MPO TPC/TAC Board Minutes - 04/09/2008WICHITA FALLS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
Technical Advisory Committee
Minutes
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Voting Members Present:
Lin Barnett — Wichita Falls MPO, MPO Director, TAC Chairperson
Allan Moore — TxDOT, Director of Construction
Danny Brown — TxDOT, Director of Trans. Planning and Development
Dave Clark — City of Wichita Falls, Dir. of Community Development
Davis Powell — City of Wichita Falls, City Engineer
James Kelley — TxDOT, Area Engineer
Mark Beauchamp — City of Wichita Falls, Traff ic Superintendent
Tim Hertel — TxDOT, Director of Operations
MPO Staff.
Donnie Arbeau — Wichita Falls MPO, Transportation Planner II RECEIVED IN
Tammy Marlow — TxDOT, Funding Administrator CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Visitors: Date `] 0 107 _- - -._.- -- ___ -_-
Jon Moller — Citizen Stakeholder By _t,e
Nora Hodges — Nortex Regional Planning Commission - =_.a -- —`.
Absent:
Karen Montgomery-Gagne — City of Wichita Falls, Comm. Development Planner III
I. Welcome & Introduction
Mr. Barnett called the meeting to order at 10:03 a.m. and welcomed everyone present. The
Chairperson immediately commenced with the next order of business.
II. Review and Approval of the January 16th Technical Advisory Committee's (TAC)
Meeting Minutes
Mr. Barnett asked for comments on the January 16th TAC minutes. None were received. Mr.
Kelley motioned to approve the minutes. Mr. Powell seconded the motion. The motion was
unanimously approved.
III. Review and Comment Regarding the Transportation Policy Committee's (TPC's)
January 30th, 2008 Meeting Minutes - No Action Required
Mr. Barnett asked for comments on the January 30th TPC minutes. None were received. The
board moved on to the next item of business.
Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 9, 2008 Page 1 of 8
IV. Review and Comment Regarding the Transportation Policy Committee's (TPC's)
February 6th, 2008 Special Called Meeting Minutes - No Action Required
Mr. Barnett asked for comments on the February 6th TPC minutes. None were received. The
board moved on to the next item of business.
V. Discussion of Current and Future Funding of TxDOT Transportation Projects
Mr. Brown updated the TAC on the current funding situation for the local District office and
TxDOT. He mentioned much of the information presented at previous TAC meetings remains
unchanged. The local District will see a dramatic reduction in funding with a final total of $27
million in CAT 3 funding available for programming for the next 3 years (2008- 2010). Mr. Brown
added that repairs to the Falls Flyover will come out of CAT 3 funding, so that amount will
reduce available funding even more. Across the board it is very tight and available funding
needs to be utilized in the most cost effective manner. Therefore, available CAT 1 funds will be
put towards the seal coat and maintenance program for this area. This typically averages $10
million, but with only $27 million available the funding shortfall will also affect maintenance.
Commenting on options to improve the current situation, Mr. Brown noted that Federal and
State legislators are looking into the possibility of raising the Gas Tax which could provide some
added funding to TxDOT. However, this is not the preferred way for a number of reasons. Mr.
Barnett commented that Texas is considered to be a donor state and receives a
disproportionate return on the tax dollars that it sends to Washington. Mr. Brown commented
that even with a gas tax rate increase it may be quite sometime before the additional revenues
begin to have an effect on programming.
At present, the total rescission for Texas is 1.1 billion. TxDOT has instituted stricter accounting
practices to maximize every dollar spent. Options like bonding projects are under review and
being discussed. To conclude, Mr. Brown felt that regardless of any short term solutions put in
place, the next 3 years will be a very slow and difficult period for TxDOT. The hope is after the
3 -4 year slow down that new funding mechanism will turn the current situation around.
VI. Review, Discussion and Recommendation of the Draft 2008 Update to the
Socioeconomic Data Collection and Forecast Study
Mr. Barnett reviewed the 2008 Socioeconomic Update process for the WFMPO. Then, Mr.
Arbeau touched on the final report submitted by BWR and stated the final dataset looked very
good. Two minor issues still need to be corrected and those are in the works. The first error was
a simple oversight in the data columns. The second issue was brought to light by Mr. Greg
Lancaster and his staff at the Texas Transportation Institute or TTI. A few weeks ago his office
was sent the data for their review and comment. The one issue raised was in regard to the
growth rate of 1% used by BWR. The state average is closer to 0.5 %, which Greg thought was
more realistic. Mr. Arbeau will follow -up with BWR and TTI to develop a consensus to finalize
the dataset and Socioeconomic Update.
In regards to the final BWR report and the information presented, Mr. Arbeau informed the TAC
committee that a small report utilizing GIS maps would be prepared to better display the
information developed in the study. This will provide a clearer picture of the data and projected
growth trends. Mr. Hertel inquired whether the consultant could prepare these maps and
presentation materials for the WFMPO. Mr. Arbeau stated this was not included with the original
RFP and the process could be easily completed in house. This update will require a 45 -day
Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 9, 2008 Page 2 of 8
public comment period before being adopted by the TPC. Staff expects this to happen at the
July 23, 2008 TPC meeting.
VI1. Review and Recommendation to Amend the FY 2008 Unified Planning Work
Program Due to Programming Rescissions
Mr. Barnett highlighted the areas of the document needing to be updated in the UPWP due to
the recent Federal rescissions. The estimated carryover of PL 112 funds from FY 2006 and FY
2007 was revoked because TxDOT could not provide the required in -kind matching funds due to
the rescissions. It reduced PL 112 funds from $279,186.00 to $224,112.32 which is a reduction
$55,073.68. The funds were taken out of sub -tasks 5.1, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5. Sufficient funding was
left in sub -task 5.2 to cover the remaining costs of socioeconomic study.
Mr. Barnett made mention of developments that came out of the recent TEMPO meeting and
the issue of transportation development credits, also known as toll credits. The larger MPO's in
Texas have asked the TTC (Texas Transportation Commission) to allow all the MPO's in the
state to use these credits as replacement for the loss of TxDOT's in -kind matching funds in
order to secure the FY 2006/2007 PL 112 carryover funds. The Texas Transportation
Commission did approve the measure at their last meeting. Mr. Barnett was informed that the
WFMPO would recover a large portion, if not all, of their carryover PL 112 funds. How this will
be implemented remains to be seen. Next year, the WFMPO will begin preparing the next MTP
Update for 2010. These carryover funds are integral to securing professional consulting
assistance and completing the document. It is a large undertaking.
Mr. Barnett asked for further comments on the changes to the UPWP. None were received. Mr.
Clark motioned to approve and forward the changes to TPC for review and approval. Mr. Brown
seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously approved.
VIII. Review, Discussion and Recommendation of Revisions and Amendments to the
WFMPO By -Laws Including: SAFETEA -LU Compliance, Term, Member Proxy,
Quorum, and Conflict of Interest
The TAC committee reviewed the revisions and amendments to the WFMPO By -laws
highlighted in the agenda. SAFETEA -LU compliance, term, member proxy, quorum, member
attendance, conflict of interest were discussed in detail. Changes were noted and those will be
added to the WFMPO By -Laws. Mr. Barnett asked for a motion to forward the WFMPO By -Laws
with noted revisions to TPC for their input and review. After TPC review on April 23, 2008, the
revisions to the By -Laws will need to be made available for public comment for 45 -days. The
By -Laws will then come back before the TAC and TPC committees for approval in July, 2008.
Mr. Kelley made a motion. Mr. Davis seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously
approved.
VIII. Other Business:
A. Discussion & Overview of Progress on Local Transportation Projects — City and
TxDOT staff (Quarterly Review)
City Report: Mr. Powell began with projects under construction. He reported the
Maplewood Phase II project was let for construction in January 2008. The Transfer
Station Bridge project was let in conjunction with the Maplewood Phase II project. The
estimated completion date for both projects is February 2009. The Street Rehab
Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 9, 2008 Page 3 of 8
program for various locations around Wichita Falls was let in February 2008. That
program is now 20% complete. Gregg Road and Langford Road project ($2.5 million)
was let to Tom McGrath and will be awarded at the next City Council meeting.
Construction on that will begin in the next couple of months.
Under Scheduled Projects, Mr. Powell stated the 10th Street and Harrison/ Speedway
Intersection project will replace the old brick with faux brick. Traffic Flow Improvement
projects (Kemp at Callfield, Maplewood at Elmwood, and Elmwood at Southwest Pkwy)
are scheduled for a May 20th award. Next, the Alley Rehab for various locations will be
let in May 2008. Lastly, the Faith Village Drainage Phase II & III ($3.4 million) is
scheduled for a June 2008 award. The right -of -way has been cleared, but a few utility
issues remain. That concluded his report.
TxDOT Report: Mr. Kelley reported that the project to repair the faulty ramp that
connects US 82 to US 277 has finished removing the concrete deck. Scans of the
structure will be completed next, but no timetable has been set for completion. However
Mr. Kelly is optimistic the repair will be completed by the summer of 2008. The concrete
repaving project on IH 44 is behind schedule (72% of the time has passed while only
55% of the work is completed). Loop 11 project has cleared some land and a couple of
utilities need to be moved. Demolition on the FM 890 project should begin next week.
This will have an impact on IH 44 traffic. The Kell West project is on schedule. And
lastly, nova chip (seal coat) projects for portions of SH240, LP 473, and SP 325 will
begin shortly. That concluded Mr. Kelley's report.
B. MPO Quarterly Financial Report (1st Quarter FY 2008 — October, November,
December)
Mr. Barnett reported that the first quarterly report for FY 2008 showed the WFMPO spent
22.33% of allocated funding. Corrections for PL 112 funding reductions are incorporated
into the report. He asked for comments and questions on the quarterly report. There
were none.
C. Update of Wichita Falls Transit System - Progress Report
Mr. Barnett was pleased to announce that the 2008 Transit Plan was accepted by the
Mayor and City Council on March 18th at the City Council Meeting. The new system will
begin operations on July 7th, 2008. Mr. Burrus commented that the public participation
process was an outstanding success. As well, local concerns over adding a paratransit
option to the new system will be approached carefully given the loss of a large employer
and rising fuel prices. Route deviations will increase from 2 blocks to a quarter mile
either side of the route. He finished by stating the Transit System will never again be a
stagnant operation and will be reviewed periodically to ensure its effectiveness. That
concluded his comments.
D. Urban Area Neighborhood District Option Stakeholder Presentation
Mr. Barnett prefaced the UAND presentation by stating that on February 11, 2008, Mr.
Moller, Mr. Brown, Mr. Jim Biggs, Councilor Elmore, Councilor Smith, Mr. Bill McGregor
and he sat in on a teleconference call with FHWA Representatives Kirk Fauver, Justin
Luther and TTI Engineer, Brian Bochner to discuss the UAND program. Mr. Moller was
then given the floor.
Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 9, 2008 Page 4 of 8
Mr. Moller spoke about TAZ 72, how he had divided it up into subsections, the principles
of the UAND program, and the proactive approach needed to promote the program for
stakeholder land redevelopment. He began by identifying localized traffic control issues
in the area and the potential of modifying the City's Thoroughfare Plan to influence future
land redevelopment. Mr. Moller stated that infrastructure improvement and land use are
key issues in regards to the challenge facing redevelopment of stakeholder properties
located within TAZ 72 and the surrounding areas. Mr. Moller stated it should be a duty of
the WFMPO to hold a public meeting using the maps provided by Mr. Moller to gauge
the level of interest in the UAND program and redevelopment of this area.
One specific thing Mr. Moller requested of the WFMPO was a deeper analysis of TAZ 72
from a socioeconomic point of view. Mr. Barnett stated that after consulting with BWR he
was notified that the current socioeconomic study could be extended for $3,500 to look
at TAZ 72 and the surrounding areas in greater detail. Mr. Moller asked the TAC to
consider supporting an initiative to extend the current study. Mr. Barnett asked Mr.
Moller how the acquisition of more data would lead to attracting interested investors to
consider investing in the zone. Mr. Moller responded that it would provide a stronger
base of knowledge about the profile of neighborhood groups. Mr. Moller then asked the
TAC to accept his map as a base map for the UAND project proposal. Mr. Barnett
opened the floor for discussion and recommendation.
Mr. Clark asked whether the UAND project was focusing on redevelopment or the
clearing of properties. Mr. Moller indicated both were possible. He continued his
response in highlighting the level of demolition that occurred during construction of the
elevated freeway and the large number of existing properties that have been cleared in
recent years. Mr. Moller was hopeful his program could show neighbors and fellow
stakeholders that there are business opportunities available, at a fair value, through what
he described as entitlement of redevelopment. Mr. Clark followed up by asking how the
Wichita Falls TAC and TPC fit into his UAND program. Mr. Moller touched on the access
to information various TAC members have at their disposal, including Mr. Clark and land
use. Mr. Moller stated that he could get access to Federal Highway funds to do the study
if it relates to the following: environmental justice, socio- economic forecasting, and traffic
analysis. Mr. Moller stated that the MPO is a consensus building organization and that it
provides him with the best representation possible, according to the way the law is
written, for public participation.
Mr. Powell made a few comments regarding traffic control and management within the
TAZ 72 area. He stated there was no problem with traffic volume or access in that area
and that he did not see how a traffic analysis study would affect or change the
redevelopment of the area. He stated that any changes should be developer driven by
private investment. Mr. Powell commented that the area has good thoroughfare access
via Brook Street as well as 11th Street, which serves the hospital. No mobility hindrance
(or issue) is present to warrant a traffic study. Mr. Powell stated the MPO should not
spend their limited funds on traffic analysis for an area needing redevelopment.
Corridors with congestion or problems with traffic flow should be the priority. Mr. Moller
responded by pointing out access management issues for Clark Street. Mr. Powell
answered: if the characteristics of Clark Street were changed or a pending development
was in the works, then a traffic study should be discussed, but not based on a "what if"
scenario. Mr. Moller then countered with the FHWA's willingness to spend money on
scenario planning public meetings. Mr. Brown was quick to note that there were quite a
Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 9, 2008 Page 5 of 8
few qualifiers for that to happen. The MPO Director outlined the requirements issued by
Mr. Kirk Fauver, Statewide Engineer for FHWA: the UAND Option must address
collector streets and above, no residential streets to be included; and, a demonstration
of how the UAND Option will benefit the on- system transportation network and the MPO
as a whole. The TAC committee determined that no collector or arterial streets are
currently located within the identified UAND project area. Mr. Moller then posed a
question asking TAC members what the City (of Wichita Falls) expects to see if the
redevelopment scenario plays out and asked, "is a collector at Clark Street a good
idea ?" Mr. Clark stated, "Developers are to do development, principally." He also added
the point that the WFMPO has eliminated corridor studies like Lebanon and Avenue H
due to funding shortages caused by recent Federal rescissions. Mr. Clark stated that he
did not think the UAND Option proposal should be a MPO project.
Mr. Moller asked the WFMPO to put the UAND option into the context of stakeholder
meetings using the maps that he was providing. He highlighted the importance of the
WFMPO public participation plan, transportation and mobility improvements, and the
need to help citizen stakeholders. He stated the TAZ 72 area is in a permanent state of
decline. Mr. Clark stated that he did not feel that transportation and mobility
improvements would improve the current state of decline. Mr. Clark commented that the
issue of decline is an issue that many neighborhoods across the nation are facing. Mr.
Clark commented that traffic planning is not the solution, "encouraging economic
development, having a pressure for development, and a pressure for the reuse of
property is the big picture." Mr. Clark commented that he would very much like to see
development happen at the location in question because it is becoming mostly vacant.
He commented that the hospital and their expansion may have interest in this area. Mr.
Moller asked why it could not come out of the MPO and why Mr. Clark did not feel the
MPO was the appropriate group. Mr. Kelley answered stating that investor development
should drive any action of the WFMPO and not vice - versa. Mr. Kelly further stated that it
is not advisable to establish precedence for one sector that other developers would
notice; such as the Loop 11 project.
Mr. Burrus suggested that Mr. Moller should first hold round table meetings with his
fellow stakeholders and invite City, TxDOT and MPO staff to come and discuss the
issues of transportation and how they relate to the redevelopment of the area in
question. Mr. Powell emphasized the importance of such meetings and the necessity of
active participation by staff. He stressed his support of the new redevelopment as did
Mr. Clark. However, Mr. Clark did stress the point that MPO and Planning staffs are not
charged with doing the work of developers. Mr. Moller stated he was not a developer,
but a stakeholder who simply wanted "the MPO to give it an under pinning" for the
information collection he felt was needed to promote the UAND proposal. Mr. Moller
stated that he was a stakeholder representing the people living in the neighborhood and
was trying to bridge a gap between (stakeholders and developers) for the redevelopment
of stakeholder owned properties. Mr. Moller commented that he was trying to unite
stakeholders and land parcels into a larger scale issue "inside the purview of the MPO
that might be good for business in Wichita Falls ". Mr. Moller commented that he hoped
the TAC, and eventually the TPC, would "let the MPO take a hand" in helping him with
his UAND Option initiative.
Mr. Barnett stated that based on the current discussion and the opinions of his TAC
committee members present; he must conclude that the TAC committee would not
support the UAND Option because it did not meet the FHWA requirements in its present
Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 9, 2008 Page 6 of 8
form. Mr. Barnett commented that the TAC supports transportation related
redevelopment and stakeholder meetings and is always willing to meet and discuss
transportation issues with local stakeholders. In response, Mr. Moller stated that the TAC
was passing or putting their responsibility to citizen stakeholders onto him. Mr. Clark
replied that "transportation movement (in that area) does not have a problem ". Mr. Moller
responded by stating that the conversation of TAZ 72 redevelopment is how the MPO
should engage the public through their Environmental Justice process. Mr. Burrus
pointed out the fact that Environmental Justice guidelines and procedures were created
to protect socioeconomically disadvantaged areas of low- income and minority
populations from the potential adverse affect of new transportation projects through
various means (i.e. avoidance, minimization, mitigation or enhancement of the project).
Mr. Barnett commented that during the teleconference of February 11th, Mr. Fauver had
stated that Environmental Justice could not go back and fix past adverse impacts on
area neighborhoods. Mr. Moller pointed out that the 1965 decision to condemn portions
of the neighborhood and create right -of -way for infrastructure for the Kell Freeway
created a huge Environmental Justice adverse impact that is now the responsibility of
the stakeholders living nearby. Mr. Barnett reiterated the point that only future
transportation projects are the focus of Environmental Justice and that no future projects
are planned for that area. Mr. Barnett stated that the MPO was willing to work in support
of redevelopment, but not in the form of the UAND proposal. Mr. Moller inquired whether
the proposal could be put on the MPO's agenda for stakeholder awareness and scenario
building; and, whether the TAC felt is was a valid or worthwhile program to pursue. Mr.
Barnett recommended to Mr. Moller that he rework his proposal so that it could be
clearly understood by others. He also recommended that Mr. Moller encourage his fellow
stakeholders to attend future TAC and TPC meetings. Adding to that point, Mr. Clark
stated the issue was philosophical and the MPO should not be expected to provide
neighborhood planning for an area that has no new roads planned in the foreseeable
future. Mr. Clark stated that the Context Sensitive Solutions criteria are not being met
with the UAND Option. Mr. Clark then mentioned that the hospital expansion and
support infrastructure, like apartment complexes, might provide an opportunity for
potential investors.
Mr. Burrus, speaking on behalf of the City of Wichita Falls, stated the juncture at which
they could assist with the project was after stakeholders united in support of the project
to market the idea to an interested developer. Mr. Moller asked whether the City could
stimulate that stakeholder meeting for TAZ 72 and the answer was "no ". The TAC
committee, and Mr. Burrus, reiterated their support of the overall concept and all agreed
they would attend stakeholder organized meetings to support the endeavor. The TAC
committee agreed that the MPO, City, and FHWA could lend staff and expertise to
stakeholder meetings.
Mr. Moller asked TxDOT and MPO staff again about the current use, future use, and
traffic analysis of Clark Street. Mr. Brown stated that TxDOT's policy dictates they take
action on development plans for an area, only at such time they are developed and
presented. Adding to that point, both Mr. Kelley and Mr. Brown said "no" it (the UAND)
was not the business of the MPO. Mr. Brown continued stating the MPO should not
spend money to produce information for the type of project being proposed. Mr. Clark
stated his office would gladly work with interested stakeholders and developers on any
pending developments. He commented that a Tax Increment Finance District could also
be an option for this area. Touching on Mr. Moller's original question, Mr. Powell spoke
about the complexities and legalities involved with upgrading a facility like Clark Street,
Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 9, 2008 Page 7 of 8
both positively and negatively.
Mr. Barnett brought the discussion to a close. The final determination was that the TAC
committee would encourage staff to participate in any stakeholder organized meetings.
However, without an interested developer the TAC committee did not see how the
UAND Option proposal would benefit the on- system transportation network in and
around the TAZ 72 area.
There were no further comments.
IX. Public Comment on Anything Not on the Agenda
Mr. Burrus notified the TAC that the Commission on Highway Transportation Needs will
be dissolved. The Commission last met in the summer of 2006. Moving forward, the TPC
can and will appoint special Citizen Advisory Committees as the need arises.
XII. Adjourn
The meeting adjourned at 12:41 noon.
6� 1 Atz
Irvan F. "Lin" Barnett Jr.
MPO Transportation Planning irector
Wichita Falls MPO
Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 9, 2008 Page 8 of 8