Loading...
MPO TPC/TAC Board Minutes - 04/14/2010WICHITA FALLS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Technical Advisory Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Voting Members Present., Lin Barnett — Wichita Falls MPO, MPO Director, TAC Chairperson Allan Moore — TxDOT, Director of Construction Davis Powell — City of Wichita Falls, City Engineer James Kelley — TxDOT, Area Engineer Karen Montgomery -Gagne — City of Wichita Falls, Comm. Development Planner III Kevin Hugman — Proxy for Dave Clark, City of Wichita Falls, Dir. of Community Development Mark Beauchamp — City of Wichita Falls, Traffic Superintendent Mike Beaver — Proxy for Danny Brown, TxDOT, TP &D Director Tim Hertel — TxDOT, Director of Operations MPO Staff. Donnie Arbeau —Wichita Falls MPO, Transportation Planner II Tammy Marlow — TxDOT, Funding Administrator Visitors: Scott "Chip" Taylor — Lockwood, Andrews, and Newnam, Inc. John Burrus — Director of Aviation, Traffic, and Transportation Jerrie Sowards, Rep. David Farabee's Office Mark McBurnett — SAFB Representative Nora Hodges — Stakeholder Absent: None I. Welcome & Introduction Mr. Barnett called the meeting to order at 10:03 a.m. and completed the role call. Participants gave their names and identified the agency and /or community they represented. Mr. Barnett proceeded on to the next agenda item. II. Public Comment on Agenda and Non - Agenda Items Mr. Barnett asked for any public comments. There was none. III. Review and Approval of the January 13, 2010 Technical Advisory Committee's (TAC) Meeting Minutes CITY Ci La K',s ()FFiVE r \\ a j BV Time n Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 14, 2010 _ ��� Mr. Barnett asked for any additions or corrections to the minutes. There was none. He then asked for motion to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Beauchamp made the motion to approve and Ms. Gagne seconded his motion. The board unanimously approved the minutes. IV. Review and Comment Regarding the Transportation Policy Committee's (TPC's) October 26, 2009 Meeting Minutes - No Action Required Mr. Barnett asked for comments on the January 27, 2010 TPC meeting minutes. There was none. V. LAN Presentation of technical Memorandum #1 for the West of Kemp Mobility Study Mr. Taylor handed out copies of the technical memorandum agenda prior to beginning his PowerPoint presentation. He restated the project objectives while reviewing corridor alternatives with planning constraints. A brief summary of operations analysis was provided for each alternative that lead into discussions concerning the direction on the balance of the study. The TAC reviewed the alternatives, corridor analysis, and Mr. Taylor was given guidance on the direction of the mobility study moving forward. Mr. Taylor developed a technical meeting review memorandum that outlines all the alternatives, issues, comments, and recommendations brought forth from the presentation /discussion. To review this document please see addendum "A" at the end of the minutes. Mr. Barnett thanked Mr. Taylor for his presentation and moved on the next item of business. VI. Review and Discussion of the Draft 2011 -2014 Transportation Improvement Program Mr. Barnett informed the committee that the current 2011 -2014 TIP was developed based on historical documents. However, the TIP document presented requires changes based on recently released information (via TxDOT) regarding Transportation Improvement Programs. In reviewing these recommendations, Mr. Barnett noted these were primarily based on format and structure seeing as the format for all 25 Texas MPO is now required to be uniform. The WFMPO will update the TIP based on the new information available from TxDOT TP &P in Austin. In lieu of the advancement of future funding to complete the Falls Flyover and Kell West main lanes, the WFMPO has no funding for highway mobility projects for FY 2011 through FY 2014. Therefore, the WFMPO 2011 -2014 TIP has no highway mobility projects at this time. Mr. Barnett and Ms. Marlow expects the funding for this category to remain empty for the next 10 years or more, barring the procurement of new funding sources. A 4% increase was assumed for all Transit grant funding. Mr. Barnett stated that as grants are authorized, the information in the TIP would be updated in turn. Mr. Barnett said that he is seeking clarification from TP &P in Austin on when the approved TIP is due to be completed and forwarded to Austin. The WFMPO will schedule a public meeting to review the TIP and arrange special called meetings for the TAC and TPC to finalize the document by June 30th. Mr. Barnett asked for comments or questions on the draft TIP report. None were received. Mr. Barnett moved onto the next item of business. Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 14, 2010 Page 2 of 7 VII. Review and Discussion on the 2009/2010 Environmental Justice Annual Analysis and Report Mr. Arbeau provided a brief overview of the updates and changes to the 2009/2010 EJ Analysis and Report. Projects for the EJ Report were derived from the WFMPO MTP Update 2010 -2035, which was approved in January 2010. These projects formed the basis for environmental justice analysis looking at low- income and minority populations. Mr. Arbeau mentioned that the tables and maps in the EJ document referenced the new MTP Project Categories — Bicycle and Pedestrian, Bridge, Mobility and Added Capacity, Rehabilitation, Railroad, and Safety. As well, the newly developed MTP Project ID numbers (i.e. BP -01 W F) were also retained in the EJ Report for the purposes of continuity. (Note: All WFMPO reports, documents, maps, and studies will reference the newly standardized MTP Project ID format.) Mr. Arbeau made arrangements with Mr. Powell and Mr. Hertel to do a final review of the EJ Report prior to forwarding it to TPC for their review and approval. Mr. Barnett asked for comments or questions. None were received. Mr. Barnett asked for a motion to forward the document to TPC for their review and approval, pending a final review. Mr. Kelley made a motion. Mr. Hertel 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) TxDOT Report: Mr. Kelley reported that the contractor was finishing up with the vegetative status (drilling and seeding) along the Kell West Main Lanes, which is all that remains on the project. He reported that the Holiday Creek Hike and Bike Trail project was "a little backed up" but the issues with contractor were resolved and work has resumed. City of Wichita Falls Report: Mr. Powell reported the Faith Village Drainage project is 60% complete. The Rhea Road section for the Hike and Bike Trail connecting Rhea Road to the existing trail at Lake Wichita is now 25% complete. The Plum Creek Drainage Project and the 2010 Drainage Project (various locations) will affect transportation due to street closures during construction and are noted on the handout. He also reported the annual scheduled Alley Rehabilitation project and the Street Rehabilitation project are scheduled to begin very soon. B. MPO Quarterly Financial Report (18t Quarter FY 2010 — October, November, December) Mr. Barnett directed the committee's attention to the summary page. He commented that funding for the Mobility Study West of Kemp was now on -going for FY 2010. As well, he mentioned that the FY 2009 Transit grant was now active. The grant is over $3 million for the first time in the history of the transit system. There were no further comments. C. Other items Mr. Barnett continued discussing the FY 2009 Transit grant. He stated that delays were caused with processing the grant on the TEAM website. He informed the committee that the grant was active and funds set aside to begin developing a new Transit Center Hub in downtown Wichita Falls. The actual funding in the FY 2009 grant will be directed towards acquiring property, Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 14, 2010 Page 3 of 7 demolition work, and building design. The FTA informed staff that no funding can be directed towards actual construction until all necessary funding has been identified and carefully reviewed by FTA. Mr. Barnett and Mr. Arbeau informed the committee that an upcoming Saturation Count study was in the works for the nine county (TxDOT District) area, which includes the MPO area. Contractors for TOOT will carry out the study. MPO, City, and local TOOT staff will review the count locations. It is expected that on August 301h the study will begin. Staff will notify local officials of information and update corresponding to milestones /events as the study is carried out. The next topic concerned a new entertainment route (MESA) being developed by the WFMPO, City of Wichita Falls, and Falls Ride. M.E.S.A. stands for Meals, Entertainment, Shopping, and Activities. Copies of the new route handout were shared with the committee members. The new service should commence at the end of April 2010. IX. Adjourn The meeting adjourned after the bus presentation at 12:17 p.m. Z�L - Irvan F. "Lin" Barnett Jr. MPO Transportation Planning Director Wichita Falls MPO Wichita Falls MPO TAC Meeting April 14, 2010 Page 4 of 7 Lan Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc. A LEO A DALY COMPANY Addendum A DRAFT Meeting Memorandum Project No.: 130- 10288 -000 Project: Mobility Study West of Kemp Boulevard Client: WFMPO Conference Date and Time: April 14, 2010, 10:00 A.M. Conference Central Services Conference Room, 2100 Seymour Hwy. Location: Wichita Falls, TX Attendees: Lin Barnett — Wichita Falls Metropolitan Planning Organization Mark Beauchamp — City of Wichita Falls Dave Clark — City of Wichita Falls Kevin Hugman — City of Wichita Falls Karen Montgomery-Gagne — City of Wichita Falls Tim Hertel — TxDOT Wichita Falls District Allan Moore — TxDOT Wichita Falls District Davis Powell — City of Wichita Falls Chip Taylor — Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc. Conference I Technical Memorandum #1 Review Meeting Purpose: Discussion: The following is our understanding of the subject matter covered in this conference. If this differs from your understanding, please notify us in writinq within five days. This memorandum presents a summary of key points discussed at the Project Oversight Committee (POC) meeting held within the context of the MPO's regularly scheduled Transportation Advisory Committee JAC) meeting. Background: • Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, Inc. (LAN) was hired by the MPO to conduct the study. • The purpose of the meeting was to restate the project objectives with alternatives and planning constraints, summarize the operations analyses, and obtain direction on the balance of the study. • Copies of the agenda were distributed to the attendees. • The Power Point presentation, agenda, technical memorandum, and constraints maps were previously made available to the POC members via the project's extranet portal. Technical Memorandum #1 Presentation Results of the operations analyses for Year 2035 conditions concluded that: The no build condition for Alternative A produced unacceptable operations (Level of Service E, or LOS E) during the PM peak hour for the Lawrence Road intersection. The realignment improved the operations to LOS D; whereas both Page 5 of 7 B- 013 -03 Addendum A the dual roundabouts and the new westbound bypass build options produced LOS C. • No other alternative studied had unacceptable peak hour operations for the associated no build conditions. • No alternative provided corridor level relief to Kemp Boulevard. Alternative C produced localized relief to Kemp at 9th Street, but made Kemp at Avenue H worse, and did not affect operations further south. None of the build alternatives carried sufficient traffic to merit a four -lane section. However, a three -lane section was recommended by LAN for a variety of reasons, namely: elimination of on street parking, added capacity due to pulling out left turns, and improved safety in separating opposing through traffic. • Alternative B provided some relief to the Beverly Drive corridor, and more relief to the McNiel Avenue corridor. • Alternative D handles the anticipated traffic adequately without widening, but is heavily traveled for a road with direct lot access. Constraints Mapping Presentation The two types of constraints maps were briefly presented. No questions or comments were received. Discussion Items: Refine Alternatives: - Alternative A — concern was expressed regarding the dual roundabouts in that it was a very prominent location for such a unique treatment. Mr. Taylor will communicate directly with Mr. Powell and Mr. Hugman regarding analysis findings and examples where this strategy has been employed elsewhere. - Alternative A — all build alternatives need to consider the access needs of the commercial properties. Mr. Taylor indicated that entrance consolidation and interparcel access will be important considerations for any design that advances. LAN will look at the magnitude of driveway trips using standard generation rates. - Alternative A — the realignment was not combined with the westbound right turn bypass. This is likely to improve the performance of the realignment option. However, the bypass was developed as a standalone, less impactful test alternative per the study scope. - Alternative B — aligning the extension to follow Arrowhead was considered preferable to Tanglewood. This alternative should be retained as less circuitous than D. - Alternative C — consensus was reached that Alternative C should not be retained. In lieu of Alternative C, Mr. Powell introduced an "Alternative E" that followed Lebanon from Kell Freeway to Seymour Road, then follow Seymour Road east to Santa Fe Street, then to Harriet Street, then to Cedar Avenue, then to Beverly Drive. This is beyond the scope of work as it is new alternative. LAN will confer with Mr. Barnett about scope and fee ramifications once the net effects of the POC guidance is taken into consideration. This new alignment has the potential to affect many residential and commercial properties and was not originally considered for Page 6 of 7 B- 013 -03 TI"Wa .11 that reason. Evaluation Metrics / Relative Importance: - The POC mentioned the need to take into consideration the number of properties impacted by an alternative and the cost. No mention was made of other factors or relative importance of these factors. Schedule: - LAN will confer with Mr. Barnett about the implications of the POC guidance upon the schedule within the context of examining the scope. - The next POC touchpoint will be after the preparation of the Decision Matrix to rank alternatives, and Technical Memorandum #2. Other Items Later in the regular TAC meeting, Mr. Barnett mentioned that a new fixed route transit service will be beginning at the end of the month called MESA (for Meals, Entertainment, Shopping, and Activities). Since part of the route coincides with the study area, Technical Memorandum #1 will be revised to include its mention. Distribution Prepared B Attendees (list attached) Michael Feeney Dave Manuel Signature: Charles E. "Chip" Taylor, PE Page 7 of 7 B- 013 -03