Map / Transportation Advisory Board / ← 2023-09-11 · 2023-11-13 →
Transportation Advisory Board · regular
10-9-23 Transportation Advisory Board Meeting
- Date
- Series
- regular
- Status
- past
- Sources
- YouTube, via the Woven archive; YouTube's automatic captions
Agenda
No agenda items read for this meeting.
Excerpts by topic
AI-read · unreviewed36 mentions; quotes verbatim from the captions or agenda, chosen by a model, unchecked by a personlow income housing tax credits to push for more Federal funds so that we can build more and more and more
They are not asking for a parking reduction. So they're meeting city of boulder parking requirements.
This is a site review application. It did go through concept review prior.
is the proposed project generally consistent with the transportation goals of the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan
Staff finds that they've done a pretty good job of addressing the Boulder Valley Comp plan and transportation master plan goals.
Staff finds that they've done a pretty good job of addressing the Boulder Valley Comp plan and transportation master plan goals.
Basically re-graded and kind of elevated the building part of the site so that it's out of the floodplain.
they're required to meet all of our floodplain regulations and all of our wetland regulations
And the life science standpoint, some of the research tech they are a little bit more office focused within the building.
I'm assuming that the low stress walking bike network plan gets incorporated into the transportation master Plan
We have now a conflict between the East Boulder subcommunity plan and the Tmp.
We have now a conflict between the East Boulder subcommunity plan and the Tmp.
what we determined as staff is that the East Boulder Subcommittee Plan takes precedence
That was taken out of these boulders subcommittee plan
it feels unusual that the proposals not seeking a parking reduction
your feelings on the project's consistency with the Tnt and with the comp plans, transportation policies
I'm not seeing a whole lot of detail in the Tdm portions of this application
and that means sort of more aggressive Tdm. More aggressive reductions and single occupancy vehicle.
So as of now this it's a call up item. So really it's it's a staff level approval
we can't really tell them to add more bike parking and take away car parking
that in 2016, through 2022, the number of E-bike crashes each year ranged from one to 6
e bike crashes relative to all bike crashes are at 20.8% based on the data reported so far in 2023
O over 80% of ebike crashes that have been reported since 2,016 have involved an e-bike with a vehicle
relative to the baseline road phase, one can project additional elements are planned to be added along the corridor
and these show some of the work to date on the baseline road phase
We have plans that are underway to add 2 additional red light running cameras next year
And I understand there's limited budget. But but yet there's things that to me are are no brainers
how the city is fiscally constrained, how we're gonna pay for pavement financing
are there any innovations, or I don't know new thinking that we should offer that city council should be thinking about with respect to financial strategies
how to think about what is pavement costs like, whether it's an annual terms
and we should be considering it like a pavement district
on the tab cip bike tour. We stopped at the Thirth and Colorado intersection to see the 2 underpasses
private utility costs typically aren't included in city budgets
what might be the most expensive city of Boulder capital project in my time on the board
when individuals in the department have not been transparent about budgets like this
I would hope in the case of this capital projects and all projects that they're willing to be transparent about resource implications