Capital District                                                                                                       May 25, 2004

Transportation Committee                                                                                                           





DATE/TIME/PLACE: May 13, 2004, 3:30 PM; CDTC Offices


ATTENDANCE: Bob Phillips; Jack Reilly (CDTA); Sandy Misiewicz (CDTC);

John Poorman (CDTC).




John Poorman briefly went over the content of the Long Range Regional Transportation Plan Comparative Analysis paper. 


  • One of the findings is that many MPO’s are making big commitments in their plans, some with no or limited population growth.  The implication is that we should feel we have permission to think about big projects in the Capital District, especially if the region is to experience any kind of higher growth scenario (which is not a prediction). 


  • The Capital District should also be thinking about “what if” scenarios such as what would happen here if areas like Phoenix can no longer physically support additional people.  Would there be a push to come to the Capital District?


As a reminder to the group, the charge of working group C is to put those big things on the table that the region should start thinking about.  However, the ideas put on the table are not guaranteed to make it into the 2030 plan but will be considered.


The project rankings submitted by members of the working group were then discussed.  The rankings and subsequent discussion led to the development of a list of projects that will be further evaluated.  These projects are:


·       California State Route 91 Congestion Pricing

·       Removal of the Park East Freeway Stub in Milwaukee

·       Minnesota DOT Noise Abatement Program

·       Ottawa Transitway

·       Raleigh Durham Regional Transit Plan/Regional Rail Project

·       Vancouver Greenways Program


In addition, several projects will be forwarded to other working groups for further analysis. Group B (Expressway System Issues and Options) will be asked to consider the Los Angeles Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control System and the Wisconsin Regional Freeway System Reconstruction Study.  This hand-off reflects the fact that Group B is already exploring reconstruction requirements and has a stated charge to look at expressway management options.  The remaining expressway candidates in Group C’s list relate to mitigation and re-integration efforts (freeway removal and noise abatement) and major expansion (congestion pricing and transitway), which are not the focus of Group B.  Group A (Effects of Alternative Growth and Development Scenarios) will be asked to consider the Portland Light Rail and Land Use Development effort (at least the land use policy aspect).  The light rail subject was not a high priority in Working Group C members’ responses.


NEXT STEPS: CDTC staff will conduct additional research on the six projects to be further analyzed and will generate brief reports on each for review by the working group.  We will set a date and time for the next meeting once we have meaningful products to share with the group.