Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Transportation Advisory Board 2021-2-17 Transportation Advisory Board Agenda Current Members: Belle Morris (03/31/23) February 17, 2021 Lawrence Gamble (03/31/23) Gordon Slack (03/31/21) 12:00 PM – 2:00 PM Ron Wilcocks (03/31/21) Tom Street (03/31/22) Ann Finley (03/31/23) Linda Hanick (03/31/22) VIRTUAL – Zoom Scott Moulton (03/31/22) Janice Crow (03/31/21) The Transportation Advisory Board will participate in the meeting remotely due to the Declaration of Emergency signed by Town Administrator Machalek on March 19, 2020 related to COVID-19 and provided for with the adoption of Ordinance 04-20 on March 18, 2020 Options for the Public to Participate Remotely and Provide Public Input: 1. By Electronic Mail: Members of the public may provide public comment or comment on a specific agenda item by sending an email to publicworks@estes.org. The email must be received by 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, February 16, 2021. All emails will be provided to the Transportation Advisory Board and incorporated into the minutes. 2. By Telephone Message: Members of the public may provide public comment or comment on a specific agenda item by calling (970) 577-3587. The calls must be received by 5:00 p.m., Tuesday, February 16, 2021. All call-in information will be provided to the Transportation Advisory Board and incorporated into the minutes. 3. No public attendance at this meeting. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION DURING MEETING Options for participation in the meeting will be available by call-in telephone option or online via Zoom Webinar which will be moderated by the Transportation Advisory Board Chairperson. CALL-IN (TELEPHONE OPTION): Dial public participation phone number, Toll Free 833-548-0276 Enter the Meeting ID for the February 17, 2021 meeting 913 1736 3744 followed by the pound sign (#). The meeting will be available beginning at 11:50 a.m. the day of the meeting. Please call into the meeting prior to 12:00 p.m., if possible. Request to Speak: For public comment, the Chairperson will ask attendees to indicate if they would like to speak – phone participants will need to press *9 to “raise hand”. The Chairperson will be moderating the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Transportation Advisory Board. Once you are announced by phone please state your name and address for the record. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (ONLINE): Individuals who wish to address the Board via virtual public participation can do so through Zoom Webinar at https//zoom.us/w/91317363744 – Zoom Webinar ID: 913 1736 3744. Individuals participating in the Zoom session should also watch the meeting through that site, and not via the website, due to the streaming delay and possible audio interference. Start Time: The Zoom Webinar will be available beginning at 11:50 a.m. on the day of the meeting. Participants wanting to ensure their equipment setup is working should join prior to the start of the meeting at 12:00 p.m. Request to Speak: For public comments, the Chairperson will ask attendees to click the “Raise Hand” button to indicate you would like to speak at that time. The Chairperson will moderate the Zoom session to ensure all participants have an opportunity to address the Transportation Advisory Board. • You will experience a short delay prior to re-connecting with the ability to speak. • State your name and address for the record. In order to participate, you must: • Have an internet-enabled smartphone, laptop or computer. o Using earphones with a microphone will greatly improve your audio experience. • Join the Zoom Webinar. o The link can be found above. • Click “Participate Virtually in the Transportation Advisory Board Meeting”. • DO NOT watch/stream the meeting via the website at the same time due to delays and possible feedback issues. Documents to Share: If individuals wish to present a document to the Transportation Advisory Board, material must be emailed by Tuesday February 16, 2021 by 12:00 p.m. to the Public Works Office at publicworks@estes.org. AGENDA NEXT PAGE AGENDA Transportation Advisory Board Wednesday, February 17, 2021 12:00 p.m. 12:00 – 12:10 Public Comment Chair Belle Morris 12:10 – 12:15 Approval of January Minutes Chair Belle Morris 12:15 – 12:30 Approval of TAB Documents Chair Belle Morris TAB Bylaws Public Works Director Greg Muhonen TAB Code of Conduct TAB Job Description 12:30 – 12:45 Review 2021 TAB Priority Outcomes Chair Belle Morris 12:45 – 1:10 Multimodal Sidewalk & Needs Inventory Chair Belle Morris Public Works Director Greg Muhonen 1:10 – 1:30 Parking Updates Parking & Transit Mgr. Vanessa Solesbee The Car Park GM, Matt Eisenberg 1:30 – 1:40 Transit Updates Parking & Transit Mgr. Vanessa Solesbee 1:40 – 1:50 Engineering Updates Parking & Transit Mgr. Vanessa Solesbee 1:50 – 1:58 Project /Administration Updates Public Works Director Greg Muhonen 1:58 – 2:00 Other Business Adjourn Carlie Bangs, Town Board Trustee Liaison Greg Muhonen, Estes Park Public Works Staff Liaison Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 20, 2021 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the Transportation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtually on the 20th day of January 2021. Committee: Belle Morris, Tom Street, Janice Crow, Ann Finley, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Scott Moulton, Gordon Slack, Ron Wilcocks Attending: Belle Morris, Tom Street, Janice Crow, Ann Finley, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Scott Moulton, Gordon Slack, Ron Wilcocks, Trustee Carlie Bangs, Public Works Director Greg Muhonen, Engineering Mgr. David Hook, Parking & Transit Mgr. Vanessa Solesbee, Rocky Mtn. Park John Hannon Absent: Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:25 p.m. (due to technical difficulty) PUBLIC COMMENT No electronic submissions of public comment were received prior to the deadline and no public was in attendance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made and seconded (Slack/Hanick) to approve the December meeting minutes as amended and all were in favor. 2021 OFFICER ELECTIONS (Chair, Belle Morris) Chair Morris indicated she and Co-Chair Street had spoken about their current roles and both agreed they’d be willing to serve again in 2021. Morris invited input from the TAB members and there were no comments. A motion was made and seconded (Slack/Hanick) to have Morris remain Chair and Street to remain as Co-Chair. All were in favor. SRTS TASK FORCE & SIDEWALK NEEDS INVENTORY (Chair, Belle Morris) There have been three meetings to date. Currently, the Task Force (TF) is creating a survey directed to school families regarding their experience walking or biking to school. The TF is also generating a document auditing the deficiencies or impediments to biking/walking to school. Member Slack thanked the TF members for the efforts invested. 2021 TAB PRIORITIES & CATEGORIES (Chair, Belle Morris) The listing of TAB’s priorities is reflected in an excel document that Administrative Assistant Van Hoozer would provide as a shared document to the TAB, along with any needed instructions on providing individual member priority rankings. PROJECT UPDATES (Parking & Transit Mgr. Vanessa Solesbee) Transit: Solesbee shared the presentation that would be presented to the Town Board regarding 2021 Transit plans. The presentation reflected the potential relocation of the transit hub from the parking structure back to the Visitor Center (VC). Solesbee will also discuss this potential with the shuttle drivers to gather more feedback. The members shared their thoughts on the move. Member Slack stated that the new traffic signal at the entrance to Steamer Pkwy. should create gaps for the shuttles exiting the VC. Hanick feels the parking structure is a safer place for the hub due to both pedestrian and vehicle traffic. Gamble stated that the priority should be the smoothest flow in and out of the hub, which appears to be from the parking structure and both Finley and Moulton concurred. Co-Chair Street suggested running another pilot year before evaluating the parking structure hub’s efficacy. Transportation Advisory Board – January 20, 2021 – Page 2 Rocky Mountain National Park’s (RMNP) John Hannon informed the group that the plan is to run the Hiker Shuttle full schedule beginning the Friday before Memorial Day through Columbus Day from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. daily. Parking: Matt Eisenberg shared that the division is preparing parking enforcement revisions to the Estes Park Municipal Code, with comments being due by January 28, 2021. Director Muhonen requested edits to language of “booting” to “barnacle” on the immobilization slide. He reminded that the Town Board does not increase fines, but the judge does. The request to the Town Board is for support to request a fine increase. Solesbee wanted to share with the group that the Electric Vehicle & Readiness Plan would be presented to the Town Board Trustees at the January 26 study session, and then in a Town Board meeting on February 9 as an action item open to public discussion. Solesbee stated she’d like some additional time allotted on the February agenda to share updates on planned seasonal paid parking outreach and communication efforts. Visit Estes Park’s Abi Huebner stated that the 2020 visitation figures were only minimally reduced from 2019. She anticipates increased travel in 2021 due to COVID - 19 vaccine availability. PROJECT UPDATES (Engineering Mgr. David Hook) Manager Hook provided updates on active Engineering projects. Graves Ave. Improvement Safe Routes to School (SRTS): The Town is ready to sign a Notice to Proceed for a design consultant to begin this project. Hook plans to return to the TAB for a special meeting in March, specifically for this project, to gather feedback on conceptual design options. The consultant will be tasked with creating a bilingual and interactive website in lieu of live meetings to receive community feedback. This will include posting of videos, like the March presentation. The TAB agreed to this request for public feedback solicitation in March. Moving forward, Hook will bring back to TAB both the 30% and 90% design drawings as they become available. There exists an opportunity for TAB members to assist with education and encouragement efforts on this project. Rather than conducting a separate meeting for those who solely speak Spanish, the Town has decided to direct all community members to the consultant-created bilingual website. Morris suggested reaching out to the Estes Valley Recreation & Parks District Community Center visitors for input as well. The consultant will be conducting a presentation of SRTS program overview. Mo rris requested this be a separate meeting from the special meeting discussed previously. 2021 Parking Wayfinding: A Notice to Proceed was signed this week to finalize bid documents. Fall River Trail: The railing is complete yet there are still punch list items remaining for Spring completion. The 2021 bid package is currently under development. PROJECT / ADMINISTRATION UPDATES (Public Works Director Greg Muhonen) Director Muhonen requested from the TAB, any suggestions or questions on the Manu al on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) for the upcoming 11th edition. Provide input directly with him if interested in sharing thoughts. Downtown Estes Loop: Muhonen shared the road designs depicting Moraine Ave. crosswalk relocation south to the end of the shown diagonal parking, as discussed previously. He stated that this frees up two additional parking spaces and eliminates the safety risk of vehicles backing into crosswalk when leaving space. The TAB agreed that the concern remains for pedestrian safety when crossing Moraine Ave. The recommendation was made for either an elevated crosswalk; having motorcycle-only parking near the crossing; or the potential elimination of the two parking spaces nearest the crossing. Transportation Advisory Board – January 20, 2021 – Page 3 Muhonen went on to share the revisions to the crossing at Elkhorn Ave. Public Works is researching durability and maintenance demands with Denver and Brighton. The TAB agreed that the preference from the perpendicular crossing would be colored concrete. The thermoplastic white starter bars existing are not visible in the winter. Thermoplastic would prove high maintenance due to de-icing and snow plow operations. TAB BYLAWS (Chair, Belle Morris) According to section VI General Provisions of the TAB Bylaws, a 20 -day notice of bylaw changes are required to be provided to all members. A vote on the proposed changes will be taken at the February 17 meeting. OTHER BUSINESS (Chair, Belle Morris) There being no further business, Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 2:00 p.m. Megan Van Hoozer, Recording Secretary Effective Period:Until Superseded Review Schedule:Annual -January Effective Date:October 24th,2018 References:Governance Policy Manual 1.6 Board Appointed Committee Principles ______ TOWN BOARD GOVERNANCE POLICIES 102 Town Committees 1.PURPOSE To establish a uniform Policy and Procedure process for Town of Estes Park committees and to provide reference for cross training and training new personnel. 2.SCOPE This Policy and Procedure applies to all Town citizen volunteer boards,commissions and task forces,herein collectively referred to as “committees”and the appropriate staff who support the functions of these entities.This Policy and Procedure does not apply to internal staff committees,committees not appointed by the Town Board or outside independent committees. 3.RESPONSIBILITY The Town Administrator and Town staff shall be responsible for the implementation of this Policy and Procedure. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/2312018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 1 of 13 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE .1 2.SCOPE 1 3.RESPONSIBILITY 1 4.PROCEDURE 4 a.Definitions 4 i.Committee Types 4 ii.Town Board Liaison S iii.StaffLiaison S b.Terms 6 c.Recruitment 6 i.Recruitment 6 H.Applications 6 Hi.Eligibility 7 d.Selection Process 7 e.Notification 8 f.Vacancies 8 g.Committee Alternatives a h.Staff Support 8 i.Trustees Liaison 9 j.Orientation and Training 9 k.Bylaws 9 I.Recognition 10 m.Ownership of Intellectual Property 10 n.Open Meetings 10 o.Decision Making 10 p.Compensation and Reimbursement 11 i.Compensation 11 ii.Mileage 11 Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 2 of 13 iii.Meals .11 iv.Expenses .11 q.Insurance Coverage .11 r.Conilictofinterest 12 s.Gifts 12 t.Minutes 12 u.Agendas 12 v.Waivers 12 Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 3 of 13 4.PROCEDURE NOTE:In instances where federal or state regulations and laws differ from this policy/procedure,the federal and state laws and regulations will be followed. a.Definitions i.Committee Types Committees serve many different roles within the Town.It is important that staff and committee members fully understand the role of each committee and the authority and responsibility for the committee and its members.To help define these roles,each committee will be designated as to type,as defined below: (1)Advisory Committees An advisory committee serves a forum of citizens to advise and assist the Town Board and/or a requesting Town department,providing them with technical and non-technical advice on issues.Advisory committees are not authorized to make decisions on behalf of the Town.The Town Board will consider the input of advisory committees,as well as other community members,in making decisions on issues.The Town Board may or may not take action that is in agreement with the advice of a Town advisory committee.Advisory committees may not speak for the Town or take independent positions on issues with the public or the press.Its purpose is to advise the Town Board or the requesting department only. Constituent Advisory Committee:This type of advisory committee is used as a polling type committee used to develop a sampling of community reaction and opinion on an issue or program(s).The membership on this type of committee should be broad based and accurately reflect the total diversity of the larger public.Example:The Transportation Advisory Board Content —Advice-giving Committee:This type of advisory committee is created to give advice to the Town Board or appropriate department to aid with decision making processes.Varied interests and opinions are encouraged,and the advisory committee may be asked to develop specific proposals and products for Town Board or department consideration.Membership is selected to encourage a wide variety of input from respected individuals from the community with specialized expertise.This advisory committee may or may not be a demographic reflection of the community as a whole.Example —The Parks Advisory Board Working Group:This type of advisory committee may reflect both the content or advisory type of committee,but is further charged with implementation of a project or program.Example —The Police Auxiliary (2)Quasi-judicial Committees Some committees and commissions are defined in state statute and have certain statutory responsibilities and authorities,as designated by statute. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 4 of 13 Often these committees have the authority to hold formal hearings,accept testimony,and make decisions which have some level of legal standing.These decisions may or may not be subject to review by the Town Board.Members of these committees must be cognizant of protecting the unbiased quasi-judicial nature of the committee and its formal hearings.Activities of these committees are limited to those authorities granted in statute or specifically by the Town Board.Example —The Planning Commission (3)Decision-Making Committees Decision-making committees are bodies that either statutorily or as granted by the Town Board have authority to make decisions which may include some of the following:approving citizen requests and applications,allocating resources, hiring or firing employees or adopting regulations.The specific authority of each decision-making committee is defined in statute or in the bylaws as approved by the Town Board.Examples—The Board of Adjustment,Board of Appeals (4)Ad-Hoc Task Forces Task forces are special ad-hoc panels created by the Town Board for a specific project or task.Task forces are limited in duration and are not ongoing entities. The responsibilities of the task force shall be designated by resolution by the Town Board at the time the Town Board authorizes the formation of the task force.The Town Board will consider the input of task forces,as well as other community members,in making decisions on issues.The Town Board may or may not take action that is in agreement with the advice of a Town task force. Task forces may not speak for the Town,and are to advise the Town Board or the appropriate department only,and are not to take independent positions on issues with the public or the press.Examples —Bond Park Committee, Transportation Visioning Committee (5)Outside and Independent Committees These are committees that may or may not be appointed wholly or partially by the Town Board,but are independent autonomous committees,often serving a governance role for another entity.This includes,but is not limited to the Estes Valley Library Board,the Local Marketing District,the Estes Park Housing Authority,and Western Heritage Inc. ii.Town Board Liaison The Town Trustee assigned to the committee pursuant to Governing Policy 1.7 iii.Staff Liaison A staff position responsible for the coordination and communication with the assigned committee and the day-to-day support for the committee. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 5 of 13 b.Terms The term for committee membership shall be defined in the bylaws of each committee. Terms for outside committees are the responsibility of the specific committee and not the Town of Estes Park. Terms for all committee members will be staggered with the exception of ad-hoc or temporary committees,which may have a finite sunset. Mid-term appointments to positions that become vacant may be made at any time or may be postponed to the regular term period,at the discretion of the Town Board. Unless otherwise specified by statute,members of a committee serve at the pleasure of the Town Board,have no property interest or entitlement in their membership or office and may be removed at any time for any reason by the Town Board. c.Recruitment The Town Clerk will publicize and advertise committee vacancies each year,and on an as-needed basis throughout the year,utilizing paid advertising,press releases to electronic and print media,the Town website,and other produced materials that might engage interested residents.Applications shall be available on the Town website,at Town Hall and at the Estes Valley Library. i.Recruitment Current committee members are encouraged to help recruit potential committee members,especially when specific targeted populations or expertise is required. Staff and Trustees may encourage individuals to apply for any open committee position,however they must be clear that the authority to appoint to a committee is solely the responsibility of the Board of Trustees,and there is no implied promise or guarantee of appointment. ii.Applications All citizens interested in serving on a committee shall complete an official Town application.These applications will be available from the Town Clerk’s office and on the Town website.Applications must be returned by the deadline to the Town Clerk’s office.Online applications are accepted from the Town website. Citizens may apply for up to three committees at a time.When applying for more than one committee,applicants should prioritize their requests on the committee application form. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 6 of 13 iii.Eligibility Eligibility for any committee shall be defined in the bylaws of each committee. However,except by special circumstance as approved by the Town Board,all members of any Town committee shall be residents of the Town of Estes Park. No individual who is currently serving a sentence after being convicted of a felony may serve on any Town board.Due to the time commitment involved,and to allow as many citizens the chance to participate in Town committees,serving on more than one Town committee at a time is discouraged.However,the Town Board reserves the right to appoint individuals to multiple committees when,in the opinion of the Town Board,it is in the best interest of the Town. d.Selection Process The Town Board will seek the most qualified diverse applicants with applicable special interest and expertise.In general,only the Town Board will select appointments to a Town committee.Existing committee members may assist with the recruitment of new members,but should not screen,interview or make recommendations for appointments,unless specifically requested to do so by the Town Board. Selection to the committees will be carried out as follows: 1.The Town Board or its designee(s)will review the applications. 2.The Trustees or their designee(s)may screen applicants to select a pool for interviewing. 3.The Trustees or their designee may conduct reference checks or background checks on applicants when,in the opinion of the Town Board or its designee(s), it is in the best interest of the citizens of the Town of Estes Park.No such checks will be completed without the informed consent of the applicant. 4.Applicants for all committees will be interviewed by the Town Board,or its designees.Any designees will be appointed by the full Town Board. a.Personal interviews shall be conducted prior to any appointment to a Town committee,unless specifically waived by the Town Board,or as excepted below. b.Prior to candidate interviews,the Town Board or its designee(s) assigned to conduct the interviews shall develop selection and evaluation criteria for review of the candidates. 5.The Trustees may request assistance from the staff liaison and other committee members. 6.Recommendations from the interview team will be made to the Town Board, which will make the appointment(s). Incumbent committee members who are eligible for reappointment will be contacted by the Town Clerk’s office to assess their interest in being reappointed.Members who desire reappointment will be considered along with all other applicants.Incumbents may be interviewed by the Town Board or its designee,at the discretion of the Town Board. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 7 of 13 By agreeing to serve on a Town committee,the member agrees to abide by this policy of the Town Board.Any committee member who violates the terms of this Policy and Procedure or the bylaws of the committee may be asked to resign or be removed from the committee by the Town Board. e.Notification The Town Clerk’s office will notify applicants of scheduled interviews.The Town Clerk’s office will promptly notify applicants and incumbents requesting reappointment,of appointments and the status of their applications. f.Vacancies The Town Clerk’s office will keep all applications on file for one year.If vacancies occur during the year,the position may be filled from the current list of applicants using the selection process delineated or through advertising for interested volunteers.For difficult to recruit committees,applications may be kept on file for two years. Resignations from any committee should be addressed in writing to the Town Board or Town Administrator. g.Committee Alternatives No Town committee will have members designated as alternates.All members,other than those designated as ex-officio or associate,shall have full membership and voting privileges on all Town committees. Where federal or state laws or municipal ordinances require alternates Section 102.3.7.1 is waived. Alternate/non-voting members who wish to become regular members must complete an application for the appropriate committee. h.Staff Support Staff support is available to committees through the staff liaison assigned to support each committee. It is the responsibility of the Town Board,in coordination with the staff liaison to provide the necessary budget and other resources for any committee to perform its assigned duties. It is the responsibility of the staff liaison to ensure the committee has adequate and reasonable staff support within budgeted resources. Staff support and staff liaisons will not be members of the committee to which they are assigned. It is the responsibility of the staff liaison to make requests for the Trustees’liaison to attend assigned committee meetings through the Town Clerk. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies PageS of 13 i.Trustees Liaison Individual Trustees may be assigned as liaisons to a committee by the Town Board. The role of the Trustee liaison is: •To serve as the primary two-way communication channel between the Town Board and the committee. •If so designated by the Town Board,to review applications,interview candidates and make recommendations to the Town Board for approval. •Serve as the primary Town Board contact with the committee. •Attend assigned committee meetings when requested or whenever appropriate,in the opinion of the Trustee liaison.Trustee liaisons are not expected to attend every meeting of the committee. •Any Trustee may attend the meeting of any committee;however they should notify the official Town Board liaison in advance of attending.This notification will allow the liaison to know when a quorum of the Town Board may be attending the committee meeting and to notify the Town Clerk so the appropriate public notifications can be made,in compliance with the Colorado Open Meetings Act. •The liaison is not a member of the committee and when in attendance at a committee meeting,shall be there as an observer for the Town Board. Participation in committee discussions should be minimal and restricted to clarification of Town Board positions or collection of information to bring back to the full Town Board. j.Orientation and Training Staff liaisons should provide new committee members with pertinent materials that will assist new members in becoming fully functioning members of the committee, including a copy of the bylaws and a copy of this policy.Staff liaisons should clearly inform all new members of the role of the committee and the responsibilities and authority of the committee.Established committee members are encouraged to share their experience and knowledge with new members.New members are encouraged to attend meetings before their term begins.All new committee members shall receive and acknowledge the receipt of the Town of Estes Park Volunteer Manual. k.Bylaws Each committee shall adopt bylaws that are consistent with these policies.A copy of the bylaws shall be sent to the Clerk’s office prior to adoption,for staff and Town Board review.This Policy and Procedure shall be incorporated,by reference,into the bylaws of all Town committees,The bylaws shall include a description of the objectives and duties or tasks of the committee,as set by the Town Board or the appropriate department. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 9 of 13 I.Recognition The Town Board shall recognize the Town’s volunteers annually,in a manner determined by the Town Board. The Town Board will send a letter of appreciation to all outgoing committee members in good standing. m.Ownership of Intellectual Property Any documents,articles,reports or correspondence,recommendations or other products produced by a Town committee shall be the sole property of the Town of Estes Park. No committee or member of a committee may copyright or in any other way take ownership for any documents,articles,recommendations or other products produced as a function of the Town committee. All documents and correspondence produced as part of the regular business of any committee shall be subject to the same open records policies applicable to all Town documents and correspondence. All documents and publications of any Town committee must be clearly identified as belonging to or originating from the Town of Estes Park. n.Open Meetings All meetings and actions of any committee shall be in full compliance with state statutes governing open meetings.It is the responsibility of the staff liaison to be familiar with these statutes and regulations. o.Decision Making Any actions,recommendations or discussions of any committee shall be limited to the defined objectives of the body as described in the approved bylaws. A common point of misunderstanding with committees and citizens is the role of the committee in decision making and the type of decision making to be employed by the committee for a particular issue.The Town Board realizes that not one method of decision making fits all situations;however it is important that the type of decision be declared early in the process of public discourse.The type of decision process is dependent on the issue involved,the time frame available and the amount of public participation desired. It is the responsibility of the staff liaison to assist the committee in its decision-making process and to train new and existing members in the appropriate responsibilities and authorities of the committee and its members.Staff liaisons are not to exert undue influence during the decision-making process,but only to keep the decision making of the committee in agreement with the objectives set by the Town Board. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 10 of 13 p.Compensation and Reimbursement i.Compensation Citizens who serve on Town committees do so as volunteers.There will be no financial compensation or reimbursement of expenses,except as noted below,for any volunteers on any committee. ii.Mileage Committee members may request reimbursement for mileage to attend any committee function if the member must travel greater than 10 miles from their residence.Mileage will be reimbursed at the rate currently adopted for Town travel by the Town Board.The staff liaison is responsible for approving mileage reimbursements for committees within the budget provided by the Town Board. iii.Meals Meals may be provided by the Town as part of regular meetings of the committee, as budgeted. iv.Expenses Members of committees may be reimbursed for out-of-pocket costs associated with the business of the committee provided the expenditures have been previously budgeted by the Town Board and authorized in advance by the assigned staff liaison or Town Administrator.(For example,office supplies,copies, printing,etc.)Other expenses may be reimbursed if,in the judgment of the staff liaison,such reimbursement is in the best interest of the Town. q.Insurance Coverage General liability (liability other than auto,including general,law enforcement and professional)is provided to all volunteers. Volunteers are not covered by the Town’s workers’compensation coverage.Any injuries incurred while volunteering is the responsibility of the individual volunteer. Specific to automobile insurance,both physical damage and legal liability for bodily injury or death is covered for all volunteers driving town vehicles,subject to coverage limits pursuant to the Town’s coverage.In addition,liability is covered for all volunteers driving their personal vehicles on Town business;however the following claims are excluded from coverage. •Bodily injury or death to passengers (including friends and family)who are not on official town business. •Physical damage to non-Town owned vehicles used on Town business. Property insurance is not provided to any personal property of the volunteer. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 11 of 13 r.Conflict of Interest A conflict of interest occurs when a person’s private,personal relationships or interests conflict so that an independent observer may reasonably question whether the person’s actions or decisions are determined by personal benefit,gain,or advantage. Members of committees shall not use their membership for private gain,and shall act impartially and not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual. A member of any committee who has a personal or private interest in a matter proposed or pending shall disclose such interest to the committee;shall not vote on the item;and shall not attempt to influence the decisions of other members voting on the matter. s.Gifts Acceptance of or giving of any gifts by a committee member,which could lead to a conflict of interest,is prohibited.In particular,no member of any committee may accept or give a gift in excess of the value specified in Article XXIX of the Colorado State Constitution,from any individual,organization,contractor,or any other entity which does business with the Town or has any control of or interest in Town business related to the activities of his or her particular committee. t.Minutes Minutes shall be recorded of all meetings of any Town committee that are subject to the Colorado Open Meetings Act.Approved or draft minutes should be posted as soon as practicable after the meeting in question.Committees are strongly encouraged to post draft minutes prior to the final approval of the minutes at the next meeting of the committee.At a minimum,minutes shall be published on the Town website within seven days of approval by the committee. Minutes should record any formal actions taken by the committee.Minutes are not intended to be verbatim transcripts of the meeting.The amount of detail included in the minutes beyond the recording of actions is left to the discretion of each committee. u.Agendas Agendas for all public committee meetings will be posted on the Town website a minimum of six days prior to the meeting,whenever possible. v.Waivers Any section of this policy can be waived by a majority vote of the Town Board. w.Sunset Review In accordance with Governing Policy 1.6.1.6,all committees will undergo a regular sunset review,at least once every five years,unless otherwise provided for more frequently and according to a staggered schedule to be adopted separately by the Board of Trustees.This applies only to non-statutorily required boards/commissions. Town Committees 102 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 12 of 13 Approved: Todd Jirsa,Payor Date Town Committees 102 Parks Advisory Board BoardlCommittee Initial Sunset review (then every five years thereafter) I Transportation Advisory Board October 2017 Family Advisory Board April 2019 October 2017 Audit Committee October2018 Revisions:10/23/2018 Town of Estes Park,Town Board Policies Page 13 of 13 January 20, 2021 Transportation Advisory Board Code of Conduct 1. Start and end the meeting on time. 2. Silence all cell phones and disregard phone interruptions. 3. Each person should participate with constructive input to help the Public Works staff craft a balanced product with the goal of understanding all perspectives and experiences. 4. Do not interrupt while others are speaking. Respectfully listen to the perspectives of others with the intent of understanding instead of listening only to formulate a counterpoint. 5. Keep the tone safe, neutral, and respectful at all times. 6. Be respectful of time constraints and other’s rights to share. Consider a time limit on comments if needed to achieve a balanced conversation. 7. No side conversations. 8. Stay on track and avoid repeating points that have already been made. 9. Confirm clear group consensus. Vote when necessary. 10. Respectfully express dissent. Consider the merit of diverse and minority views. 11. Respect and defer to the role of the elected Chair to guide the meeting and oversee the input collection process. 12. Model diplomacy by speaking accurately and factually when publicly addressing decisions made by the TAB. Express support for the legitimacy of the majority decision. Refuse to engage in subversive, divisive, and undermining conduct. Revised: January 20, 2021 TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD JOB DESCRIPTION GENERAL: The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) consists of nine volunteer members who serve staggered three-year terms. All members are appointed by the Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees. AUTHORITY: The Transportation Advisory Board was established by the Board of Trustees in 2013 and will serve in an advisory capacity to the Town Board, making recommendations on transportation issues and concerns, but without authority to make final decisions. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS: The board members shall perform the duties, responsibilities and obligations set forth in the TAB Bylaws. The essential functions of the Transportation Advisory Board are: 1. Support comprehensive transportation planning that enhances the quality of life for the citizens, businesses and visitors to the Town of Estes Park. 2. Support the continued safety and maintenance of the Town of Estes Park Transportation System and to review and recommend transportation related capital projects to implement the Board of Trustees’ transportation goals. 3. Act as a sounding board to the Board of Trustees and the Town department of Public Works on transportation planning, construction and maintenance issues including: roads, transit, trails, pedestrian access, parking and air quality. 4. Support the Town Board and staff in local and regional transportation planning and promote cooperative efforts to resolve transportation issues in the Estes Valley. DUTIES: 1. Be prepared for, attend, and participate in Transportation Advisory Board meetings, including work sessions. 2. Conduct site visits to view transportation issues, concerns and projects. 3. Have an awareness of, and willingness to understand, community values, the role of local government, and the social and economic characteristics of the Estes Valley. 4. Provide open public processes that respect due process for all stakeholders. 5. Represent and serve the Town of Estes Park Board of Trustees, Public Works Department staff, residents, and visitors in a collaborative and unifying manner. 6. Honor the established Transportation Advisory Board Code of Conduct. Revised: January 20, 2021 ADDITIONAL DUTIES: 1. May serve as chair or vice-chair and fulfill roles described in the Transportation Advisory Board bylaws. 2. May serve on sub-committee or task force for Transportation Advisory Board assignments. 3. May attend other public meetings as deemed necessary. SKILLS AND ABILITIES: There are no minimum skills and abilities that an applicant must have to be appointed as a Transportation Advisory Board member; however, the following list has been identified as those skills and abilities that make a quality Advisory Board member. 1. Open mindedness, respect, and patience. 2. Willingness to listen and learn. 3. Ability to think in abstract terms. 4. Willingness to contribute, e.g., to speak accurately and constructively regarding TAB topics in a public forum. 5. Ability to compromise and work within a team framework. 6. Ability to balance private benefit with public good. 7. Ability to consider and articulate facts related to a specific transportation issue and the effect on the surrounding area and community as a whole. 8. The ability to sustain harmonious working relationships with other Transportation Advisory Board members, the Town Board, residents, and the public. RESIDENCY: All appointees of the TAB shall be residents of the Estes Valley Planning District at the time of application and during their entire term. RESTRICTIONS: No member of the Town Board of Trustees may also serve as a member of the Transportation Advisory Board. The Town Board may appoint a Trustee to serve as a non-voting liaison between the Town Board and the TAB. TERM: With the exception of the initial term, each member shall serve a three-year term. There are no term limitations, and members may be reappointed by the Town Board. MINIMUM TIME REQUIREMENTS: Regular attendance by the members of the Board is expected. Revised: January 20, 2021 WORKING CONDITIONS/PHYSICAL AND MENTAL EFFORT: This position primarily conducts business indoors (95%) completing tasks such as reading and reviewing information and participating in public meetings. This position requires a lengthy attention span and involves sitting (95%), walking and standing (5%). Site visits can involve inclement weather conditions. I understand the description of this position, including the essential functions. Signature: Printed Name: Date: Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 25, 2021 Minutes of a scheduled meeting of the Sidewalk & Trail Needs Task Force of the Trans- portation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtually on the 25th day of January, 2021 Task Force: Belle Morris, Ann Finley, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Scott Moulton Attending: Belle Morris, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Ann Finley, Greg Muhonen, Ryan Barr, Christy Crosser, David Hook, Christy DeLorme, and Blake Robertson Absent: Scott Moulton Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:02 p.m. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The Task Force Meeting was advertised and a link to the virtual meeting was provided. No members of the public participated in the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Gamble informed the group that future meeting dates included in the January 11 minutes had been updated to show scheduled Task Force meetings on January 25 and February 1. A motion was made and seconded (DeLorme/Robertson) to approve the January 11 meeting minutes as amended and all were in favor. NEW BUSINESS Chair Morris began the meeting by informing the group that there are two Task Force initiatives in progress. One is a survey for students and parents about impediments to walking or riding a bike to/from school. The second initiative is a boots-on-the-ground engineering audit of multi-use paths within a 1-mile radius of the school campus. Public Works Director Muhonen ask the group if there should be a third item on the agenda to determine TAB, the Task Force, and Town staff roles in Graves Avenue pro- ject. He indicated it would be ideal to clarify involvement and to look for efficiencies. Chair Morris informed the Task Force that she had talked to school representatives to- day (January 25), and they told her that the school had already completed a survey. She was unaware of this and requested that the Task Force be provided with the survey results and data. Director Muhonen pointed out that the survey referenced by the school district was for the Brodie Avenue project, not the upcoming Graves Avenue project. He reiterated that this is why it is so important that we know who is involved and what they are doing. Finley wanted to make sure that the survey the Task Force has been working on is not redundant. Following further discussion it was clarified that the school district distributed pre- and post-project surveys for the Brodie Avenue project as required by SRTS and using a standard SRTS web portal. The target audience was elementary and middle school parents and school staff. Approximately 600 survey invitations were sent out, and there were about 60 responses. Town staff will communicate with the Colorado SRTS contractor to determine if the Brodie Avenue surveys can be used for the Graves Avenue pre-project survey. This is particularly relevant since the post-project survey for Brodie Avenue was administered in November 2020, and teachers were included as part of that survey. The Task Force is also considering if additional survey questions would be useful in understanding impediments to walking or biking to school. Project Manager Hook shared some of the Brodie Avenue pre- and post-project survey data on screen. The pre-project survey was conducted July - December, 2017. The sur- vey report he shared was generated on October 24, 2017, and the SRTS grant applica- tion was submitted on November 1, 2017. A Student Travel Tally Report was completed in fall, 2010. Hook mentioned that there were 21 school staff responses to 3 questions, and 40 responses on behalf of middle school students, which resulted in good data to evaluate. Given the recently completed Brodie Avenue post-project survey Gamble suggested that the Task Force take a pause to evaluate the survey data before proceeding. The survey data could have some bearing on the engineering audit as well. Chair Morris recommended that the Task Force should take the time to understand the recent survey data, but continue to work on the multi-use path audit. She thought it would be beneficial to have “citizen eyes” on the survey results and to identify gaps that could help to design future surveys. Finley agreed with Morris’ assessment and requested that the survey results be sent to the TAB Task Force members. Director Muhonen mentioned that he did not realize that the most recent survey had been completed in December, but we should be thankful that we now have recent sur- vey results to use. Chair Morris indicated that she did hear back from some folks about the audit checklist, and she, too, had some feedback to offer. She asked if the audit would strictly focus on engineering aspects, or should it also look at human (experiential) dimensions? Director Muhonen’s guidance was to generate useful information that the Town and oth- ers can act on. Hanick agreed that experiential information would be useful. She pointed out that there are no definitive questions on crosswalks and what contributes to making them unsafe. For example, the crosswalk on East Elkhorn Avenue just east of Kind Coffee feels un- safe to her. There is no way to know if a car is going to stop if a pedestrian is at the crosswalk. Robertson pointed out that cars not stopping at crosswalks really requires a “time and motion” study, and is episodic in nature. He does have a pocket radar that could be used to measure traffic speed during an audit. He suggested that the auditors could identify potential safety and experiential issues that could be studied in more detail at a future time. Gamble agreed that auditors may not capture experiential issues during the short time they would have boots-on-the-ground. Chair Morris pointed out that SRTS has resources for conducting a walking audit, and it it is best to have several people involved in order to capture multiple observations, in- cluding experiences. She wanted to know what information should be collected to help drive decision making? Would experiential information be useful? Director Muhonen stated that it would be good to know why people feel unsafe, and what would make it safer. Chair Morris believes it would be good to know how people are traveling (pushing strollers, etc.) as well as understanding if travelers feel safe. Crosser pointed out that the walking audit will help Public Works come up with an SRTS plan, and once the plan is in place, the Town can apply for SRTS funding. DeLorme wanted to make sure that the Task Force isn’t duplicating survey work that has already been done. She supports the boots-on-the-ground survey and believe it will provide important information. Chair Morris ask the group if more experiential data should be collected? DeLorme raised a question about what would be done with such information? She wanted the Task Force to focus on data it can collect and to look at ways to make things better such as with lighting or signage. Chair Morris pointed out that just because a new sidewalk gets built does not mean people will use it. Especially if it isn’t inviting for people, which is more of an environ- mental or aesthetic condition, like landscaping, along the walkway. She would like our walkways to feel welcoming. Morris added that planting a tree or shrub along a path helps with aesthetics, but also can assist with wind barrier needs. Given our climate, wind can be a barrier to walking or biking to school or to downtown. Finley suggested that in the audit checklist we could merge that “hard” engineering with the “soft” experiential data collection. This could be done within the subcategories in the checklist. Robertson suggested using health and safety as metrics instead of experience. Experi- ential becomes more complex because what some may see as aesthetically pleasing could cause some users to feel unsafe. For example, a hedge running along a sidewalk. Director Muhonen believes that more open ended questions either in a survey or on the checklist could work. For example, “Does this feel safe? If not, why not?” Chair Morris reminded the group that the assessment should not just be for pedestrian users, but also for bikes and other modes of transportation. For this reason, it was sug- gested that the best term to use would be “multi-use path.” Barr recommended that the checklist should retain “Yes” and “No” responses, but should also include more open ended questions and responses. The checklist should identify specific problems, and specific problem locations should be noted. The checklist should include a component on drainage, and where there are large vertical drops along a multi-use path that could be made safer. He pointed out that the survey template that has been administered at the schools is a standard SRTS survey. The Task Force could identify gaps in the standard template. He recommended that the Task Force should look at the current survey results with an eye toward encouraging more walking and bik- ing participation in the future. Director Muhonen asked what the role of the Task Force should be on the Graves Ave- nue project. He pointed out that during the project there will be opportunities for TAB to comment. He wanted to know if TAB or the Task Force desired to provide additional in- put. Chair Morris stated that she would like to look at the Brodie Avenue survey results and then decide on the TAB or Task Force role in the Graves Avenue project. Director Muhonen stated that the contractor will be collecting topographic and other land surveying data. There could be a boots-on-the-ground pedestrian survey, and infor- mation gathered at that time could be shared with the contractor if desired. This should happen in February. Barr recommended that the Task Force should focus on development of an SRTS plan that would identify the next project that Public Works should pursue. Hook said that it would be desirable to have a list of deficiencies to pass along to the consultant for the Graves Avenue project. This needs to happen soon. Crosser shared a list of SRTS items that would be desirable to have the Task Force work on. This included education, encouragement, evaluation, etc. Roberson suggested that the Graves Avenue project would be a good first effort for the Task Force and would provide an idea of what can actually be accomplished. It would help to fine tune the process and procedures. It would also help the group to understand the difference between experiential data and health and safety data. Chair Morris agreed that it would be good to do a walk through of the Graves Avenue project and use the newly developed checklist. Those who agreed to participate are Morris, Gamble, Hanick, and Robertson Action Items 1. Crosser or Hook to share 2010, 2017, and 2020 survey results with Task Force members 2. Task Force members will review the survey results with an eye toward how the re- sults can be applied to the Graves Avenue project, the multi-use path audit, and fu- ture SRTS efforts. 3. Public Works will contact the Colorado SRTS contractor to determine if the post-pro- ject Brodie Avenue survey can also serve as the pre-project survey for the Graves Avenue project 4. Gamble will revise the audit checklist and will make it available before the next Task Force meeting on February 1 5. Morris will arrange for a boots-on-the-ground survey of the Graves Avenue project sometime in February. Meeting adjourned at 1:20 p.m. Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 1, 2021 Minutes of a scheduled meeting of the Sidewalk & Trail Needs Task Force of the Trans- portation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtually on the 1st day of February, 2021 Task Force: Belle Morris, Ann Finley, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Scott Moulton Attending: Chair Belle Morris, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Public Works Director Greg Muhonen, Christy DeLorme, and Blake Robertson (Joined at 12:30 via phone) Absent: Scott Moulton, Ann Finley Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:06 p.m. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The Task Force Meeting was advertised and a link to the virtual meeting was provided. No members of the public participated in the meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the January 25, 2021 Task Force meeting were amended and distrib- uted for review to all who attended that meeting. A motion was made and seconded (Hanick/DeLorme) to approve the January 25 meeting minutes as amended and all were in favor. NEW BUSINESS The Task Force reviewed the Brodie Avenue pre- and post-project surveys for applica- bility to the current task of conducting an audit of walking and biking pathways to/from the school campus and identifying impediments to walking and biking. Gamble thought the survey results provided good information. Many of the written com- ments identified impediments to walking or biking to/from school. Director Muhonen reported that Town staff consulted with the CDOT SRTS contractor, and the result of that communication was that the Brodie Avenue post-project survey (completed in December 2020) can be used as Graves Avenue pre-project survey. Therefore, another survey isn’t really needed at this time. Chair Morris found that the Brodie Avenue surveys contained interesting information on the routes to school. She noted that several families appeared to be very engaged in the potential to walk or bike to school. The surveys also revealed that wind is an impedi- ment. Director Muhonen was surprised to learn that at least one bike had been stolen and there was fear that others could be stolen at school. He assumed that every school had a bike rack where a bike could be locked. Chair Morris reported that each school has a bike rack, but they are not conveniently lo- cated. She wondered if bike rack location and lack of bike locks was an impediment. Both could be corrected fairly easily. Hanick also suggested that the schools could re- consider bike rack location so they are closer to the main entrance and more visible. Hanick noted that the survey results indicate that there is a fear of crossing Highway 7. This confirms how important an option such as an underpass may be. She also noted that at least one student would like to ride to school from Old Ranger Road, but the mul- tiuse path is on the opposite side of West Elkhorn Avenue, so a crosswalk may be needed. Director Muhonen shared that the only new sidewalk west of downtown on the south side of West Elkhorn Avenue is to extend from the entrance to the Elkhorn Lodge to Mrs. Walsh’s Garden. Hopefully the need for a crossing at Old Ranger Road will show up in the pathway audit and can be addressed in the future. Chair Morris pointed out that there is already an accessible ramp on the multiuse path at Old Ranger Road. What is needed is a crosswalk at that location. Chair Morris believes that the Brodie Avenue surveys provide legitimate data, and the Task Force could identify a few questions that could be included in a future survey. For the future there could be questions on why a pathway was perceived as too narrow, and would families be interested in the concept of shared space streets? Director Muhonen stated that more education would be needed before a respondent could answer those questions. He believes that the consultant could address the shared street idea with Graves Avenue design concepts. That concept could then be part of the community outreach. Gamble mentioned that Christy Crosser had told the Task Force that the Brodie Avenue surveys were standard SRTS format and were administered on the national SRTS web portal. Those surveys were therefore limited to standard questions. He also was in- trigued with a comment that suggested suspending school bus service within 1 mile of the school campus. DeLorme responded that she would be hesitant to suspend school bus service within 1 mile because of weather. She also pointed out that some parents are more comfortable putting kids on the bus rather than walking or riding a bike. Hanick stated that the Brodie Avenue surveys contained lots of good information. She went on to say that if she had a student in school she would not want them to ride a bike on the street. Highway 7 in particular is a big impediment. Chair Morris pointed out that it is clear that students who live further out aren’t walking or riding to/from school. To this point, Gamble responded that it is amazing how many students are driven to/from school. The Task Force reviewed the Pathway Audit Checklist prepared by Gamble. Chair Mor- ris wanted to determine how the auditors would map identified locations. Director Muhonen suggested that the on-the-ground work needed to be divided into log- ical segments, and the team needed to be thoughtful about how the data was to be col- lected and interpreted. He wondered if the data could be collected using software that could tabulate responses rather than on paper copies. Because of the significant effort involved he recommended that the Task Force identify highly used corridors within the 1-mile radius around the school campus and focus on those routes. Gamble also rec- ommended that the team focus on streets and pathways that students are actually using at this point in time. Hanick suggested that the team should look at the main “spokes” radiating out from the school campus along with the major streets. She wanted to ensure that the team knew exactly what information to capture. Director Muhonen pointed out that the community had identified missing trail/sidewalk links in the Master Trails Plan. He believes there is value in having the team identify main corridors or routes and to survey them first. He recommended using the 1-mile ra- dius map that Roberson developed and literally use a highlighter to identify the main routes to be surveyed. The Master Trails Plan could be used in the next phase (outside the 1-mile radius) to identify key routes. He recommended that the team use Graves Av- enue as a pilot for the Pathway Audit Checklist. It was pointed out that the Master Trails Plan was not really fine grained enough to de- finitively show needed improvements in the downtown area. The plan was focused more on the periphery. Chair Morris mentioned that the Brodie Avenue surveys clearly identified a lack of con- nectivity. She also pointed out that the Stanley Park Master Plan should also be refer- enced as it also contains mutiuse connectivity recommendations. She also recom- mended that the team could invite residents known to team members to participate in the pathway audits in specific neighborhoods. The team should definitely look at the Master Trails Plan to see what is proposed within the 1-mile radius from the schools. DeLorme is aware of several pathway gaps in the area of Mountain Top Preschool. Muhonen acknowledged that providing connectivity to the preschool would be important It was at this point in the virtual meeting that Blake Robertson was able to join via phone. Robertson has a measuring wheel, and he asked if it would be helpful to identify specific locations along a route. Muhonen responded that it would be useful if the starting point was clearly identified (0+00) and the station of the identified need was recorded (for ex- ample: 2+75 = 275 feet from the starting point). Chair Morris pointed out that photos would be important as well. Robertson suggested that the station where each photo was taken should also be recorded. He also thought about mounting a GoPro camera on the measuring wheel so the entire route would be captured on video. He advocated for capturing sufficient information so the route did not have to be walked again. He also supported doing a “test run” on Graves Avenue so the Task Force would then know what is useful data to collect. Chair Morris responded that she did not believe we needed to capture video of the entire area. Chair Morris stated that she had some concerns with the more technical terms in the Pathway Audit Checklist. For example “deflection.” She requested that the boots-on-the- ground team receive some interpretation from Public Works so they get the information they need. Muhonen suggested trying out the checklist in the field and rewording as needed. The Task Force agreed to meet for 1 hour to conduct a test audit on Graves Avenue starting at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 9. The lower lobby at the Recreation Center is the meeting location. Action Items 1. Muhonen to have Town staff upload the Master Trails Plan and the Stanley Park Master Plan to the shared Google drive 2. Gamble to upload the 1-mile radius maps Robertson created to the shared Google drive 3. Muhonen to arrange for virtual meetings at noon on February 8, 15, and 22. Public Works will set up the virtual meetings, send invitations, and notify the public of the three virtual meetings and the February 9 audit of Graves Avenue. Meeting adjourned at 1:09 p.m. Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, February 8, 2021 Minutes of a scheduled meeting of the Sidewalk & Trail Needs Task Force of the Trans- portation Advisory Board of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held virtually on the 8th day of February, 2021 Task Force: Belle Morris, Ann Finley, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Scott Moulton, Christy DeLorme Attending: Chair Belle Morris, Larry Gamble, Linda Hanick, Ann Finley, Public Works Di- rector Greg Muhonen, and Blake Robertson (joined at 12:14 via phone) Absent: Scott Moulton, Christy DeLorme Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 12:07 p.m. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT The Task Force Meeting was advertised and a link to the virtual meeting was provided. No members of the public participated in the meeting other than Blake Robertson. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A motion was made and seconded (Morris/Finley) to approve the February 1 meeting minutes and all were in favor. NEW BUSINESS The Task Force reviewed the Estes Valley Master Trails Plan, paying particular atten- tion to how the plan relates to the upcoming pathway audit to be conducted within a 1 mile radius of the school campus. Chair Morris wanted to ensure that the audit would also capture “mobility challenged.” Finley suggested that the notes section on the Path- way Audit Checklist could be used to capture impediments hindering ADA compliance. Chair Morris pointed out that there are two pathways noted in the Implementation Chap- ter of the Master Trails Plan that directly relate to the pathway audit. These are listed as #8 (School Zone Improvements) and #8.5 (Stanley Park Trails) on the Master Trails Plan map and in the Implementation Table. Because the Master Trails Plan does not identify any needed improvements on High- way 7 between U.S. Highway 36 and Pawnee Drive, Director Muhonen recommend that the Task Force look for potential crossing locations that would connect the west side of Highway 7 with the pathway that runs along the east side of the highway. Chair Morris encouraged the Task Force to look and think “big.” The planning work of the Task Force will ultimately be tied into the Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan and the future Multi-Modal Transportation Plan for the Estes Valley. For example, should there be a pathway along the west side of Highway 7 since the future Wind River Housing Project will be constructed at Lexington Lane and Highway 7? A current affordable multi-unit housing project is under construction on the west side of Highway 7 south of Tranquil Lane. Families, students, and workers will need safe access to the school cam- pus and various job locations. She encouraged the Task Force to collect such infor- mation now to fill in the gaps in the trail system. Ultimately this information will be incor- porated into other planning documents. She believes the goal should be to have path- way integrity. Director Muhonen pointed out that the trails depicted in the Master Trails Plan do con- nect, but Graves Avenue, for example, is not included in the plan. Chair Morris also pointed out that the Master Trails Plan does not include a connection to Mountaintop Preschool as was discussed at the last Task Force meeting. Director Muhonen pointed out that the upcoming audit could be at a higher level, or “big- ger picture” approach. Or at the extreme, the Task Force could consider a sidewalk on every street. Chair Morris agreed that would be extreme, but mentioned Woodstock Drive as an important street that should be considered. It provides connectivity between Mountaintop Preschool, the Event Center, the residential neighborhood off Prospect Av- enue and a connection to Estes Park Health. Chair Morris suggested the Woodstock Drive connection to Stanley Avenue should be considered as important as Graves Ave- nue. It is gaps and connectivity like this that the Task Force should focus on. Director Muhonen wondered what happens once the Pathway Audit Checklist has been completed? What is the ultimate goal of the exercise? Chair Morris recommended that the Task Force identify the routes to assess and then assign individuals to complete the assessment. Task Force members need to make the case for which streets and routes are important. Gamble recommended using something like a street classification for the routes to/from school. For example, Arterial, Collector, or Local. Director Muhonen proposed that the Task Force members highlight the1 mile radius map with the three levels. He also pointed out that the Task Force may need to decide where it is acceptable to have a shared surface for walking. For example, a short cul-de-sac could have a shared sur- face for autos, pedestrians, and bikes because of low traffic speed and low traffic vol- ume. Chair Morris mentioned that there are some streets that are too steep for sidewalks and ADA compliance is difficult. Examples include Aspen and Birch streets. They would be unsafe for wheelchair use. She also mentioned Morgan Street where it connects to Highway 7 since it would serve a sizable neighborhood. If the Task Force uses traffic volume as a criteria of importance, we may miss the pedestrian volume in well-fre- quented areas similar to Morgan Street. She asked the Task Force members to develop criteria for the three classifications. Director Muhonen suggested that there be three cat- egories to keep it simple. After some discussion, it was agreed to use three classifications and accompanying col- ors for mapping as follows: High - Green Medium - Yellow Low - Pink Some example ways to define the “High” category include the following: - Volume of traffic on the street - Residential density being served. For example the new workforce housing on the west side of Highway 7 currently has no sidewalk and no crosswalk. - Pedestrian/bicycle demand - Most impactful. For example where a sidewalk would dramatically improve safety and accommodate a significant number of users. Chair Morris suggested that the “Low” category, which would be local streets and neigh- borhoods, could be assessed by individuals who could also invite neighborhood resi- dents to participate. The “High” and “Medium” categories could be assessed as a group. Director Muhonen agreed to print 11” x 17” street maps of the 1 mile radius from the school campus. These will be made available to Task Force members during the Graves Avenue audit scheduled for February 9. The Task Force reviewed the Stanley Park Master Plan. Chair Morris wondered if making a sidewalk a priority along Community Drive would help to secure funding for the U.S. Highway 36/Community Drive roundabout? Director Muhonen stated that would not help to secure funding. However, he would like to see trails funding continue beyond 2024. A prioritized list prepared by the Task Force and ultimately the TAB would help to create a vision for the community to get behind which could eventually lead to additional trails funding. The Task Force looked at the promenade within the Stanley Park Fairgrounds as a pos- sible connection between Fourth Street and Community Drive. Chair Morris encouraged the Task Force to look at multimodal connections and ensure they are complete (i.e., continuous) and can safely accommodate multimodal users. The Task Force agreed that 4th Street upgrades could extend to the sidewalk along Highway 7 and the pro- posed sidewalk along Highway 36 for continuity. Discussion followed about high traffic speeds on Highway 7. Director Muhonen men- tioned that more effective than flashing pedestrian crossing lights would be some sort of impediment that would slow cars down. Robertson pointed out that effective traffic en- forcement may be less expensive than infrastructure improvements. He went on to rec- ommend that any fines collected should go into a special fund to continue enforcement, pathway, or crossing improvements. He mentioned how well the MacGregor Avenue roundabout was working to slow down traffic speeds and improve pedestrian safety. Discussion followed about roundabout etiquette and using turn signals to indicate the driver’s intentions. Finley and Robertson suggested that education on roundabout eti- quette is needed in local newspapers and possibly as a handout at area motels. The Task Force briefly reviewed the Pathway Audit Checklist. It was agreed that the Checklist would be used for the Graves Avenue audit on February 9, and the Checklist would be amended in the field as needed. Gamble offered to make changes to the Checklist following the Graves Avenue audit. Action Items 1. Muhonen to print the Pathway Audit Checklist for the Graves Avenue audit to be held on February 9. 2. Those participating in the Graves Avenue audit should bring a clipboard and a pen. 3. Muhonen to print 11” x 17” street maps showing the 1 mile radius around the school campus. These will be provided to Task Force Members at the Graves Avenue au- dit. 4. Task Force members to identify High, Medium, and Low pathway routes on the street map using Green (High), Yellow (Medium), and Pink (Low) highlighters. High- lighting to be completed by the next Task Force meeting on Monday, February 15. 5. Task Force members are to revise the Pathway Audit Checklist in the field as needed during the Graves Avenue audit. Revisions are to be forwarded to Gamble. 6. Gamble to revise the Pathway Audit Checklist following the Graves Avenue audit. Meeting adjourned at 1:17 p.m.