Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 04/19/1995Draft Minutes to be approved by the Board at the May 17, 1995 meeting. TRANSPORTATION BOARD MEETING MINUTES APRIL 19, 1995 5:50 - 7:50 FOR REFERENCE: Chair -- Colin Gerety (970) 546-0460 Vice Chair -- Paul Valentine 493-0100 Council Liaison -- Will Smith 223-0425 Staff Liaison -- Rick Ensdorff 221-6608 Secretary -- Cindy Scott 221-6608 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Alan Beatty, Mark Egeland, Sara Frazier, Colin Gerety, Dolores Highfield, Elizabeth Hudetz, Ray Moe, Paul Perlmutter, and Paul Valentine. STAFF/COUNCIL/GUESTS PRESENT: Rick Ensdorff, Cindy Scott, Jan Meisel, Craig Foreman, Tom Frazier, and Ron Phillips. AGENDA: Call to Order Approval of Minutes A. PUBLIC COMMENT B. ACTION ITEMS C. DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. Parks and Recreation Master Plan Update 2. One-way Couplet Update 3. Board Member's Comments 4. Update From Staff 5. Summary/Next Agenda 6. Other Business Chair Gerety called the meeting to order at 5:50 p.m. There was a motion, a second and a unanimous vote to accept the March 15, 1995 Transportation Board meeting minutes as presented. A. PUBLIC COMMENT Alan Beatty said that he invited a couple of women from CSU who were at the advisory board meeting for public transit to come tonight. They are student interns in social work activity who are worried about the transit access to the new senior center. Apparently no one with the transit group is giving them good, clean answers. He asked that someone get in touch with them to give the information they need. Ensdorff said that this issue has come up and that the Parks and Recreation group has had several meetings with the public. Maybe it's a situation where they are asking the wrong people. He asked that Beatty give him their names and he will have the right folks at Parks and Recreation get in touch with them. B. ACTION ITEMS None C.1. PARKS AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN UPDATE Jan Meisel gave an overview of the plan history and explained that recently staff sent out a survey to find out on a broad spectrum what the people in this community do in terms of parks & recreation. She explained that there is a master plan in place, this is not creating a new one. This is simply an update of the plan that was adopted in 1998 as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. She said that the intent of tonight's meeting is to get feedback from this board to find out if Parks &Recreation staff have addressed their concerns in regards to access to the system and transportation needs. This is going before five other boards and all comments will be recorded. She said that Parks & Recreation staff can either come back to the board formally or informally, but ultimately, they will need a letter from this Board stating that they either agree or disagree, as is or with modifications. Late summer is the tentative council "date". She then went over the "meat" of the update to the plan (all of which is included in the information that was sent in the agenda packets). Hudetz asked if anything is being done for rollerbladers. Foreman said that in the future, the trails will perhaps be widened to accommodate all the users. Highfield said that the Boulder trails are unique in that they have wider paved trails and a dirt trail that winds and widens to accommodate heavy usage. Egeland said the wider the better and that facilities are important, but one of the main things that is missing is education and enforcement on the trails. Foreman said that some PR will be included in the plan. Beatty suggested that a good start would be to put up signs that say, "Please be courteous to other users of this trail". Valentine said that he heard that Ft. Collins ranks fourth in recreation systems in cities of comparable sizes. Meisel asked the Board how they would like to proceed with another meeting --as a full work session where the whole can be seen and include the funding or just present the draft if it 2 hasn't changed dramatically. She further stated that Parks & Recreation staff want to know if the Transportation Board feels the plan is in conformance with their goals and policies. Perlmutter said that after hearing Meisel's presentation, which was good, that there are a number of issues related to alternate modes of transportation, but one of the main issues will be funding. Hudetz asked which is more important --the acquisition of land or the development of it and as far as funding goes, can they be separated? Foreman responded that Choices '95 had some money for the acquisition of Southridge Park, but typically the bigger parks are bought and then sit until the city is ready to build on it. He said that the last three years, acquisition was a higher priority because they had to follow Poudre R-1 around to the new schools where parks were placed nearby. Gerety said that to wrap it up, there should be another meeting to go over the whole, but in the interim the Board could formulate individual questions for discussion. Foreman said that staff will be receiving the first draft of the document and that through staff, the Transportation Board can review it and then get together for another meeting. C.2. ONE-WAY COUPLET UPDATE Ensdorff distributed a hand-out and said that there will be more information in May. He then went over the hand-out page by page. He said that when this was discussed previously, there was talk about a public comment survey. He wanted to check with the Board on this --should it be added and if so, when? The one-way couples are not doing what they were originally intended to do, but they were not built as originally intended. Gerety said that he believes that changing them back would have nothing to do with traffic or safety, it would have to do with the cost/benefits of switching for other economic reasons. He said we have to look at what are the overall impacts in terms of the cost/benefit analysis. Issues like safety are incredibly important. Mr. Lemberg said that there are too many islands on College Avenue, supposedly put in for geometric improvements that actually make getting off College more difficult. He said that the traffic light on Laurel/Howes is impossible. The red on Laurel is probably longer than the red on Howes. The signal progression is not timed and the traffic people have said over and over that it is, but it isn't. A computer scientist at CSU could probably find somebody to do studies for the city to find ways to time the lights better - has this ever been done and if it hasn't, it should be. He further stated that it is important to analyze what happened in the past and that is that the couplets were put in without adequate public input. Nobody he knows was ever contacted or heard about the couplet. He said that there needs to be some town meetings, let people raise their concerns, both pro and con. Put questionnaires in all of the businesses affected and see what their feelings are on the issue. The one -ways here are not needed. Hudetz said that changing -it back would make the railroad more confusing. Moe said that he agrees with Gerety, that the issues are non -traffic related. Frazier said that she would like to see the two one-way streets become multi -modal avenues. You've already got the lanes for the train, have one lane for cars and a lane for bicyclists, open it upl Valentine said that the diagonal parking on Mason across from the courthouse needs to be removed as a safety measure. He would also like to see more alternative modes utilized on the one -ways if they stay. Ensdorff said that he will talk to others and see if we can identify some of the economic issues and bring it back to the Board as soon as possible. He asked when the Board wants to go out with public comment. Gerety feels it is too early to ask for public input and Valentine agreed. Ensdorff suggested that he get more information together, flesh it out, and also bring back ideas for public process for discussion. The next version will show Riverside. C.3. BOARD MEMBER'S COMMENTS Valentine reported that the draft Bike Plan should be ready next Wednesday. C.4. UPDATE FROM STAFF Ensdorff passed out the Travel Mode Special Report to all the board members for their information. Pages of interest were 1-14, 1-20, 2-7 and 2-9. C.S. NEXT AGENDA - Bike Plan - (At some point in the near future, Gerety would like to see information on taxes/budget scenarios.) - One-way Couplet Information C.6. OTHER BUSINESS There being no other business, the meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. lLri� D�f • Baled Cindy CjScott, Secretary