The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 03/20/2002look, REGULAR MEETING MINUTES of the TRANSPORTATION BOARD March 20, 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 282.1319 STAFF LIAISON: Don Bachman 224.6049 ADMIN SUPPORT: Cynthia Scott 224.6058 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Dan Gould Neil Grigg Bruce Henderson Tim Johnson Tom Kramer Brad Miller Ray Moe Christophe Ricord Brent Thordarson Heather Trantham CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Don Bachman John Daggett Linda Dowlen Randy Hensley Mark Jackson Cam McNair Ron Phillips Tom Reiff Cynthia Scott GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE: Dale Natalie Brown ABSENT: Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes March 20, 2002 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Ricord called the meeting to order at 5:55 p.m. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT None. Page 2 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There was a motion and a second to approve the February 20, 2002 Transportation Board minutes as presented. Discussion: Johnson stated he would like the following revisions made to page 6 as shown below: Page 6 Johnson: The main point that I want to make is I take a pretty big exception to saying that we have an obligation. In the case of utilities for example, if we 04M NEEDS exceed our capacity to store water, we DO NoT have an obligation in the City to build a new- dam in the canyon. . I would be very careful as staff in using that word "obligation" and to send that forward as a policy... Johnson:... In one sense, if we have a community obligation to fix it, it would drive this solution towards a sales tax only. Developers have a trip distance obligation because they are HAVE created trips. I is also THE u►rnR cmmrss a strong argument in this capital discussion of oR an excise tax. That's why I caution very strongly about how you use the term "obligation." The amendments were approved by the board and the motion carried by a unanimous vote. 4. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT None. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes March 20, 2002 Page 3 5. DISCUSSION ITEMS a) CSU STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE - Daggett Mr. Daggett presented a Status Report of the Colorado State University Strategic Transportation Plan via Power Point slides. Highlights of the presentation were: • Key Issues Et Opportunities - Campus growth slow versus FC population which has increased significantly • Main Campus Organization • Main Campus Master Plan • Campus Commute Patterns • Student Housing Locations • University Revenue Sources - Tuition - State Et Federal Grants - Private Donations and Grants - Fees and Fines - Auxiliary Income • Stakeholders' Concerns/Comments: - Change from rural to urban place - Support for alternative transportation - High level of trust and communication between the City and the University - Concern for the future • Land Use • Parking Costs (Construction costs, cost per space, land cost, etc.) • Parking Revenues (Fees, Fines, Other) • University Area Parking Issues - numerous • Transportation Demand Management - Many programs in place - Limited CSU specific marketing • Transit Ridership and Issues • Pedestrian Issues • Bicycle Issues • Initial Overall Assessment - Things are just fine right now o There are no immediate crises n CSU staff is doing a great job of managing existing resources - Opportunities for future growth and development are constrained by the parking situation - Another academic building or two that displaces parking will force the question of what to do with parking • Analysis - Currently working to determine automobile demand to the CSU campus and on streets adjacent to the university (Roadway volumes in CSU vicinity) Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes March 20, 2002 Analysis - Currently working to determine parking - Four parking alternatives: 1. Null alternative Page 4 2. Fees pay 100% of parking program costs 3. Parking demand management 4. Parking restrictions • Analysis - Bike/Ped - working to determine the adequacy of bicycle and pedestrian facilities on and around the CSU campus • Analysis - Transit - working to determine the adequacy of Transit services to and on the university campus and the newly adopted transit plan • Next Steps: - Complete Primary Analysis - CSU Steering Committee - April - Follow-up and Development of Three Transportation Alternative Scenarios - City Transportation Board - May - City Council - July - State Board of Agriculture - August b) DIAL -A -RIDE SERVICE OVERVIEW - Sittner Marlys Sittner, Operations Supervisor for Transfort, presented a video to the board that portrayed an overview of Dial -A -Ride services. The board was very complimentary to Sittner and staff who was involved in producing the informative video and encouraged it's showing via all available opportunities. c) TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT REPORT - Dowlen Linda Dowlen described the TDM program and how it has changed in the last year. She talked about the steady increase in participation of SmartTrips programs and there was a 22% increase in miles traveled by "alternative" forms of transportation. In 2001, 1.4 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were saved by participants in SmartTrips programs. Dowlen explained how each program administered by SmartTrips works, i.e. Freewheels Business Bicycle Loaner Program, Try Transit Week, and the Drive Less Challenge and how many VMTs each program saved. The board appreciated the information and thanked Dowlen for her report. d) MASON STREET TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR UPDATE - Hensley Hensley stated that there was little to report this month, but next month should be more informative. There have been care staff team meetings, but again, nothing of real substance to report yet. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes March 20, 2002 Page 5 e) TRAFFIC/SAFETY/ENFORCEMENT ISSUES -All Chair Ricord made an opening statement about the importance of the board's continued efforts to champion this issue on behalf of the community. Johnson referred to a letter that the Board sent to the Mayor and City Council members re: Improving Traffic law Enforcement in Fort Collins dated May 12, 2000. He thought that it might be helpful to start with the city's top 10 (worst) intersections where there is a need for better enforcement. Grigg suggested there be a comparison, a benchmark with which to see how Fort Collins does compared with a city with a similar # of officers, photo radar, etc and see how we do. Gould stated that this would be an excellent time to "market" if you will, the pedestrian right-of-way laws. Trantham suggested there be a focus on an aggressive driving campaign. Johnson said that it would be helpful for staff to find out what the 10 worst intersections are and get a comparison of Fort Collins to other cities in terms of traffic safety and enforcement issues. This information will be compiled from both Traffic Operations and the Police Department and brought to the board at a future meeting. "Dale" (member of public) requested permission to comment. He stated that he had some innovative ideas about this topic. He said that traffic hostility is due to the lack of continual flow. He suggested that if there were more grade - separated crossings, this would help the traffic flow problem immensely. On a side note, he said that he firmly believes in instituting a public oriented "tattletale system" to help with traffic enforcement. f) LETTER BY D. GOULD - All The letter was briefly discussed and all agreed that it should come across as positive even though there is a message that how the bike lanes are plowed are of importance in terms of "drying" time once the storm clears out. Gould said he would edit the letter and submit it to staff. The letter will be addressed to Streets personnel and copied to City Council. Transportation Board APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes March 20, 2002 Page 6 g) TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL FUNDING - All The notes taken at the special funding meeting on February 27 were distributed and Johnson said that he would like to have more time to review them. If there are any changes, he will let Bachman know. Much of the discussion that followed stemmed from board members who were reiterating the points of the meeting for Trantham, as she was not able to attend. To sum up tonight's discussion, Bachman said that there are four points that need to be addressed. They are: 1. There is a struggle with how much of the overall shortfall is reasonable to fund. 2. Which mechanism should we use? 3. What is an acceptable package? 4. How long should they be good for? It was agreed that the Board's Finance sub -committee would dedicate time to this issue, carrying on the work already begun by the board. They will meet before the next regular meetin� of the board - on April 11 - and report their progress to the board on the 17 h. 6. ACTION ITEMS None. 7. OTHER BUSINESS None 8. ADJOURN Chair Ricord adjourned the meeting at 9:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, l JC61 Cynthia Scott Executive Administrative Assistant