Item 01: Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) San Marcos Transportation Corridors Study

Status
Not open for further replies.

COSM_Admin

Administrator
Staff member
Receive a presentation and hold discussion on Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (CAMPO) San Marcos Transportation Corridors Study.
 

MBaker

Council Member
Very great study with lots of helpful information!

Is it possible to get a better version of the priorities list that isn't across two pages? It would also be helpful to see all the short/mid/long terms goals together to see if any of the short term goals align with ARP dollars.

I noticed park and rides were only recommended a few times, were they not favorable to the respondents or are they not as feasible because of our growing bus system/other factors?

For the longer connected bike/walking routes have we considered adding more public restrooms/trash receptacles? I also saw in DC that they had smaller trash service vehicles, do those have lower impacts on streets/curbs and does TDS offer that service? Oh and are those smaller vehicles more fuel efficient/electric?

Considering the types of industries we're attracting to the area, do we anticipate larger truck traffic to support the warehouse spec buildings going up, and what can we do to control the flow of larger vehicular traffic through congested areas? Are there ways to limit time of use, charge fees for violators, and disincentivize vehicles of certain sizes around downtown for instance?

Where would we move the dog park?

Maybe missed it, but does the study mention how many railroad accidents we have each year?

It doesn't seem like the plan suggests adding more parks and open space to the study area, did I miss something?

Gaining trust for public transit by "getting the little things right" like shade, timing, communications, etc. This is what we heard from DOT on our DC trip.

With the price tag on these recommendations, should we consider a bond to jumpstart the program and create funds for matching grants/investments?
 

COSM_Admin

Administrator
Staff member
Response provided by Laurie Moyer, Interim Assistant City Manager:

Is it possible to get a better version of the priorities list that isn't across two pages? It would also be helpful to see all the short/mid/long terms goals together to see if any of the short term goals align with ARP dollars. See attached.

I noticed park and rides were only recommended a few times, were they not favorable to the respondents or are they not as feasible because of our growing bus system/other factors? I do not recall that this was a specific issue discussed as part of this study. More discussion was held on the “park once” concept by encouraging the multi-modal experience. Conversations are starting about park and rides on IH-35 with discussions on regional commuter bus service between Austin and San Antonio.

For the longer connected bike/walking routes have we considered adding more public restrooms/trash receptacles? I also saw in DC that they had smaller trash service vehicles, do those have lower impacts on streets/curbs and does TDS offer that service? Oh and are those smaller vehicles more fuel efficient/electric? Lighting and trash/recycling receptacles are part of design consideration on greenways projects. Restrooms at locations that intersect with parks or other public places would be the easiest to consider. Maintaining the cleanliness of these facilities are the current challenge with staff/funding. Will need more time to investigate the question about the impacts of trash vehicle sizes.

Considering the types of industries we're attracting to the area, do we anticipate larger truck traffic to support the warehouse spec buildings going up, and what can we do to control the flow of larger vehicular traffic through congested areas? Are there ways to limit time of use, charge fees for violators, and disincentivize vehicles of certain sizes around downtown for instance? We do consider the amount of proposed freight traffic with the design of a roadway; design elements can support or discourage. From the larger perspective, providing appropriate freight transportation routes benefits all parties. CAMPO is just beginning a freight study to help communities determine those roads which are necessary for the movement of goods in the region. It will include each city’s preferred scenario for industrial/warehouse land use and where the existing are located. Companies like Amazon will be stakeholders in the study.

Where would we move the dog park? The dog park can remain in its current location in both scenarios for the municipal complex catalyst. Under Plan B it could also be relocated to the proposed greenspace at the current HHW drop off site.

Maybe missed it, but does the study mention how many railroad accidents we have each year? Appendix B page 73, of the document states that from the Texas Railroad Information Management there were 2 in the last 5-years. I will check on the actual years as I believe it would be the 5 years prior to 2020.

It doesn't seem like the plan suggests adding more parks and open space to the study area, did I miss something? That recommendation would have been outside the scope of this transportation study. The cross-sections and catalyst sites do include considerations from an environmental/human level interaction perspective.

Gaining trust for public transit by "getting the little things right" like shade, timing, communications, etc. This is what we heard from DOT on our DC trip. Good message

With the price tag on these recommendations, should we consider a bond to jumpstart the program and create funds for matching grants/investments? Yes
 

Attachments

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top