Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.23.20 UAPB MinutesMINUTES MPOJC URBANIZED AREA POLICY BOARD WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2020 - 4:30 PM ZOOM MEETING PLATFORM APPROVED MEMBERS PRESENT: Coralville: Meghann Foster Iowa City: Pauline Taylor, John Thomas, Laura Bergus, Janice Weiner Johnson County: Lisa Green-Douglass North Liberty: Terry Donahue, Chris Hoffman Tiffin: Steve Berner University Heights: Louise From University of Iowa: Erin Shane ICCSD: Ruthina Malone Iowa DOT: Cathy Cutler OTHERS PRESENT: Jeff Woods, Anthony Klauman, Amanda Martin, Kevin Boyd, Sara Helmer STAFF PRESENT: Kent Ralston, Emily Bothell, Frank Waisath, Sarah Walz 1. CALL TO ORDER Donahue called the meeting to order at 4:30 PM. The meeting was held online through the Zoom meeting platform in accordance with Iowa Code Section 21.8 due to complications preventing in-person meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic. a. Recognize alternates None b. Consider approval of meeting minutes Motion to approve made by Berner, Thomas seconded. The motion carried unanimously. 2. PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None 3. Update on the Final CRANDIC Passenger Rail and Rails-to-Trails studies Ralston explained that the third and final phase of the rails study was completed a few months ago. The study researched the ridership, revenue forecast, and financial strategy for a train that could be implemented between Penn Street in North Liberty and Gilbert Street in Iowa City. Ralston then introduced Jeff Woods from CRANDIC Railroad, Anthony Klauman from the Henningson, Durham and Richardson Architecture and Engineering Firm, and Amanda Martin from the Iowa DOT. Woods presented on the broad Conceptual Feasibility of the Passenger Rail. Phase 3 was focused on “The End Game” of the project and analyzed the potential UI student travel market, the realities of operating the service, and a broad understanding of the rules and regulations. According to Phase 3, the existing infrastructure and CRANDIC partnership would make implementing the passenger rail relatively easy. A 30-minute one-way ride provided 7 days/week between 6am and 7pm would be most attractive to riders. The MPOJC Urbanized Area Policy Board Minutes _________________ Page 2 planned equipment to be used is Diesel Multiple Unit Railcars which are self-propelled and eliminate train turns, although CRANDIC is still considering greener options. Stations would be designed for efficiency and functionality and would be ADA compliant. 1.4 million passengers are anticipated per year. The expected cost is $55 million up front with $4.8 million assumed annual costs for operations and maintenance, which is a bit higher than originally planned. Revenue is expected at $2.1 million per year from a $1.50 single trip fare. Social and economic benefits are also anticipated in many ways. Funding is expected from a federal grant and capital expenditure programs as well as private and public-private partnerships. Martin added that CRANDIC is a great partner for regional railroad opportunities and wanted to move the project forward as much as possible. Martin emphasized the potential impacts of the project and said that it was a rare situation for a freight railroad to encourage passenger rail. The railroad corridor was originally developed for passenger rail, so the train does not have many at-grade crossings and would be a great attribute for the communities. Martin explained that there had been potential in Des Moines, Ankeny, and Ames for commuter lite rail, but dealing with their abandoned rail is not cheap or easy. Additionally, each system is unique, but economic development is typically prevalent surrounding these types of corridors. Ralston added that the MPOJC functions as a consultant for the board and that they would not push for any action to be taken without the board’s approval. Ralston also stated that the $55 million may seem high, but is actually low relative to other transportation projects and that exploring the path of the anticipated rail line exemplifies the hearts of the communities being accessed. Green-Douglass asked for clarifications on some of the metrics and its relation to the Iowa City climate change plan. Thomas responded that the rail would be a great climate alternative to individual vehicles as well as providing urban development and therefore increasing the density of travel. The ride would also be interesting and potentially increase local tourism. Taylor indicated a potential high interest from healthcare workers but was concerned about the operation hours for early and late hour shifts and wanted to know if the currently scheduled times were flexible. Klauman responded that the times were potentially flexible depending on scheduling for multiple crews, so extended hours could be possible if future studies supported that idea. Green- Douglass added that there is a different transit study that was completed relating to second and third shift and Sunday transit services, so those needs may be there. Donahue asked what the next steps in the study are. Ralston responded that the public will need to be involved at some point for this project to continue, but in order to make that happen, the Board needs to advocate for those necessities for their communities. Ralston added that the price is still high, but the MPOJC should be getting about $8 million in federal funding to spend on these types of projects and board approval can help these things get done. Donahue encouraged internal discussions in the short term for understanding the project before outward discussion and requested the materials to do so. Ralston agreed to send the presentation to members and to post study information to the MPOJC website. Hoffman agreed that public interest is vital to the project’s survival and wanted more details to help inform their constituencies. Hoffman asked how the ridership count was calculated, believing it to be very high. Hoffman also wondered where else the money to fund this project would come from besides community budgets and how Centro freight and commuter rails would function together. Green-Douglass wondered if freight for Centro was currently being used since the line had been abandoned for some time. Hoffman argued that it was likely due to COVID-19. Woods said that freight rail was coming from the south and that 29% of North American rail freight is parked and added that Centro can still receive freight with commuter rail. Klauman explained that temporal separation splits freight and passenger MPOJC Urbanized Area Policy Board Minutes _________________ Page 3 operations to ensure safety on the same railroad and follows federal regulations. Ralston explained that funding is difficult now with COVID-19, so the procedure can be thought out and slow for now, but not all the money would be required to come from community residents. Klauman responded again to say that Section 4 of the study explains a lot of the funding questions Hoffman has. Ralston said that the model used is similar to the MPOJC travel demand model. Foster asked if there was information about bus ridership impacts. Ralston responded that some routes would be either diminished or eliminated and specifically the CAMBUS routes to Oakdale may not be necessary, although amidst COVID-19 ridership rates, it’s hard to tell whether now is the right time to launch a passenger rail. Bergus asked if there would be a way to coordinate information so that funding could be adequately redistributed and considered as needed. Ralston responded that it’s hard to decide details and that will take time, but bus services are aware of the potential for a commuter rail and should have enough time to reconsider their own services. 4. Public hearing and consideration of an amendment to the adopted FY2021-2024 MPOJC Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) - modifying programming of Interstate 80/380 interchange construction funds Ralston explained that the TIP is a document submitted by the MPOJC to the Iowa DOT every year to document the status of local transportation projects using state and federal funds and projects must be included in the document to receive that funding. The Iowa DOT must include their projects in this document as well and they requested an amendment increasing the funding amount in federal FY21 for the I-80/380 project due to construction delays from summer to winter, which was approved at the July UAPB meeting. The total amount for FY21 is shifting from $137 million to $207 million to account for funding arriving in the correct fiscal year. TTAC unanimously voted to approve this amendment, hence the public hearing. No public comments were made. Motion to approve made by Thomas, Hoffman seconded. The motion passed unanimously. 5. Discussion regarding amendments to the adopted MPOJC Bylaws Ralston explained that the MPOJC bylaws are to be reviewed at least every five years by a committee of five representatives: four from the Urbanized Area Policy Board (UAPB) and one from the Rural Policy Board (RPB). Amendments must be approved by 2/3 vote in the UAPB and by simple majority in the RPB. Members of the current committee are Terry Donahue, Louise From, Meghann Foster, Pat Heiden, and Chris Taylor. In addition to considering the bylaws in their entirety, the committee was specifically asked to look at how appointments are created in the East Central Iowa Council of Governments and whether the Rural Policy Board is necessary. The committee decided that the Johnson County Board of Supervisors should have a citizen representative appointed by the county with no term limit. The Johnson County Board of Supervisors should also have one permanent representative on the ECICOG Board as well as two appointments on rotation from the five urbanized areas (Iowa City, Coralville, North Liberty, Tiffin, University Heights), meaning there would be no more rural representation on the board. Term limits for these appointments should increase from 1 to 2 years. Additionally, the Rural Policy Board should be eliminated and Johnson County should absorb the balance of the rural budget assessments starting in FY22, estimated at about MPOJC Urbanized Area Policy Board Minutes _________________ Page 4 $6500. MPOJC staff would continue to solicit for work program projects from these communities and provide the same services as before. The message from smaller communities will still have the same, if not better, say through Douglass-Green and Heiden. If amendments are agreeable by the UAPB, Ralston will schedule a special meeting with the RPB. If the RPB approves the amendments, then Ralston will bring the changes back to UAPB for final approval and budget considerations, as they will change with the dissolution of the RPB. Taylor wanted to note that Heiden’s name was spelled incorrectly on the committee’s document and agrees with the term change. Weiner also agreed with the term increase and asked if Chris Taylor had been consulted. Ralston said he had contacted Taylor but he has not had a special meeting with him, so that will have to occur before any decisions are officially made. 6. Discussion regarding Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG) and Transportation Alternative Program (TAP) scoring criteria for funds allocated by MPOJC Bothell explained that STBG and TAP funding would be available in February 2021 and staff is asking for any feedback on the current scoring criteria. The first version of the scoring criteria was approved in November 2018 and the function of the criteria remains the same. Bothell followed that TTAC supports the continued use of the criteria and opened the floor to board comments. Thomas claimed that the Environment criteria is primarily focused on air quality instead of all environmental elements and wanted to add channels for housing density in respect to land and storm water management in respect to water to adequately cover all three aspects of environmental protection. Ralston responded that housing density is considered under quality of life, but because transportation rarely deals with storm water, they will have to consider how to include that in more depth. Thomas said Des Moines has water quality included in their plan and believes that land use is a downplayed part of transportation that should be included in the document. Ralston responded that adding a storm water management point as an environmental criterion would be relatively easy to add with the board’s approval. Thomas agreed, adding that street trees could be part of that connection. 7. Discussion regarding potential Federal Functional Classification changes for MPOJC Urbanized Area roadways Bothell mentioned that STBG and TAP grant applications will be due in February 2021 and funding can only be used on roadways classified as collector or higher. TTAC was asked to review the classification of their roadways by October 15th for the Iowa DOT to review and approve, although it is noted that roads without high connectivity or new roads not in the Capital Improvement Program for a community will not be approved. A 35% limit is put on the system and the MPO is currently at 32%, meaning 13.5 miles can still be classified. Once the Iowa DOT pre-approves the roadways, the issue will be brought back to board and committee for final approval before the scoring and funding allocation for next year. 8. Update and initial discussion on the MPOJC Long Range Transportation Plan revision process Bothell explained that the new Long Range Plan is intended to emulate the last plan due to high user-friendliness. The new plan builds on the 2017 vision because most of the information is still relevant and applicable. The guiding principles are the foundation of the plan and connect with the scoring criteria discussed above. The performance measures are MPOJC Urbanized Area Policy Board Minutes _________________ Page 5 required for the plan to compare with 2017 goals. All old measures will continue to be studied as well as new federal requirements since the last update. Ralston added that this version is more of an update than a full revision due to past success from 2017. 9. OTHER BUSINESS None 10. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn made by Taylor, Hoffman seconded. Meeting adjourned by Donahue at 5:48 PM.