This is a request the council approve a study—costing up to $50,000—of how well the city is doing meeting multimodal standards of traffic management. The money has already been budgeted for.
Bagby objects that the study, as proposed, doesn’t factor in the trips generated by nearby Okaloosa County development, and adjusts the traffic counts to get averages: “I’d like to know the actual counts.”
Planner Ashley Grana: We can get you those.
Bagby: We need the information on county area: As Commons get built up, it’s going to get very bad. “When we report trips separately, nobody knows we’re both pouring trips on (the road). When you put this hand over here and this hand over there and nobody knows what you’re doing and then you put them together …”
Jim Wood: “I just have a minor concern. As we progress through our multimodal plans, one of the intents is to see if we’re succeeding or not.” Will this data help?
Ashley: “That’s the whole purpose … we’re submitting this documentation to DOT.”
Wood: Second issue: He gets very disturbed by some of the wages we pay our consultants and contractors. There’s not only a project manager, there’s also a “responsible person”—why isn’t the manager responsible? “When I’m paying an admin person almost $30 an hour to do admin work, that just sickens me.”
Barker: I thought we had to pool trips? Grana: The county wanted to amend that because they didn’t want to do it. Barker: “I didn’t think the county could bow out of an agrement just by not wanting to.” Grana: “I didn’t either.”
Kisela: Was the agreement amended? (I may have the answer in an old file, I’ll have to check).
Motion: Unanimous.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.