HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 06/21/2000Draft minutes to be approved by the Transportation Board at their July 19, 2000 meeting.
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES of the
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
June 21, 2000 5:45 p.m.
City of Fort Collins — City Hall West
300 LaPorte Avenue
FOR REFERENCE:
Chair:
Tim Johnson................416-0821
Vice Chair:
Chris Ricord.................472-8769
Staff Liaison:
Randy Hensley.............416-2058
Admin Support:
Cynthia Scott ...............224-6058
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
Dan Gould
Bruce Henderson
Tim Johnson
Tom Kramer
Brad Miller
Ray Moe
Chris Ricord
Brent Thordarson (late)
Heather Trantham (late)
Mary Warring
Steve Yeldell
CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE:
John Daggett
Linda Dowlen
Susanne Durkin
Tom Frazier
Randy Hensley
Cam McNair
Ron Phillips
Cynthia Scott
Marlys Sittner
ABSENT:
GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE:
Kathryn Johnson — D-A-R Committee
Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 5:53 p.m. At Scott's request, Chair Johnson
explained that the recordings of the last few meetings have been poor. He asked that members
speak louder and clearly to help Scott obtain a better recording.
Transportation Board
DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21.2000 Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
There was a motion and a second to approve the May 17, 2000 Transportation Board
meeting minutes as presented. Discussion: Warring stated that the Traffic
Enforcement Safety statement discussion beginning on page 2 does not adequately
reflect the gist of the discussion. She contacted Scott and made arrangements to go to
the Transportation Services office to listen to the recording of that portion of the
meeting in hopes of capturing the discussion that she remembered Unfortunately, she
felt that the recording was very poor and of no use. There being no other discussion
about the minutes, Chair Johnson called the vote. The minutes were unanimously
approved as presented
For clarification, Hensley stated that Scott is not expected to produce verbatim style
minutes and that she is has been researching options in purchasing a new recording
system and is authorized to purchase a new system when the appropriate one is chosen.
3. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT
None
4. DISCUSSION ITEMS
a) TRANSFORT ROUTE CHANGES — M. Sittner
Marlys Sittner, Transfort Operations Manager, went over all changes route by route.
The changes are to take effect July 1, 2000. Comments from board members are as
follows:
Route 1 — Ricord said that most people attend classes at Front Range Community
College after 6 p.m. He feels they should be accommodated if possible.
Route 4 — Miller suggested eliminating a bus stop in order to help the bus time wise.
Route 14 — Warring asked if the Cloverleaf Mobile Home Park could be
accommodated and Sittner said that staff did look at that, but it wasn't feasible.
General comments:
Miller: Recalled that at a recent meeting, there was a discussion about broader
coverage versus a grid system. He inquired how this relates to that discussion.
Sittner said that the route changes presented today are not related to that. These
changes were done to fine-tune the existing system.
Chair Johnson: Expressed that the changes are a great improvement. He also
commented that it would be good idea if future editions of the schedule were to show
the start and end points as larger symbols to make them more easily seen.
Tom Frazier said that the schedule is also available in large print, Braille, and
Spanish.
Transportation Board
DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21, 2000 Page 3
b) MASON ST TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR UPDATE — S. Durkin
Durkin reported that there was an excellent turnout at the last work session held
at the Lincoln Center.
Moe displayed the corridor in seven segments. He talked about design
issues/changes segment by segment.
Public Outreach: There will be another public open house at Foothills Fashion
Mall on August 26. The committee will put out another newsletter, more video,
and utilize 30-second spots on TV. The committee realizes that more intense
coverage needs to be done for those who are most affected, therefore, people
will be going door-to-door to invite people to a special focus group meeting just
for their specific neighborhood area. Owners of Markely Motors, Fossil Creek
Nursery, the ditch company, and others are being contacted on a one-on-one
basis and all appropriate boards and commissions will be presented with project
updates.
Durkin then closed with an invitation for comments on the approach the
committee is taking.
Kramer: Why are you negotiating just south of Prospect? That's real
narrow through there. RM: We are within the R-O-W at that location on the
eastside of the tracks, and yes, it is narrow. That shopping center is one of the
businesses that we want to spend time with and show them the dimensions.
Chair Johnson: Is it an option to re -look at the east/west movement on
Drake Road? I know you went through some of the negatives earlier in your
update, but I still think it's doable and would have a major impact on the west
side traffic. SD: Would you like us to do more engineering on Dan's (Gould)
idea? TJ: Yes, please. There needs to be a major change in east/west traffic
movement as it is pretty limited and I think this would also be an added bonus to
sell with the whole package to the community.
Thordarson: I talked to Ron Rapinski at the open house and he said that the
railroad might be interested in moving that track up a foot or two.
c) TRANSPORTATION FUNDING ISSUES - Hensley
Hensley explained a year ago in April, a transportation tax initiative was brought
forth that the voter's did not approve. That left a variety of unfunded
transportation needs. Next Tuesday night, at the Council Study Session, they
are to set some policies about the direction that staff should take in the future to
address those unfunded needs.
Hensley distributed the same background material that the City Council Finance
Committee was given — "Updated Snapshot of Annual Transportation Needs."
He also explained the Pavement Management graph, noting that it is the top
priority.
Transportation Board
DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21, 2000 Page 4
He then explained the various options that will be presented to Council at their
meeting on Tuesday. Hensley asked Board members to monitor the Study
Session and said that depending on the outcome, the Board may want to
develop a recommendation.
Chair Johnson stressed that the General Fund MUST pay for more basic needs.
5. ACTION ITEMS
a) CMAQ PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS — J. Daggett
Daggett gave a Power Point presentation on the Congestion Mitigation & Air
Quality fund project selection process.
These funds are awarded to Colorado non -attainment areas since the ISTEA
legislation was enacted in 1991. CMAQ was reauthorized with TEA-21 in 1996.
The North Front Range contains only one non -attainment area - an area
bordered approximately by the urban growth area of the city of Fort Collins.
In the beginning, the amount of CMAQ funds reaching northern Colorado was
quite small. With the advent of TEA-21 in 1996 however, those amounts have
increased each year and are now seen by the State Transportation Commission
and the Federal Highway Administration as substantial and in need of a more
formal project selection process.
The greater Fort Collins area will be allocated an average of $1.2 M a year over
the next three years in CMAQ funds. Those funds can be expended in the non -
attainment area for a variety of transit, TDM, bicycle, pedestrian, and roadway
projects for capital, operating, marketing and planning purposes. These funds
must be expended in the non -attainment area or for projects that will show air
quality benefits in the non -attainment area.
A CMAQ steering committee was established to help the MPO and City staff
develop a project selection process that: meets Federal regulations; meets the
needs of the City of Fort Collins; selects projects in an objective manner; selects
projects with air quality benefits; accommodates VMT reduction, tailpipe emission
reduction and Qualitative Projects; and includes all parties that could potentially
submit proposals. The Committee recommends that projects be grouped into
three categories: 1) Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT) projects, 2) Tailpipe Emission
Reduction Projects, and 3) Qualitative Projects.
VMT reduction projects primarily function to reduce vehicle miles of travel.
Examples include vanpool, carpool, transit, bikeway and pedestrian
improvements in either service or infrastructure.
Tailpipe Emission Reduction Projects primarily reduce tailpipe emissions.
Examples include inspection/maintenance programs, signal timing, and
intersection improvements.
Transportation Board
DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21, 2000 Page 5
Qualitative Projects are the most difficult to define. This type includes programs
or projects that don't fit clearly into the previous two, but have air quality benefits
that can be defined. Examples include marketing, educational, planning, and
other programs targeted at behavioral change.
The Steering Committee recommends establishing two independent committees:
1) an Allocation Committee and 2) an Evaluation Committee.
The Allocation Committee's sole purpose is to make a policy recommendation
the MPO Council on the amount of CMAQ funds to be allocated to each of the
three project categories listed above over the three year period: 2001-2003.
The purpose of the Evaluation Committee is to score projects within each of the
three project categories and provide the MPO Council with a recommended list of
projects to be funded. This committee would most likely produce most of the
projects competing for CMAQ funds.
Both committees would report independently, but directly to the MPO Council.
The Evaluation Committee would provide information and a constrained list of
recommended projects to the Technical Advisory Committee JAC) for reference
only.
There are two primary categories of criteria: 1) the Air Quality Benefit and 2)
Other Benefits.
Daggett explained the details on each of the two benefits above, as well as
criteria weighting and scoring.
The Project Selection Process is as follows:
1. Call for Projects - The MPO staff will issue a formal call for projects. Projects
are due in 60 days.
2. Project Eligibility Screening — MPO staff to determine CMAQ eligibility will
review all projects.
3. Project Scoring — the Evaluation Committee will score all eligible projects.
4. Project List — A constrained project list will be prepared.
5. MPO Council Approval — The constrained project list will be forwarded for
MPO approval and inclusion in the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP)
Upon conclusion of the presentation, Daggett repeated that he is asking the
Transportation Board to recommend adoption of the proposed process to the
MPO Council. The immediate next step is that the MPO Council acts on the
proposed process at their meeting on July 6. Then the Allocation Committee
recommends CMAQ allocations for three categories of projects to the MPO.
When questioned about the public process by Warring, he stated that the call for
projects is the public process in his opinion.
Hensley agreed with Daggett's statement adding that that is where the public
process starts. He explained that all 14 people on the Evaluation Committee
have their own constituencies, both public and private and it is up to all of those
members to solicit projects from all of the input groups, of which the
Transportation Board
DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21. 2000 Page 6
Transportation Board would be one. He stated that there is also a second place
for public comment, which is when the results of the Evaluation Committee are
forwarded to the North Front Range Council. During their meeting, before the
process is approved, there is time for public comment.
Warring stressed that it is very important the Fort Collins community be able to
comment on the projects. Since the North Front Range Council alternates their
meeting locations to accommodate the various entities that are represented, she
suggested that the particular Council meeting where the list of projects is
discussed should be held in Fort Collins. It should be in an open house format
so the public is sure to have an opportunity to have input.
Hensley said that having that type of an open house would give the public an
unreasonable expectation that the projects would or could be re -ranked, when in
fact, the State and Federal guidelines say that the projects with the highest air
quality benefit is a priority. The selection process is truly is a quantitative
process — there are formulas behind all of the activities so each (project) can be
measured quantitatively and ranked against each other purely from an air quality
point -of -view.
Phillips added that what Warring is requesting is met in the Regional Planning
process because one of the requirements is that these projects be projects in the
Regional Transportation Plan. There is an extensive public process as the
Regional Plan is developed and then CMAQ projects are simply extracted from
the Regional Plan.
Warring asked if it is possible to request that the MPO Council meeting be held in
Fort Collins. Phillips said that he would have to talk to the Council about that.
There was more discussion covering topics such as normalizing, how it came to
be that there is more CMAQ funds available today, and how project benefits over
time were considered in the equation.
There was a motion to recommend adoption of the CMAQ project selection
process to the MPO Council. There was a second and the motion carried
unanimously.
Warring made a motion to recommend that the MPO Council meeting,
where Final approval of the project list will take place, be held in Fort
Collins. There was a second and the motion carried unanimously.
Durkin publicly recognized Daggett and his team who worked on the process,
thanking them for all the hard work that has gone into this effort.
b) TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENTISAFETY CAMPAIGN — Sub -committee
Warring distributed the "Preliminary Draft of Traffic Enforcement Issues for
Council Consideration." She apologized for not sending this draft out ahead of
time via e-mail as originally intended.
Transportation Board
DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21, 2000 Page 7
Each change from the last iteration was explained by Warring. Chair Johnson
asked the board members for comments. There was consensus that the
essence is contained in the draft. Chair Johnson asked that Warring e-mail it to
everyone and if they think of anything specific they would like to see in it, they
can let her know. He also suggested that one or two members sit down with
Chief Harrison and briefly discuss the draft with him. Chair Johnson will set this
up.
Board members thanked Warring for her hard work and for producing an
excellent document.
6. REPORTS
a) Board Member Reports
Trantham: Kids on Bikes. Heard on National Public Radio that the number of
kids riding bikes as a main activity is declining due to safety
reasons. Parents don't want their kids to ride as it isn't safe!
Makes one wonder what the next generation is going to be like.
Warring: Roundabout. What are the costs? Also, who dictates what
"failure" is in terms of the City promising to replace it if it does?
RH: We have those figures and can get an answer to you on the
other question.
Gould: Bicycle Safety Panel. There was a bicycle injury/safety panel
sponsored by the City and CSU. Some mapping where bicycle
accidents were happening has been done. During the panel
discussion, I noticed cynicism on the part of the Mayor and
Officer... when law enforcement as it relates to bicycles was
brought up.
Bike/Pedestrian Underpass. Bike/Pedestrian underpasses are
critical issues for the Mason Street Transportation Corridor. It was
amazing to see the one done over a single weekend on College
Avenue near Pitkin.
Thordarson: Bike Path. Next month there will be another choice on how to get
to DIA. A bike path is going to be constructed.
Electric Bikes. These have been in the press lately. Next time I'll
bring some materials on it. Hensley said that the City has one and
anyone is welcome to take a test ride on it.
Mason &Howes. I've talked to several people about the idea of
Mason & Howes going back to two-way streets again. So far,
everyone seems to like the idea.
Transportation Board
DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes
June 21, 2000 Page 8
Miller: S. Taft Hill Meetina. At the last meeting, Jerry Mead talked about
the S. Taft Hill Widening project. I was contacted by their group
and invited to their homeowner's meeting last Tuesday, which
lasted about 2 A hours. I won't be here next month, but I have
several pages of hand-outs and notes I took. I'll make sure that I'll
send these out before the meeting. I urge you to really listen to
these folks. One of the major complaints they have about things
is that the City, in their view, isn't listening to them. They feel that
they are trying to work with the City, but the City isn't
reciprocating.
Johnson: Mean Streets 2000 Report. Report from the Denver Post that
rated the streets in different cities on how mean they were for
pedestrians and cyclists!
b) Staff Reports
Hensley: Roles of Boards and Commissions. An updated document from
the City Clerk's office was distributed to all members for their
information.
NEXT AGENDA
- S. Taft Hill Widening Project — McNair & Lang
- Transportation Maintenance Fund Issues Update — Hensley
- Mason Street Transportation Corridor - Durkin
- Transportation Planning Items (x 2?) if needed
- Traffic Enforcement/Safety Update
- CMAQ Update — Hensley
- Talk about information on the intergovernmental agreement on the
roundabout in staff reports as an FYI.
OTHER BUSINESS
There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Cynthia L. Scott
Executive Administrative Assistant