MPO TPC/TAC Board Minutes - 11/08/2000TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MINUTES
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Date `i
By /-Time�/�1
WICHITA FALLS METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION
Wednesday, November 8, 2000
Voting Members Present:
Joe Anderson, TxDOT, Director of Construction
John Barton, TxDOT, Director of Transportation Planning & Dev't
George Bonnett, Director, Public Works Department
Dave Clark, Director, Community Development
Tim Hertel, TxDOT, Director of Operations
Andy Petter, TxDOT, Area Engineer
Steve Seese, MPO Director
Scott Taylor, City Engineer
Others Present:
Carolyn H. Askins, TxDOT, Transportation Planning Assistant
Phillip Lujan, TxDOT District Planning Engineer
Karen Montgomery- Gagne, Planner III
James Berzina, City Manager
Robert Powers, Assistant City Manager
Visitors:
Sharlynn Keys, interested consultant, Dikita Engineering
Jon Moller, Citizen
Absent:
Bob Parker, Director, Traffic and Transportation
The MPO Director called the meeting to order at 8:40 am and directed the committee members to Agenda
Item I.
I — Discussion of Scope of Project for the Loop 11 Area
Mr. Seese outlined some of the issues with the Loop 11 area and proposed the idea of developing a
feasibility study , more appropriately a Route Study for the Loop 11 extension. Mr. Seese had prepared a
detailed diagram of the potential project area — Figure A. Figure A outlined the flow area for Plum Creek,
the City's permanent flow easement, access roads from 1 -44 to the former Siemens property and Loop 11,
U.S. 287, 1 -44 and Airport Drive. Loop 11 was shown on Figure A to extend northward to Airport Drive as
currently noted in the City's Thoroughfare Plan.
Mr. Barton informed Committee members that a 'purpose and needs statement' would be a prerequisite
prior to conducting the feasibility study. Mr. Barton stated that at the most recent Policy Committee
meeting some members had mentioned the idea of extending Loop 11 north to connect with Missile Road.
If that is indeed the route the Committee would choose, TxDOT has concerns regarding the protection of
the Plum Creek area. Mr. Clark raised a point to the members regarding what type of intersection is
preferred with Loop 11 and Airport Drive. Ultimately, in the long -range plans a northern connection would
be a viable alternative for traffic movement. Mr. Barton agreed with Mr. Clark that the Committee must
decide whether a T- intersection or a loop would be the most effective long -term solution for extending
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes — November 8th, 2000 Page 1
Loop 11. Mr. Taylor suggested a 'phased' study of the Loop 11 area with a Phase I and Phase II. Mr.
Clark and Mr. Bonnett agreed with the idea of studying the extension in two sections.
Mr. Bonnett introduced a motion that the scope of the Loop 11 feasibility study should be prepared and
conducted in two phases — Section A and B. Mr. Taylor seconded the motion that passed with a
unanimous vote.
II — Review and Discussion of the MTP — Transportation Project Listings and
III — Discussion of FY 2002 -2004 TIP Preparation
Mr. Barton informed the Committee members that a draft Transportation Improvement Plan for FY 2002-
2004 is due in Austin by January 2001. He noted that the Technical committee members need to
prioritize projects (ie. 4D streets and highway), determine where the funds will come from (ie. TxDOT,
City, County etc.) and then forward the information to the Policy Committee for their final approval at a
public meeting.
Mr. Barton and Ms. Askins referred members to the two hand -outs provided for them — the first is the
project listing from the MTP 2000 -2025 and the second is a revised (tentative) letting schedule for
discussion by the Technical committee members. Mr. Barton reminded members that the project listings
are dynamic and are subject to change as a result of funding availability, etc. However, it is vital to
maintain a 10 -year listing of potential projects for the above noted reasons.
Members agreed that a second Technical committee meeting would be necessary prior to the end of
December to finalize project selection /ranking and associated cost level. Ms. Askins provided additional
information regarding the second handout. She indicated that the revised project listing shows all the
original TIP projects from FY 2000 through 2002, any subsequent revisions, MTP projects and which
projects have already been scheduled to be let prior to the commencement of the TIP for 2002 -2004.
Mr. Clark asked what the timeframe would be for the Loop 11 study. Mr. Barton responded that the timing
was really dependent on the cost of the feasibility study and that it was still up for discussion. Mr. Clark
added that there is local political interest for extending the northern portion of Loop 11. Mr. Bonnett
added that in the near future it would be extended northward by building 150ft with the developer having
partial interest in the project since it would extend toward the proposed gas station for which money had
already been escrowed. On another note, Mr. Bonnett asked about the status of the Cypress Road
Bridge. Mr. Taylor responded that that project had been pulled from the project listing.
Mr. Barton introduced a motion that agenda items II and III should be tabled until the next Technical
committee meeting in early December to allow for discussion with staff and additional review of potential
projects. Mr. Bonnett seconded the motion and it passed unanimously.
IV — Discussion of FY 2002 Transportation & Community System Preservation Pilot Program Grant
Opportunity
Mr. Seese explained to the committee what was involved with Agenda Item IV. He indicated that he had
recently received this information regarding the grant opportunity from the local TxDOT district and then
forwarded the materials to pertinent City department heads for comment. Essentially, this is really the
first year that the Wichita Falls MPO would be eligible to participate in the program, which is somewhat a
state - supported enhancement program.
Mr. Barton indicated that there is not much time to prepare a submission since the applications are due in
early January 2001. The projects that have been selected in the past are noted in the attachment to the
handout. Mr. Barton stated that it is a potential grant opportunity but for a small MPO there really is not a
lot of funding available and the probability of having a project selected is minimal since it is a statewide
competition. In the past, larger MPO's have captured significant funds, ie. Dallas- Fort-Worth, Houston,
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes — November 8th, 2000 Page 2
San Antonio etc.
Mr. Seese stated that he was concerned from a staff perspective - if the time and energy expended on
the application would be worthwhile if the MPO project had a very minimal chance of being competitive on
a Statewide basis. Mr. Seese put the idea forth to the committee members to determine if they or any
community organization would be interested in this grant opportunity.
Mr. Barton indicated that various non - profit groups from the community might have an interest in knowing
about the potential grant opportunity for next year. However, one of the criteria for a project application is
that the project can not already be listed in the MPO's most recent MTP.
Mr. Moller asked if he could comment. Mr. Moller suggested that the MPO should advertise the
information to community organizations so that they are aware of the potential grant opportunity for next
year. Mr. Barton responded that the application would most likely be available next year but by making
the information available now the community organization can develop research and conduct the
background work necessary to be a successful applicant and then submit via the local governmental
body.
V - Discussion of Quarterly Technical Meetings
Mr. Seese informed Technical committee members that at the most recent TPC meeting the idea of
quarterly technical and policy board meetings was discussed. The TPC members appeared to be in favor
of having pre - scheduled meetings for the entire year which coincided with the TIP revision deadlines of
November 1St, February 1St, May 1St and July 1St.
Mr. Barton indicated that it was a good idea to have regularly scheduled meetings in order to avoid
conflicts and issues with lack of quorum. If possible, Mr. Barton stated that probably Wednesdays and
Fridays were the best days to schedule the MPO meetings as it avoided City Council meeting and County
Commissioner meeting dates. Both Mr. Seese and Mrs. Montgomery-Gagne indicated that they would
develop a schedule of meeting dates and forward them via email for comment prior to the next TAC
meeting.
VI - Other Business
Mr. Barton indicated that he had brought a GIS generated map, which plotted the transportation projects
within the MPO through 2025 (as noted in the MTP), and the income areas that were below 51 % poverty
level and the areas considered to be above the 50% poverty level. Mr. Barton explained that TxDOT had
prepared this information in a visual format in order to help justify project selection and have a readily
developed system /logic if any questions should arise because of Environmental Justice directives. He
noted that various resources were used to develop the map, in particular, Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) income standards and existing CDBG areas within Wichita Falls. Mr. Barton added that
based on Environmental Justice directives TxDOT must be aware of whether there has been an undue
burden of activity or in- activity regarding transportation projects and their development in areas with high
levels of low- income and minorities. Mr. Barton proposed to committee members that now that this
information has been researched that it should be kept up -to -date so that all new projects are mapped
with regard to their relationship with impoverished and minority neighborhoods.
VII - Public Comment
Ms. Keys, an interested consultant from Dikita Engineering in Fort Worth, asked about the 'Scope of
Study' for the Loop 11- feasibility study and the potential funding. Mr. Barton and Mr. Lujan indicated that
TxDOT had already gone to bid for potential consultants on their listing of eligible consultants. The
consulting firm of S & B Infrastructure, a national firm was selected as the preferred choice for conducting
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - November 8th, 2000 Page 3
the study.
Mr. Moller indicated that at the Policy committee meeting held in early July there was some discussion
regarding the realignment of Lawrence and Lebanon and that it was noted in the minutes that it would be
discussed by the Technical Committee. Mr. Moller asked if a study of the realignment would be added to
the UPWP? Mr. Clark indicated that current traffic counts along Lawrence north of Kell Freeway would be
a good indication of future traffic patterns. Mr. Barton stated that a traffic count for 2025 could be
obtained after significant research and numerous phone calls to TxDOT in Austin. The Austin division
could probably run some type of model to obtain potential projections for traffic counts at Lawrence and
Lebanon. Mr. Seese asked Technical committee members if they were in favor of TxDOT researching
traffic counts in the area north of Lawrence at Lebanon? Mr. Barton indicated that the current numbers
could be used to project whichever year is requested, however, it will take numerous days before the
projected traffic count number is obtained. Mr. Clark stated that the traffic shift from the realignment of
Lawrence and Lebanon would probably have a minimal effect on the neighborhood along Lebanon. Mr.
Moller stated that he would like to have the `theory' tested in order to determine if indeed the Lebanon
neighborhood would see significant changes as a direct result of the roadway realignment.
Mr. Bonnett suggested that the traffic count numbers could be obtained and the projections developed in
order to get a final determination on the issue. He stated that he would contact Mr. Burrus in the Traffic
and Transportation Division.
VIII - Adjourn
No other items to discuss.
A motion was introduced by Mr. Bonnett to adjourn the TAC meeting at 9:35 am.
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - November 8th, 2000 Page 4