Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Board - Minutes - 09/15/2007MEETING MINUTES of the TRANSPORTATION BOARD September 15, 2007 5:45 p.m. City of Fort Collins Municipal Building 215 N. Mason Street — Community Room FOR REFERENCE: Chair: Gary Thomas 482-7125 Vice Chair: Ed Robert 224-4864 Staff Liaison: Mark Jackson 416-2029 Administrative Support: Polly Bennett 224-6058 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Neil Grigg Bill Jenkins Shane Miller Ed Robert Gary Steen Gary Thomas Scott VanTatenhove CITY STAFF: Mark Jackson Polly Bennett Kathleen Bracke Randy Hensley Ward Stanford, Interim Traffic Engineer Erika Keeton, Interim Pavement Management Engineer Rick Richter, Interim City Engineer Larry Schneider, Streets Superintendent Marlys Sitmer, GM Transfort, DAR Sandy Aragon, Financial Coordinator, Traffic ABSENT: OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE: James Clausen Wade Troxell, Council Liaison Kevin Westhuis Tim Johnson Nancy York 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Thomas at 6:00 p.m. 2. AGENDA REVIEW Mark Jackson requested the addition of the Legislative Policy Agenda, and rescheduling the November meeting. 3. PUBLIC COMMENT Nancy York invited the Board to the Mobility Management meeting at Natural Resources (on Mountain and Mason) on Monday at 4:30 p.m.. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (August 2007) Robert moved to approve the August 2007 Transportation Board meeting minutes as presented. There was a second by Steen. The motion carried unanimously. 5. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT Wade Troxell, Council Liaison DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes Transportation Board September 19, 2007 Page 2 Transportation is becoming more of an issue from a Council point -of -view as well as public. He and Ben Manvel attended the last MPO meeting where there was general discussion surrounding regional transportation and how to proceed. He asked that we send the summary report from the MPO to the Transportation Board. Windsor and Fort Collins Councils are meeting next week to discuss 392/I-25 Interchange funding. Thomas: There was a Council agenda item on the airport a few weeks ago. Does the Council want the Transportation Board to be involved? Troxell: We are a 50% partner in the airport with some responsibility for oversight. It is an asset we should think and use strategically. Jackson: Any item the Council hears about the airport is welcome at the Transportation Board. The airport used to be housed under Transportation Services. Since the arrangement with the City is primarily financial, it was decided to move it to Mike Freeman's responsibility. Robert: When it comes to the transportation aspect of the airport, we were led to believe that Fort Collins wouldn't push for any commercial transportation. Is that policy under scrutiny for change? Troxell: I don't know. Jackson: I don't remember that. I think they are carefully restricting commercial growth out of the airport. Troxell: The bar was raised substantially because of security issues. Troxell: I requested some Transfort ridership information last night at Council. My main purpose for the request is best utilization of resources and balancing current versus future needs. Jackson: Marlys submitted a draft response that we hope to have ready for Council next Tuesday. 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS a. Pavement Management Program Rick Richter, Interim City Engineer Erika Keeton, Interim Pavement Management Engineer Richter presented the technical review of the Pavement Management System by Applied Pavement Technology, Inc. (APTech) The City aims for a Pavement Condition Index level of 75. Above 70, preventive maintenance is warranted. At 70, rehab is necessary; at 40, reconstruction is necessary. This is based on normal traffic usage, and deterioration over time. APTech's Report revealed: • State-of-the-art data collection activities. Internationally recognized software (Deighton). 75% of recommended projects are included in City's work plan. Progressive use of preventive maintenance treatments. Fort Collins (139,908) paved 1,742 lane miles at $2,997 per lane mile in 2006 (1" yr of participation). Westminster (108,351) paved 1,025 lane miles at $2,978 per lane mile in 2005* Denver (579,744) paved 5,665 lane miles at $2,599 per lane mile in 2005* *These numbers will be updated/changed when APTech releases the new data. APTech's Recommendations: • Level of Service (LOS) Current target 75 DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 Transportation Board September 19, 2007 Proposed target LOS B (70 — 85) • Designate separate LOS targets for arterial, collector, and residential • Link CityWorks program and Deighton software Adding 10 miles of streets every year. Costs are escalating at approximately 10% per year and the network condition continues to decline. Vehicle crashes increase at a level 40 and below. Currently, 2% of network is functioning at a level of service D or F. Jenkins: Is the escalation of oil prices taken into consideration? Richter: 65% - 70% of our expense is for asphalt. Asphalt costs have gone up 30%. Robert: Are we looking at new materials that might make a difference financially? Richter: Yes, we are using improved materials already. Miller: If we want to keep this curve the same as today, do you know what that would cost? Richter: It is somewhere between $13 & $15 million. Miller: Is there a projection on absolute lowest cost? Richter: This assumes '08 and '09 as fixed and projects to maintain the condition over time. Thomas: On your 2-line curve, if I read what you're saying, Council can take the existing recommended offer, sit on their hands until 2012, and still recover. Is that correct? Richter: This line assumes the infusion of $4.1 million in 2010, so no. Thomas: This Council can't indenture the Council of 2010 to do that, right? Jackson: Yes. This is all based on the assumption that the Council in 2010 will see that the funding is critical. VanTatenhove: Is 2010 the year that is critical across the board? Jackson: The quick answer is yes. The drawn out answer is that there are lots of things due to come online (projects, etc.). The magic number you heard on Monday night is that 2010 is when we rise out of the negative curve we've been in. Robert: The offer then, has been reduced as a means to spreading out the budget, is that correct? Jackson: Right. The Pavement Management offer was handled differently than other BFO offers because we were directed by management that the offer was to be X-amount. Hensley: Rick's 2007 budget is $8,267,000, about $700,000 short of maintaining a flat line condition -wise. We were asked what it would take to maintain the same level of service in 2008/09. Those numbers are $9,093,000 and $10, 003,000 to maintain what we are doing right now. $8,698,091and $8,846,034 are on the offers on the table, with an infusion of $4.1 million in 2010. That represents a decrease of $395,000 in 2008 and $1,157,000 in 2009. Jackson: Darin Atteberry sent a message to the T-Board: "I get it." Grigg: What we're looking at is a creeping crisis. An immediate crisis is what gets attention. We should come up with a strong statement that they are putting this off to a future Council. Johnson: This issue goes back many, many years. In 1997, the Board made a strong statement about this. Griggs: It might be good to remind the Council that citizens voted to maintain streets and maintain them well. Hensley: From a budget manager's point -of -view, the crisis is trying to find $4.1 million dollars. If I were advising Council, I would ask if it is realistic to expect to find $4.1 million in 2010. DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes Transportation Board September 19, 2007 Page 4 Griggs: Show present value of future costs, then bring in what is the likelihood that we'll get the $4.1 million dollars. Miller: Is there any analytically reliable way to translate the change in the amount of roads that are dangerous into an actual number as to injury or loss of life? Is there a function or way to relate the change in vehicle miles traveled/traffic usage and how, if modified, it would affect this? Richter: There is safety data relating to highways. I will see what I can find for an urban setting. Jackson: Safety is only one factor that affects this. You could also show the economic impact to the community. Robert: I don't think our Board can agree that this is a fiscally -responsible position for the Council to take. It is going to take some time to digest this and come up with a response to Council. If we do this right, it will show a strong need for a funding source above what we have now. We probably need to wrap this up tonight and regroup to come up with a response. Steen: What is our window for response? Jackson: Probably the P week in October. Jenkins: What percent of the entire Transportation budget is Pavement Management? Hensley: In a normal year, when we aren't funding the Mason Corridor project, this is our largest program. b. Budget Discussion Mark Jackson/Randy Hensley Jackson: We will take this discussion any way you want. Spotlight, line -by-line... Grigg/Thomas: Let's focus on Spotlight issues. What are potential problem areas? Jackson: The Mason Corridor project has become a focus for people wanting to poke holes in this budget. It is listed both in funded and unfunded because of the increased 20% local match, which is currently unfunded. Because it is leveraged funds, it would be an actual $4.2 million dollar hit. We have been instructed to look at efficiencies as the project goes into design. Robert: Can we assume you've already scrubbed the Transportation budget to find money? Bracke: We are looking at some of the BOB projects for potential local match funding. We are in the design development phase of the project. Final design won't be complete until sometime next year, so there may be other areas to find money. FTA understands that our numbers will change after final design. Private development could potentially fund part of the gap. There may be a way to find the $850,000 by the time the project goes to construction. Steen: Is there a way to advertise that you are looking for that kind of investment? Thomas: What you're saying is that there is a crisis, but you may work through it. Bracke: Right. Although I would be more comfortable if we had the money. The City's contribution to this project is very small compared to the Federal money infused. FCBikes may also rise up as an issue, although it takes a small amount of General Fund money and quadruples it with grant money. Jackson: When you look at funded offers, also look at the "Stop Doing" list. Some accepted offers aren't the level that was submitted. There were reduction offers that offset some of them. DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 Transportation Board September 19, 2007 In unfunded offers, some are enhancement offers that were not accepted (Streets/Engineering for curb repair and the bridge program; Transfort for expanded hours; ADA, etc.). Some critical Planning projects didn't make the cut. Thomas: Can you speak to the office of the PDT Director? Jackson: As part of the reorganization that took place in 2007, CPES and Transportation were combined into Planning, Development & Transportation. The idea was that it reduces the number of direct reports to the City Manager and strengthens efficiencies in functions. Robert: Didn't we save $267,000 by eliminating two directors and executive administrative assistants? Jackson: The Transportation Director's salary went to fund the CFO. Since BFO does not allow offers to be split between Results Teams, the PDT Director's office was put in Transportation. Thomas: Isn't this something that could be put off? Hensley: In the short-term, we've been functioning well. Mark has been doing a terrific job. He reports directly to the Deputy City Manager. She also manages another Service Unit, which is a big load for her, and creates some gaps. The other Service Unit has a Director. Griggs: Are the cuts to Streets too large a hit for us? Jackson: The unfunded $300,000 offer for deicing was put in at the request of a citizen. We will continue with the same mix of materials we currently use. Schneider: The capital improvements cut ($245,000) is a large decrease and will result in equipment being run longer. Grigg: I suppose that means we'll have large replacement expenditures down the road when the equipment needs to be replaced. Thomas: If we have another large blizzard, there is the risk that some equipment will break down. Schneider: We saw than during the 2006/2007 blizzards. Miller: What does community emergency mean in a bad storm... that you'll plow a residential street if someone calls 911? Schneider: Yes, we will dispatch a truck so emergency equipment can get in. Miller: Do you keep a list of streets that have people with serious medical conditions? Schneider: No. Our equipment can get there as quickly as the ambulance/fire trucks when a 911 call comes in. Miller: Is there cost benefit information available from the deicer material manufacturers? Schneider: Yes, plus we do soil/plant sample testing with CSU and rely on CDOT studies on magnesium chloride. Our material is 30% mag chloride. The alternative requested was mag chloride free, which is extremely expensive. Robert: If we have a warm season in 2007/2008 and the plows are sitting there unused, do you get to keep the money? Schneider: No. It goes back to the reserves. Hensley: We maintain reserves for emergencies/revenue shortfalls, etc. Since Streets went so far in the hole with the 2006/2007 blizzards, we had to infuse his budget from reserves so he can deal with this year's storms. We are hoping we don't get a lot of snow so we can replenish the reserves. VanTatenhove: Could we dip in those reserves to fund Mason? Jackson: No, that would come from identified one-time cost savings. DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes Transportation Board September 19, 2007 Page 6 Griggs: Are there spotlight items for Transfort and Traffic? Thomas: Dial -A -Ride is only funded until the end of this year. I suspect there will be pressure on Council to fund it next year. Sittner: Evening service is being operated currently, and is funded through the end of this year. There is no money in the recommended budget after January 1, 2008. I anticipate a loud outcry from the people using it. Jackson: Council is adamant that they will only take it to January. Sittner: Because they were so adamant, I did not write a solo offer for Dial -A -Ride. Jackson: We went to Council in advance of the BFO process to get a reading on their position. Miller: Can you recall the amount of money required to fund extended hours this year? Sittner: Approximately $65,000. Thomas: In Council's view, that means if you're disabled, you get a ride at night. If you are a fixed -route user, you don't, because fixed route doesn't run at night. Sittner: The disability has to prevent the person from using fixed route, which means they wouldn't have a ride at night. Edmondson: It shouldn't be a special issue. Miller: Not all of us need all services in equal manner at all times. A person who is disabled may or may not have access to alternative transportation. Robert: I want to know what you want the Transportation Board to do. Sittner: As a manager, the basic service offer was accepted, for the most part. That maintains our current level of service with the exception of Dial -A -Ride. The offer for extended hours is very costly, so I understand why that wasn't funded. The Travel Trainer program is new, so I understand why that wasn't funded. I think the offers accepted were reasonable. Hensley: From a budget manager point -of -view, the Transportation Board is a great advocate for us. There is a limited pot of money, so when you ask what we want you to support, it is very difficult for us to answer. You should look at your priorities and see what your priority programs are. Remember, that if you think something should be moved above the line, something else would have to fall below. VanTatenhove (38.42 & 32.52) If Transfort expands service, would we have to also extend Dial -A -Ride services? Sittner: Yes, within 1/4 of a mile. York: My understanding from Monday night's presentation is that you can move money from another Result Team if necessary. Thomas: I agree that we can look at other platforms to see what could be pulled down. Johnson: In the extended hours are there hours that get more bang for the buck? Sittner: We put 4 extra hours of service for all routes, which meant we started 1 hour earlier and ran 3 hours later. There are many ways you could dice it and slice it, but we put it in as a full service offer. Bracke: There were Transportation offers that were submitted to other Results Teams as well. For instance, the Quiet Zones offer wasn't funded, but it wasn't in the Transportation Result area. York: What is the Downtown River District project that is getting $500,000 unrestricted? Bracke: It is the grant -funded work on Jefferson & Mountain Avenue (Highway 14). Jackson: This group of managers excelled at using leveraged funds this year. There was a huge amount of leveraging in these offers ... a great use of taxpayer money. Robert: Capital projects are included in the budget. DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes Transportation Board September 19, 2007 Page 7 Jackson: we all winced when we learned that BOB projects were to be included in the BFO process. Edmondson: Are the stop doing amounts proportional for the departments? Hensley: When we first started out, all of the proposed cuts were proportional. When the recommendations got to the Results Teams, they applied their priorities to it and it ended up disproportional. Thomas: We could each do our homework and reconvene, the entire group could work via email and then get together again, or we can do a small group and make recommendations. We need to do a classic job, because this is where we can have some impact. Edmondson: For this group to come back from zero to formulate that, will take too long. We need to work according to a plan. Thomas: I am willing to take a shot at a rough draft capturing the elements we've discussed tonight, and perhaps we can get together in 2 weeks. Thomas: I will email a first draft of our letter to Council. Please express any opinion, whether you agree or disagree with others. ACTION ITEMS a. Legislative Policy Agenda Mark Jackson Thomas: Deferred. b. Reschedule November meeting Thomas: The December meeting isn't a meeting ... we go out for dinner. Suggestions for rescheduling the November meeting? Send an email to the Board polling a move to November 28t', hopefully to be held at the new Police facility. 8. ACTION ITEMS None. 9. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS Griggs: Railroad Committee met twice. Met with CO PUC and RR commission. How to designate/get approval for Quiet Zones; Cut down on switching delays by working with RR; develop a conceptual long-range railroad plan. Will meet 6 — 8 more times. Edmondson: None. Jenkins None. Miller None. VanTatenhove: Attended 2 school district bus meetings; overlap is special education and DAR for disabled students. Difference is curb -to -curb vs door-to-door. Robert: Met Chief Harrison on Monday night and mentioned wanting to meet at the Police Facility. He thought it was a great idea. Perhaps November. Steen: Climate Task Force meeting tomorrow night. Looking for solutions to reduce emissions. b. STAFF REPORTS DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes Transportation Board September 19, 2007 Page 8 Jackson: Legislative Policy Agenda: Transportation statements begin on page 31. They are looking for comments on those. The 2007 Urban Mobility Report: Hours of delay for the average American. City Engineer Interviews: October 3. Traffic Engineer position is advertised. Want to interview early November. PDT Director position is advertised again. Goal is to interview 4`" quarter. Assistant General Manager, Transfort — Selected candidate withdrew after accepting. October Agenda: • Windsor/Fort Collins IGA 3921-25 Interchange 8. OTHER BUSINESS None. 9. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 9:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Polly Wrinett Executive Administrative Assistant