get across this intersection. If there were some way to portray what it was like to really cross two lanes out on those arms, struggling with traffic that is really only coming from one direction, it would be nice to somehow demonstrate that. Bracke: There are programs out there that can do that. Diede: There are plenty of videos out there that show how pedestrians cross at roundabouts, we'll just get a hold of those and show them. Grigg: If we could get some good video that shows how well roundabouts work such as the one Bracke mentioned in Michigan, then we could design a public relations campaign of the service clubs, etc and it would be a balanced presentation. It would cover what Johnson was saying as well as how pedestrians would get across and how well it would work in general and just say to the people, we think this would really be super and we realize people are against it. We feel like you need to know more about it. You make the choice in the end or talk to your council person. Then to handle what Diede was talking about, we wouldn't have to redesign it and give the high cost for the LOS A for both the traditional and the roundabout. You could do it the way you did it with the cost about the same, but you could have a bar chart or some kind of illustration that you would get the Cadillac program with the roundabout and you're getting the VW program with the traditional. Johnson: I think that's an excellent idea. Clearly, some analysis that would pick up one or the other, maybe just touch on the cost and spend most of the time on performance, I wouldn't object to that. Bracke: In terms of public relations, when we did Mulberry and Lemay, we went to about 20-25 service groups, we had a video and had unanimous support. Everybody supported it with the exception of the Coloradoan newspaper and the general public. We couldn't fight the letters to the editor, etc. Ricord: I think it's a good place to start. Make sure your numbers are in place in the cost estimate. Also, I recommend that staff continue to look at ways to make roundabouts more bicycle and pedestrian friendly. There was a motion and a second that the Board endorse stafrs study with a favorable opinion of a roundabout, but request staff to go to the Council with a strategy that includes public acceptance. The motion passed with a unanimous vote b) TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL FUNDING - D. Bachman After a lengthy discussion by the board, Board member Grigg summed it by the following statement: The Transportation Board believes that Fort Collins is too congested now and with so much growth, it will only get worse unless we spend at Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes April 17, 2002 Page 8 least 25%. We don't think the status quo is adequate and recommend an improvement program in the 40-50% range. This statement became a motion by Grigg and was seconded by Thordarson. The motion carried by a majority vote with Board member Kramer opposed Kramer stated that although he did vote against the motion, he would support 35-40%. 7. REPORTS a) BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Chair Ricord stated that before Moe had to leave the meeting, he asked if Moe would do a presentation at some point in some of the new innovations in alternative mode friendly devices and implementation of new ideas. Ricord: Bike Safety @ Lemay and Mulberry. Last time I mentioned the bicycle safety issue at this location, McNair mentioned that there was to be a meeting the next day or so regarding that intersection. During staff reports, please let me know what occurred during that meeting. Kramer: Bicycle Rental Vending Machine. Watched a Channel 9 news segment on a bicycle rental vending machine in Japan. It was really slick how it worked. It mechanically stores the bikes and brings them out. Henderson: Was in California recently and noticed at their major arterial intersections there are large signs (2' x 2') that say 'TRAFFIC SIGNAL VIOLATION $251 ". Then in smaller print it says "minimum penalty". One was mounted on the post in all four directions. Johnson: Rural Transportation Authority. I sat on a League of Women Voters Forum on the RTA as well as a City Council Study Session. One of the issues was whether Ft. Collins should have a weighted vote which comes out to a veto power because based on population we have a 40% vote or somewhere in that range. b) STAFF REPORTS McNair: Reported on several items including Mulberry restriping, the Horsetooth Dam project, Taft Hill Road project update, Kechter Road closure, and an upcoming Prospect Road project. Bachman: NEXT AGENDA • CSU Strategic Plan • Street Standards • MSTC Update Transportation Capital The next meeting of the Board's Finance sub -committee was set for Thursday, May 2 at 6 p.m. 215 N. Mason, conference room 1 B. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes April 17, 2002 8. OTHER BUSINESS None 9. ADJOURN Chair Ricord adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Cynthia Scott Executive Administrative Assistant Page 9