HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 11/20/1996CITY OF FORT COLLINS
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
Meeting Minutes
November 20, 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, Alan Beatty, Mark Egeland, Sara Frazier, Tim Johnson,
Kathleen Kilkelly, Ray Moe, and Andy Trenka. Staff Members present included: Susanne
Edminster, Tom Frazier, Ron Phillips, and Kelly Roberts.
Each of the Board members introduced themselves and welcomed Mr. Trenka to the
Board.
Approval of Minutes
Moved by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Beatty to approve the minutes of the last
meeting. On page 2, third paragraph the correct figure is 3.6; however "of growth" should
be removed. Mr. Johnson also complimented the summary of the minutes. Motion
approved unanimously.
Traffic Calming/Speed Humps on Stuart Street
Mr. Gary Diede reported that there was a neighborhood meeting held on October 23.
Attendees were very active in speaking at the meeting and in writing letters. There were
over 135 responses since the meeting.
The recurring themes shared at the meeting were:
> Remove all of the speed humps. Ice is a problem.
Reduced speeds make it difficult to get up the grade.
> Keep all of the speed humps
> Build speed humps gentler
> Build fewer speed humps
> Raise the speed limit
> Use more enforcement
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 2
> Install stop signs at Constitution and Heatheridge
> Raise crosswalks
> Use better pavement marking
> Use flashing signs
> Install a traffic circle
Before the input from the neighborhood meeting, it was planned to have a total of 8 speed
humps. The average speed has decreased by 7 miles an hour since the speed humps
were installed.
The proposed plan is to have 2 raised crosswalks. There will be one located where the
trail comes up and goes into the park. The other will be a pedestrian crosswalk. There will
be 5 speed humps and 2 flashing speed limit signs at each end of the area. The speed
humps will be designed so that motorists may pass over at 25 miles per hour. It is hoped
that this setup will be a permanent solution to the problem.
The emergency departments are satisfied with the proposed plan.
The profile of the raised crosswalk is a 5-foot ascend, 2-foot plateau, and a 5-foot
descend. The total height is 3 inches. Asphalt will be used; however, a brick impression
will be created on the plateau.
In the interim there will be 3 speed humps. Those 3 speed humps will be tapered down
Board members shared the following comments and questions:
> Install stop signs and flashing lights in the area.
Response: Possibly drivers will no longer stop with caution.
The criteria studied in order to justify a stop sign include volume and
accident frequency in a 12-month period.
It is also more of an air quality issue to stop and start again.
> Is there a problem with speed increase between speed humps?
Response: That will always be a concern with some drivers.
> Install bulb outs in the area.
Response: Too costly.
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 3
>What is the discussion with regard to the traffic circle?
Response: The construction of a traffic circle would be costly. The
traffic circle would not be as effective in a three-way intersection.
The emergency departments are tolerable of traffic circles as long
as they are able to go against the grain in emergency situations.
Public Comment
Ms. Jenny Baxter, a neighborhood resident, feels that the speed humps are not a huge
deterrence at this point because motorists are becoming more accustomed to the jolt and
are driving even faster. Ms. Baxter reminds the board that the purpose for the speed
humps is for safety. She feels that if they are removed or even tapered down that there
will be risk. Ms. Baxter suggests a stop sign at Heatheridge and Stuart. She also
commented that if the speed humps are designed to be driven over at 20 miles per hour
there is nothing to keep motorists from driving 35 and 40 miles an hour through the area.
Moved by Mr. Perlmutter, seconded by Mr. Valentine to draft a letter endorsing the
proposed plan as detailed by Mr. Diede. Motion approved unanimously.
1997 Transportation Board Work Plan
Mr. Valentine handed out the November 13, 1996, memo. The memo includes projects
that came to mind for Mr. Valentine.
The following topics were added to the list:
> Hazardous waste
> Transit Facilities
> Alternative Fuels and Vehicles
City Plan will have several integral pieces including the following:
> Parking
> Streets Oversizing Fund
> Adequate Public Facilities
> Level of Services
> Pedestrian
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 4
> Bikeway
> Transit
> Technological Advances
Kelley Roberts, the new bikeway coordinator, was introduced by Mr. Frazier.
It was mentioned that the City's Technology Board should be addressed with regard to
assisting the Transportation Board with technological advances and alternative fuel and
vehicle issues. Board members felt it would be beneficial to have some type of
presentation for alternative fuel and vehicle information. Mr. Trenka's knowledge and
experience will be very helpful in this area as well.
Harmony Road 1-25 Interchange Project
Ms. Reavis introduced Shawn Han and Michelle Li of J.F. Sato and Associates. She also
introduced David Martinez of the Colorado Department of Transportation.
Mr. Martinez explained that the project will be federally funded. The project was started
in 1990, and design money was received last year. The firm of J.F. Sato and Associates
was hired in July.
There have been several meetings with different groups in attempt to get input on the
project. When the conceptual design is complete, there will be a public open house held
someplace near the site. The anticipated date for the open house is mid -December.
The federal aid funds will be available October 1997. Construction will be started this time
next year. The anticipated completion time is a year or less.
Mr. Han gave more details on the project based upon the fact sheet that Board Members
received on the project.
There are two options for the construction of the bridge. Half of the bridge can be built and
then the existing bridge can be taken down. The other option is to move the alignment
further north so that the bridge can be built in its entirety and then the existing bridge can
be taken down. After considering the pros and cons of each option the realignment option
is preferred.
Board members shared the following comments and concerns
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 5
>There has been talk about a high speed train along 1-25. Will the design
allow for that possibility?
Response: The design will accommodate a possible transit. There will be
a walk to return to vehicles.
>It was pointed out that currently the 1-25 north exit ramp is dangerous in
severe weather conditions and suggested that special surface be used as
a safety tool.
Response: The design will consider safety in severe weather conditions.
There will be a guardrail along the side. CDOT will be contacted regarding
the special surface suggestion.
>Transit centers tend to be more advantageous for one direction of traffic.
The design for the transit center located at 1-25 and 120th Avenue in
Denver seems to be ideal.
Response: The design for that transit center is for a much greater influx.
That design would be much too costly.
> It may be better to spend the money today than to have to spend the
money updating the TTC down the road.
Response: Because of the budget constraints the TTC will be designed
according to the studies for 1998.
> What are the constraints in working with the floodplain?
Response: There will not be funding for development in the floodplain.
The decision of what types of amenities will be out at the TTC will be a
factor.
> At the open house, will there be more details available about the bike
lane?
Response: Information is available about the progress of the smaller
sections of the interchange project. The document is not final.
Suggestions should be sent to Dave Martinez.
> Is there any reason why the existing bridge has to come down or can it
be retained as a commuter bridge?
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 6
Response: Future expansion of 1-25 would require a higher clearance than
the existing bridge provides. There will be a 850-foot envelope to
accommodate future development, i.e., rail.
Regional Transit Development Plan
Mr. Daggett explained that the reason for the regional transit development plan is twofold.
One is to design regional routes for transit services between cities. The second is to
update existing local transit plans and incorporate them into one regional document which
would be incorporated into a large regional transportation document.
An analysis has been completed on the potential transit corridors for intercity transit. The
studies were based on current work trips made between communities and those
commuters that chose to ride the transit. Fort Collins to Loveland has the highest number
of trips followed by Fort Collins to Greeley. Air quality and traffic congestion may be
somewhat alleviated in the Fort Collins -Loveland corridor.
Public meetings in the region have revealed that fares will play a great role. For the Fort
Collins to Denver trip people are willing to pay between $4 and $6. That would pay for
more than 50 percent of the operating cost.
Both institutional and financial options were reviewed. In the first three to five years,
intergovernmental agreements will best serve the region for maintenance and related
issues. In the long term other institutional and organizational options should be
considered. The institutional options do not seem to fit the needs of the project. Currently
there is a Rural Transportation Act in front of the legislature to build roads up to Black
Hawk and Central City. The outcome of that proposed Act may provide some guidance
for this project.
At this point in time there is not a service plan. There will be various studies and surveys
to come up with the best service plan for the various areas.
If the transit is an express route, there will be no implication with ADA. If it is not localized
service there will be no implication with ADA. The bus will be required to be equipped
properly to accommodate wheelchairs and other special devices.
Currently there is a service in the County, Dial -a -Ride, that provide transportation for
specific services, i.e., dialysis. It is possible that they would be provided service for a fixed -
ride cost.
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 7
The trips to DIA from the north Front range are well served at this time. The fares for
airport shuttle are $14 one way and $20 one way for door-to-door service.
Mr. Daggett explained that the two -page memo provided to the Board is only a summary.
There are not any fine details about the transit in the memo. There is still a lot of work to
be done so that the service plan can be devised.
Board members had questions regarding the details of the study. Mr. Daggett will be able
to provide more specifics in the future with regard to van pools and recreational trips that
affect the figures in the study. The current figure is very conservative, only accounting for
the annual average of work trips.
It was commented that there is not a real motivation from a business point of view to
implement the transit services. The figures in the study should have more background to
make them more compelling.
It was suggested that the report explain each of the steps through the actual
implementation of the transit. Possibly the report should focus on the obvious route, Fort
Collins - Loveland.
City Council needs advice from the Transportation Board with regard to the approval of the
regional transit plan. At this point no action is needed; however, council has requested to
review the minutes to the meeting. Mr. Daggett will meet with City Council on December
10. 1996.
Level of Service/Adequate Public Facilities
Mr. Frazier updated Board members on the progress of the level of service and adequate
public facilities.
The meeting on Monday with the City Plan Implementation Consulting Team went well.
The way that the level of service document was written up is causing some legal
difficulties. In order to call something a 'level of service" there must be standards to
compare it to. The solution may be to use the term "design standard." Zoning codes and
design standards can be tied into the level of service concept; however, it will take longer
than anticipated.
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 8
Different communities use a different grading system for the level of service. A classic
grade scale of A through F based on delay time and volume to capacity is common. The
City Attorney has been pretty conservative on the issue.
The schedule will be delayed. There will be a meeting on December 10 and 11 with the
consulting teams in attempt to resolve some of the remaining issues. Presentation will not
be given to City Council on December 17. Updates on the schedule will be provided.
Ms. Edminster further reported on Adequate Public Facilities. There has been analysis of
what it takes to create a transportation system that meets the criteria of City Plan and
some of the other plans. Some intriguing maps and dollar amounts have been the result.
Two meetings are scheduled. One is to present the vision and financial options to City
Council. The other meeting will deal with issues on providing public facilities to
developments that are out in areas that are not currently serviced.
The general thought is that developers should not be required to pay for deficiencies in the
existing plan. The task at hand is to show where the current plan is deficient and make
revisions so that the plan fits into the future land use. Cost and obligation must be defined
in order to avoid adopting a plan that cannot be financed. There is a lot of work to be done
before the March implementation of City Plan.
T-Notes (Updates)
Ron Phillips reported that Regional Passenger met October 3. They met in May and
August as well. There was considerable discussion with CDOT about how to proceed. It
was agreed that the North Front Range Metropolitan Organization would be the lead
agency.
There is a scoping committee that has met twice. A draft scope of services will be
modified as a result of the progress made at meetings with several organizations.
There is a three-phase process that will be followed:
> Public Scoping Process
> Investment Study Work
> Environmental Impact Statement & Preferred Alternatives
0 •
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 9
The Upper Front Range Transportation Planning Commission has asked CDOT Region
IV to place $150,000 in the budget for this project. $2 million has been requested from
Congress. The anticipated total figure is between $1.5 million and $2 million. Funding
may also be sought from the following:
> CDOT
> Transportation Commissioner
> Local Governments Within Five -County Area
Mr. Valentine reported that the new MPO Coordinator, Vicky McClain, will start December
16. With the addition of Kelly Roberts and Vicky McClain Board will be fully staffed for the
first time in 2 years.
Susanne Edminster has moved over to Transportation Planning. She will manage the
transportation planning and parking piece and continue to handle the financial
management for the service area. Ron Phillips moved his office to Olive Street.
A $30,000 conservation grant has been received. The old depot behind Washington's is
being considered for a transportation/transfer center. The property is currently owned by
the City of Fort Collins, Stormwater Department.
Staff Reports
Ms. Kilkelly reported that she attended the October 28 Planning and Zoning Board
meeting. During the discussion there were many issues that dealt with traffic and
transportation issues. Neither the old or new street standards apply to intersections. Each
intersection is reviewed on a case -by -case basis.
When big boxes go in, the traffic generated will, in the long term, necessitate 12 lanes on
College and on Harmony. That number of lanes includes two bike lanes and turning lanes.
The concern is that that type of setup would not be pedestrian friendly. The street designs
do not address the geometry at intersections.
The biggest contention with the pedestrian plan was what to do with pavement treatments
and lighting for pedestrians to cross.
It was proposed that some of the traffic issues be relegated to the Transportation Board.
Transportation Board Minutes
November 20, 1996
Page 10
Mr. Moe felt that a level of service grade study would define that setup as unacceptable.
It would also clear up any discrepancies regarding the traffic studies. The fact that the
grading system needs to be updated on an expedited status is magnified by this example.
Mr. Valentine handed out a report for the 1996 accomplishments. The report is based on
a review of the action items in the minutes for the year. Members are asked to mail input,
as to other tasks that should be listed, to Mr. Valentine.
Mr. Beatty suggested that Council Liaison be moved to the beginning of the meeting to
enable more interaction with Mr. Smith.
Adjourn
Upon motion by Mr. Valentine, seconded by Ms. Frazier, the meeting adjourned at 8:50
p.m.