Metropolitan Planning Organization

MINUTES LAWTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION Minutes of the Lawton Metropolitan Planning Organization meeting held September 12, 2013, in the City Hall Auditorium, 212 SW 9th Street, Lawton, Oklahoma. The agenda for the meeting was posted on the bulletin board in City Hall in compliance with the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act. The meeting was called to order at 1:56 p.m. by Chairman Pat Henry. MEMBERS PRESENT: Ron Jarvis Jim Nisbett Dave Davison David Denham Pat Henry Neil Springborn MEMBERS ABSENT: John Jones (excused) John Pereira (excused) Charlotte Perkins (excused) ALSO PRESENT: Debbie Dollarhite, Assistant Secretary Steven Greb, Assistant City Attorney John C. Mackey, Legal Counsel Ha Vu, Transportation Planner Jackie Monette, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 15, 2013 MEETING. MOTION by Springborn, SECOND by Denham, to approve the minutes of the August 15, 2013 meeting as written. AYES: Nisbett, Davison, Denham, Henry, Springborn, Jarvis. NAYS: None. MOTION CARRIED 6 – 0. RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM GUERNSEY AND ASSOCIATES ON THE DOWNTOWN TRANSFER CENTER LOCATION AND DESIGN CONCEPT AND TAKE APPROPRIATE ACTION. One of the projects in the FY 2013 Unified Planning Work Program was the study of the location and design concept for the transit transfer center. Guernsey and Associates was selected as the consultant to prepare the study. The consultant has worked with the Downtown Transit Transfer Center Advisory Committee and selected two sites: the Wayne Gilley City Hall site at 4th Street and A Avenue and an area on the east side of Railroad Street between Gore Boulevard and B Avenue. Karl Stickley with Guernsey and Associates will give a presentation of the design concept and discussion on the attributes of both sites. Karl Stickley, project manager from Guernsey and Associates provided a presentation of the 476 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 study. The following are the points made in the presentation: A. Field Survey Observation B. Site Options C. Transit Transfer Center D. Site Plans E. Evaluation Matrix Mr. Stickley stated that the study included observations, as well as speaking to passengers at the current transfer station at Wayne Gilley City Hall. A. Field Survey Key Observations › The majority of passengers time their transfers well and are not waiting very long. › Passengers are satisfied with the current amenities and transfer system. › Passengers mostly prefer to wait outside because they don’t want to miss their transfer. › Passengers are very cognizant of who their bus driver is and where they are located. › Most passengers arrive from a bus, but a few walk up from the mall, the library, or another place within walking distance. › Clear sight lines to the buses are highly important. › A new transfer facility building would not need to be very large. Table 1, below, shows the number of passengers during the period that Guernsey and Associates staff was observing the current transfer station. Table 2, which follows, shows the ridership for full days and on a weekly basis. He stated that they also projected a 20% increase in ridership to show the potential for growth in ridership. 477 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 He stated that the transfer center will handle between twenty-five and twenty-six percent of the passengers use the transfer center, so the center does not have to be that large. B. Site Options › Site One is at the Wayne Gilley City Hall building, where the transfer center is currently located. › Site Two is located between West Gore Boulevard and SW B Avenue and SW Railroad Street and SW Larrance Street. Specifics of Site One- Mr. Stickley stated that it appears that there is some question about a revisionary clause on the ownership of Shepler Park, which is north of the old City Hall, where it cannot be used by the City for anything other than a park. He stated that there would have to be an asbestos inspection on the building. He stated that either a portion or all of the building would have to be demolished, and a new transfer center building would have to be constructed. He provided the following potential site plan for the transfer center building. 478 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 Mr. Stickley stated that the transfer center will have a lobby area with glass walls so that the passengers can see their buses when they arrive. He added that the transfer center could have some vending machines, a place to purchase tickets, a seating area, public restrooms and an employee lounge and break room. Commissioner Davison stated that the drivers currently unload their fare money at a different location than the transfer center. He asked if there would be a management office that performs that function at the transfer center. Mr. Stickley stated that the transfer center would not have a management office. He stated that it is his understanding that the current management office has a vault for the funds collected. He stated that there have also been discussions about Jefferson Bus Lines renting space and using the new transfer center as an annex and for storage of freight. Mr. Stickley provided the following diagram showing how the buses would enter and exit the facility if it is located at the Wayne Gilley City Hall site. 479 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 Specifics of Site Two- Mr. Stickley stated that there wouldn’t be any need for demolition at the Railroad Street site, because the only current structure on the lot is a billboard. At sometime in the past, there was possibly an above ground oil storage tank located in the northwest portion of the site. The following is a diagram of how the buses would enter and exit the Railroad Street site. 480 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 Mr. Stickley provided an evaluation matrix showing the advantages and disadvantages of both sites. He stated that both sites had the same number of advantages, so either site would be feasible. He added that LATS is a stop on demand service, so passengers can get closer to the mall or the new retail center on 2nd Street without requiring that the transfer station be in close proximity to either of those locations. Commissioner Davison asked if there has been any consideration given to pedestrians who want to go to the new shopping center on 2nd Street. Mr. Stickley stated that the City is developing a trail system along the old railroad corridor, so the study provided shows a pedestrian crossing across Gore Boulevard at Railroad Street. He stated that a signal may be warranted at Railroad Street and Gore Boulevard if the transfer center is located on Railroad Street. He added that the Railroad Street site is of sufficient size to locate a compressed natural gas filling station, should the buses be converted to that form of fuel. 481 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 The following is an evaluation matrix showing the issues studied and how each site ranks for advantages. Mr. Stickley stated that it is still unclear about what type of grant funding would be available. He stated that the standard split is that the City would have to come up with 20% of the funding. He stated that the old City Hall site could be more financially beneficial. He stated that the building would probably have to be demolished when it is vacant, because there does not appear to be any needed use for the building, and the City probably wouldn’t want an old building to remain standing without any occupants. He stated that, if the City were going to demolish the building anyway, the City could use the demolition costs as the matching funds. Given that, the City’s total out of pocket expense would be less for the Wayne Gilley City Hall site. Mackey stated that his law office is located at SW 5th Street and SW C Avenue. He stated that he didn’t initially want the transfer station to be located at the Wayne Gilley City Hall site, but he now believes that it really doesn’t matter. He stated that either site would really work, because the new facility will accommodate the passengers better than the current facility. He stated that the question could really come down to which location is more cost effective. Commissioner Springborn stated that he saw this presentation on September 24th, and he has had time to consider the advantages and disadvantages of both sites. He stated that he now feels that the Wayne Gilley City Hall site would be the better choice. He stated that he could see no business wanting to use the existing building, and constructing the new transfer center there would be a good use for the space, especially since it is possible to offset the costs with the demolition of the building. 482 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 Mr. Stickley stated that the cost estimates that they have calculated show that the 20% match can probably be covered by the asbestos abatement and demolition expense of the existing building. Commissioner Springborn stated that the costs are still speculative, but the building would have to be demolished either way, so it makes sense to get whatever financial benefit is possible. Commissioner Jarvis asked if the building site plan that was presented would allow for Jefferson Bus Lines to use the facility. Mr. Stickley stated that there was another site plan if Jefferson Bus Lines would be included. He stated that the alternate site plan would allow Jefferson Bus Lines to have their own areas. He stated that it is possible to revise the building to have a shared waiting area for passengers. The following is a copy of a possible site plan with separated areas. Mackey asked how many people from Jefferson Bus Lines would use the transfer center. Mr. Stickley stated that Jefferson Bus Lines only has two current runs, so there would not be a lot of traffic. Commissioner Jarvis asked if the old City Hall location would be inconvenient for Jefferson Bus Lines. Mr. Stickley stated that the current location that Jefferson Bus Lines uses is already in the area, so there would not be any additional inconvenience for them. 483 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 Commissioner Springborn asked how the LATS buses run. Commissioner Denham stated that they run until 9:00 p.m. on Saturday and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays. Commissioner Springborn stated that the Railroad Street site could be more difficult at certain times during the day, as Gore Boulevard gets backed up during certain hours during the day. Mr. Stickley stated that the possibility of using SW A Avenue or SW B Avenue as an access street to relieve that issue. Commissioner Davison stated that he is concerned with the possible expansion for the facility. He stated that the new buses are much bigger than the older buses. He stated that he thinks the Railroad Street site would be better for that. Mr. Stickley stated that the site plans they have submitted will accommodate the large buses. He stated that the only advantage to the Railroad site is that it is a little wider than the old City Hall site. Commissioner Denham asked if any discussion has happened with LATS for going to Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) and if the fueling station would be on the new site. Mr. Stickley stated that the LATS maintenance people don’t like the idea of using CNG for fuel, but it may be something implemented in the future to assist in obtaining federal transportation funds. Chairman Henry asked if it would be better to delay sending this report to the City Council before any environmental issues are identified. Dollarhite stated that the study won’t go to the City Council until the first round of environmental assessments is complete. She added that the selection of the site is the next step in this process, but today’s item is just to accept the report. MOTION by Denham, SECOND by Jarvis, to accept the study for the Downtown Transit Transfer Center as presented by Guernsey and Associates. AYES: Davison, Denham, Henry, Springborn, Jarvis, Nisbett. NAYS: None. MOTION CARRIED 6 – 0. CONSIDER APPROVING A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ISSUE THE RFP. The FY 2014 Unified Planning Work Program includes the task to begin the update of the long range transportation plan. The first step in this process is to update the travel demand model. The model must also meet air quality modeling requirements and generate outputs appropriate for use in the EPA MOVES air quality modeling software. The Planning staff does not have the software or the expertise to update the model. The attached Request for Proposals sets out the scope of services to include: 484 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013  Develop model parameters: o Establish data needed and methods to obtain the data o Establish the project timeline  Data collection and analysis: o Develop household and workplace characteristics for base year and forecast year o Develop population and employment projections for forecast year o Develop database of traffic counts and other network attributes to include supplementary counts if necessary  Develop new model: o Update model to 2010 calibration year o Create network model files o Code intersections and transit routes o Compile and enter land use/socioeconomic data o Develop trip generation rates o Evaluate external trip characteristics o Calibrate/validate  Traffic Forecasts o Generate future trips o Develop growth rates for LMATS area o Determine scenarios for low, medium, and high growth rates o Code network modifications for each scenario o Run model for each scenario o Provide plots showing volumes, link volume-to-capacity ratios, and other data outputs as model may produce o Provide summary statistics including but not limited to total trips, vehicles miles of travel, lane miles, and average volume-to-capacity ratio  Document the model and modeling process The RFP also requests pricing for future on-call model runs as needed and to conduct the model update in five years as separate items. RFPs will be due October 7, 2013, and it is anticipated the contract will be awarded on October 24, 2013. Dollarhite stated that the LMPO has between $75,000 and $100,000 for this project. She stated that the last time the long range transportation plan was updated was in 2007, so quite a bit of work will need to be done. MOTION by Springborn, SECOND by Nisbett, to approve the RFP for development of the travel demand model and authorize staff to issue the RFP. AYES: Denham, Henry, Springborn, Jarvis, Nisbett, Davison. NAYS: None. MOTION CARRIED 6 – 0. CONSIDER APPROVING A RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING THE REQUEST TO REDESIGNATE THE TRANSPORTATION POLICY BOARD OF THE LAWTON METROPOLITAN AREA AS THE LAWTON METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 134, TITLE 23, UNITED STATES CODE. 485 LMPO Minutes September 12, 2013 In 2003 the City Planning Commission was designated by the Governor of the State of Oklahoma as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Lawton Metropolitan Area. With the adoption of the new transportation bill, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), each MPO must consist of elected local officials, officials of public agencies that administer or operate major modes of transportation in the metropolitan area, and appropriate State officials. The Federal Highway Administration is requiring Lawton’s MPO to meet these requirements. A Redesignation Agreement is being prepared which will designate the Transportation Policy Board as the MPO for Lawton and also sets out the membership of the Board to meet the regulations. The attached resolution acknowledges that a redesignation will be made to designate the Transportation Policy Board for the Lawton Metropolitan Area as the Lawton Metropolitan Planning Organization. It is anticipated the effective date of the redesignation will be November 1, 2013. Once the redesignation has been made by the Governor, the transfer of assets, bank account, contracts, and agreements will be required. Chairman Henry stated that the City Planning Commission would like to be kept apprised of transportation issues that will be addressed by the new Board so that the CPC can have the opportunity to provide input to the new Board. MOTION by Nisbett, SECOND by Jarvis, to adopt LMPO Resolution No. 13-02, acknowledging the request to redesignate the Transportation Policy Board of the Lawton Metropolitan Area as the Lawton Metropolitan Planning Organization in accordance with Section 134, Title 23, United States Code. AYES: Henry, Springborn, Jarvis, Nisbett, Davison, Denham. NAYS: None. MOTION CARRIED 6 – 0. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS OR COMMENTS None. SECRETARY’S REPORT None. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION None. Meeting adjourned at 2:57 p.m. _______________________________ Pat Henry, Chairman LMPO jm 486