Community Outreach Report

Transcription

1 Attachment E Community Outreach Report Amendments to CAMPO 2040 Plan and TIP Spring 2016

2 Attachment E Background In February and March 2016 the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO), in accordance with its Public Participation Plan, launched a Tier 2 community outreach effort. The purpose of this effort was to engage the public and solicit input in CAMPO s six-county region on amendments to the CAMPO 2040 Plan and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and on the new TIP. This outreach effort followed the recommended practices of a Tier 2 effort, including news releases, and postal mail notices, community meetings, and maps. This effort also went beyond the recommended Tier 2 practices by using earned media, social media, online event calendars, an online open house, and print brochures for in-person open houses. Document Being Amended Number of Projects Submitted 2040 RTP Table 32. Roadway Projects RTP Table 34. Grouped Projects 191 FYs TIP Roadway Projects 19 FYs TIP Grouped Projects 123 FYs TIP Roadway Projects 67 FYs TIP Transit Projects 23 FYs TIP Grouped Projects 158 Notifications CAMPO s Public Participation Plan Tier 2 notification requires at least one news release, notification to list subscribers, and postal notification to postal mail subscribers. A news release was sent to 61 media contacts on February 23, 2016 which briefly described the TIP and RTP development and amendment processes and listed the in-person open house dates and locations, online open house webpage, and comment opportunities. Community Outreach Report 2

3 Attachment E An was sent to 5,787 subscribers of the CAMPO list on February 23, A post card was mailed to 1,153 subscribers of the CAMPO postal mailing list on February 19, Like the news release, the and postcard briefly described the TIP and RTP development and amendment processes and listed the in-person and online open house participation and comment opportunities. In response to public and TPB member input, the Georgetown open house was rescheduled and a second Hays County open house was added. A news release and were sent to CAMPO media contacts and subscribers alerting them to these changes. Additionally, other notifications about these changes to the original open house schedule included social media, online events calendars, and updates to the CAMPO website. While meeting the Tier 2 notification requirements, this effort also included supplemental notifications as a way of reaching those who may not be as familiar with CAMPO and CAMPO processes. These notifications included earned media through television, print, and radio announcements, social media posting on CAMPO s Facebook and Twitter feeds for all nine open houses, and posting all open houses on a regional online events calendar. Open Houses CAMPO hosted nine in-person open houses throughout the six-county region. An online open house went live February 29, 2016 and stayed open until March 28, 2016 for the CAMPO 2040 Plan and TIP amendments, and will be available until April 15, 2016 for the TIP. Displays and comment cards were also available at the Transportation Policy Board meeting on March 21, 2016, the meeting that included the public hearing for the amendments to CAMPO 2040 Plan and TIP. Community Outreach Report 3

4 Attachment E In-Person Open Houses In compliance with Tier 2 requirements, nine in-person open houses were held throughout the CAMPO region to provide opportunities for the public to talk one-on-one with CAMPO staff about the RTP, TIP, process of amending these documents, projects submitted for the for the new TIP, and other CAMPOrelated questions. TxDOT Area Office staff also attended the in-person open houses as a resource for those who had project-specific questions. In addition, Travis County and Capital Metro had representatives in attendance at the Austin open houses. Capital Metro provided information and accepted feedback on their Connections 2025 effort. Open House Locations Open houses used a come-and-go format and were held 4-7 p.m. to allow flexibility in the late afternoon and evening schedule and to accommodate travel demand management at the highest peak of the evening rush. Open houses were held at community libraries when available to make information easily accessible, attract those who may not have known about the open houses, and offer a convenient, comfortable location for community engagement. Public Open Houses All Open Houses Held 4-7 PM Monday, February 29 Bastrop Library Wednesday, March 2 Pleasant Hill Library, Austin Thursday, March 3 Marble Falls Library Monday, March 7 Lockhart Library Thursday, March 10 Kyle Library Monday, March 14 Cedar Park Library Tuesday, March 15 University Hills Library, Austin Wednesday, March 16 Dripping Springs City Hall Thursday, March 17 Georgetown Parks & Rec Admin Building A brochure describing the TIP, depicting submitted project on maps, and explaining the variety of commenting formats was distributed to all open house participants. A QR code (quick read code) linked to the online open house was also included in the brochure as a way to revisit the information after the Community Outreach Report 4

5 Attachment E in-person opportunities. The QR code can be scanned from a smartphone s code reader to instantly display the online open house website. Large display boards accompanied the brochure showing the submitted project maps and supplying project ID numbers used to match projects with their descriptions on the submitted project spreadsheet. In addition to the large maps, displays explained the purpose of the open house and the various ways to submit comments, along with the commenting deadline. CAMPO staff was available at all open houses to explain the open house format and commenting options, answer questions, and assist the public in matching the project ID numbers on the display maps to the projects descriptions in the submitted project list. Staff also had laptops and hard copies of the CAMPO 2040 Plan and TIP on hand for reference. Online Open House An online open house went live the day of the first in-person open house, February 29, 2016, and will stay online until the comment deadline for the TIP, April 15, The online open house supplemented the in-person open houses by providing the same information and maps for those who may not have been able to attend in person, and as a reference for those who did attend in person to review maps and information prior to and following the in-person open houses. The online open house provided the same large display boards as the in-person opportunity, but in PDF format, showing the submitted project maps and supplying project ID numbers used to match projects with their descriptions on the submitted projects spreadsheet. In addition to the maps, the online information explained the purpose of the open houses, the various ways to submit comments with a linked address for comments, the commenting deadline, and the spreadsheet of submitted projects that described project details for projects numbered on the maps. Community Outreach Report 5

6 Attachment E Comments The comment period for amendments to the CAMPO 2040 Plan and TIP ran from February 29 March 28, Commenting on the TIP also began February 29 and is scheduled to conclude April 15, The comments received as of March 25, 2016 were informational for the TPB s consideration. These comments did not include questions that required follow up. commenters received an from CAMPO confirming that their comments were received and will be included for consideration by the TPB. The comments that follow include all comments received from the in-person open houses and comments as of March 25, As of this date, no comments have been received by postal mail or fax. Community Outreach Report 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 From: To: Subject: Date: Susan Pantell Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Comments on the TIP and 2040 Plan Wednesday, March 02, :55:36 PM To whom it may concern: I strongly support the following projects in the TIP: #1 City of Austin - pedestrian safety measures #23 Capital Metro - all projects listed for bus and rail service I would like to see more money for these projects and others like them that support public transit and pedestrian access and safety. Regarding items 82 p and r, IH-35 express lanes, I would like to know whether these lanes will be tolled and how they will be used. I oppose toll lanes, but support express lanes for use by buses. I have the same comment for the 2040 Plan items 82n - 82r. Sincerely, Susan Pantell

15 From: To: Subject: Date: Mickelson, Christopher Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization Suggestion for CAMPO Plan... Wednesday, March 02, :22:42 AM I am unable to attend any of the open meeting time periods for the CAMPO Plan; therefore, I am submitting my suggestions by for consideration. I would suggest considering the following, in no special order: Dedicated carpool lanes. Variable carpool lanes (these are lanes that turn into carpool only lanes during specific time periods, normally morning/evening rush hour, such as 7-9a or 4-6p). Reversible lanes (these are lanes that are used to help ease congestion going in and out of the city during specific time periods. Similar to Seattle, where an additional lane from the Northbound and Southbound flow into the city starting at midnight going until noon, then reverses and flow out of the city from noon until midnight on those same Northbound and Southbound lanes.) Light-rail in the South, West, and East of Austin, similar to the one in the North. A bypass highway/freeway around Austin (from Buda to Round Rock) that is not tolled. Expand all major arteries in all directions (North, South, East, and West) in Austin to help ease congestion. Have growth help pay for expansions and enlargements of roads. Thank you for your time. Chris Christopher T. Mickelson Regulatory Planner Utility Austin Energy Finance and Corporate Services Division Town Lake Center 721 Barton Springs Road, Austin, TX This and any attachments states the informal opinions of Austin Energy staff, offered as technical assistance, and are not intended as legal advice. We reserve the right to amend these opinions should circumstances change or additional information be brought to our attention. Staff's opinions are not binding on the City Council. In addition, the information contained in this and any attachments are intended only for the addressee shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination, or use of this transmittal or its contents by anyone other than the addressee is strictly prohibited.

16 March 28, 2016 Transportation Policy Board Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization P.O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas Via Re: Amendments to the CAMPO FYs Transportation Improvement Program and the CAMPO 2040 Regional Transportation Plan Dear Members of the CAMPO Board: Save Our Springs Alliance (SOS Alliance) offers the following comments on the proposed amendments to the Fiscal Years Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the CAMPO 2040 Regional Transportation Plan (2040 Plan). SOS Alliance appreciates the opportunity to comment and CAMPO s consideration of these comments. As always, SOS Alliance urges CAMPO to focus transportation dollars on equipping and expanding mass transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. CAMPO should take into account land-use planning and support road improvements only where they are cost-effective and serve compact development patterns in preferred growth areas. The primary goal of every regional transportation project should be to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMTs). Reducing VMTs is the only way to create a sustainable future that preserves the quality of our environmental resources and the region s quality of life, while making the best use of limited federal funds. The TIP and Plan should include more mass transit, pedestrian, and bicycle infrastructure. CAMPO must invest in mass transit now to ensure future supply meets demand. Given recent developments rendering the future of Lone Star Rail uncertain, it is more important than ever for CAMPO to take the lead in coordinating transportation planning that provides a range of choices for commuters beyond single-occupancy-vehicle use. Yet the amendments to the TIP and 2040 Plan do not include any mass transit projects. This is unfortunate given the wealth of research showing that transportation patterns have shifted away from driving and towards greater use of alternative forms of transportation. The number of projects to construct and improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities is miniscule compared to the number of road projects requested to be included in the 2040 Plan and TIP. Requested amendments to the 2040 Plan include only two new

17 pedestrian facilities, and six projects that include bike and pedestrian improvements among a list of improvements. Request amendments to the TIP include one shared use path and three projects that include bike and pedestrian improvements. Often, these improvements can just mean fixing a cracked sidewalk, and are secondary to road expansion. CAMPO should prioritize new and expanded pedestrian and bicycling facilities over endless road expansion, as such projects can be a cost-effective manner to reduce congestion. The Plan should prioritize road projects to the east of IH-35. SOS Alliance applauds the fact that the requested amendments to the 2040 Plan and TIP are not within the environmentally sensitive Barton Springs watershed. CAMPO should continue to support and prioritize improving IH-35 as our top road project priority. CAMPO should also emphasize supporting development in the preferred growth corridor between IH-35 and SH 130. Through traffic must be encouraged to use SH 130 rather than building environmentally destructive highway projects to the west. The South Loop 1 Project should not be approved as a requested amendment to the CAMPO 2040 Plan. The Requested Amendment to the CAMPO 2040 Plan, in Table 34: Grouped Projects, includes the following project to be added: SL 1 from North of Slaughter to South of La Crosse, (Project ID 101), described as Grade Separation of Main Lanes, at a price of $45, 875,001. It is unclear whether this is the same project, or one in addition to the Loop 1 project on the 2040 Plan, which is on the same stretch of road but with the project description construct underpasses at Slaughter and La Crosse with an estimated cost of $43.5 million. Further muddying the waters is the fact that the same project is included in the TIP with an estimated cost of $65 million. Is this a different project, or the same one with a 50% price increase? If it is the same project, why would the price not be consistent across plans? Regardless, the project should not be included on any plan. The entire project would take place over the environmentally sensitive recharge zone of the Edwards Aquifer and Barton Springs, and replace what is currently a scenic, naturally vegetated median with pavement. The increased impervious cover and run-off will infiltrate the porous limestone below and pollute the aquifer, further despoiling Austin s most treasured swimming hole. No matter how many environmental controls are in place, more impervious cover means a more polluted aquifer. SOS Alliance acknowledges that congestion in this area is an increasing concern, but there are alternatives that would save money and reduce harm. CAMPO should direct TxDOT to revisit the environmental study to explore reasonable alternatives, such as changing the timing of traffic lights or reconfiguring the intersections to allow continuous flow or through turns, which can substantially reduce traffic delays from current conditions while accommodating a doubling of traffic volume at a small fraction of the costs of the proposed grade separations and addition of six new lanes, all without the environmental damage that the grade separations and new lanes will cost. Please see attached memo from Mike Brown of MetroAnalytics. 2

18 CAMPO should also provide commuters from Hays County and elsewhere with other alternatives, such as fast and reliable rail and bus service. CAMPO should address the public participation deficiencies going forward. Finally, SOS Alliance would like to draw the CAMPO Board s attention to the numerous confusing and contradicting elements of this public participation process. Most significantly, the timing of public comments seems far too close to Board consideration for the public comments to have a meaningful impact on the Board members decisions. The deadline to comment on amendments to the TIP and 2040 Plan is March 28 (at least, that is what it appears to be; see below). The Board s draft April 4 agenda includes discussion and possible approval of these amendments, meaning public comments are due one week prior to the Board s consideration the amendments. CAMPO s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) considered whether to make a recommendation on requested amendments on March 23, 2016, prior to the close of the public comment period. A back-up document for the TAC March 23 meeting agenda states that: a public involvement summary will be distributed to the TPB prior to consideration of approval. Depending on the number of comments received, this may be a monumental task, but regardless of how quickly the summary is finished (and quality should not come at the price of speed), Board members will have a maximum of five business days to consider the public comments. It is questionable whether this is enough time for CAMPO Board members, given their busy schedules and other responsibilities, to carefully consider public comments. Moreover, there are various documents listing the project amendments that are inconsistent from each other, creating confusion as to what exactly to comment on. Different versions of the project list are found on: a back-up document to the February 24 TAC meeting agenda, a back-up document to the March 23 TAC meeting agenda, and the Open House. None of these versions is dated or contains any notes as to how it relates to other versions. It is concerning that either the public document or the document provided to TAC members is inaccurate. Further, the deadline for submitting comments has been changed at least twice, with no public notices or acknowledgment of these changes. Postcards were sent stating that the public comment period closes on March 25, The website currently states that the comment period ends March 28. The CAMPO Open House linked to on CAMPO s website states that comments are due April 15, 2016; although the website states that this deadline applies to the TIP, this should also be made clear on the Open House document too, to reduce unnecessary confusion. Additionally, a link in the right hand column to Get Involved from CAMPO s Transportation Improvement Program page (CAMPO> Plans & Programs> Transportation Improvement Program) indicating an opportunity to comment on the TIP takes the user to a post dated September 11, 2015 and announcing several October open houses. 3

19 The Open House document is also confusing in that it contains two separate sections of the list of requested amendments to the 2040 Plan, with the two lists separated by the draft TIP. Intuitively, one would think that each list would be grouped together at once; because the TIP comments are due later, it is not given the public will continue to turn the pages and see the additional 2040 Plan amendments during the applicable public comment period. Also, the last two columns in Table 34: Grouped Projects, showing requested amendments to the 2040 Plan, have the exact same description at the top, but a mix of no and yes in each column for the individual projects. Perhaps one of the columns is supposed to be labeled FY Group, but it is not known which one that would be, or what the description provided even means. In short, the public comment process was fraught with confusion and inconsistent information. This can have a chilling effect on public participation not only in the current process, but also in future opportunities for public involvement. SOS Alliance asks that going forward, CAMPO facilitates public involvement by providing clear, consistent, up-todate information, including explanations of changes or inconsistencies across documents. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, /s/ Kelly D. Davis Kelly D. Davis, Staff Attorney Bill Bunch, Executive Director Lauren Ice, Staff Attorney For Save Our Springs Alliance 4

20 metro analytics TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Date: January 14, 2014 To: SOS Alliance Subject: Congestion Relief Concepts MichaelR.Brown,PE,PTP,AICP Transportation Engineer, Planner Address: 1435 N. Easthills Circle, Bountiful, UT Mobile: (801) Site: metroanalytics.com Today s problems cannot be solved by the same level of thinking that created them. Albert Einstein Slaughter Lane and LaCrosse Avenue on the MoPac highway (Hwy 1) are proposed for grade separation because existing congestion at these locations is reportedly getting too high. As experts in Innovative Intersections, we were contacted by SOS Alliance, who requested that we look at these locations briefly and suggest any strategies for relieving congestion that could work well without expensive grade separation. At-grade intersections often become congested and inefficient when left-turn arrows are added to improve safety. The arrows increase the number of phases in a signal cycle, and also increase the overall amount of yellow and red time, which reduces capacity. Innovative Intersections are a new family of strategies designed specifically for handling left turns in creative ways that do not require dedicated left-turn arrows at the main intersection. In our quick review, there are at least four general strategies that may work well at both locations. We have not researched either existing or future traffic levels, but it appears from aerial photos that at both intersections the most problematic left turn will be the EB to NB movement. The next page shows four ideas. With the Continuous Flow Intersection (CFI), the red path shows how left turning traffic would cross over westbound traffic just west of the west intersection. It can then safely turn northbound without conflict. The crossing one-way couplet strategy is sometimes referred to as Town Center Intersections because such couplets are often part of walkable urban environments, and the interiors can easily be developed without seriously impacting traffic. It requires four signals, but each signal is 2-phase rather than 3 or 4- phase, which allows the overall system to easily handle more traffic even in a pedestrian environment. The green arrows show how both free-rights and free-lefts are possible. Note that the four lefts together make it appear like a large roundabout, and indeed these are sometimes referred to as square-abouts. The Median U-turn is very popular in Michigan and gaining strength nationally. It requires a bulb-out wide enough for design vehicles to turn around. A variation called a Bowtie uses either roundabouts or ellipses, which help define the gateway to the intersection, and can serve important traffic calming functions that improve safety at the main intersections. Lefts are then accomplished as Thru-U-Right, or as Right-U-Thru depending on which design is selected. A fourth idea is to use Roundabouts or Super- Circles directly in the intersections. A super-circle is like a roundabout, but uses one or more signals to create gaps for critical movements. The same concepts all appear practical at LaCrosse Avenue, though they were not drawn. At first glance it appears there is plenty of room at both LaCrosse and Slaughter to make any of these designs work very nicely, and they may work well as a permanent solution if MoPac were not extended any further. All of these strategies are vastly less expensive than bridge structures, and there is nothing about them that is inherently incompatible with future grade separation if ultimately it came to that. The next step is to test them in micro-simulation tools against existing volumes and potential future volumes to see how well they perform relative to existing conditions. A primer on Innovative Intersections is available at metroanalytics.com under the download section titled Innovative Intersections ~ Drive Slower But Travel Faster.pdf.

21 metro analytics

22 Attachment E Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organiza on Transporta on Improvement Program (TIP) The Transporta on Improvement Program (TIP) is CAMPO s planning document that details transporta on improvement projects to begin construc on or implementa on in a four-year window. Regional agencies such as TxDOT, Capital Metro, and the Capital Area Rural Transporta on System (CARTS), as well as local governments, examine their an cipated projects for the four-year TIP cycle then submit those projects to CAMPO for inclusion in the TIP. Before a project can be listed in the TIP, it must be included in the long-range plan and funding must be available. In accordance with federal regula ons, all transporta on projects that use federal funding or are regionally significant must be included in the TIP before construc on can begin. The TIP is a mul -modal program that includes road, transit, bike, and pedestrian projects. The TIP can also include opera onal improvements, which are projects like electronic signs that alert motorists to lane closures, crashes, and travel mes. Provide Comments on the Transporta on Improvement Program Public comments on the TIP will be accepted un l 5 p.m. April 15, Comments for amendments to the TIP and CAMPO 2040 Plan are due by 5 p.m. Monday, March 28,2016. Maps and addi onal details are available at Comments can be submi ed by: Mail: CAMPO Fax: P.O. Box campo@campotexas.org Aus n, Texas In person: 505 Barton Springs Rd., Suite 700 Inside Bastrop County.Page 2 Burnet County.. Page 2 Caldwell County...Page 2 Hays County Page 3 Travis County. Page 3 Williamson County..Page 3 What is CAMPO? Page 4

23 B C Attachment E B C C C H C 2

24 T C Attachment E M P Project areas for projects submi ed for the TIP and amendments to the TIP and 2040 Regional Transporta on Plan are shown on the accompanying maps. In addi on to these projects, others not displayed here include maintenance and safety grouped projects such as repaving, rehabilita ng bridges, improving pavement markings, and installing flashing beacons and traffic signals. W C For more details and project descrip ons associated with the project ID numbers shown here, please visit or call Scan from your smartphone s code reader to view the open house material. 3

25 Attachment E Physical Address: 505 Barton Springs Rd., Suite 700 Aus n, Texas Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1088 Aus n, Texas Phone: Fax: Area Metropolitan Planning Organiza on What is CAMPO? The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organiza on (CAMPO) is the agency that approves the use of federal transporta on funds in CAMPO s six-county region Bastrop, Burnet, Caldwell, Hays, Travis, and Williamson coun es. The Transporta on Policy Board is the governing body of CAMPO and is made up of 20 elected officials and representa ves of transporta on agencies from the six-county region. CAMPO is responsible for coordina ng with regional agencies and local governments to develop a 20+ year long-range plan and a four-year program of projects. 4

26 Attachment E Open House Purpose Learn about the projects submitted for the TIP and amendments to the TIP and 2040 Plan. Ask questions about the projects submitted for the TIP and amendments to the TIP and 2040 Plan. Comment on the projects submitted for the TIP and amendments to the TIP and 2040 Plan. Comments must be received by 5 p.m. Friday, April 15, 2016

27 Attachment E Bastrop County

28 Attachment E Burnet County

29 Attachment E Caldwell County

30 Attachment E Hays County

31 Attachment E Travis County

32 Attachment E Williamson County

33 Attachment E Tell us what you think! By Mail P.O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas By Fax By campo@campotexas.org Comments must be received by 5 p.m. Friday, April 15, 2016