HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 05/19/2004REGULAR MEETING MINUTES of the
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
May 19, 2004
5:45 p.m.
City of Fort Collins -Municipal Building
Community Room
215 N. Mason Street
FOR
CHAIR: Bruce Henderson 8984625
VICE CHAIR: Heather Trantham 206-4255
STAFF LIAISON: Don Bachman 224-6049
ADMIN SUPPORT: Cynthia Cass 224-6058
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Dan Gould
Neil Grigg
Bruce Henderson
Tim Johnson
Christophe Ricord
Gary Thomas
CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE:
Don Bachman
Cynthia Cass
Tom Frazier
Mark Jackson
Cam McNair
Ron Phillips
Rick Richter
Lucinda Smith
ABSENT:
Joe Dumais
Claudia Eberspacher
Ray Moe
Brent Thordarson
Heather Trantham
GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE:
Margie Joy
Mary Warring
Rick Gabel
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Henderson called the meeting to order at 5:57 p.m.
APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes
Transportation Board
May 19, 2004
Page 2 of 9
12. AGENDA REVIEW I
Chair Henderson noted that a quorum was barely present and that Board Member Grigg
needed to leave at S p.m. Therefore, he warned that the action items would have to be
completed and voted on before then.
No changes were made to the agenda as presented.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
None.
14. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (APRIL 2004)
There was a motion and a second to approve the minutes of April 21, 2004 as presented,
Discussion: None. The question was called and the motion carried by a unanimous vote,
6-0.
15. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT I
present.
6. ACTION ITEMS
a. FINAL DRAFT AIR QUALITY PLAN UPDATE — L Smith
Smith stated that Council will be asked to adopt only the Policy chapter of the Air
Quality Plan (AQP). She explained that this has been done in the past in terms of the
Natural Areas Policy Plan and also for Solid Waste Reduction. Council sets policy, but
staff basically develops the program to implement the policies. That's why staff is asking
Council to just adopt the Policy chapter. However, staff has had Council review the Plan
and tonight, if the Board would like to, they may consider making a recommendation to
Council on the Policy chapter and also if there are any comments on the whole plan,
Smith said she would welcome those.
She stated that there was a Study Session with Council last week and one of the major
outcomes was that staff asked them if they wanted to retain, as a principle, the concept of
a long-term vision, that it would be the City's long term vision to reduce the Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) growth rate to the population growth rate. Some of the Council
feedback on that questioned a couple of things. One was how is population a good
indicator or metric against which to compare VMT growth and secondly, is that
appropriate for the Air Quality Plan? She said that she understands that's a relevant issue
to this Board because it's still part of the Board's mission statement. She added that she
doesn't think Council was saying it's not a worthy objective per se, but she believes they
were saying that it's not appropriate in the AQP. Therefore staff is removing anything
that's a policy in City Plan, Transportation Master Plan and the AQP on reducing VMT
APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes
Transportation Board
May 19, 2004
Page 3 of 9
growth rates, population/growth rate. Smith apologized for not mentioning that in the
memo to the Board.
Smith said that most of the other policy changes that she outlined that occurred since she
last met with the Board are relatively minor and routine, except for two items that she did
bring to the Board's attention.
Smith then opened the floor to Board comments and questions. There was a lot of
discussion about whether the board should pass a recommendation on aspects of the Plan
that don't pertain to Transportation.
Chair Henderson attempted to rein the discussion in by stating that there are three options
for the Board:
1) Make a recommendation on just Policies;
2) Policies and Strategies; or
3) The whole Plan
He stated that what Smith is after is the Policies recommendation. Smith said that some
clearly do not relate to the Transportation Board's mission. Many of them are so broad
that they could relate indirectly, such as Enforcement for example.
Thomas made the following motion: We think that Air Quality is important to the
quality of life and well-being of the citizens of Fort Collins. We therefore recommend
that the City Council adopt the transportation policies as presented in the Air Quality
Plan and request that staff review with us strategies pursuant to those policies as they
are being formulated Gould seconded the motion.
Discussion: Smith stated that the word Transportation might be confusing because the
transportation policies specifically have already been adopted. So if it said, the
"transportation -related air quality policies" it might help with reducing any confusion.
Thomas stated he would accept that as a friendly amendment.
Ricord: In policy 1.1.5., page 2, where it speaks of air quality indicators, in the comment
section, is there a mistake on the frequency?
Smith: Yes, that is a mistake. What we will be doing is updating the indicators at least
twice in a five-year cycle.
Ricord: Okay. The other question refers to policy AQ 15.3, again under the
"Comments" column it looks like staff doesn't want to delineate certain specific kinds of
risks. Can you tell us a little about the staff decision to not identify those risks?
Smith: That list of risks, that was included previously in the Policy, we don't know if
it's comprehensive and it seemed more appropriate to staff to not try and... with the
background or investigation into issues, select a list of risk type issues. There might be
some other things that we're missing so in order to simplify the policy and move away
from the very health related aspects that it calls out, we felt it was reasonable to exclude
those types of risks or problems associated with their toxics. It doesn't mean that they
wouldn't be looked at.
APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes
Transportation Board
May 19, 2004
Page 4 of 9
Ricord: But certainly all the risks that are delineated here are clearly identified as
resulting risks of air quality issues. So you wouldn't necessarily say they're not. I'm not
sure that that's a good argument for not having it. It doesn't affect the motion on the
table, but I would like to go on record as saying that it does need to be listed.
Thomas: What makes that work for me is if you look at the context of the principle it
falls under.
Ricord: I just think it's better to be more specific than not.
Johnson: In the beginning you mentioned the notion of cost benefit elements and they
were taken out — I would like to comment that the city is here for the long-term so I'm
not sure why it would even be considered short-term.
Smith: It is not something that was taken out of anything that had ever been adopted. It
was proposed as a new policy, but then taken out. You're right, the City is here for the
long-term, but it may be an evolution in practices to begin and embrace life cycle costing
which is one aspect of looking long-term. Even that term, long-term, is kind of vague. If
you start looking at the issue of sustainability, how long-term will you be looking?
Chair Henderson asked that the motion be repeated. Thomas read: We think that Air
Quality is important to the quality of life and well-being of the citizens of Fort Collins.
We therefore recommend that the City Council adopt the transportation -related air
quality policies as presented in the Air Quality Plan and further request that staff
review with us strategies pursuant to those policies as they are being formulated
Johnson asked to make a friendly amendment to the motion by adding the word
improving before "Air Quality" in the first part of the sentence. Thomas accepted the
friendly amendment.
The question was called and the motion carried by a unanimous vote, 6 — 0.
Smith thanked the board and stated that she would come back with the transportation
issues.
Chair Henderson reminded the Board that Board Member Grigg is leaving at 8 p. in. so
there is one hour left to get through the second action item.
b. CARPENTER ROAD—M. Jackson
Jackson provided the Board with background information, updated info and the next
steps regarding the issue via a PowerPoint presentation. Many hand-outs were
distributed to the board.
Jackson stated that staff recommends to Council that they consider adopting the
Memorandum of Agreement (MOLD to CDOT that transfers the jurisdiction. He said that
staff also recommend that in the next three years, in a short term time frame that CDOT,
with cooperation from the City and Larimer County would undertake a feasibility and
APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes
Transportation Board
May 19, 2004
Page 5 of 9
alternatives analysis of the corridor, do a preliminary identification of what some of the
potential alignments and design issues may be, all in an effort to minimize the road
footprint near these sensitive areas. And finally, the recommendation is that any future
improvements of the corridor embrace context sensitive design or context sensitive
design solution principles and methodologies.
He then opened the floor for discussion.
After a lengthy discussion, Johnson summed up the discussion by outlining the following
four points:
1) Design standards, something similar to or comparable to Fort Collins City Design
Standards,
2) Minimal footprint to minimize environmental impact and mitigation,
3) Corridor Study that brings in a lot of things such as roundabouts, consideration of
the alignment of the road, etc
4) Capital Needs and Maintenance Shift
Grigg made a motion that the Transportation Board supports the MOU to transfer
control to CDOT of Carpenter Road provided that it faithfully represents Fort Collins
Transportation Planning as expressed through corridor studies (concepts like
roundabouts, looking at potentially realignment, Prospect Streetscape), incorporates
the design standards at least as good as Fort Collins, exercises responsible
environmental stewardship in roadway construction and operation, and protects Fort
Collins from exposure to excessive Capital and Operating costs. There was a second
Discussion:
Ricord: A lot of this information was handed out tonight. Would it not have been
possible to include it in the packets?
Jackson: Had it been possible, I would have.
Ricord.• I would submit that in the future when we have a discussion of this
magnitude that the information be in the packet if at all possible because
to really give this any kind of credence tonight during the discussion to
look through all this was unrealistic. Secondly, I would like to have seen
the memos from both the Natural Resources Advisory Board and Planning
and Zoning.
Jackson: I don't think they've prepared them yet. They were going to communicate
directly with Council, not us.
Ricord: But wouldn't it have been possible for us to see those?
Jackson: I'm certain that it was possible, but I'm not certain that they had it done in
time that you would have something to react to tonight. I note your
concern on the inserts. I try and get complete information to you as timely
as possible, but sometimes it isn't possible.
Chair Henderson called the question and the motion carried by a majority vote, 5 —1
with Ricord opposed
APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes
Transportation Board
May 19, 2004
Page 6 of 9
Chair Henderson: I had some concerns too with the speed with which this is moving and
a lot of it does have to do with getting a lot of information at the very end. I talked to
Randy Fisher about this a couple nights ago and I know that some of the specific Natural
Resources Board concerns had to do with the NEPA process and around that $ 1OM had
been invested in the Duck Lake area for environmental projects and that sort of thing and
just concerns that that doesn't get lost in the process if we wind up with a 6-lane road and
the proper mitigation isn't done.
In general I think there is a lot of nervousness on people's part because this is such an
environmentally sensitive area and I think if the MOU reflects the points that Tim
brought up, it will certainly go a long way towards doing that, but we need to be careful
to make sure that we do communicate that to people and to make sure that in crafting the
MOU that it really addresses the nervousness and concerns of people around the
environmental sensitivity.
Mark Jackson stated that it has indeed been an aggressive schedule and that staff is trying
to incorporate what they are hearing from the different boards as far as their issues and
concerns including those things heard from Mr. Fisher and the Natural Resources Board
and have tried to build clauses into the draft MOU that we're working on.
The NEPA process is obviously very rigorous, but people have such an investment in the
environment along this corridor already and there is so much concern about lack of
control that a lot of that is being heard.
Thomas: Can someone clarify how the motion will translate into action.
Chair Henderson: This gets written up automatically in the minutes and there will be a
letter that will be sent.
Thomas: Considering that everyone has a sensitivity in making sure that the points
Johnson brought up are tightly crafted, it would be a good idea to have a letter review
process.
Chair Henderson: I'm perfectly okay with doing that.
It was agreed that the letter could take a couple of weeks to draft and that Jackson will
verbally update Council on what the board decided tonight when he meets with them on
Tuesday. Chair Henderson stated that he could also send an email to Council letting
them know that the board did approve this, but are also very concerned about the wording
of the letter and would like some time to finalize it and it won't be there until next week.
It was also agreed that if a member can attend the meeting it would be beneficial as well.
Jackson and Gabel thanked the board for their time and their support.
APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes
Transportation Board
May 19, 2004
Page 7 of 9
At this time, 8 p.m., Board Member Grigg had to leave, so a quorum is not
present from this point on.
17. DISCUSSION ITEMS I
a. OVERVIEW OF DRAFT 2030 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN—M. Joy
Joy gave a PowerPoint presentation that included the following highlights:
• MPO Responsibilities
- Long range Transportation Plans
- Transportation Improvement Programs
- Conformity Determinations
- Grassroots Input
• Purpose of Regional Transportation Plan
- Create an inclusive and comprehensive transportation plan for the
region
- A one -stop plan that captures all the federal and state transportation
dollars projected to be spent within the NFRMPO
- Implement a systematic, regional process to create a prioritized and
coordinated project list for the state plan
- Follow Federal procedures to update on a 3-year cycle
• 2025 Regional Transportation Plan
- Listed over 400 projects
Over $4Billion in total projects
• NFRMPO's Responsibilities for the RTP
- Creates a unified plan
- Facilitate a process to allow for more local input
- Coordinate the planning process (local, region, and CDOT, USDOT)
- Identify Transportation Needs
- Identify Air Quality Impacts
- Give Colorado Transportation Commission the priorities for NFR
region
Update on a 3-year timeframe
General RTP Steps
- Visions, Goals and Key Strategies
- Inventory of Existing Transportation System
- Socio-Economic and Demographic Profile
- 2030 Travel Demand Modeling and Mobility Demand Analysis
- Corridor Visioning
- Project Identification
- Preferred Plan — Project List
- Draft Plan
Public Input
Final Plan
APPROVED Reguiar Meeting Minutes
Transportation Board
May 19, 2004
• Key Strategies
• Corridor Visioning
• Project Selection Process
• Six Evaluation Criteria
- System Continuity
- Congestion Mitigation
- Safety Enhancement
- Multi -modal Enhancement
- Timely Implementation
- Land Use Compatibility
• Revenue Sources
• DRAFT Preferred Plan
Page 8 of 9
b. PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM - R Richter
Due to the lateness of the hour, there was consensus of the group to have this item back
on the agenda in June. Chair Henderson thanked Richter for waiting patiently for so
long.
8. REPORTS
a. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
Thomas: Dial -A -Ride Committee. For some time they've been talking about expanding
their mission from just DAR to include transit in terms of accessibility.
They're looking at a proposed Mission Statement, which Thomas read to the
remaining four board members and asked for feedback on.
Henderson: Sneed Humes. I was just going to pass around this article on speed
humps that I collected in my travels over the last month and a half. It's
actually a great thing and at the end they make this little comment that it's a
cost effective alternative to roundabouts in terms of safety.
b. STAFF REPORTS
Phillips: Timberline. This was actually Johnson's idea. There have been a number of
Council members that have questions about the Timberline/Prospect interim
project and how it's funded and what it means and so on. So what we've done
is work with the new Engineering consultant that's been chosen to do the
engineering for this project and on this display, we've tried to show the Street
Oversizing portion in yellow, the green is the City Capital portion, the red is
the developer's local street portion and blue is the voluntary portion. The top
project is the interim project and the bottom one shows the ultimate project.
Phillips went through and explained the display in more detail. The Board
members expressed how much they liked the display.
Bachman: Next enda:
■ Pavement Management Report — FIRST on agenda!
APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes
Transportation Board
May 19, 2004
Page 9 of 9
19. OTHER BUSINESS I
�10 ADJOURN
Chair Henderson adjourned the meeting at 9:13 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cynthia Cass
Executive Administrative Assistant
City of Fort Collins — Transportation Services