Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 05/19/2021 TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR May 19, 2021, 6:00 p.m. Virtual Meeting Via Zoom 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 1  FOR REFERENCE: Chair: Nathalie Rachline Vice Chair: Council Liaison: Cari Brown Emily Gorgol Staff Liaison: Aaron Iverson 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Rachline called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. 2. ROLL CALL BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Nathalie Rachline, Chair Cari Brown, Vice Chair (arrived late) Jerry Gavaldon Indy Hart York Diego Lopez Kevin Borchert BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Rob Owens CITY STAFF PRESENT: Nicole Hahn Dean Klinger PUBLIC PRESENT: Tim Olig 3. AGENDA REVIEW Iverson stated there were no changes to the published agenda. 4. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Tim Olig discussed the E-skateboard trail use initiative noting the general interest would be finding ways to potentially allow access to E-skateboards on some of the paved trails on the outskirts of the city. He stated the program would be similar to the E-bike pilot project and there would be a speed limit involved. He mentioned certain trails that could be good options for success of the program. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 2  Mr. Olig requested Board feedback and thanked members for their time and consideration. (**Secretary’s Note: Brown arrived at this point in the meeting.) York asked about the specific trails being targeting noting Mr. Olig mentioned outlying trails at first, but then specifically mentioned the Spring Creek and Poudre Trails which run through the city. He asked if the Power Trail and Mason Trail were also being considered. Mr. Olig replied portions of the Mason Trail is one of the exceptions where E-skateboards are currently allowed. He stated he would generally advocate for those portions of the trail more toward the periphery of the city for this initiative. Hart suggested the initiative should include all trails on which E-bikes are allowed in order to reduce confusion. Borchert asked about the maximum speed these devices can reach. Mr. Olig replied there is a spectrum of speeds for E-skateboards, some of which go upwards of 30 miles per hour and would not be appropriate for trails. Borchert asked if there are regulators or governors that control speeds. Mr. Olig replied many do have digital interfaces for limiting top speeds. Borchert asked how E-skateboards are primarily used now. Mr. Olig replied they are typically used in bike paths and on sidewalks and are allowed on paved trails in some other municipalities. Borchert asked if the City keeps any crash statistics on E-skateboards. Mr. Olig replied he was not aware of that. Lopez asked if E-skateboards need tool stations similar to those of bikes. Mr. Olig replied E-skateboards generally have a more robust set of tires and maintenance is generally substantially less than bikes. Gavaldon asked why this mode was not considered when work was being done with other modes. He also asked if there has ever been a capacity analysis done on the trails. Iverson replied the E-bike pilot program was focused solely on E-bikes and was following the lead of what was being discussed at the state level. He stated he was unsure if a capacity study has ever been completed but he would follow up with Parks Planning. Gavaldon asked if there is any type of safety data specific to E-skateboards. Iverson replied he was unsure if general accident reports specify the user types. Nicole Hahn, Engineering, replied there are a number of transportation categories that can be included on a police report, including E-bikes and other modes. Dean Klinger, Planning, Development, and Transportation Deputy Director, stated there have been different trail standards over time which have allowed for increased capacity. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 3  5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – APRIL 2021 Gavaldon made a motion, seconded by Hart, to approve the April 2021 minutes as written. The motion was adopted unanimously. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Update on College Avenue Back-up Issues at Raising Cane’s and Starbucks – Nicole Hahn Dean Klinger, Planning, Development, and Transportation Deputy Director, noted the situation with backups on College Avenue at Raising Cane’s and Starbucks is not acceptable and is a difficult problem to solve. He commented on the City’s need to adapt to the COVID environment and the associated traffic trends. Nicole Hahn, Engineering, commented on the increased backup of traffic in the area during the pandemic due to the increase in drive-through use. She noted monitoring of queues in the area has been ongoing since September and trends have shown a decrease in queuing at Raising Cane’s since things have started to return to normal, but an increase at Starbucks, likely due to people returning to work. Hahn discussed crash analysis in the area noting police reports are now including information related to possible traffic backups. She stated staff has met with Raising Cane’s regularly and they have submitted a site redesign to help improve capacity on the site. She stated temporary improvements have helped to reduce the duration of the College Avenue stacking and noted there has been a significant reduction in overflow stacking since the dining room reopened at 100% capacity at the beginning of May. Regarding the Starbucks location, Hahn stated staff is working to develop capacity solutions to help improve the overall function of the site. Hahn outlined the plans for ensuring this issue does not occur in the future, including the requirement of a queuing analysis with every drive-through location, working with existing drive-throughs on site orientation and ways to improve capacity, and ensuring development agreement language requires all traffic to be contained on-site. Hart suggested a solution moving forward would be to not connect access directly to major arterials. He also noted the statistics seem to show a number of which would not have occurred had the situation been addressed by the restaurants. Hart mentions that while those restaurants cannot be held responsible for those collisions, they are a significant contributing factor. Gavaldon commented on issues with the Starbucks location and stated he is not satisfied with any of the solutions. He stated one accident is one too many. He stated that while the issue at Raising Cane’s has improved somewhat, there are still concerns, particularly given the speed of vehicles coming down the hill. He TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 4  suggested there may need to be a no right-turn on red at Stuart. He also commented the City should perhaps have been more assertive in stopping drive-through developments. He stated the City should be better at addressing these issues in a timely manner. York stated the plans outlined by staff are good for moving forward; however, they do not address dealing with urgent situations for which a quick response is necessary. He stated the quick response for Raising Cane’s would have been to block the driveway and require all vehicles to enter from the back. Chair Rachline agreed with York that it is disappointing a more immediate solution did not occur. She asked about Raising Cane’s plan for the double drive-through and suggested more serious consequences be placed upon business who cause these types of issues. Hahn showed the Raising Cane’s site plan of what it will look like after the improvements and discussed what will occur during construction. Klinger acknowledged the frustration around short-term action and agreed drive- throughs should be sited in off-roadway parking lots. He noted there are only a few streets in the city that allow drive-throughs, College Avenue being one. He detailed some of the challenges around having Police enforce traffic backup issues noting there are questions around what laws are being broken and around initiating traffic enforcement around other priorities. Regarding enforcement mechanisms that may be available from a land use or business licensing perspective, Klinger stated these businesses have gone through the development process at one point in time, have met the requirements, and have an entitlement to these uses. York stated that while these may be excuses, they are not solutions to the problems. Chair Rachline stated Boardmembers are expecting actions that are taken, not excuses for not taking actions, and that this topic predates the pandemic. Gavaldon stated a change of use for a business should involve a study of traffic patterns, citing the example of the change from Arby’s to Starbucks. He stated the drive-through capacity is not adequate for the Starbucks nature of business. Klinger stated that while he did intend to add more context around challenges, he will instead communicate to the Board what the short-term solution action will be as soon as it can be determined. He noted the data around Raising Cane’s has shown actions have significantly reduced the amount of time traffic is backing up. Hart suggested it is time to table the discussion of this item until something new is brought up. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 5  b. Board Comments on the Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards (LCUASS) Update Hart commended the summary of the revisions. There were no other comments on the item. 7. NEW BUSINESS a. Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO) Review of Round One Offers – Aaron Iverson Iverson briefly introduced the list of round one offers for the transportation area of the budget. York asked if land use planning BFO offers fall under the high-performing government or neighborhood livability and social health outcome area. Iverson replied the Planning Department and similar entities fall under neighborhood livability and social health. York stated some of the things that are being done right now need to change in order to meet the City’s climate action goals, including changes in how the Transportation Plan and Land Use Plan are thought about. He commented on incentivizing land use planning to encourage bus rapid transit, human-powered transportation, and other things to ensure the land is present at the front end. Iverson agreed the items are intertwined, which is why City Plan combined land use and transportation. Iverson outlined the FC Moves budget offers and their classifications as either ongoing, enhancement, or restore. Gavaldon stated he is cost sensitive about adding staff and ensuring there is a valuable return on investment. Iverson replied staff must make a compelling case for the need to add FTEs. He stated the ‘Shift Your Ride’ program would be large enough for a full-time employee. York asked if the school traffic safety assessments are only for Poudre School District schools or if charters and pre-schools are included. Iverson replied the partnership is with the School District; however, he will follow up with Nancy Nichols, Safe Routes to School Coordinator, to determine her intent. York commented on parents parking in bike lanes during school pick-up at Ridgeview Classical School. Borchert suggested the Board could add value in terms of providing feedback on enhancement offers or missing items. Iverson concurred. Brown requested additional details about the virtual adaptive bike library. Iverson replied that offer may be dropped completely as the new E-bike and E-scooter program is getting ready to launch and Spin is going to run an adaptive system out of that TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 6  program as well. Brown suggested Drew Brooks make a presentation at a future meeting. Chair Rachline asked if there are any Transfort enhancement offers. Iverson replied in the affirmative and provided details on the Transfort offers. York asked about the length of the Transfort contract with CSU for game day service. Iverson replied he would need to look into that. Chair Rachline asked if all the offers correlate to the Strategic Master Plan. Iverson replied in the affirmative and pointed out the offers’ links to strategic objectives. Hart suggested Boardmembers examine the offers and bring forth suggestions and desires for a recommendation to Council. Iverson commented on the current staffing levels at FC Moves. York noted each of the BFO outcome teams have public participation and asked why the Board does not have a liaison on the transportation team. Iverson replied he is meeting with the team next week and will look into it. Hart stated he would like to see all restore offers receive funding as well as many of the enhancement offers. York asked if there is a total for all transportation BFO offers. Iverson replied there are $95 million in offers for the transportation outcome area; however, there is not enough money to fund all offers. He stated he has yet to be informed of the allocated budget for the outcome area. Gavaldon asked if this presentation will go before the BAC. Iverson replied in the affirmative. Gavaldon asked if the BAC submits its budget recommendations through the Transportation Board. Hart replied that is how it has occurred historically. Chair Rachline suggested BFO topics be on the agenda at each of the upcoming meetings and encouraged Boardmembers to ask questions leading up to each meeting. 8. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Hart reported he is in support of an item mentioned in an email to be discussed by Chair Rachline. Lopez reported on discussions with Amanda Mansfield about the low-income bike rental program. Borchert reported on attending the first North Front Range Metropolitan Planning Organization (NFRMPO) Community Advisory Committee meeting. Chair Rachline encouraged Board members to sign up for the NFRMPO newsletter. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 7  York reported on the recent Super Issues Board meeting during which the BFO process and water supply requirements were discussed. He also discussed the importance of ensuring equitable access to all levels of transportation in new development and redevelopment. He noted the BAC coordinated the E-bike study, during which time he was the liaison to the BAC and he suggested at the time the policy should have included other E-micro transit mechanisms other than just bikes. He agreed trail capacity should be analyzed and commented on the importance of having corridors that promote the safe, efficient use of non-gasoline powered transportation, which would involve changes in the Land Use Code related to development and redevelopment. He stated he had a discussion around this topic with the Planning and Zoning Commission at its recent work session. York reported the Planning and Zoning Commission also received a presentation on the LCUASS updates and had a discussion around gas-powered bicycles. York noted gas- powered bicycles are currently only allowed on streets, not trails, and suggested the Board may want to consider that topic. Borchert agreed the Board should consider the evolving forms of micro-transit and appropriate locations for each. York announced the transportation section of the International Science and Engineering Fair for high school students. Gavaldon reported on the Super Issues meeting and discussed the water reduction program at his HOA. He commented on his research on metro districts and on the upcoming Civic Center Master Plan input session. Chair Rachline stated Cortney Geary, the new Active Modes Manager, sent a message regarding the conflict four times per year between the BAC meetings and the Super Issues meetings and suggesting the BAC meet with the Transportation Board during the months of conflict. She requested input from Boardmembers on this possibility. Hart expressed support for quarterly joint meetings and noted there are many times the Board discusses cycling and related impacts. York stated having 1/3 of the meetings be combined seems excessive and stated the point of having the BAC was to delegate cycling issues to it. He suggested dedicating just a portion of the joint meetings to be combined if quarterly meetings were to occur. Gavaldon stated he would not be comfortable with regular joint meetings as they could potentially take away from both groups. He suggested the BAC could potentially meet on a different night when there is a conflict with Super Issues meetings. York expressed support for having a joint meeting once per year during a week when there is a conflict and having the BAC determine an alternative meeting day for the other three. Gavaldon agreed. York made a motion, seconded by Gavaldon, that the Transportation Board officially hold a joint meeting with the Bicycle Advisory Committee at least once per year during a TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 8  month when there would be a conflict with the Super Issues meeting. Hart stated he would support the motion if the Board is better about delegating and communicating to the BAC when there are bicycle-related topics it would like considered. The motion was adopted unanimously. Chair Rachline stated she has sent information to members regarding the Air Quality Advisory Board’s initiative around electric vehicles and asked if the Board would be interested in having the Chair make a presentation or in having a joint meeting. York expressed interest in having a discussion and agreed the Energy Board should also be involved. Chair Rachline stated Emily Gorgol will be the new Council liaison and she and Brown will be meeting with her to discuss priorities. 9. OTHER BUSINESS a. Bicycle Advisory Committee Report (**Secretary’s Note: As Owens attended the last BAC meeting and was not present, Gavaldon and Iverson stated they would provide minutes to the Board.) b. City Council 6-Month Calendar Review Iverson stated Council will be discussing the Linden Street project on June 15th and budget discussions will begin in August. c. Staff Liaison Report Iverson reported on the reopening plans for the City and stated there has been no direction on the future of the format of Board meetings. He suggested members start a conversation about their preferences. York asked if the City has announced whether vaccines will be required to be in City buildings and suggested that could play into whether meetings return to an in-person format. Iverson replied his understanding is that requirement will not exist as the City does not want staff to be put in the position of trying to enforce that for the public. He also stated there will be no requirement for staff vaccines. Gavaldon suggested he may be more comfortable with remote or hybrid meetings for the upcoming future. Brown and Chair Rachline agreed. York questioned whether the City has the technology for a hybrid meeting. Iverson replied that would need to be examined. Borchert stated he would like to learn more about the feedback from Council regarding the discontent with the reimagining Boards and Commissions project. TRANSPORTATION BOARD TYPE OF MEETING – REGULAR 5/19/2021 – MINUTES Page 9  10. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:39 p.m. by unanimous consent.