Page 1 of 14
Strafford Metropolitan Planning Organization
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
DRAFT
March 7, 2008 Minutes
Present: Bruce Woodruff, Chair (Dover), Wally Dunham (Madbury), Larry Brown (Milton), Diane Hardy (Newmarket), Melodie Esterberg (Rochester), Ed Jansen (Rollinsford - Alternate), David Sharples, Vice-Chair (Somersworth), Tom Dube (Wakefield), Rad Nichols (COAST), Becky Ohler (NH DES-ARD), Nick Alexander (NH DOT), Steve Ireland (NH DOT – District 6), Leigh Levine (FHA), Paul Foundoukis (FHA – Alternate), Steve Pesci (UNH)
Proxy Votes: John Law (Farmington)
Members Not Present: Mark Stevens (Middleton), Michael Clark (New Durham), Nathaniel Leach (Rollinsford), Shelley Winters (NH DOT – Rail & Trails), Tom Reinauer (SMRPC)
Guests and Staff: Dale Abbott (SRPC), Myranda McGowan (SRPC)
NOTE: Bruce Woodruff arrived late to the meeting. In his place, Vice-Chair David Sharples ran the meeting.
- Introductions
Introductions were made around the table and people gave their name and what town or agency they were representing.
- Staff Communications
- Draft Strafford MPO TAC November 1, 2007 Minutes
B. Ohler stated that at the top of page five, CMAQ Action Committee should be changed CMAQ Advisory Committee. S. Pesci, D. Sharples, and T. Dube all abstained from voting due to not attending the last meeting.
4. STIP Revision Procedures
D. Abbott reminded the committee that the STIP Revision Procedures broke down into three amendment types: amendments, administrative modifications, and information only. D. Abbott gave an update on the STIP Revision Procedures draft document and explained that the Federal Highway Department is currently working the draft version and that the final version may be available for the next Strafford MPO TAC Meeting.
L. Levine stated that the Federal Transit Authority would also need to approve the draft version.
5.STIP Amendment #6
D. Abbott distributed the legal notice of STIP Amendment #6 and explained that this was a summary of projects and changes taking place in STIP Amendment #6 and that the full document was available on the SRPC website and at the SRPC Office.
D. Abbot explained that the additional project in the document was for the Dover Community Trails project. D. Abbott the Dover Community Trails program has received an additional $230,000 from the TE (Transportation Enhancement) Committee at their last meeting on February 13, 2008. D. Abbott reported that the rest of the projects in the STIP Amendment #7 have been discussed at the last two TAC meetings.
D. Abbott announced that the Strafford Metropolitan Planning Organization’s Policy Committee would be holding a special meeting and public hearing on April 11, 2008 at 9:00AM at the Strafford Regional Planning Commission Office, following the regularly scheduled meeting of the Strafford Regional Planning Commission’s Executive Committee meeting to approve STIP Amendment #6. D. Abbott explained that STIP Amendment #6 needs to be approved prior to the next regularly scheduled Strafford Metropolitan Planning Organization’s Policy Committee meeting at the end of May 25, 2008.
S. Pesci stated that he was concerned about not having a quorum at this meeting due to the time of day that it was being held and explained that the UNH bus purchase needed the STIIP Amendment #6 approval to be moved forward. D. Abbot explained that the members of the Executive Committee were also members of the Policy Committee and that there would need to be three to four additional Policy Committee members at the meeting to have a quorum.
D. Abbott asked the committee if they had any questions regarding STIP Amendment #6. B. Ohler wanted to know if the committee needed to make a motion to make a recommendation for the Policy Committee to accept STIP Amendment #6. D. Abbott responded by stating that he thought the recommendation could wait until the April meeting, but that the committee could make a recommendation today if they felt comfortable.
S. Pesci made a motion to allow the Technical Advisory Committee to recommend that the Policy Committee approve the STIP Amendment #6. R. Nichols seconded the motion. All members present were in favor of the motion, with T. Dube abstaining from voting.
L. Brown asked the committee about the construction along the Spaulding turnpike and the regulations for billboards for highway information. S. Ireland responded that advertising signs are regulated by the outdoor advertising patrol, however there are some signs that have been obscured by trees and have recently been un-obscured. L. Brown spoke a billboard in Rochester by Exit 14. S. Ireland stated that he wasn’t sure which one that was but said that billboards are regulated by the outdoor advertising patrol and the believes that billboards are also regulated and charged a fee.
L. Brown also asked the group about the definition of a second barrel, in reference to the Newington-Dover Turnpike Project. S. Ireland explained that the two-barrel describes the divided highway, one going north and one going south and explained that they would be building one barrel and then they build the other barrel.
D. Sharples asked the committee if there was any further discussion on STIP Amendment #6. S. Pesci stated that this MPO and Technical Advisory Committee have been discussing for many years about the indexing of project costs and expressed that he thought it was great to see the indexing of projects and to see the realistic view of what the projects are costing as they are delayed. S. Pesci stated that he was glad that the state and Federal Highways have agreed to use a standard of 3.2% of indexing.
D. Abbott reminded the committee that the number currently being used is not official and that it is still being reviewed. D. Abbott stated constraint within the STIP is based on projects. N. Alexander stated that each project is inflated by the year of whenever the project it is programmed, so if a project is programmed in 2010, then it would include 3.2% compounded over four years. N. Alexander explained that in the STIP Amendment #6, inflated project totals are not included, but they are taken into account in the financial constraint but they hope to be moving in that direction. S. Pesci stated that this a positive step in the right direction and that he was glad to see this happening. D. Abbot stated that he has updated the TIP to include the draft numbers but that they are not being used at the moment.
B. Ohler stated that this would be interesting for TAC and MPO members to see how the projects change in cost and will be a good reality check because it could stress the importance of not delaying projects because of the higher construction costs that been occurring over the past few years.
6. Fiscal Constraint Analysis
D. Abbot explained that after December 11, 2007, all MPO’s were required to show year the year of expenditure of the inflated costs for projects in their TIPs and Long Range Plans. D. Abbot stated that at this time, the STIP is the actual fiscal constraint document and that the MPO has the draft numbers in the MPO TIP, but the numbers are not official and there has been discussion at Federal Highways about the actual figures to use on the inflated cost.
L. Levine responded by stating that it hasn’t been much of a discussion of the inflation cost or the figures to use, but on how to portray that in the STIP project listing and that they are working on that in the next STIP updated in FY09.
D. Abbott handed out the fiscal constraint analysis for STIP Amendment #6 so that the committee could see the numbers. D. Abbott explained that this will become part of the Amendment process and the TIP will show the values for each project.
D. Sharples asked how the rate of inflation was decided upon? L. Levine explained that they have had guidance that suggests a figure in lieu of locally developed information, which is 4%. L. Levine explained that the 3.2% in New Hampshire was developed with the assistance of the Federal Highway Administration and New Hampshire Department of Transportation and they believed the rate was reasonable, partially based on looking back at the inflation rate over the past twenty years.
N. Alexander stated that they have received many comments about the number being too low. N. Alexander explained that while costs have increased dramatically over the past several years, a rate of 3.2% is inline with a longer, twenty-year view of annual increases." N. Alexander also explained that using 18-20% inflation rate would be too high.
7. Route 125 Corridor Study Update
M. McGowan gave an update on the Route 125 Corridor Study and report that the consultants, VHB have finished the final draft version of the document and have given it to Strafford Regional Planning Commission staff for their review. M. McGowan stated that the draft version of the plan is available for review and that it can be downloaded from the Strafford Regional Planning Commission website ( and that people have until Friday, March 14, 2008 to send a written comment via e-mail () or fax (603-742-7986).
S. Ireland reported that he has received several phone calls regarding the Route 125 Corridor Study. S. Ireland explained that he had referred a resident of Epping to Strafford Regional Planning Commission because the representative for the town of Epping on the Route 125 study was no longer available. M. McGowan stated that she had not received any phone calls, but would ask the Project Manager, Julie LaBranche if she had received any phone calls.
B. Ohler asked if there was a summary of the conclusions from the report. D. Abbot explained that in the town of Lee is looking at rezoning the town so VHB has made some recommendations for Lee for rezoning. D. Abbott stated that Epping has added significant development that when people are traveling from Rochester into Epping, traffic slows when entering Epping. D. Abbott stated that one of the recommendations for the town of Barrington is to add a roundabout because they are interested in redeveloping the town center at Route 125 and Route 9 near Calef’s and a possible roundabout north of that location due to a potential development.
B. Ohler asked if there were any suggestions on limiting access or combining driveways. D. Abbott stated that as part of the plan, access management was discussed with all four communities with the intention of having them all sign memorandum of understanding.
B. Ohler asked if that meant no more curb cuts or limiting them. D. Abbott responded that it would be to try to eliminate them, and explained that VHB included aerial photographs that show rough estimates of access roadways for large developments in an attempt to eliminate curb cuts.
M. McGowan reported to the group that a citizens based warrant article will be voted on in the town of Lee to rezone part of Route 125 into Commercial development. D. Hardy stated that she was surprised to learn that the zone where S&J Transportation is located is not commercial zoning. D. Abbott stated that along the Route 125 corridor in Lee, there are many environmental constraints.
D. Abbott recommended that the committee review the document because there are sketches, suggested intersection improvements along the Route 125 corridor; examples include putting in left-turn lanes, center medians.
L. Brown asked if the plan included rough costs of projects. D. Abbott responded that he didn’t know if estimated dollars for the projects were included in the plan.
B. Ohler asked if it included zoning changes. D. Abbott responded that he believed that plan did address zoning changes.
D. Hardy asked if there would be any changes to the Lee Traffic Circle. D. Abbott stated that SRPC had asked VHB to come up with a conceptual design to reduce the size of the traffic circle, to make it into a two-lane roundabout.
R. Nichols stated that COAST and Wildcat Transit actively participated in the Route 125 Corridor Study committee and there was much discussion around public transportation along the corridor. R. Nichols stated that UNH has a growing population of students in Rochester and from that COAST would be interested in public transportation along the Route 125 corridor, near the Lee Traffic Circle that could connect to UNH.
S. Pesci discussed park and ride lots in the region and the closing of the Sugar Shack Park and Ride lot in Lee. S. Pesci suggested that another park and ride lot should be build, preferably on the eastern part of Route 4 near the Lee Traffic Circle and stated that transit along that route is UNH’s highest priority and that it is possible that UNH would start this service as early as next September, 2009 as a UNH Commute service with an AM, PM, and mid-day transit service through the Route 125 corridor to Rochester and the Exit 10 park and ride lot.
S. Pesci discussed the regional issue of park and ride lots and asked about when and how DOT looks at funding in developing park and ride lots. S. Pesci stated that the Regional Planning Commission, UNH, and COAST have had conversations with DOT in the past to discuss park and ride lots, and that the region has completed several successful park and ride lots and we should be looking at how we can come up with the funding to complete more park and ride lots. S. Pesci discussed the success of the park and ride lot at Pease and how it is has expanded once already. R. Nichols stated that park and ride lots can be very successful when paired with transit.
B. Ohler asked if there have been any discussions on completing a study for an east-west transit route along Route 4. B. Ohler stated that a few years ago, a study was being looked into, but was not done. B. Ohler expressed that with the price of gas increasing and the increased number of curb cuts that have slowed traffic along Route 4 that it might be time to look at this study again.
D. Abbott stated that he has not heard of any proposed study, but that we are looking for input into possible SPR grant applications.
S. Pesci stated that UNH is interested in getting a connection between the Durham and Manchester Campuses and is interesting in working with the Manchester Airport and the Downeaster. S. Pesci expressed that UNH is willing to be an active participate and willing to be the match provider for a market rate transit connection between Downeaster riders and the Manchester Airport. S. Pesci stated that wasn’t sure if this could be an SPR study but that it should be discussed, as UNH would be interested.
- SPR Grant Round: Grant Application
M. McGowan explained that the SRPC staff have been discussion several different options for SPR grant applications for FY08. M. McGowan explained that the first study would be a corridor study, either a study on Route 108 near Skyhaven Airport in Rochester to Somersworth, and then finishing near Oak Street in Dover or Route 108 in Newmarket.
M. McGowan acknowledged in the last few months, two pedestrians were killed in our region, one waiting at a bus stop and one crossing the street after visiting her daughter’s apartment and that SRPC is proposing to create a Pedestrian Safety Plan.
D. Sharples asked if the study would focus on any particular area. M. McGowan responded that focus would be on towns with transit stops, Dover, Somersworth, Farmington, Durham, and Newmarket.
D. Hardy reported that Newmarket has been working for decades on the development on the mills and that recently, a developer had approached the town in redeveloping one of the old mills into 151. D. Hardy explained that the developer had to go before of Zoning Board of Appeals due to the current zoning not allowing that much density. D. Hardy stated that the application was denied and that the reason the application was denied was because of the safety of pedestrians crossing street from the parking lot to the building. D. Hardy suggested that a study could be completed to look at pedestrian safety in Newmarket that could review possible traffic calming solutions for pedestrian safety.
S. Pesci expressed that he thought this would be a great focused study, as some of the SPR studies tend to focus on big corridors.
D. Sharples asked the development would include any new building. D. Hardy stated that it would not be building anything new, but would be renovating the existing footprint of the building that would have included commercial space and 2,500 square feet of space for the community, and a pedestrian courtyard.
S. Pesci stated that all towns in New Hampshire have a state or federal road running through the center of town and the ones that have succeeded have been able to get people to the downtown and manage the traffic.