Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 01/18/2006MEETING MINUTES of the TRANSPORTATION BOARD January 18, 2006 5:45 p.m. City of Fort Collins Municipal Building Community Room 215 N. Mason Street FOR REFERENCE: CHAIR: Brent Thordarson 679-2165 VICE CHAIR: Gary Thomas 482-7125 STAFF LIAISON: Mark Jackson 416-2029 ADMIN SUPPORT: Cynthia Cass 224-6058 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Don Edmondson Sara Frazier Neil Grigg Jeannette Hallock-Solomon Tim Johnson Rick Price Ed Robert Gary Thomas Brent Thordarson CITY STAFF: Kathleen Bracke Cynthia Cass Mark Jackson Ron Phillips 1. CALL TO ORDER ABSENT: Lee Watkins Kevin Westhuis OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE Ed King Carol Parr Man Han Craig Gaskill Dave Martinez Tom Anzia Robin Stoneman Allan Brown The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Thomas at 6:05 p.m. APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes Transportation Board January 16, 2006 2. AGENDA REVIEW Page 2 of 6 Jackson stated that item 7b is no longer an action item. There will only be a brief overview. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT Jackson introduced Ed King who is here as an observer tonight. Mr. King has some background in transportation and before moving here, served as Chair of the Metropolitan Planning Organization in Chicago. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (NOVEMBER 2005) There was a motion by Johnson and a second by Hallock-Solomon to approve the minutes as presented. The motion carried by a unanimous vote, 9 — 0. 5. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT None. 6. DISCUSSIONANFORMATIONAL ITEMS a. US 287 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (NORTH) — M. Jackson & Team Jackson introduced Dave Martinez with CDOT and Xian Han with JF Sato who is the consultant on this project. Dave and Shawn presented the background and an update on the project. Hahn said that A4 is the preferred alternative. After the presentation, the board had a few questions and comments such as asking the team to make sure that a roundabout is considered as part of the project and to keep bike lanes and safety in mind as the project moves along. b. US 287 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW STUDY (SOUTH) —M. Jackson & Team Carol Parr with CDOT and Craig Gaskill with Carter & Burgess were introduced as part of the project team. This study identified and evaluated future transportation needs in the US 287 corridor between 29`h Street in Loveland and Harmony Road in Fort Collins. The needs were considered in the context of environmental constraints and public input. The outcome is a recommended alternative that identifies future right-of-way footprints. The purpose of this project is development of a US 287 corridor that provides safe and efficient mobility for all modes by addressing congestion, modal alternatives, and safety. The recommended alternative will ensure adequate area for the following future improvements: • Widening the roadway to 6-lanes to accommodate future travel demand and reduce congestion. • Intersection improvements to accommodate peak -hour demand. APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes Transportation Board January 18, 2006 Page 3 of 6 • Priority for future bus transit. • Safety improvements including access control south of Carpenter Road to 29`h Street. • Pedestrian and bicycle facilities connecting Fort Collins and Loveland. • Traffic signal timing improvements. Upon conclusion of the presentation, the board again expressed that it's imperative that bike lanes and sidewalks be as far away from the 55 mph auto lanes as possible for obvious safety reasons. c. I-25 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Dave Martinez with CDOT and Tom Anzia with Felsburg, Holt & Ullevig were introduced as members of the project team. The board was given an update via Power Point. Highlights of the presentation were: • Highway: - Regardless of transit improvements made, widening I-25 would be necessary to accommodate anticipated 2030 demand - Auxiliary lanes or 8 general purpose lanes on I-25 may be necessary in select locations. - Of the managed lane alternatives, High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes would provide the most improvement in congestion and would attract the most users. • Transit: - Commuter rail would attract the most ridership but bus would be the most cost effective. - I-25 transit options would compete for ridership with the US 287 and US 85 alignments. US 287 and US 85 alignments would not compete with each other. - Ridership would be similar on the western and central rail alignments. - Western rail alignment would be closer to population and employment centers and would cost less. - Overall travel time is less for Western Alignment. • Environmental: - Western rail alignment has more potential to impact existing residential uses, including increases in noise and vibration. - Central rail alignment has less potential to impact residential uses and less potential to impact archaeological properties and threatened or endangered species. - Alternatives with the least environmental damage to aquatic resources focus improvements along I-25. - Central rail also has less potential to benefit or adversely impact low income or minority populations. - Packages that include commuter rail (western alignment) or bus rapid transit result in the greatest reductions of vehicle miles traveled. - Packages that include commuter rail are more consistent with local and regional agency policies and plans. APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes Transportation Board January 18, 2006 Page 4 of 6 There are three packages up for consideration: 1. Package A: 6 General Purpose (GP) lane + Western Commuter Rail (WCR) alignment 2. Package B: Managed Toll (MT) lane + Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) 3. No Action Alternative The project team is seeking public input as to: 1. Questions about Level 3 analysis? 2. Concerns about recommendations? 3. Clarifications about improvements? 4. Improvements you like or dislike and why? There were a few questions and comments from the board that included a comment that because of connections, the Western alignment is preferred by at least one member. It would be nice to see the smaller communities connected; not just Denver. Another comment was that is would be nice to see a Denver to Longmont rail connection as well. The question was asked whether Highway 7 interchange upgrade was being considered in any of this and the team said that it hasn't been considered yet, but they will look into it. The team also stressed that they are not going to be asking the locals for any money for the project. 7. ACTION ITEMS a. SH-392 (CARPENTER RD) ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW STUDY—M. Jackson Jackson stated that this was originally scheduled as an action item, but since the Natural Resources Advisory Board was not ready to make a recommendation on this study tonight, it can wait until next month. As background information, the board was reminded that the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) is investigating solutions to meet the future transportation needs on SH 392, Carpenter Road, and Larimer County Road 32, from US 287 through Windsor. The purpose of the SH 392 Environmental Overview Study (EOS) is to study potential alternative alignments for local planning agencies to follow in order to set aside land for future transportation needs as development occurs. The study team gave the board a Power Point presentation that explained the alternatives currently under consideration in the third and final phase of screening and showed traffic volumes and levels of services for various scenarios. After the presentation, the floor was open for discussion. There was a consensus of the board to wait until next month to take action on this item. In the meantime, it was agreed that Chair Thordarson will call the NRAB Chair to get their thoughts and staff will provide feedback that's gathered at the Open House. APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 6 Transportation Board January 18, 2006 b. TRANSPORTATION MAINTENANCE FEE INTRO —M. Jackson Jackson briefed the board on the latest development saying that new direction has been given as of today. This topic will go before Council again on February 14 at a Work Session. The new idea is that TMF will only be one element of things to consider such as districts, new fees, services cuts, etc. Stay tuned -- more to come. 8. REPORTS a. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Thomas: David Roy is hosting a public meeting on January 21 regarding transit. - PTAG, February 8 at Joe's Coffee Shop Bill Kaufman and referendum money Johnson: - As part of new member packets, they should get copies of the various master plans and our Work Plan. Price: - TDM Program: Suggest an analysis of why this program fell below the line in the budget process. Frazier: - In a city as large as Austin, Texas, I saw buses with very few people in them there as well. Robert: - Attended EVSAG meeting and gave a report - Connection to Redwood? When? - Web site suggestions Thordarson: -Noticed stakes are out on S. Taft Hill In the City of Vancouver, Washington there are bus stops are that are equipped with lights that come on automatically at night. Are there any entities where it's legal to go through an intersection on a red light, such as late, late at night, if it's safe? b. STAFF REPORTS Jackson: The Bike Coordinator position has been advertised. We're hoping that perhaps March 1 we'll have a person on board. TSA Annual Reports were distributed. SmartTrips/TDM is currently doing a TMA study. Next Agenda • Cone Zones Report • BOB Appropriation Schedule • TDM Concerns (Rick Price) • SH 14 Relocation/Non-Route Based Strategies (action) • TMF Update • SH 392 EOS (Action) • Bike Plan Update (David Averill) • Election of Officers APPROVED Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 6 Transportation Board January 18, 2006 9. OTHER BUSINESS None 10. ADJOURN Chair Thordarson adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, EVA0--.' 04'a6 Cynthia Cass, Executive Admin Assistant City of Fort Collins — Transportation Services