Loading...
MPO TPC/TAC Board Minutes - 04/02/2003Approved 7 -9 -03 WICHITA FALLS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Technical Advisory Committee Minutes Wednesday, April 2, 2003 Voting Members Present: Joe Anderson — TxDOT, Director of Construction John Barton — TxDOT, Dir. of Transportation Planning and Development Tim Hertel — TxDOT, Director of Operations Jeff Hogan - City of Wichita Falls, City Engineer Darron Leiker — City of Wichita Falls — ACM /Dir. Aviation, Traffic & Trans. David Lyne - City of Wichita Falls, Engineering Department Andy Petter — TxDOT, Area Engineer Steve Seese — MPO Director Others Present. Carolyn Askins — TxDOT, Transportation Planning Assistant Lin Barnett — MPO, Planner II Karen Montgomery-Gagne — MPO, Planner III Highway Needs Committee Members: Gordon Griffith Joe Jacobi J. W. Martin Bettye Tanner - Shelby Visitors: Barbara Lingle for David Farabee - State Representative Charles P. Kazmer - Citizen George Lueck — TxDOT (TPP) Austin Gregory Lancaster — TxDOT (TPP) Austin Jon Moller — Citizen Absent: Dave Clark — City of Wichita Falls, Dir. of Community Development 1. Welcome & Introduction The MPO Director called the meeting to order at 8:35 a.m. Introductions were made around the room with special recognition of Mr. Greg Lancaster and Mr. George Lueck from TxDOT (TPP - Traffic Analysis Division) in Austin. 11. Public Comment on Any Item Not on the Agenda Mr. Seese asked for comments on any item not on the agenda, no comments were received. He then suggested allowing Mr. Lancaster and Mr. Lueck make their presentation first because of a previous commitment in Dallas at 12:30 p.m. Wichita Falls MPO — Technical Advisory Committee Approved 7 -9 -03 Mr. Lancaster proceeded to discuss the transportation model and its timeline, stating it should be completed around July 2003. He asked the board if the MTP forecast timeframe could be bumped from 2025 to 2030 in order to keep it within the MTP criteria of a 20 -year plan. Mr. Seese discussed the ongoing conversations with Austin as to the completion of the model. Mr. Lancaster stated the base year would be complete in 2 -3 weeks with the forecast date roughly 2 months later. Mr. Seese asked about 5 year saturation counts and if they would be included because of all the recent construction within the MPO boundaries. He asked if the validity of the model would stay intact. Mr. Lancaster stated the model would be valid to the counts that were taken within plus or minus 5 percent. The counts were done in 2000, but Mr. Lancaster stated they needed to be done again in 2005 to revalidate a new model. Mr. Barton asked if services needed to be retained to update the demographic information since U.S. Census (2000) data had become available or if that data had already been incorporated into the model. Mr. Lancaster commented he believed the data had been checked against census data; however, (TPP) Austin used the data submitted by the MPO. Mr. Barton offered that it would be beneficial to have someone fit current census data to the model in preparation for the 2005 model. Mr. Lancaster commented that several cities were going to validate their model with 2000 census data. Mr. Seese discussed the Wilbur -Smith consulting firm study completed in September 2000 and the long wait from TxDOT for the data to come back. He pointed out TxDOT's position was not to communicate with consultants but via District and MPO staff and the need for some type of TOOT approved format for completing the research. Mr. Lancaster agreed the model was long overdue in coming back from TOOT, but there were concerns with employment, as it was all contained within Wichita County, specifically within the MSA, which produced a 75% employment rate. This was generating many trips, but the modelers had overcome the problem. Mr. Lancaster then discussed a new program TOOT was offering that would help MPO's write contracts with consultants or, if the MPO would rather, do the work in- house. Mr. Barton commented the MPO was not quite clear on the scope of the project and that help would be welcome. Mr. Lancaster then handed out timelines for the project. Mr. Barton advocated following up quickly with the additional census data once the model was in hand. Mr. Seese turned the discussion to TransCAD and its implementation. Mr. Lancaster stated he had brought updates for it with him. Ms. Gagne commented there was a need for training on the software. The board agreed to Mr. Lancaster's suggestion to change the 2025 plan to 2030 and to provide updates to TPP as required. Mr. Lancaster then gave TOOT and the MPO their TransCAD updates. Mr. Lancaster and Mr. Lueck concluded their presentation and excused themselves from the remainder of the meeting. 111. Discussion and Approval of January 8th & 16th TAC meeting minutes Motion #1: Mr. Seese asked for discussion of the minutes, there being none. Mr. Leiker motioned to approve the minutes and Mr. Anderson seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Wichita Falls MPO — Technical Advisory Committee Approved 7 -9 -03 IV. Review and Comment Regarding the Transportation Policy Committee's January 22"d Meeting Minutes Mr. Seese asked for discussion and comment on the minutes, there being none. No action was required. V. Review, Discussion & Recommendation of Updates /Revisions to the MTP- Table 3 -4 Project & Financial Plan Ms. Gagne outlined the updates and revisions to the table explaining the proposed changes were in bold or shading. She commented the long -range plan needed to reflect all proposed projects for the upcoming TIP (2004 - 2006). She stated all projects were now listed in the table and were still outlined using the former funding categories. The next step would be to re- organize the projects under the 12 new funding categories. She went through the different small projects and how they would be listed under Category 4A. Next, she described the revisions to Category 6, bridges. Under Category 10 she described some miscellaneous work that would be done concerning landscaping. Mr. Seese questioned if there was a separate category for landscaping, Mr. Barton stated that Category 10 was designated for landscaping. Ms. Gagne stated she kept the format in its original form for simplicity's sake but major changes would eventually happen and requested the board's assistance as needed when making the transition. She then discussed Category 7,8,11,12,14, and 16, the Various Programs, and its updates. Mr. Barton explained events taking place on Business 287J from Loop 11, that it was currently in Phase 2. Ms. Gagne then outlined the Category 4D Urban Mobility projects. One other inclusion she commented on was the enhancement project for the bicycle trail system awarded to MSU listed under Other Needs. Mr. Seese expressed his concern about project number 11 on page 5 and whether it should be split up. Mr. Barton stated this would be two out of the four ramps needed and funding might have to come from another source. Ms. Gagne stated the proposed changes were for the board's review and requested they consider them for recommendation and forwarding to the TPC for its review and discussion. Mr. Moller inquired as to where the project and cost numbers originated. Ms. Gagne explained the MPO created the project id numbers to coincide with the TxDOT CSJ numbers and that TxDOT supplied the cost figures. Mr. M61ler asked what monies were available to the MPO. Ms. Gagne explained the funds were already allocated and that the table reflected what work had been completed and what was left to accomplish. Mr. Barton explained how the MTP was financially constrained and that some projects were costing more than originally budgeted, thus causing some projects to be dropped from the list. Motion #2: Mr. Barton motioned to adopt the revised table for forwarding to the TPC. Mr. Hertel seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. a Review, Discussion &Recommendation Regarding DRAFT FY 2004 -2006 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) & Commencement of the Public Comment Period Trough to April 23rd, 2003 at 8:30 a.m. Wichita Falls MPO — Technical Advisory Committee Approved 7 -9 -03 Ms. Gagne commented this agenda item was a follow up to the previous one. She explained the TIP as a three -year short-range plan and that the MPO must complete this requirement at the end of the second year as an overlap. The current 2002 - 2004 program would overlap the pending 2004 — 2006 TIP. She directed the board to page 4 commenting on the progress made in previous years, specifically IH 44 and the elevated freeway. Some of the projects had been pushed back but with a rescheduled date. Ms. Gagne stated the main items within the document that change every three years are the highway and transit projects. Pages 7 through 12 illustrated the detailed listing of projects recommended for listing in the MTP. She stated all short-range plans must also be listed in the long -range plan. She explained how to reference the projects. Mr. Barton explained the project listings from pages 7 through 12, while the transit projects were listed on pages 14 through 16. He then gave a brief description of how the table worked and highlighted some of the upcoming projects such as ice detection and surveillance systems on U.S. 287 and IH -44. Mr. Barton stated that although it appears there are $42 million worth of projects to be completed, page 12 contains three projects not funded yet (Kell Freeway -west main lanes and the Kell Interchange). Only $9 million is currently available from local TxDOT funds. Mr. Martin inquired as to whether the engineering was in place for the connection of U.S. 277, Kell Blvd., and IH -44. Mr. Barton stated that it was and that ramp configurations would be reexamined for better efficiency. He described some of the customer complaints and hazards already brought to light concerning the new Kell West lanes. Mr. M611er inquired about progress on Loop 11. Mr. Barton explained there was still right -of -way that had not been acquired. He stated the money should move with the project as it progresses in time. Mr. Barton commented other projects might move up in priority on the list if Loop 11 did not evolve quickly enough due to the same fiscal restraints. Mr. Jacobi asked how difficult it would be to acquire the right -of -way. Mr. Barton stated it could be difficult but that no one had stated they were not interested in participating. Mr. Seese commented there have been discussions with the property owners along Loop 11 but no action had been finalized with them as of yet. Mr. Barton stated that if he had not felt confident the project could be completed within the three -year plan then he would not have recommended it. Mr. Barton commented the City of Wichita Falls would be required to participate at a minimum level of 10% when purchasing the right -of -way. He stated, basically, the acquisition was in a state of flux. Mr. Hogan commented that some work between the City and TxDOT had already been completed. Discussion then turned to the transit programs. Ms. Gagne explained the needs for the transit program over the next three years. She outlined the base costs, and needs of the current 2003 -year and how they were projected through 2006. She explained the requirement by TxDOT for alternatively fueled buses and the costs in light of the need for new replacement busses. She stated transit would need a 30- foot, heavy -duty, ten -year lifespan, alternatively fueled bus. The additional cost for buses utilizing alternative fuel is approximately 30% more than diesel. A current alternative fuels study would not be completed until June or July of this year, thus making it difficult to plan for the next three years. She explained this was an unfunded mandate passed down from the commissioners of the TTC. Mr. Leiker explained the City was waiting for the outcome of the study and that probably some Wichita Falls MPO — Technical Advisory Committee 4 Approved 7 -9 -03 type of fueling facility would have to be built. Mr. Barton added the Center for Transportation Research at the University of Texas had already completed one study and even though "clean" diesel or emulsified diesel was not defined as alternative fuel, the City should offer comments to area federal legislators during reauthorization of the federal funding program to expand the definition of alternative fuels to include "clean" diesel and emulsified diesel as a choice. Mr. Seese commented that ULSD (Ultra -Low Sulfur Diesel) or "clean" diesel had been approved by TxDOT but availability was scarce. Also, hybrid vehicles using diesel and electricity would be allowed. Ms. Gagne stated the MPO self- certification needed to be signed by the TPC and the program forwarded to Austin by May 1St in order to be incorporated in the statewide plan. Motion #3: Mr. Barton moved to approve the presented TIP and forward it to the TPC for consideration and approval. Mr. Anderson seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Vll. Review, Discussion & Recommendation Regarding Public Comments Received During 45 -day Public Comment Period for the PIP Amendments Ms. Gagne explained the 45 -day pubic comment period went beyond the scheduled time frame and that four advertisements were placed in the newspaper at a cost of $674 per ad. Two people responded with comments and ideas, Mr. Moller and Mr. Barton. Mr. Barton explained the key elements of his comments that he felt would help clarify issues from the reader's perspective, specifically turning from a negative to a positive the issue of mailing materials to those parties who never respond. He suggested letting those individuals that did not want to receive materials contact the MPO and request to be taken off the mailing list rather than dropping them off the list after a certain period of time. This would give the receivers the benefit of the doubt. Mr. Moller did not discuss any of his comments but asked that his comments be forwarded to the TPC. Ms. Gagne commented that she worked with the Times Record News to reduce all of the comments to a manageable level in order to keep costs down. She stated the full version of both sets of comments was published on the City's website and on Channel 11. Mr. Seese agreed for the need to publish future comments on the website, clean up the language and establish some kind of consistency. Motion #4: Mr. Barton motioned to forward the comments, without recommendation, to the TPC for their evaluation. Mr. Leiker seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Vlll. Update Regarding Kell Freeway /Interchange Priority — Texas Transportation Commission Hearing — February 27, 2003 Wichita Falls MPO — Technical Advisory Committee 5 Approved 7 -9 -03 Mr. Seese outlined the letter sent to all the TTC members, the Executive Director of TxDOT(Austin) along with the W.F. District Engineer in support of the Kell Interchange. He gave a brief description of the TTC hearing proceedings held in Austin on February 27tH IX. Discussion & Overview of Progress on Local Transportation Projects — TxDOT Staff (Quarterly Update) Mr. Barton stated there was one additional project obligated since the last meeting, the Sikes Lake Hike and Bike facility. Construction should start within the next several weeks. Mr. Petter described the construction currently in progress on FM 369 (Southwest Pkwy.), FM 2380 (Kemp St. into Lake Rd.), which should finish next December /January, Seymour Hwy. (Bus. 277) should complete by June /July, and work on IH -44 toward Burkburnett. The Gateway project was also nearing completion on the plans from the architect. Mr. Hogan commented that bids had been opened for the CDBG street rehabilitation project worth $450,000 and the City was in the process of designing $1.9 million of regular street rehabilitation due out in about 30 days. He stated there would be information posted on the City's website. X. Review & Discussion — Census Data Methodology's and Environmental Justice Mr. Barnett explained he had written the memo to help explain the difference between TxDOT's and MPO staffs approach to identifying ethnic and minority populations within the City's census tracts. The intent was not to promote one methodology over the other, but rather to eliminate any confusion on the observer's part when comparing the two. Mr. Moller asked if both methodologies would be employed or if the board needed to adopt one over the other. Ms. Tanner - Shelby was concerned about using the right information. Mr. Barton commented the information in each method could be used for presenting comparisons. He stated that Mr. Barnett's approach would allow the user to compare on a tract -by -tract basis to the overall city average, whereas Mr. Barton's approach would allow the user to compare the percentage of minorities in an area based on the population in that area. Mr. Barton stated he based his methodology — according to the same executive directive Mr. Barnett based his methodology — on locating those readily identifiable minority populations within the tract where high concentrations were most likely to occur. Mr. Barton stated his methodology would help identify those areas where projects or policy decisions would have an impact. Mr. Moller asked if Mr. Barton's methodology would satisfy the Environmental Justice requirements. Mr. Barton responded that he was trying to satisfy the intent of the executive directive without the benefit of TAZ level information. He stated if he had access to TAZ level information that his approach would be the same but that it would be left up to the TPC to determine what is a readily identifiable population". Mr. Moller discussed the 1990 TAZ level information and questioned the viability of modeling minorities and ethnicities once the 2000 TAZ levels became available. Mr. Barton commented TxDOT and MPO staff were using census tract data in lieu of TAZ data at this time. Mr. Barnett commented he used a macro - analysis approach that encompassed the entire city, whereas Mr. Barton utilized a microanalysis approach that focused on individual tracts. Mr. Moller asked which approach would be used. Wichita Falls MPO — Technical Advisory Committee Approved 7 -9 -03 The general consensus was that the TPC would have to make that decision. Mr. Hogan inquired as to the range limit for when either approach would be implemented. Mr. Seese commented the main challenge was identifying the areas of interest and that Mr. Barnett and Mr. Barton used two different approaches to reach a conclusion. Mr. Leiker asked what processes the other MPO's were using. Mr. Barton stated there was a plethora of methodologies currently being used and that a single set standard had not been approved by FHWA, FTA, and USDOT as of yet. He stated it was not a matter of using a macro or micro approach, but rather what kind of threshold would be used. The main goal would be to not discriminate against areas where policy decisions would have an impact but instead provide for more public involvement. Mr. Martin stated the issue would become more confusing because of mixed races within the tracts. Mr. Barton and Ms. Gagne pointed out the fact that the census bureau now takes this issue into account. Mr. Barnett gave an example of comparing the census data on the macro and micro level and Mr. Barton commented that when working with statistics there are various ways to analyze the data presented. Discussion then centered on the different ways of determining total population within the City and the MSA. Mr. Moller asked if this issue would be forwarded to the TPC for guidance. Mr. Seese stated no that it was for discussion purposes only. Xl. Review and Comment Regarding the Transportation Policy Committee's Approval of Revisions to the MPO By -Laws Mr. Seese asked for any comments. Mr. Anderson stated the TNRCC acronym on page 4 should be changed to TCEQ to reflect the change in name to Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Mr. Jacobi asked where the MPO was in relation to progress on the TxDOT findings report. Mr. Seese stated that information would be forthcoming soon. Mr. Barton commented that Austin's reaction had been very positive. X11. Other Business: a. Recommend to TPC the Creation of a TAC MTP Subcommittee to Work with MPO Staff Regarding Major Revisions to the MTP (Table 3 -4) Mr. Seese asked for volunteers to serve on the TAC MTP subcommittee. Mr. Barton explained the issue involved streamlining 34 funding categories down into 12 categories and that FHWA and FTA no longer wants every single project listed; rather they should be consolidated into a statewide CSJ or project. Multiple pages would become multiple lines. The smaller projects would become staff level decisions rather than Policy level decisions. He explained there would still be a listing of the projects presented to the TPC at least once a year. Mr. Barton stated that for TxDOT Phillip Lujan, Carolyn Askins, Andy Petter and he would volunteer for service on the subcommittee. Mr. Hogan and Mr. Lyne volunteered for Wichita Falls. Mr. Moller asked if the subcommittee meetings would be open to the public. Mr. Seese stated they would not but that all work would be published. Wichita Falls MPO — Technical Advisory Committee Approved 7 -9 -03 b. Other Mr. Seese described the La Entrada El Pacifico, a transportation corridor in Mexico, and the corridor from Presidio, Texas leading up to Wichita Falls through Abilene. Mr. Barton further outlined the route, which starts at the largest Pacific seaport on the Mexican coastline and progresses up to Presidio. There is a highway and a light rail line in place on the Mexican side that could be used for link -up. The benefits would be tremendous for Wichita Falls if this route could be opened up. Mr. Seese stated he wanted the HNC to become involved but that high -level politics would also need to come to bear. Mr. Barton suggested representatives visit with the Midland /Odessa MPO to discuss issues and a possible day -trip over to Mexico to meet with the Mexican government as a prudent course of action prior to political discussions. X111. Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m. I Darron Leiker Interim MPO Director, TAC Chairperson ACM, Director of Traffic, Transportation and Aviation nr"`"' . ` .- FFICE CITY CLERK'S Date Time By Wichita Falls MPO — Technical Advisory Committee 8