On Jan 5, 2012, at 2:33 PM, D. Williams wrote:

Notes:
 
Good Afternoon Everyone:
 
I only have a few comments.
 
Pg 5 Q 16: Change the “s” to “x” on the second line item
Pg 9 24h: Does this include HUD housing, senior housing, etc.?
Pg 20 46a: “busses” or “buses” seems correct
Pg 21 47. The MMMPO’s TDM program encouraged 705 Corridor Employers (a high congestion area) to promote Bike to Work Week and Bike Month to their employees.

Is it MMMPO, GMPO, M3PO, MPO?  Currently the application uses MPO.

Pg 31 17: There are traffic counts and traffic classification counts from the City and from the MPO that include axle widths for class 1 vehicles that can be used to determine Cyclists usage.

Do you mean Pg31 Q73. What additional information do you have on bicycle use for your community?  That's where I added your sentence.

 
See you this evening.
 
D. Williams
 
 
 
Planning is about leading, innovating and inspiring the next generation.” –APA, Communication Bootcamp
 
 
From: bikeboard-bounces@cheat.org [mailto:bikeboard-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Frank Gmeindl
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 5:38 PM
To: Bicycle Board
Subject: [Bikeboard] Fwd: BFC application
 
Bicycle Board Members,
 
When I integrated everyone's input into the BFC application, I did not use the most recent Engineering input.  The attached v02 of the application now includes the most recent Engineering input.  There are some differences but only in a few of the questions.  Everything else in the application is the same as v01 that I sent you yesterday.  The attached file is also in Dropbox at http://db.tt/M3bbJyfC .  
 
As I said yesterday, there are still some rough areas in the application that are easy to find by looking for red text and comments in the margin.  If you have solutions to any of those issues, please reply-all to this message with them.  Also, please indicate anything that can be improved.  The application should be ready to submit by the end of tomorrow's meeting.
 
Frank