HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 08/18/2009 - RESOLUTION 2009-079 ADOPTING THE 2009 TRANSFORT ST ITEM NUMBER: 18
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY DATE: August 18, zoos
FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL STAFF: Kurt Ravenschlag
Nicole Hahn
Scott Weeks
SUBJECT
Resolution 2009-079 Adopting the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan as a Component of the
Transportation Master Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
The Transfort Strategic Operating Plan was presented to the following boards and commissions as
part of the transit strategic plan process. Their recommendations are:
• The Transportation Board voted 6-1 to support a recommendation to City Council to adopt
the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan on July 15, 2009.
• The Planning and Zoning Board voted unanimously to support a recommendation to City
Council to adopt the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan on July 17, 2009.
• The Natural Resources Advisory Board voted unanimously to support a recommendation to
City Council to adopt the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan on July 15, 2009.
• The Economic Advisory Commission voted 4-1 to support a recommendation to City
Council to adopt the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan on June 3, 2009.
• The Commission on Disabilities sent a letter of support for the Transfort Strategic Operating
Plan to City Council on April 22, 2009.
• The Air Quality Advisory Board voted unanimously to support a recommendation to City
Council to adopt the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan on April 20, 2009.
• The Youth Advisory Board sent a letter of support for the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan
to City Council on March 4, 2009.
Attachment 1 contains the minutes of the boards and commissions.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
No direct financial impacts exist as a result of adopting the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan
(TSOP). However, the TSOP provides funding strategies as recommended by a citizen committee
that the City may be involved in at a later date.
August 18, 2009 -2- Item No. 18
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of the 2008/2009 Budgeting for Outcomes process, the City Council approved funding to
pursue the 2009 Transit Strategic Operating Plan update, which was to be completed by the end of
2009. Over the past year and with extensive public input, the proposed Transfort Strategic
Operating Plan was prepared by a team that included City staff and consultants. The primary
elements of the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan include goals, operating plans, financial plans,
implementation, and action items.
The Transfort Strategic Operating Plan update was part of a larger transit strategic plan process
among the City of Fort Collins-Transfort, the City of Loveland-COLT, and the Poudre School
District(PSD). The purpose of the transit strategic plan process was to provide a coordinated effort
in updating the 2001 Transfort Service Plan and the 2004 COLT Transit Plan, as well as providing
detailed analysis of the opportunities public transportation offers PSD high schools.
The Transfort Strategic Operating Plan also addresses the coordination of transit service with the
planned Mason Corridor MAX project, identifies potential funding mechanisms and practical
phasing options, and addresses financial solutions required to create and sustain a high-performing
transit system.
Separate documents have been created for Transfort and COLT in order to simplify the plan
adoption process.
BACKGROUND
The 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan(TSOP)is an update to the 2001 Transfort Service Plan
adopted by the Fort Collins City Council. The purpose of this project is to prepare an updated
TSOP,which serves the Fort Collins urbanized area,and to contribute to the transit services related
policies contained within the adopted Fort Collins City Plan and Transportation Master Plan.
The TSOP itself is divided into chapters covering the following topics:
• Chapter 1 —Introduction
• Chapter 2 —Existing Conditions
• Chapter 3 —Demographics and Community Profile
• Chapter 4—Public Involvement and Stakeholder Coordination
• Chapter 5 —Proposed Phased Service Concepts
• Chapter 6—Capital and Operating Requirements
• Chapter 7—Implementation of Service Improvements
• Appendices
Presented below is a summary of the contents of each chapter.
August 18, 2009 -3- Item No. 18
Chapter 1 - Introduction
The project team developed six primary goals to guide the development of the 2009 TSOP update.
These goals are outlined below:
• Goal 1 —Develop an expanded transit system focused on productivity and performance to
meet the Transportation Master Plan and City Plan Policies.
• Goal 2 — Meet and exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal for Transportation CO2
reductions by 2020.
• Goal 3—Provide enhanced mobility for seniors, youth, disabled, and transit dependent.
• Goal 4 — Develop a public transportation system that reduces roadway related costs for
maintenance, right-of-way acquisition, and construction.
• Goal 5 - Provide funding recommendations to fully implement the Transit Strategic Plan.
• Goal 6 - Stimulate the local economy through investment in public transportation
infrastructure and operations.
The 2009 TSOP update was undertaken in several key steps, as noted below:
• Collection of community input
• Review of related plans
• Evaluation of existing transit market
• Consideration of growth patterns
• Assessment of existing transit services
• Development of initial transit service concepts
• Identification of opportunities to phase transit improvements
• Integration of PSD transportation needs
• Evaluation of funding and governance options.
Chapter 2 - Existing Conditions
To identify the productivity and effectiveness of the existing Transfort system, an assessment of
existing transit system performance was conducted. Between January 1, 2008 and December 31,
2008,Transfort had approximately 1.9 million riders on its fixed-route system. Transfort ridership
varies significantly depending on whether or not CSU is in session;with average weekday ridership
being 73%higher when CSU is in session. Service improvements were developed based on current
productivity measures for each route, determining routes with more efficiencies, those that are
underperforming, and routes which are unable to accommodate high demand.
Chapter 3—Demographics and Community Profile
Land use densities can have a significant impact on the productivity and effectiveness of transit
services. Three land use density characteristics (population density, employment density, and
combined population and employment density) were considered for the year 2005 and the future
forecast year of 2035. Density is defined as the number of persons(residents and/or employees)per
acre. This data is collected and forecasted by the North Front Range Metropolitan Planning
Organization (NFRMPO).
August 18, 2009 -4- Item No. 18
The 2005 population density in Fort Collins was concentrated in residential areas near downtown
Fort Collins,as well as the areas west of CSU. By 2035,population density is projected to increase
in these same areas, as well as in the vicinity of Mountain Vista and Timberline. The 2005
employment density in Fort Collins was concentrated along College Avenue and the Mason
Corridor, in particular downtown Fort Collins, near "Old Town" and the CSU campus. By 2035,
employment density is projected to intensify in these same areas, as well as in the vicinity of
Mountain Vista and Timberline. The 2005 combined population and employment density in Fort
Collins was concentrated in the older established areas of Fort Collins and projected to increase,
with the exception of less density in the southern portion of the city. As already noted,the Mountain
Vista area is projected to increase significantly in combined density by 2035.
Demographic information was incorporated into the service concept development process as this
particular data reflects transit dependency,and can also indicate the potential productivity of transit
services. Transit dependent populations often include students, individuals who are not able to
drive, or persons that do not have the economic means to own a vehicle. Predictably, the highest
densities of students exist near the CSU campus. Individuals ages 17 and younger are most
concentrated south and west of downtown Fort Collins. The density of individuals over the age of
60 years is also concentrated in and around downtown Fort Collins. When reviewing median
household income characteristics, lower income households are somewhat concentrated in central
Fort Collins with higher income households in the perimeter areas. These demographic
characteristics indicate that transit dependent populations are more focused in the central areas of
the City of Fort Collins, but these markets are also distributed throughout the outlying areas.
Current and projected traffic conditions were also considered in the service concept development
process in an effort to identify appropriate roadways for transit service and alternative modes of
travel. As of 2005, the most congested portions of the roadway were along Harmony Road near
Shields, College, and Timberline and along College near Harmony and near the CSU campus. By
2035,congestion and traffic volumes are projected to increase significantly,with the most congested
areas projected to be along College Avenue, both near CSU/downtown and south of Carpenter.
Portions of Harmony are also expected to experience high volumes and congestion,particularly just
east of College Avenue. Prospect is also expected to experience increased congestion.
Chapter 4 - Public Involvement and Stakeholder Coordination
In an effort to gain current perspectives and needs regarding transit services, public input was
gathered at a series of public and stakeholder meetings held in Fort Collins and Loveland.
Comments were also received via email, phone and postal mail. Key public stakeholder activities
conducted in Fort Collins are listed below:
• Three public meetings were held from July 2008 to April 2009.
• Open houses were held at the four PSD high schools(Fort Collins,Poudre,Rocky Mountain,
and Fossil Ridge High Schools).
• Stakeholder briefings/interviews with City staff, local and regional governmental agencies,
advocacy groups, CSU, boards and commissions, UniverCity Connections, Chamber of
Commerce, local businesses,the real estate and development community,transit users, and
social service agencies were conducted.
August 18, 2009 -5- Item No. 18
The most frequently received comments from the public are listed below:
• Increase frequency to at least 30 minutes on all routes
• Increase hours of service, especially in the evening and on weekends
• Establish regional connection routes between Fort Collins and Longmont
• Ensure that schedules and routes are easy to understand
• Implement a grid system
• Increase access to lower income housing areas
• Add more room for bikes on buses and for bike parking at stops
• Add more transit coverage throughout the community.
A Citizen's Financial Advisory Committee(FAC)was organized in support of the project and was
comprised of representatives from both Fort Collins and Loveland. The purpose of the FAC was
to develop a range of funding mechanisms and ultimate recommendations that will enable proposed
operational strategies to be implemented. The FAC had open discussions about the required
investment for transit strategies, related funding issues, and options to address those issues. The
recommendations of the FAC are listed in Attachment 7.
The following is a brief summary of the FAC's evaluation criteria and recommendation:
• Establish reliable and dedicated funding sources
• Ensure that the sources are fair and do not place undo burden on users,who may be the least
able to pay
• Ensure an ease of administration and implementation
• Revenue must grow as the community grows
• Ensure a mechanism for service differentiation by community
• Attempt to identify a proposal that is likely to gain public acceptance and success with
voters.
Chapter 5 - Proposed Phased Service Concepts
The TSOP update presents a framework for implementation of future transit improvements in three
phases. Phase 1 recommends modest transit growth over existing service. It assumes the
implementation of MAX service and the refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX.
Several near-term improvements were implemented in March 2009 as a result of initial
recommendations from the TSOP update. These changes were incorporated into the TSOP update
under Phase 1 improvements. Near-term improvements included the elimination of one low-
productivity route, the addition of one new route (Route 19 with service between CSU and Front
Range Community College via Shields) and minor changes to the schedules of seven routes to
enhance efficiency.
i
August 18, 2009 -6 Item No. 18
PHASE 1
An overview of the Phase 1 recommendations follows:
Local Services:
• Relocation of the South Transit Center (STC) to the MAX terminus at a location off of
Fairway Lane
• Assumes the implementation of MAX service along the Mason Corridor from the DTC to
the proposed new STC
• Proposes some new services and realignment of existing routes along Elizabeth,University,
Horsetooth, and Drake
• Recommends the extension of hours on select routes so that early evening service(until 8:30
PM) is provided on weekdays and Saturdays
• Recommends improved service frequencies on CSU routes and proposes a new numbering
system for CSU routes
• Includes a proposed new Downtown circulator that would be operated by Transfort, but
would most likely be funded through public/private partnerships.
Poudre School District Services
• Includes afternoon service via two dedicated local routes that serve Lincoln Junior High and
Poudre High Schools
• Recommends improved access to Rocky Mountain High School via Shields.
Regional Services
• Proposes modification of the FoxTrot route so that it connects to the proposed new STC in
Fort Collins (terminating at the existing North.Transfer Center in Loveland).
PHASE 2
Phase 2 recommends significant expansion of transit service in Fort Collins as well as expansion of
regional connections to Denver. Partnering strategies between participating jurisdictions would
likely be considered for implementation of regional services. This Phase assumes the continued
refinement of local routes to coordinate with MAX. Phase 2 introduces a transition to a grid
network in Fort Collins and provides greater route coverage, higher service frequencies, and
increased service hours. An overview of the Phase 2 recommendations follows:
Local Services
• Proposes a new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center in the vicinity of Harmony Road and
Timberline Road
• Introduces the transition to a grid route configuration
• Recommends 15 new or reconfigured grid system routes with improved peak hour service
frequencies
• Recommends 10 routes with early evening service (until 8:30 PM), two routes with late
evening service (until midnight), and 16 routes with Saturday service.
August 18, 2009 -7- Item No. 18
Poudre School District Services
• Provides greater public transit coverage near PSD high school student residences
• Proposes increases in service frequency in the vicinity of Fort Collins,Rocky Mountain and
Fossil Ridge High Schools.
Regional Services
• Recommends a new regional route connecting Fort Collins, Loveland, and Denver
• Proposes Saturday service for the regional route connecting Fort Collins and Loveland, as
well as late evening service (until midnight) on weekdays and Saturdays.
PHASE 3
Phase 3 recommends additional transit growth in Fort Collins including longer service hours and
limited Sunday transit service, as well as expansion of regional service to Denver, Berthoud,
Boulder, and Longmont. Partnering strategies would likely be considered for implementation of
regional services. This Phase assumes the implementation of additional MAX services that extend
outside of the Mason Corridor and completes the transition to a full grid network in Fort Collins.
Attachment 5 is a map of service improvements recommended for Fort Collins as part of Phase 3.
An overview of these recommendations follows:
Local Services
• Proposes two new Express routes utilizing Mason Corridor to minimize transfers for high
demand travel patterns and increase service frequencies along Mason Corridor
• Proposes late evening service(until midnight)for all Express and MAX routes on weekdays
and weekends
• Proposes extended service hours with 12 routes offering early evening service and four
routes offering late evening service
• Recommends additional Saturday service on select routes
• Recommends Sunday service for seven routes
• Includes the complete transition to a grid route configuration
• Recommends increased service frequencies on most routes
• Proposes new service to the Mountain Vista area.
Poudre School District Services
• Proposes improved connections and service frequencies to Fort Collins and Fossil Ridge
High Schools
• Recommends additional public transit coverage for PSD high school students including
longer service hours and greater opportunity for connections to FRCC and CSU.
Regional Services
• Proposes a new route providing connections between South Fort Collins, Loveland
(Centerra), Longmont, and Boulder with additional Saturday and Sunday service
August 18, 2009 -8- Item No. 18
• Recommends reconfiguration of a regional route to provide service between Fort Collins,
Loveland, Berthoud, and Longmont and introduces Sunday service
• Recommends additional early evening service and late evening service for regional routes.
Chapter 6 - Capital and Operating Requirements
Transfort operates a total of 18 fixed routes, including the FoxTrot regional route connecting to
Loveland, and a complementary paratransit (Dial-A-Ride) service. Twenty-three vehicles are
deployed for the fixed-route service during peak weekday operations. The total operating and
maintenance (O&M) cost was approximately $8.2 million in 2008; with 75% of costs associated
with fixed-route services, 4% with regional service, and 21% with Dial-A-Ride service.
Phase 1 services include:
• 19 fixed routes including the Mason Corridor MAX and 1 regional route
• 26 local vehicles and 1 regional vehicle
• Over 30% more revenue hours
• Approximate increase of $3.3 million in annual O&M costs from 2009 (assuming an
inflation rate of 5% over 3 years).
Phase 2 services include:
• 20 fixed routes including the Mason Corridor MAX and 2 regional routes
• 38 local vehicles and 4 regional vehicles
• Approximately 110% more revenue hours for fixed-route services as compared to 2009
operations
• Approximate increase of$10.6 million in annual O&M costs from 2009 levels (assuming
an inflation rate of 5% over 5 years).
Phase 3 services include:
• 22 routes including three Mason Corridor MAX routes and 3 regional routes
• 41 local vehicles and 10 regional vehicles
• Approximately 170% more revenue hours as compared to 2009operations
• Approximate increase of$17.7 million in annual O&M costs from 2009 levels (assuming
an inflation rate of 5% over 7 years).
Regional services under each phase represent proposed routes that connect Fort Collins with other
Front Range communities. Therefore, implementation and funding requirements would likely be
undertaken as part of partnership arrangements.
Several capital improvements would be required to support the phased operational recommendations
for the Transfort TSOP update. This includes both vehicle requirements and facility improvements.
Transfort's existing fixed route service requires an overall fleet of 30 active vehicles. The mix of
vehicle types includes 26 standard 40-ft. transit buses and 4 mid-sized 35-ft transit buses. The
Mason Corridor MAX BRT service will require 60-ft.low floor alternative fuel buses. Compressed
Natural Gas and Bio-Diesel are used for operation of the 30 buses in the existing Transfort fleet.
August 18, 2009 -9- Item No. 18
Eleven vehicles in the Transfort fleet are currently scheduled for replacement. This will require an
investment of approximately$4.4 million independent of any proposed service expansions. Phase
1 also requires an investment in additional replacement vehicles and new buses for the Mason
Corridor MAX service. Mason Corridor buses will be funded through a Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) Small Starts Grant. Due to the two routes being replaced by MAX, 3 fewer
vehicles are needed for the remainder of the improved local fixed-route system. The cost associated
with replacement vehicles for Phase 1 would equate to approximately $6.5 million.
Phase 2 would require:
• 50 vehicles,17 vehicles over Phase 1, which would be approximately $8.7 million.
Phase 3 would require:
• 60 vehicles,10 vehicles over Phase 2 plus replacement vehicles that reach end of useful
service life, which would be approximately $8.4 million.
Transfort may be able to secure funding contributions for up to 80%of vehicle costs through Federal
Transit Administration programs such as the Section 5309 Capital Funding Grant. If Transfort is
successful in securing federal capital funding,the total local cost of vehicle acquisition for all phases
could be substantially reduced.
Several additional facility requirements would be necessary with the recommended phased
improvements. Fleet expansion associated with Phases 2 and 3 would exceed the capacity of
Transfort's current bus storage facility,which has some additional storage capacity planned for the
Mason Corridor MAX vehicles. This could be addressed through reconfiguration and expansion of
the current facility onto adjacent land, purchase or construction of a new supplemental facility,
leased facility arrangements, or utilization of facilities that are provided through a contractor.
The 2009 TSOP update assumes that Transfort's current contract with NextMedia would support
the need for additional transit stops;therefore,no additional capital expenses for standard bus stops
are reflected in this plan. Finally, each Phase involves some form of transit infrastructure
improvement to support the proposed service enhancements. The magnitude and extent of these
improvements would require further definition as the implementation planning is undertaken in each
Phase.
Phase 1 requires various capital components related to MAX'BRT service, including a relocated
South Transit Center and new outdoor bus storage, as well as a University Avenue transitway
through a short segment of the CSU campus.
Phase 2 requires a new PVH Harmony Campus transit center and expanded maintenance facilities.
Phase 3 includes the addition of a bus turnaround facility at Elizabeth and Overland Trail.
Chapter 7 - Implementation
The citizen's Financial Advisory Committee(FAC)was organized by Transfort and COLT staff and -
met on a semi-monthly basis from November 2008 to April 2009 to evaluate and recommend
funding strategies for implementing the recommended phased improvements. Early in the process,
August 18, 2009 -10- Item No. 18
FAC members and staff acknowledged that defining a fair and practical funding plan meant
balancing many disparate factors.
A wide variety of revenue generation mechanisms and institutional structures were evaluated by the
FAC as potential ways to generate and collect funds for transit improvement. The FAC selected a
mix of funding mechanisms that offer what it determined to be a fair appointment of costs and
reliable revenue production.
Current sources of revenue for Transfort include a large general fund transfer and revenue from the
federal government. Other Transfort revenue sources include a negotiated agreement with the
Associated Students of Colorado State University (ASCSU), farebox revenue, and advertising on
buses, bus benches and bus shelters.
Estimated revenues for Transfort were compared to the estimated O&M costs for the proposed
phased improvements. This analysis resulted in the identification of funding shortfalls for O&M
costs under each phase, summarized in Table 1. It should be noted that regional services would
likely be implemented through a shared funding arrangement with other jurisdictions, and the
shortfall would not be the full responsibility of Transfort.
Table 1 - Projected Annual O&M Funding Shortfall for Transfort Phased Improvements
-Funding Shortfall Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Transfort Local $2,695,600 $7,257,000 $11,258,100
-Regional $36,450 $632,100 $2,402,250
Total $2 732 050 $7 889 100 $13,660 350
Estimated capital costs for vehicle acquisition for Transfort and COLT were also compared to the
minimum estimated federal funding sources that would likely be available. This analysis resulted
in the identification of funding shortfalls for capital costs under each phase, summarized in Table
2.
Table 2 - Projected Annual Capital Funding Shortfall for Transfort Phased Improvements
-Funding Shortfall Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Transfort Local $5,932,550 $6,047,300 $3,402,400
-Regional N/A $1,381,550 $3,639,600
Total $5 932 550 $7 428 850 $7 042 000
Source:Transfort and DEA Project Team
The FAC recommended a series of funding mechanisms, all designed to allocate the costs of
Transfort and COLT services to those that benefit from them. The following funding mechanisms
were chosen based on their ability to provide a reliable revenue stream and to grow with the
community. Funding mechanisms options that could be considered for future implementation for
Transfort and COLT include:
• Maintenance of Effort—The continuation of municipal general fund revenues with a growth
in fares commensurate with an increased level of service.
a
August 18, 2009 -11- Item No. 18
• Dedicated Sales Tax—An excise tax on retail goods imposed to the point of sale. The FAC
recommended a 1/4-cent tax.
• Transit Utility Fee—An additional fee charged to residential and business utility accounts.
• New Negotiated Agreements—The active investigation of new partners,including PSD and
Front Range Community College, as well as the renegotiation of current agreements.
• Special Assessment — An annual per household or square foot charge placed on property
within a special improvement district.
Figure 1 provides an overview of the projected revenues that could be available for each of the
above funding mechanisms recommended by the FAC.
Figure 1 - Projected Transfort Operation and Maintenance Revenues from FAC-
Recommended Funding Mechanisms
Transfort O&M
$25.7 Million
Special
New Negotiated Improvement
Agreements, Districts,
$500,000 $1M
Maintenance of
$8 Transit Utility Effort,
Fee, $10.9 M
$7.1 M
1/4 cent Sales Tax,
$6.2 M
The FAC also recommended the investigation of the feasibility and practicality associated with the
formation of a Regional Service Authority (RSA) to serve in the administration, organization, and
consolidation of transit operations for Fort Collins and Loveland. An RSA is a form of government
designed to provide specified services on a regional basis; in this case,-public transportation. The
FAC recommended a RSA because of its potential revenue raising authority, inter-jurisdictional
flexibility between Fort Collins and Loveland,ease of formation,and public acceptance. The FAC
specifically recommended the investigation of a RSA structure with no internal funding
mechanisms, meaning that each jurisdiction must raise its own funds and purchase transportation
service from the RSA. Fort Collins and Loveland are the most likely candidates to purchase services
from the RSA, although other jurisdictions would be able to raise funds by any means when they
join the RSA. Further study of a regional transit provider is recommended as an action item of this
report.
August 18, 2009 -12- Item No. 18
Implementation Timeline
The 2009 TSOP Update was developed based on a potential implementation horizon of five to seven
years from initiation. A phased approach for the TSOP has been proposed to serve as a framework
for implementation priorities and to allow for the opportunity to scale new improvements and
investments to future available funding sources. The ability to secure new or additional funding
sources will be critical in achieving full build-out of all three proposed phases.
Successful implementation and meeting the desired timing for phased improvements will require
that the funding mechanisms described in the previous sections are in place early on for full
implementation. This is necessary to build capital reserves that are needed for the purchase of new
vehicles. Ongoing revenue streams from future revenue sources will then be used to fund annual
operating and maintenance costs for expanded transit services.
Other Implementation Considerations
The previous 2002 TSOP presented a number of key considerations that require attention as new
transit services are considered for implementation. Many of these tasks are routinely addressed
when any level of service refinements are undertaken. These common planning steps, operational
issues and guidelines for many of these tasks are briefly summarized below:
• Dates for Start of New Service—Implementation target dates should consider the necessary
steps for Council approval and public process. In addition, vehicle procurement should be
carefully coordinated with scheduled implementation. Summer is often a common season
to implement substantial route changes in university communities, which allows drivers to
become more familiar with services before school sessions and winter weather begin.
• Ridership and Customer Impacts —Changes in ridership trends should be monitored to
determine issues with system familiarity and the level of benefit realized from new route
configurations. Ridership trends after several months provide the best indication of service
change results.
• Further Service Revisions—Early service refinements may be necessary if new routes are
not operating or performing as desired. Schedule times, safety, peak load and demand
points, transfers and complaints should be monitored to determine if early route revisions
are necessary.
• FTA Grant Funding for Vehicles—The potential to secure grant funding for future vehicle
purchases should be identified as soon as possible. The timing for the grant application
process and vehicle procurement could effect the desired implementation dates for new
service.
• Responsibilities of Transfort Staff—New staff responsibilities related to service changes
include new marketing and informational materials, hiring of new drivers, schedule
conformation, and development of new bus stops and signage.
August 18, 2009 -13- Item No. 18
Monitoring
An efficient monitoring process can provide significant value for making ongoing service
refinements,future operation planning,and can support future budgeting requirements and financial
decisions. Two types of monitoring are recommended to assure the continued effectiveness and
efficiency of transit services for Transfort — trend analysis and peer system comparisons. Trend
analysis compares current operating data with historical data to establish trends in service efficiency
and effectiveness. Peer system analysis can be conducted on an annual basis using statistics from
other peer agencies and the National Transit Database (NTD). Ideally, the peer group should be
selected based on some common characteristics such as population of the area, existence of higher
educational institutions, system fleet size,annual vehicle hours or annual vehicle miles of service.
Performance standards for three representative transit agencies were reviewed to examine other
typical procedures for service monitoring. Representative agencies included the Metropolitan
Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority(MARTA)in Atlanta,Georgia,the Regional Transportation District
(RTD)in Denver, Colorado, and Pierce Transit in Tacoma, Washington. Each agency uses similar
monitoring tools, statistics and metrics to document their relative route productivity and
performance. However, the methods employed for making decisions on service adjustments or
changes differ somewhat among agencies. The case studies provide a good range of techniques for
grading route performance and categorizing'routes based on relative levels of efficiency and cost-
effectiveness.
Future Action Items
A set of action items have been developed to guide the key steps for future phased service
implementation. These items listed below will include responsibilities among Transfort, the City
of Fort Collins and future transit service partners:
• Confirm the feasibility of route changes and new facilities based on physical opportunities
and'constraints. This includes all street configurations used for new transit routes, the
University Avenue transitway on the CSU campus, and the new PVH Harmony Campus
Transit Center.
• Develop transit service standards or guidelines for remaining Enhanced Travel Corridors.
• Undertake a feasibility study regarding the establishment of a regional transit provider that
could provide services for two or more jurisdictions in the North Front Range with a
completion date by December 31, 2010.
• Identify and confirm the future funding sources that will be sought for plan implementation.
• Initiate discussions with potential downtown Fort Collins partners to implement the
recommended circulator route.
• Undertake discussions with the Poudre School District regarding a negotiated agreement for
a transit service partnership.
1
August 18, 2009 -14- Item No. 18
• Initiate discussions with potential partner jurisdictions for the implementation, of new
regional services.
• Develop a formalized transit system performance monitoring program and new performance
standards.
• Initiate federal funding applications for future transit system capital requirements.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Minutes from the Transportation Board, Planning and Zoning Board, Natural Resources
Advisory Board,Air Quality Advisory Board,Commission on Disabilities,Youth Advisory
Board, and Economic Advisory Commission.
2. Existing Transit System Map
3. Proposed Phase 1 Transit Improvements Map
4. Proposed Phase 2 Transit Improvements Map
5. Proposed Phase 3 Transit Improvements Map
6. Summary of May 12, 2009 Work Session
7. Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) recommendations
8. PowerPoint Presentation 1
9. Transit Strategic Operating Plan Executive Summary
Attachment 1
City of Transportation Board
Flirt Collins Gary Thomas, Chair
July 31, 2009
Mayor Hutchinson and Members of Council;
At its regular July 151h meeting the Transportation Board was given the opportunity to
review the Executive Summary of the final Transportation Strategic Plan (TSP). The
final plan has since been published on the city website and does not appear to differ from
the material we reviewed.
The TSP has been completed along the lines we anticipated when we wrote you to
endorse its direction in April 2009. A copy of that earlier letter is also attached.
In this final version of the plan is a list of nine Future Action Items (page 22) that outlines
the actions needed to ratify the plan and to begin to follow up on specific
recommendations.
By a vote of seven to one at the meeting, the Transportation Board recommends adoption
of the Final Transit Strategic Plan and in particular the nine future action items. (The
"no" vote was cast by a member who was not comfortable voting before the final plan
was published. Since Council will consider this plan before our next T-Board meeting,
we had elected to proceed based on the Executive Summary.)
In the nine Future Action items are several immediate actions that can be undertaken by
staff that will not require pursuing the new major revenue sources contemplated by the
Financial Advisory Committee report. Actions such as, investigating a new
organizational structure that could combine two or more towns' transit systems;
developing new standards and measures; and negotiating with potential new partners
could all be undertaken during the current downturn so that when it is appropriate to
expand the service much of the ground work will be ready.
The Transportation Board hopes that in the new standards is additional recognition of the
need for safe, accessible bus stops. We were pleased to hear that a project is underway to
improve the situation for the Foothills Gateway riders on South College. We would
encourage the continued assessment and improvement of stops based on their usage and
condition.
The Transportation Board thanks the Transfort and COLT staffs, and the volunteer
finance committee who all worked hard on this very comprehensive study over the past
1
Attachment 1
City of
F6r�t Collint
many months. With reduction of vehicle miles driven as one of our long standing
objectives, it is very heartening to see the city put time and effort into preparing for the
future transit needs of the community.
As usual, I would happy to discuss this recommendation more at your convenience.
Best regards,
Gary D. Thomas
Chair
c
Attachment 1
Page 2
Transportation Board
April 15, 2009 minutes
- - - Jenkins
a. The committee-m-eets the second Monday each month.Dan Gould was appointed C
There was discussion about Board protocol. Members were encouraged to tak ards&
Commissions class. DK gave a presentation on FC Bikes.Discussio surround financing
for the program. The Committee will provide input for DK in pursuing CMAQ funding.
b. Safe Routes to School-huge success today!All s experienced an increase in
participation over last year.
Robert: Did you discuss the St egislature's bill about motor vehicle operators staying 3 feet away
from bikes?
Jenkins:No. i not come up.
Robe • ers need to have a real bike lane, not a 6"strip from the dirt shoulder. I suggested to Rep.
con that we require by law,a minimum 2' bike lane.
7. ACTION ITEMS
a. Transit Strategic Plan-Kurt Ravenschlag
Chair Thomas explained that although his name is on the financial report, he was not signing on
behalf of the Transportation Board.
Ravenschlag.• We put this as an Action Item in case you want to weigh in on the Financial aspect.
Phase 1 shows the impacts to Poudre School District. We conducted an analysis so they could see
how they can utilize our system.-Phase 1 shows a modest increase over the existing situation.
Phase 2 shows a greater increase over existing;with service extended to a large number of
students.
a
Thomas: What percentage of students who could ride,will actually get on the bus?
Ravenschlag: We will pursue marketing efforts to get students to ride,including the possibility of
having student ambassadors.
Lund: Was the analysis put together based on schools of choice or on neighborhood schools?
Ravenschlag: It was based on attendance boundaries.The District put together a school of choice
busing committee to examine potential ridership.This study_is to investigate the option for PR-1.
Miller: Would the students pay for their rides and/or would PSD contribute to the expense?
Ravenschlag.•There could be cost sharing opportunities.
Phase 3 shows similar increases. It isn't as much expanding coverage, as adjusting frequency and
service hours.
Robert: Do these figures consider four grade high schools?
Ravenschlag.• Yes. It included 91h grade.
Detailed financial plans for each phase were developed and a Citizen committee was formed.
Their recommendations are included in your packet.
Operating and Maintenance expenses were broken out by participants.There is an$11.6 million
dollar shortfall in Fort Collins based on a plan for 2015. Loveland shows a$7.1 million dollar
shortfall.The Citizen Committee was tasked with exploring potential solutions. Increasing
frequencies requires additional buses.
Miller: When you add a bus due to increased frequency, how much of the cost is payroll?
Ravenschlag: Approximately 65%.
Attachment 1
Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3
April 15, 2009
We receive Federal funding,which was included in revenue projections.
Buses increase from 23 existing to 27 in Phase I,38 in Phase II,and 41 in Phase III.
"The purpose of the Citizen Financial Advisory Committee(FAC) is to develop as set of funding
recommendations that will,in turn, enable the operational recommendations to be implemented."
The recommendation includes:
1) Immediate creation of a Regional Service Authority.
2) Increase funding for Phase III implementation with the following sources: Maintenance of
effort; fares, general sales tax,Transit utility fee,negotiated agreements, Special
Improvement Districts.
Lund: Why should taxpayers pay a Transit utility fee if they don't use the service?
Ravenschlag: It is a service that benefits the entire community.
Miller:Why does electricity usage contribute to an increase in the fee?
Ravenschlag: It could be a flat fee,a scaled fee(flat for residences,scaled for businesses based
on trip generation). It is similar to an excise tax.
New negotiated agreements with Front Range Community College, Poudre Valley Hospital, etc.
were explored.
Robert.- Was the Y4-cent sales tax investigated base on other Transportation-related needs?
Ravenschlag: It was based on the shortfall in funding.
Thomas: We referenced the potential for combining with other Transportation efforts.
Jenkins: Was there any consideration of private entity involvement?
Ravenschlag: We discussed the possibility of service for HP, for example,where they would pay
for the service.
VanTatenhove: The concept of renegotiating an agreement while considering tax increment
financing is odd.
Robert:Did the Committee also consider options for Loveland?
Thomas: It is combined in these results,but is broken out by City in the full report. It meets the
shortfall for Fort Collins and comes very close for Loveland.
Why a Regional Service Authority?It meets the Partner's objectives.A Service Authority is just
that—it provides a service. It avoids confusion with other regional transportation infrastructure
efforts. Each entity provides its own funding and contracts with the RSA to provide transit service
at a desired level. It can be designed so additional jurisdictions can join.
Miller: What authority would a RSA have?
Ravenschlag: It would have specific authority regarding Boards, etc.The Board would have
members from the Communities it serves, hopefully from the Mayors/Councils of those
communities.Most likely,there would be a feasibility study about how this would actually
happen. A community split by a county boundary could participate.
VanTatenhove: Does Poudre School District stand to become a member?
Ravenschlag: Yes.
VanTatenhove: What about private entities?
Ravenschlag: If they desire a higher level of service they could.
Thomas: I believe it has to be a government organization.This can be established without a tax
increase and the money comes from the Communities/organizations buying service.
Attachment 1
Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4
April 15, 2009
Ravenschlag:The Authority is established and contracts with Transfort to provide the service.
Communities contract with them to purchase service through an Intergovernmental Agreement
(IGA).
Steen:Does the RSA have the ability to leverage anything with the MPO regarding funding?
Ravenschlag: It would allow us to better leverage state and federal funding. The RSA would be a
designated recipient for federal funding.
Miller: The benefit is that you have an administrative organization that provides services,has
economy of services, and makes them eligible for funding that they otherwise might not be
eligible to receive.
Ravenschlag:Correct.
Robert: I read in the AIS that we are looking at an update to the Transit Strategic Plan. Are we
putting an RSA under that?Is the Transfort Strategic Plan a separate entity?
Ravenschlag:The recommendation under an RSA is that Transfort and Colt would become the
providers.
Steen: Does the Transit Strategic Plan replace the Transfort Strategic Plan?
Ravenschlag:The Transit Strategic Plan includes Fort Collins, Loveland,and Poudre R-1 and
would be the Transit Plan tied to CityPlan.
Thomas:The question before the Board tonight is if we want to send forth a recommendation to
Council. We've seen the maps and phases and the Financial Plan.
VanTatenhove: I think it is an innovative took at Transportation that fits with the goals of our
Board. It pushes Transportation forward as a Utility.
Ravenschlag: We are going to Council for final adoption on July 7.
Lund: Our purview is to look at Fort Collins. We are being asked to endorse the Plan in full,but
we don't have any details.How much is subsidized,and how much is paid by the riders?I don't
see that here. Fee paying passengers is approximately 12%; existing negotiated agreements are
approximately 20%. It is consistent with other towns.
Steen: Are the funding options similar to other comparable cities and towns?
Ravenschlag: Ours is more creative.Others are based on sales tax,property tax, and payroll tax.
We are offering a package of solutions.
Robert: If we do nothing, what is the negative?Could our input say we encourage serious
consideration?
Thomas: Council wouldn't have our input if we say nothing.
Miller:In the past we've looked at things like this and have had further discussion to ensure that
it reflects various concerns. Perhaps that is the way to approach it.
Jenkins: I think we should recommend that this go in front of Council for consideration.
VanTotenhove: I remember Senator Salazar saying that we need these entities if we want to go for
Federal funding.
Miller: It makes sense for us to have some input at this stage, but we haven't seen the benefits
part of the presentation.
Duvall: I like the idea, but question how to input it in real life.
Frazier:The area has not been receptive to other similar proposals(RTA)but this one gives
options.
Thomas: We can keep going with the benefits part of the presentation if you want.
Board agreed to continue the presentation.
Economic Benefits:
• Investment in infrastructure generates huge benefits. For every$10 million invested in
capital,you will see a$30-$32 million return on investment.
i
Attachment 1
Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5
April 15,2009
• Creates and sustains employment; enhances personal economic opportunity and saves
individuals money; boosts real estate values; stimulates development and redevelopment;
fosters more livable communities.
• Transit use saves fuel,reduces carbon emissions.
• Benefits to seniors who do not drive and low-income individuals.
• Reduction in the investment required for expansion of streets, because capacity increases
without widening streets.
• Traffic congestion is reduced.
The demand for Transit Service is projected to more than double in next 10 years.
Robert: I move that the Transportation Board will send a letter to Council that supports
the direction being taken by the Transit Strategic Plan including the concepts of the
Financial Advisory Committee,and that the letter will include the issues and questions
raised in tonight's presentation and discussion.
Simonson: Second.
The motion passed unanimously.
8. DISCUSSION ITEMS
a, Cone Zone Update—Erika Keeton,Street Maintenance Program Manager
The Cone Zone map illustrates major traffic impact project for all entities (develop projects,
utility projects,Larimer County, City projects) `
Information is found through a link on the City's main web page. www.fc ov. m/conezones
There is a map with numbers that refer to the spreadsheet that outlines eac oject,the responsible
agency, the project manager, start and end dates, street closure dates,an affrc impacts.
The FCTrip site(www.fcgov.com/fetrip)shows real-time informatio amera views update every 5
minutes. Project information is also shown on the map.
A number of major projects are underway and/or scheduled ' cluding quick Hot-in-Place projects,
work on the Mason Trail,complete reconstruction projec ,a joint capital project/reconstruction on
West Drake near Overland Trail,overlay projects, uti ' es installations warranty work on the South
College Bike Lanes,and complete reconstruction sects.
Jenkins: What is happening on Howes near t ost Office?
Keeton. We are working toward LaPorte eniue and will be at Oak Street in the next couple of
weeks. It isn't a complete reconstructio
Lund: Shields to Seneca—is that stil n schedule for completion at the,end of next month?
Keeton: Yes, it is still on schedul o the end of May.
Migchelbrink:The Mason& es conversions to two-way will be impactful projects.
Thomas: It appears that th are parallel streets being worked on which is a nightmare for the public
if they happen simu. an sly.
Keeton: We work wi raffic Operations to schedule projects with the least in possible.
Migchelbrink:Wi he Stimulus money flowing to pavement projects,they have to be completed in a
short time pen . We have no control over some of the scheduling,but do our best to reduce
inconvenie based on getting the best costs for projects.You will see paving underway everywhere
this su r and fall.
b. N h College Improvement Project—Jennifer Petrik,Transportation Planner
he project encompasses Vine Drive to the Hickory/Conifer intersection.
t
�— — --- - - — ---- 1 Attachment 1
Transportation Board Page 3
July 15, 2009
DRAFT minutes
of Fort Collins and we are improving safety an
)it could be a good plan. Use of the funds can a
. ,ty wuucu uecision wimoutsenamg it to vote. Darin gave us approval to approach Cou with the
idea.
Lund:New bicycle safety law?
Petrik: The law takes effect August 5, 2009. It says that motorists-must give cych 3' of space when
passing. Cars are allowed to cross the lane line to give the room.
Jenkins: The concern with Option 3 is diminished visibility because of the t s in the landscape.
Petrik: Idaho and New York decided not to put something like that in pl if there were more than 8
drive cuts per mile. We were planning on 25—30 per mile.
Robert: What calls for the 8' wide bike lane?
Petrik:The Larimer County Urban Area Street Standards call to at.
McCauley: Do we currently have 12' lanes?
Jackson: We have 12' lanes now. CDOT requirement. r�
Petrik:This is the vision. Any redevelopment would ins the vision.
Petrik: I would like your recommendation to include ' you support a isio p n, if you support
using Truck Bypass funds,and which option you er. "
McCauley: I prefer Option 2 because the landsc ing there is dismal.
Lund: The distance between the vehicle lane d bike lane isd0h6"stripe. Something needs to be done
about the new law that was just passed bee se you won' able to give a cyclist 3' if two cars are
side-by-side.
Steen moved that the Transportatio card reco end e North I Ilege Improvements plan to City
Council with the following prov' ons:
• That the design optio ailed"The Vision PI a &s the preferred design alternative.
• That the former tru by-pass fund tly red9cled by the voters be dedicated to this
project. 11 -
• That the Coun consider > ding p ision such as bonding so that the project can be done
all at one ti to avoid din al futur c sts.
• However, ' the project c o all at one time,that the funding option that
comple each s ,I ' ' c g Ian scaping be chosen.
• And, at staf a reque to stigate if additional striping is appropriate to meet the new
sta aw on°a obile v is cle separation.
McCau y se nd.The Bo oted unanimously on point 1 —3 and favored point 4 seven to one
with cCau g no.
at i
ontinu oordination with City Departments, CDOT,NFCBA,TAC.
I'1 work session on July 28, 2009
b. T ansit Strategic Plan—Kurt Ravenschlag
Ravenschlag: We provided presentations to you on the Plan development. T-Board wrote a
recommendation after our last presentation approving the direction of the Plan. Our Executive
Summary is provided tonight. The entire report is finalized and will be posted on our project website
tomorrow fcgov.com/tsp.
We developed 6 goals to guide the development of the Plan.
1. Develop an expanded transit system focused on productivity and performance to meet the
Transportation Master Plan and City Plan Policies.
2. Meet and exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal for Transportation CO2 reductions by 2020.
Attachment 1
-DRAFT Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4
3. Provide enhanced mobility,for seniors, youth, disabled,and transit dependent.
4. Develop a public transportation system that reduces roadway related costs for maintenance,right-
of-way acquisition, and construction..
5. Provide funding recommendations to fully implement the Transit Strategic Plan.
6. Stimulate the local economy through investment in public transportation infrastructure and
operations.
We conducted over 30 stakeholder meetings, 7 open houses, written input, and a citizen advisory
committee that worked for 6 months. We developed the service plan in 3 phases. A Downtown
Circulator Route was added since you last saw the presentation.
O&M Shortfall—projected to 2015: $11,258,100 shortfall.
Capital funding required—projected to 2015: $15.3 million shortfall.
Funding recommendation would have to be in place during Phase 1. e ve&used for capital
purchases in Phase 2 and 3. .
Action requested: Approval of operational plans (3 phases) 4 pursuing the action items outlined
on Page 22 of the Executive Summary.
Discussion on wording of Future Action Items:
• Change#4 to read"Identify potential future din ources t ill be sought for plan
implementation."
• Reorder the wording of#8 to read"D elop new ormance standards and a formalized transit
system performance monitoring progra
Robert: I would add a goal about 'ding sa and nvenient bus stops.
Ravenschlag: We received a gr ' 0 8k to b, 'l a stop for Foothills Gateway with a sidewalk
connector.
McCauley moved to re mine C pil that they adopt the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan
Update and Future Items o in in the Executive Summary,Page 22. As recommended in
the past,we again reco d tha afe and convenient bus stops be a priority of the City.Jenkins
seconded. T*he
on passe - .Lund voted no because the Board didn't have a chance to read the
entire plan p action.,
8. DISCUSS MS
a. ewike!reeman—Chief Financial Officer, City of Fort Collins
Sal s down over 4% for the year. It translates into $2.2 milli ar reduction.
Use to /o on construction materials, computers,vehicles down 30.8%.
Building fees are down significantly.
Property tax is holding its own.
General Fund revenue shortfall i Iected at$6 million. That does not include the Transportation
shortfall.
Robert: The as reserves. Has it tapped into them?
Freem eneral Fund no, Transportation yes. There is approximately$40 million in reserves. $8—9
on is liquid reserves.
Attachment 1
WY'
,,��.. .� • of o • C e. • ¢- - s' .
tip.. 1 0•
Council Liaison: Lisa Pop paw Staff Liaison: Steve Dush
Chair: Brigitte Schmidt Phone: (H) 224-9418
Chair Schmidt called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
Roll Call: Campana, Carpenter, Lingle, Rollins, Schmidt, Smith, and Stockover
Staff Present: Dush, Tempel, Petrik, Ravenschlag, and Sanchez-Sprague
Agenda Review. Director Dush reviewed the agenda.
Citizen participation:
None
Consent Agenda:
Chair Schmidt asked members of the audience and the Board if they'd like to pull any items from the
consent agenda. Chair Schmidt requested item 2, North College Corridor Improvement Project—Phase
Il, Vine Drive to the Hickory/Conifer Intersection be pulled from the consent agenda since staff had new
information about the project.
1. Minutes from the June 18, 2009 Planning &Zoning Hearing
3. Transit Strategic Plan Update
Member Stockover moved to approve the consent agenda which includes item # 1 June 18, 2009
Planning and Zoning Board Hearing minutes and item # 3 Transit Strategic Plan Update. Member
Compana seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 7:0.
Chair Schmidt noted when Plans such as those noted on the agenda tonight are on the consent agenda
it's because the Board has already reviewed them thoroughly at a work session. Unless there are
members in the audience or on the Board who would like a further review, they remain on consent and
are approved as such.
Discussion Items:
2. North College Corridor Improvement Project— Phase II, Vine Drive to the Hickory/Conifer
Intersection
Project: North College Corridor Improvement Project— Phase ll, Vine Drive to the
Hickory/Conifer Intersection
Project Description: This is a request for a re ation from the Planning and Zoning Board for
City Coun ' u y 28th City Council work session. The project area includes
ion of North College Avenue/US287 from Vine Drive north to the
Attachment 1
Natural Resources and Advisory Board trash services study materials had been prepared for
July 17, 2009 1)ng stated they will be posted on City's website
DRAFT minutes e producing materials to support that age M.
• k-;iuccu ni'io autnuna.,,,a....,. - -.e'garding the request to the board to ea
recommendation to adopt a proposed ordinance to codify net metering. T posed ordinance
places a cap on net metering at 125% of the consumer's peak dema ric asked the NRAB to
provide guidance to Council and recommend a different cap % of the consumer's
consumption. He stated this cap is more generous and ' commended by national organizations
throughout the US as best practices. He stressed ' pinion that Fort Collins lags way behind many
other cities in its energy policy. He also s sted the NRAB should not make a recommendation if
it has any uncertainty or lack of ex in this area.
Review and Approval of J 7, 2009, Minutes:
Liz Pruessner had so anges to her phone number and place of employment.
Steve A se moved and Liz Pruessner seconded a motion to approve the June 17, 2009,
N minutes as amended.
Minutes approved unanimously
Transit Strategic Plan
Senior Transportation Planner Scott Weeks and Planning Specialist/Transfort Nicole Hahn provided
copies of the executive summary of the Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update. This document is
also on the Transfort website at www.fegov.com/tsp. Scott stated they had come to the NRAB to ask for
a recommendation to update the Transfort Strategic Plan.
• Scott stated their presentation is an update on what the Operating Plan Update contains and the
changes that have been made since they last addressed the NRAB.
• Nicole stated they will be going to Council August 18, 2009, for final presentation.
• As background,Nicole stated they partnered with Loveland and Poudre School District on this plan
to determine efficiencies and to establish partnerships for the future.
Discussion
• In answer to a question from Clint Skutchan,Nicole Hahn stated if Poudre School District(PSD)
expands their walk boundary to 2-1/2 miles around each school Transfort can help transfer students
to school. They are also working with PSD to get students from one high school to another.
• Alan Apt stressed there must be outreach to parents regarding this service being safe for their
children.
• Clint stated many high school children drive and riding the bus would be a way to cut down
on vehicle miles travelled.
• Project goals
o Develop expanded transit system
o Meet the 2008 Climate Action Plan goal for 2020
o Provide enhanced mobility for community
o Reduce roadway related costs
o Provide funding recommendation
o Stimulate local economy.
• Benefits
o Reduce dependence on oil.
o Reduce COZ emissions by 37 million metric tons annually
o Using transit for work—replacing appliances and thermostat
2
Attachment 1
• Recommended build out phases
o Phase 1 —modest service growth
o Phase 2—transition to grid network and more regional service
o Phase 3 —full grid network and additional regional service—designed to feed into Mason
Corridor as main trunk line
• Financial planning
o A citizen financial advisory committee met for 5 months to develop funding for the three
phases. They recommended a 25 cent sales tax, new negotiated agreements, special
improvement districts and maintenance of effort.
• Future action items
o Create enhanced travel corridors
o Do a feasibility study
o Initiating discussions with partners
o Negotiating agreements with Poudre School System
o Get more regional buy-in
o Develop a formalized transit system performance monitoring program and new performance
standards
o Initiate federal funding applications for future transit system capital requirements.
Discussion:
• In answer to a question by Clint Skutchan who asked if any interim funding had been considered,
Nicole Hahn and Scott Weeks stated the advisory committee was not asked to consider that.
However, as part of the next study with the Regional Service Authority they will look at regional
funding methods, other funding mechanisms, negotiated agreements and federal grants.
• Steve Ambrose asked if the federal stimulus package could be a source of funding. Nicole
responded they got$2.3 million for new vehicles, but are actively looking at other federal funding
streams.
• In answer to a question by Joe Piesman,Nicole stated there was a $50,000/year grant for youth
riders from the Bohemian Foundation.
• Phil Friedman pointed out 68% of Transfort's budget comes from general fund and wondered how
Fort Collins compared to other cities of similar size. Nicole stated a lot of them have dedicated taxes
and sources of revenue for transit. Phil then asked, since there is no extra funding dedicated to
transportation in Fort Collins, which should come first: increasing service or increasing ridership.
Nicole stated if Fort Collins invests in increasing service like Eugene, Oregon, did she expected
ridership would increase as it did in Eugene.
• Joe Piesman asked if the Mason Street Corridor would boost ridership. Nicole stated the Mason
Street Corridor is the main element in Phase I and anticipated a 40% increase in ridership once
completed.
• In answer to a question from Glen Colton,Nicole stated general ridership increased 16% last year,
mainly because of gas prices. Glen suggested, because of the economy, the City should have more
public outreach about saving money by riding the bus. Nicole stated they are working on advertising
campaigns for youth.
• In answer to Alan Apt,Nicole stated Transfort is recommending a feasibility study on becoming a
regional transportation provider to provide service for the community. Other communities could buy
into it at various levels.
• To answer Clint who asked if there would be funds for road maintenance,Nicole stated the service
authority would only provide transit. Clint also stated there needs to be a culture shift to accept
public transportation in order to make this work.
3
Attachment 1
• Phil Friedman asked if Larimer County would be a player. Nicole stated they have been at the table
on this plan and they could be a partner to buy into it.
• Joe Piesman stated hours of service is a big problem.
• Steve suggested having free fares to increase ridership, $.25 nights or other creative ways to increase
ridership.
• Glen suggested increasing parking fees to reduce VMTs.
Phil Friedman moved and Liz Pruessner seconded a motion that the Natural Resources Advisory
Board recommends adoption of the 2009 Transfort Strategic Plan.
Motion passed unanimously.
Code changes related to net metering
Light and Power Operations Manager Steve Catanach stated the net metering ordinanc/sked
one
through first and second readings at City Council. During the second reading Counc' or
clarifying language on generation limits of the maximum level at which net mete ' is offered. Steve
was at the NRAB meeting to ask the board for a recommendation to adopt the ow underlined
clarifying language into the net metering ordinance:
Net metering. Net metered service is available to a customer-generat producing electricity
exclusively with a qualifying facility and using a qualifying renew a technology. For auali&ing
facilities that generate more than twenty-five 25 kilowatts the eration capacity o such acili
shall not exceed 125% of'the customer's peak demand or up t ne megawatt, whichever is less. L(
the customer's peak demand is unknown then the name 1 ca aci o the customer's service
entrance shall serve as the limit. The energy generated b he eligible on-site qualifying facility and
delivered to the utility's electric distribution facility wil e used to offset energy provided by the utility
to the customer generator during the applicable bill' period. The customer generator and electric
service arrangement are subject to the requireme and conditions described in the electric utility
rules and regulations, the IEEE 1547 and this apter. Acustomer-generator who receives approval
from the electric utility to obtain net and
ervice is subject to the monthly rates described above
for this rate schedule. The customer gene or's consumption of energy from the utility will be
measured on a monthly basis and in the ent that the qualifying facility has produced more
electricity than the customer-generato as consumed, the customer-generator will receive a monthly
monetary credit for such productio During the second calendar quarter of each year, the customer-
generator will receive payment fo he net excess generation accrued for the preceding twelve (12)
months.
Discussion:
• Steve Catanach state ere was some confusion about best practices on how to set net metering
rates: consumptio s. peak demand. He suggested going to wwwAsireuse.org website to see all
the various net ering programs across the US.
• Steve stated orado Senate Bill 51 did pass and will become effective September 1, 2009. It
Steve
th aximum consumer solar generation size currently in Colorado of two megawatts and
changes ' o a kWh limit of 120% of the annual consumption of the site. Municipally-owned
utilitie uch as Fort Collins will be exempt. Steve did not think this was a well-thought out piece of
legi tion. This would require extensive change of infrastructure for Excel Energy and expects
E el to ask for changes.
• eve stated the Fort Collins Utilities looks at several factors for consumption of customers with
different size service entrance sections. The maximum size of the panel indicates peak demand
4
Attachment 1
Air Quality Advisory Board ited for this area and the resulting impacts
April 20, 2009 minutes
lies from VMT, there are als
• In,summary, the AQAB agreed they do not have MT'
to make a
recommendation at this time. email any more questions to Matt Wempe and
Pete Wr a iaison Brian Woodruff.
Transit Strategic Plan
Transfort Assistant General Manager Kurt Ravenschlag was present to update the Board on the
Transit Strategic Plan (TSP), including recommendations from the funding cominittee.New
planner Scott Weeks also attended. Kurt stated the first half of his presentation is the same as
when'he previously presented to the board several months prior. To summarize:
• The Transit Strategic Plan (TSP) is a partnership between Fort Collins, Loveland and the
Poudre School District.
• The purpose of the plan is to:
o Update the 2002 Transfort Strategic Operating PIan
o Address specific City Policies and Objectives
o Foster a Dialogue With the Community and Region
o . Review Existing Service and Performance Standards
o Examine the Existing Four Phased Approach to a Grid.Transit Network
o Address the Financial Solutions Required.
• Project goals and objectives
o Goal 1: Develop an expanded transit system focused on productivity and
performance to serve the Fort Collins area that meets City Plan Policies. They will
focus on the high schools to see if Transfort can be an option for them.
o Goal 2: Meet and exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal for Transportation COZ
reductions by 2020.
o Goal 3: Provide enhanced mobility for seniors, youth, disabled and transit dependant.
o Goal 4: Develop a public transportation system that reduces roadway related costs for
maintenance, right-of-way acquisition, and construction.
o Goal 5: Provide funding recommendation to fully implement the Transit Strategic
Plan.
o Goal 6: Stimulate the local economy through investment in public transportation
infrastructure and operations.
• The process is to:
o Collect input from the community. They will have seven open house meetings in
Fort Collins and Loveland; four PSD open houses and 30 stakeholder
briefings/interviews.
o Examine existing Strategic Plan goals and objectives
o Examine Existing conditions
o Develop system build-out to meet project goals r
o Financial planning
• Most frequent comments from public outreach
o Increase hours of service(evenings and weekends)
o Increase frequency to a minimum of every half hour
o Need to implement a Grid System
o Establish regional connections between Fort Collins and Denver Metro
o More transit coverage throughout community and region
5
Attachment T
, 1
• Draft Build-out phases
o Phase 1 - Modest service growth.
o Phase 2 -Transition to grid network and regional service
o Phase 3 - Full grid network and additional regional service
• Costs
o The annual operating and maintenance costs for phase III for Fort Collins is predicted
to cost about $22 million; $10 million for Loveland and $5 million for regional
service. They anticipate shortfalls-for each
o They also anticipate a$13 million capital shortfall to implement the plan for Fort
Collins; $5.7 million for Loveland and$6.6 million for regional. They are pursuing
grants.
o Operating expenses to implement the plan in Fort Collins are:
■ Existing: $8 million—72,000 service hours and 23 busses
■ . Phase I: $11,773,084—96,100 service hours and 27 busses
■ Phase II: $18,012,894— 141,000 service hours and 38 busses
■ Phase III: $22,551,179— 162,800 service hours and 41 busses
• Financial Planning
o Developed Financial Plans for each Expanded Service Phase
o Citizen Financial Advisory Committee convened bi-weekly for 6 months to develop a
funding recommendation for the expanded service for Loveland and Fort Collins.
Their recommendations were:
■ Immediate Creation of a Regional Service Authority
■ Increase Funding For Phase III Implementation with the Following Sources:
Maintenance of Effort; Fares; General Sales Tax; Transit Utility Fee; Negotiated
Agreements and Special Improvement Districts
• Why a centralized service provider
o Meets Partners Objectives
■ Most direct and effective means of achieving coordinated transit service
■ A service provider avoids confusion with other regional transportation
infrastructure efforts.
■ Each entity provides its own funding and contracts with the service provider
for transit service at whatever level it wishes
Can be designed so that additional jurisdictions could join now or later.
o Governance
■ Simplifies administration and improves accountability
■ Strengthens regional partnerships
■ Better leverages State and Federal funding.
o Operational Efficiencies and Economies of Scale
■ Shared overhead costs, staffing, and facilities.
o Long Term Opportunities
■ Fully achieving long range visions for Northern Colorado mobility requires
the formation of one regional transit provider.
• Staff Recommendation
o Staff recommends that a Regional Service Authority Feasibility Study be completed
by January 2010 as an addendum to the Transit Strategic Plan with the following
scope of work: Background Analysis; Stakeholder Interviews; Peer Analysis;
Alternatives and Cost/Benefit Analysis
Benefits—based on ridership projections
o Reduced dependency on oil
6
Attachment 1
o Reduction in CO2 and
o Transit reduction in VMT and CO2
o Relieves congestion
o Benefits to seniors and low income individuals
o Builds strong economy and saves money by having one less car/family
■ Greg McMaster suggested they be clear with this argument
o Increased real estate values and;development
o Reduces investment required for expansion of streets
• Summary—demand will increase in next few years—need to prepare now
o Economics—increase in oil increases commodities and cost of living
o Aging population
o Environmental concerns—city council goals CAP
• Next steps
o April - June: Meet with City Boards and Commissions
o April 28th: City Council Work Session
o May-June: Documentation
o July 7: Council Regular Session for Adoption
Discussion:
• Greg McMaster asked where the BFO process fits into this plan for the next 2 years. Kurt
responded that the Citizen Financial Advisory Committee recommended to target revenue
that may or may not come from the general fund such as sales tax dedicated to transit or from
a future tax initiative for overall City improvements. They are prepared with projected costs
and options.
• Eric Levine pointed out the 2008 Scorecard in the AQAB packet predicted a$5 million
revenue shortfall for the City and asked, if that is not remedied, would Transfort services go
down. Kurt pointed out at the beginning of 2009, 50%of the fleet was past its useful life and,
will need to be replaced. .Transfort got stimulus funding to replace 5 busses but they need 10
more and will also need to make facility and fueling upgrades. The dilemma is that increased
ridership will require more busses to provide more convenient service. They will also focus
on the densest corridors to make the system more productive.
• In answer to a question by Eric,Levine, Kurt Ravenschlag stated the 2020 goal to reduce
transportation CO2 by 14,000 tons over the 5 year expansion period will require multiple
solutions. Increases in ridership would be tied to the reduction of vehicle miles not traveled
and corresponding reduction of CO2.
• In answer to a question from Dave Dietrich, Kurt explained the capital costs projected are for
purchase of busses only.
• .Dennis stated he was not ready to take action until this plan was reworked to be more
productive and several AQAB members were concerned about the expensive cost per ton of
CO2,reduced. Kurt stated that this was a satisfactory framework from which to develop
further actions and funding.
Greg McMaster moved and John Schroeer seconded the following motion:
From an air quality perspective,the Air Quality Advisory Board supports a phased
transit plan, managed by a regional service authority,that will productively and
measurably reduce overall vehicle miles travelled (VMT) in Fort Collins and throughout
the northern front range.
Motion passed unanimously.
7
Attachment 1
Commission on Disability
City`o,f Fo Box 580
F6rt Collins Fort Collins, 80522
970.221.6610
�
970.221.6534-fax
fcgov.com
April 22, 2009
To Whom It May Concern:
On behalf of the Fort Collins Commission on Disability, we would like to express our full
support for all three phases of the Transit Strategic Plan. It is well known that Fort Collins and
the surrounding Northern Colorado area is in need of a more sophisticated and efficient public
transportation system. This plan will offer residents better and more convenient access to
transportation,particularly for those who comprise the underrepresented populations of this area.
More specifically, we see this plan as increasing access and independence for members of the
community who have disabilities. Moreover, as the population in the Fort Collins area
continues to grow, this improved transportation system will certainly accommodate this growth,
while working to reduce traffic congestion, which has become an increasingly important issue
for residents. Insum, the Transit Strategic Plan is a proactive measure that seeks to
accommodate the growth of the area and also promotes improved mobility for the general
population.
Sincerely,
Terry Schlicting
Chairman
Fort Collins Commission on Disability
Attachment 1
C�y, o Northside Aztian Community Center
�Y 112 E.Willow Street
E6rt Collins
Fort Collins, 80524
970.221.6655
970.416.2278-fax
fcgov.com/north
June 10, 2009
To City Council Representatives;
On March 4, 2009 the Youth Advisory Board was presented with the Transportation
Strategic plan to expand the Fort Collins Transportation System. The plan, as described by Kurt
Ravenschlage and Nicole Hahn was found by the Advisory Board to be very beneficial for Fort
Collins residents, especially youth.
We were particularly appreciative of the efforts to increase routes and stops around local
schools and feel this will increase youth ridership. The extended hours of the bus schedule will
likewise be favorable to the youth of Fort Collins. The expanded routes to Windsor and Loveland
will be helpful for youth living beyond Fort Collins city limits, especially those attending PSD
schools.
Overall we were very impressed with the presentation. The examples and facts used were
very informative and all our questions and concerns were answered and thoroughly explained.
Regarding fuel efficiency, traffic congestion, convenience to citizens, and aid to economic
growth we find this plan to be ideal. We could see no faults within the expansion plans, however
we did ask Nicole Hahn to return with details on the financial aspect of this proposal.
Nicole Hahn returned with the funding plan for this project on April 1". We were slightly
concerned with additional fees applied to.utility bills,but decided the money saved by not having
to use a vehicle would ultimately be worth this addition. While the project is expensive and some
funding comes from Fort Collins residents, the expansion of the bus service and routes will
ultimately be worth the added cost.
After the presentation of the Transfort expansion and reorganization plan plus the
financial plan,Youth Advisory Board members found this proposal to be positive for our
community. Thus, as a Board, we hereby recommend the proposal to you in the hopes you will
find it as rewarding to the community as we have.
i
With Respect,
The Youth Advisory Board
City of Fort Collins
Ka S e
C irperso
Attachment 1
YOUTH ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES
Regular meeting—May 6, 2009
7:00 p.m.
Council Liaison: Aislilnn Kottwi[z Staff Liaison: Steve Budner,Recreation,221-6861
Board Cha' erson:Kai Stuckey
Board Members Present: Lisa Parker, Brittany Belmarez, Kai Stuckey, Caroline Wockner, Kinsey
Kappeler and Kelsey Hennig
Board Member(s) Absent: none
Staff Members Present: Steve Budner, Administrator—Recreation Department
Carol Fahring, Staff Support—Recreation Department
Guest(s) Present: none
Call meeting to Order: -
The meeting was called to order by Chairper, ai Stuckey at 7:00 pm.
Approval of Minutes:
The minutes from April 1 amended to say that Barnes and Noble bookstore gives groups a
percentage of book s and an opportunity to raise more money with cheesecake sales. The minutes as
amended wer proved after a motion by Brittany which was seconded by Lisa(6-0).
da Review:
T-shirt purchase was added to the agenda.
Citizen Participation:
The financial part of the Transit Strategic Plan was presented by Nicole Hahn. Recommendations
included the immediate creation of a Regional Transit Provider and increased funding for Phase III
completion from the following sources: maintenance of effort, fares, general sales tax,transit utility fee,
negotiated agreements, and special improvement districts. A regional transit provider would simplify
administration and improve accountability, strengthen regional partnerships and leverage federal and state
funding. It would also allow for shared overhead costs, staffing and facilities.
Chairman's report:
Kai discovered that the open area between
o a y not going to happen.
Other business:
1) Work plan—Kai, Brittany and Lisa will present the work la a sey an
Kinsey. Adoption of the work plan une.
2) Yout y teve Budner—The beginning of summer registration for classes
went very well. The number of registrations and total fees both set new records, which is even
more impressive considering the economy.
3) The board decided to submit a letter to City Council'endorsing the Transit Strategic Plan. Lisa is
writing a draft of the letter and will send it to the other board members for their comments.The
letter will be finalized at the June meeting.
i
- Attachment 1
Financial Services
City of 300 LaPorte Ave
Fort Collins PO Box
Fort Collins,CO 80522 ;I
970.221.6521.6505 i
970.224.6107-fax
fcgov.com
1
Memorandum
To: Mayor Hutchinson and City Council Members
From: Economic Advisory Commissicn6
CC: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Mike Freeman, Chief Financial Officer
Date: June 81 2009
Subject: Recommendation on the Transit Strategic Plan
The Economic Advisory Commission was presented the Transit Strategic Plan (TSP) and TSP
Financial Advisory Committee Recommendation. The following recommendation to Mayor and
Council was made June 3, 2009:
The Economic Advisory Commission(EAC)has actively reviewed the Transit Strategic Plan
(TSP) during the course of two plan reviews at EAC meetings.The EAC believes that an
effective mass transit system as proposed by the TSP can be an investment for the future of the
City and its economic vitality if it is incorporated into a broader vision and plan for the City. The
EAC strongly believes that planning for an effective transportation system,with a quality transit
system as part of the plan, can positively affect a vibrant and sustainable economy in a number of
key ways including but not limited to:
o Enhancing economic opportunities and real-estate values,particularly along transit
corridors
o Enhancing the competitiveness and high quality living environment of the City by
providing legitimate transit options for residents as part of the City's Master Plan.
o Providing City residences options for minimizing their personal transit expenditures(cost
of living)
o Generating direct and indirect economic drivers based on capital and on-going
expenditures
The EAC recommends that the cost and benefits of the Transit Master Plan should continue to be
analyzed, and that the funding for the plan should be considered in context with the City's
transportation plan, the City's budget, and the City's Master Plan.The EAC would like to remain
actively engaged in reviewing the economics and cost/benefit analysis component of the plan as
it proceeds.
Thank you for considering this recommendation
Attachment 1
Economic Advisory Commission
June 3, 2009 minutes
MOM Agenda Item 4—Member updates and 6 mo calendar discussion
Formal action by Council on the Transit Strategic Plan (TSP) is scheduled for July 7,
2009 per the 6-month planning calendar. The EAC plans to invite Kurt Ravenschlag,
Transfort/Dial-A-Ride Assistant Manager to present at the July 1, 2009 to hear the final
TSP to Council.
Following up on previous TSP presentations by Kurt Ravenschlag on Jan 7, 2009 and
May 6, 2009 to the EAC, Christophe Febvre motioned:
The Economic Advisory Commission (EAC) has actively reviewed the Transit Strategic
Plan (TSP) during the course of two plan reviews at EAC meetings. The EAC believes
that an effective mass transit system as proposed by the TSP can be an investment for the
future of the City and its economic vitality if it is incorporated into a broader vision and
plan for the City. The EAC strongly believes that planning for an effective transportation
system, with a quality transit system as part of the plan, can positively affect a vibrant
and sustainable economy in a number of key ways including but not limited to:
o Enhancing economic opportunities and real-estate values, particularly along
transit corridors
o . Enhancing the competitiveness and high quality living environment of the City by
providing legitimate transit options for residents as part of the City's Master Plan.
o Providing City residences options for minimizing their personal transit
expenditures (cost of living)
o Generating direct and indirect economic drivers based on capital and on-going
expenditures
The EAC recommends that the cost and benefits of the Transit Master Plan should
continue to be analyzed, and that the funding for the plan should be considered in context
with the City's transportation plan, the City's budget, and the City's Master Plan. The
EAC would like to remain actively engaged in reviewing the economics and cost/benefit
analysis component of the plan as it proceeds.
The motion was seconded by Bill Timpson.
Kevin Shaw motioned to table the TSP motion by Christophe because not all commission
members were present to vote and that the EAC hasn't received enough"solid evidence"
to support spending Mass transit funds that may stimulate the local economy.
The motion to table was seconded by Jim Clark.
Nay: Blue Hovatter, Christophe Febvre, and Bill Timpson
Beena Bawa, Stu MacMillan, Tom Clevenger and Rick Price abstained since they were
not present at the meeting.
After a brief discussion on commission member attendance Christophe suggest a vote on
his TSP motion:
Affirmative: Jim Clark, Christophe Febvre, Bill Timpson, Blue Hovatter
Nay: Kevin Shaw
Attachment 1
Beena Bawa, Stu MacMillan, Tom Clevenger and Rick Price abstained since they were
not present at the meeting.
A passed written TSP motion/recommendation memo to Council will be included in the
read before packet on Tuesday June 9, 2009.
Part of the June 9,2009 Council Work Session will be-dedicated to Financial Issues
including the Foothills Mall Redevelopment or Midtown Commercial Redevelop nt
Project. Following up on the EAC Special meeting held May 28, 2009 Blue H atter
motioned:
The Economic Advisory Commission (EAC) supports the City Staffs dtown
Commercial Redevelopment Project and its proposed Budget. The E believes that this
project fits with and enhances the City's existing plans,projects, a values including;
City Plan,the Mason Corridor Project, the Economic Vision and alues that came out of
the Economic Vitality and Sustainability Action Group (EVS and the City of Fort
Collins Economic Policy.
The EAC appreciates the City and City Staff taking a pr ctive approach to the City's
economic needs. The EAC believes it is strategically ' portant that the City create a
vision for Midtown that will provide future develo rs of this area a clear understanding
of the where, when and hows of the City's possi involvement and partnerships in this
area. The EAC views this as an opportunity t nspire the type of redevelopment that fits
with the values of the Fort Collins commun'
The motion seconded by Bill Timpson ssed unanimously.
Affirmative: Jim Clark, Christophe F vre, Bill Timpson, Blue Hovatter and Kevin Shaw
Beena Bawa, Stu MacMillan, Tom levenger and Rick Price abstained since they were
not present at the meeting.
A passed written Foothills Redevelopment Project motion/recommendation memo,
to Council will be include the read before packet on Tuesday June 9, 2009.
Meeting adjourned 1:4
Agenda Item 5— How up discussion regarding previous meetings
Christophe su arized an email by Tom Clevenger asking for consideration by the
commission ' the following 3 areas:
• El tric Utility Rates
• conomic Development incentives along Mason Corridor
• Manufacturing use tax
N ecommendations or decisions by the EAC were made.
Agenda Item 6—General Update of DDA Activities
ATTA-'(NMLrjqTjt 2
RICHARDS LAKE
ui
W
m
z
Q'
WILLOX ~ MOUNTAIN VISTA
■ MANSERMCEs
8
a
VINE 1 � VINE W
g Downtown W -
❑TVHALL —
LAPORTE ■ sit Center �
Poudr s MUSEUMILIBRARV ■
s ■ N 14 MULBERRY �I
ACUNIC
z Existing CSU Tra enlenn IHS
ILL
.j ILL
W 1 w �WVA /
OCot, State PouoREVAaEvnosPITAL
sity
a '-(1a PROSPECT
W BETE \
(' CENTER `
JQ EPICC JTER y4 25
Vv K W ■ WMANSE•CEs
CSU LLI
; J POLICE DEPARTMENT
SENIOR CENTER 7 Vet N I
DRAKE school
n
Y
J Rocky Mountain HS 7 17
_ O 1
U. W FOOTNLLS MALL
~ Existing S19 th Transit Center Fort Collins HS
s .. _ HORSETOOTH
o
Z LU
J
T (,
N Existing Harmony
o . T n Transfer Center
ul FRONT RANGE VI LAGE HARMONY
1 16 ■
rant ge ■
Co yCollege FOX ARMO
wBc MPUS
z
Q Fossil Ridge HS Q
U
w W - KECHTER Cn
I J
ui Q
W W
J z
of J N
U LU
W
00
H
TRILBY I
Transit Strategic Plan
I Existing - Fort Collins
Q Existing Transit Center
CARPENTER M. Existing Park and Ride
Proposed Transit Center
Proposed Park and Ride
Local Route
woo CSU Route
71ST ST _ . 0 Regional Route
Paratransit Boundary
o 0.5 1 z School/College/University
Miles '
WALJMART
P:\F\FCOL00000001\06001NFO\GS\ rdects\O eratin Scenarios\AIIPhases U datedPlan TransfortONLY -20-09.nRA
ATTAC)4ME1k }ngnt 3
r
RICHARDS LAKE
}
ui
W
I m
V
WILLOW ~ MOUNTAIN VISTA
■ MANSERMCES
8
W
W LU
I VINE Jj VINE W
I Z
(91) is ' LDawa1pwn �
j LAPORTE ALL _ sit Center m
92 •,,. ._._._.�
`l , _ ~ WALM T
PoUdreHS C, F
\ MUSEUMILIBRARY ■ Nc��N
J
MULBERRY
jVACUNIC 1
! z Existing CSU Transit Center Centenni I HS •
so
LIJ
' � z
POUORE VALLEY HOSPITAL
p Col orState 1 $ t�
I
Uni✓ersity
3. . . PROSPECT
l ?i
W BETENTIc \
t-``��`. J Q EPICCENTER ENTER `
• • • (AV` V 0 d' W ■ FUMANSE`CES 11
CSU
V J POLICE DEPARTMENT
��----1 SENIOR CENTER /\ II
6 ■ vet P-
)
DRAKE I school
10
J Rocky Mountain HS MAX 17
x 0
� n �
a19 W FOOTHILLS MALL
< I Fort CollinsS
L
HORSETOOTH
o
LU
Z J
T (,
�, Z Existing Harmony
- o RGET m Transfer Center
W FRONT RANGE VILLAGE
• HARMONY IF:
Front Range rHMRMON1
PUSCommunity College Pus
New South Transit Center I z
Fossil Ridge HS Q
I / W KECHTER Cn
� W Q
J Z
J J fn
0 �
v LU
(Fox)
TRILBY I Transit Strategic Plan
Phase 1 - Fort Collins
Existing Transit Center
l Existing Park and Ride
CARPENTER Proposed Transit Center
I Proposed Park and Ride
l Local Route
I - � • CSU Route
- O -71ST ST Regional Route
I
—•- Downtown Circulator Route
IParatransit Boundary
o 0.5 1 z Miles School/College/University
WALJCART
P:\F\FCOL00000001\06001NFO\GS\ rdects\O eratin Scenarios\AIIPhases U datedPlan TransfortON LY 8-4-09.mxd
ATTA1344MEW nt 4
RICHARDS LAKE
,
W
f m
` z
WILLOW ~ MOUNTAIN VISTA
■ MAN SERNCES
4 2
a
LU
VINE j VINE W
0 _ z
rExis�q Do wntown IX
LAPORTE LL _ twsit Center C
' _ WAIT M T
iPoudre HS i ■MUSEUMILIDRARY ■ �*00 1
MULBERRY
. ^ - - 1 - - . .• '� G
VACUNIC
z Existing CSU Transit E - e Centenni I HS ■ sG
J �-(1s90
w F W ?h
OColora State PURDUE VAaEv "osPnaL
univu;sity
PROSPECT
i W DE-EN-I
(.9 CEN-ER
W EPIC CENTER
Vv 0 IX W ■ HUMAN SERVICES
CSUV W J POLICE DEPARTMENT
SENIOR CENTER
■ 5 Vet y
School
10
J g MN 7
Rocky Mountain HS '
3 0
W w FooTRus nwu
H Fort Collins HS
HORSETOOTH
1
L
1 =
r 11
co
m Existing Harmony
o TARGET m Transfer Center
W
= FRONT RANGE VILL� HARMONY
18A
Front Range . Pr d PVH Harmony I
Community College wNCAMPPUS am us Transit Center
New South Transit Center z S
Fossil Ridge HS Q
a
w KECHTER 18BCn
W J
WI W
J z
of N
U W I
00
TRILBY 11 Transit Strategic Plan
Phase 2 - Fort Collins
Existing Transit Center
Existing Park and Ride
CARPENTER Proposed Transit Center
Proposed Park and Ride
I Local Route
- � • CSU Route
- O -71ST ST Regional Route
---•- Downtown Circulator Route
Paratransit Boundary
o 0.5 1 z Miles School/College/University
WAL MART
P:\F\FCOL00000001\06001NFO\GS\ rojects\O eratin Scenarios\AIIPhases U datedPlan TransfortONLv -4-09.n-A
ATTACQItfldEMTa5nt 5
RICHARDS LAKE
W
m
Z
Q'
WILLOW ~ MOUNTAIN VISTA
MANSERMCES
LU
� a
VINE o z VINE z
I
rExis q Do wntown W L
LAPORTE LL _ �I sit Center 1 m
- - - - - - - 1 a
1 _ WAL-M T C H
PoudreHS 1 •■MUSEUMILIBRARY ■ NCO \
MULBERRY I
6
VACUNIC
} z E risting C$ Tl�lli sit ce iter Centenni I HS • +
MAX c MAX B — 0
W W POUORE VAIEYHOSPITAL �A
>O Colora State ; C)!�
University MAX
' PROSPECT
1 8
i LU EN
1 — cD �R
EPICCENTER
.j - 25
Vv d' W ■ HIMAN SERMCES
Gs.0 V J POLICE DEPARTMENT
SENIOR CENTER
5 Vet y
Schoo
Rocky Mountain HS 30 0
H
3 �
WFOOT HILLS MALL
■ Fort Collins HS
HORSETOOTH
1
L
0
x LL
1 , MAX c z
LL
Cn m Existing Harmony
TARGET z Transfer Center
w •
FRONT RANGE VILLAGE
HARMONY
18A ■
27
Front Range . Pr d PVH Harmony
WT HARMO
Community College CAMPUS us Transit Center
New South Transit Center z
Fossil Ridge HS Q �
Q 1 U
W I w KECHTER 18B Cn
c�
WI a
J Z
O N
Uy LU
TRILBY Transit Strategic Plan
hh Phase 3 - Fort Collins
�1J Existing Transit Center
Existing Park and Ride
CARPENTER Proposed Transit Center
Proposed Park and Ride
mmomm Local Route
- () • CSU Route
71ST ST - O - Regional Route
---•- Downtown Circulator Route
I Paratransit Boundary
0 0.5 1 z Miles School/College/University
WALJMART
P:\F\FCOL00000001\06001NFO\GS\ rdects\O eratin Scenarios\AIIPhases U datedPlan TransfortoN LY -4-09.mxd
Attachment 6
oq ity of
6570 Port/ r Roa-Ride
Q�s 6570 Portner Road
F6rt Cothns Fort 21.62.5- 80522
970.221.6620
970.221.6285-fax
fcgwcom
Memorandum
DATE: May 15, 2009
TO: Mayor and City Council members
THRU: Darin Atteberry, City Manager
Diane Jones, Deputy City Manager, Community Services
FROM: Jeff Scheick,PDT Director
Marlys Sittner, General Manager, Transfort/DAR
Kurt Ravenschlag,.Assistant General Manager, Transfort/DAR
SUBJECT: May 12, 2009 Work Session Summary- Transit Strategic Plan Update
This memorandum summarizes the May 12, 2009 Work Session regarding the 2009 Transit
Strategic Plan.
Council.Members Present: ..
Mayor Doug Hutchinson, Mayor Pro Tern Kelly Ohlson, Councilor David Roy, Councilor Wade
Troxell, Councilor Lisa Poppaw, Councilor Aislinn Kottwitz.
Staff Present:
Darin Atteberrv, City Manager; Jeff Scheick, Planning Development and Transportation
Director; Marlys Sittner, Transfort/Dial-A-Ride General Manager; Kurt Ravenschlag,
Transfort/Dial-A-Ride Assistant General Manager.
Direction Sought from Council:
Does Council need any additional information before action is requested on July 7?
Council Feedback and Key Discussion Points:
• Ensure that various entities such as ASCSU and Larimer County are involved in this
study and any additional studies regarding regional transit service.
• Look at providing connections to CSU campus from east of College Avenue.
• Ensure ridership forecasts are included in the Transit Strategic Plan for the three phases
of expansion.
Attachment 6
City of
• If a feasibility study is held to examine the recommended governance and creation of a
regional transit provider, ensure it addresses accountability from the governing board
members, and how there could be differentiation between communities in terms of
investment made to avoid gaps in service throughout the region.
• The City Manger will meet with Transfort staff to ascertain if it is feasible to ask Council
to adopt the Transit Strategic Plan on July 7, 2009.
Proiected Next Steps:
• April —June- Meet with City Boards and Commissions
• May—June- Report Preparation
• July 7 - Council Regular Session for Adoption
;r
Attachment 7
MEMORANDUM
To: Fort Collins City Council
Loveland City Council
Fort Collins City Manager
Loveland City Manager
Poudre School District Superintendent
From: Financial Advisory Committee of the Transit Strategic Plan
Date: April 4, 2009
Committee report on funding alternatives for transit
This letter reports the findings and recommendations of the Financial Advisory
Committee of the Transit Strategic Plan for the Cities of Fort Collins and Loveland and
the Poudre R-1 School District. Our basic assumption in making these recommendations
is that expansion of transit service will be an essential means of adapting to future,
potentially, disruptive changes in energy economics, environmental policy, and
community demographics.
Overview:
In the immediate time period, the advisory committee recommends establishment of a
consolidated management structure for the area's transit operations. While there are
several ways to do so, a Regional Service Authority (RSA) could be created without a
concurrent tax increase that would provide the platform for future funding efforts as the
economy and conditions warrant. In doing so, an RSA would allow for differing levels
of funding and service as each City wishes. This will be discussed in more detail below.
The advisory committee also finds that there is no one funding source likely to support
the transit improvements envisioned by the Transit Strategic Plan. Instead, a combination
of sources will be required. The timing of the funding will have to be informed by the
timing of any improvements in the transit system. And, while this advisory committee is
forecasting certain levels of support from each potential source, we recognize that further
discussion and debate may result in changes to the amounts shown.
The committee was given the singular task of making funding recommendations for
proposed improvements in the transit systems of Fort Collins and Loveland and better
coordination with the Poudre School District. While we were briefed on the progress of
developing the Transit Strategic Plan itself, and availed ourselves of those opportunities
to comment, we were not charged with recommending any of the design elements,
phasing, or other aspects of the plan. While the committee is supportive of improvements
in the transportation system, the Transit Strategic Plan stands on its own.
1
Management Structure:
The advisory committee looked at several governance options as they might relate to
funding possibilities. The three most likely candidates are:
Status quo. Each entity operates its own system, raises its own funds, and only limited
intergovernmental agreements exist for routes in common such as the Foxtrot line today.
The committee believes that a new approach will be needed to meet the growing needs
for transit in the area.
Combined efforts under an IGA. There are already ongoing discussions between the City
staffs seeking to improve coordination, operations and efficiency. The Transit Strategic
Plan analyzes those possibilities in more detail. While this is an improvement over doing
nothing, it fails to capture the economies of scale that a true consolidation offers.
A new operational authority. The committee recommends that a Regional Service
Authority(RSA), dedicated to transit with no new funding, be considered as the initial
step towards an area-wide transit operation. There appear to be several advantages to this
approach for the near term:
• An RSA requires a vote to establish but then becomes its own legal entity for
future fund raising, operations, etc. Getting public support for a consolidated
effort will build knowledge and support for future growth of the system.
• The RSA can be structured so that each participating entity provides its own
funding and contracts with the RSA to provide transit service at whatever level it
wishes.
• The RSA starts with an appointed,unpaid board of directors. By contracting with
the cities for all staff services, little if any resources are needed to sustain the
board itself.
• An RSA allows the participating cities to take best advantage of economies of
scale in their transit operations. ,
• The need for inter-city mobility and federal funding requirements already favor a
consolidated transit operation across the study area.
• While this recommendation speaks only to Fort Collins and Loveland, an RSA
can be designed so that additional jurisdictions could join now or later.
• The tight focus of an RSA on only transit service helps avoid any confusion with
any other regional transportation efforts towards infrastructure.
The City Transit Staffs have more detail about this option and the requirements to
establish such an authority.
Potential Revenue Sources: (See Attachment A for summary)
The committee recognizes the differences in transit philosophies between the two cities.
As a result, the following discussion of possible sources of funding needs to be combined
with the concept of an RSA where each city can pick and choose how it raises the funds
for the amount of service it wishes to provide. However, in the interest of brevity, the
numbers shown below are for combined Fort Collins and Loveland. The Transit
Strategic Plan will have more individual city detail. The mission of this committee was
to research how all three phases of the strategic plan could be funded—a total annual
2
need of approximately $37 million dollars by 2015. The numbers shown below illustrate
at least one route to that amount. (Numbers shown are estimates and subject to further
refinement.)
Attachment B of this letter lists the most promising revenue sources considered by the
committee. In evaluating possible revenue streams for the strategic plan,the advisory
committee used several criteria to evaluate each:
• Reliable and dedicated source
• Fair: Places burden on users, but not undue burden on those least able to pay
• Ease of administration and implementation
• Revenue grows with the community
• Ability for differentiation by community
• Likely success with voters,public acceptance
In regard to the last item, likelihood of success, the advisory committee is keenly aware
of the current economic situation. Timing will require careful judgment.
After reviewing a wide range of possible funding sources, the committee recommends
further consideration of the revenue sources described below. These recommendations
reflect the general consensus of the committee except for the Transit Utility Tax as
discussed below.
Maintenance of Effort: Today both Loveland and Fort Collins are using General Fund
revenues along with Federal and occasional State support to operate the current level of
transit service. This report anticipates continuation of that effort. However, in packaging
a suite of community improvements with a tax increase, it may prove advantageous to
combine all transit funding in a common statement of need. Today, the existing sources
of funding(local, state and federal) contribute $9.5 million to the transitsystems. With
projected volume and inflationary increases, those sources will produce $15.1 million by
2015.
Fares: A fare is the fee someone pays each time they step aboard a vehicle. It can take
the form of cash; a pre-paid monthly or yearly pass (with or without a discount); a
transfer from another bus; or a waiver based on some factor such as age. Typically the
fare-box revenues cover 10% to 15%of the cost of operating the system. Commuters
taking a lengthy inter-regional bus to work might pay most of the cost of the trip, while a
fully subsidized local service that caters to tourists and shoppers might not charge at all.
Too high of a fare becomes a regressive burden on the low-income transit-dependent
population and discourages choice riders from giving up their alternatives, typically
automobiles. As a result, setting of fares is a philosophical question regarding the overall
mission of the transit system as it relates to mobility, congestion, economic development,
air quality, etc. For the purposes of this study, the advisory committee recommends
continuation of the existing fare levels which will grow by an additional $1million by the
time the system is built out.
General Sales Tax: This has the greatest capacity to raise funds. It is also the most
sought after revenue source and competition by other City needs will be intense. Any
increase in the rate of sales tax, or redirection of an existing sales tax,will require a
3
public vote. The advisory committee recommends by the time of the final build out of
Phase 3 of the strategic plan, $11.2 million additional dollars per year for transit should
be funded by sales tax which is just over a ''/< cent tax on non-grocery sales. This would
be about$11 per month per household.
Transit Utility Fee: A fee would be added each month to an existing utility bill to pay for
the basic mobility service provided by the transit system.
• The majority of the committee supports this approach on the belief that all
members of the community receive direct and/or indirect benefits of the fully-
developed transit system. The benefits apply to drivers as well as non-drivers
since the reductions in congestion, improvement in air quality, etc. extend beyond
the transit ridership. The fee would be applied as a flat rate for households, but
may vary for businesses based on their traffic generation potential. Properly
designed, a fee can be assessed by the City Council without a public vote. Up to
$6.7 million dollars per year can be raised by a 5% utility fee which would cost
lust under$7 per month per household—or perhaps as low as $3 per month if
businesses are assessed at a higher level commensurate with their traffic needs.
• Two committee members do not support this approach for several reasons. For
one, in difficult times like this, it is felt that citizens should vote on any fee or tax
increase since many households already have to make difficult spending
decisions. Also there is the concern that such a fee is not a stable resource since
new councils can redirect or stop the funding. And, finally, there is a concern that
assessing fees on businesses based on volume of rides generated could be
subjective and place an undue burden on businesses.
Negotiated Agreements: Today the Associated Students of Colorado State University
(ASCSU)pays a fee to Transfort in exchange for which all students with a current I.D.
can ride any Transfort bus without paying a fare. The bus routes serving CSU are the
most heavily used, and Transfort is able to share the economies back to the students with
a collective fee that is much lower than if all riders paid the current fare box rates. Also,
as a marketing tool, businesses are offered the opportunity to buy highly discounted
annual passes for their employees. The advisory committee believes there may be a few
places where special, additional service might be offered in exchange for a flat fee such
as used with CSU. Following an extensive analysis of this option the committee was
disappointed to find that negotiated agreements can generate no more than an additional
$1 million per year, and it could be some time before that level of funding could be
reached. The committee notes that the existence of an area-wide RSA would improve the
ability to recruit new partners thanks to the broader service area.
Special Improvement Districts: There is already a great deal of interest in the
development and business community around the Transit Oriented Development
possibilities of the Mason Corridor and its Bus Rapid Transit system. Other transit
corridors, such as along Harmony Road in Fort Collins are envisioned in the long-term
Transit Strategic Plan. Additional revenues are possible in such a district through either
an increase in property values such as the Fort Collins Downtown Development
Authority, or through a tax increment financing, or even a special district sales tax. This
source could ultimately have considerable potential. In the time horizon of the stud
2015 Special Improvement Districts could generate $2 million per year of revenue.
4 1
Implementation:
If a Regional Service Authority is to be established, additional study will be needed with
legal and operational experts to design the underlying agreements and ballot language.
Then a campaign effort will be needed to,present the concept and benefits to the voters.
The committee recommends that other potential partners, such as Larimer County and the
_ City of Berthoud be contacted to see if their transit operations would be candidates for
inclusion.
Once the governance structure is decided, timing and approach to funding and service
levels then revert to local leadership:
• Transit Utility Fees, fares, and negotiated agreements are within the purview of
the City Councils and thus the quickest sources to raise additional funds.
• Special improvement districts typically require a vote of the property owners
within the district. While these sources individually and in combination can fund .
a number of improvements, they are not sufficient to fund the full build out of the
transit system as envisioned in the strategic plan.
• Sales tax increases or redirections will require a popular vote which can be held
on a city by city basis. The timing of such votes must coincide with established
elections and generally require a non-governmental organization to champion and
fund the campaign.
The advisory committee noted that the City of Denver successfully used a multiple
choice tax referendum called"A to I" where voters could chose among several options.
Knowing there are other varying calls for funding in Fort Collins, Loveland and Larimer
County (police,jails, pavement, parks, mental health, etc.) structuring a common,
singular campaign seems problematic across all jurisdictions. However, the concept of
increased voter choice within each individual jurisdiction warrants additional study.
Justification and conclusion:
Double digit increases in transit ridership followed the spike in gasoline prices last year.
In the future our communities will likely see the return of higher fuel costs, continued air
quality and climate issues, increasing road congestion, and an aging population. The
need for, and growing value of, mass transit options is clear.
According to the American Automobile Association, it costs a family about $500 per
month to own and use an automobile. Use of a high service transit system by family
members can offset the need to fuel, or even own, one or more automobiles. This can
free up a considerable amount of household wealth for other needs. To a low income
family that might mean the difference in finding and holding a job, or qualifying for a
mortgage or educational loan. To an upper income family, elimination of the second or
third.family vehicle would put funds currently being exported to car manufacturers and
oil companies back into the local economy.
Whatever route is pursued, improved transit service must in the end make sense to the
population. Any endeavor to ask officials and voters for additional funding will have to
connect the benefits of transit back to the individual.
5 _
The advisory committee wishes to compliment the City and School District staffs for
their professionalism and dedication to their work. It has been a pleasure to work with
them on this effort. Our community is already the richer for having such people in its
employ.
Thank you for considering this recommendation. We will be happy to answer any
questions at your convenience.
On behalf of the Financial Advisory Committee,
Gary D. Thomas
757 Cherokee Drive
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Home 970-482-7125
Work 970-223-8604
Attachment A: Recommended possible revenue sources
Attachment B: All revenue sources considered
Attachment C: Roster of advisory committee
6
Attachment A
Recommended possible revenue sources vs. needs
Phase Annual Costs Sources Revenues Balance needed
2009 Existing local and
Current 9,500,000 federal funds 9,500,000 0
2015
Phase III 37,000,000 37,000,000
Maintenance of
Effort 15,100,000 21,900,000
Add'1 fares 1,000,000 20,900,000
'/, +cent sales tax 11,200,000 9,700,000
5% utility fee 6,700,000 3,000,000
New negotiated
agreements 1,000,000 2,000,000
Special improvement
districts along
corridors 1 2,000,000 1 0
Amounts shown are projected estimates including inflation.
7
Attachment B
Funding Sources Considered with Strengths and Weaknesses
General Fund ■ Has ability to raise large amounts of revenue.
(sales tax) • Majority of regional retailers are located in Fort Collins and Loveland.
■ Diffuses funding burden over many people and businesses, including
out-of-region visitors.
■ Easy to administer.
■ Represents majority of existing revenue and unable to keep pace with
rising costs.
■ Requires City Council to allocate additional funding to transit budget.
■ Competes with other City services.
■ Subject to changes in biennial City budget(BFO).
■ Vulnerable to business cycles and may stagnate or decline during
economic downturn.
■ Seen as regressive but rebates possible to lessen impact.
■ Historically reliable source of funds.
■ 5307 Funding is formula based, so as revenue hours increase funding
increases.
■ Generates decent revenue,but would not keep pace if system were to
grow.
Federal Funding • Easy to administer.
■ Federal funding is generated from national sources not just local.
■ Mostly only available for capital assistance.
■ Does not provide enough funding to meet capital needs.
■ No guarantee of increased annual amounts.
■ Users are paying for service.
■ Discounted pass sales has resulted in a growing segment of fare
revenue and large increase in ridership.
• New Technology could increase fare recovery rate.
Fares and Passes ■ Represents only 5%of current operating costs.
■ Limited in amount that can be increased due to impacts on ridership.
■ Not keeping pace with increased operating costs.
■ Challenging to have 100%fare recovery except on long distance lines.
■ Represents approximately 16%of the costs to deliver service to
campus.
• Provides a higher revenue recovery than if we collected fares from
ASCSU Agreement riding students.
■ Contracts are negotiated regularly(strength and weakness)
■ Easy to administer.
■ Contracts are negotiated with students who have short term interests.
8
■ 20 year Contract with Next Media covers all bus stop
installation costs, and generates revenue.
Increased opportunities for additional advertising with new
technology at stops and transit centers.
■ Easy to administer.
Advertising ■ Funds coming through commercial advertising.
■ Revenue represents a little over 2%of total operating costs.
■ Growth in advertising revenue is limited to space available to
advertise.
■ Does not keep pace with increased operating costs.
■ Provides unexpected revenue primarily for capital needs.
Misc. Grants ■ Very unreliable.
■ Has ability to raise large amounts of revenue.
■ Majority of regional retailers are located in Fort Collins and
Loveland.
■ Diffuses funding burden over many people and businesses,
Sales Tax(Other than including out-of-region visitors.
General Fund) ■ Considered a regressive tax but rebates possible to lessen
impact.
■ Vulnerable to business cycles and may stagnate or decline
during economic downturn.
■ Potential for substantial reliable revenue.
• Revenue will rise with rising property values.
■ Can be imposed on those that benefit most from property value
increases related to transit.
■ Is a regressive tax, affecting lower income households more
Property Tax than higher income households.
■ Fully funded by landowners in taxing jurisdiction.
■ Commercial landowners pay higher property tax per dollar due
to Gallagher Amendment.
■ If a district is used, could have equity arguments.
■ Directly tied to transportation.
■ Assessed on motorists who contribute to congestion of
roadways.
Motor Vehicle ' Not as productive as sales or property tax.
Registration Fee - Fee is capped at$10 per registered vehicle per year.
■ Similar problem as Gas Tax, as more people ride transit fewer
autos are being purchased.
■ State just added a new fee.
9
■ Requires new growth to "pay its own way"for transit infrastructure.
■ Captures both residential and commercial development.
■ Only available for capital assistance.
Impact Fees ■ Not as productive in revenue generation as sales or property tax.
■ Must demonstrate rational nexus and rough proportionality in the fee
amount.
■ ,Would provide a higher revenue recovery than if we collected fares
from passengers.
■ Would potentially increase ridership, which would in turn increase
Federal funding.
New Negotiated ■ Could target apartment complexes, school districts, CSU admin.,
Agreements existing districts(DDA),business parks, etc.
■ Agreements can be terminated at any time.
■ Agreements can be renegotiated.
■ Could increase overhead costs to manage various agreements and
contracts.
Improvement ■ See property tax.
Districts
Visitors,not residents,will fund improvements.
■ Reliable revenue source.
Visitor Benefit Tax ■ Could face lodging industry opposition.
■ Lodging industry claims high visitor benefit taxes hurt tourism.
■ Steady revenue stream,keeps pace with growth.
■ Relatively easy to administer with existing utilities already in place.
Transit Utility Fee Relatively low revenue production with a flat fee.
■ Can be regressive,rebates can lessen impact on low income
households.
■ Direct link to transportation impacts.
■ Residents and commuters pay the fee.
■ Employer and employee share the fee(Denver model).
Head Tax Fee Potential citizen aversion to a"new"tax.
■ Not as productive as sales or property tax.
■ Direct link to transportation.
■ Residents and commuters pay the fee.
■ Will keep pace with growth.
■ Reliable revenue stream.
Congestion Fee ■ Exogenous benefits.
■ Unprecedented in the United States.
■ Upfront infrastructure investment—How do we collect this revenue?
■ Potential adverse effects on businesses.
Carbon Credits ■ N/A
10
Attachment C
Roster of Advisory Committee
Mary Atchison
Larimer County United Way, Senior Vice President for Community Investment
Donna Chapel
Chapel and Collins Wealth Management, Co-Founder
Board of Directors for the Fort Collins Area Chamber of Commerce
Dan Gould
CSU Professor, Retired
Former Fort Collins Transportation Board Member
Robert Heath
Heath Construction, Founder
Daniel Hill
Loveland Outlet Malls, General Manager
Loveland Transportation Advisory Board Member
Doujz Johnson
UniverCity Connections, Director of Implementation
Gary Thomas
SAINT, Executive Director
Loveland Transportation Advisory Board, Chair
Fort Collins Transportation Board, Chair
Kitty Wild
Wild Real Estate Services, Broker/Owner
11
ATTACHMENT •
2009 Transfort Strategic
Operating Plan
Kurt Ravenschlag , T/DAR Asst . General Manager
Tonight' s Council Meeting
• Resolution to Adopt the 2009 Transfort
Strategic Operating Plan ; component of
the Transportation Master Plan .
Wit_f
ATTACHMENT •
Project Background
• Update approved by Fort Collins City Council
2008/2009 Budgeting for Outcomes
• Update to the 2002 TSOP
Project Partners
City of Fort Collins
Update 2002 TSOP
City of Loveland
Update 2004 Loveland COLT Transit Plan
Poudre School District ( PSD)
Increased Mobility for High School Population
ATTACHMENT •
Project Purpose
• Update TSOP
• Align with City Policies and Objectives
• Dialogue with Community and Region
• Examine Existing Service/Performance Standards
• Identify Phased Approach to Grid Transit Network
• Address Financial Solutions
TSOP Goals and Objectives
• Goal 1 : Develop plan for expanded transit
system
• Goal 2 : Meet 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal
• Goal 3 : Provide enhanced mobility
'fit_f
ATTACHMENT •
TSOP Goals and Objectives
• Goal 4 : Reduce roadway- related costs
• Goal 5 : Funding recommendation to fully
implement
• Goal 6 : Stimulate local economy through
public transportation investment
TSOP Process
• Community input
• Review related plans/studies
• Evaluation existing transit market
• Consider growth patterns
• Assess existing transit services/conditions
• Develop transit service concepts
'�t_r
ATTACHMENT •
TSOP Process
• Identify opportunities to phase transit
improvements
• Screen concepts & identify recommended
strategy
• Integrate PSD transportation needs
• Evaluate funding & governance options
• Council consideration of TSOP update
Existing Conditions
• Fixed Routes
• 23 Vehicles Peak
• 1 , 884 , 194 � „ 't
Ridership for 2008
• 14 . 8 % over 2007 -
ATTACHMENT •
Public Involvement
• 7 open houses in Fort Collins/ Loveland
• Plus 4 PSD open houses
• 33 Stakeholder briefings/interviews
• Citizen Financial Advisory Committee
Public Involvement -
Most Frequent Comments
• Increase hours of service evenings/weekends
• Increase frequency minimum 30 minutes
• Implement a Grid System
• Regional connections - Fort Collins to Denver
• More transit - community and regional
'fit_f
ATTACHMENT •
Service Concepts
14
• Phase 1 : Modest service growth
• Phase 2 : Transition to Grid Network and
Regional Service
• Phase 3 : Full Grid Network and Enhanced
Service Hours and Frequency
Phase 1
Service Concepts
• MAX _ ` t
• Relocate STC �� '
• Add East/West Service � �
• Downtown Circulator � �
ATTACHMENT 8
Service Concepts
Phase 2
* Transition to Grid
0 Increase
■ eak
Fre _
f
•
Hours0 Increase Service
Regional Service
Denver
■
Fort Collins
Phase 3
Service Concepts
Improved
Frequency
1
• Service
i
Hours
0 New Service • - I
a
Mountain Vista
0 Regional Route to
Boulder
■
• Co
16
8
ATTACHMENT 8
Phase 1 $9 , 088 ,400 $386 , 300 $2 , 003 , 500 $ 11 ,478 ,200
Phase 2 $ 15, 388 , 600 $ 1 , 143 ,200 $2 , 297 , 350 $ 18 ,829 , 150
Phase 3 $ 19, 744, 900 $3 ,657 ,400 $2, 532, 650 $25 ,934 ,900
•
17
Capital Needs
FixedLocal Routes
Routes
Existing System $4 .4 Million - $4 .4 Million
Phase 1 $6 . 5 Million $6 . 5 Million
Phase 2 $7 . 1 $ 1 . 5 Million $8 . 7 Million
Phase 3 $4 . 5 Million $3 .9 Million $8 .4 Million
F6r Collins
18
9
ATTACHMENT •
Implementation
Purpose and Responsibility of
Financial Advisory Committee
"The purpose of the citizen Financial
Advisory Committee (FAC) is to develop a set
of funding recommendations that will, in turn,
enable the operational recommendations to
be implemented"
Advertising and
Fare
Implementation
Current Revenue Sources
. .
Federal , 16%
Other Local eneral Fund
20
10
ATTACHMENT 8
• :
$zs,000,000
Y $20,000,000 ❑ Funding Shortfall
N ■ Available Revenue
L)
U $11,258,100
2 $15,000,000
06
O
$10,000,000
7
C
C
Q $5,000,000
$2,402,250
$0
Local Regional
Service Type
•
$20,000,000
$18,000,000
U) $16,000,000 ❑ Funding Shortfall
p $14,000,000 ■ Available Revenue
U
� $12,000,000
06 $10,000,000 $15.3 million
O
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
C
Q $4,000,000
$5.0 million
$2,000,000
$0
Local Regional
Service Type
11
ATTACHMENT •
Implementation
FAC Evaluation Criteria
• Ease of administration and implementation
Transfort
• Reliable and dedicated source , that is fair with no undue
burden on those least able to pay
• Revenue grows with the community
• Ability for differentiation by community
• Likely success with voters , public acceptance
Implementation
FAC Funding Recommendation
•
$ 25 . 7 Million
New Negotiated Special
Agreements. $ i
. 5 Improvement
. icts, $1 . 0
$6 Transit Utility
L# Maintenance of
0 .
ATTACHMENT •
Implementation
13
FAC Recommends
Regional Transit Provider
• Maximize Efficiencies - Provide services for two
or more jurisdictions in the North Front Range
• Staff recommends future action item —Regional
Transit Provider Feasibility Study
Implementation
Future Action Items
• Feasibility of route changes/new facilities based
on physical opportunities or constraints
• Transit service standards/guidelines for
remaining Enhanced Travel Corridors
• Feasibility Study regarding Regional Transit
Provider - Completion date of December 31 , 2010
ATTACHMENT •
Implementation
14
Future Action Items
• Identify potential future funding sources
• Discussions with downtown Fort Collins partners
for circulator route
• Discussions with PSD for transit service
partnership
Implementation
Future Action Items
• Discussion with partner jurisdictions for
implementation of new regional services
• Develop formalized transit system performance
monitoring program
• Seek federal funding for future capital
requirements
ATTACHMENT •
Conclusion
15
Consideration of
• 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan
• Associated Future Action Items
ATTACHMENT
Transit Strategic Operating Plan Executive Summary
The entire Plan is available at:
http://www.fcgov.com/tsp
Attachment 9
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
ES . 1 Project Overview and Purpose
The Transit Strategic Plan (TSP ) process is a collaborative partnership among the City
of Fort Collins-Transfort , the City of Loveland - COLT , and the Poudre School District
( PSD ) . The purpose of the TSP was to provide a coordinated effort in updating the
2002 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (TSOP ) and the 2004 COLT Transit Plan , as
well as providing detailed analysis of the opportunities public transportation offers PSD
high schools . The plan also addresses the coordination of transit service with the
planned Mason Corridor MAX project , identifies funding mechanisms and practical
phasing options , and addresses financial solutions required to create and sustain a
high - performing transit system . The 2009 TSP is an update to the 2002 Transfort
Strategic Operating Plan adopted by the Fort Collins City Council and the 2004 COLT
Transit Plan adopted by Loveland City Council . Separate documents have been
created for Transfort and COLT in order to simplify the plan adoption process .
Undertaking the 2009 TSOP update was approved by Fort Collins City Council as part
of the 2008/2009 Budgeting for Outcomes process to be completed by the end of 2009 .
Six primary goals were developed to guide the development of the 2009 TSOP update
and to meet the purpose of the project . These goals are outlined below :
• Goal # 1 — Develop an expanded transit system focused on productivity and
performance to meet the Transportation Master Plan and City Plan Policies .
• Goal #2 — Meet and exceed the 2008 Climate Action Plan Goal for
Transportation CO2 reductions by 2020
• Goal #3 — Provide enhanced mobility for seniors , youth , disabled , and transit
dependent
• Goal #4 — Develop a public transportation system that reduces roadway related
costs for maintenance , right-of-way acquisition , and construction
• Goal #5 - Provide funding recommendations to fully implement the Transit
Strategic Plan
• Goal #6 - Stimulate the local economy through investment in public
transportation infrastructure and operations .
The 2009 TSOP update was undertaken in several key steps , noted below .
• Collection of community input
• Review of related plans and studies
• Evaluation of existing transit market
• Consideration of growth patterns
• Assessment of existing transit services and conditions
• Development of initial transit service concepts
• Identification of opportunities to phase transit improvements
�o a ES- 1 August 2009
0
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
• Screening of initial concepts and identification of recommended strategy
• Integration of PSD transportation needs
• Evaluation of funding and governance options
• Update and adoption of the TSOP update
ES . 2 Evaluation of Existing and Programmed Transit
Services and Facilities
Transfort provides local and paratransit service in the City of Fort Collins with a
connecting regional route (the FoxTrot) to Loveland . Transfort operates 18 routes when
CSU and PSD are in -session and 14 routes when schools are not in -session . Fixed
route service is provided Monday through Saturday and generally begins between 6 : 00
and 6 : 30 AM , with the last trip scheduled to depart between 6 : 30 and 7 : OOPM . Service
frequencies range from 20 to 60 minutes . Paratransit Dial -A- Ride service currently
operates between the hours of 6 : 00 AM and 11 : 00 PM Monday through Saturday within
a specific service area . Transfort operates under a defined philosophy that has been
approved by the Fort Collins City Council . The Transfort service philosophy focuses on
productivity , meaning that bus routes focus on areas with higher ridership potential , as
opposed to dispersed coverage . Figure ES -1 summarizes the two philosophies .
Figure ES - 1 . Transfort Service Philosophy
Coverage VS Productivity
Dispersed Frequency and Speed
Service Everywhere Where There ' s Demand
Low Ridership High Ridership
but really important for the but no service in
people who use it. many places.
Single - Seat Rides Frequency
Close Route Spacing Frequency
'Adopted Philosophy by
Fort Collins City Council
Source: Transfort Strategic Operating Plan , 2002
Transfort serves a variety of transit users including adults , seniors and disabled
individuals , youth , PSD students , CSU students , and Dial -A- Ride users . Ridership
composition for the existing transit service by fare category is shown in Figure ES -2 .
o a August 2009
0 ES-2
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
As shown , PSD and CSU -related riders represent the largest portion of ridership ( nearly
60 % ) .
Figure ES -2 . Percentage of Ridership by Fare Category
%*
�ENIOJJ,,�
ADULT
L CSU
Source : Transfort
Transfort owns and maintains 26 standard 40-ft transit buses , four mid -sized 35-ft
transit buses , and 13 paratransit vehicles as part of its fleet . Services currently operate
out of three transit centers : the Downtown Transit Center ( DTC ) , the South Transit
Center ( STC ) , and the CSU Transit Center . The STC will be relocated as part of the
Mason Corridor project to a location off of Fairway Lane . Funding has been secured for
the new STC from a Colorado Department of Transportation ( CDOT ) funding program .
An assessment of existing transit system performance was conducted in order to
identify the productivity and effectiveness of the existing Transfort system . System -
wide , Transfort reported approximately 1 . 9 million riders between January 1 , 2008 and
December 31 , 2008 on its fixed - route system . Transfort ridership varies significantly
depending on whether or not CSU is in -session . On average , weekday ridership is 73 %
higher when CSU is in -session than when it is out of session . Key productivity
measures were evaluated for each route in order to identify those routes which are
more efficient , those that are underperforming , and routes which are not able to
accommodate high demand . This analysis contributed to the development of service
concept improvements .
ES . 3 Public Involvement Process
Public input was gathered from the community at a series of public and stakeholder
meetings in an effort to gain current perspectives and needs regarding transit services
in Fort Collins and Loveland . Key public stakeholder activities conducted in Fort Collins
o a August 2009
p ES-3
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
in support of the TSOP update are listed below . Comments were also received via
email , phone and postal mail .
• Three public meetings held from July 2008 to April 2009
• Open houses held at the four PSD high schools ( Fort Collins , Poudre , Rocky
Mountain , and Fossil Ridge high schools )
• Stakeholder briefings/interviews with city staff, local and regional governmental
agencies , advocacy groups , CSU , boards and commissions , UniverCity
Connections , Chamber of Commerce , local businesses , the real estate and
development community , transit users , and social service agencies
The most frequently received comments from the community are listed below :
• Increase frequency to every half hour, at least
• Increase hours , especially in the evening and on weekends
• Establish regional connections between Fort Collins and Longmont
• Schedules and routes should be easy to understand
• Need to implement a grid system
• Need for two-way route patterns in some areas
• Need to access lower income housing areas
• More room for bikes on buses and bike parking at stops
• More transit coverage throughout the community
A Citizen ' s Financial Advisory Committee ( FAC ) was organized in support of the project .
The FAC ' s purpose , representation , and evaluation criteria for revenue sources are
detailed in Figure ES -3 .
o a August 2009
0 ES-4
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES -3 . Citizen ' s Financial Advisory Committee
Committee Purpose
The Transit Strategic Plan (TSP) update included a number of operational
recommendations. The purpose of the Transit Financial Advisory Committee
(FAC) was to develop a set of funding recommendations that will, in turn, enable
the operational recommendations to be implemented. The FAC had bi-weekly
meetings from September 2008 through March 2009 and their recommendations
will be included in the overall TSP Update for City Council approval.
Representation
The Financial Advisory Committee was comprised of representatives from both
Fort Collins and Loveland. To enhance creativity during meetings, individuals who
represent agencies or constituencies were not expected to restrict themselves to
the prior positions held by their agencies or constituencies. The goal of the FAC was
to have frank and open discussion about the information under review and related
issues, and the options to address those issues.
Evaluation Criteria for Revenue Sources
» Reliable and dedicated source
» Fair: Places burden on users, but not undue burden on those least able to pay
10000, » Ease of administration and implementation
» Revenue grows with the community
» Ability for differentiation by community
» Likely success with voters, public acceptance
Source : Transfort and DEA
ESA Proposed Phased Service Concepts
Several near-term transit service improvements were implemented in March 2009 as a
result of initial recommendations from the TSOP update . These changes were
incorporated into the TSOP update under Phase 1 improvements . Near-term
improvements included changes in the schedules of seven routes to enhance efficiency ,
the elimination of one route and the addition of one new route ( Route 19 with service
between CSU and Front Range Community College via Shields ) .
The TSOP update presents a framework for implementation of future transit
improvements in three phases . Phase 1 recommends modest transit growth over
existing service . It assumes the implementation of MAX service and the refinement of
local routes to coordinate with MAX . Figure ES -4 provides a map of service
improvements recommended for Fort Collins as part of Phase 1 . An overview of these
recommendations follows .
o a August 2009
0 ES-5
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Local Services
• Includes relocation of the South Transit Center ( STC ) to the MAX terminus at a
location off of Fairway Lane
• Assumes the implementation of MAX service along the Mason Corridor from the
DTC to the proposed new STC
• Proposes some new services and realignment of existing routes along Elizabeth ,
University , Horsetooth and Drake
• Recommends the extension of hours on select routes so that early evening
service ( until 8 . 30 PM ) is provided on weekdays and Saturdays .
• Recommends improved service frequencies on CSU routes and proposes a new
numbering system for CSU routes
• Includes a proposed new Downtown circulator that would be operated by
Transfort , but would most likely be funded through public- private partnerships
Poudre School District Services
• Includes afternoon service via two dedicated local routes that serve Lincoln
Junior High and Poudre High schools
• Recommends improved access to Rocky Mountain High School via Shields
Regional Services
• Proposes modification of FoxTrot route so that it connects to the proposed new
STC in Fort Collins (terminating at the existing North Transfer Center in
Loveland )
o a August 2009
. ,. ,; ES-6
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES4 . Phase 1 Improvements — Fort Collins
RICHARDS LAKE
w
IN
m
z
WILLOX ~ MOUNTAIN VISTA
LU
'a
VINE w VINE W
z_
xis " g..Aoulntown J
::
w
�. ncJF ` sitCenter � m
AwwreNs Y [ WDMFY • �14vA
--1
MULBERRY
raMc
' Misting CSU Transit n Qnlenn HS ■
`a
Cda St2tB F ro�.�ru.eY�+a'nu
3 18
n,_ _ _ - _ PROSPECT
W
UA
a 25
• J L
6 • Vei 6
DRAKE scrool
=1 RodyMounbaHS MAX}
3
'19' � Monuaru
t- ■
1 - -
HORSETOOTH
U.
rn % Existing Harmony
9UA Transfer Center
r
6 HARMONY �'
front Range .
Cal nmirycaege :
Now South Transit Cantor z
Q FoSPIRidge HS q
_ U
KECHTER y
W �
C:1 Q
I z
O
( ) Q
i W
m
r -
TRILBY I Transit Strategic Plan
Phase 1 - Fort Collins
0 Existing Transit Center
31 Existing Park and Ride
CARPENTER 0 Proposed Transit Center
Proposed Park and Ride
Local Route
a (D at CSU Route
�� • Regional Route
71 ST ST
- Downtown Circulator Route
Paratransit Boundary
Mile" School/College/University
•kY
1 OWWW 1 i0M101111 U' 4\\ M nl l hmdnl.dHatt Ti at I ' -09 nwd
Source: DEA
03 August 2009
ES- 7
VOIr
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
Phase 2 recommends significant expansion of transit service in Fort Collins , as well as
expansion of regional connections to Denver. Partnering strategies between
participating jurisdictions would likely be considered for implementation of regional
services . This phase assumes the continued refinement of local routes to coordinate
with MAX . Phase 2 introduces a transition to a grid network in Fort Collins and provides
greater route coverage , higher service frequencies , and longer span of service . Figure
ES =5 provides a map of service improvements recommended for Fort Collins as part of
Phase 2 . An overview of these recommendations follows .
Local Services
• Proposes a new PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center in the vicinity of Harmony
Road and Timberline Road
• Introduces the transition to a grid route configuration
• Recommends 15 new or reconfigured grid system routes with improved peak
hour service frequencies
• Recommends 10 routes with early evening service ( until 8 . 30 PM ) , two routes
with late evening service ( until midnight) , and 16 routes with Saturday service
Poudre School District Services
• Provides greater public transit coverage near PSD high school student
residences
• Proposes increases in service frequency in the vicinity of Fort Collins , Rocky
Mountain and Fossil Ridge high schools
Regional Services
• Recommends a new regional route connecting Fort Collins , Loveland , and
Denver
• Proposes Saturday service for the regional route connecting Fort Collins and
Loveland , as well as late evening service ( until midnight ) on weekdays and
Saturdays
August 2009
0
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES -5 . Phase 2 Improvements — Fort Collins
RICHARDS LAKE
rr
w
m
z
WILLOX ~ MOUNTAIN VISTA
2
a
VINE VINE w z
1 ExisJiag Oolaotown W
a LAPORTE *sit Center M
- - 1 AAII
POIII¢e H$ ; -- YI<ZtWlNR, �y,YCO� ~
MULBERRY
'- - - - - -�� - 1 - - - - • ��- 1 6
1 raalc
z Ex ting CSU Trani ll � �"" fu ■ s�
• - -r - - b'' s�
rr ^22•
" Cda state rwnxwue."rsmR �y
PROSPECT
� w mem
MCI** grmR
' '' 4YI� O ■ M.W>MfU �25
1Wu P YM[t(y14R ti.fl
■ VrWAkT �-
to
S000
-�-2 Rocky Mowf" HS '.woc 7
3'.
nwnuunu
■ r-ortCdtos H,;
HORSETOOTH
12
I
Existing Harmony
o Transfer Center
rAwr R.wx ru.61
_ ■ HARMONY In La
4
Front Han, ■ I PVH Harmony
Cmmudycorfege "" us Transit Center
New South Transit Center
Q Fos ifR' HS
U I
KECHTER
w 12 6 fn
w � w
z ix
O N
w
m
TRILBY it Transit Strategic Plan
Phase 2 - Fort Collins
II Q Existing Transit Center
i 2! Existing Park and Ride
CARPENTER 15 Proposed Transit Center
Proposed Park and Ride
- Local Route
? � • CSU Route
� •? 1STST Regional Route
- Downtown Circulator Route
Paratransit Boundary
r School/College/University
• LLles .ur.
P: IW UgIgNpl\UbegNl04l eorvh0 uti. .mrb. lYN.au, Il nlel.JPbr. 0n•Jor10111Y' -1tia4.nwA
Source: DEA
o a August 2009
01 ES-9
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
Phase 3 recommends additional transit growth in Fort Collins including longer service
hours and limited Sunday transit service , as well as expansion of regional service to
Denver , Boulder, Berthoud , and Longmont . Partnering strategies would likely be
considered for implementation of regional services . This phase assumes the
implementation of additional MAX services that extend outside of the Mason Corridor
and completes the transition to a full grid network in Fort Collins . Figure ES =6 provides
a map of service improvements recommended for Fort Collins as part of Phase 3 . An
overview of these recommendations follows .
Local Services
• Proposes two new express routes utilizing Mason Corridor to minimize transfers
for high demand travel patterns and increase service frequencies along Mason
Corridor
• Proposes late evening service ( until midnight) for all express and MAX routes on
weekdays and weekends
• Proposes extended span of service with 12 routes offering early evening service
and four routes offering late evening service
• Recommends additional Saturday service on select routes
• Recommends Sunday service for seven routes
• Includes the complete transition to a grid route configuration
• Recommends increased service frequencies on most routes
• Proposes new service to Mountain Vista area
Poudre School District Services
• Proposes improved connections and service frequencies to Fort Collins and
Fossil Ridge high schools
• Recommends additional public transit coverage for PSD high school students
including longer service hours and greater opportunity for connections to FRCC
and CSU
Regional Services
• Proposes a new route providing connections between South Fort Collins ,
Loveland ( Centerra ) , Longmont , and Boulder with additional Saturday and
Sunday service
• Recommends reconfiguration of a regional route to provide service between Fort
Collins , Loveland , Berthoud , and Longmont and introduces Sunday service
• Recommends additional early evening service and late evening service for
regional routes
August 2009
0
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES -6 . Phase 3 Improvements — Fort Collins
RICHARDS LAKE
r
rr
m
w
m
cr
cr
WILLOW ~ MOUNTAIN VISTA
■
VINE 2 VINE w
z
SjrQg.�0Y07tplM1 w
LAPORTE °"v isit censer I m
Rwde HS ■W■�rw.a 0t ., VNCO F
t t �N MULBERRY
=- --- --21 - - - -- -.art a
z E fisting CSU TrnsitrA itter Cenron HS ■�
cc= k' c was Lu +iP
a
j `. W :4'OµFr xOYbIai `C
O Ul MAII h h
t 8 PROSPECT
t W
icvta
•_'� �j J � ■ 25
�V � � � ■ KyA QryCFS
SwA A.Re
CSV rW.:E[eMMnBI
■ 5 16t �
0
Rody Maiden HS
s ry
3 a
i :ucru Fat Coans HS
1z
HORSETOOTH
T
H = Existing Harmony
W ` _ Transfer Center
W ■
_ rxan ww� ■
_ HARMONY
■ PVH Harmony
Cmnnrru Cow s Transit Conte► II
New South Transit Center z
TT Fowl Hs tQ.7 521
w KECHTER 188 vtei
Lu LU
of y II
UI Lu
Lu II
TRILBY ; 1= Transit Strategic Plan
Phase 3 - Fort Collins
51 0 Existing Transit Center
Existing Park and Ride
CARPENTER 0 Proposed Transit Center
I Proposed Park and Ride
Local Route
• Q • CSURoute
71ST ST Q • Regional Route
Downtown Circulator Route
Paratransit Boundary
f 1 2 1 Miles School/College/University
xu-
:rgEO\G$\proects\Op an marros\MlMases UpdatedPlan TEansf= LY 409.o d
Source: DEA
o a August 2009
p ES- 11
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
ES . 5 Poudre School District
PSD serves approximately 24 , 000 students in 50 schools . School bus transportation
and Transfort service combine to meet the needs of students attending the four PSD
high schools : Poudre , Rocky Mountain , Fort Collins , and Fossil Ridge . PSD has
partnered in this study in order to identify opportunities to enhance and promote
Transfort services to these four high schools .
PSD school bus transportation currently provides 1 . 2 million miles and 203 , 000 hours of
service at a cost of approximately $ 7 . 2 million per year. Approximately 50 % of current
PSD students are eligible for school bus service . Students who are eligible for school
bus service must live within the defined attendance boundary for that school and must
live outside of the defined walk boundary , which is currently defined as 2 . 0 - miles from
the school .
Transfort routes are not specifically dedicated or oriented to the high schools , except for
Routes 91 and 92 , which provide one trip each in the afternoon from Lincoln Jr. High
and Poudre high schools respectively . Poudre High School is served by four Transfort
routes . Rocky Mountain and Fossil Ridge high schools are served by two routes and
Fort Collins High School is served by one route . PSD high school students generate
several types of transit trips including home-to-school and school -to- home trips , as well
as after school trips related to sports and other special events and travel to CSU and
Front Range Community College ( FRCC ) for advanced and /or specialized classes .
Implementation of the phased TSOP update will provide PSD students with improved
coverage and frequencies , which will provide for greater convenience and flexibility for
students making home-to-school , school -to- home , as well as special trips including
travel to CSU and FRCC . Table ES -1 provides an overview of the increase in service
coverage that would exist under all three phases .
Phase 1 provides for incrementally better access to PSD high schools , particularly to
Rocky Mountain High School which would be served by one additional route . Phase 2
provides better access to PSD high schools , particularly to Fort Collins , Rocky
Mountain , and Fossil Ridge high schools which would benefit from increased service
frequencies on nearby routes . Phase 3 recommends further geographic expansion of
coverage and would benefit all four PSD high schools with increased service
frequencies .
August 2009
0
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Table ES -1 . PSD Students within '/z-Mile of Phase 1 , 2 , and 3 Routes
Percent of • ' of •
High School ( Percent Change compared to Existing Routes)
lior Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Poudre 44 % ( + 3 % ) 47 % ( + 11 % ) 47 % ( + 11 % )
Rocky Mountain 68 % ( + < 1 % ) 83 % ( +22 % ) 83 % ( +22 % )
Fort Collins 76% ( + 15% ) 84 % ( +27% ) 84 % ( +27 % )
Fossil Ridge 40 % ( +26 % ) 67 % ( + 110% ) 67 % ( + 110% )
Total 57 % ( + 8 % ) 69 % ( + 31 % ) 69 % ( + 32 % )
Source: DEA
Over 5 , 500 students currently attend the four PSD high schools . In fall 2009 , an
estimated 1 , 800 additional students will be attending the four high schools when 9tn
graders will be shifted from junior high schools and integrated into the high schools . In
order to meet increased transportation demands , PSD is considering an expansion of
the walk boundary from the current 2 . 0 - miles to 2 . 5- miles from the school in fall 2009 ,
which would reduce the number of students eligible for PSD transportation . Under the
phased improvements , these students would have significantly improved access to the
Transfort public transit system . The expansion of the walk boundaries would result in
an estimated 21 % reduction in the number of students eligible for bussing . This could
result in over $ 100 , 000 of annual cost savings for PSD . Figure ES -7 illustrates transit
coverage within '/z- mile of existing Transfort routes with both current and expanded walk
boundaries .
o a August 2009
p ES- 13
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES -7 . Transfort Coverage within %=Mile of Existing Transfort Routes
1
Poudre Senior HS
� . Tfs
■ r . I t•+i
o - . • . . . .
,it " - t ' - • .'••� Fort Collins Senior HS
axLSall
• . :
WIWI
• • � . �
son
IL
Rocky Mountain Senior HS � �: :: . _ . _ �_ •
j . •
iv
IV
4v}'=`= ;.• ,. -i�� ; Fossil Ridge HS
.. ■
i.. .
7. i
6 � � � •
I Ire
01
/. : r ;� i %
ua:• {
° .
J
LEGEND
Home Location of TransFort Routes
High School Student Existing Bus Route
Area within 1 /2-Mile of Route Schools
(by Attendance Boundary) - High School
N - Fort Collins High School Q Expanded Walk Boundary
Fossil Ridge High School • Current Walk Boundary
ry
- Poudre High School School Attendance Boundaries
Rocky Mountain High School Fort Collins Senior HS
Outside Attendance Boundaries Fossil Ridge HS
0 0. 5 1 1 . 5 2 Sources Leosf rt 120031 and _ Poudre Senior HS
Miles Poudre Valley School Dhstnct 120060
Date Plolted Jury e. 20o9 Rocky Mountain Senior HS
Source - DEA
w
August 2009
ES- 14
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
ES . 6 Operating , Maintenance , and Capital Requirements
Transfort operates a total of 18 fixed routes including the FoxTrot regional route
connecting to Loveland and a Dial -A- Ride service . Twenty-three vehicles are deployed
for the fixed - route service during peak weekday operations . Total operating and
maintenance ( O & M ) costs were approximately $ 8 . 2 million in 2008 , with 75 % of costs
associated with fixed - route services , 4 % with regional service and 21 % with Dial -A- Ride
service .
Phase 1 services include a total of 19 fixed routes ( including the Mason Corridor MAX
and one regional route ) , with 26 local vehicles and one regional vehicle deployed during
peak weekday operations . Phase 1 would require over 30 % more revenue hours for
fixed - route services compared to the existing system operations . These additional
revenue hours equate to an approximate increase of $ 3 . 3 million in annual O & M costs
from existing levels ( assuming an inflation rate of 5 % for a three year horizon ) .
Phase 2 services include a total of 20 fixed routes ( including the Mason Corridor MAX
and two regional routes ) , with 38 local vehicles and four regional vehicles deployed
during peak weekday operations . Phase 2 would require approximately 110 % more
revenue hours for fixed - route services as compared to existing system operations .
These additional revenue hours equate to an approximate increase of $ 10 . 6 million in
annual O & M costs from existing levels ( assuming an inflation rate of 5 % for a five year
horizon ) .
Phase 3 services include a total of 22 routes ( including two Express Routes and Mason
Corridor MAX route and three regional routes ) , with 41 local vehicles and 10 regional
vehicles deployed during peak weekday operations . Phase 3 would require nearly
170 % more revenue hours as compared to existing system operations . These
additional revenue hours equate to an approximate increase of $ 17 . 7 million in annual
O & M costs from existing levels (assuming an inflation rate of 5 % for a seven year
horizon ) .
Regional services under each phase represent proposed routes that connect Fort
Collins with other front range communities . Therefore , implementation and funding
requirements would likely be undertaken as part of a partnership arrangement .
Several capital improvements would be required to support the phased operational
recommendations for the TSOP update . This includes both vehicle requirements and
facility improvements . Transfort existing fixed route service requires an overall fleet of
30 active vehicles . The mix of vehicle types includes 26 standard 40 ft . transit buses
and 4 mid -sized 35 ft . transit buses . A 60 ft . low floor alternative fuel bus will be used
for the Mason Corridor MAX BRT service . Compressed Natural Gas and Bio- Diesel is
used for operation of the 30 buses in the existing Transfort Fleet . The proposed phased
improvements would require additional vehicles to provide increased service levels .
Eleven vehicles in the Transfort fleet are currently scheduled for replacement . This will
require an investment of approximately $4 . 4 million independent of any proposed
o a August 2009
0 ES- 15
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
service expansions . The Phase 1 three year time horizon would also require an
investment in additional replacement vehicles and new buses for the Mason Corridor
MAX service . Mason Corridor buses will be funded through a Federal Transit
Administration ( FTA ) Small Starts Grant . Due to the two routes being replaced by MAX ,
three fewer vehicles are needed for the remainder of the improved local fixed - route
system . The cost associated with replacement vehicles for Phase 1 would equate to
approximately $ 6 . 5 million in future year dollars .
Phase 2 would require a total of 50 vehicles ( 17 additional vehicles over Phase 1 ) . The
cost associated with fleet expansion for Phase 2 would equate to approximately $ 8 . 7
million in future year dollars . Phase 3 would require a total of 60 vehicles ( 10 additional
vehicles over Phase 2 ) and also some additional replacement vehicles due to outdated
service life . The cost associated with both fleet expansion for Phase 3 and replacement
of outdated vehicles would equate to approximately $ 8 . 4 million in future year dollars .
Transfort may be able to secure finding contributions for up to 80 % of vehicle costs
through FTA programs such as the Section 5309 Capital Funding Grant . If Transfort is
successful in securing federal capital funding , the total local cost of vehicle acquisition
for all phases could be substantially reduced .
Several additional facility requirements would be necessary with the recommended
phased improvements . Fleet expansion associated with Phases 2 and 3 would exceed
the capacity of Transfort' s current bus storage facility , which has some additional
storage capacity planned for the Mason Corridor MAX vehicles . This could be
addressed through reconfiguration and expansion of the current facility onto adjacent
land , purchase or construction of a new supplemental facility , leased facility
arrangements , or utilization of facilities that are provided through a contractor.
The TSOP update assumes that Transfort ' s current contract with Next Media would
support the need for additional transit stops . Therefore , no additional capital expenses
for standard bus stops are reflected in this plan . Finally , each phase involves some
form of transit infrastructure improvement to support the proposed service
enhancements . Phase 1 would require various capital components related to MAX BRT
service , including a relocated South Transit Center and new outdoor bus storage . In
addition , Phase 1 would require a University Avenue transitway through a short
segment of the CSU campus . Phase 2 recommends a new PVH Harmony Campus
transit center and would also require expanded maintenance facilities (as noted above ) .
Phase 3 includes the same facility requirements as Phase 2 , with the addition of a bus
turnaround facility at Elizabeth and Overland Trail . The magnitude and extent of these
improvements would require further definition as the implementation planning is
undertaken in each phase .
a" August 2009
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
ES . 7 Implementation
The Citizen ' s Financial Advisory Committee ( FAC ) was organized by Transfort and
COLT staff and met on a semi - monthly basis from November 2008 to April 2009 to
evaluate and recommend funding strategies for implementing the recommended
phased improvements . Early in the process , FAC members and Transfort and COLT
staff acknowledged that defining a fair and practical funding plan meant balancing may
disparate factors . Figure ES -8 shows a visual representation of the factors that must
be balanced to achieve an equitable funding strategy for Transfort and COLT .
Figure ES -8 . Funding Challenges : Finding Balance
Adequacy/
Fairness
Political Institutional
f
Reality Options
MuItF
Funding
Jurisdictional
Cooperation
Cash Flow
Certainty
Source: BBC Research & Consulting
A wide variety of revenue generation mechanisms and institutional structures were
evaluated by the FAC as potential ways to generate and collect funds for transit
improvement . The FAC selected a mix of funding mechanisms that offer a fair
appointment of costs and reliable revenue production .
Figure ES -9 exhibits the current sources of revenue for Transfort . Major revenue
sources for Transfort include a large general fund transfer and revenue for the federal
government . Other Transfort revenue sources include a negotiated agreement with the
Associated Students of Colorado State University (ASCSU ) , farebox revenue , and
advertising .
August 2009
0
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES -9 . Current Revenue Sources — Transfort
Advertising and
Fare box , 5% Other, 5%
Federal , 160/40
ASCSU , 5 %
Other Local General Fund ,
Government , 1 % 68 %
Source : Transfort
Estimated revenues for Transfort were compared to the estimated O & M costs for the
proposed phased improvements . This analysis resulted in the identification of funding
shortfalls for O & M costs under each phase , summarized in Table ES -2 . It should be
noted that regional services would likely be implemented through a shared funding
arrangement with other jurisdictions , and the shortfall would not be the full responsibility
of Transfort . Assuming an ultimate Phase 3 build -out , Figure ES -10 exhibits the future
projected amount of available revenue for O & M , the total projected amount of O & M
funding required for implementation , and the resulting shortfall .
Table ES -2 . Projected Annual O & M Funding Shortfall for Transfort Phased
Improvements
Funding Shortfall '
Transfort Local $2 , 695 , 600 $7 , 2573000777
Transfort Regional $367450 $6325100
Total $257317050 $7 , 889 , 100 $ 1376605400
Source : Transfort and DEA Project Team
o a August 2009
p1 ES- 18
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES =10 . Annual O&M Shortfall for Phase 3 Implementation
$25,000,000
$ 204000 .000 i0Funding Shortfall
N ■ Available Revenue
O $ 11 , 258 , 100
U $ 154000 ,000
2
06
O
M $ 104000 .000
C
Q
$ 5 , 000 ,000
$2,402, 300
$ 0
Local Regional
Service Type
Source : Transfort and DEA Project Team
Estimated capital costs for vehicle acquisition for Transfort and COLT were also
compared to the minimum estimated federal funding sources that would likely be
available . This analysis resulted in the identification of funding shortfalls for capital
costs under each phase , summarized in Table ES -3 . Assuming an ultimate Phase 3
build -out , Figure ES -11 exhibits the future projected cumulative amount of available
funding for capital expenses , the total projected cumulative amount of capital funding
required for implementation , and the resultant shortfall .
Table ES -3 . Projected Annual Capital Funding Shortfall for Transfort Phased
Improvements
Funding ShortfallPhase
Transfort Local $ 55932 , 550 $ 6 , 047 , 300 $ 3 , 4023400
Transfort Regional N/A $ 153815550 $3 , 6395600
Total $ 57932 , 550 $7 , 4287850 $77042 , 000
Source : Transfort and DEA Project Team
o a August 2009
p T ES- 19
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES =11 . Capital Funding Shortfall for Transfort Phase 3 Implementation
$ 20 , 0009000
$ 189000 .000
$ 16 , 000 ,000 13 Funding Shortfall
N ■ Available Revenue,
N $ 14 , 000 .000
O
U $ 12 , 000 ,000
O $ 10 , 000 .000 15 .4 million
M $ 8 , 000,000
_ $64000 .000
Q
$4, 000 .000
$ 5 . 0 million
$ 2 , 000 ,000
$0
Local Regional
Service Type
Source : Transfort and DEA Project Team
The FAC recommended a series of funding mechanisms , all designed to allocate the
costs of Transfort and COLT services to those that benefit from them . The following
funding mechanisms were chosen based on their ability to provide a reliable revenue
stream and to grow with the community . Funding mechanisms options that could be
considered for future implementation for Transfort and COLT include :
• Maintenance of Effort — The continuation of municipal general fund revenues with
a growth in fares commensurate with an increased level of service .
• Dedicated Sales Tax — An excise tax on retail goods imposed to the point of sale .
The FAC recommended a 1 /4 -cent tax .
• Transit Utility Fee — An additional fee charged to residential and business utility
accounts .
• New Negotiated Agreements — The active investigation of new partners ,
including PSD and FRCC , as well as the re - negotiation of current agreements .
• Special Assessment — An annual per household or square foot charge placed on
property within a special improvement district .
Figure ES - 12 provides an overview of the projected revenues that could be available
for each of the above funding mechanisms recommended by the FAC .
i OR August 2009
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
Figure ES - 12 . Projected Transfort Operation and Maintenance Revenues from
FAC -Recommended Funding Mechanisms
Transfort O & M
$ 25 . 7 Million
New Negotiated Special
Agreements, $0. 5 Improvement
Districts, $ 1 . 0
$ 8 Transit Utility \
Fee , $7 . 1
X Maintenance of
Effort, $ 10 . 9
i
114 cent Sales Tax , \ \
$ 6 . 2
Source : Transfort and DEA Project Team
The FAC also recommended the investigation of the feasibility and practicality
associated with the formation of a Regional Service Authority ( RSA) to serve in the
administration , organization and consolidation of transit operations for Fort Collins and
Loveland . An RSA is a form of government designed to provide specified services on a
regional basis , in this case public transportation . The FAC recommended an RSA
because of its potential revenue raising authority , inter-jurisdictional flexibility between
Fort Collins and Loveland , ease of formation , and public acceptance . The FAC
specifically recommended the investigation of an RSA structure with no internal funding
mechanisms , meaning that each member jurisdiction must raise its own funds and
purchase transportation service from the RSA . Fort Collins and Loveland are the most
likely candidates to purchase services from the RSA , although other jurisdictions would
be able to raise funds by any means when they join the RSA . Further study of a
regional transit provider is recommended as an action item of this report .
Implementation Timeline
The TSOP update has been developed based on a potential implementation horizon of
seven years . A phased approach for the TSOP has been proposed to serve as a
framework for implementation priorities , and to allow for the opportunity to scale new
improvements and investments to future available funding sources . The ability to
secure new or additional funding sources over the next two years will be critical in
achieving full build -out of all three proposed phases .
August 2009
0
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
Successful implementation and meeting the desired timing for phased improvements
will require that the funding mechanisms described in the previous sections are in place
before the specific target years for implementation . This is necessary to build capital
reserves that are needed for the purchase of new vehicles . Ongoing revenue streams
from future revenue sources will then be used to fund annual operating and
maintenance costs for expanded transit services .
Other Implementation Considerations
The previous 2002 TSOP presented a number of key considerations that require
attention as new transit services are considered for implementation . Many of these
tasks are routinely addressed when any level of service refinements are undertaken .
These common planning steps , operational issues and guidelines for many of these
tasks are briefly summarized below .
• Dates for Start of New Service — Implementation target dates should consider
the necessary steps for Council approval and public process . In addition , vehicle
procurement should be carefully coordinated with scheduled implementation .
Summer is often a common season to implement substantial route changes in
university communities , which allows drivers to become more familiar with
services before school sessions and winter weather begin .
• Ridership and Customer Impacts — Changes in ridership trends should be
monitored to determine issues with system familiarity and the level of benefit
realized from new route configurations . Ridership trends after several months
provide the best indication of service change results .
• Further Service Revisions — Early service refinements could be necessary if
new routes are not operating or performing as desired . Schedule times , safety ,
peak load and demand points , transfers and complaints should be monitored to
determine if early route revisions are necessary .
• FTA Grant Funding for Vehicles — The potential to secure grant funding for
future vehicle purchases should be identified as soon as possible . The timing for
the grant application process and vehicle procurement could effect the desired
implementation dates for new service .
• Responsibilities of Transfort Staff — New staff responsibilities related to
service changes include new marketing and informational materials , hiring of new
drivers , schedule conformation and runcutting , and development of new bus
stops and signage .
Monitoring
An efficient monitoring process can provide significant value for making ongoing service
refinements , future operation planning , and can support future budgeting requirements
and financial decisions . Two types of monitoring are recommended to assure the
continued effectiveness and efficiency of transit services for Transfort — trend analysis
and peer system comparisons . Trend analysis compares current operating data with
August 2009
0
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary - Transfort Technical Report
historical data to establish trends in service efficiency and effectiveness . Peer system
analysis can be conducted on an annual basis using statistics from other sister
agencies and the National Transit Database ( NTD ) . Ideally , the peer group should be
selected based on some common characteristics such as population of the area ,
existence of educational institutions , system fleet size , annual vehicle hours or annual
vehicle miles of service .
Performance standards for three representative transit agencies were reviewed to
examine other typical procedures for service monitoring . Representative agencies
included the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority ( MARTA) in Atlanta , Georgia ,
the Regional Transportation District in Denver, Colorado , and Pierce Transit in Tacoma ,
Washington . Each agency uses similar monitoring tools , statistics and metrics to
document their relative route productivity and performance . However , the methods
employed for making decisions on service adjustments or changes differ somewhat
among agencies . The case studies provide a good range of techniques for grading
route performance and categorizing routes based on relative levels of efficiency and
cost-effectiveness . Transfort may choose to tailor similar measures specifically to their
current goals and objectives for system performance .
Future Action Items
A set of action items have been developed to guide the key steps for future phased
service implementation . These items listed below will include responsibilities among
Transfort , the City of Fort Collins and future transit service partners .
• Confirm the feasibility of route changes and new facilities based on physical
opportunities and constraints . This includes all street configurations used for new
transit routes , the University Avenue transitway on the CSU campus and the new
PVH Harmony Campus Transit Center.
• Develop transit service standards or guidelines for remaining Enhanced Travel
Corridors .
• Undertake a feasibility study regarding the establishment of a regional transit
provider that could provide services for two or more jurisdictions in the North
Front Range with a completion date by December 31 , 2010 .
• Identify potential future funding sources that will be sought for plan
implementation .
• Initiate discussions with potential downtown Fort Collins partners to implement
the recommended circulator route .
• Undertake discussions with the Poudre School District regarding a negotiated
agreement for a transit service partnership .
• Initiate discussions with potential partner jurisdictions for the implementation of
new regional services .
• Develop new performance standards and a formalized transit system
performance monitoring program .
• Initiate federal funding applications for future transit system capital requirements .
August 2009
0
Transfort Strategic Operating Plan Update Executive Summary — Transfort Technical Report
This page intentionally left blank .
o as August 2009
lfOlr. ES-24
RESOLUTION 2009-079
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
ADOPTING THE 2009 TRANSFORT STRATEGIC OPERATING PLAN
AS A COMPONENT OF THE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN
WHEREAS, as a part of the 2008/2009 Budgeting for Outcomes process, the City Council
approved funding to pursue the updating and revision of the existing Transfort Strategic Operating
Plan to become the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan (the "Operating Plan"); and
WHEREAS, the Operating Plan establishes Transfort's goals, operational plans, financial
plans, implementation techniques and various action items; and ,
WHEREAS, the Operating Plan also addresses the coordination of transit service with the
planned Mason Corridor MAX project and identifies potential funding mechanisms and practical
phasing options as well as financial solutions required to create and sustain a high performing transit
system; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of the Operating Plan will have no direct financial impact on the
City; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Operating Plan has been recommended for adoption by the
Transportation Board, the Planning and Zoning Board,the Natural Resources Advisory Board,the
Economic Advisory Commission,the Commission on Disabilities,the Air Quality Advisory Board,
and the Youth Advisory Board; and
WHEREAS,the City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the City that the
Operating Plan be adopted as a component of the Transportation Master Plan.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT
COLLINS that the 2009 Transfort Strategic Operating Plan, a copy of which is on file in the office
of the City Clerk and incorporated herein by this reference,is hereby adopted as a component of the
Transportation Master Plan.
Passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Fort Collins this 18th
day of August, A.D. 2009.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk