HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 11/06/1996Transportation Board Meeting
Held November 6, 1996
Page 1
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
TRANSPORTATION BOARD
Meeting Minutes
November 6, 1996
Paul Valentine, Chair
Paul Perlmutter, Vice Chair
Will Smith, City Council Liaison
The Meeting of the Transportation Board began at 5:50 p.m. at the Ben Delatour
Room of the Fort Collins Public Library, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board Members
present included: Paul Valentine, Paul Perlmutter, Alan Beatty, Mark Egeland, Don
Hopkins, Tim Johnson, and Ray Moe. Staff Members present included: Ron
Phillips, Tom Frazier, Susanne Edminster, and Eric Bracke. Council Liaison Will
Smith was present for a portion of the meeting.
Mr. Valentine called the meeting to order and introduced the new board members,
Steve Hanna and Andrew Trenka. Mr. Trenka could not attend the meeting, but Mr.
Hanna was present. The new members of the Board gave their names and a brief
summary of who they were and why they were on the board.
Moved by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Egeland: To approve the minutes of
October 2nd. Mr. Johnson submitted a sheet of recommended changes, mostly of
a minor nature. Motion approved unanimously.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM
Susanne Edminster discussed the last City Council meeting. Mayor Azari was
displeased with the meeting and left. The six remaining Council members decided
upon a list of projects and put them into a ranking order. Dollar amourts have not
been settled upon at this point in time. Some of the bigger items such as the new
main library or the new performing arts center have been left off the list at this time.
More discretionary dollars will be available at a later date. Police services and
street maintenance and natural areas were felt to have priority.
A study session with Council is scheduled for December 17, 1996. Between this
time and the meeting, public surveys will be held to gauge reactions to the list and
ranking. The attempt is to keep the list to an $80 million figure to present to the
voters. Ms. Edminster suggested that contact be made to the Council and letters
written to help facilitate the progress.
Transportation Board Meeting
Held November 6, 1996
Page 2
A cap is recommended of $22 million on street maintenance and natural areas. Any
funding over and above that would be put into a pool to be determined which project
would get the funding. Street maintenance is still short on funds, but public
perception could well be that natural areas would receive funding more easily than
street maintenance.
A clarification was asked about specific open space areas. A list was defined and
developed by the Natural Resources Department which properties they are
interested in acquiring. The properties basically comprise the fringe area around the
Poudre River Corridor. The $22 million is in addition to the $16 million that will be
received from the county -wide open space tax. Staff only recommended 22 million
for the natural areas. School partnerships were also not included, except from the
$220,000 funding level. Parks and Rec did not have an opportunity to review the
school partnership funding, as it was a later consideration; a $1 million funding level
was ultimately voted on.
Discussion was held about the levels of funding for various departments. The
Board's recommendation of the quarter -cent tax to fund $25 million for street
maintenance was accepted but reduced to $22 million; and the funding will be
capped at $3.6 million of growth per year, regardless of the growth of the receipts.
Board recommendations were reduced for North College from 2.5 million to 2
million; Prospect Road, from 4 million to 2.5 million; Fossil Creek Park, from 9.5
million, to receive probably 7 million.
The Transit Development Plan and the Pedestrian Plan are on the list. Funding is
uncertain due to the list containing more expenses than generated funds. The City
Manager has made his recommendations; the decisions now rest with City Council.
The funds generated are calculated at $25.6 million per quarter cent of tax, with a
growth rate of five percent factored in. The public seems to be comfortable with a
six -year, quarter -cent tax. A phone survey was done to obtain public reaction.
Discussion was held about the possibility of bonding.
Some dissatisfaction was expressed by Board members over the capping of growth
of the tax revenues. Since transportation funding comes out of the general fund, any
funds generated by the quarter -cent sales tax would ease pressure on the general
fund. Staff noted that capital projects are not funded from the general fund. General
discussion was held on presentation of the issues to the voters and the need to
present specific means of funding for specific projects. The alternate truck route is
a hot point for voters. The phasing of Vine Drive as an alternate truck route was
discussed. Ballot language must be set by February 4, 1997.
Mr. Bracke briefed the Board on the Traffic Calming Program. Staff has worked
with City Council's Health and Safety Committee and neighborhood groups on this
program. The effort will include press releases from Mayor Azari and getting the
C,
Transportation Board Meeting
Held November 6, 1996
Page 3
word out that applications from neighborhoods will be accepted shortly. The name
may be changed to Neighborhood Traffic Safety Program. The use of a turtle as
the program's symbol was questioned.
Funding help by the neighborhoods is being encouraged on a point system. One
point is awarded for every thousand dollars contributed by outside sources.
Clarendon Hills has expressed such an interest. Obstacles remain; neighborhoods
such as Clarendon Hills could possibly get this funding accomplished, while lower
income neighborhoods may have to resort to sweat equity; and the City would retain
the right to remove the traffic humps as needed.
Rumble strips were discussed. They can be a good safety tool, as they reduce
accidents, especially at night. If not properly designed, they can cause damage to
the road through inadequate water drainage during freeze -thaw cycles. Bicyclists
do not care for them. Better designs are being developed. The amount of pavement
used for rumble strips may be lessened. They are now 8 to 12 inches in width.
They are to be used only to bring attention that the driver has left the lane. A
possible use of rumble strips would be to reinforce the impact of a speed limit sign.
Confusion exists within the document whether 70 percent of the larger
neighborhood or the street facing the traffic calming devices are needed for
installation and/or removal. Several Board members agreed that the entire
neighborhood should be used for ratification. Discussion was held concerning the
definition of a neighborhood in such areas as Whalers Way and Centennial Drive.
Mr. Johnson suggested that the citizens' input to the City should be included in the
Goals and Objectives portion, since the process is begun this way.
Mr. Egeland raised the issue of the ability of the City to install traffic calming devices
regardless of neighborhood polling. Mr. Bracke noted that sufficient measures would
be taken, and traffic humps were used as a last resort. Mr. Bracke noted other
means, such as raised crosswalks and traffic circles. Dips are not as effective; they
are primarily used for drainage, and the deceleration forces enhance the impact and
damage potential to the car.
Mr. Valentine noted the discussion that was held at the Lincoln Center concerning
the Stuart Street speed humps. By his count, of the 41 who spoke, 20 were in favor,
20 opposed, and one undecided. Discussion was held conceming the configuration
of speed humps, washboard sections, and the damage potential to varying s zes of
cars.
The Lincoln Center meeting of the 20th was meant to be a fact -gathering session.
Staff asked people that attended than meeting to come up with solutions. Possibly,
Stuart is being used more often because of the construction on Drake this year.
Transportation Board Meeting
Held November 6, 1996
Page 4
Discussion was held that such traffic -calming devices as extended curbs should not
reduce the width of bicycle lanes.
The traffic enforcement letter that will come from Transportation Services to
observed violators will not be a ticket and will not cite the person who observed the
speeding, but will request that the violator cooperate with the speed limit. The
purpose of this program is for neighborhoods to take responsibility for themselves,
particular for speeders who live within those neighborhoods. A $500 radar gun is
available for neighborhoods to borrow.
MYN-7-0 Wk
Mr. Frazier advised the Board that Council had approved the 10/30/96 document,
six to one. There are still changes and suggestions to be made. Any rewording by
Board members should be submitted to Mr. Frazier. Transportation issues appear
throughout the document. The defeat of the County initiative will probably not have
a bearing on the final tone of the document.
Mr. Valentine suggested items to be added to the document: Provision of parking;
exploring technological means to improve levels of service; improving traffic along
College Avenue; and reducing pollution.
Mr. Frazier noted two important elements of implementation: level of service for
different modes, and adequate public facilities. Levels of service should correspond
to the service needed for the area. Downtown does not have a high level of service
for the automobile, but does have higher levels of service for other modes. A
discussion of public services reveals that levels of service for all modes are
inadequate; and review needs to be done as to the needs and costs thereof.
Another part of implementation deals with design standards. They will be reviewed
as far as local streets and street patterns. Codes may need to be changed as well
to meet development line and criteria. Implementation and City Plan is to be done
by March. These items are on a fast track for the level of service and adequate
public facilities piece to be implemented by December 17. Other meetings in
January and February will address the items to be readied for the meeting in March.
Council is sticking to the time constraints; no additional time will be granted.
A point was raised for developers to do the streets and main arterials that front
developments. Mr. Frazier explained the mechanics of the street oversizing fee. An
inquiry was made into the possibility of bonding for doing streets. Amendment 1 was
discussed and the improbability of voter approval for such issues. Growth within the
Urban Growth Area is fairly well defined due to the existing boundaries.
Transportation Board Meeting
Held November 6, 1996
Page 5
Mr. Johnson noted the inadequacy of looking at a one square mile area for funding
of arterial improvements. A much wider area impacts the arterial; by the time the
arterial is in need of improvement, inadequate funding exists. The street oversizing
fund is inadequate for the task, and more of a user payment policy must be in effect
for funding to work. Mr. Frazier suggested that anyone interested in the
development review process look at the Type 1 and Type 2 permitted uses. A
zoning map is going to be one outcome of this endeavor. Certain types of uses will
be outlined in each zone. Permitted uses will be put on the fast track process for
approval.
Mr. Valentine mentioned that, unlike present City policy, many of the newly -defined
zones eliminate home occupations. This is a growing trend that should be included
in the zoning. Home offices are a growing trend, little traffic for the neighborhood.
However, covenants in the neighborhood could restrict the types of businesses in
the area. Discussion was held between different types of home occupations, e.g.,
a law office versus a backyard mechanic. It was agreed that an auto mechanic shop
did not meet the definition of a home occupation. It was noted that a two square
foot sign may be erected for a home office.
Discussion was held whether the City Plan would endure intense scrutiny as the
inevitable shortcomings were found. Staff noted that the Plan is a fluid document,
still in conceptual stages in some areas, and that revisions would be made as
necessary.
The Board was encouraged to review both Level of Service document and
Adequate Public Facilities Plan. Those will be implemented together, with
preliminary costs.
T NOTES
The Parking Plan was adopted. Parking fines, permit fees, and meter rates will go
up in January 1997. Restriping will be completed on all surface lots. Some have
been reassigned so people know where to park. More two-hour parking is available,
along with permit parking. The parking garage will change to a fully controlled
access facility, probably in summer, due to operational equipment and other items
to be obtained. Flyers will be published and distributed to inform people. Significant
changes will be taking place to open up more customer parking for downtc,ron.
Staff will be working with mid -town about using parking better for everyone,
employees and customers. Prospect -Shields wishes to do a permit parking. They
feel their needs exceed two-hour posting. Discussions will be held with the
Transportation Board Meeting
Held November 6, 1996
Page 6
neighborhoods to reach some type of agreement. Council has approved parking
revenues going back to the parking program.
BOARD MEMBER REPORTS
Mr. Egeland noted that County Road 9 has been closed once again by Hewlett-
Packard. This is the third time since repaving has been done. It is the only
standard bike facility out to H-P and Harmony Road, as well as an arterial for cars.
It was noted that Engineering decides when to close a road. Generally, the purpose
is to get work done quickly and easily than would be allowed by partial closures. Mr.
Egeland suggested that provisions be made for passage by bicycle and other
alternative modes.
Mr. Hopkins noted a flyer on bus service between communities published by RAE
Consultants. RAE did the survey for the towns of Fort Collins, Loveland, and
Larimer County TDPs. They wanted more specific information.
Hach Chemical gave a conference on: "Colorado Transportation Crisis; Who Pays?"
Different transportation modes were shown, including rail. TransFort was there as
well as Smart -Trips. Public and private entities were there. Discussions were held
at the conference about transportation along the Front Range 20 years from now.
Different alternatives were presented, such as: increasing fees; a fuel tax; the Nobel
bill; using general fund surpluses; creating RTD districts throughout the state and
using them for local taxation; using the HUTF fund; bonding; and reduced
regulations from CDOT. A report will be forthcoming at another meeting showing
what the participants rated as the best top three to look at and perhaps implement.
Mr. Hopkins also recommended that Board members review the mass transit
minutes from the CSU committee. There is a new parking lot on-line in service at
CSU near the General Services Building on East Drive. There is to be a second lot
developed this spring by Green Hall. This should improve parking on the campus.
North Transit Center is still in conceptual stage.
Mr. Beatty noted new zoning by Boulder County concerning narrow streets, parking
in the alleys, and garages on the alleys. Some Staff members have been in
Boulder looking over these concepts. Fort Collins has somewhat similar new
developments off of West Elizabeth and off of East Stuart.
STAFF REPORTS
Mr. Frazier reported that several local representatives - Bill Kaufman and Jim
Disney among them - met in Washington with several Transportation
subcommittees conceming money earmarked in the reauthorization bill for a major
Transportation Board Meeting
Held November 6, 1996
Page 7
passenger rail feasibility � Judy in this corridor. A lobbyist is working with the
committee. The local repres :ntatives were given a great deal of time to present their
viewpoint.
Much positive groundwork was laid at this meeting. This concept targets fiscal year
1998 for Federal funds. A feasibility study would be presented by December 1,
1996. Private industry needs to be involved. The study will cost a half a million to
$2 million, which will include a major investment study, and an environmental impact
study. Hopefully, funding will come from the Federal government, with matching
dollars coming from the north Front Range MPO, different communities and the
private sector. Light rail and railroads are being investigated.
The next meeting, December 4, will be the only Board meeting in December.
Discussion was held concerning the advisability of one versus two meetings per
month. Mr. Johnson noted the need to draw Council into lobbying efforts statewide
on transportation issues, now that Council has been able to see clearly the capital
efforts that are needed for transportation versus the inability to pay for them. Staff
explained the allocation of the gasoline tax.
Planning and Zoning received some e-mail from a citizen suggesting that the
Transportation Board be drawn into the development review process. The Board
was generally disinclined to take on responsibilities that it felt were properly within
the purview of P&Z.
Meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.