Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 08/16/20171 MINUTES of the CITY OF FORT COLLINS TRANSPORTATION BOARD August 16, 2017 6:00 p.m. Community Room 215 North Mason Fort Collins, CO FOR REFERENCE: Chair: Eric Shenk Vice Chair: Annabelle Berklund Staff Liaison: Paul Sizemore 970.224-6140 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: CITY STAFF PRESENT: Annabelle Berklund, Vice Chair Valerie Arnold Karl Ayers Nathalie Rachline York ABSENT: Eric Shenk, Chair Indy Hart Cari Brown Andrew Bondi Councilmember Ross Cunniff Tessa Greegor Paul Sizemore PUBLIC PRESENT: Mark Houdashelt, Air Quality Advisory Board Chair 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Burklund called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. 2. AGENDA REVIEW Berklund recommended the Action Item and Discussion Item be reversed in order. York made a motion, seconded by Ayers, to switch the agenda item order. The motion was adopted unanimously. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT Mark Houdashelt discussed the Work Plan for the Air Quality Advisory Board which references communication with the Transportation Board to better advise Council to educate and collaborate with the public on air quality and climate change issues. He stated dealing with budget offers effectively in terms of recommendations to Council could be a beneficial topic to discuss, as well as ozone and greenhouse gas emissions. He also suggested the possible formation of a committee similar to the Bicycle Advisory Committee to deal with greenhouse gas emissions. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C9BB7A0-F547-47AC-ABFF-9290FD8ED273 2 York suggested the possibility of having official liaisons between Boards if a separate committee could not be formed. Houdashelt replied that could potentially work. Boardmembers and Houdashelt discussed ways in which the Boards could interact and partner for various initiatives. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ayers made a motion, seconded by Arnold, to adopt the July 2017 minutes as written. The minutes were adopted unanimously. 5. COUNCIL LIAISON Councilmember Cunniff was unable to attend. 6. BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT – York York stated the Committee adopted its 2018 Work Plan at its last meeting; therefore, it can be included in the Transportation Board Work Plan. The Committee also received a presentation on City Natural Areas trails and regional connections and a presentation on various bike projects. He stated the Land Conservation and Stewardship Board has been examining plans for parks and Natural Areas south of Harmony. 7. ACTION ITEMS • Protected Bike Lane Pilot Project – Greegor Greegor stated she is seeking Board input and a recommendation regarding whether it supports staff’s recommendation regarding West Mulberry Street as the preferred candidate for the 2018 protected bike lane pilot project. She discussed the various types of protected bike lanes and stated research shows such lanes get more people on bikes and improve safety. Greegor summarized the findings from the Laurel Street project which include: reduced crashes, and increased perception of safety and comfort. Challenges include winter maintenance and parking impacts. Greegor discussed the pre- and post-survey plans for the upcoming project and detailed the selection process for this corridor as the pilot project area. She discussed the 2020 Low-Stress Network, which is the network plan that resulted from the 2014 Bicycle Master Plan. It works to leverage existing low-traffic, low-speed streets as bikeways. Pilot project goals include increased bike ridership, increased safety and comfort for all users, the ability to test and evaluate new arterial design strategies, and the ability to refine best practices for winter maintenance. Greegor listed the key criteria that were used to evaluate possible alternatives for this project and walked through the pros and cons of the top candidates. Mulberry and Vine were both ranked highly. Greegor noted the West Mulberry corridor is within the Big Jump area which will help with joint resources related to evaluation, marketing, and publicity. She indicated that a plan for the improvement of Vine had been submitted as part of a large Inspire Grant opportunity, and that this would be the preferred means of funding those improvements. These considerations led to Mulberry emerging as the preferred location for the pilot project. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C9BB7A0-F547-47AC-ABFF-9290FD8ED273 3 Greegor showed plans of the corridor and locations of proposed protected elements and Boardmembers discussed the proposal. Greegor and Sizemore discussed the snow removal and maintenance procedures for various types of protected bike lanes. Greegor stated many details still need to be worked out including operations, lane configuration, maintenance, and types of protection. A project budget of $300,000 has been approved by Council; however, costs of current conceptual designs have yet to be determined. Berklund asked if rumble strips have ever been tried as a buffer. York replied bicyclists do not tend to like rumble strips as they may throw them out of control. Berklund stated that would be preferential to a large curb. Berklund stated there is a large amount of data indicating protected bike lanes increase ridership and safety. Arnold discussed the importance of functionality for the least cost. Rachline asked if there will be signs warning drivers of upcoming protected bike lanes. Greegor replied that would typically involve bike lane signage and merge signage. Greegor stated next steps will involve cost estimates and street maintenance/snow removal plans. Public outreach efforts will also occur. She asked if the Board would recommend the West Mulberry corridor as the preferred candidate for the next protected bike lane pilot project and noted the Bicycle Advisory Committee recommended moving forward with both West Mulberry and Vine as the preferred corridors for the project. Arnold asked if anything will be done on Vine if the Inspire grant is not received. Greegor replied things will be reevaluated should the grant not be received; there is a great deal of interest in making improvements to Vine. Boardmembers discussed the improvements needed for Vine. Greegor stated two projects could not move forward with just the funding for this pilot project, but with the grant funding both would be possible. York clarified the BAC recommendation was that Mulberry would be a good test case; however, they did not want to limit the use of the funds for Vine if funding were to change or the grant did not come through. Arnold inquired about traffic impacts and stated it would be helpful to see the traffic studies and projections. Greegor replied additional operations analysis, particularly at intersections, would be completed prior to any lane changes. Arnold asked about the potential impacts to bus service on Mulberry. Sizemore replied Transfort was a part of the Old Town Neighborhoods Plan and design charrettes that led to these recommendations. Arnold asked how important a recommendation is at this point. Greegor replied staff would love to have the Board’s support or direction to move forward with public outreach efforts. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C9BB7A0-F547-47AC-ABFF-9290FD8ED273 4 Arnold stated more information regarding how Mulberry was specifically chosen would be helpful. York and Rachline noted this recommendation would allow for additional analysis and outreach of the recommended preferred alternative. Sizemore stated the idea is to select the route which is most likely to be successful in meeting the project goals based on the outlined criteria, with the understanding final design still must occur. If unanticipated deal breakers are found throughout the process, other options are not discounted. Greegor stated the move from 4 lanes to 3 has some support among other departments regardless of the pilot project installation. Arnold asked if Greegor would return with design recommendations in the future. Greegor replied in the affirmative. Ayers made a motion, seconded by Rachline, to agree with the recommendation of the BAC with the understanding that Vine is secondary to Mulberry based on other funding and that additional design will occur. The motion was approved unanimously. Boardmembers discussed the importance of respectful communication during meetings. 8. DISCUSSION/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS • 2018 Draft Work Plan Boardmembers reviewed the 2016 and 2017 Work Plans. Berklund noted detailed goals will not likely be helpful if there are no City plans surrounding those goals. Boardmembers discussed the wording of various aspects of the proposed 2018 Work Plan. Sizemore stated this basic form for the Work Plan was first adopted in 2009 and presents an opportunity for the Board to outline current priorities. Arnold recommended the placement of the Transportation Master Plan as a key item. Boardmembers agreed and went on to discuss the importance of collaborating with other Boards and Commissions. Berklund suggested adding a statement related to advocating for transit related resources provided by the City. Arnold suggested including an examination of transportation in conjunction with affordable development. Boardmembers discussed the importance of working with the Parking Board regarding potential opposing and matching goals. Sizemore summarized the Board comments. 9. REPORTS • Boardmember Reports DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C9BB7A0-F547-47AC-ABFF-9290FD8ED273 5 York reported on judging for the Innovation Challenge and on the ClimateWise bicycle tour of the new underpass. Berklund stated she would like to see a post-project evaluation reports on large intersection projects. • Staff Report Sizemore stated the Sign Code update is in its initial stages and some elements will have a relationship with transportation. He stated the City Attorney’s Office is working on developing Board bylaws and other information for each Board and Commission. I-25 updates, the E-bikes white paper, travel behavior survey results, transportation master plan updates, and pedestrian prioritization model for sidewalks updates will be forthcoming. The Walk and Wheels Skills Hub will have a grand opening on August 30th. 10. OTHER BUSINESS None. 11. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. by unanimous consent. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C9BB7A0-F547-47AC-ABFF-9290FD8ED273