Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout012407 Transportation Coordinating Committee Minutes.doc BOZEMAN AREA TRANSPORTATION COORDINATING COMMITTEE COMMISSION ROOM, CITY HALL 411 EAST MAIN STREETMINUTES WEDNESDAY, JULY 26OCTOBER 25, 2006JANUARY 24, 2007 - 9:30 A.M. - 12:00 P.M. AGENDA ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Vice Chairman Andrew EppleRoss GammonAndy Epple called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, July 26October 25January 24, 2007, in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, 411 East Main Street, and directed the TCC and audience members to introduce themselves. Members Present: Andy Epple, Planning Director, City of Bozeman, Chair Bob Lashaway, Director, Facilities Services, MSU Kerry White, Gallatin County Planning Board Ralph Zimmer, Pedestrian/Traffic Safety Committee Jeff Krauss, Mayor, City of Bozeman Christopher Scott, Gallatin County Planning Rick Hixson for Director of Public Service, City of Bozeman Pat Abelin, Citizen Member, Gallatin County Ross Gammon, Maintenance Chief, Bozeman Division, MDT Lee Provance, Road Superintendent, Gallatin County Rob Bukvich, Bozeman Division, MDT Al VanderWwey, Urban Planning, MDT Jon Henderson, Bozeman Bicycle Advisory Board Doug McSpadden, Safe Trails Coalition (temporary member) Jeff PattMadden, Federal Highway Administration Joe Olsen, Engineering Services Supervisor, Butte District, MDT Jeff Ebert, District Engineer, Butte District, MDT Bill Murdock, Gallatin County Commissioner Chris Kukulski, City Manager, City of Bozeman Staff Present: George Durkin, Road Office, Gallatin County John VanDelinder, Street Superintendent, City of Bozeman Ron Brey, Assistant City Manager, City of Bozeman Tracy Oulman, Neighborhood Coordinator, City of Bozeman Rich McLane, Bozeman Police Department Robin Sullivan, Recording Secretary Guests Present: David Cobb, Senator Baucus’ Field Office Andy Epple, Director Joe Olson, MDT Engineering Rob Buckvich, Bozeman Jon Henderson Pat A Debbi A All Vanderway, MDT for Lynn’ Christioper Scott Jeff Rupp Lee Provance Ralph ZimmerRich McLane Bob Lashawy JP Pom Ross Gammon, MDT Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director Kerry White, Gallatin County Planning Board David Smith, Bozeman Area Chamber of Commerce Bill Murdock, Gallatin County Commission Bob Lashaway, Facilities Services, MSU (arrived late) Maintenace Robin Sullivan, minutes Ted Lange____, Gallatin Valley Land TrustVLT John Vandelinder Rick Hixson George Jurdin Tracy Oulson Oug Madden Steven Johnson, Executive Director, Gallatin Valley Land Trust MSU professor and students in traffic engineering class Sara Folger Jeff Ebert, MDT ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT {Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Bozeman Area Transportation Coordinating Committee not on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker} No comment was received under this agenda item. Ted Lange, Gallatin Valley Land Trust, noted that a temporary appointment to the TCC for the Safe Trails Coalition is one of the items on the agenda. He stressed the Gallatin Valley Land Trust’s interest in participating in the process, indicating that they wish to be a part of the working group and can serve in that capacity without a temporary appointment to the TCC. Chair Andrew Epple responded that at the last TCC meeting, there was consensus that the Safe Trails Coalition should be represented on the TCC for the duration of the update process and that official action should be taken at this meeting. He then noted that the Gallatin Valley Land Trust is always welcome at these meetings and can be represented through the Safe Trails Coalition or the Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board. Doug McSpadden, Safe Trails Coalition, asked if that group should meet with representatives from Gallatin County and the Montana Department of Transportation regarding the final plans for Valley Center Road, to ensure that adequate bicycle facilities are provided, particularly through the interchange. Pat Abelin encouraged Mr. McSpadden and Mr. Lange to attend the next public meeting on the interchange to look at the plans, noting that the date and place for that meeting have not yet been set. Steven Johnson, Executive Director of the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, noted that agency has not been involved with the Transportation Coordinating Committee since the revision of the transportation plan five years ago. He stated that, since the GLVT is dedicated to bicycle and pedestrian initiatives, the agency would like to be of service in the new update, particularly in developing alternative plans. He noted that the Dan Burden event this month has resulted in tremendous energy, and he would like to bring forward some of those suggestions. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF APRIL JULY 26OCTOBER 25, 2006 Doug McSpadden requested that he be listed as a temporary member rather than as a guest. Jeff Ebert submitted the followingseveral corrections.: Jeff Ebert – several corrections that I will incorporate into these minutes as soon as I find them. IIt was moved by Lee Provance, seconded by Kerry White, that the minutes of the meeting of October 25, 2006, be approved as amended. The motion carried. Jeff Ebert made the following revisions to the minutes of July 26: Page 3 – Item B – change to read “Pat Abelin reported that the EIS EA (environmental assessment) is currently on schedule.” Page 8 – the next to the last sentence in the first paragraph states that the two projects total $6 million; the correct number is $9 million. David Smith requested that his name be moved from the list of guests to the list of members. It was moved by Kerry White, seconded by Jeff Ebert, that the minutes of the meeting of July 26, 2006, be approved as amended. The motion carried. The list of attendees was revised to delete Pat Abelin from the list. Also, Rob Bukvich made the following revisions to the minutes of April 26: Page 8 – No. 7.b. second paragraph – change to read “Mr. Bukvich also noted that the Springhill and North 19th Avenue will now have two signals, one for the straight-away and the other a turn signal at the intersection of Springhill and US Highway 10 and the other at the intersection of Springhill and North 19th Avenue.” Page 8 – No. 8 – change to read “Mr. Bukvich stated that public meetings are continuing. HKM Engineering is doing the public outreach and preliminary design work. environmental assessment and environmental document.” Rob Buckvich, Page 8 – two signals, one at two signals in that area. One at springill and US 10 and other at Springhill Road and North 19th. No. 8. North Rouse Avenue – HKM doing environmental assessment and environmental document. Not yet to preliminary design. Say public outreach and environmental assessment. Page 9 – No. 9 – change first sentence to read “Mr. White questioned the members as to whether or not there will be a round-about at the intersection of 191 and Huffine Lane Montana 64 (Big Sky spur road) on the way to Big Sky.” Chair Epple announced the minutes are approved as amended. Ralph Zimmer requested that the pages be numbered on future minutes. Item 9 under discussion. Mr. White questioned if roundabout at 191 and Huffine. Talking 191 and MT 64. instead of Four Corners. (Big Sky spur road) Andy – declare approve as corrected. Ralph – would appreciate having pages numbered. Andy – will make sure done for next go round. ITEM 4. TCC MEMBER REPORTS A. Transit Committee Report 1. Transit Partnership 1. Transit Committee Report - Chris Budeski 2. Transit Stop at 9th Avenue/ and Main Street. Chair Epple stated he has received a request for a transit stop in front of the Community Food Co-op. Rob Bukvich stated that a stop at the Food Co-op was identified as important during the scheduling process because it was thought that those who shop at the Co-op would be the main constituency of the bus system. Since there was no space on Main Street to establish a bus stop and since stopping in a traffic lane is not desirable, a stop has been established on West Babcock Street behind the Co-op. Andy – received request for transit stop in front of Co-o9p. Rob Buckvich – prior to the busses startingto run schedule and travel routes, it was important that be stop at Co-op bcause thought main constituency. Established stop on Babcock behind co-op. realize that those routes are somewhat in flux yet. Couldn’t put on Main. No stop and no space. Andy – stop in traffic alne is not desirable? Rob – certainly can say that.Ralph Zimmer stated that, from a pedestrian point of view, it is less desirable to have a stop on the opposite side of the street, particularly for those with handicaps. He then voiced his preference for a stop on West Main Street or on South 9th Avenue. Responding to Chair Epple, Mr. Bukvich reiterated that stopping in a traffic lane is not an option. He then stated the bus route drivers wish to avoid left hand turns, which also precludes a stop on South 9th Avenue with the way the routes are currently configured.Kerry – parkikng for residents in that stp or Co-op frontage loss? Rob – don’t rcall if lost parking or not. Andy – item requested to be put on agenda. Sorry don’t have any other representation and thought process. Ralph – realize maybe no legitimate options but for sensitive options, less desirable to have stop on opposite side of street for pedestrians, particularly those with handicaps. From pedestrian standpoint, preferable to have stop on Main or side street and not on other side of Babcock. Andy – can MDT entertain that or subject to further analysis? Rob – not sure can do anything about having bus stop in traffic lane. No options for that. Routes driven by bus folks and Ralph has good point about people offloading there. But route drivers driven by avoiding left hand turns. Why didn’t want to go up 9th. Only know that drdove them and talked about htem. And how can serve. Know would be nice to have a stop there but no safe way to stop on Main because no shoulder. Transit Partnership. Bill Murdock stated that the Human Resource Development Council (HRDC) is running the transit system. He announced that the system is encountering problems in getting the yellow retro busses ordered, noting that two bids have been thrown out because they don’t meet the State’s requirements. He stated that the timeframe for having the busses in place for the next school year is now very tight. He cited funding as another problem, noting it is very dependent on state highway funding and the subsidies that Gallatin County and the Cities of Bozeman and Belgrade provide. He indicated that the formation of a UTD is still being discussed as an option for providing permanent funding for the bus system. He concluded by stating the Transit Stakeholders Committee is very inactive, and concentrates on day-to-day operational issues when it does meet. Responding to Chair Epple, Bill Murdock stated there is a definite need to encourage the Committee to reactivate itself and move forward with planning for the bus system. He indicated that a secretary from the County Commission office takes the minutes for that Committee, which has not yet accepted the final report from Stoddard. He then suggested this could be the topic of one of the joint City/County Commissions’ 7:00 a.m. meetings. Bill Murdock noted that ridership on the bus system continues to climb; however, he has no statistics to present at this meeting.1. Transit Bill – HRDC basically running system and some problem getting yellow retro busses speced out. Two bids thrown out. To have up and running for next school year, on very tight timeframe. Funding is another problem. If gets expanded to what consultant says would be best system, fundng is very dependent on state highway funding and subsidides from Bozeman, Belgrade and county. Still conversation on forming UTD and possib ly putting question of permanent funding. Right now the district not doing anything with it. Committee focused on getting splashed at bus stops and turns. No one paying attention to it right now. Committee very inactive and dormant right now. Day to day operational issues right now. Andy – is there a need to promote reactivating? Bill – yes. Andy – members? Bill – me, Steve K, Chris Budeski Chair Epple asked if there is a consensus that the TCC should write a letter encouraging the Committee to reactivate itself. Following a brief discussion, Chair Epple indicated he will draft a letter on behalf of the TCC and enlist a couple of the TCC members to collaborate in reviewing and finalizing it. In that letter, he will invite the Committee to attend the next TCC meeting and discuss their issues. Is this letter done or do I need to draft one??? Lee – what’s answer to getting back on track? Should we send letter? Bill – Secrtary from County Commission office takes minutes and Stoddard his work is almost completed but committee hasn’t accepted final report. Maybe should be topic of one of the joint city/county commission 7 am meetings. Andy – such a push to get the busses up and running and was done. Bill M – ridership continues on up climb but no numbers available right now for you. Andy – maybe for spring meeting, do better job prepping reports and try to get someone here. Bill – transit system was one of the highest recommendations in last TCC area planning. Andy – suggestion that write letter, if think would be helpful. But if Mayor and County Comm willing to active. Consensus from TCC to write letter would that be helpful? Lee – lot of public funds being used and certainly we ar responsible for that. Doug McSpadden – s it being held up because not urban? Andy – not factor in this situation. Andy – I’ll draft letter on behalf of TCC to that effect. Enlist one or two of you to review and collaborate. Jeff Krauss noted that the bustle back busses cost $8,500 more than the square back busses. He stated that, since the various local entities agreed to fund six busses, a decision will have to be made on those additional costs. Responding to Chair Epple, Rob Bukvich stated the transit section of the MDT advertised and received the bids for the busses. Chair Epple noted that neither Chris Budeski nor David Kack are members of the Transit Stakeholders Committee. Bob Lashaway suggested that they should be added as members and encouraged to participate in the process. Chair Epple requested that membership be added to the next TCC agenda. Bob Lashaway stated that MSU is preparing a survey for faculty and staff regarding bus ridership and parking on campus. Also, David Kack is working on a survey for the student body to test the student ridership and identify student demographics. He suggested the responses from those surveys may be available for the spring meeting.Jeff K – time to respond to bids. Were there two bids? Bill – third one now. Jeff K. – bussle back busses $8500 more than square back. We agreed to buy six in total so have to make decision on that. Where funding coming from. Andy – who received the bids? Jeff K – the state. Rob B – transit section advertised. Bill M – invitation to Jim Kack would be in order. He would be able to do it. Lee – specifics to be included in letter – attend this meeting and attendance at meeting. Attend or get replaced. Andy – will pump up with encouragement and invite to next meeting and ask to address issues. Bob L – not on committee. Maybe would be good to include on committee now that up and running. Andy – you’re right. Chris B and David Kack were here all of the time and fixtures. Bob L – doing out of good graces and not paid for work. should encourage. Andy – get leter out and Jeff Madden Highway And Membership on enext agenda. Good to see ridership increasing. Bob L – relative to transit, MSU preparing survey for faculty and staff to test responses relative to ridership and parking on campus. Relationship but not specific. Know David working on oen for student body that hope to be out in Feb to test response on student ridership. And student demographics. And one to ask riders to fill out and leave with bus system and one at MSU to send with students. Maybe responses to those for spring meetng. Bill Murdock reported that the transit system is up and running, but the Committee is awaiting the Montana Department of Transportation’s approval of the purchase of the yellow busses. As a result, it is anticipated those busses will not be on line until next summer. Mr. Murdock reported that a connection between Big Sky and Four Corners is anticipated in the next few months. Ridership has increased from 100 to 110 rides per day when the system was started to over 300 rides per day now. This is beyond the Committee’s expectations and without any promotion or signs posted for the stops. He indicated that, while the busses are generally not full, there are times when the bus from Belgrade is full, and it is possible that a larger bus will be put on that route. Responding to David Smith, Bill Murdock stated that the interim system is being driven by HRDC and ASMSU and, until the bugs are worked out of the transit system, including the stops and schedules, they do not want to print schedules or install signs. Ross Gammon reported that Rob Buckvich has been riding the bus occasionally to identify stop locations and see how the system is working. Jeff Rupp presented the report on the new Streamline bus system for Chris Budeski. He stated the application has been finally approved, so the busses can now be purchased. They will not be available for this year’s service, so busses will be leased from Laidlaw, with Laidlaw employees driving those busses. He stressed that these will not be the yellow retro busses, but will be more like the para-transit busses that have been used for the Bobcat transit system. Also, busses are to be borrowed from Yellowstone Park for the summer fair and Sweet Pea. Rob Bukvich reported that during the past couple weeks, City staff and MDT staff have been working to identify stop locations for the bus system that have handicapped accessible curbs readily available. He indicated that efforts will be made to have this process completed when the new bus system is ready to run. Responding to Chair Epple, Rob Bukvich stated that a marketing agency has been retained; and MDT is currently awaiting the logo to order the signs for the bus stops. Responding to Ross Gammon, Jeff Rupp confirmed that there is initially no cost for riding the busses; however, he does not know how long that will remain in effect. Chris B not present. Jeff Rupp – recei ved final approval of application. So can now purchase. Have borrowed from Yellowstone Park for fair and sweet pea. Made commitmentment to MSU to keep open for students. Laidlaw is partner and trying to access inventory for lease for a year. Since long time getting monies for bus. Will not be yellow buses retro. Will be two or three square transit and three more like paratransit like see now. Rob B – City and MDT staff in last couple weeks involved in stop locactions and what need to make bus stops work. Handicapped accessibility curbs. Starting to work so will do what cdan to be ready when system is ready. Andy – so system will be up and running with leased buses and stops as best can. Jfefff – will use as many stops as can. Streamline. Rob B – mostly new. Not many existing that we found. Andy – how will this be marketed? Anyone developing marketing and advertising to get word out to maximize ridership. Rob B – waiting for logo to order signs for bus stop. Have a marketing agency on board. Will be marketing it. Some talk that would start running routes two weeks before taking on passengers. Andy – laidlaw employees? Jeff – yes. Debbie – if have any pull with logo, need to make signs. Andy – sounds like good progress being made. Energy to get going. And will be advertising to get going. Good. Feedback from fair? None. Gammon – part of marketing strategy is no cost for riding? Is that for first year? Jeff – don’t know how long. Andy – one of our members is sight impaired and would be good to have you introduce yourselves for Mr. Zimmer. 2. Transit Partnership B. I-90/East Belgrade Interchange Report – Pat Abelin Pat Abelin reported that the committee is not very active because it has entered the difficult phase of identifying where the money will come from. She stated the County is spearheading a number of government to government meetings, noting that approximately $10 million in additional funding is needed for the project. She also indicated that a Memorandum of Understanding is being developed to identify what entities will be responsible for what road sections. Bill Murdock stated the total estimated cost of the project is $47 to $48 million, including the connector roads, based on current actual bids with escalators. He indicated that, through annexation to Belgrade or county subdivision, it is anticipated that developers will be required to provide right-of-way and build as much of the connector road system as possible. Jeff Ebert indicated that federal monies and earmarked matches total around $20 million. Bill Murdock stated the County is requesting $3 million in cash from the airport and is looking at $4.5 to $5 million between Gallatin County and the City of Belgrade, but that still leaves the project $10 million short. Responding to Kerry White, Bill Murdock stated that Alaska Road will not be constructed in the five-lane format immediately, but will initially be a two-lane road to Valley Center Road initially with expansion to occur when it is determined necessary. Jeff Ebert stated that, while Alaska Road will be only two lanes when the new interchange opens, the right-of-way for the full five-lane facility will be in place. He then indicated the two lanes will be constructed in a manner that precludes the need to tear up any improvements for the future road expansion. Ralph Zimmer voiced concern about the construction of a two-lane road with no curbs. He also asked that the adequate facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists be provided with the initial construction. Jeff Patton stated that facilities accommodating pedestrians and bicyclists are to be provided under the interstate and are included in the environmental assessment. Ralph Zimmer stressed that wonderful future plans for bicyclists and pedestrians are not very satisfactory if they are not available when the first vehicle travels on the roadway. Rob Bukvich stressed the importance of remembering that any plans for the connector roads are preliminary at this time and that details, such as curb, gutter and sidewalk, have not yet been discussed. He indicated there will be adequate time for public comment when the design reaches that point. Andy – paper trumped us with article. Pat A – our committee not very active because think probably gone into difficult phase which is where money comes from. County spearheading number of govt to govt meetings. Important that Belgrade, airport, state know contributions. About $10 millino short right now. Need to know where comes from. Working on MOU to identify what entieis will be responsible for road sections. Waiting to see what happens with negotiations. Bill M – Jeff E could add and Lee P coujld. Where we’re at. MOUs and extra money. Andy – tone of today’s article, too. Bob L – total cost? Bill M -- $47 to $48 million with connector roads. And that’s based on actual bid with escalators. Double what antivipated three years ago. Met with landowners to the south. Maybe over 3,000 prospective lots coming on line there. Marks property. In MOU with Belgrade, either thorugh annexation or county subdivision, developers will provide ROLW and building as much of that as possible. Figuring in the $17 million mix. Jeff E -- Federal and earmarked matchses around $20 million with matches. Bill M – asking for $3 millino cash from airport. And with Belgrade, looing at $4.5 to $5 million between them and county. But still $10 millino short. the committee had an interesting meeting with the Belgrade City Council on Monday night. She noted that the funding sources for the interchange must be identified, particularly since it is estimated to cost $29 to $30 million with the connector roads. She stated that Gallatin County has been considering this issue for a long time, and the City of Belgrade is looking at its sources. She suggested that, with the commercial development made available through the construction of the interchange, seeking private sector assistance seems appropriate. She indicated that, until the funding sources have been identified, the environmental assessment is not moving forward. Kerry White noted it is his understanding that some of the arterials may be included in the County’s capital improvement program and could be eligible for impact fees. Lee Provance reported that the findings of fact for Ryan Glen Subdivision require that development to construct the east bypass in addition to the monetary contribution that was required. Pat Abelin stated the committee is trying to look to the future and ensure that those who may benefit from the development made feasible with the interchange help to pay for it rather than requiring the general public to bear those costs. the EIS is currently on schedule. She noted that cooperation among agencies has been amazing, and she anticipates the final public hearing will be held within the next couple months. She stated the next issue to be addressed is links to the interchange, their locations, funding options, and who will be responsible for building them. She indicated that efforts are being made to have developers participate in the construction of these roads to the greatest extent possible. Lee Provance stated the County anticipates that it will do the lion’s share of the construction. Pat Abelin confirmed that constructing the roads to county standards would be cheaper than building to state standards. Pat – EIS moving right along. Doing ery well on original schedule. Should have final public hearing in nex Responding to questions from JP Pomnichowski, Jeff Ebert stated that Airport Manager Ted Mathis is on the committee and is supportive of the Belgrade interchange and bypass, and is helping to shepherd it through the process. Rob Bukvich indicated that the bypass study is estimated to cost $300,000, and consists of a route through the airport to Dry Creek Road to relieve pressure on Highway 10. Jon Henderson voiced a desire for adequate bicycle/pedestrian facilities through the interchange. Ted Lange reported that he and Doug McSpadden met with County Grants Administrator Larry Watson on a safe trail from Bozeman to Belgrade, and noted that Valley Center Road to Alaska Road seems to be the best alternative. As a result, the airport interchange is an extremely important link. He cited the tunnel for the linear trail along the interstate in Butte as an example of a safe trail component. Rob Bukvich stated that a separate 8-foot-wide path has been proposed for the Valley Center Road project. Responding to Lee Provance, he acknowledged that it is not the 10-foot-wide path generally required by MDT but, in this instance, the Commissioners have convinced MDT that a narrower path would be acceptable given the width of the right-of-way. He noted that, as currently proposed, the MDT would construct the project and the County would accept responsibility for its maintenance. Ralph Zimmer voiced his support for Jon Henderson’s comments, noting that the Pedestrian/ Traffic Safety Committee strongly supports adequate pedestrian and bicycle facilities in conjunction with new construction. He cited a recent opportunity to walk through interchanges in Billings, where there was no provision for pedestrians; and he does not wish to have that occur in this area. C. TSM’s Report Rick Hixson stated there is nothing new to report. He stated that City staff is now waiting for the 2007 update of the transportation plan and its list of TSMs. Responding to Kerry White, Jeff Ebert stated that acquisition of the right-of-way for West College Street at South 19th Avenue will begin when the final plans are ready. D. stated there is nothing to report under this agenda item D. Bozeman Area Bicycleike Advisory Board Jon Henderson stated the Board continues to work with the scoping committee and is pleased that the majority of its comments and recommendations have been included in the final scope. He reported that the Board will meet a week from today to discuss the budget and funding for the transportation plan update. He indicated the Board has become aware that around 2009, the MUSTCD will include a hybrid lane that can be shared with vehicles. He noted the Board will look at those standards as an alternative for lanes on arterial roadways. He concluded by stating the Board has acquired a well-done 8-minute-long video on bicycle and pedestrian use of roadways produced by the Illinois dDepartment of tTransportation in Illinois for driver’s education. He noted a copy of the video is available on the City’s website, and the Board will carry the video to various events and promote it as much as possible. Rich McLane asked that the video be made available on the Police Department’s page as well as the Bike Board’s page. stais anxious to get started on the transportation plan update process. He served on the selection committee and is enthused and encouraged that the consultants forwarded multi-modal approaches. The board is working with the Pedestrian/ Traffic Safety Committee and the Gallatin Valley Land Trust to ensure that everything is addressed and anticipates that recommendations from the larger group will carry more weight. The Board also recommends that the bike lane in the North 7th Avenue connectivity plan be extended beyond the project boundary to Springhill Road. The board is willing to help on negotiations and research as the update progresses. Jon Henderson concluded by noting that a couple of the members have become involved in safe routes to school, which will be funded with CTEP monies. E. Other TCC Member Reports Pedestrian/Traffic Safety Committee (PTSC). Ralph Zimmer reminded the TCC that this is a long-standing committee. He voiced concern that in recent years, the City staff and City Commission have not referred as many items to the Committee for its consideration as they might have. He noted the PTSC welcomes the opportunity to provide input and asked that they be given the opportunity to do so. He concluded by identifying the officers of the PTSC for the upcoming year, noting that a request for input can be forwarded to any of the officers. Ralph Zimmer reported that the Pedestrian/Traffic Safety Committee is working through the summer this year, and is in the process of establishing better working relationships with other groups. David Smith reported that last Friday, the Chamber talked about legislative issues and identified the need for a laundry list of other items, such as potential bond issues. He noted that the unanimous support of the group for a local option gas tax reflects the recognition of transportation infrastructure needs. He concluded the expressing the Chamber’s interest in playing a big role in the transportation plan update. Chair Andrew Epple noted that when the local option gas tax issue surfaced about a year ago, one of the County Commissioners was surprised that the option was available. David Smith characterized the local option gas tax as a user tax and, with the amount of tourism in the area, the result could be to effectively double the monies available for transportation projects. Rob Bukvich noted that the local option gas tax has not yet been utilized in Montana, suggesting that Gallatin County could be the first to do so. No other reports were given ITEM 5. OLD BUSINESS There were no items under this agenda item. A. Draft Huffine Lane Access Management Plan Chair Andy Epple noted that a DVD and documentation on the project were included in the packets for this meeting. Jeff Ebert indicated that, since the traffic engineer is unable to attend this meeting, he will provide an overview of the Huffine Lane study on which the consultant, Short Hendrickson Elliott, is working. Jeff Ebert reminded the TCC that in 1998, Huffine Lane was reconstructed and, for the last several years, the MDT has been working on an access management plan in cooperation with the City of Bozeman and Gallatin County. The roadway is currently a five-lane facility with a center turn lane and no restriction on access;, and this plan is looking at the issues of safety, mobility and access. The study looks at the corridor from Four Corners to the West College Street/West Main Street intersection, taking into consideration that it serves as the gateway from Bozeman to Yellowstone Park, to Norris, and to Belgrade. Jeff Ebert highlighted the access management plan determinations, which suggest a raised median through the entire corridor to restrict full access movements. Under the plan, full turning movements would be provided on a half-mile spacing, with future traffic signals being allowed at those locations, and three-quarter access at quarter-mile spacing. All other accesses would be restricted to right in/right out only. Also, U turns are to be provided about 500 feet in advance of traffic signal locations to allow traffic to change directions; however, those movements may be restricted if a crash history develops. Jeff Ebert stated a key component of the corridor is the development of an auxiliary roadway network parallel to Huffine Lane, similar to the network being developed along Jackrabbit Lane. The recommendation is that developers be required to build those internal roads in conjunction with development along the corridor. Mr. Ebert stated the intent is to get comments on the draft plan and to get TCC buy-in. He noted that the plan will preclude the “willy nilly” installation of improvements, including traffic signals, and will provide a mechanism for the City and County to collect funding for the medians. He indicated that once the TCC and the local governments have bought into the plan, it will be presented to the public for comment. He then indicated a similar access control plan has been developed for Jackrabbit Lane, and several good comments have been received regarding that plan. Responding to Lee Provance, Mr. Ebert indicated that it is anticipated the medians would preclude a number of the T bone crashes that are currently occurring along Huffine Lane. He also suggested the speeds will be slowed with the raised median. He acknowledged that some type of barrier in the center could be considered to prevent crossovers into the wrong lane. Responding to Doug McSpadden, Mr. Ebert affirmed that this access control plan would be incorporated into the transportation plan update. Further responding to Mr. McSpadden, Mr. Ebert stated that the transportation plan looks at establishing a grid system and acknowledged that that system might relieve some of the traffic at the Four Corners intersection. Responding to comments from TCC members, Rob Bukvich stated the blue lines on the renderings simply depict generalized locations for the auxiliary road system, noting the actual locations of those roads will be developer driven. He suggested that tThe auxiliary roads will generally tie into Jackrabbit Lane and Huffine Lane at half-mile increments. Christopher Scott noted concern has been voiced about the problems that a signal at Cobb Hill Road could create, particularly because of the grade of the hill to the east of that intersection, and suggested that lower speeds might help to address those concerns. Jeff Ebert stated that the road grades have not been considered in the access management plan to date, but should probably be included in the plan. Responding to Chair Epple, Mr. Ebert asked that TCC members identify any fatal flaws or other issues of concern. He noted that the MDT staff wanted to make this presentation to the TCC prior to scheduling a public meeting on the draft plan. Responding to Al VanderWey, Jeff Ebert stated the City and the County will be asked to create a special improvement district or a rural improvement district or to possibly earmark impact fees to assist in funding of the median. Chair Epple suggested that incorporating this access plan into the transportation plan update would allow for prioritized allocation of resources for the improvements, noting that no funding commitments will be made until the transportation plan update has been completed. Jeff Krauss noted that if this access plan is in the transportation plan and is eligible for impact fees, then those improvements can be required as development occurs along the corridor. Al VanderWey cautioned that the roads crossing Huffine Lane are not eligible for urban funding, so other sources of funding must be identified. Lee Provance stated the County is currently collecting monies for traffic signals from developers and putting them into an escrow account. He noted that any endorsement of a raised median is a political issuedecision that must be made by the County Commission and City Commission. Christopher Scott suggested that a condition pertaining to funding of a median along Huffine Lane be incorporated into the preliminary plat approvals offor developments along this corridor. Kerry White noted the preliminary design shows road alignments that skirt around conservation easements and questioned if roads are precluded across those easements. Chair Epple noted that the City is seeing development proposals immediately east of the conservation easements, and it is important to know if a grid street system is allowed through the conservation easements or if curvilinear arterial roads will be necessary. He then encouraged a more gridded off-road street network than the one shown on these plans, noting that a curvilinear road system sometimes leads to inefficient use of land. Christopher Scott suggested a conversation with the trust company that oversees the conservation easements to see if roads are allowed through them. Rob Bukvich stressed the main issue is to show there will be connecting streets on both sides of the roadway; however, the location of those roads will not be established until development goes through the County planning process. Kerry – on Page 3 propsoed road east/west north and future road to avoid conservation easement. Don’t recall any need to go around an easement, not precluded. Jeff E – we may have given the consultant that direction. Agree that may be able to eliminate some costs. Andy – seeing development proposals east of conservation easements. We need to know answer in next ten to twelve months. Need to know if can use grid system through conservation easements. Prefer to curvilinear arterial roads. Realize political battle. In general, comment some of the connecting roads deviate from grid pattern. In some instances, may not need to do that. Encourage off road network be a little more gridded. Sometimes inefficient uses of land. Prefer grid wherever possible. Rick Hixson noted the transportation plan update will show the framework for a peripheral road system, and stated that will lay the groundwork for requiring a developer to build the applicable portion of that system. Bob Lashaway suggested that, if there is a desire to preserve the possibility of extending the road system through the conservation easements, the lines on the draft plan should go straight through those areas rather than around them.Chris Scott – suggest conversation with the trust company that oversees the conservation easement to see if roads allowed. Rob Bukvich stressed that this document is not to be formally adopted; rather, it is to be included in the transportation plan update. Rob B – red flag in front of bull when went to public. Wn’t have involvement in wher that road goes, but will be through County planning. Main issue was to show connecting on both sides. Andy Epple cautioned this is a more detailed plan and design than is typically found in the transportation plan and suggested that any specific plan be included as an appendix to avoid the potential for conflicts. Stephen Johnson, Executive Director of the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, voiced his desire to discuss the conservation easements and the land use goals for this area. Andy Epple cautioned that introducing the area road network will detract from the road plan itself, and suggested it may be better to simply show access points and include a brief narrative that the alignment of the roads is to be determined later. There was general consensus from the TCC members. Just drawing attention to the decision.Rick H – the main issue is the trans plan update. Willl show network hope everone can agree on and that everyon will adopt. Framework for peripheral road system. And can tell developer that need to build this portion of this street. Andy – think all of us are in agreement on east/west and north/south connections. And this is conceptual. And bsed on development. Jeff K – if road through easement, city or county would have to do. Bob L – this drawing shows intent is not to go through conservation easement. If want to preserve right to do, should put line straight through. If present to public this way, would be represented as original plan was to go around. Concede now or argue later. Could be problem in future. Andy – would rather see presented as big issue to resolve. Road to avoid conservation easement. If city and county endorse that, we’ll be reminded of it. Rob B – this is not a document to be formally adopted. Just to be included into trans plan update. Rob Bukvich voiced his agreement with eliminating the blue lines on the draft plan that depict the area road network, noting that this discussion has revolved around those lines rather than the traffic signals and medians that are the subject of the access control plan.Jeff E – agree that not adopted. And will fine tune before public meeting. Want to have recognized as future of Huffine to address safety, mobility and access. Andy – considered more detailed plan and design than typically found in trans plan. Be careful not to create conflicts. Specific plan to be referenced and coordinated in plan, maybe as appendix. And say future road may need to avoid conservation area. State is right to say need east/west connection but city and county to enact. Bob L – if want to show public have right to go through, blue line should be changed to go straight and then say could be. Rob B – maybe need to take blue line off. Chris Scott – need to talk to GVLT first and see if allowed. Steven Johnson, GVLT – happy to meet with you about our understanding of law and these easements and since trans plan drives land use, talk about land use goals for this area. Rob B – maybe having blue lines on here is going back over old ground with last update showing grid system. Maybe show grid system that says locations to be determined. Not intent to have fight again, but wanted to show would connect to future system yet to be determined. And showing lines causes to go over b attle again. Andy – introducing the area road network will detract from the road plan itself. Maybe would be better to show access points and brief narrative that roads to be determined later. Leave the trans plan street network to upcoming process and eliminate blue lines except where connect to road. General consensus from the TCC. Kerry – visionary to include. Andy – hear what saying but think better in the trans plan. This is access control study. To show roads not in trans plan is ahead of time. Lee – the portion of Monforton will be abandoned and line through new school. Considerations there. Grid needs to be drawn in the plan and agree on curvilinear thing too. Doesn’t provide well for land use or transportation. Rob B – spent time talking about blue line and the issue is buy in on traffic signals and medians. Andy – agree with that. Responding to Jeff Krauss, Jeff Ebert stated that, as improvements to the highway and development occur, engineering studies will be performed and the result could affect the speed limits. Rob Bukvich stressed that this is simply a study at this time; there is no funding to do the improvements. Chair Andy Epple concluded this item by thanking Mr. Ebert for his presentation. Jeff K – will there be a speed limit reduction once start putting medians in? Jeff E – as part of any improvements to highway and development occurs, can look at engineering study on impacts. And could affect speed. Ross – with the additional development and traffic, will drive some of the speed limits down, especially with traffic signals. Lee – changing driver perception of safe speed to drive is the issue rather than throwing up signs. Jeff K – the medians might drive up the speeds. Lee – tends to slow down the speeds. Jeff K – anything that reduces speed is good. Rob B – this is just a study. No funding to do improvements right now. Kerry W – seeing large parcel improvements in that area that would span probably more than one signal. Compensation from those? Use this as basis for collecting fees? Jeff E – what would like to see. As get further and further from Huffine, don’t have access. Realize might affect two locations. Andy – traffic analyses for each development will be necessary. And may be SID included. Andy – thanks for presentation. B. North 7th Design and Connectivity Plan Andy – this plan has been finalized. Chair Andy Epple noted that the City Commission has adopted this plan. Assistant City Manager Ron Brey reviewed his employment history, noting that, because of this background, he realized throughout the process of developing this plan that it would require endorsement from the Transportation Coordinating Committee and that it includes conflicts with traffic planning documents. He also recognized that several years ago, the Montana Department of Transportation and City of Bozeman butted heads over road designs; however, he noted that in the past decade, the Montana Department of Transportation and the City of Bozeman have worked together on developing unique and different designs. Assistant City Manager Brey noted the impetus for this design was the proliferation of big box development in Bozeman and the identifiable impacts of that development on the North 7th Avenue corridor. In February 2005, the City Commission directed staff to pursue creation of a tax increment financing district to assist in redevelopment of the corridor; and the urban renewal district has now been created. The City retained Winter and Associates to prepare the design plan, and the transportation portion of the plan was sub-contracted to Bob Marvin and Associates, who has prepared other plans for both the Montana Department of Transportation and the City of Bozeman. That plan establishes a character for the North 7th Avenue corridor which replaces the 1960s traffic-oriented strip commercial development and reflects input from a planning committee which was comprised of several business owners and residents in the immediate area. He acknowledged there are points of contention in this plan that need to be resolved. Assistant City Manager Brey quoted from Chapter 12.01 of the transportation plan, noting that passive measures, such as tree-lined streets, boulevards, raised center medians, parking, pedestrian crossings and short building setbacks, tend to slow speeds. He noted that Page 8 of the Design and Connectivity Plan for North 7th Avenue Corridor talks about a 20-mile-per-hour street. He stressed that this is a reference to the actual travel speed and not the posted speed limit. He noted that data collected in 2000 reveals the average travel speed to West Mendenhall Street is less than 15 miles per hour and to West Tamarack Street is 15 to 25 miles per hour. The Assistant City Manager noted that roundabouts are the most dramatic element of the plan. He noted that the West Main Street/North 7th Avenue intersection uses every square foot of right-of-way available and, to accommodate additional traffic in the future, it must undergo a bold and dramatic redesign. Assistant City Manager Brey turned his attention to the proposed street sections, which he acknowledged do not comply with existing standards. He stressed that the current street does not comply with existing standards, and there is no right-of-way to bring it into compliance. He further noted that no one involved in the process wants this street to look like West Oak Street or North 19th Avenue, and suggested that it may be time to look at the existing arterial street standards through the transportation plan update process. The Assistant City Manager noted that the City and the owners along North 7th Avenue want to work with the Montana Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration to develop a streetscape that meets the desires of the community while ensuring the safety of those using or crossing the street. – have been ACM since 1990 and from 1987 to 1990 in planning and 1984 to 1987 was urban planner at MDT. Throughout the planning process for the plan, were aware of the need for endorsements, etc, for this. Thinkgs in here in conflict with books and causes stress and strain were done with eyes wide open, and took with perspective of how the relationship has evolved. Had previously dealt with ridig MDT and federal. More than willing to work over last decade tohelp us to unique and different. Main Street Bozeman. For years the City butted heads to make friendly pedestrian corridor. More recently, MDT came up with design to do what City has asked for and City walked way. Maybe not best thing after all. The give and take wehave now. Won’t talk about the time and effort spent on the plan andpublic input. Assistant City Manager Brey stated the design plan calls for parking in the rear and internal circulation systems between private parcels. He noted that when the consultant presented this plan to the Planning Board, he got a round of applause and, while the approvals were unanimous, everyone acknowledged that there issues yet to be resolved.Impetus for this. Seeing proliferation of big box devel;pment in Bozeman and City felt identifiable economic impacts. Set up big box task force to identify impacts and if should use funding from them to help. At that time, half to affordable housing and other half to assist with infrastructure in existing Bozeman. Referenced over and over was North 7th. And West Main was also qualify. In Feb 2005 the Commission directd staff to created TIF. Now urban renewal area. Funds can be captured and reinvested. Limit on how reinvedsted and is to be toward infrasatrucutre improvements. Not totall reliant on standard sources. The Commission authorized use of big box funds. Establish character for North 7th rather than traffic oriented 1960s strip. Commercial development with big parking ltos. Want charcter and vitality of its own. Retained Winter and Associates and established planning committee. And Winter did design objectives plans for Bozeman. And sub-contrated traffic to Bob Marvin & Associates. So trans elements that causing consternations were done by someine with long history with Dept and City. Public workshops. Specific things in the plan. Consultant stayed tied with adopted provisions. Where points of contention, acknowledgement that need to be resolved. Chapter 12 01 trans plan. Passive measures – examples tree lined streets, boulevards, raised center medians, parking, pedestrian crossings, short building setbacks. Each tends to slow speed. Those were used by consultant. Principal arterial but address congestion, bicycle safety and pedestrian safety. Rob Bukvich characterized the plan as detailed and thoughtful, with a lot of opportunities to look for solutions. He then voiced his desire to accommodate parking and bicycle lanes, and he likes the landscaping. He acknowledged that lane widths are an issue to be addressed. Assistant City Manager Brey noted that the 10-foot lane widths were the last issue to be resolved; and that was the only way that bicycle lanes could be accommodated on a portion of the roadway. He then suggested the new shared lane option may alleviate some of the concerns.Issues of concern from TCC. Page 8. plan for 20 mph on street. Language says slow to 20. always talking about travel speed and not posted speed limit. Less restrictions, less obstructions and more safety. Went back to speed and delay study. Data collected in 2000. average speed to mendenhall less than 15 and to tamarack 15 to 25. so if take into account when look at 20 mp in corridor, not a large adjustment. Second, roundabouts. Most dramatic element of plan. Way approaches it, first is Main and 7th. Intersection right now uses every square foot of ROW available. At 20 30 or 50 percent of volume. Bold and dramatic redesign however done. Page 10. Area A, first phase includes enhanced crosswalks, detailed engineering study to address traffic flow and esign of roundabouts. More carefully delineates traffic lanes and crosswalks. ROW takes are huge for those. Next one was signage. Page 25. lot of emphasis. Was to be design and connectivity study. Show ways this portion of the community relates to others and not just arterial corridor. Conventional signage scheme that tied with downtown MSU and other areas. No intent to get into the street. Will comply. Last one is why would plan propose street sections that don’t comply with existing standards. Can’t address 10 or 11 foot lanes. Current street doesn’t compy with existing standards and no ROW to make it. And frankly, no one involved that wanted it to look like Oak or 19th. Suggesting that through trans plan update, time for us to take look at existing arterials and what want to have happen and come up with another street standard that accommodates design intentions. Also, today heard about new tools. Possibility of opportunity for combined lane. May be opportunities from desgign standards. Bottom line, couple places in plan. Page 6, statement that community participation is imperative. Page 9 to acheve street section will require coordinateion with MDT. What’s important is that went in with eyes wide open. Want to work with MDT and federal highway admin t get the type of landscape in palce without impacting the engagement. Want tio get across the street saely. Don’t want to impact safety. Where these things are possible, becomes operating manual. In most places where doesn’t hwere need to go to work. not just street sections. Calls out parks. Where city doesn’t own parkland. Revised rout for Darigold where don’t have ROW. Advocacy document. Don’t have anything going on on North 7th to do with internal circulation on 7th. This calls for parking in rear. Interla circulation systems between private parcels. While lot impede traffic flows, additional things to assist. Plan has een received like nothing else I’ve seen in Bozeman. When presented, consultant got round of applause at Planning Baor. The approvals were unanimous although everyone acknowledged that had things to be rsolved. What everyone wanted to see for 7th. Rob B – I’ve gone through this whole thing with minimal involvement. Aisde from lane widths, don’t see anything compatible with way do business. Wil lconsider roundabouts for everything. MUSTD is state law. Want to accommodate parking and bike lanes and like landscaping. No speaks about specific traffic lane widths. Looked through plan in detail and thoughtful and lot of opportunities to look at solutions. Ron – the 10-foot lane widths were last to be resolved. If to have bike lanes, how got in. don’t know if shared lane becomes option. Jeff Ebert voiced his agreement with Rob Bukvich’s comments. He noted that when the plan was first released, a lot of misinformation was given to the Montana Department of Transportation, and they reacted to that information. He stated the 10-foot-wide lanes were of extreme consternation as well as the roundabout at the intersection of West Main Street and North 7th Avenue. He stressed that roadways under the State’s jurisdiction cannot be designed to eliminate use by trucks. He then asked for clarification on the road design to be used across I-90, noting that the MDT is planning a reconstruction of that interchange and it is important that the design be coordinated with the North 7th Avenue corridor plan. Responding to Mr. Ebert, Assistant City Manager Brey stated the bike lane is to continue northward along North 7th Avenue, extending beyond the boundary of the Design and Connectivity Plan for North 7th Avenue Corridor. Jeff Ebert stated he recognizes the street design does not meet what MDT would like to see, but he also acknowledges those involved in developing the plan do not want to seen another West Oak Street or North 19th Avenue. Jeff E – agree with Rob. When first came out, lot of misinformation given State and we reacted off the bat. Notice 10foot lanes were severe consternation with reard to corridor. One of the concerns have is use of roundabuts at Main and another. Is it the desire of this plan to. Dairgold trucks. One of our things is make sure design roadways that are under state jurisdiction can’t be designed to eliminate use of trucks. Not sure how many would use Main and 7th intersection right now. Roundabout would have to be looked at in design. Question – it specifiallly shows on page 9 area b and C over I-90. is that by design? As may know have reconstruction of that interchange in works. Heard loud and clear need provisions for bike and pededstrian on both side and travel lanes. No problems if that is specifically excluded form plan for that reason. Ron – don’t recall anything on vehicular portion of overpass. Page 17 says improvements to be considered. Jeff E – haven’t addressed with our project. Ron – bike lane continues all of the way out. And the overpass was an issue when looking at a waterslide out there. Responding to Bob Lashaway, Assistant City Manager Brey stated the North 7th plan has been adopted, and stressed that the transportation plan update is where the roadway design issues must be resolved. Jeff E – pretty up on plan as is. Recognize doesn’t meet what would want out there and recognize don’t want an Oak or 19th. So can shut mouths. Chair Andy Epple noted the North 7th Avenue plan is not the major focus of the transportation plan; rather, that document focuses on identifying new corridors and the standards for collectors and arterials. He suggested it should provide for a new arterial standard in a developed urban setting. Responding to Al VanderWey, Assistant City Manager Brey stated the urban renewal plan for North 7th Avenue has been adopted, and it gives that agency the local authority to be involved with all infrastructure plans. Kerry White stressed the importance of the City working with the State to find a standard that can be incorporated into the transportation plan update that will work for this corridor as well as others in the community.Andy – thanks to Ron for this presentation. Bob L – do you expect trans plan update to endorse this plan or is to approved and trans plan bound to work with it? Ron – this has become adopted policy. Where doesn’t where work with sleeves rolled up begins. Trans plan is place where those issues get resolved. Want this to be vision for that street section brought to the table. Lee Provance noted the corridor plan is an attractive one, but he has a big problem with the 10-foot-wide travel lanes. He expressed concern about the functionality of those narrow lanes and the ability to remove snow with a 12-foot-wide blade. He further cautioned that a large truck will not be able to stay within a 10-foot-wide lane, and the result will be crushing cars or taking mirrors off passing vehicles. He also questioned why, in Area C of the corridor, the travel lanes are 14 feet and 11 feet instead of two 12-foot-wide lanes. Assistant City Manager Ron Brey acknowledged there are competing values at work, but stressed the biggest is safety. Chair Andy Epple concluded this agenda item by thanking Assistant City Manager Brey for his presentation and the opportunity to comment on the plan.Andy – North 7th plan not major focus of trans plan. It focuses on identifying new corridors, collectors, standards for new facility development. Need to work with consultant on recognition that standard for new arterial ighway not necessarily standard in developed urban setting. But anticipate plan will recognize the adopted 7th plan. Al Van – do you foresee projets we might include in the plan being identified in conjunction with oversight from connectivyt plan? Ron – we’ve adoptd an urban renewal plan for North 7th. It gives that ageny the local authority to e involved withal those kinds of plans for infrastructure and the 7th plan adoptes trans plan. Kerry – state under certain regulation they control. Looking fo new standard to be adopted to accommodate this. City needs to wrok with State in finding standard and could be incorporated as new street standards in plan and could be included for others as well. Andy – agree. And rcognition needs to be urban developed aras. Lee – attractive plan but big problem with 10-foot lane. Functionality and snow removal with 12-foot blade. And truck won’t be able to stay in the 10-foot lane so crushing cars or taking off mirrors. Type of design you have, good idea to discourage truck traffic to some degree but can’t preclude it. Area C don’t understand why 14-foot and 11-foot travel lane side by side instead of 12-foot lanes. Ron – Bob Marvin addressed that and can’t remember explanation. Semis in 10-foot lanes. Biggest trouble is south end. Had some residents and mainstays were business onwners who get merchandise from semis. And allow Darigold on 7th. Competing values. Biggest is safety. Lee – the roundabout on Baxter. 12-foot lane but trucks cannot make it around that without driving on sidewalk. Issue. Can touch curb on one side and rear tires go over sidewalk. Ron – at one point in this process, Bob was suggesting that roundabout be a full block configuration. To get work for semis, ROW take is huge. C. Other Old Business No items were raised under this agenda item. A. Status of Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2006 Update Chair Andrew Epple stated that Planning staff took the lead in putting together the request for proposals and anticipated they would manage the contract for the transportation plan update. Because of the workload in his department, however, that responsibility has been transferred to the Engineering Division; and Bob Murray will be the administrator of the project. Rick Hixson announced that the deadline for proposals has passed, and the following three proposals were received: PBS&J, Robert Peccia & Associates, and HKM Engineering. Copies of those proposals will be sent out to the selection committee for review, after which interviews will be conducted, a firm selected, and a scoping meeting held. Al Vanderwey cautioned that, before the contract for the consultant can be signed, the funding must be assured; and Gallatin County has not yet budgeted monies for it. He then cautioned that the State cannot put monies toward the plan until the contracts have been signed. Christopher Scott stated the County’s budget will be approved in mid-August, and it appears the funding is in it at this time. Chair Epple noted that once the update process begins, the TCC will probably need to meet monthly to review draft documents and make policy decisions. B. Establish Temporary Appointment to TCC to represent the Safe Trails Coalition during the 2006 Transportation Update Process Chair Andrew Epple noted that this issue was discussed at the last meeting, but no formal action could be taken at that time because it was not an agenda item. Rob Bukvich voiced his preference for charging the consultant with the requirement to meet with various pedestrian and bicycle groups, particularly since there are several unrelated groups interested in those facilities. He suggested that would be preferable to having only one or two selected groups on board for the update process. Jon Henderson agreed that having consensus within the groups would be good. Responding to questions from Chair Epple, Bob Lashaway voiced preference for making the position a voting position. It was moved by Debbie Arkell, seconded by JP Pomnichowski, that a representative from the Safe Trails Coalition be appointed to serve as a temporary voting member of the Transportation Coordinating Committee during the transportation plan update process. The motion carried. C. Other Old Business No additional business was submitted under this agenda item. ITEM 6. NEW BUSINESS A. Transportation Plan Update Status No items were submitted under this agenda item. 1. Consultant Selection Process and ResultsFinal Scope of Services Chair Andy Epple stated the sub-committee is still in the process of finalizing the scope of services with the selected engineering firm, Robert Peccia and Associates. He reported the initial scope resulted in a preliminary budget estimate of almost double the amount budgeted, so the sub-committee has been working with the consulting engineer to pare down the scope without completely gutting the intent of the plan. He noted the budget endorsed by the City and the County was $160,000, and the engineer’s estimate for the plan under the initial scope is $360,000. He stated that the revised scope of services has resulted in a $220,000 estimate. Responding to Ralph Zimmer, Jon Henderson identified some of the items that were eliminated, including coordination of safe routes to school, a couple of community charettes, and some other fairly incidental items; and noted that he is happy with the revised scope of services. He then indicated that a week from today the issue of funding the difference is to be discussed, and the Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board had expressed an interest in providing funding to cover some of the difference. Responding to Rob Bukvich, Jon Henderson stated there is not a transit element in the scope of service, just an acceptance of the current system. Chair Andy Epple stated that a final scope of services will be distributed for TCC consideration at its April meeting. He then indicated the sub-committee is concerned that the result would be a diminished product if the scope of services is reduced much further; rather, the preferred alternative is to fund the difference. – sub-committee is still in process of finalizing scope of services with selected engineering firm. Initial scope of services resulted in preliminary budget estimate of almost double the budget. So your committee has worked with consulting engineer to pare that down without completing gutting intent of the plan. Lot of wish list things in scope. Budget endorsed by city and county was $160,000 and engineer estimate was $360,000. committee reviewing a revised scope of services eliminating some of the things that were costly and dnow to $220,000 now for estimate. Better position to report in April. Firm is Peccia and Associates. Ralph Z – work in progress. Will it be finished in April? If so, opportune time for guidance to sub-committee. Any idea what has been cut out? Andy – didn’t bring draft with adjustments. Not prepared to present right now. Jon Henderson – one was coordination with safe routes to school. Also a couple charettes proposed in addition to initial draft. From my perspective, went through with fine tooth comb. Still very happy with outcome. Majority were fairly incidental. Bob L – sounds like lot more to cutg? Jon – discussing a week from today the possibility of funding to make up difference. BABAB interested in providing funding to help but may be additional cuts. Responding to Ralph Zimmer, Chair Epple confirmed that the entire Transportation Coordinating Committee will have the opportunity to review the final scope of services and contract before it is signed. Agenda item for April??? Rob B – is there a transit element in this scope of work? Jon – nothing to analyze the system. Just accept what’s here today. Andy – will distribute final draft for TCC consideration in April. Other funding sources – state has committeed $60,000 and City/Counhty hve committed $100,000. feel diminished product if reduce much further. Don’t see getting down to $160,000 and getting project. Ralph Z – so entire TCC will be given chance to reaview before final and contract signed? Andy – yes. By-Laws Discussion JP Pomnichowski requested that this discussion be continued to the next meeting. Following a brief discussion, Ross Gammon asked that this item be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. C. B. Other New Business No business was raised under this agenda item. 1. South 19th Avenue and South 19th Avenue/West College Street intersection projects Jeff Ebert noted that during the transportation construction program update last week, the Montana Department of Transportation discussed urban priorities and projects, specifically the South 19th Avenue reconstruction and the South 19th Avenue/West College Street intersection improvements. He stated that during the last legislative session, $5 million was earmarked for these projects, less takedowns; and it is his understanding that Bozeman wishes to utilize urban funds to make up any shortfall in the costs of these projects. He stated that a review of the files did not reflect any documentation that that was the TCC’s desire. Debbie Arkell noted it is her recollection that the TCC passed lists of project priorities for urban funds and for CMAQ funds, but she recognizes the importance of making the City’s priority projects very clear. She then stated she is confident that the costs will exceed the monies available. It was moved by Jeff Ebert, seconded by Debbie Arkell, that the TCC reconfirm its urban priorities for the South 19th Avenue reconstruction and South 19th Avenue/West College Street intersection improvements. The motion carried. 2. North 7th Avenue connectivity plan Debbie Arkell reported that on Monday night, the Bozeman City Commission finally adopted the connectivity plan for North 7th Avenue, which is part of the tax increment financing district recently created. She recognized that this plan has not been submitted to the TCC for review, even though it does include transportation improvements along the North 7th Avenue corridor from West Main Street northward beyond the viaduct. She indicated one of the key components of the plan is three different street designs, one from West Main Street to West Beall Street, one from West Beall Street to West Oak Street, and one from West Oak Street to the north end of the project. The adopted design includes 10-foot-wide driving lanes, which does not comply with the existing transportation plan, the growth policy or the unified development ordinance standards. She then requested that this issue be discussed at the next TCC meeting. Chris Saunders noted that, not only does the plan section not follow current specifications; the street itself does not follow current specifications because the right-of-way is narrow and is subject to physical constraints. He characterized this as part of the balance between current standards and existing conditions. Debbie Arkell noted the City’s engineering staff has come concern with the 10-foot-wide driving lanes since North 7th Avenue is heavily commercialized and several of the businesses are served by semi trucks. Responding to Kerry White, Jon Henderson noted that there is a bike lane along the entire length of the project, although some parking may be restricted and the planned median may need to be removed. Responding to Rich McLane, Chris Saunders stated the travel lane is normally 11 or 12 feet wide on primary arterials. He then indicated the key issue is sharing of lanes, which is possible on lower volume streets. Chris Kukulski noted the narrower lanes are accompanied by a bike lane, which provides additional space for turning radii. He then acknowledged that in the connectivity plan, the roadway is rated as a 20-mile-per-hour road, which is based on the length of time it actually takes to get from West Main Street to the interstate. David Smith voiced his discomfort with the 10-foot-wide lanes in this major commercial corridor. He then questioned how a plan that does not meet City standards can be approved. He also expressed his disapproval of bringing the buildings to the sidewalk. Responding to questions from David Smith, Chris Kukulski acknowledged that the proposed plan does not have the unanimous support of the business community; however, the business core was heavily involved in development of the plan. He asked that the TCC look at this plan holistically rather than at individual controversial components and further asked that a battle not be created between the transportation side and the economic side of the corridor. JP Pomnichowski stated the plan does a good job of promoting good traffic flow. Lee Provance stated that a 12-foot-wide driving lane has been the national standard for a long time and is viewed as safe. He noted that people are not used to driving in narrow lanes, and he is concerned that the result will be safety problems. Further, he stressed that many plans do not work in snow country and voiced his concern that the problems will be compounded with the plowing of snow. He concluded by stating he does not find that this is a good plan for public safety. Kerry White voiced his agreement with Mr. Provance’s comments, characterizing the plan as a safety issue. Sara Folger stated she lives in the neighborhood, which has a large number of low-income people and people with disabilities, so much of the travel is by foot or wheelchair. From a pedestrian or bicyclist point of view, North 7th Avenue is a dangerous street. She stated forcing neighborhood people to accept a plan that favors 18 wheelers will not sit well and asked that the area residents be given consideration as this plan is reviewed. Chris Saunders noted that North 7th Avenue is primarily designed as a highway, and the question is whether the business people want slower lanes with more visibility, like Main Street, or the ability for motorists to fly through the corridor. He stated the narrower lane will cause traffic calming, but acknowledged that maintenance will be an issue. Chris Kukulski asked that the TCC be careful about its assumptions and that it not become overly emotional in its decisions. He stressed that both five-lane main streets and pedestrian malls utterly fail, and noted that a careful balance is critical to the success of the corridor. Jeff Ebert stated that from the State’s standpoint, the only project for North 7th Avenue is the seismic inadequacy of the North 7th Avenue interchange. That project is in the preliminary design phases and will include adequate pedestrian and bicycle facilities. He indicated the MDT will review this plan and try to incorporate those concepts into the design of its project. He concluded by noting that urban funds are the only monies available for the North 7th Avenue corridor, and the blessing of federal highways will be required for the expenditure of those monies. He then thanked Debbie Arkell for bringing this issue forward and voiced his interest in discussing it further. Ross Gammon asked that further discussion of the North 7th Avenue corridor plan be placed on the agenda for the next TCC meeting. ITEM 7. PROJECT UPDATES - Discussion only as needed MSU Projects Update Bob Lashaway indicated he has nothing to report – nothing at this time. Chris Saunders stated that he attended one of the planning sessions for the campus-wide master plan He encouraged TCC members to look at the website for this project and to provide input. Belgrade Projects Update – Jeff Ebert indicated that the MDT continues to work on the acquisition of right-of-way for Valley Center Road; and there is nothing new to report. – still working on VC ROW acqusisiont. Nothing new. Jeff Ebert stated the Main Street/Jackrabbit Lane project is completed. Jeff Ebert turned his attention to the Valley Center project, noting that acquisition of right-of-way is underway for both projects. An update of construction plans for the next five years was given at last week’s Transportation Commission meeting, and improvements from the interstate to Love Lane are included. The issues are the 30 to 40-percent increase in costs and the legislative directive to maximize recouping of overhead costs, which is 11 percent. In light of those changes, the project has been moved from 2007 to 2009, based on the monies available for secondary roads. He indicated that acquiring right-of-way and relocating facilities will continue as originally planned in anticipation that grab bag monies may become available. Lee Provance noted that the entire project was initially estimated at $3 million; the estimate for the first half is now estimated at $5.4 million. Jeff Ebert stated that Bozeman is in the lowest allocation of the five districts in the state, and indicated that this project will be readied for any potential additional funding. CTEP Projects Andy Epple indicated there is nothing new to report, noting that staff continues to work on projects that have been in the pipeline for – nothing new. Work continues on projects in works for several years. is about to wrap up the Soroptimist Park project; bids for the Library site rail/trail project are to be opened on Monday; work will be undertaken this winter to get a consultant for the West College Street/Huffine Lane pathway project; and steps are being taken to move the East Willson School reproofing project forward. South 19th Avenue – Main Street to Kagy Boulevard Jeff Ebert reported that several individuals, including City staff members, attended a public meeting on this project. He noted that a number if issues were raised that Department personnel will look at, including additional amenities and a design that ensures “grandma can cross the street”. He indicated that the MDT will possibly meet with the City Commission on February 8 to discuss this project, noting that it is currently scheduled for a February 2008 bid letting. He reported that the MDT is currently working on appraisals and acquisition of right-of-way and the installation of a traffic signal at the fire station which interconnects with the other signals along South 19th Avenue. – public meeting held. Several individuals were present. Staff and Rick and Debbie. Several individuals form public. Although copeting with MSU basketball game. Overall, heard things needed to look at. Additional amenities. Making sure grandma can cross the streetRob Bukvich announced the department is in the process of advance right-of-way acquisition, in preparation for the scheduled June 2007 bidding. He indicated there are right-of-way issues involving Dr. Rogers’ property along West College Street; and if those issues can be resolved without much redesign, it should be possible to remain on schedule. Provide refuge in middle of medians to provide ability for safer crossing. Lighting. Similar to further out. At stage can’t make wholesale bunch of changes but willing to sit down. Potential meeting Feb 8 with City Commission. Bring in consultant or MDT staff. And maybe federal highways come in as well. Jeff Patton. And if can provide. Scheduled for Feb 08 letting. Acquiring ROW. Worked out issues with fire station. Put in a traffic signal to interconnect with signals. Activate to allow fire truck to get out onto 19th. Flks beginning appraisals for ROW acquisition and then negotiations will start. Chair Epple yielded the gavel to Vice Chair Ross Gammon took overand left the room. cautioned that inability to successfully resolve the issues with the Dr. Rogers property could potentially be a show stopper. He noted Dr. Rogers feels the street should be realigned and that the right-of-way should be acquired from MSU. He cautioned that shifting the alignment of West College Street affects the City’s options for that street in the future. He also noted that shifting the alignment to the south will affect MSU property both east and west of South 19th Avenue. Responding to Chair Epple, Mr. Ebert stated that, whether the roadway is shifted or not, it will be necessary to acquire some right-of-way from Dr. Rogers. Responding to Debbie Arkell, Rob Bukvich stated the West College Street legs of the intersection are to include four lanes: a right turn lane, a straight through lane, a left turn lane, and a straight through lane in the opposite direction. He cautioned that these improvements are essential before South 19th Avenue can be improved between West Main Street and Kagy Boulevard. Further responding to Debbie Arkell, Jeff Ebert noted that both the West College Street and South 19th Avenue improvement projects must be designed at the same time and then constructed at essentially the same time. He indicated that the $5 million earmarked for this project is available until it is expended. He cautioned that, while Congress has earmarked those monies, it is important to remember the federal highway administration has “takedowns” that amount to approximately 12 percent, which are deducted from the amount appropriated for a specific project. Further, legislation adopted during the last legislative session provides that the State utilize the maximum amount of overhead for the processing and use of FAU monies. He cautioned that these deducts from the appropriation will result in the necessity to use more urban funds for projects. Mr. Ebert noted that the department is working hard on the improvements to the intersection of West College Street and South 19th Avenue since it has been identified as one suffering from congestion and air quality issues. The design and construction costs for this intersection have been estimated at $3 million, and he will request that additional CMAQ funds be earmarked for this project. He then estimated that the two projects will total $6 million. Sara Folger stated discussions with the head of the CTEP Bureau have revealed that after 2008, approximately 15 percent of the allocation will be taken for administration. 5. North 19th Avenue/Valley Center Project Debbie Arkell reported that this project is substantially complete and can now be removed from the list. She indicated that once all of the construction is complete, the speed limit will be set at 40 miles per hour, based on the results of a recent speed study. David Smith announced that the ribbon cutting for this project is set for August 17 at the rest area. Chair Andrew Epple noted this project has opened the doors for businesses to construct and has allowed traffic to move better. 6. Signal Projects a. Willson Avenue/ College Street Jeff Ebert noted that the MDT had a consultant from Florida look at the possibility of a smaller roundabout at the South Willson Avenue/West College Street intersection after it was determined the original design would require the purchase of additional right-of-way, and found it would also require additional right-of-way. He stated the Department is now looking at two different alternatives for a traffic signal as well as two alternatives for a roundabout, and indicated that the MDT will try to have a new design ready for review by the City in February or March. Mr. Ebert announced that design for the traffic signal improvements has revealed that additional right-of-way will be required; however, additional design is needed to determine how much right-of-way is needed and how it compares to the amount needed for a roundabout. – internal MDT meting. As previously misstated if put in traffic signal, will require purchasing ROW. So need to progress furthetr in design to determine what impacts are. Had the consultant from Florda to look and stated possibly could be smaller roundabout int hat location. Appeared would require more ROW to be purchased. So now looking at four different alternatives. Two with signal and two with roundabout. Will try to get design in Feb or March and back to staff within city and making recommendation on what finding with the new design. New thing is found traffic signal requies purchasing ROW so changed argument on roundabout. Need to proceed further with design. Didn’t have environmental document done. Two signal options, one where large WB50 truck and bus on how would utilize intersection. Bottom line is back to city and explain where we are at. Responding to questions from Bob Lashaway, Jeff Ebert stated the environmental assessment must be revised since it did not initially identify the need for additional right-of-way for the traffic signal. He indicated that, when the information is available, it will be presented to the City Commission for consideration. Bob L – another round of public meetings or back to Commission? Jeff E – right now, our understanding is Commission would like roundabout. One of the drawbacks was environmental document said didn’t need ROW for singal. Have to modify environmental document. Want to do more design so when come before you know better where we are at with respect to whether have to buy ROW and how much. Also have made commitment to look at what smaller roundabout would accommodate trucks. So comparing similar items. Andy back.Chair Epple returned and assumed the gavel. gave a brief history of this project, noting that Robert Peccia & Associates was hired to help with the environmental analysis, which looked at the effects of a traffic signal and a roundabout. Because of the necessity to acquire right-of-way for a roundabout, that option was deemed to have an adverse effect on the historic nature of the area. In light of that determination, the MDT made the decision, which was concurred in by the State’s Historic Preservation Office, that the traffic signal is the option to be selected. The issue now is the type of traffic signal that will meet the City’s request that it reflect the historic character of the neighborhood. He noted the City will be asked to select the design of the signal, noting the department will then use that same fixture when it updates the signals along Main Street. Responding to Commissioner Jeff Rupp, Jeff Ebert stated that the City Commission’s direction was that if a roundabout was determined to not be an option, then the department was to proceed with a traffic signal. Responding to Bob Lashaway, Jeff Ebert stated that if the Commission does not support MDT’s plan, they will walk away from the project. He cautioned, however, that if the project is stopped at any point now, the City will be responsible for paying back the costs associated with the no build option. Chair Andrew Epple asked that an estimate of the City’s obligation under the no build option be provided in conjunction with the final report, so the Commission can understand the costs involved with that decision. Rick Hixson voiced his frustration that the City was not previously informed of the costs associated with the no build option. He noted that, if that had been known, it might have affected his division’s submittal of the application for nomination. Bob Lashaway asked if the TCC should take a stand on this issue, particularly since it has been supportive of the project. Rich McLane, Bozeman Police Department, acknowledged that the residents in the immediate area do not support the installation of a traffic signal; however, many residents of the community do. Also, statistics reveal this intersection is not safe. JP Pomnichowski noted one of the area residents has indicated behind the scenes that she does support the installation of a traffic signal, particularly since it would provide an interruption in traffic flow that would allow her to safely maneuver into and out of her residence. She noted that she has been awaiting a solution at the intersection of South Willson Avenue and West College Street since she was a college student crossing the street. She suggested that a traffic signal is the most predictable system for both drivers and pedestrians, noting that she does not support the roundabout in light of the MDT’s analysis and the fact that three of the property owners do not want to give up property for its installation. Rob Bukvich noted that the no build option has always been on the table, and noted that when the Commission supported the project, that line was crossed and the requirement for payback was triggered. It was moved by Bob Lashaway, seconded by JP Pomnichowski , that the Transportation Coordinating Committee send a letter reconfirming its support for resolving safety enhancements at the intersection of South Willson Avenue and West College Street in recognition of the safety issues and lack of level of service. Responding to Christopher Scott, Rob Bukvich stated the stop sign option was rejected because of the disparity in the levels of traffic on the various legs of the intersection. Ross Gammon stressed that this is a safety issue only. He encouraged the TCC to recommend the installation of a traffic signal, if that is their preference, rather than taking a softer approach to the issue. Lee Provance voiced his concurrence, noting that the TCC should strongly support the traffic signal option if that is the only viable option to address the safety issues. Jeff Rupp stated he feels it is wise for the TCC to provide input to the City Commission. The following substitute motion was placed on the floor: It was moved by Ralph Zimmer, seconded by JP Pomnichowski, that the Transportation Coordinating Committee go on record as recommending installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of South Willson Avenue and West College Street, based on the outcome of the study of this intersection. The substitute motion was accepted by the Transportation Coordinating Committee, with Jeff Rupp abstaining. The motion on the substitute motion then carried, with Jeff Rupp abstaining. Ralph Zimmer noted that rarely does change in intersection controls totally solve a problem; rather, it often results in a different type of accidents. He cautioned that the question which a traffic engineer and the decision makers face is whether the benefits of the change outweigh its penalties. b. Other Street lights and traffic signal along South 19th Avenue. Lee Provance voiced concern that a traffic signal has been installed on South 19th Avenue at West Graf Street and is now operational even though it does not meet warrants. He noted this is a three-legged intersection where the side street is seldom used, particularly in the winter. He asked that it be deactivated or put on flash until development is occurring. Jeff Ebert stated that the latest correspondence from the City of Bozeman to MDT indicated that the City does not like to see traffic signals on flash because of a recent pedestrian death at a signal on flash. He noted that, if requested to do so, the MDT would look at the issue. Lee Provance noted the County still maintains that section of South 19th Avenue and indicated he will request that the signal be deactivated until it meets warrants because it currently detracts from traffic safety. Rob Bukvich noted part of the issue is that construction workers park along West Graf Street so that the video detection equipment sees the vehicles and turns the traffic signal red for South 19th Avenue. He suggested that the construction workers be asked to park so that they do not trigger the signal. Lee – south 19th by lifeless swans, the big lights. You stalled traffic signal that doesn’t meet warrants. Three legged intersecgtion seldome used, especially in winter. Can you deactivate or put on flash on Graf red. As bad as has been for ice, would be wonderful. Jeff E – we’re under impression, last correspondene from City is would not like to see traffic signals on flash because of pedestrian death. If could get request to do that, would consider it. Was done because later on this spring, portrayed to us would meet requirements and edeveloper put signal in. and because of construction traffic in spring and then warrant. Lee – we still maintain that section. Certainly ask to deactivate until meets warrants. Rob B – issue is video detection on side lane and construction folks are parking so detected so that turns read. If could get them to not park there, would not turn red. Lee – until warranted should be deactivated because detracting from safety. Lee Provance cautioned that concrete requires a 14 to 21-day cure time before trucks can travel on it. Jeff Ebert stated that the milling and overlay can be done fairly quickly; the concrete crosswalks, ADA ramps, and signal replacements are the components that will take the time. Rich McLane asked if the traffic signal at East Main Street and Church Avenue is to be part of the project; Joe Olsen responded that it is. Rich McLane noted that bicycles on the sidewalk are a current problem and asked if anything can be done about that issue; Debbie Arkell indicated she will see if signage can be done. noted that Lowes is being required to install a left turn arrow on the traffic signal at the intersection of North 19th Avenue and Baxter Lane. She asked if the Montana Department of Transportation would be willing to determine whether that left turn arrow can wait or if it needs to be installed before that business opens; Jeff Ebert indicated a willingness to do so. (OVER) 76. North Rouse Avenue Rob Bukvich stated there is nothing new to report at this time. Tracy Oulman stated that HKM Engineering held a meeting with the NorthEast Neighborhood Association last night. She noted that they are working hard to continue communications with the neighborhood while moving forward with the project; and construction is scheduled to begin in 2010. She indicated that a survey conducted by NENA in conjunction with MSU revealed a statistically positive response on the North Rouse Avenue improvements. Jeff Ebert cautioned that the project is probably further out than currently estimated. He then stated work on the environmental assessment is currently underway, and that will drive the design. He indicated that accommodating bike lanes, pedestrian facilities, parking, snow removal and Bozeman Creek within the corridor will be extremely difficult. Tracy Oulman noted it is anticipated that three or four parcels will be subject to takings for this project; and efforts are being made to find out what the EPA will require for Bozeman Creek. Jeff Ebert noted that the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks is not excited about the concept of piping the creek but acknowledged that is an issue to be addressed. Rob Bukvich reported that meetings have been held with the school district, and some of the concerns regarding bicycle and pedestrian facilities are being addressed. He noted that the department is currently working through the environmental assessment process, and he anticipates another public meeting will be scheduled during the winter. Jeff Ebert noted that staff and the consultant also met with residents along North Rouse Avenue to discuss the processes and the amount of right-of-way to be acquired for the project. He noted several of the homes are located on fairly small lots, and acquisition of the right-of-way will probably result in a total taking of those sites. He indicated that almost all of the residents have voiced appreciation for their efforts to involve them in the process early. He noted that, while the five-lane option might be considered for the north end of the project, it has been dismissed as an option for the southern end. 78. Durston Road Street Improvements Rick Hixson stated he has no additional information at this time.Rick Hixson reported that the portion of Durston Road west of Hunters Way is virtually complete, and he anticipates the work between Hunters Way and North 19th Avenue will move fairly quickly. He indicated that the project is on schedule to be completed this fall. He then turned his attention to the Durston Road east project, stating that that project is also on schedule and is to be done this fall. Debbie Arkell reported that Durston Road between North 11th Avenue and North 19th Avenue is substantially complete; that portion between North 7th Avenue and North 11th Avenue and the sidewalks will be done next year. Debbie Arkell noted that the North 19th Avenue/Durston Road intersection improvements are being done in conjunction with the Durston Road west project. The pads have been poured for the signal poles, but the mast arms are not yet on. That portion of Durston Road between North 27th Avenue and Fowler Avenue is now open, and it is anticipated the remainder of the road to North 19th Avenue will be open in mid-November. 98. I-90 Improvements Rob Bukvich stated that this project is continuing, with chip sealing and westbound bridge replacements to be completed yet this construction season.Jeff Ebert stated replacement of the structures over Montana Rail Link lines continues. The contractor has poured the bridge decks, and they are currently curing. The approaches are now being paved and the rumble strips are in. Yet to be completed are the pavement markings and the guard rail. It is anticipated that the bridges will be open by mid-November and the crossovers Jeff Ebert announced that the bridges are complete; the only items left are the bridge approaches, the chip seal and final pavement markings, which will be done in the spring. will be eliminated for the winter. While a portion of the chip seal has been completed, the approaches will be done next summer. Responding to Kerry White, Mr. Ebert stated the overpass on North 7th Avenue is scheduled beyond 2011 due to funding constraints. He indicated that replacement of the North Rouse Avenue overpass is scheduled for 2009 or 2010. Further responding to Kerry White, Mr. Ebert stated that one-third of the interstate is located within the Butte district. He then indicated that there is no separate funding for seismic projects; rather, those projects must compete with other maintenance projects. He indicated that the North Rouse Avenue overpass can be completed earlier because there is separate funding available for steel structures. 910. Huffine Lane Access Control StudyJeff Ebert stated a consultant has been hired, and work is being done on the final access plan. A public meeting is to be scheduled over the winter, with the final plan to be submitted in June 2007. 9110. Jackrabbit Lane Jeff Ebert stated that reconstruction of Jackrabbit Lane to Hulbert Road is scheduled well beyond 2010, however, design of the roadway is progressing. He noted the design includes work on the south leg of the Four Corners intersection. Jeff Ebert indicated this project has been divided into two parts, reconstruction from Four Corners north to Hulbert Road and reconstruction from Hulbert Road to Frank Road Work is currently being done on the design, with construction for both parts now scheduled for beyond 2011. Chris Saunders noted there is a lot of development occurring along that corridor, and suggested that developers might help to fund these road improvements so they can be completed earlier. He stated the alternative might be that the County Commissioners won’t approve any further development because the road has not been improved. Jeff Ebert acknowledged that the need for road improvements is being driven by development and noted that two new subdivisions are being required to provide some of those improvements. He then stated that Butte gets the least amount of funding statewide, and Jackrabbit Lane is designated as a national highway. Responding to Lee Provance, Jeff Ebert identified the boundaries of the Butte district, which includes Garrison, Dillon, Springdale, Gardner, West Yellowstone, White Sulphur Springs, and nearly to Helena. He indicated that the Transportation Commission allocates the monies based on what is needed to preserve existing infrastructure after which congestion needs are addressed. 1210. Other Main Street—Grand Avenue to Haggerty Lane. Jeff Ebert reported this project is scheduled for a May bid letting, with the work to be completed this season. The project will include milling and overlay of Main Street as well as the upgrading of traffic signals to the west. Highway 191/Big Sky. Responding to Kerry White, Jeff Ebert stated several projects are currently underway. He noted that centerline rumble strips are being installed in the no passing zones from the mouth of the canyon to Big Sky, and the fog seal and final pavement markings are yet to be done. The signal at Big Sky is scheduled for completion by November 22, and is the subject of a $200,000 contract. The safety project from the mouth of the canyon to south of Big Sky includes identifying locations for turn lanes, slope flattening, and installation of guard rails. Turn lanes are to be provided at Big Sky and the Forest Service campgrounds located at Greek Creek, Moose Creek, Red Cliff, and Swan Creek. He indicated that passing lanes had been proposed originally, but were not well received by the public. Ross Gammon stated he met with representatives from the Forest Service and, in addition to the turn lanes for the campgrounds, they are considering safe pull-offs for fishing, including building a trail under the 35-mile-per-hour bridge so people can cross the highway without incurring the current visibility problems. Jeff Ebert stated that pavement preservation from Yellowstone Park to Big Sky, including overlay and seal coat, is scheduled for next construction season. He indicated that the MDT is also looking at engineering studies regarding the speed limit in that corridor, along with variable message signs at Big Sky and north of West Yellowstone for the migration of wildlife on the road. Ross Gammon stated two speed trailers and sign boards were installed along the road; however, someone unbolted the electronics and took the radar. Turn arrow on North 19th Avenue/Baxter Lane signal. Responding to questions from and concerns voiced by David Smith, Debbie Arkell stated that improvements are being made to Baxter Lane in conjunction with the Lowes project, and the road is to be open soon. Chris Kukulski stated that he talked to the crew this morning. He noted they were doing work on the manhole covers and would be working on paving except for the snow. He indicated that the underground work is complete and, as soon as the weather permits, they will pave. Ross Gammon addressed the hazards of working along roadways, noting that there are 4,000 workers killed every year in work zones. David Smith stated that utilities seem to be a problem, noting there should be better coordination and more effort made on correct utility locates. Debbie Arkell responded that one call locates are required for construction projects, however, no one knows here the fiber optics are located. She also noted it is difficult to get the utility companies out to assist in locating their services, and the City has no control over them. Chris Kukulski stated Montana is unique in how it handles utilities in the public right-of-way, which makes construction projects even more difficult. Ross Gammon stated the MDT requires plans for utilities; however, it is not uncommon for companies to move the line a few feet but not indicate the change on the plans. Main Street resurfacing. Bob Lashaway asked if the US191/Main Street resurfacing is still on schedule; the response was that the downtown street is to be resurfaced next summer with the remainder scheduled for 2010 or beyond. David Smith voiced concern about the negative impacts that the chip seal and overlay project had on businesses along North 7th Avenue earlier this summer. He suggested that the contractor be encouraged to do evening work and to keep impacts on businesses to a minimum when the downtown project is undertaken. Rob Bukvich responded that when Main Street was last improved, the work was done at night. He then indicated that input will be sought from the downtown business owners before the project is undertaken. Jeff Rupp noted the various downtown boards are well aware of the impending street project. Jeff Ebert suggested that a contractor website and weekly meetings could help to keep everyone informed on the progress of the project. He then cautioned that it is not possible to avoid the June to August time period for undertaking the work due to the area’s weather conditions. Rob Bukvich noted this is anticipated to be a week-long project, and one lane will remain open each way during the work. He then indicated that countdown timers are to be installed in the downtown core, and detector loops are to be added on the side streets with emphasis to be placed on the Main Street traffic. Responding to Jon Henderson, Rob Bukvich stated that today’s actuators are not sensitive enough to respond to a bicyclist; rather, a cyclist must use the pedestrian button. He indicated another option that could be pursued is a video actuator. Responding to Debbie Arkell, Joe Olsen stated the crosswalk treatment has not yet been determined, and assured her that the City will be involved in that process. Debbie Arkell then expressed an interest in possibly using the same crosswalk treatment on the side streets as on Main Street. Responding to Ralph Zimmer, Rob Bukvich stated the traffic signals are to be interconnected in an effort to maintain progression; however, they will be also semi-actuated through the core. Sara Folger stated the Downtown Bozeman Partnership has let the request for proposals to expand the downtown core to include the side streets between Mendenhall Street and Babcock Street. With that expansion, she suggested that CTEP monies could possibly be used to fund a portion of the costs of decorative crossings on the side streets. Detours. George Durkin asked that detours for city projects that impact county roads be better noticed. He also proposed that the contractors be required to provide dust abatement on unpaved county roads when they are used for detours, noting it is difficult enough to maintain them without the additional traffic. Valley Center Road. At Debbie Arkell’s request, Jeff Ebert provided an update on the Valley Center Road project, noting it is scheduled for 2008. He indicated the department is currently in the process of acquiring right-of-way. Responding to Doug McSpadden, Rob Bukvich stated the speed study on Valley Center Road was done by the City, but that study did not apply to the entire length of the roadway. He then indicated that the reconstruction project is divided into two pieces, with the east section to be done first and the west section to be done at a later date. ITEM 8. DISCUSSION ITEMSELECTION OF OFFICERS Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. Chair Andy Epple noted the practice has been to rotate these positions through the city and county officials, noting that he has served as Chair and Ross Gammon has served as Vice Chair for the past two years. Following a brief discussion, it was moved by Lee Provance, seconded by Kerry White, that Andy Epple continue as Chairperson and that Ross Gammon continue as Vice Chairperson for this year. The motion carried. 19th Avenue Overpass. Kerry White proposed an overpass on 19th Avenue at West Main Street. He noted that from 3:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. on any given day, traffic is backed up because both streets are very busy and there is no way to handle the current volume of traffic with a traffic signal. Chris Saunders stated some of the current Main Street congestion problems result from the closure of Durston Road. He also suggested that if Stucky Road were extended to Kagy Boulevard, many of those accessing the southwest quadrant would take that route. He stated there is a plan in place to provide the needed transportation links, but they are costly. Debbie Arkell stated that, as development is occurring, the grid system is coming into place. She cited the improvements to Flanders Mill Road and Harper Puckett Road as examples and noted that two new signals are anticipated along South 19th Avenue south of Kagy Boulevard. Gas tax/miscellaneous updates. Chris Kukulski stated that the issue of a two-cent gas tax was discussed at the last City/County meeting; the County Commission is interested, and the City Commission is definitely interested. He then indicated that, during his Wednesday morning radio talk, one of the issues raised was left turn arrows, and he attempted to explain the challenges of planning when no left turn arrow was considered in the initially installation. City Manager Kukulski noted that opening of the Fowler Lane/West Garfield Street connection will be a huge reliever for the West College Street/South 19th Avenue corridor. Setting of speed limits. Chris Kukulski suggested that steps need to be taken in becoming more proactive in setting speed limits, particularly since rural roads are significantly different from urban streets. He suggested that the designing of streets and roads should include discussion of the speeds rather than setting the speeds at the 85th percentile from speed studies done after the improvements have been made. He noted that the Durston Road improvements will solve a lot of problems; however, he anticipates the neighborhoods will be unhappy when the speed limits are set at 35 or 40 miles per hour. Lee Provance stated the same issues revolve around setting speed limits in the County. He characterized it as a hugely political issue, noting that setting the speed limit at the 85th percentile will reduce accidents and improve safety; however, that often does not match with political pressures. ITEM 9. 2006 & 2007 MEETING DATES AND AADJOURNMENT – 12:10 47p.m. Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - Regular meeting 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, January 24, 2007 – Regular meeting 9:30 a.m. There being no further business to come before the Committee at this time, Chair iIJP PomnichowskiJeff EbertKerry WhiteAndy Epple adjourned the meeting. Reminder of upcoming meetings. Wednesday, October 25, 2006 – Regular meeting 9:30 a.m. Wednesday, April 25, 2007 – Regular meeting 9:30 a.m. _____________________________________________ Andrew C. Epple, Chairperson Bozeman Area Transportation Coordinating Committee *Transportation Coordinating Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a special need or disability, please contact our ADA Coordinator, Ron Brey, at 582-2306 (voice) or 582-2301 (TDD).