Nov 14, 2017 Mobility Committee on 2017-11-14 9:30 AM

To order at 932, we're meeting at City Hall 215 East McKin ney Street in Denton, and the first item on the agenda is to consider approval of the Mobility Committee of the Denton City Council meeting minutes from October the 10th. I move for approval. And I, well I can't second, but, but all those in favor raise your hand. It passes unanimously. With your permission, we're going to move to item G on the agenda, having to do with the TextDOT online system because we have some representatives from the, from TextDOT here to talk about that. And we can let them get back to work so that they can be getting those two lanes going to three lanes and making all of our citizens happy. So, Mr. Nelson. That's fine with me. Good morning Mr. Chairman, Mobility Committee. As you stated, we do have a couple of representatives from the Denton area office, actually the project manager for TextDOT. Brandon Barnett and then Jay Loomis is also here. What I'd like to do rather than start from the very beginning, we can go ahead and push forward to that particular project, which is the 35E Brinker 288 Mayhill Project. Yeah, and if you would, I suspect you're going to do this, but as we saw in the letter to the editor this morning, there are people that are scratching their heads about why we had the project, Phase 1 basically completed with the three lanes each direction except for that section where Br inker Road is going to be going under the interstate. So if you could kind of explain that. We can do that. I'll actually allow John Polster to walk through that, but again it was really a reassessment. So this is the this is the particular project in question. That's the I-35E Mayhill. I think that's the wrong one. Yep, you're right. There we go. Sorry about that. Appreciate your patience. That's the I-35E Luke 28 Brinker Mayhill. We've kind of identified this as a Phase 1B as you know, AGL has substantially completed the 35 Express Project, which is the larger project with the 28 mile project from 635 in Dallas all the way up to 380 here in Denton. And so in fact they just had the ribbon cutting last week down at Highland Village. And so again, there's a handful of nominal items, cleanup items that AGL is doing up and down the corridor, but they are substantially complete. You've got an update in the back of your packet that talks about the medallions, which is the aesthetic project. It looks like they'll be completing that towards supposedly mounted the UNT medallions this week and then they'll mount the Denton medallions next week. But all that to say is that they do have a handful of other nominal projects, cleanup projects on the 35 Express Project that they'll be completing. But this particular project, Phase 1, what we've called it as Phase 1B, is essentially was established or came after the fact or while we're, after the project had already been let, the 35 Express Project, whereby the city of Denton was requesting TxDOT to take a second look at some of the intersections and mobility issues associated with 288. And Brinker, we had a funding opportunity to work with a developer as well as with the county and then TxDOT to advance that particular project. And so again, what this particular project does is it opens up the 288 intersection to its full complement. It pushes through Brinker just south of there. There had been a Texas turnaround that was about a thousand feet further south towards the hospital. It was just going to be a turnaround northbound, southbound , southbound, northbound. But we requested to push that further north and connect to Brinker, which would provide some additional mobility capacity for the retail area up near the mall, an alternative route to Loop 288 accessing northbound, south bound 35, as well as adding a Texas turnaround at Mayhill to provide a little bit more capacity for that particular intersection. So with that, I'd like to turn it over to John Polster and kind of walk through that where we are at this point in time. So at the beginning of the project, we had about $1.1, $1.2 billion to try to do a $5 billion project. So we had to find some economy skills. There were some project components that were not included in the original scope of the project, 288 being one of those projects. We added projects throughout the life of the contract. We added direct connects at 121, the collector distributor, the post oak bridge, as the revenues came online. The revenues for this particular improvement came late enough into the contract with AGL that TechStop did not want to add any additional scope of services to the AGL contract. So they went and had a separate contract done and OHL got that project. And so OHL essentially takes over for AGL in that segment from just right around Mayhill to just north of 288. The improvements that are lacking in the corridor right now compared to the other parts of 35 to the north and south there are improvements that had AGL put those in, OHL in another two or three months would be coming in and ripping out because we're going to be bringing in field dirt there and raising the elevation of 35. So where the main lanes are now will be under a lot of dirt and a lot of field. So TechStop decided to take that part of the contract that AGL had to resurface and add the third lane and put it in the OHL contract because ultimately OHL would be doing that anyway. So the timing isn't perfect, but funding is never perfect in timing as well and that's the issue. We got the money later in the process, we decided to go ahead and bite the bullet and do it. So we knew there would be a period of time where the segment between 288 and Mayhill would be less useful as those sections to the north and south. So that's kind of where we're at. So as this project moves forward, we started with OHL. We've got a timeline that we're trying to address. This says February. We currently, TechStop is not accepting that timeline. The contract says August of '18. OHL and TechStop are working to create a recovery schedule to get it back into the summer of 2018. And with that, we're going to be talking about another topic that is going to impact the city for the duration of the project. And that is we have to, in order to come in and make these improvements, go back to some of the closures that we had during the cycle for AGL. One of those is the fact that we're going to have to be closing down Dallas Drive as it goes into 35 Southbound out of downtown. And that notice will be given today. Ten days from today, the contract requires that to be closed. And then the contractor will begin to move the Southbound frontage road to its new location so they can start moving the Southbound main lanes and then the northbound main lanes. And so when we presented this, you know, pre-Tem didn't get to experience the joy and pleasure of going through all the traffic control meetings first through with AGL. And so when he saw that we were proposing to shut down Dallas Drive after we revived him, got him off the floor, he started saying that, you know, we needed to look at alternatives. So we met yesterday. There's really, there's no really good alternatives. We have to shut it down. And if we move too much of the closures and the phasing of this project, too much more than what we've already got, there's a jeopardy that it'll push our schedule back into the 2019 time frame. So we're trying to hold to that schedule. So I've got Brandon Barnett and Jay Loomis here. They're the project managers for this project. We just want to let you know that come 10 days from now, Dallas Drive closes. That'll put pressure on on Teasley. That'll put pressure on, you know, 288. And then at some point during this process, 288 will become less habitable because we have to reconstruct that bridge across 35. So it's just going to be a pretty rough 12 months. So pre- 10 wanted us to come tell you. Shawn, before you hear it from the public. One of the things that may be helpful is if you or Brandon can talk about the phasing of the southbound frontage road, then the shifting of the traffic and then how how and when, or at least the schedule proposes a brinker than 288. Well, if that's okay, I want to ask Brandon come up to the mic to do that because he's the man with the plan. Good morning. As John said, my name is Brandon Barnett. I'm the project manager out there on this project. The phase into this project starts with building the new frontage road. Wanted to make sure your mic was on. Is building new frontage road just from south of Goodwill to just past the achievers. We're going to be putting in new frontage road there. Matter of fact, we're looking probably about the first week we're going to have that road. You're going to see the new asphalt down and we're going to be starting that shift. The shift goes with the existing frontage road moving over to the new frontage road. The southbound main lanes move to the old frontage road. The northbound main lanes go to the southbound side. So you're we're transitioning everyone over to the south bound side of I-35E. So that means I've got to get northbound over to the south, not only on the south end, but when we get up to the north end at 77, they're on the south side. And I've got to get back over to the north side. That's the reason for the closure of the 77 entrance. Once that's done, now I've got to move everyone back to the northbound side. That means I've got to take southbound and move them to the north. And so having that entrance come in is detrimental to not only the traveling public, but to us working there and building these transitions and getting the traffic. So what we're trying to do is minimize as much moving as possible with the traffic with the public. Essentially what we're doing is we're moving the main lanes to the south. And then we're going to be building the structure for the northbound side. Yes. Once that's done, then we'll move the traffic back to the to the I guess I'm going to say the west. And then we'll do the same thing. You all have seen it when we did 35, when we did North Texas Boulevard and McCormick. We moved the traffic to one side, build part of the bridge, move the traffic to the other side, build the other part of the bridge. So during that phase shifting, interjecting that Dallas Drive, which is already still a difficult movement with the reduced number of lanes we have there, is problematic to the phasing of the project. So they have to close it. You'll be able to then go make the U-turn, come back to Te asley. And then if you want to go south, make the U-turn and go back around going south. And we talked to Preetem about maybe once we get this closure established that he could go back and look at ways to tweak the signals to try to encourage people to go in a direction that he feels is more conducive to reducing road rage. I think it would be very helpful. Thank you, by the way, for being here and sharing that information with us. I was wondering about what appeared to be, as I was driving past it the other day, in front of where the Buc-E's will be. That's where those new service roads are. Frontage roads. I understand that people call them different things in different locations. They do. I think it would be really helpful for our public information office to craft some really important information that would go out in a press release to the papers and also show up on our website. And I think that some of the things that are important to put in there is that the 35 Project started as a $5 billion project with $1.2 billion in funding. Things had to be cut. So it was a Phase 1 and a Phase 2. And that after Phase 1 came out and was approved, we continued here locally. I think this is important, that we continue to work here locally to add some elements that were very important to mobility within the city. And that we were able to actually squeeze in the Post Oak Bridge in Phase 1. And that we crafted a Phase 1B to get intersections at Loop 288, Brinker, and at Mayhill. And that the Brinker intersection will provide access to all of those hotels on what we, I suppose, call the north side. The northbound side. Oh, that's a good way of putting it. Thank you. You must have done this before. So all of the hotels and the restaurants on the northbound side and the new commercial developments that's going in on the southbound side. We can say new commercial development so that we don't have to say Buc-E's, which causes some people to get a little bit anxious. So anyway, I think if we could get that kind of information out on the website in a press release and maybe in the upcoming one of the -- I know that space is really an issue in the utility packet, the utility bill. But if part of that information could also be, we could take -- citizens of Denton could take a little bit of pressure off of this if we just decided that we were not going to use 35 to get out to Bill Elder Ford. There's another way to do that. We can do that a different way. [ Inaudible ] Okay. So one positive scenario that's going to happen with these closures is that your in-town mobility will be different and somewhat more arduous. But the actual traffic on 35 will experience a little bit of a relief because right now we have three lanes going into two and 77 coming in. There's that conflict that's occurring. Once we close 77, we start moving these lanes to where they 're supposed to be, the traffic that's on 35 will have a little bit better experience than your residents. Have we had any feedback from citizens about the current exit off of northbound 35 onto Dallas Drive where there are these two lanes that very quickly go to one lane? It was a shock and I had a -- there was somewhat of a p ucker factor there for me. So have you had any feedback? Is that the technical term? I learned it from you, sir. So the process that Texas is going through right now with A GL is they're going to put together a punch list item for the entire 30-mile corridor. And then once they get that done, before they determine this project is -- punch list is done or the total that's in it's going to be done and they do substantial completion , they're going to come back to the city of Denton, they're going to come back to Louisville and the lake cities, and they're going to seek to get y'all's input on what y'all think are issues that need to be resolved before the contract is closed. That's been one item that we've already tagged at TechStat, the strategic project office. But like I said, you'll have another shot at it. But yeah, those are the types of things during this punch list item that we want to get resolved. So when we get comments from citizens, to whom should we direct those so that they get put in the mix? You can go ahead and -- So we'll get you that email address. You need to have your microphone on when you speak. Dalton, we'll get you that email address and you can go ahead and CC me. Okay. So if we send it to Brandon Barnett and then CC me, I'll work then internally whether I need to work with Mr. Pol ster or with Todd Estes or pre-Tim in terms of other issues. Yeah, the only thing I would say is that if you've got a concern that a citizen has given to you, you don't need to worry about who it needs to go to, per se, because you've got a city to run. You know that you've got to get it to Mark or Mario and then we'll get it to the right folks. Okay. So that's what I'd suggest is get it to your right staff member and then we'll get the answer for it. Okay. We'll funnel them all to you guys and then you all can send them out and get them lined up. Okay. Okay. Go ahead. Do you have anything? We are -- both of the members present today are under the weather. I am not practicing for some kind of special phone work. I can't believe I said that. So I'm going to -- we can go ahead and scroll through and finish this particular item with commentary from Mr. Pol ster. Okay. I will go quickly. So we have the 2181 North-South project. We have the pre-construction meeting that occurred October 5th. The MCM has worked with the city to get their batch plant permit established and the timeline we got for the other day started November 6th. And I haven't got that in the report because I sent this report out and then they told us they started time on November 6th. So your contract starts. It's the 674 working days and we will start putting in the report, an actual construction report from MCM. But like I say, their contract time started November 6th and they are excited about the batch plant being in the right place. The Fort Worth Drive project, we are looking at a May ready to let on this issue. We're getting down to the very last part of our negotiations with UP on the Exhibit A. We went from 176 comments to about 79 and we got those down to about 34 and only about 17 are comments that we think are major. So we feel fairly confident by spring of next year this project is let for construction. And your utilities are on page five. They are all in that same zone from being cleared long before the project is let. And again, remember we're using, the contract will be used and the city will be using the contractor to install y'all 's utilities in that project. Your 2499 section five, we're still on a December timeframe . We have the signal at Robinson Road, the plans for the location of it, where the poles go. The material has been ordered and as we receive it, Weber will be installing those and working with your traffic engineer to make sure they get set and established. We have a question. December, early December, late December, do we know or is it just whenever in December? I'm just kind of getting it. December. Okay. Probably closer towards the end, right? Towards the end, okay. So we don't want to open the road without the signal functioning. Right. So the contractor was pretty much getting done with what he 's got to do at that section just where it ties into Mayhill . So we're just coordinating some of the punch list items so that it doesn't close until we get, I mean it doesn't open until we get the signal installed. So the signal is kind of the critical path. So it's tight. And pre-tem, weren't they pouring the foundations for those ? No. Yes, they have the locations. When he submitted the 60% plans, that gives you the location and all the specs they need for the actual foundation. So it's just about when we get the material in and then it doesn't take long to get them installed. The long lead is usually the order of the material and getting it in for the signal. So it's December. Yeah. So we've already submitted the 90% plans and Tech started reviewing that. I was just saying, when you submitted the 60, that's all they needed in order to do the foundations. And the other thing that we're delayed for the materials is because of Hurricane Harvey, Houston is more of all the materials going in that direction. We're the last ones on the list to get the material. So there's at least a two to three week delay in getting material for signal equipment. OK, so your 35A Mayhill 2499 improvements. This just was like, what, last Thursday? Your city manager and staff met with Michael on all things Mayhill. And we should be getting a letter sometime this week saying that COG is going to help us with the funding on the actual bridge at Mayhill in 35 to go to the ultimate width of May hill. So it'll be two less, two throughs and two use. And then the grade separation at Mayhill from the four lane section across the DCTA facility. So it was very productive meeting. And COG seems very interested in putting investment in this corridor where they've got a significant amount of their resources invested because 2499 to the south is an RTR project, Mayhill to the north is an RTR project. So we should be able to have in writing some good news in the next four or five days that the COG staff is going to be recommending a funding opportunity for these two projects. And just to clarify that is Michael Morris, director of transportation for North Central Texas Council. What did I say? Michael. I thought there was only one Michael. Unless you don't count the archangel. All right, so we already talked about the Brinker project. We'll skip that one. So 35 north, there's also a significant push. We had when we had the riveting cutting for 35 V sometime last week. Wednesday. Last Wednesday. I lived it. We had Chairman Bug in attendance. And in that conversation, we were able to have we had Bill Hale there from his chief engineer now. We have Brian Barr, former DOS district employee, former district engineer, Fort Worth and then Kelly Salmon. We were able to do some conversations and I think there is some interest in the commission not looking silly by having 35 in the Wichita Falls district, which is just north of us out of our county to the Oakland area. To the Oklahoma border being six lanes and then from three 80 south, their improvements and this segment being left out. So they're in the process of looking at a new funding round for large projects. And we feel fairly confident we should get some news here in probably the next four to six months that this segment is not only coming close to being cleared by next year, but that there should be a funding source identified for it. That's big because you all see right now, once we get the brinker to to Mayhill improvements done or may help 288 done your next big problem on 35 is that wishbone tying for 35 W up to 288. That this was this will fix that problem. Okay, so your in town is open to be doing a punch list items, probably after this month we'll leave it in one more time and have a big green complete on it so it looks like we can celebrate on that. And so the question is, I mean sometimes what we'll do is see if the locals want to do like a ribbon cutting or some kind of celebration. If you want to, we can do that if you don't, you don't have to decide today. Some people don't want to be associated with that road. I understand. Just throwing it out there. And then, I'm calling this the, the Briggs improvement, because these are the and we met with the area office last Tuesday or whatever we had our technical committee meeting, and they are going to be getting me a schedule on when they want to do this because this is something they're going to do just with their maintenance. People, and it's just something they're going to do. So I'll get a schedule. They're working on schedule for us on that. So this is actually going to happen in a near term . So we believe that to be in the 90 to 120 day or certainly within six months. So what will happen is if they decided to do with asphalt, we're going into the cold weather timeframe. So we got to work out some logistics on what it is we're actually going to do. And then they'll tell us what the schedule is. There's only certain times you do asphalt. All the improvements will be done to the inside on tech start right away we're looking at maybe making it where we avoid avoid that, that control box in the median. That's the city's, I think it's part of their signal and equipment. The East, this project is fully funded at a little over $ 130 million. It's been designed in house in the green section. But the third floor, I think, is doing that. So it's fairly easy, straightforward. When you say in house, that's text up in house text. I apologize. The blue section is being done by text. And it is they've got two firms, trans systems and white oak engineers doing the blue section for PS and E. There's a total of 114 parcels in both segments. I think there's like 89 in the blue and balances in the in the in the green. And so that's your critical path. We're looking at having an environment cleared the summer of 2018. But there's a significant amount of right away to be acquired. And we're looking at they're saying a year and hopefully because I know that Frisco and little L and Solana and prosper have been because that's where all the active developments going in have been doing fairly aggressive setback requirements for that quarter. So we feel like this the right away, although there are large, large number of parcels, most of the people are already aware and have been preparing for the fact that they're going to get the right away acquired. A lot of it's commercial. And so we think we can expedite that time frame. That's the issue. Question. So I know that this section was widened several years back. So with a situation like that, did they plan that this soon it would need to be widened again? Was that part of the thought process or did this just kind of sneak up quicker than it snuck up on the council governments, it did not sneak up on the folks in Denton County that were pushing this project. Because years ago we were we were trying to get additional funding for 380 and we're talking 15 years ago. And we made the mistake of having a meeting out here in the middle of the day. We brought the director of transportation out there and he was not convinced that the need existed. He said this is the only facility seen that could actually land at 747 on it. Nobody got hurt. That's that was his argument. We were arguing that we knew what was coming. We were arguing that they've always kind of soft played our demographics for whatever reason they always do that to the northern counties. We tried for a very long time to get this project funded and the first time we did it where we went to the four lanes with the wide median. It literally took an act of Congress because the Corps of Engineers were adamant about not allowing 380 to widen. And so back back then and there was at one point when we were doing this constructing what we got approved where the text that area engineer called and said that the Corps of Engineers says that they're bringing out the US Marshals to stop them from working because they're outside of their permit area. And one of the county to help. So we called the our congressional office and worked on that so we knew that 380 was an issue for a long time. We just couldn't get the region to understand what was going on. So now we're catching up. Okay. And there's literally, if you look at the demographics here we're already at 75,000 cars a day in 2035. So we were trying to do a freeway at one point, didn't county gave almost a million dollars to call in county because they were doing a study to do turn 380 into a freeway. And so we paid for our part of the study to do a controlled access facility. And McKinney and prosper and Frisco at the time balked at a freeway. And so calling county backed away from doing a freeway segment. So, then we went today. If you're not going to do the work give us our money back because we've made the mistake of up front in the payment. And it took us a long time to get the money back so we were actually trying to design. 380 is a freeway so what we ended up with is that a hint mark where you get me to go on. Okay, quick. So what we ended up with is a compromise what we have is what's called a super street structure. So we're going to have a great separations that till legacy for 237 20 and Navo. So in those major arterials that come and hit 380 you will not have to stop for cross street traffic they will come either under over. Come on ramps and get on the facility so we're eliminating as many of the complex as possible you'll still have mayhill you'll still have, you know, some other small roads but that'll help with the traffic right we'll get pretend to cheat all those signals that he can, so that if you come up to that facility at that street you'll try to go to one that has a great separation next time because you don't get on. Or we can go with a great separation from a health next next next time. 28 West. This is a project where we're getting environmentally cleared it's the, I'll tell you is the EA approval says December 2020 the reason it's in 2020 right now is because we're doing the mobility 2045 update once we get that done sometime in spring next year we'll be able to change that to a more current date. Right now it's not in the mobility plan so we can't show it. And while we're on that slide is the white area where it starts curving to the south. Is that is that crumb. This area here yes. Now, who is communicating with the city of crumb on on that issue and how that's working. So, we're also one in FM 1173 . So the county has a regular communication with crumb on transportation issues associated with their area including not only 1173 out to crumb proper but how 1173 is going to tie into 288, is it some. Yes, we are communicating with. Thank you. I need to give it short answers. So the FM 1515, we have LTR on contract, it works says we 're supposed to go to commissioners court in November, unless that's going to happen on the 28th it won't happen in November. But I'll check on that, because my step was out last week so I couldn't check on it but it's fully contracted, we've got a green on the term on what it is, and we just got to get it executed. And we told LTR a that the primary stakeholder in that project is the city of Denton and so they're, they basically have to coordinate with the city because you've got Bonnie Bray, where it ties in to the 35 project and you 've got your airport so that's pretty much y'all are the primary stakeholder for LTR a to make happy on that project . Again, a clarification, widening the existing two line to a six lane. And then your 1830 this is the, the shoulder project, you know there were some folks that had some concerns about this. And so we just started to start reporting it to you what we 're doing out there. And then the ultimate, this is just to come in and do the 12 foot planes and then do a three foot shoulder along the corridor, and then text that is in the process of developing 1830 as a four lane divided facility and so we 're having a conversation as to what divided means because in a rural setting, you typically don't want to have a divided facility. And so there may be at areas where part of 1830 has a raised median. There may be areas of 1830 to have a flush median, and it may be areas 1830 that have a multiple median, depending upon what decisions the district makes and all those conversations will be vetted back through your staff to make sure we're doing what you want. So the way that the area merges with 377 is what a lot of the locals call Country Club Road. Is that correct. Yeah, so up at up at the north part or the . Yes, so that we're going to do an inner improvement with 377 for drive project, assuming we get it let next March or spring, where we're going to add a left turn lane on the co bson. So we're going to add on 377 1830 before you get to ops and a lot of traffic gets stuck in that little area. Right. So we're going to widen 1830 in that part and add a left turn lane so that if you're just trying to go south on 1830, you 're not stuck as bad by the people turning left and I think we're doing that on Ryan also aren't we writing a right turn lane at Ryan and country club. And I think that's all I have questions. All right. Well I got confused when I saw a card from a former staff member and thought, well what she doing here. But it's just a reminder that we're need to be done here by 1115, we're going to finish that easily. Mr. Chair, I did want to remind you that typically within a day after the presentation, this one system report is then loaded onto our city didn't website so for those who are viewing this, they'll be able to see this. We do that on a monthly basis. Thank you, Mr. Nelson. So we are to item B, receiver report hold the discussion and provide direction regarding the options for regulating stationless bike share companies in Denton. It looks like Julie Anderson, our bicycle and pedestrian coordinator is going to take this. That is correct. We did talk briefly last month mobility committee about stationless bike share. We were asked to come back and provide options for regulating. So for anybody who's watching at home or is not aware what stationless bike share is, this is third generation bike share so it's app based. There's no stations or docking stations that you have to take your bike to. It gives the user more freedom to drop off a bike to wherever their bike, wherever their trip ends or wherever their trip begins. They are operated by private companies, not by the city, and there's no monetary exchange that the city has to go through with that. They're private companies. So these are just some screenshots from the Vbikes app that they have on their, use on your phone, talks about parking your bike, how to unlock it, how to return it, and then they have a customer service. So that's how Vbikes has been, Vbikes is what's currently here in Denton right now. They arrive in approximately, hang on. On the customer service, is that a 24 hour response? I believe it is. This says that you can report issues actually in the app itself. I don't know if they have somebody checking it all 24 hours , but you can report it through the app. So do they not have an 800 number? They also have a number. The number is however not on the bike. They do have a number though. And an email. Okay. So Vbikes is currently the only stationless bike share we have in Denton right now. They came in June with about 60 bikes. We've also had other stationless bike share reach out to the city to be here as well, so Spin and Line Bikes and Z axter. We have had multiple complaints about bikes being left in the middle of the sidewalk or in random places. And so we were asked to look at what the options were to regulate these in our city, either working through an existing permit or existing ordinance or creating a new one to better regulate. So we did, met with legal. We have a few options, about four. Obviously we could just do nothing and keep both of them operating as they are now. We could use an existing ordinance, which we provided in your backup, some ordinances in Chapter 16 of our code that could pertain to this. There were some questions about who would enforce it. It doesn't really give the city any more control if we didn't have any sort of permit system. We could go ahead and use an existing ordinance and create a permit through that. But again, that ordinance isn't really specific to bike share. So the fourth option, which was to create a new ordinance that would regulate bike share and then have a permit system that addresses very specific bike share concerns. And that was the recommendation from our legal department and that staff is bringing to this body here today. So some other cities that have already done this, because this is new, St. Louis Bike Share, it's new for other cities as well. Seattle kind of is the forerunner. They started this at the end of June. San Francisco began their permit system in July. And then Aurora, Colorado just started theirs at the beginning of October. And I had a conference call with them yesterday to talk about how their permit application is actually working and their system actually is going really well for them. So we've reached out to them. We've reviewed what their permits look like. We think we can create one as well if that was the direction this body wanted to go. We like this option because a permit can cover very specific things for bike share. It can cover safety such as we don't provide a helmet, but we recommend you wear a helmet. Parking, so this is just an excerpt from the Seattle parking permit application. They talk about where you're supposed to park your bike, where not to park your bike. And it puts the impetus on the bike share operator to educate their users. Right. Do we as a city have bike laws on the books as far as I guess you just said we don't require a helmet? We don't have a helmet requirement law. Do we have a lighting law? There's a Texas state law that you're required to have a white light on the front of your back and a red light or reflector on the back of your bike. And do the bikes that we have now, do they currently have those? The bike share bikes? Yeah. I cannot, I don't know that officially, no. Right. And so that... What? That might be something that we can address. Yeah. And we would address that right in safety. You know, as followed, the Texas transportation code about the need to have lights. Insurance requirements. Yes, and we would require insurance. All of that would come as part of that permit process. Okay. Thank you. Great. Yeah, no problem. So it can cover parking, operations, so the permit could say you must have a staff here in Denton, you must be able to resolve all problems within 24 hours, you must have a phone number on your bike, all those things. We can also ask them to data share with us. Obviously we'd be anonymous, but it would say where are these people going, where are they dropping off their bikes that can help us better plan our bike infrastructure. And then it'd also talk about fees, what kind of fees we would apply to the bike share company. As I said, our current ordinance doesn't cover any of these things specifically, and so it'd be really hard to actually enforce it or try to do anything. So creating the specific permit and ordinance that we could do just for bike share is our recommendation to this body. Comment. I'm in complete favor of this, and I appreciate all this work. And just for clarification, I think the V-Bikes, that was considered a pilot program, right? When it came into, I mean that's how I heard it referred to originally as a kind of a pilot. Pilot, like we didn't authorize them to come here, we just, we did meet with them and then I think the next week their bikes showed up, but we hadn't said, sure, come on down here. Right, and we do have other companies reaching out to us as well wanting to do this, so right now is a really good time . It is, and we've asked other companies, I met with both of them, Line Bikes and Spin, we've asked them to please just wait, we're kind of figuring this out so we can give you a better option instead of just throwing it together at the last minute. So they're aware of that and they're supportive of this. Both of these, all these companies are in Seattle and in Aurora already. And so with V-Bikes already being here, I'm sorry, can I? Go ahead. And we create this, they will have to comply, right? Correct, I would reach out to them and make them aware of what it is they need to do to be compliant, to be able to get a permit to be in our city. Okay, thank you so much. I think a couple of important things that we consider as we do this. It's important to point out, as you did, that this is like the third generation of bike share. And when we were looking at earlier generations and wanting bike share in Denton, we wanted it specifically so that there would be bike share stations at the Transit Center, downtown, at UNT and at TWU, so that we could deal with that last mile issue that a lot of our transit users have about getting off the train and then what do they do. And in the earlier generations, we were looking at the possibility of expending some significant dollars to help create the older kind of stations for leaving the bicycles. The fact that this latest generation does not require any upfront money from the city, but still addresses a need that we have identified and that the universities have identified is actually a good thing. So I think that as we're crafting this, we want to craft it in a way that addresses the concerns that are raised by our local residents, our local businesses. That also points out that if you're going to be using our streets for a program to generate income for yourself, that you have to, that's not free. The city is required by state law to get some type of remun eration for that. But let's do it in a way that does not necessarily make it so difficult for a bike share program to operate that they want to leave. Now, maybe if the Yellow Bike program that we have here now wants to leave, that may be okay because of the way that they're dealing with leaving bikes everywhere. Or maybe this will just get them to be more responsive. I'm wondering if this particular company that's here in Denton, are they in other cities that have implemented more regulations? I believe they are in Aurora and in Seattle, yes. Okay, and so you're going to be, as you craft the ordinance , trying to address the concerns that have been raised by business owners and by citizens? Correct, yeah. We've already had some very preliminary discussions with myself and their legal department about if we could restrict them in certain areas or require that they have to have them in areas we want them, such as by the train station or at the university, that can be a requirement in the permit. And when do you anticipate coming back to us with something specific? I believe we could probably come back next month. I don't know how many, if we're meeting in December, but we could also do it in January. Would you anticipate or consider inviting the VBike folks to attend that meeting? Yeah, I let all of them know that we're having this meeting here today and that they could live stream it if they wanted to. Well, there are throngs of folks here. Right, they didn't, they're not here, but they might be watching online. I told them all about it. Yes. Would it need to come back to this committee or could it just go to council? Because with this committee approving this going forward, then could it come to council to eliminate that one step, to get something on the books? Because I know there's other people wanting to come in and I don't want to restrict, you know. It's at your pleasure. I mean, typically the normal process would bring it back, make sure it would work session, work session to ensure that we're moving forward in the direction that you provided us and then before we would advance it. My guess is it's not going to get on a council agenda before the end of the year anyway. So if you had something and could bring it back to us. Next month? Next month or even probably at the start of January, we could queue it up for the council agenda. But we could have a chance to do a little bit of the detailed work on it that might not get done at a council work session. So that's fine with me, but in the meantime, what are some of the options that our citizens have when these bikes appear, like in trees or in ditches or inside of schools? Right, so their best option is to contact the company directly. They have people who are supposed to be here in the city or at least that work in the North Texas region to rebalance bikes. So the best because they're a private company and we don't actually have anything signed with anybody at this point. So the best point thing is to contact them directly. They show up in trees? Yes. Wow. Yeah, someone put one in a tree. And that's just typical vandalism. Is there a way to get their 800 number on our website under the bike program? I mean, just if somebody is looking and that's where they because they first they think it's a city. Oh, yeah, definitely. You know, yeah, or just yeah. Just so there is some some place if a citizen can because you said they're not located on the bikes currently. Yeah. So people don't have the app or access on their phones. Right. Yeah. If you're not a user, then you don't have the app. Right. Just in the meantime, because I know, you know, it's might take to the end of the year. So yeah, that would just be my request. That's a good request. Yeah. Thank you. Thanks. Anything else on this? Thank you very much. Thank you for that presentation. Thank you. Item C, receiver report, hold the discussion and regarding plans for the 2017 18 bike fund and provide an update on projects. Don't worry. It's me again. I will try to keep this one brief as well. OK, that's really tickled the way we're supposed to be. So it's the start of a new fiscal year. And so, as you know, the bike fund has it's not really the bike fund, but that's what I refer to it as. Two hundred thousand dollars is allocated each year from the general fund to implement our bike plan. And so when we came to you last year at about this time, one of our goals for the projects of 2017 was to accomplish all of the immediate projects that we could. So most of those were share of projects and we were able to accomplish all of those share of projects that we had planned to do this year. We got them all completed. They are the black lines on this map. Those were done. We do that. We do share with our in-house project, our in-house crews, traffic ops, go ahead and they lay those down and they put the signs on the road as well. So we were able to finish all of those this year. There were some other projects such as Ector Street that was done. It's not officially a bike lane. It's a shared bike parking lane. And that was able to get completed with our traffic ops. They had a new long line truck and they needed to practice using it. And so they used Ector as their street for practice. So that street we got striped free of charge. So that was nice. And then we have some other projects that have been slightly delayed. This is due to staffing and role changes in the engineering department. So there's no longer any in-house design, a bike infrastructure in our engineering department. So that will now be consulted out to an engineering firm that will design our bike projects for us. So on that particular point, will that put more pressure on the funds allocated or less pressure? It will put a little bit more pressure. It will be a little bit more expensive to design those projects because it will not be in-house. Now Noreen did charge her time to projects, but I do believe the cost might be a little bit more. When was that decision made and by whom? That decision was made, I don't know, a couple months ago by our engineering staff. Todd can speak about that if you would like. Okay. So part of that was a recognition that we just don't have the staff internally, a number of people to be able to address all the design needs, and a consultant can get to it much faster. Now city staff will still act as a project manager to make sure that the design goes forward quickly and efficiently. But it also allows us to take a whole group of these bicycle projects, put them into one design package, and then we can let them out much faster to construction than what we currently are doing. So will some of the other projects that had been designed internally be facing the same situation? Yes, but that's a recognition that we just do not have the capacity in-house to handle all of that work, plus this water and sewer work and everything else that was trying to be done in-house. So we push a lot of this to a consultant with our oversight to make sure that it gets done quickly. And if it ends up being more expensive for the taxpayers, more expensive for meaning that we get less bang for our buck out of the small amount of money that we're putting in the bike fund, was there not consideration to just go ahead and expand the engineering staff to handle the needs? That's definitely a consideration long term. We do not have the available full-time employee positions to be able to handle that kind of expansion. We just don't, not with the amount of work that's left to be done on the overall capital projects. Okay, go ahead. So what I think I hear you saying is there are a lot of projects right now that we could get out and have them covered under one, in one consultant under a design project instead of coming to our engineering department one at a time. Right. Right. And so it will speed the process up, but will it, how much will it reduce the funds to actually complete the work, I think is the big question. I won't know that one until we complete our RFQ process. We put an RFQ on the streets at the beginning of November for general engineering design for a wide variety of things. We will have all some middles in by the end of November. It 's been December reviewing those and then January will be coming back with contracts that come out of that. One of those contracts would be for bicycle sidewalks, things like that. Because a beautiful design doesn't really do anybody any good if we don't have the money to implement it. So I would like to make sure that we're still going to have enough to implement. And to help Todd out, you know, we are looking at, as he said, bundling a lot of our projects that are being designed into, again, having these contracts in place so that we can plan further ahead. Again, these onesies and twosies are killing our staff. And so we're just trying to bundle all these. If it comes to the point that it's -- and again, not knowing until we get the proposals in, if it comes to the point that the design dollars to design all the various planned projects are chewing up the dollars to actually do the work, then we'll come back to council with requests for additional funds. So we'll work through the budget process, make sure that we 're not losing our capacity to construct or paint or recon figure our streets so that we can make sure that we're making headway on it. Well, and I have no beef or concern. I'm not -- I'm sorry that you're up there. I think that this is at the highest levels. I think that council has been so intent, the majority of our council, on reducing the tax rate and saying that we're not reducing services. But I think this is a particular and specific example of where it is going to reduce services. We're not going to be able to continue to provide the same amount of money or get the same bang for our buck out of our bike fund because we're holding the line on hiring additional engineers. We're going to have to outsource. And because we're outs ourcing, it's going to cost a bit more money, which means that we're actually not going to be able to provide the same level of service. Surprise, surprise. When cost for construction and everything else goes up and we're trying to hold the line on our revenues, we're going to get less for that. It's just plain arithmetic. And I think that it's something that we need to put in our folders as the next round of budget discussions start because we can't pretend that we 're getting the same level of service. For the same amount of dollars when services continue to cost more and more. Well, yeah, I will say that I'm in favor of this. This is well for now, but I think I think it's a good thing that we're getting caught up. And I know that we're behind on projects and this is a good way to move forward. And then eventually we can reevaluate, like you said. But yeah, I think going forward right now, this is good. And I didn't mean to be negative or anything. I just wanted to make sure that. That's a good question. Well, I did mean to be negative, but not towards staff. Well, we definitely don't want to the intent is definitely not to do less. I mean, so, but, but we are having to take that broader approach of how do we get so many things designed and and doing it in a way that again, a bundling may help us with some economies of scale. Have some shovel ready projects available just from a speed of getting those firms because they do have the capacity staffing wise to be able to knock those complete those projects. And then we again, if it does come to a point that we need additional funds, we will come back to counsel or the committee and in the council to make sure we get those funds available for these projects. One of the things that does cost us is the longer it takes to get a project out the projects themselves get more expensive. So you definitely don't get what you intended. And this does allow us to cut down on the time frame. There's a cost center as well. I have a question because some of these projects qualify for grant funding right with sidewalks and but to qualify for grant. Don't you have to have a design in place to turn in. So this may help if we have a design already completed and the grant comes up and we see it. We're like, oh, okay, we can do that. We have this information right here. So that it's definitely more helpful if you already have a design. You don't always have to have it. But if you do, it's definitely better. Right. I just remember when we were talking about oak, we kept coming back and you know, Noreen had to do this or do that. And I know that was probably really time consuming. So I just keep thinking of that situation and how having a I guess a stack of designs already in place would be beneficial. Definitely. Well, in that regard, the stack of designs, how long is the stack of designs good. It seems that after a while, we've had designs before that have been on shelves and by the time it's we can fund them. They're no longer adequate designs. What is there. What's the shelf life. There's a lot of factors that go into that, as you can imagine, but typically anything within about a six month window. Most your consultant engineers will tell you. I don't really have to look at it. I probably need to resign it reseal it and then we're ready to go. Once you get past six months, then it's an effort to say, was anything changed appreciably for bicycle lanes. You're really just kind of looking at it. Did did something come in that changed the size of the road. Did something change. Usually get a better shelf life out of a project like that. Now you do a project where we had to do something that had a lot of elevated sidewalks and we changed the actual profile of the road up and down and anything beyond six months. They're going to want to re verify that what we've got still works. Okay, thank you. And we interrupted your presentation. Thank you, Mr. Estes. So one of those projects that will get bundled is Avenue A right here. Hercules, which is not on this map of Hercules of the northern part of town. And then this part of Crescent, which has been delayed for street work. And then we have to wait till school is out. And so that one should be getting done and sub coming summer though. I don't see Malone or is it was it was it Malone or Fulton that was doing it was Fulton that was going to have the road diet. Isn't that correct? Malone Malone Malone. Yeah, we just had a coordination meeting a couple of weeks ago when I asked if we should put Malone on our list to do next year. And they said no. Pardon me. They said no. Who said no. The other departments and water wastewater and street they 're still doing some work on Malone and they don't believe it'll be done. Their portion of it for the street then to come in and get restriped by next year. So it'll probably have to be on next fiscal year's plan. Okay. Did you have a question. It was kind of in the bundling and the project. So looking at the the bike fund projects. So some of the ones that say in design. Does that mean that they are the ones that are going to be bundled and contracted out or does that mean that the ones that are in design are going to currently stay in our. Nothing's staying right now. We had one that was on the c usp and that was mockingbird and that's going out to be consulted already. We've actually already done that one. Okay. Sent out that design. So yeah, the ones that say in design Hercules Avenue A and then the DCTA and anything else that will be done on Oak and Hickory. Those will all be designed outside. What about the ones that are on hold. Pennsylvania and sick more sick more is that that's going to be done. Yes. We had that discussion with the new the new lighting and yes sick more was a project that was discussed. Right after the bike plan was adopted. But from the stories I've been told there was never like a firm agreement on what they were going to do and they had to talk with DCTA. So decided just to shelve that project. But now we're doing a side path on sick more as part of the transportation alternative set aside. But we wanted to make sure that was on the list because money was expended at one point on that project and Pennsylvania is still on holds. I don't know when that will move forward. So are there can I just follow up with are there any of these that have been completed but not implemented that will go back out to be redesigned. Is that a situation or no if they're completed that means they're done if they're completed that means they're done with on the ground. Okay. Thank you. I'm getting a little bit anxious about time because of but I think we have to dig into a little bit of detail. I was surprised to see that Pennsylvania was on hold. I thought that that was actually funded mostly with money from the county. Correct. And that when the neighborhood reacted as they did that we went to plan B which was we transferred that money to Winds or still in the commissioners district and the county commissioners district. But but so I'm surprised to see that that's on hold. I thought that was probably dropped. Yeah on hold is probably the wrong terminology here it should just be finished or not finished but shelved and I am I don't know what what we're talking about designing for the DCTA hike and bike trail. What's that. Yes. So there are two intersections of the a train trail where crosses the road so there's one at Brinker and then there's also that crossing at Colorado Woodrow Colorado that right there we have to go over to the light and we're trying to design those to be enhanced intersections instead of kind of the work around it is now. And of course, when that was actually real originally designed that the Colorado Woodrow situation. There was a curb cut in the median. Pay attention folks, there was a curb cut in the median right next to the train track. It had been designed by the DCTA engineers, it had been accepted by the city. It was built. Then, the city engineering department came back and said no , we don't like mid block crossings. We want to go down to the corner. The problem is is that most of the trail users don't go to the corner. They continue to cross. They get stuck from time to time. In that very very narrow section of trying to get back onto the trail in the, in the, the curb cut to get back up onto the sidewalk. So they're going right next to the train track, they're going in the train track they're going in between the train tracks. When the crossing arms come down, they're caught inside the crossing arms. And that was all because our city engineer said we want to go down to the corner. But any person could stand there at the corner and stand there at that intersection and watch as bicyclists and pedestrians use it. And you'll see that hardly anyone uses the corner. Certainly because it's not possible to ride your bicycle and do that 90 degree turn there at the corner in a sidewalk that's only three feet wide. It's a bad plan. It's a plan that, that and, and mid block crossings are used all over the world successfully. But, but we caused DCTA, we the city caused DCTA to spend extra money to undo that median to put the median back up. And we've put users of the trail in greater jeopardy because that's not the way that they're going to use it. So I'm going to be, I'm going to be very concerned about spending a lot of money for a bad plan. A plan that people will not use. And Mr. Estes, I'll be glad to drive you and anybody and your staff out there. I know you're new to this. Now it's probably to the point that you can't see the difference in the color of the concrete where the curb cut was done and put back in. But, but I want to, I don't want to spend a great deal of money on the design for something that that's not going to be used by the pedestrians and the bicyclists that use that trail. Right. And we've been asked to expedite those two trail projects in advance. I'm sorry, I'm not getting sick. Well, join the rest of us. I'm definitely not getting sick. I don't know what that. Looking to advance those two projects in advance of the gain, the consultant on board in January. So I've been working with the engineering group about getting something out to get those designed by a very bike friendly firm. So we hope to have some good designs for those two cross ings. Okay. So now I'm just going to briefly go over just the budget like to show you our budget that we have every year for the bike fund. You can see that a lot of our funds this year are going to go towards our matching funds for the set aside. So that's one hundred and ninety thousand dollars that we 'll have to pay as our 20 percent. That does take a big chunk of our money to do other projects. But we are getting a really good project for 20 percent of the cost. We also have to put aside money for that US 380 side path that work where we coordinated with tech stock to get for that trail from May Hill to the Green Belt. And we're doing about thirty thousand each year for that as well. That leaves us about thirty nine thousand. I'm sorry, not three nine. Thirty thousand dollars for 2018. So with that, we do hope to be able to do something on Wind River. You know, it's very wide, has a very wide turn lane. What do you believe we can put some bike lanes in there? And then if other money shakes out elsewhere, we can look at some other projects. What part of Wind River are we talking about? Yes, Wind River from Teasley to not quite the interstate where the movie theater is. Oh, Wind River where we used to have bike lanes. Is that what used to be there? Oh, yeah, we used to have it. Wind River used to be. I feel like I'm having a cathartic moment here. Wind River used to have bike lanes and it was one lane in each direction. And then the bike lanes went away and we put two lanes in each direction and pretended like there had never been bike lanes there. And there was denial that there had ever been bike lanes there. So we're going back to bike lanes. I didn't know there used to be bike lanes there. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Noreen thought this was a really great idea. I thought this is a great idea. It's a very wide street. There's room for it. Yeah. I did not know that there used to be bike lanes. Go ahead. And here's just a map of projects. Sorry, this mouse doesn't scroll. So you can see -- let me zoom out. We have what's been completed in green. Projects that we're still working on in the dashed blue are big CIP projects that do have bike accommodations. Hinkle, Bonnie Bray, and Mayhill are in red. And then we have Wind River right down here, which is what we plan to do in 2018. Does anybody have any questions for our plan for 1718 bike fund? I don't think so. Thanks very much. Great. Thank you, Del. Appreciate it. Councilmember Gregory, thank you. We're to item D, receive a report, hold a discussion, and provide direction regarding Denton County Transit Authority fare schedules. Mr. Nelson, is this you? That's correct. So pursuant to Council's request, we had reached out and visited with DCTA, as stated in the backup, requesting some information regarding their reduced fare schedule. I believe the question or an interest was, is there a way to provide a reduced fare for low-income individuals in our community? So what you have in the backup material demonstrates that they've got their local standard fare for a two-hour, for $3, and then a day past their standard fares at $6, and then for their reduced fare, which is for seniors over the age of 65, and for students basically between the ages of 5 and 18, is $1.25. And then that local day pass reduced fare is going to be $2 .50. So in visiting with DCTA management, one of the things we had talked about is how, is there a way to maybe expand that? How would you do that? The concern they would have would be how to demonstrate and what is low income? How would you facilitate that particular program? What they had indicated is that, you know, they're open to working with various social service organizations in their member cities whereby a fare book or passes could be purchased and then distributed, you know, purchased at a reduced rate and then distributed by those particular agencies that may be better equipped to identify or verify income levels. Well, I brought this up because the reduced fare is for the students or for the elderly, and there's a large section of working citizens who have trouble getting to their job, to and from their job. Transportation is an issue. And during the homeless, during the PIT count, I was talking to someone who was homeless and transportation was a big issue and I went to buy a bus pass. And I was surprised at how much it cost. I was like, I think it was $25 or $30 or something, and I think for the month, for the month, right? Because you don't, I mean, you can get to work day by day, but the best thing to do is to get monthly so you know that you have a way to work every day, that you wake up, you're not stressed out about having that cash on a daily basis. And so anyway, it triggered something in me and I thought, you know, there's something that we can be doing, maybe partnering or purchasing a group of monthly passes and giving them out to the nonprofits to pass out might be an okay solution. But so that's just kind of where I was coming from in the situation that made me realize how difficult it is on a day-to-day basis to get to work for some people. And if there was something we could do and if we were doing anything currently, so I appreciate the information in the backup and what they 're doing for the students, of course. But I just I wish that we could do more. So there's an opportunity for DCTA to come forward and present to the Mobility Committee. It's probably about time for them to come back and do one of their typically do a quarterly meeting. And I think we're probably on schedule for that. We could ask them to come forward and visit with us on the remainder of their operations and have this as a particular item as well that could provide some additional information for the committee and council as a whole, if that's something that you would like to have them. Yeah, I think that would be good. And some additional clarification. When you say we as an organization, the City of Denton, to purchase those particular passes, is that something that you would like us to look into in terms of what that would cost? Right. Well, I mean, we have a community development part of our city that works with low income as well. And I didn't know if there was a way. I mean, that, of course, is beyond what the Mobility Committee could do. But that may be something that they can they can take up. Right. And I visited briefly with Barbara on this particular issue. And so we can we can engage her further in the discussion and potential solutions. Yeah. So I mean, it reaches across many different committees. You know, so however, the best way to address that. Thank you. Then we'll go to item E, receive a report, hold the discussion and provide direction regarding regional transportation council monthly reports and actions. This is a spot on our agenda where our representative to the regional transportation council, Mayor Pro Tempi-Kerry, would have a spot to make a report. But she's not here today. But we have staff members that have attended that meeting. So if you have a couple of quick updates that you can share with us. I do, Mr. Chair. Two very brief updates. Mr. Polster is handing out a an excerpt from one of the agenda items. It's agenda item five on the November 9th RTC meeting. And essentially, it was a it was a transit grant funding cleanup. And what you can see here is as part of that particular action taken by the RTC on Thursday, that they they move forward with providing some funding close to about $2 million that would in part assist with a a connectivity between the city of Denton and Fort Worth along the 35 West corridor. So I do want to bring that to your attention as one item that that directly impacted our community and citizens. The other item we referenced in the on system presentation earlier this this morning regarding the loop 288. And it's kind of a planning cycle in terms of when we would have a the project cleared. And they are moving forward with mobility 2045. So once mobility 2045 is approved and the schedule for that , they're starting to work that through the process now. And it looks like in the April May timeframe, they'll have that in front of the RTC for for formal consideration. So just want to bring that to your attention. And certainly, those agenda items or the agendas on can be found online. Council member post those and they hope and they have a whole library of past agendas and the presentations associated with them. If you're interested in looking at that more detail. Thanks. Any questions? All right. Item F. Receive a report, hold discussion and provide staff direction on an increase in project scope of the Hickory Street roadway improvement project by adding pedestrian lights along the north side of West Hickory Street from Wel ch Street to Carroll Boulevard. Mr. Estes. I gotta say I was really hoping to get in the first word before John. I was excited to see that on the agenda. I got foiled again. Okay. So Hickory Street pedestrian lighting. You do have a copy in your backup information of the presentation. In the interest of time, I'll be as short as possible, but I want to give you as much information as you're willing to receive at this point. So, currently, the Hickory Street project goes from Bonnie Bray all the way over to Carroll. It's about a $4.2 million project primarily done by city forces. They are clearing out the atmosphere locations and utility work will follow right behind it with roadway work and to start the beginning of next year. They're intending to start near Bonnie Bray and then work back to the east towards Carroll. So if we are going to look expanding some of the scope of the project to include a piece from Welch to Carroll that's on the extreme east end, we do have some time to figure out how we're going to do that. So recently there has been a series of public meetings where stakeholders get some updates on what's current progress, how are things going on the project, what's the current anticipated changes in schedules, if there are any. And some of the things that have come up through that has been a request for pedestrian lighting on Hickory Street, recognizing that when we did Oak Street not too long ago, there's pedestrian lighting on both sides. It's a very well finished street. Hickory needs the update, which is why we're out doing the work. But the question came up as to Hickory seems to be about four or five feet wider. Why couldn't we narrow that up and put in pedestrians lighting on the north side of the road where there's currently only pedestrian lighting on the south side of the road. So, and if you notice the nice little white Kia there, if you see that one floating around town, that would be me taking pictures. But the top picture here, that is Oak Street as it is today. You'll see off in the distance there's a pedestrian street light on the north side. There's also one on the south side . The roadway between curbs right now, as we measure them, is about 33 feet wide. So you have two 11 foot lanes, you have bicycle lane on one side, and then you have on street parking on the south side . On the bottom, this is what Hickory looks like if you're facing Carroll from about Welch Street looking towards Carroll. You have pedestrian lighting on the right hand side. That's the south side. So there is pedestrian lighting that's spaced about every 150, 200 feet. But on the north side, the other side where the parking is, you don't have a sidewalk with pedestrian lighting tied to it. You have an existing sidewalk over there, but the road is actually maxed out between the right away lines. So in other words, right on the edge of the sidewalk is the right away. That's actually looking east, isn't it? Yes, sir. One's looking west, one's looking east. Yeah, the caption says west on the bottom. You have a good eye, sorry about that. I caught all the other things in here, I promise, but that one item. It confused me when I saw it, I thought, well, that doesn't seem to work. It's looking the other west. Okay, how do you ask? I took the first direction I saw. So looking east, not west, you have, what you have today is you have wider lanes than what we actually have to have. And with it coming off the university, there is an opportunity that we could narrow the roadway. It's 38 feet on Hickory from the back of curb on one side to the other side. So we could narrow the road five feet, put in a sidewalk behind that on the north side, which would bring the sidewalk closer to the roadway. It's right on the roadway right now, but we just bring it in and gives us room to put the pedestrian lights in. But it would also have the added benefit if we narrowed the lanes of traffic down to 11 foot wide, which is more of a traffic calming feature anyway. So it would preclude some of the higher speeds that potentially would run through there coming in and across a more pedestrian facility. Go ahead. And how big would the bike lane be? Bike lane, I believe we had in there at five, maybe five or six feet, five foot, yeah. So it would stay? It would stay. Yes, ma'am. It wouldn't go away. That would leave everything on the south side. Or it wouldn't shriek? No, no it wouldn't. I would not want to go less than five feet anyway. Some cities say three foot, but that is way too narrow. Thank you. So what we would need to do, we've talked about briefly, we 'd narrow the streets down to or the lanes down to 11 foot. So you still have two lanes. We'd still have the bicycle lane. We'd put in a sidewalk, bring that across. Some of the things we would have to do to make this work though is you have some properties that are higher on the north side and they have existing retaining walls along the sidewalk. So we would have to survey all this. We would have to make sure that we understand. Are there any other underground utilities out here that we 'd have to get out of the way? So there's a bunch of things that we would have to do just because we'd be moving everything over a little bit before we go put streetlights in. So I walked that this morning. Yes sir. Because I was curious. And it would seem I was surprised about having to consider moving utilities because we're going to be doing from curb to curb anyway, right? So if we're just if we're just taking the north curb and moving it towards the center of the street by three or four feet. Yes sir. Why would that cost any more for utility reloc ation to make that sidewalk wider? I'm not saying it would necessarily cost us any more for utility relocation, but it would take time to figure out. For instance, are there cable lines? Are there power lines that we're not seeing? Is there a gas line, service line, water line that runs from say the middle of the street to the house? We want to know where those are before we start digging the road. Sometimes those facilities are shallower than you would think, especially on an older road. And it's cheaper for us to identify it up front rather than hit it when we're in the field and then try to figure a workaround out in the field. But would we not be doing that anyway as we're resurfacing the road? Not necessarily. Really? It depends on what we're doing to the road. This was strictly more of it. We're doing some utility relocations, but because we'll be pulling the curb in closer, we'd want to verify that what's under the sidewalk is not something else we also have to get into. The roadway's pretty well been explored. That's not what we 're worried about. But when I start bringing an existing sidewalk over five foot, I want to know what's in that area . I've got some water meters. I've got some other things that probably wouldn't have been considered because we were staying in between the curbs. Does that make sense? I think. Small long lines of doing our due diligence, front end loading the project so that when we get into construction, we're not costing more in delay, time, and money by the workarounds. Well, I think part of what my thought was is as I walked it , I walked both sides, north and the south. I think I only counted two or maybe three of the decorative , old timey looking street pedestrian lamps like we have on Oak Street. They were very far apart. And I think that we were basically relying on the other street lamps that are on the utility poles, the wooden utility poles, to light the street, light the way for the pedestrians. So when I was walking on the north side, I was thinking there could be enough light simply to rely on the light that's currently available and simply make the north sidewalk a little bit wider without necessarily doing the lights on that side because those lights are fairly far apart. Anyway, it does not provide continuous lighting. It's not like the lamp that goes to this edge and then there's another lamp that's connecting straight to it. It's almost more aesthetic than it is anything else. And I was just thinking, as I was walking on the north side, this sidewalk feels very narrow. And in some cases, it's completely blocked by some trash dumpsters and some tree jut juts and things. It would be, I think it would be impossible for a person in a wheelchair to navigate the north side anyway. Yes. Go ahead. This is the project where Council received several emails in support of this. Is this that same project? It was a while ago and we didn't discuss it at that time as a depth, but I remember several emails from either homeowners on the street. Right. Excuse me. Willing to give up part of their property. I mean, well, I mean, was. Well, this was brought up, I believe in November, it was brought up in September. So I walked the same the street as well. Councilman Gregory and the request was made, you know, since you're about to go on to the end of construction. Could you take one last look at how you can basically mimic Hickory like you did on Oak? And that's what we brought forward to you all. And you also please go explore. But yes, I think there were some emails that were received by the city council members by city council members or at least on the mobility committee members about there being support for this. So in light of the time that we have left, we have about eight minutes. We have read the backup. Yeah, yeah, no, I'm actually in favor of the two streets matching. And I think the more light we have, the better it is for our pedestrians and people walking in that area. It makes it safe. And so I am I am in favor of the design. Where does the money come from? Where does the extra nine hundred fifty thousand dollars come from? You want to fill that one? Well, that is our next effort is to go seek those funds to see what's available within the city or other projects that that where the money would be coming from. I think our first step was to bring this forward to you all to see if there is any any consideration to move, move the the ask any further along so that we can go do that due diligence with our finance department and seek those funds. I think that that once that road gets repaved, the old traffic calming mechanism of potholes will no longer be useful and people will be driving down the road significantly faster. So narrowing the lanes, I think are appropriate. Acquiring additional right of way, I think, is inappropriate and it would be too expensive. I'd be in favor of acquiring additional right of way on either side. So narrowing the lanes, as long as it did not impact in any way the bike lanes, I would be OK with seeing that that sidewalk widened. I'm OK with I'm not sure I would be hesitant about about lighting on the north side if we can have adequate lighting on the south side that would that would eliminate that site . I haven't walked it at night. I need to go back and do that to see it because it may not be adequate at all. So I guess the direction is to move this on to full council . But as you do so, we would need to see some specifics on recommendations for where the funding would come from. Yes, sir. OK. And also a report on what it's like at night, like if the adequate lighting is adequate for safety or not. Well, that may be that we all need to walk it at night and see what our personal feelings are about adequacy. You know, I'd be scared if it's too dark. Well, I'll walk with you because I'm a big, strong man and I can protect you from all kinds of bad things. Of course, I understand you're you're learning how to pack heat these days, so and taking karate and everything. Maybe you'd protect me. You'd protect an old elderly man. I loved it when earlier you were talking about the youth getting bike passes and the elderly and you put my direction and I qualified, by the way. Thank you, Mr. Astes. Next item is H staff reports. Oh, I mentioned I skipped it. I have one I think would be item six, which is on the McKin ney Street project pedestrian signal status on that. And then after that, if you've got any quick heads for us to add to the future items, we'll take those after the pre- trial. OK. So for that particular signalized intersection, McKinney at Mayhill was the question there. And we have installed pedestrian buttons as well as the pedestrian heads that flash. So for now, we have capability of the signal stops for pedestrians to cross and they get the this is an interim situation in the moving forward. Mayhill will come in and kind of work with starting it as a as it goes. Mayhill project will start from that intersection and go further south. OK, thank you. Thank you so much. The only thing I would ask as we're talking about the aesthetic enhancements along I-35, we had set aside funds for transportation projects for those kinds of things. When I think about what we've seen with the presentation of the medallions there near the North Texas Boulevard Bridge and what I've seen as far as aesthetic enhancements around Hickory Creek, around the lake. I'm very curious as to how much they spent on those kinds of enhancements because it's sort of a theme of like things like that. The brick, the poured concrete with the mural sort of thing. Form liners. OK. It's in the millions of dollars. We can pull that information. I'd be curious. Just just in that could come in the form of just informal staff report or something. I would mention one thing. If you recall the North Texas, the North Texas Bridge reconstruction was the only intersection that was in phase one of the 35 Express project that was. And so as we move further south in phase two and they would do that reconstruction, it will provide us an opportunity to do a more robust or more comprehensive aesthetic program . All right. Anything else for today's meeting. I have one concluding item. So I remember last meeting we talked about future projects going forward and this one was on there but it's getting more and more difficult to turn left on the 3 80 from Old North. And I know that there has been a couple of accidents because I've seen them in the past few months. So just if we can have an update on the intersection with the amount of racks and what other things that we can do there. So I know that that lighting project was for the future. I don't know how future that that is maybe an update on that. And that's really that's it. Can I get a point of clarification on that when you say left. So is that a northbound to eastbound or I'm sorry south bound eastbound on the old north going east turning on to 3 80 left. But it's old north going south south. Okay. Southbound on old north turning east on to university. Right. There's not a an arrow. And so people try to rush really fast. Why other people are coming straight. Okay. Okay. If there's nothing else and we're going to adjourn the meeting at 1114 1114 let the record show.