Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 12/04/1996CITY OF FORT COLLINS TRANSPORTATION BOARD Meeting Minutes December 4, 1996 Paul Valentine, Chair Paul Perlmutter, Vice Chair Will Smith, City Council Liaison Tom Frazier, Staff Liaison The meeting of the Transportation Board began at 5:30 p.m. at the CIC Room, 300 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board Members present included: Paul Valentine, Paul Perlmutter, Mark Egeland, Sara Frazier, Steve Hanna, Donn Hopkins, Tim Johnson, Kathleen Kilkelly, Ray Moe, and Andy Trenka. Staff Members present included: Susanne Edminster, Tom Frazier, Ron Phillips, and Kelley Roberts. Approval of Minutes: After noting the following changes to the minutes, the minutes were approved unanimously: 1. Next to the last page, second paragraph, beginning with the words "Mr. Valentine reported", it should be "Mr. Phillips reported." 2. Page 2, "four foot' should be "two foot." 3. Transportation Work Plan A will be an attachment to the minutes. 4. Correct the spelling of Kelley Roberts. Discussion Mr. Phillips relayed that he had gotten a call from Sandy Lemberg, who indicated that his remarks had not gotten relayed properly. He wanted to make it clear that he is opposed to speed bumps and some traffic calming, but very supportive of traffic circles. City Plan Mr. Frazier discussed the Monday night open house at the Lincoln Center to show the draft zoning map. There was an insert in the Coloradoan of the map. The main point behind the open house was to present the zoning map and to receive comments. Approximately 60 to 80 people attended. Ms. Kilkelly stated that she was present at the open house and that there was a great deal of information available. She also stated there are several different categories to deal with. Feedback that she received was that people were happy to see a little more predictability. One major focus of the map is the Type I and Type II zoning. A lot of residential will fall into Type I zoning, and a lot of commercial will fall into Type II zoning. Mr. Frazier stated that the expectation under a Type I is that it fits in with the structure plan, it meets the requirements of the zoning area, and it goes through an administrative review. Therefore, it's not in a preliminary presentation Planning and Zoning. It will still go through Planning and Zoning for final review, but it cuts through much red tape. Ms. Kilkelly expressed concern that by the time a proposal gets to final hearing, that a citizen could make comments, but by that time any changes or impact of citizen's comments would not carry the same worth as they do now. Mr. Frazier gave a broad overview of what's occurring right now with the implementation process and City Plan. Within the development review process for incoming commercial, residential, industrial development, there is a certain type of review process occurring. The implementation process will review all of the zoning code and also review the application and how to utilize any future manual that is called the Land Development Guidance System or Development Guidance Book. Staff, consultants, and attorneys will have city quadrant meetings in January. They will be receiving input as to what people think about the zoning map, its layout, and the process used to review development. There will be an open house on December 11, similar to the first one. The information from the open house and input from the consultants will be used to redo the development review manuals and the zoning code. Staff will review the packet and work with CPAC to produce a readable and understandable document. In January, a series of meetings will occur to take that information out to the public. In February, this information will be taken for approval before the Planning and Zoning Board. The adoption of the new documents and the new zoning code and map and other items concerned with the City Plan is expected in March of 1997. Planners have stated if the Transportation Board is interested in having a mini -presentation of what will be taken to the quadrant committees, they would be happy to schedule that. Ms. Edminster indicated that at the growth management team meeting, it was conveyed that the Transportation Board is invited to join the Council Growth Management Committee, Planning and Zoning Board, and the County Commissioners on January 9th for a joint meeting to talk about City Plan implementation, Fossil Creek Study area, transportation adequate public facilities piece, and the adoption policy for all of the City Plan, to be held at City Hall West in the Council chamber. It was agreed upon that the Transportation Board would appreciate a presentation by the planners to be held before the quadrant meetings start. It was also agreed upon that the next Transportation Board meeting will be held January 8th, 1997. 2 Adequate Public Facilities Ms. Edminster stated that adequate public facilities is a way of looking at the city in terms of its infrastructure or those things that it provides the city. Adequate public facilities are things such as roadways, utilities, fire and police protection; the services that the city provides to a community. Whether these facilities are adequate is judged by what level of service the community desires. In terms of the City Plan, the approach to adequate public facilities in conjunction with the City Plan deals with the transportation system. The City Plan has created a vision for transportation that includes a great deal of alternate modes. It also includes an extensive transit system with high frequency attached to it. Staff will look at current facilities to see if the City is meeting the adopted standards. The level of service for different modes includes bikeway plan, the pedestrian plan, master street plan, the transit development plan. Level D is the level of service for vehicular traffic. Some deficits presently exist. For streets and roadways, congestion plays a major role. A map has been drawn to show where the level of service falls below that. The map is being reviewed to reach solutions. The available funding comes from street oversizing, the City's Capital Improvement Program, and the City general fund. Staff calculated the funding needed to improve the deficiencies. For roadways, $75 million; pedestrians, $8 million; bicycles, $18 million; transit, $17 million. Figures for transit do not count evenings and weekends. Staff is looking at a six -year window on improving all these deficiencies. Discussion was held on how to approach these matters with Council and realistically come to solutions. Mr. Moe commented that the pedestrian figure is far under budget. He also asked where the six -year window comes from. Ms. Edminster stated the six years was chosen because it coincides with projects in the Capital Improvement Program. The purpose for this procedure is to give Council an honest picture as to what is being considered. The figures are for arterials, not local residential streets. Mr. Frazier indicated that many things need to be worked out with the existing facilities. There are significant issues to be dealt with that need to be put into our City codes and into our land development codes within the next month and a half. Mr. Johnson stated that the County collects nothing with regard to road impact fees. Discussion was held about the impact that would have as property is annexed. Ms. Kilkelly would like to see development impact fees go to the County for adoption of that resolution. Survey Results Ms. Edminster stated that 65% of the people surveyed thought the City is going in the right direction. When asked about the most important issues facing Fort Collins, traffic congestion/transportation/roads has gone up in terms of area of concern from 13% to 31 %. Then voters were asked to renew the existing sales tax for capital programs; 72% stated probably or yes. When asked for the reason for being supportive of renewal, it was stated tax is needed to support the city growth. When asked for the reason for opposing renewal, the most common reasons were sufficient taxes exist, and present funds should be managed better. Streets, traffic, transportation and natural areas continue to be high priorities for voters. When asked what their general priorities were for programs to be funded if the taxes were renewed, they ranked seven programs in this way: (1) Continue street maintenance program; (2) Expand street/transportation system with more lanes and better intersections; (3) Preserve additional natural areas; (4) Improve the bus system by adding routes, frequency and hours of operation; (5) Add to the trails and pedestrian system including regional trails, in -town bike lanes, and sidewalks, (6) Upgrade library technology, and (7) Add new parks. When asked about specific street construction and recreation facility projects, likely voters tended to prefer street projects, and ranked them in the following order: (1) Northeast Truck Route; (2) Taft Hill Road; (3) East Prospect Road, Poudre River to Summitview; (4) City Park Pool and Recreation Center; (5) North College Improvements; (6) Shields Street; (7) EPIC Enhancements; (8) Northside Aztlan Center; and (9) Horticulture Center. When voters asked if they would support or oppose increasing the sales tax in order to build any of the large-scale projects which were proposed, the new police building ranked the highest. When voters were asked reasons for opposition to the County project SAFE, 27% said they didn't want the higher tax, and a large percent said they didn't feel they had enough information. Voters were asked if they would be more likely to vote to approve funding for the Building Community Choices program if it were six years or eight years in length. Voters said they would prefer a six -year tax term. Voters were more likely to approve the ballot item if it benefits all areas of the community. This survey was done by George K. Baum. Voters were randomly selected. The demographics are indicative of the population. .- On December 17th, Council will be having another study session on the Capital Improvement Program. They plan to then make their final selection of what projects make the list. Ms. Edminster stated that the three-quarter cent sales tax expires at the end of 1997. The voters are being asked to review those, which will generate about $78 million over six years. Ms. Edminster handed out a Possible Packages, Based on Council's First "Cut" with highlighted projects that Council is favoring. Discussion was held on capping the quarter -cent package for street maintenance. This Board recommended that the quarter -cent for street maintenance be put on the ballot as a separate item for 12 years, to begin lengthening that time. Discussion was held about sending a letter to Council. /t was agreed that a lettershould be sent including the following points: (1) transit development plan, (2) increase the funds for street maintenance with no cap, (3) put the street maintenance on a different cycle. Also it was agreed that the 72% in the November election for retention might be mentioned in the letter to show public outreach. It may be advisable to stress the transit development plan as visionary and a real direct link of the City Plan. T-Notes (Updates) A. Office of Energy Conservation Grant, $30,000 granted. B. Fort Collins/Loveland Transit Service; Fort Collins City Manager will approve $55,000; the Larimer County Commissioners said they have put that amount in their budget; and the Board is still waiting to hear from Loveland City Council. C. Overland Trail Update. A focus group will meet December 23, 1996. Other Business Discussion was held concerning the airport and how it fits into the transportation system. Mr. Perlmutter discussed the status of the growth of the street oversizing fee. Discussion will be held with consultants on how to expand the street oversizing fee. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.