Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 03/15/2000E Draft minutes to be approved by the Transportation Board at their April 19, 2000 meeting. REGULAR MEETING MINUTES of the TRANSPORTATION BOARD March 15, 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 Ray Moe Chris Ricord Brent Thordarson Heather Trantham Mary Warring Steve Yeldell CITY STAFF IN ATTENDANCE: Eric Bracke Susanne Durkin Gary Diede Randy Hensley Mark Jackson Cam McNair Ron Phillips Kathleen Reavis Cynthia Scott GUESTS IN ATTENDANCE: Tess Jones - CDOT Everitt Bacon - Consultant Ray Moe briefly presented the Mulberry/Lemay computerized roundabout simulation. Bracke stated that the simulation can also be accessed via the City's web page, which is: mrww.cityaet.ci.fort-collins.co.us Click on Transportation, then Traffic Operations, then roundabout. Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. Transportation Board DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes March 15, 2000 1. PUBLIC COMMENT None Page 2 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There was a motion and a second to approve the February 16, 2000 Transportation Board meeting minutes as presented On page 3, #6 a) Board Member Reports. Thordarson requested that the last line be reworded to "between the cities and the county. " The motion then carried by a unanimous vote. 3. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT None 4. ACTION ITEMS a) MASON STREET TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR— Durkin Durkin said that tonight's expectations are for the Board to review and recommend a transit option for the Mason Street Transportation Corridor. These options have been presented to the Planning & Zoning Board and the Council Growth Management Committee, who both supported staffs recommendation. Next, there will be three open houses: Coldwell Banker, Lincoln Center and Foothills Fashion Mall. The item goes before the Air Quality Advisory Board on March 281" and City Council will make a final decision on April 4. Moe gave a presentation, which covered the three transit options: #1 Bike/Ped + Dedicated Busway #2 Bike/Ped + Rail #3 Bike/Ped + Elevated Transit Other highlights included in the presentation were drawings or pictures of how the following might look: • Drake Corridor Northwest ■ Drake northbound ■ Mason Downtown ■ Drake Northbound • Drake Plan View • Troutman Moe explained the Lead Team's Evaluation Results and all 14 criterions used. Upon conclusion of the presentation, Durkin asked if the Board would support the recommendation of the Lead Team, which is Option #1: Dedicated Busway (at - grade). Chair Johnson asked for board member's comments. Transportation Board • • DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes March 15, 2000 Page 3 BOARD COMMENTS/QUESTIONS: Yeldell: In terms of the bike/ped impact, is there a difference between the three options? Durkin: We didn't do that analysis, but I don't think so because bikes can be put on buses and rail, so there shouldn't be any difference. Ricord: I like the soft surface ped idea and the under -grade bicycle crossings. Would like to see a property value enhancement assessment done for the affected property owners. Is there a difference in reliability among the modes? Moe: That was discussed during the Transportation Alternatives Feasibility Study and it was determined that rail is more dependable in bad weather, but if it breaks down, it may block traffic for long periods of time. A bus on the other hand, is smaller and can be moved or you can drive around it if it breaks down. Gould: Would be a good idea to look at pros and cons of rubber tired electric buses. Durkin: After a transit mode is selected, the Team will look at those types of options. We know it has to be snazzy and enticing for people to embrace it. Thordarson: Maybe you could show air quality improvements on the corridor in terms of buses starting/stopping as they do on College Avenue now, versus the easy flowing way they should on the Mason corridor. Johnson: 1. I like the separated bike/ped way. 2. I'm not sure that a meandering bike trail is a good idea. I would suggest that it be more functional — keep it subtle. 3. The feeder link system needs to work well. 4. Happy to hear that the buses will be able to flow through the corridor thanks to the set-up in the signal system. There was a motion that the Mason Street Transportation Corridor Lead Team move forward with the at -grade bus option and consider designs for future rail options. There was a second and the motion carried unanimously. b) ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN — Reavis Reavis said that the last update given to the board was in November 1999. Since then, there have been numerous open house events, meetings with property/business owners, correspondence with the trucking industry and work sessions with the City's Planning & Zoning Board and the Larimer County Commissioners. Reavis stated that she would present the final draft of the Access Management Plan for North College Avenue (US287), Jefferson Street/Riverside Street (SH14), and Mulberry Street (SH14) to the Board this evening. She requested that after the Board reviews the project, they make a formal recommendation to City Council in support of this project, including support for the Master Street Plan amendments associated with the Access Management Plan. Transportation Board DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes March 15, 2000 Page 4 The presentation covered many items, but the following are important highlights: ■ Goal - Create a long-range Access Management Plan for these corridors that works for business and property owners, the City of Fort Collins, CDOT, and Larimer County. - Safe and equitable access to all properties. - A plan that can be implemented over time, working toward a common vision for each corridor. When Will Access Be Modified, and Who Will Pay? - CDOT, Larimer County, or the City may initiate improvements to reduce the accident potential in hazardous locations, and/or when traffic increases such that safety concerns become evident (public funds). - When a single or a combination of several parcels redevelop or change use (combination of public and private funds). - Property owners may initiate improvements to create a safer and more attractive street frontage by defining, eliminating or sharing driveways and installing landscaping and sidewalks (private funds). • Cost Estimates - It is estimated that all of the improvements in the AMP could be implemented for approximately $53,091,000 (in year 2000 dollars). - This cost estimate is for construction costs only and does not include right-of-way acquisition or displacement/relocation costs. • Segment 1: North College Avenue (US 287) between SH1 & Jefferson - Access issues include: Lack of defined access; offset signalized intersections; no formal sidewalk or parkway; and unsafe left turns. - There is a short-term and a long-range access and circulation plan. • Segment 2: Jefferson/Riverside between N. College & Mulberry - Access issues include: Undefined, open access along property; unsafe parking, poor site distance; insufficient tum-lanes; and difficult, unsafe left -turns from angled intersections. - There is a long-range access and circulation plan. • Segment 3: Mulberry/SH 14 between Riverside and 1-25 - Access issues include: Insufficient turn lane storage; unsafe turn lane conditions onto SH 14; uncontrolled access to SH 14; and proximity of frontage road intersections with SH 14. - There is a long-range access and circulation plan. ■ Final Steps: - Final presentations - Finalize three access control plans and intergovernmental agreements - IGAs to include an amendment process requiring agreement among all three agencies and updates at least every three years. - Amend Master Street Plan to reflect Access Management Plan. Transportation Board • DRAFT Regular Meeting Minu March 15, 2000 Page 5 Mark Jackson then went over the three proposed Master Street Plan amendments that are associated with the recommended improvements along the North College Avenue (US 287) and Mulberry Street (SH14) corridors. The amendments are: 1. Eliminate the Offset "T' Intersections at Hickory and Conifer Streets by Realigning Conifer Street. 2. Addition of Parallel Circulation Roads east and west of North College Avenue. 3. Extension of Greenfields Court North of SH 14 (Mulberry) BOARD COMMENTS/QUESTIONS: Thordason: How many mobile homes would have to be displaced to do amendment #2? Reavis: The amendments will only occur when the area is redeveloped — no one will have to lose their home. Please keep in mind also that these are conceptual alignments at this point, not engineered alignments. Warring: How closely will the area in amendment #1 be watched for safety? Isn't there something that could be done in the interim to improve safety? Reavis: We have looked at closing the south access to Ken's Muffler. Tess Jones: We could probably do some changes in the striping there and also put signs up for clarification. Gould: It might be a good idea to say where the positive pedestrian impacts might occur when doing your presentation. Ricord: I agree with Dan. It would also help to include pedestrian and bicycle improvements in the text. Pedestrians are mentioned once and there is no mention of bikes at all. There was a motion and a second to approve the overall Access Management Plan along with the three amendments to Master Street Plan. The motion carried by a unanimous vote. 5. DISCUSSION ITEMS a) TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT STATEMENT — Gould, Ricord, Warring Chair Johnson thanked the sub -committee (Gould, Ricord and Warring) for their work in creating the preliminary draft statement included in the Board's packets. Gould said that the bottom line is that the Board needs to make a case that lack of enforcement is a major problem and that there is a need to invest more funds into enforcement. He suggested that the Board send a strongly worded letter to the Council. Chair Johnson stated that the specific recommendation needs to be generic at this point. The first step is to raise the profile of this to the Council. Transportation Board DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes March 15, 2000 Page 6 After a discussion, it was agreed that the sub -committee will meet again to draft two letters to the Council. One will be about traffic and the other about trucks. They will get the letters to staff for inclusion in the next Board packets and will be listed as an action item on the agenda. Trantham noted that there needs to be a way to quantify accident rates because some areas don't have a high accident rate in the database, but they do need some attention to improve safety regardless. 6. REPORTS a) Board Member Reports Henderson: Overland Trail - Master Street Plan. Concerned that there are still inaccuracies on the map. With S. Taft Hill Road issues heading to the forefront, it would be a good idea to have the MSP as accurate as possible before it starts. Staff: Jackson will research the discrepancies between the verbiage of the council meeting in approximately March 1997 and the current map. Thordarson: Roundabout F�tperience. Had the opportunity to drive the roundabout at 120"' and 1-76, which was okay. Unsafe Bike Rider. Observed a bicyclist traveling at night without any lights — was obviously hard to see him. Perhaps new roadways, as they are built, could have better lighting. Warring: LUTRAQ. Asked about an upcoming LUTRAQ meeting. Yeldell and Trantham plan to attend, but haven't received any information to date. Hensley said will contact Woodruff from Natural Resources again. Warring asked that the members representing this board talk about reducing car trips at the LUTRAQ meeting. Johnson: Distributed Handouts: 1. Mulberry/Lemay Roundabout letter to Council. 2. Article entitled, "Owl Canyon Neighbors Unite to Oppose Northern Bypass." 3. Article entitled, "Aurora considering Circular Interchange." Kramer: Roundabouts. Researched roundabouts on the Internet. Found that after 5,000 vehicles, it starts to break down — generally speaking. Noted that according to the simulation shown at the beginning of this meeting, there is an allowance for 7,000 but the lights have been timed accordingly to crate gaps for entry. Ricord: Coloradoan Article. Distributed copies of an article from the Coloradoan entitled, "Debate on Roundabout Going Round and Round" and pointed out a quote from a trucker stating that a roundabout is going to put all the truck traffic down Vine Drive and jokingly added that it's a major truck route now. Transportation Board • • DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes March 15, 2000 Page 7 b) Hensley: Distributed handouts: 1. Questions/answers from Chief Harrison from last month's meeting. 2. Public Meeting Calendar. (The Board would like staff to create a schedule of transportation related meetings and distribute them on a regular basis.) 3. 1-25 Corridor meeting/press release. j.Liaison. Kay Rios with Colorado State University has asked Toni Lueck to be included on the Board's mailing list as a Dial -A -Ride Committee Liaison. She may attend future board meetings on behalf of that committee. 7. NEXT AGENDA - Transit Development Plan/Strategic Plan — J. Daggett - ACTION - Truck Bypass Update — M. Jackson - INFORMATIONAL - Mason/McClelland Study Results - S. Durkin — INFORMATIONAL - Traffic Enforcement/Safety-Letter to Council - Sub -committee - ACTION - Pedestrian Plan (15 min or wait until May) — Reavis — INFORMATIONAL - Roundabout (15 min or FYI in packets) — Bracke - INFORMATIONAL OTHER BUSINESS There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m. Cynthia L. Scott Executive Administrative Assistant