Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout~Master - Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) Transportation Policy Committee Meeting 08/18/2015 MINUTES OF THE AMES AREA METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TRANSPORTATION POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING AMES, IOWA AUGUST 18, 2015 The Ames Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) Transportation Policy Committee meeting was called to order by Ames Mayor Ann Campbell at 6:00 p.m. on the 18th day of August, 2015, in the City Council Chambers in City Hall, 515 Clark Avenue, pursuant to law with the following additional voting members present: Gloria Betcher, City of Ames; Amber Corrieri, City of Ames; Tim Gartin, City of Ames; Chris Nelson, City of Ames; Wayne Clinton, Story County; and Hamad Abbas, GSB Transit representative. Matthew Goodman, City of Ames; Peter Orazem, City of Ames; Jonathan Popp, City of Gilbert; and Chet Hollingshead, Boone County, were absent. Also present were City of Ames Transportation Planner Tony Filippini, Garrett Pedersen of the Iowa Department of Transportation Systems Planning, Cathy Brown of Iowa State University, Ames Public Works Director John Joiner, Ames Public Works Traffic Engineer Damion Pregitzer, and HDR Project Manager Jason Harvey. Public Works Director John Joiner briefly re-introduced the Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) and Priority Listing for 2040 and stated that the final Plan would be finished by the September 22, 2015, City Council meeting. Ames Mobility 2040 is a collaborative effort among public, state, and local transportation officials with the goal of understanding the Ames area transportation priorities, current and future transportation needs, and how to best address those needs with available transportation funding. The Plan covers areas in and around Ames that are expected to be urbanized within the next 25 years. Project Manager Jason Harvey reviewed the project goals and development process, which consisted of three stages: project planning, environmental evaluation and preliminary design, and project design and implementation. The projects were placed into anticipated implementation timeframes to determine the fiscal feasibility of the Plan based on the availability of traditional funding sources. The time frames were defined as: Short-term, 2015- 2024 (includes those projects that are already programmed); Mid-term, 2025-2032; and Long-term, 2033- 2040. Illustrative projects are included in the Plan as a need; however, they are not included in the time frames. If new funding is made available, these projects could be implemented earlier in the Plan. A map displaying the draft implementation timing for the Transit Plan projects was presented with short-term and long-term projects being noted. Council Member Betcher asked if anything was considered with all the major development on S. 4th Street and Lincoln Way. Public Works Traffic Engineer Damion Pregitzer said the area is not being overlooked; however, a different approach consisting of a review and study will determine if anything is needed. Mr. Pregitzer 2 explained how the time frame for projects is related to available funding, and depending on cost and the need for a project, the system benefit scoring ranks them into hi gh, medium, or low. Short-term projects can be shifted and moved around for priority. Council Member Gartin asked how the Land Use Policy Plan (LUPP) will evolve with the Transportation Plan. Mr. Pregitzer replied that it is an effort to update the Plans together, but staff is working to reflect accurately with the LUPP. City Manager Steve Schainker stated that it will take two to three years for the LUPP to be updated because it is usually done every five years. The roadway projects were introduced by Mr. Harvey, who clarified that mid-term projects would include widening of lanes, and long-term projects would include paving gravel roads, adding turn lanes, and developing farther out of town. The term “Dutch Style” from Project No.14 of the draft roadway implementation was defined as a route for all means of transportation including vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians. It could consist of a wider roadside for bike lanes, the road being striped differently, or a separate protected facility at specific intersections. Mr. Pregitzer mentioned there are many ways to handle traffic signals in this situation and it is a great way of separating modes of transportation to better the flow of traffic. Council Member Nelson pointed out Project No.20—the widening of S. 16th Street to three lanes from University Boulevard to Grand Avenue—and questioned if ISU funding was affecting the Plan. Cathy Brown of ISU said they are working together to establish a partnership in funding, and by having the projects in there, it allows for the potential of federal funding. It was also made known that if the cost of a project becomes part of a developer cost, the funding would be replaced by developer funding. Council Member Betcher asked about Project No.16B—the addition of turn lanes at the Grand Avenue and 13th Street intersection. According to Mr. Joiner, it is up to local jurisdiction to determine the process and a longer term discussion with neighborhood input will decide what kind of project will occur. Council Member Nelson questioned Project No.19A—the conversion of Lincoln Way to a three- lane between Gilcrest Avenue and Duff Avenue. Mr. Pregitzer stated that the project is not viable until the Grand Avenue extension is complete. A greater study and post evaluation of Grand Avenue is needed to determine what will be done. In response to Transit Representative Hamad Abbas’s question about the clarification of adaptive signal technology, Mr. Pregitzer described how the technology would detect the wait time of cars and pedestrians in real time. The cost of collecting data would be minimized and it would benefit during the winter and special events. Mr. Pregitzer discussed Project No.20—the widening of S. 16th Street to three lanes from University Boulevard to Grand Avenue Extension. Considering residential growth, the addition of a third lane or turn lane would be beneficial during peak hours and special events. Council Member Gartin pointed out that the bike trail on the north side of this area is only paved to a certain point before becoming a gravel path, and he was concerned about the safety of bicyclists 3 crossing the road. Mr. Pregitzer agreed the path does need to be extended and said local funds could allow this to be accomplished sooner. Council Member Gartin asked how the expected growth in North Ames would be reflected in the Plan. Mr. Pregitzer stated that the model is based on a census block, and staff is working on capturing the expected population growth. Mr. Harvey briefly introduced the bicycle and pedestrian projects and clarified that bike boulevards and sharrows (SH) would be on streets with lower volume and speeds, and shared use paths (SUP) and trails are completely separate facilities for bikes and pedestrians that are not on streets. Mr. Pregitzer pointed out that on-street bike lanes are primarily used for transportation. Council Member Betcher asked about the trail connection around Hayward and if it consists of widening sidewalks or a completely new trail. Mr. Harvey replied by saying that it will be mostly widening of sidewalks, but a few areas will have a block or two of new path. Council Member Gartin said the area just a few blocks south of Lincoln Way on Duff Avenue is one of the hardest places to navigate with bicycles and questioned if the area would be addressed. Mr. Pregitzer agreed the area is challenging and described how a parallel route labeled with signs could be created to divert cyclists away from the problem area. Council Member Corrieri asked how the previously referred to areas, such as Stange and Northridge Parkway, are put into the Plan. According to Mr. Pregitzer, discussions with the neighborhoods would determine what needs to be accomplished. Council Member Betcher mentioned that Project SUP No.6—trail connection between Beedle, Mortensen, and Campustown south of Lincoln Way Intermodal Facility—had a note stating it would be an important bike combination identified for either SUP 6 or a combination of SUP 4 and SH 2. Mr. Harvey responded by saying the project has two potential options. A public input process would be needed in order to determine which option would take place. In many cases, three to four options were possible for the projects. Council Member Gartin stated that on South Dakota when approaching Mortensen, the path disappears and asked if this would be finished. Mr. Joiner answered that the project is budgeted as done and it will be. At the inquiry of Council Member Nelson, Mr. Pregitzer said the intent to connect to the Heart of Iowa Trail in Slater exists, but which option to go with has yet to be determined. PUBLIC FORUM: Dan DeGeest, 4212 Phoenix Street, Ames, representing the Ames Bicycle Coalition gave a brief presentation on the SUP 6 —trail connection between Beedle, Mortensen and Campustown south of Lincoln Way Intermodal Facility. Mr. DeGeest mentioned that if the trail was a loop, it would be a great benefit to children traveling to and from school and a safe neighborhood amenity. He stated that off-street trails are the safest. Mr. DeGeest then showed a video filmed on a GoPro camera of the path and pointed out where the desired trail is already 4 traveled. Alternate paths towards the south were pointed out with the potential of connecting regionally. Trevin Ward, 2610 Northridge Parkway, #201, Ames, representing the Ames Bicycle Coalition, presented a map of the existing infrastructure and pointed out that the trails across Ames do not connect. Mr. Ward then added an overlay of the expected short-term and already committed projects. He recommended that Ames should try to accomplish these projects by 2020 like other surrounding areas, if not sooner. Mr. Ward believes that a clear, safe path for inexperienced and new cyclists should be provided in Ames. He indicated that signage is also very important, and although it is inexpensive, it can have a strong impact. Mr. Ward stated that a lot can be done in a short-term time frame to make Ames a better place. Sandra Looft, 723 Duff Avenue, Ames, representing Ames Kidical Mass, spoke about the safety of families using roads for cycling. She had mentioned that for a specific event, a police escort was provided, and traffic had treated the cyclists differently. Traffic was more aware of them and shared the road, and Looft feels as if this is something that should always happen. She believes that separating the children away from cars is important, but doesn’t recommend the use of sidewalks either. Looft stated that trails connecting various routes in Ames would continue to promote Ames as a great city for families. COUNCIL COMMENTS: Moved by Gartin, seconded by Corrieri, to approve Council Member Betcher’s request to attend the 8th Annual Growing Sustainable Communities Conference in Dubuque on October 6 and 7. Vote on Motion: 4-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT: Moved by Nelson, seconded by Corrieri, to adjourn the AAMPO Policy Committee meeting at 8:02 p.m. Vote on Motion: 4-0. Motion declared carried unanimously. ___________________________________ _____________________________________ Diane R. Voss, City Clerk Ann H. Campbell, Mayor ___________________________________ Heidi Petersen, Recording Secretary