Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Transportation Advisory Board 07-18-18 Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, July 18, 2018 Minutes of a regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in the Room 203 of Town Hall on the 18th day of July, 2018. Present: Tom Street Belle Morris Stan Black Amy Hamrick Janice Crow Ron Wilcocks Also Present: Greg Muhonen, Public Works Director David Hook, Engineering Manager Tom Carosello, Estes Valley Recreation & Parks District John Hannon, Rocky Mountain National Park Absent: Gordon Slack Ann Finley Linda Hanick Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:00 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENT: No public in attendance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion was made and seconded (Street/Crow) to approve the June meeting minutes with a minor edit and all were in favor. SHUTTLE UPDATE The Town’s Transit Program Manager, Brian Wells provided shuttle updates to the TAB:  June passenger counts were 7,536 which is in line with last year’s counts  A grant application is being prepared for the FTA’s 5339b – capital funds grant. Included was a request for 80/20 matching funds for another battery-electric trolley (if the previous grant fails), an electric charging station (if the previous grant fails), garage for storing/charging the current trolleys and a cutaway bus to re place a leased vehicle. Results should be available early in 2019.  Another grant application will be submitted later this summer for the replacement funds grant, FTA 5339b, for either an electric cutaway shuttle or a hybrid, based on research for the best solution.  The DoubleMap GPS tracking system is fully operational. Some work still needs done to firm up connectivity. E-BIKE POLICY REVIEW/RECOMMENDATION: Member Hamrick researched e-bike policies/ordinances in other mountain communities. She stated there are three classes of e-bikes and different communities allow different classes on different trails. There was no “one size fits all” ordinance found in her research. Hamrick found most information contained within newspaper articles reflecting that this appeared to be a fairly new concept by most. Allowing some type of electronic pedal assistance, especially with Estes Park topography, could p otentially encourage individuals to commute to work or downtown via bicycle. Transportation Advisory Board – July 19, 2018 – Page 2 Member Slack stated he doesn’t feel e-bikes should be allowed on the Lake Estes Trail or along the Riverwalk. Slack further stated the trail along Highway 7 is too narrow to allow e-bikes. Tom Carosello, Executive Director of Estes Valley Recreation & Parks District (EVRPD) stated he attended a meeting last week covering this topic. The EVRPD determined it most appropriate to place the responsibility with the rider. They determined that e-bikes should be allowed where bikes are currently allowed. Carosello feels that the Lake Estes trail is a fine place for an e-bike. The actual e-bike speeds are not that different from regular bikes. Member Wilcocks agreed with Carosello’s assessment. Co-Chair Street stated there is a small minority of e-bike riders that exceed 20 mph. Street feels both Class I and II should be allowed. It is important to maintain trail connectivity so allowing e-bikes on one portion and not another is not desirable. It is important to trust people to use good judgement. Should a speed limit be imposed, is it enforceable? Estes Park Police Captain Eric Rose knows law enforcement individuals in both Breckenridge and Steamboat Springs that state there are no bicycle speed limit signs posted and therefore, no enforcement. Chair Morris suggested installing trail etiquette signs at entries to trails to guide individuals to appropriate trail use behaviors. Riders and pedestrians will often self-correct if they know what is expected of them when sharing a multi-use trail. Chair Morris suggested widening the trail along Highway 7. Director Muhonen stated this suggestion has been made for a future Capital Improvement Project. John Hannon with RMNP stated the topic of e-bike usage in the Park has not been discussed. Muhonen suggested that the TAB write a memo to Town staff containing their e-bike recommendations. The TAB will determine their position on the topic come up with key components the e-bike ordinance would contain. Member Hamrick suggested taking a look at the Estes Valley Trails Master Plan prior to final determinat ion on what would/would not be allowed as some trails are restricted due to surface type (hard path vs. soft path). A majority of the TAB feels both Class I & II should be allowed on all trails. The EVRPD will most likely develop their own ordinance and it was suggested by Director Muhonen to work on the ordinance collaboratively with other agencies, remembering the TAB can only recommend activities for the Town’s trail system. Carosello stated that the EVRPD does not allow “motorized” equipment on the trails unless necessary for mobility. Co-Chair Street suggested further discussion on allowing Classes I and II while prohibiting Class III. Member Hamrick stated that would complicate the rest of ordinance due to differentiating between pedal–assist and a throttle. Hamrick and Member Black feel it makes more sense to allow Class I only. Carosello reminded the group the difficulty differentiating between the classes. There would be the ability, however to issue a citation in the event of an incident should the disallowed e-bike classes be involved. A motion was made and seconded (Wilcocks/Street) to allow Class I e-bikes only and all were in favor. Chair Morris would write a recommendation and send to Director Muhonen for review. It will then be distributed to all members. SHUTTLE FUNDING OPTIONS: Transportation Advisory Board – July 19, 2018 – Page 3 The Town Board has opted to postpone discussions of the establishment of a Rural Transportation District. The Town Board is contemplating dropping shuttle stops outside Town limits since those locations do not collect Town sales tax. Current f unding for the shuttle program sustains existing levels of service. Member Black stated that expanding the Town’s shuttle services has been a perpetual problem. Muhonen stated that with the adoption of the Downtown Parking Management Plan (DPMP) there is a revenue stream and that b y bringing parking and transit together in one division it enables the revenues to be used for transit issues. If a revenue stream doesn’t occur, it should continue to be put in front of the Town Board for consideration. Member Wilcocks stated that better definition of what the Shuttle Service’s mission is, is critical to what is requested. Member Hamrick asked if there has been any thought if serving the largest area possible is the best method since it has not been successful. If year-round service is needed, is there a potential to shrink the core service area to allow funding to spread throughout the year? Muhonen stated if this is a recommendation that is made, there may be a potential for a service reallocation which would utilize the same budget and change how it is spent on a tighter core. John Hannon stated that the continual Town shuttle service time changes are killing the perception of the shuttle system. Visitors are witnessing these changes and are often disappointed to learn the service anticipated has been changed. Member Black stated that a small amount of sales tax or additional property taxes are needed and pointed out that this services is more helpful to visitors than residents. Chair Morris would work to define mission statement and to the Town Board. Member Wilcocks states that more discussion is needed to determine what is appropriate to present to the Town Board. Member Black agreed and suggested this is something that can be worked on over the several months. Muhonen stated that Town staff has a fair amount of discretion and influence through Service Change Proposals used in the budget process. This type of proposal can be used to reallocate the structure of the shuttle program with the advice of a citizen advisory group. Should potentially extend this conversation beyond the TAB and involve the community. Brian Wells would like direction on whether the shuttle system should be geared more toward residents or visitors, stating the visitors love it. COMPLETE STREETS DRAFT POLICY: Co-Chair Street shared with the group, a first draft of a Complete Streets policy. Street used verbiage from policies implemented by Billings, MT but tailored it to Estes Park. Street also utilized the recently adopted Downtown Plan (DP) findings for incorporation into the policy. It is important, in this policy, to address the needs of all transportation modes. Street established the policy to require an exception be granted in order to deviate from the checklist. Wilcocks would like to recommend underpasses be implemented wherever possible and would send verbiage to this affect from the DP to Street. This policy would not be a regulatory document, but a guiding document. OTHER BUSINESS Chair Morris reported that Member Finley had conducted further research into the potential university assistance with the Town’s wayfinding needs . The university is very Transportation Advisory Board – July 19, 2018 – Page 4 interested in assisting. The Town’s Community Development Department will continue leading the effort in establishing wayfinding per the adopted DP and the Public Works Department will implement. With no other business to discuss, Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 2:02 p.m.