WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:07.440 Alright, welcome everyone to the Sustainability Framework Advisory Committee. 00:00:07.440 --> 00:00:11.760 We are meeting in the City Council Work Session Room at City Hall. 00:00:11.760 --> 00:00:16.400 Today is February 25th and we are getting started at 1 of 2. 00:00:16.400 --> 00:00:22.240 This is our first recording actually of our meeting and so we will need to speak up into 00:00:22.240 --> 00:00:25.040 the mic to make sure that everyone can hear us. 00:00:25.040 --> 00:00:30.480 We will go ahead, we do have a quorum, and we will go ahead and get started with items 00:00:30.480 --> 00:00:32.880 for individual consideration. 00:00:32.880 --> 00:00:38.800 A, consider approval of the December 17, 2021 minutes. 00:00:38.800 --> 00:00:46.720 Did everyone get a chance to read over those, any changes? 00:00:46.720 --> 00:00:48.240 Yes, Adam? 00:00:48.240 --> 00:00:55.920 It says here, "Receive report, hold the discussion on the climate hazards and vulnerability assessment 00:00:55.920 --> 00:00:56.920 tools." 00:00:56.920 --> 00:01:02.080 We discussed it and it says, "Following discussion, there was no direction provided." 00:01:02.080 --> 00:01:09.360 Maybe direction is a technical term, but I thought we did say something to the effect 00:01:09.360 --> 00:01:14.280 of, "Well, let's keep pushing forward with the climate action plan," and that there was 00:01:14.280 --> 00:01:16.560 in fact direction in that sense. 00:01:16.560 --> 00:01:21.840 I'm just wondering, am I understanding this not in its technical sense? 00:01:21.840 --> 00:01:26.000 It kind of makes it sound like we sat there and listened and just dropped it. 00:01:26.000 --> 00:01:27.000 Right. 00:01:27.000 --> 00:01:28.240 I feel like that's not what we did. 00:01:28.240 --> 00:01:29.240 Okay. 00:01:29.240 --> 00:01:33.920 Catherine, do you want to address that at all? 00:01:33.920 --> 00:01:40.720 Is direction, is that an actual item for us to move forward on or does that mean there 00:01:40.720 --> 00:01:49.600 wasn't any discussion or is there a better way to present that in the minutes? 00:01:49.600 --> 00:01:52.880 I think that there's probably going to be a better way to present that in the minutes. 00:01:52.880 --> 00:02:00.080 We can talk to Rosa about it, since it wasn't give feedback on climate hazards and not actual 00:02:00.080 --> 00:02:01.080 direction. 00:02:01.080 --> 00:02:08.640 I think that's why it's that term, but we can talk about how to better clarify that. 00:02:08.640 --> 00:02:12.200 We'll just listen to it and say, "Okay." 00:02:12.200 --> 00:02:16.680 There was a lot of discussion and it's still on the matrix. 00:02:16.680 --> 00:02:17.680 Okay. 00:02:17.680 --> 00:02:19.680 We know it's still moving forward. 00:02:19.680 --> 00:02:20.680 Okay. 00:02:20.680 --> 00:02:27.520 Should we make an amendment to these minutes to take out no direction and discussion to 00:02:27.520 --> 00:02:29.080 keep moving forward? 00:02:29.080 --> 00:02:31.080 I'm okay. 00:02:31.080 --> 00:02:35.080 Is that a better term? 00:02:35.080 --> 00:02:37.560 I feel like that's more accurate. 00:02:37.560 --> 00:02:38.560 Okay. 00:02:38.560 --> 00:02:41.720 In layman's terms, that's what happened, I feel like. 00:02:41.720 --> 00:02:42.720 Okay. 00:02:42.720 --> 00:02:47.440 Whoever wants to make a motion to approve, just approve without change? 00:02:47.440 --> 00:02:49.280 I'll move to approve without change. 00:02:49.280 --> 00:02:50.280 Okay. 00:02:50.280 --> 00:02:51.280 Second. 00:02:51.280 --> 00:02:52.280 All right. 00:02:52.280 --> 00:02:53.280 Second. 00:02:53.280 --> 00:02:54.280 All in favor? 00:02:54.280 --> 00:02:55.280 Aye. 00:02:55.280 --> 00:02:56.280 Aye. 00:02:56.280 --> 00:02:57.280 All right. 00:02:57.280 --> 00:03:00.280 Those minutes approve without one change. 00:03:00.280 --> 00:03:10.000 We will move on to item B, stock report, update on SB 241 energy reporting. 00:03:10.000 --> 00:03:22.320 JT couldn't be with us today, so if you have any questions, I will do my best. 00:03:22.320 --> 00:03:23.320 What is this on? 00:03:23.320 --> 00:03:30.840 This is the Senate Bill 241 local government energy reporting update. 00:03:30.840 --> 00:03:37.520 We're required to report annually about our energy usage. 00:03:37.520 --> 00:03:53.280 We saw a 3.6% reduction between 2019 and 2021 calendar year, with a 14% reduction in buildings. 00:03:53.280 --> 00:04:00.360 Catherine, I did see that there was an agreement to reduce it by 5%. 00:04:00.360 --> 00:04:08.080 The goal that the state sets is 5% annually for, it's usually a five-year term, to try 00:04:08.080 --> 00:04:12.720 to get that 25%. 00:04:12.720 --> 00:04:20.760 The reporting for the state is somewhat imperfect in that there's no weatherization normalization 00:04:20.760 --> 00:04:27.920 included with it, and there's no accounting for new buildings coming online, buildings 00:04:27.920 --> 00:04:33.280 going off, so 5% is the goal. 00:04:33.280 --> 00:04:37.840 We've met the 5% some years, we don't some years. 00:04:37.840 --> 00:04:42.360 Is there any repercussions for not meeting it, or is it just we just try harder next 00:04:42.360 --> 00:04:43.360 time? 00:04:43.360 --> 00:04:44.360 No. 00:04:44.360 --> 00:04:45.360 No repercussions for not meeting it. 00:04:45.360 --> 00:04:48.360 They did make a big push over the last few years to get everybody reporting, because 00:04:48.360 --> 00:04:51.240 most people weren't even reporting. 00:04:51.240 --> 00:04:59.200 We've been doing it since it started way back in the old days, but this is I think the fourth 00:04:59.200 --> 00:05:02.160 iteration of the Senate bill to do that. 00:05:02.160 --> 00:05:04.800 Adam, and then Brian. 00:05:04.800 --> 00:05:08.920 Quick question, it's okay if you don't know it, it says this is a response to being a 00:05:08.920 --> 00:05:10.640 non-attainment area. 00:05:10.640 --> 00:05:13.000 I read that to mean air quality. 00:05:13.000 --> 00:05:14.000 Correct. 00:05:14.000 --> 00:05:21.460 It's only for jurisdictions that are located within non-attainment areas of the state. 00:05:21.460 --> 00:05:22.460 Why? 00:05:22.460 --> 00:05:26.120 It seems like a non sequitur to me to say you're in a non-attainment area and then target 00:05:26.120 --> 00:05:32.400 the electricity sector when that's not driving our primary non-compliance with air quality, 00:05:32.400 --> 00:05:33.400 I would say. 00:05:33.400 --> 00:05:38.400 It would be better if they said you should have a 5% reduction in vehicle traffic, wouldn't 00:05:38.400 --> 00:05:39.400 it? 00:05:39.400 --> 00:05:42.400 Or am I misunderstanding the cause and effect of this? 00:05:42.400 --> 00:05:45.800 That would make sense. 00:05:45.800 --> 00:05:50.000 This is just how the state decided to tackle building energy usage. 00:05:50.000 --> 00:06:02.920 It was noted that the 14% decrease in building electricity use, it was kind of noted that 00:06:02.920 --> 00:06:04.720 that might have been due to COVID. 00:06:04.720 --> 00:06:11.160 Can you account why the 70% increase in street and traffic lights might have occurred? 00:06:11.160 --> 00:06:19.000 The street traffic is a very small portion, so the 70% doesn't account for a very many 00:06:19.000 --> 00:06:25.920 kilowatt hours, but mostly that was new installations of lights and then re-identifying some from 00:06:25.920 --> 00:06:30.560 the other sector as street or traffic lights. 00:06:30.560 --> 00:06:45.680 Ed? Yeah, I was just curious as to whether or not the increased number of solar systems 00:06:45.680 --> 00:06:53.520 in the city, photovoltaic systems, were taken into account in this reduction. 00:06:53.520 --> 00:07:01.600 No, this is only for municipal consumption, so only municipal facilities are tracked with 00:07:01.600 --> 00:07:02.600 this report. 00:07:02.600 --> 00:07:09.760 Okay, well the only way I was making that connection was there seemed to be some sort 00:07:09.760 --> 00:07:21.640 of relationship with this, with the electricity put back into the grid from residential and 00:07:21.640 --> 00:07:33.640 commercial installations, and if, how, I don't see how that could have, how that could possibly 00:07:33.640 --> 00:07:41.440 maybe influence the volume of electricity that's either being consumed or saved. 00:07:41.440 --> 00:07:44.040 Does that make sense? 00:07:44.040 --> 00:07:49.760 I understand where you're going with that, it does, this report doesn't take into account 00:07:49.760 --> 00:07:58.600 that we are 100% renewable either, so it's strictly the usage for our facilities in trying 00:07:58.600 --> 00:08:03.600 to reduce the usage. 00:08:03.600 --> 00:08:10.000 So I would think that if the municipal buildings had solar on them, right, then it would account 00:08:10.000 --> 00:08:13.680 for that if it was direct with the municipal buildings. 00:08:13.680 --> 00:08:14.680 Right. 00:08:14.680 --> 00:08:15.680 Yeah. 00:08:15.680 --> 00:08:18.360 We would see the demand for the kilowatt hour reduction there. 00:08:18.360 --> 00:08:20.440 So this is strictly municipal operations. 00:08:20.440 --> 00:08:21.440 Yeah. 00:08:21.440 --> 00:08:22.440 Yes, sir. 00:08:22.440 --> 00:08:23.440 Mr. Stevens? 00:08:23.440 --> 00:08:24.440 Yes. 00:08:24.440 --> 00:08:25.440 Back to the streetlights. 00:08:25.440 --> 00:08:26.440 Yes. 00:08:26.440 --> 00:08:36.280 Is there any way to extrapolate out new lights in comparison to the base period of 2019? 00:08:36.280 --> 00:08:43.440 Is there any way to determine if the initiatives that were put in place in 2019 to reduce the 00:08:43.440 --> 00:08:50.200 kilowatt usage, was that effective at all, because looking at it like this with the 71% 00:08:50.200 --> 00:08:56.880 increase, it could skew the overall bottom numbers if progress has been made. 00:08:56.880 --> 00:09:05.640 So for example, the 3.6% that we're looking at as the achievement could possibly be higher 00:09:05.640 --> 00:09:13.880 if we were able to separate the lights from the measured lights that established the 2019 00:09:13.880 --> 00:09:14.880 data. 00:09:14.880 --> 00:09:15.880 Does that make sense? 00:09:15.880 --> 00:09:16.880 It does. 00:09:16.880 --> 00:09:24.800 And we do have the total count of streetlights and traffic signals. 00:09:24.800 --> 00:09:32.360 And as we change out to LED lights, we may be adding more lights, but they aren't using 00:09:32.360 --> 00:09:33.360 as much energy. 00:09:33.360 --> 00:09:38.120 So there's some trade-offs there, so we can look at the counts year over year and see 00:09:38.120 --> 00:09:40.120 what that looks like. 00:09:40.120 --> 00:09:47.240 We've been using primarily LED traffic signals for many years. 00:09:47.240 --> 00:09:52.360 So I think a little bit of this could be some of those areas where Coast Guard and THU are 00:09:52.360 --> 00:09:56.720 coming in with lighting, and we may not have as much direct control over what they're installing, 00:09:56.720 --> 00:10:00.720 because we also have to account for those that are within our city limits. 00:10:00.720 --> 00:10:05.520 But we can get the count of the streetlights, and we can look at that. 00:10:05.520 --> 00:10:12.240 This seems like it'll improve what we're targeting to get to if we had relative data to look 00:10:12.240 --> 00:10:13.240 at. 00:10:13.240 --> 00:10:18.240 The usage on the lights, the streetlights and the traffic signals is still low. 00:10:18.240 --> 00:10:24.240 Most of them are not metered, they're just assigned a value annually, because there's 00:10:24.240 --> 00:10:29.240 not enough consumption to go out and have the meter and read it every month. 00:10:29.240 --> 00:10:33.240 So we just get a count and an average. 00:10:33.240 --> 00:10:38.240 A last question on the lights, because that's a good point, thank you for pointing that. 00:10:38.240 --> 00:10:44.240 On the streetlights, is that also neighborhood residential or is it just main streets? 00:10:44.240 --> 00:10:45.240 It's all. 00:10:45.240 --> 00:10:46.240 All of them. 00:10:46.240 --> 00:10:52.240 So some of that could account for a lot of the growth that we've seen all through the 00:10:52.240 --> 00:10:53.240 city. 00:10:53.240 --> 00:10:54.240 Okay. 00:10:54.240 --> 00:10:55.240 All right. 00:10:55.240 --> 00:10:56.240 Thank you. 00:10:56.240 --> 00:10:57.240 Everybody okay on this item? 00:10:57.240 --> 00:10:58.240 Good? 00:10:58.240 --> 00:10:59.240 Okay. 00:10:59.240 --> 00:11:00.240 All right. 00:11:00.240 --> 00:11:05.240 So we will move on to, we're going to go ahead and talk about the Matrix. 00:11:05.240 --> 00:11:12.240 We missed the Matrix last night, so we have a pretty full Matrix here. 00:11:12.240 --> 00:11:17.240 Got some presentations put that we're going to plan on for March. 00:11:17.240 --> 00:11:22.240 A couple that we'll take care of today. 00:11:22.240 --> 00:11:29.240 Parks will be coming back probably in May after the growing season to talk about IPM 00:11:29.240 --> 00:11:33.240 and then we'll probably bring the Urban Forester back at the same time. 00:11:33.240 --> 00:11:37.240 I like that kind of view, park centric meeting. 00:11:37.240 --> 00:11:38.240 Okay. 00:11:38.240 --> 00:11:44.240 And since we have this here, if there's anything we want to add to the Matrix, we could go 00:11:44.240 --> 00:11:48.240 ahead and talk about that today at this point. 00:11:48.240 --> 00:11:49.240 Talk about it right now? 00:11:49.240 --> 00:11:50.240 Okay. 00:11:50.240 --> 00:11:51.240 Yeah, we can talk about it right now. 00:11:51.240 --> 00:11:52.240 Okay. 00:11:52.240 --> 00:11:57.240 Has everybody had a chance to review the Matrix and Adam? 00:11:57.240 --> 00:12:03.240 This isn't an addition, but maybe just a contextual point on the update climate action plan I 00:12:03.240 --> 00:12:04.240 see on here. 00:12:04.240 --> 00:12:09.240 It would be, I think it would be really good if that could happen in the context of the 00:12:09.240 --> 00:12:10.240 2040 plan. 00:12:10.240 --> 00:12:16.240 I think it's really important to think about how all these plans are integrating, mobility 00:12:16.240 --> 00:12:18.240 plan and all of this. 00:12:18.240 --> 00:12:21.240 I don't know, that's not a new item. 00:12:21.240 --> 00:12:26.240 It's just to say it'd be neat if that conversation could be self-consciously set in that context. 00:12:26.240 --> 00:12:30.240 I think that might be the most useful for city council. 00:12:30.240 --> 00:12:31.240 Okay. 00:12:31.240 --> 00:12:32.240 Ed? 00:12:32.240 --> 00:12:33.240 Pardon me. 00:12:33.240 --> 00:12:46.240 Yeah, along the same lines, I would like to see more information about what the committee 00:12:46.240 --> 00:12:56.240 is doing and what the city is doing in terms of net zero by 2050 on the Simply Sustainable 00:12:56.240 --> 00:12:57.240 webpage. 00:12:57.240 --> 00:13:05.240 There's really not much information there about what's going on with climate change. 00:13:05.240 --> 00:13:13.240 I also think a simple tutorial on that website as to what climate change is and what can 00:13:13.240 --> 00:13:16.240 be done about it would be advantageous. 00:13:16.240 --> 00:13:23.240 Seeing as how we discussed earlier how important the educational aspect of this is so that 00:13:23.240 --> 00:13:30.240 the public understands what the city is doing. 00:13:30.240 --> 00:13:40.240 I think the debt and sustainable schools, it's either a Facebook page or webpage. 00:13:40.240 --> 00:13:44.240 The schools should mention their solar installations. 00:13:44.240 --> 00:13:53.240 They should mention their non-diesel propane fuel bus fleet, and they as well should have 00:13:53.240 --> 00:13:59.240 an explanation of climate change. 00:13:59.240 --> 00:14:11.240 I second Adam's idea of coordination and inter-departmental communications regarding 00:14:11.240 --> 00:14:20.240 what we're doing and plugging that in with current plan drafts such as the 2040, which 00:14:20.240 --> 00:14:26.240 makes absolutely no mention of net zero by 2050. 00:14:26.240 --> 00:14:43.240 When the Parks Department was working on the IPM, we used Austin's plan as a template and 00:14:43.240 --> 00:14:48.240 worked on putting the plan together for Denton. 00:14:48.240 --> 00:14:53.240 Our philosophy being we're going to make it better than Austin's. 00:14:53.240 --> 00:15:03.240 And I would suggest perhaps a similar approach with some of these educational initiatives 00:15:03.240 --> 00:15:05.240 that I was just talking about. 00:15:05.240 --> 00:15:11.240 Check out the Austin sustainability page, which I'm sure you have. 00:15:11.240 --> 00:15:15.240 The public outreach is absolutely remarkable. 00:15:15.240 --> 00:15:21.240 So I'd like to see discussion and action on that very near future. 00:15:21.240 --> 00:15:23.240 Thank you. 00:15:23.240 --> 00:15:26.240 So, Katherine, let me simple about what I think I just heard. 00:15:26.240 --> 00:15:32.240 Maybe on the matrix of presentation on the sustainability and sustainable schools website 00:15:32.240 --> 00:15:38.240 for us, and then that way we can have a meeting and all of us, we can all give you ideas on 00:15:38.240 --> 00:15:45.240 public outreach, how we think it should change and maybe be better. 00:15:45.240 --> 00:15:47.240 So website updates. 00:15:47.240 --> 00:15:51.240 Website update and public outreach. 00:15:51.240 --> 00:15:55.240 Is that good, Ed, for that item? 00:15:55.240 --> 00:16:01.240 Yeah, I mean, I would think that it could probably be something done in a very timely 00:16:01.240 --> 00:16:10.240 manner because there are certainly models out there that we can learn from. 00:16:10.240 --> 00:16:17.240 In addition, I'd like to request a review of our current development code as it relates to 00:16:17.240 --> 00:16:25.240 our parking minimums as well as on-street parking. 00:16:25.240 --> 00:16:27.240 And then just a point of clarification. 00:16:27.240 --> 00:16:33.240 I'm not sure how much it matters, but I believe that I had requested the item on here under 00:16:33.240 --> 00:16:40.240 the tree code update, Ed, if you can remember correctly. 00:16:40.240 --> 00:16:43.240 I'm not sure how much, so that's a stickler. 00:16:43.240 --> 00:16:44.240 So the last item? 00:16:44.240 --> 00:16:48.240 Yes, I believe so, if I'm remembering from December correctly. 00:16:48.240 --> 00:16:51.240 Okay. 00:16:51.240 --> 00:16:57.240 Yeah, so I thought at one time we were going to get a full kind of update brought about 00:16:57.240 --> 00:17:05.240 the sustainability codes or how that can be intertwined. 00:17:05.240 --> 00:17:11.240 So that would be a good place to put that and make sure we have the parking minimums. 00:17:11.240 --> 00:17:17.240 I think there's a section here for blood covers and then tree codes. 00:17:17.240 --> 00:17:24.240 So there's a lot of code discussions that we can have on how that integrates with sustainability. 00:17:24.240 --> 00:17:30.240 I don't know if you want to do those individually or if we just want to have an overall development. 00:17:30.240 --> 00:17:37.240 It might be best served if I have an overall discussion with someone from Scott's group. 00:17:37.240 --> 00:17:40.240 Maybe even get Scott in over. 00:17:40.240 --> 00:17:43.240 Okay. 00:17:43.240 --> 00:17:48.240 Anyone else want to add to or see something you want to expand on? 00:17:48.240 --> 00:17:53.240 Could we potentially add things at the end of our discussion today if other things come up? 00:17:53.240 --> 00:17:59.240 Let's go ahead, since we have this item open now, we'll go ahead and add things to the matrix. 00:17:59.240 --> 00:18:04.240 And we could table this and then bring it back if things come up? 00:18:04.240 --> 00:18:05.240 Through the meeting? 00:18:05.240 --> 00:18:07.240 Okay. 00:18:07.240 --> 00:18:09.240 All right. 00:18:09.240 --> 00:18:10.240 So we will do that. 00:18:10.240 --> 00:18:11.240 We will table this. 00:18:11.240 --> 00:18:18.240 And if something comes up through the meeting, we can reopen the item and add to the matrix at the end of the meeting. 00:18:18.240 --> 00:18:19.240 Sounds good. 00:18:19.240 --> 00:18:21.240 Thank you for that, Catherine. 00:18:21.240 --> 00:18:31.240 We'll go ahead and move on to item C, receive an update, hold a discussion about the status of the landfill gas project. 00:18:31.240 --> 00:18:32.240 Brian, welcome. 00:18:32.240 --> 00:18:34.240 Thank you very much. 00:18:34.240 --> 00:18:38.240 For those of you who do not know me or we haven't seen each other in a while, my name is Brian Berner. 00:18:38.240 --> 00:18:41.240 I am the solid waste director for the city of Hennepin. 00:18:41.240 --> 00:18:48.240 And I do appreciate the opportunity to come and talk a little bit about our landfill as well as our landfill gas collection system 00:18:48.240 --> 00:18:51.240 and the exciting project that we're working on right now. 00:18:51.240 --> 00:18:58.240 So just a little bit of education on the front end before we talk about the project on the back end here. 00:18:58.240 --> 00:19:07.240 City of Denton has had a landfill at the 1527 South Mayhill site since about 1980. 00:19:07.240 --> 00:19:08.240 Yes, ma'am? 00:19:08.240 --> 00:19:09.240 Do you have a presentation? 00:19:09.240 --> 00:19:10.240 I do not. 00:19:10.240 --> 00:19:11.240 We're just going to talk a little bit. 00:19:11.240 --> 00:19:14.240 And part of it has to do with the fact that we're still in negotiation with the company. 00:19:14.240 --> 00:19:15.240 Okay. 00:19:15.240 --> 00:19:20.240 And there's some things that we can talk about here, but I don't need to have, you know. 00:19:20.240 --> 00:19:28.240 Can we click on the agenda sheet so that is online so that individuals who are watching this can see? 00:19:28.240 --> 00:19:35.240 Just have that on their screen. 00:19:35.240 --> 00:19:36.240 Thank you. 00:19:36.240 --> 00:19:37.240 You're welcome. 00:19:37.240 --> 00:19:39.240 So, okay. 00:19:39.240 --> 00:19:44.240 As I stated earlier, the landfill that we currently have at 1527 South Mayhill, 00:19:44.240 --> 00:19:51.240 we're collecting garbage for residents and commercial customers as well as outside waste in about 1980. 00:19:51.240 --> 00:19:57.240 And we operate as a regional landfill, so we've never been for the exclusive use for the City of Denton. 00:19:57.240 --> 00:20:00.240 We recognize that while we're there to serve the citizens of Denton, 00:20:00.240 --> 00:20:05.240 the resident or the outside waste sort of acts as a little bit of a seed corn. 00:20:05.240 --> 00:20:11.240 It provides us with some buffer and some rate reduction in helping us to operate the facility. 00:20:11.240 --> 00:20:15.240 Originally, the original footprint was about 25 acres. 00:20:15.240 --> 00:20:18.240 We've expanded the landfill twice. 00:20:18.240 --> 00:20:27.240 The first time with permit 1590B, which took us from 25 acres to about 154 acres of actual fill space, 00:20:27.240 --> 00:20:29.240 not including the aerial height. 00:20:29.240 --> 00:20:35.240 And then here last August, we were awarded a permit through the TCEQ under 1590B, 00:20:35.240 --> 00:20:45.240 so the second modification permit, for our total lateral space to be about 258 acres. 00:20:45.240 --> 00:20:55.240 Again, this takes our life of the total disposal capacity right now at our current waste amount that we're taking in 00:20:55.240 --> 00:21:02.240 about anywhere from about 50 to 60 years at our current volume and current recycling rates and things of that nature. 00:21:02.240 --> 00:21:07.240 We are probably one of the top five growing areas in the region. 00:21:07.240 --> 00:21:14.240 The DFW landfill waste management facility was in Louisville shut down fully about eight months ago, 00:21:14.240 --> 00:21:17.240 and we are seeing a tremendous amount of waste coming into our facility. 00:21:17.240 --> 00:21:20.240 So again, as part of our comprehensive solid waste management strategy, 00:21:20.240 --> 00:21:27.240 we're going to be working to put into effect different programs that will help us increase diversion, 00:21:27.240 --> 00:21:30.240 decrease the amount of material that's going in. 00:21:30.240 --> 00:21:35.240 And while that's superfluous to what we're talking about, it's directly related to what we're talking about here too. 00:21:35.240 --> 00:21:42.240 So again, we've got to recognize that we've got a lot of moving parts recognizing what we're doing here at the facility. 00:21:42.240 --> 00:21:47.240 When we talk about landfill gas, it's not something that we put in the landfill, 00:21:47.240 --> 00:21:50.240 but it results from the things that we put in the landfill. 00:21:50.240 --> 00:21:57.240 Basically, the landfill, somebody described to me one time as a big compost pile, for lack of a better term. 00:21:57.240 --> 00:22:03.240 We put organic materials in there, and through an anaerobic digestion process, we get methane, 00:22:03.240 --> 00:22:11.240 we get a little bit of CO2, oxygen, nitrogen, what's called balanced gas, and then some other gases along with it. 00:22:11.240 --> 00:22:15.240 So about 50% of what we get is methane, and 50% is this other stuff. 00:22:15.240 --> 00:22:21.240 When we talk about the organic material, it's the residential trash that's in our carts at the curb side. 00:22:21.240 --> 00:22:26.240 So anything that we get that can rot that goes in there, yard waste that may not be diverted, 00:22:26.240 --> 00:22:31.240 construction demolition debris that may be able to decay. 00:22:31.240 --> 00:22:39.240 So things like wood, paper backing on sheetrock, just any of that material that goes in there, that can decay, 00:22:39.240 --> 00:22:45.240 and that is really what contributes to the management and the production of the landfill gas. 00:22:45.240 --> 00:22:51.240 We are required by federal and state law to manage this gas. We can't just let it vent to the atmosphere. 00:22:51.240 --> 00:22:59.240 First and foremost, it's not prudent, but secondarily, it actually has a benefit if you manage it correctly. 00:22:59.240 --> 00:23:06.240 In our permit, volume four, it requires us to create what's called a landfill gas collection and control system. 00:23:06.240 --> 00:23:13.240 So currently we have about 150 wells in the existing landfill, all connected by laterals. 00:23:13.240 --> 00:23:22.240 The landfill gas is collected under vacuum, and then currently right now we are flaring the gas to the atmosphere. 00:23:22.240 --> 00:23:34.240 By flaring the gas, it's the least emission intensive way to manage that gas for the complete destruction of the methane. 00:23:34.240 --> 00:23:39.240 We're required to monitor. So right now we have 22 probes that surround the existing landfill. 00:23:39.240 --> 00:23:49.240 As we go into the new permitted area, we're going to add approximately, let's see, 13, 14 more, so that we monitor these on a quarterly basis. 00:23:49.240 --> 00:23:54.240 We're required to keep the methane levels down below five percent. Most of the time they read zero. 00:23:54.240 --> 00:24:00.240 Sometimes they peak at one or two, but most of the time they're non-detectable in these areas. 00:24:00.240 --> 00:24:08.240 Also, as we expand the landfill, some of the existing probes and wells that are in our growth area will be removed 00:24:08.240 --> 00:24:13.240 and we'll put in additional wells to ensure that we completely encompass and surround the landfills, 00:24:13.240 --> 00:24:20.240 so we know what's happening upstream, downstream. We know if there's problems and we can respond accordingly. 00:24:20.240 --> 00:24:33.240 Brian, you just said we're going to add 13 to 14 more. Did you mean more wells or more flaring in your statement just a minute ago? 00:24:33.240 --> 00:24:39.240 No probes to monitor. Currently we have one flare and it is sized to manage the existing landfill. 00:24:39.240 --> 00:24:48.240 As we move into the new part that we've permitted, we may or may not be required to source an additional flare, 00:24:48.240 --> 00:24:56.240 and that has to go back to the project. I hate to bait you that way, but give me just a minute to get to that point. 00:24:56.240 --> 00:25:07.240 We are required to maintain this gas collection control system throughout the entire life of the site, 00:25:07.240 --> 00:25:13.240 and actually our permit requires us to maintain it and monitor it 30 years beyond the point that we close it down. 00:25:13.240 --> 00:25:19.240 Reason being is if you look at the growth curves and the way that natural gas or the landfill gas is produced, 00:25:19.240 --> 00:25:28.240 it takes about 30 years for it to actually start producing significant amounts of gas due to the anaerobic digestion process. 00:25:28.240 --> 00:25:37.240 It's without air, so it moves a whole lot slower, and basically we maximize the amount of material we put in at some point, 00:25:37.240 --> 00:25:45.240 and then as we trail off, we still have to account for that gas that continues to be produced from the material we put in there after we close down. 00:25:45.240 --> 00:25:53.240 So it may be 30 years, but again we have to have assurances from the state, from the TCEQ, that we've reached a level 00:25:53.240 --> 00:26:00.240 that we're no longer producing gas so we can shut the system down. See, 30 years plus 50 years, that's at least 80 years. 00:26:00.240 --> 00:26:06.240 I'm not going to be around at that time. If any of y'all are, y'all can check on the system. I'd appreciate that. 00:26:06.240 --> 00:26:10.240 I'm not going to be anywhere, I'm not going to be walking face to face the earth in 80 years. 00:26:10.240 --> 00:26:18.240 Anyway, there's a lot better things that we can do with this landfill gas than just burn it. 00:26:18.240 --> 00:26:29.240 In 2008, we entered into a partnership with a company called DTE, where we actually set a generation unit out there. 00:26:29.240 --> 00:26:37.240 A big 12-cylinder cat engine looked up to a gen set, spun it up, and was producing what was called renewable energy, 00:26:37.240 --> 00:26:42.240 renewable electricity for about 1,500 homes in the city of Dent. 00:26:42.240 --> 00:26:48.240 When that started, that's when natural gas, if y'all may remember, was about $10, $12 an MCF. 00:26:48.240 --> 00:26:51.240 It was very expensive and it made a whole lot of sense. 00:26:51.240 --> 00:26:58.240 As natural gas prices dropped, it actually became the highest price point of electricity in the city of Dent's portfolio. 00:26:58.240 --> 00:27:11.240 As such, it was costing city of Denton ratepayers in excess of about a million dollars a year just to run that and produce energy from that plant. 00:27:11.240 --> 00:27:17.240 As a result, in 2002, DNE actually bought the DTE plant and shut it down, 00:27:17.240 --> 00:27:21.240 which is why we're required to burn all the gas now under a mitigation plan. 00:27:21.240 --> 00:27:26.240 But recognizing that there are better ways to manage that material. 00:27:26.240 --> 00:27:32.240 What we've decided to do, we actually had a consultant come in, look at our generation, look at our different options, 00:27:32.240 --> 00:27:41.240 and we're currently in the process of negotiating with the company to come in and create what's called high BTU gas. 00:27:41.240 --> 00:27:45.240 As I stated earlier, landfill gas is about 50% methane. 00:27:45.240 --> 00:27:52.240 When you look at what Atmos has flowing in their line, it's about 99.98% methane. 00:27:52.240 --> 00:27:58.240 So what we're proposing to do is actually take the landfill gas plus gases generated from our wastewater treatment plant, 00:27:58.240 --> 00:28:07.240 the concrete facilities, anaerobic digesters, pull that gas off and actually treat it and concentrate it down to pipeline grade, 00:28:07.240 --> 00:28:13.240 removing the balanced gas, removing the oxygen, removing other things that you don't want in the natural gas, 00:28:13.240 --> 00:28:25.240 and feeding it to the local Atmos lines and basically providing additional sources of gas for people to use in their homes and businesses here in the City of Dent. 00:28:25.240 --> 00:28:32.240 Once that molecule gets into the pipeline, it's really no different than any other molecule of gas that's flowing up and down that pipeline. 00:28:32.240 --> 00:28:36.240 Benefit to the City of Dent, first and foremost, we're not flaring it. 00:28:36.240 --> 00:28:43.240 Ideally, any time we've got the flare running, it means it's dollars out of our pocket, it's dollars out of our contractor's pocket. 00:28:43.240 --> 00:28:49.240 So it shuts the flare down immediately, puts all that natural gas into the pipeline, 00:28:49.240 --> 00:28:56.240 and it's used to create hot water, to cook, and then to do the other things that need to happen. 00:28:56.240 --> 00:29:10.240 Additionally, there are green energy credits to what's called RINs and RECs that will actually pay us to manage this gas in such a way that it doesn't have to be produced at a natural gas wellhead. 00:29:10.240 --> 00:29:17.240 So again, it becomes a cleaner and greener option to provide natural gas into the system. 00:29:17.240 --> 00:29:24.240 As I said earlier, we are currently negotiating with a third-party contractor to come in and construct and operate this plant. 00:29:24.240 --> 00:29:32.240 We've prepared the RFP, we've talked with the company, we actually had four respondents step up and want to do this for the City of Dent. 00:29:32.240 --> 00:29:40.240 So we've selected the highest and best value consultant that we feel will bring benefit to the City of Dent. 00:29:40.240 --> 00:29:50.240 What we're hoping to do is within the next 90 days actually come before the PEB and the Council with a contract to memorialize this contract and the pricing structure. 00:29:50.240 --> 00:30:04.240 Following the acceptance of the contract, we'll spend the next 12 to 18 months permitting, designing, constructing, getting the pipeline to induct it into the Atmos facility, designing where the most appropriate place is. 00:30:04.240 --> 00:30:13.240 And then in 18 months have that facility up and running and actually benefit in producing what's called renewable natural gas into the system. 00:30:13.240 --> 00:30:18.240 So again, it's an exciting process, it's an exciting project that's on the ground. 00:30:18.240 --> 00:30:22.240 There's considerable economic benefit to the City of Dent. 00:30:22.240 --> 00:30:39.240 We're looking forward to helping not only support some rate relief for our customers, solid waste customers with it, but also help fund some of the exciting programs we're planning on implementing as a result of our comprehensive solid waste management strategy. 00:30:39.240 --> 00:30:47.240 So with that, I'd be glad to answer any questions you might have about our natural gas system or the solid waste system in general. 00:30:47.240 --> 00:30:53.240 Well, I have a few comments. Anybody else want to give up? 00:30:53.240 --> 00:30:57.240 We'll just start. Do you have one? No. Okay. Adam? 00:30:57.240 --> 00:31:09.240 Forgive me if I missed this. What percent would you say of material that goes in landfill is organic that decays and produces this gas? 00:31:09.240 --> 00:31:13.240 That's a really good question. 00:31:13.240 --> 00:31:17.240 We're currently trying to figure out exactly what that number is. 00:31:17.240 --> 00:31:23.240 As part of the development of our style comprehensive solid waste management strategy, we did do a couple of waste characterization. 00:31:23.240 --> 00:31:28.240 So we took basically your garbage bin off and we went through it and weighed things out. 00:31:28.240 --> 00:31:36.240 Currently about 45% of what's thrown away is considered organic material. 00:31:36.240 --> 00:31:42.240 So it's food waste, it's yard waste, it's wood, things of that nature. 00:31:42.240 --> 00:31:52.240 So again, there's significant opportunities in not only the residential but in the commercial sector to divert additional organic material out of the landfill. 00:31:52.240 --> 00:31:59.240 And it's probably one of our biggest and little hanging fruit from an impact standpoint and diversionary standpoint. 00:31:59.240 --> 00:32:02.240 Can I follow up on that? That's where I was going with this. 00:32:02.240 --> 00:32:08.240 Let's say we get operational with this and we're making renewable natural gas, which is a beneficial thing. 00:32:08.240 --> 00:32:14.240 How do you weigh that benefit against the benefit of diverting this out of the landfill and doing something else with it? 00:32:14.240 --> 00:32:23.240 In other words, you say to people in Denton, should you put your compostables in the brown bin or just chuck it in the green one because we're making gas out of it? 00:32:23.240 --> 00:32:26.240 Well, and we win from both sides. 00:32:26.240 --> 00:32:32.240 But at the end of the day, when you look at best practices that are across the nation, across the world, 00:32:32.240 --> 00:32:47.240 regardless of what you're doing in the city of Denton, we would only be able to divert probably 73% of that 45% because the rest is things that are adhering or absorbed into other paper or other options. 00:32:47.240 --> 00:32:50.240 So there will always be an organic sector going in. 00:32:50.240 --> 00:32:56.240 So we may flatten that curve a little earlier than we thought we would, but we will always have organic material. 00:32:56.240 --> 00:33:09.240 And again, we've had the landfill here since 1980. So we're really only realizing the gas from the material that we put in there in about 1990, 1995. 00:33:09.240 --> 00:33:15.240 So we still have 20 years of stuff we've been putting in there before we realized that gas. 00:33:15.240 --> 00:33:21.240 So we're kind of chasing our tail. We're lagging from the gas production standpoint. 00:33:21.240 --> 00:33:27.240 So we're well within our contract defined terms, our ability to sell gas and to use this. 00:33:27.240 --> 00:33:37.240 So by starting to divert that organic material now, it will have minimal impact on what this renewable energy plant, high BTU plant, will produce for the city of Denton. 00:33:37.240 --> 00:33:41.240 Thank you. 00:33:41.240 --> 00:33:42.240 Go ahead. 00:33:42.240 --> 00:33:47.240 From a cost perspective, you mentioned that it has cost benefit to the city. 00:33:47.240 --> 00:33:48.240 Correct. 00:33:48.240 --> 00:33:53.240 Which could look like consumer reduction in their energy fields. 00:33:53.240 --> 00:33:55.240 In their solid waste rates. 00:33:55.240 --> 00:33:56.240 Solid waste rates. 00:33:56.240 --> 00:33:57.240 Correct. 00:33:57.240 --> 00:33:59.240 Okay. 00:33:59.240 --> 00:34:01.240 That leads into my question even deeper. 00:34:01.240 --> 00:34:09.240 The amount of the projected amount of gas that will be put into at most as an example. 00:34:09.240 --> 00:34:15.240 Have you calculated out what that dollar benefit would look like coming back to us? 00:34:15.240 --> 00:34:30.240 I know I'm probably stretching it somewhat, but with the annual cost of inflation, cost of operations, will there come a point where their net gain will be gone away and we end up with another million dollar cost to operate that system? 00:34:30.240 --> 00:34:31.240 Does that make sense? 00:34:31.240 --> 00:34:35.240 That is a very fair question and that was the first question we always asked going through this. 00:34:35.240 --> 00:34:39.240 At what point in time is the city actually on the hook for paying something versus receiving it? 00:34:39.240 --> 00:34:40.240 Correct. 00:34:40.240 --> 00:34:47.240 And I can't share the prospectus with you right now because again we're still in contract negotiations and that's still going back and forth. 00:34:47.240 --> 00:34:59.240 But based on our calculations, we're still net positive, including inflation and growth and everything else for at least the next 20 years. 00:34:59.240 --> 00:35:00.240 Thank you. 00:35:00.240 --> 00:35:02.240 Did you have any questions? 00:35:02.240 --> 00:35:21.240 Yeah, I'm sort of conflicted about this from a long range point, I guess you could say, rather than short range. 00:35:21.240 --> 00:35:34.240 Whether methane is fossil, methane, or whether it's renewable, it still has the global warming capacity, I assume. 00:35:34.240 --> 00:35:35.240 Is that correct? 00:35:35.240 --> 00:35:36.240 Yes. 00:35:36.240 --> 00:35:51.240 Okay, so we know that methane leakage is a huge problem. 00:35:51.240 --> 00:36:15.240 We're underestimated and new reports have come out, I'm sure you're aware of, that show massive methane leakage and how this is really reducing our chances to get climate change under control before it's too late. 00:36:15.240 --> 00:36:34.240 Well, I don't understand in that respect, and just reading now about the health hazards of combustion of methane, ethanol, gas, whatever, in stoves. 00:36:34.240 --> 00:36:39.240 And I'm sure you're aware of these reports that are coming out too. 00:36:39.240 --> 00:36:58.240 And I assume that you're aware of the movement in many cities to revamp their building codes to keep natural gas connections out of new buildings. 00:36:58.240 --> 00:37:10.240 And there are now grants available to retrofit existing gas heated buildings with electric heat pumps, et cetera, et cetera. 00:37:10.240 --> 00:37:35.240 So I guess what I'm getting to is, does this really fit in with a net zero 2050 plan, and it just seems like a very limited investment, meaning the time that it's going to have to make money to the city. 00:37:35.240 --> 00:37:48.240 In that we know that it's a system that needs to change for the benefit of the future. 00:37:48.240 --> 00:38:12.240 And I have, like I say, conflicting feelings about this because in one way I can see it's a benefit to the city financially. We're not flaring anymore, yet we are prolonging a system that needs to change. 00:38:12.240 --> 00:38:24.240 There's no question about that. We've got to do whatever we can to stop using methane except for essential purposes. 00:38:24.240 --> 00:38:42.240 And in an area like this where we have so many options available to us, other things we can explore, which I don't know if you've explored yet, and that's one of my questions. 00:38:42.240 --> 00:38:50.240 Instead of just jumping into this and making it sound like it's a done deal, I think we need to examine it more. 00:38:50.240 --> 00:38:57.240 I think we need to look at it at a comprehensive waste management plan. Is that plan finished? 00:38:57.240 --> 00:39:05.240 We're in the final stages. There is an actual presentation of PUB and Council on Monday and Tuesday regarding our final goals and metrics we'll be using. 00:39:05.240 --> 00:39:14.240 And then we'll be buttoning it up and then starting the development of the administrative portion and then the implementation plan for the different projects. 00:39:14.240 --> 00:39:29.240 I assume then that what you're talking about with this methane plan is something that is recommended in the waste management plan? 00:39:29.240 --> 00:39:38.240 Regardless of whether it's recommended or not, it's required. If you have a type 1 landfill and state attaches, you are producing methane. 00:39:38.240 --> 00:39:48.240 And your permit from a federal standpoint requires you to manage it. So we're going to have methane and we either burn it, run it in an engine, or we put it in a pipeline. 00:39:48.240 --> 00:39:59.240 That's really our three options that then we have to manage it. So again, it's not an either/or or we can just turn a key and we're not going to produce methane anymore. 00:39:59.240 --> 00:40:09.240 We have it and we have to manage it. Long term, I think that I understand and appreciate the fact that we're moving towards electrification. 00:40:09.240 --> 00:40:17.240 But we still have a large amount of housing stock plus industrial sources in the city of Denton that will be using methane for quite a while. 00:40:17.240 --> 00:40:27.240 If we can locally provide that methane, we're not looking at transporting at long distances. We're not looking at fresh fossil fuel sources. 00:40:27.240 --> 00:40:40.240 It's a beneficial piece that helps us get to this point. Until we can get everybody converted over at some point in time that we're not needed anymore, then we can start flaring again. 00:40:40.240 --> 00:40:52.240 Hopefully we're on the downside of the curve at that point. Through partnerships with local universities and other innovators, we can figure out other alternatives, things to do with methane. 00:40:52.240 --> 00:40:59.240 But right now, heat and combustion is really the big thing that we can do with methane. 00:40:59.240 --> 00:41:22.240 Have you thought about expanding the aerobic composting? Not the anaerobic, but the regular composting program? 00:41:22.240 --> 00:41:29.240 We have. With food waste and methane producing materials. 00:41:29.240 --> 00:41:41.240 We're looking at that also as part of the whole comprehensive management strategy. Part of our issue with doing just regular composting and windrowing is that we're space restricted. 00:41:41.240 --> 00:41:52.240 So we're going to maximize that, looking at doing some anaerobic also to help make that process just a little bit quicker. 00:41:52.240 --> 00:41:56.240 But again, with the anaerobic digesters, you still get methane on the back end. 00:41:56.240 --> 00:42:08.240 There's also studies out there right now that if you're not maintaining your windrows correctly, you actually have significant methane emissions from a traditional aerobic type of composting facility. 00:42:08.240 --> 00:42:14.240 There's a lot of moving variables, and we're looking at this from a holistic standpoint. 00:42:14.240 --> 00:42:24.240 We're trying to keep an open mind and look at these things from a cost benefit standpoint, recognizing sustainability is an important part of that. 00:42:24.240 --> 00:42:41.240 Okay, I know at some point, I was just looking at here, I had asked for a further report on a plan of composting for the city. 00:42:41.240 --> 00:42:48.240 I think that's when you were sitting on the PUB that you had asked for something like that, and we were including that in the carbon subliminal strategy. 00:42:48.240 --> 00:43:02.240 Okay, well those are my feelings about it, and I understand where you're coming from, and I just feel that it's a very short sighted decision. 00:43:02.240 --> 00:43:11.240 And I have a problem with short term solutions for long term problems. 00:43:11.240 --> 00:43:17.240 I really don't think that the long term is being looked at here. 00:43:17.240 --> 00:43:26.240 I'm not saying that what you're doing is wrong or anything, I just feel like there needs to be more looking at this. 00:43:26.240 --> 00:43:28.240 Thank you. 00:43:28.240 --> 00:43:35.240 Hi, so I have been taking some notes, so bear with me while I try to go back through them. 00:43:35.240 --> 00:43:43.240 One, you said there's the three options, and since this is the Sustainability Framework Committee, our concern is environment and emissions. 00:43:43.240 --> 00:44:00.240 So have we looked at, I know one of the reasons we went from the electricity to flaring is because we were told that it would capture more methane and reduce those greenhouse emissions 00:44:00.240 --> 00:44:09.240 because of the energy that we were using was that the machine was old and there was leakage and stuff, so we made that choice. 00:44:09.240 --> 00:44:15.240 It wasn't the methane, we were still having complete methane destruction with the engine and the flare or the flare. 00:44:15.240 --> 00:44:18.240 The issue is with the flare, we don't have any NOx emissions. 00:44:18.240 --> 00:44:30.240 With the engine we were running, we were having significant NOx emissions, which again is the, I forget the exact term, but again it directly impacts our non-attainment. 00:44:30.240 --> 00:44:38.240 So again, by removing the engine offline, we actually improved our air quality suit for lack of a better term. 00:44:38.240 --> 00:44:48.240 Piggybacking on that, moving to this new gas capture, does it do the same thing as burning? 00:44:48.240 --> 00:45:03.240 Because what I want to see is the data that this is going to not only be financial, but be better for our environment in a way that it helps our air quality, since we're in non-attainment. 00:45:03.240 --> 00:45:10.240 Can you, I think that's what this committee would like to see, everything sounds good. 00:45:10.240 --> 00:45:24.240 I know that I'd much rather not flare if we don't have to, but if moving to this new system is not going to be as good for our air quality or good for our city, 00:45:24.240 --> 00:45:33.240 then that's the kind of, if it's going to have more leakage, those are the kind of things that I'm looking to see when you come back with this. 00:45:33.240 --> 00:45:43.240 Well, and again, just quick, in talking molecule for molecule, right now we're burning everything that we're pulling out of the landfill. 00:45:43.240 --> 00:45:52.240 So again, it destroys the methane, produces water, carbon dioxide, and some other trace chemicals. 00:45:52.240 --> 00:46:01.240 When we have this plant up and running, the flare goes away, and that methane then goes to your house. 00:46:01.240 --> 00:46:06.240 Currently you're cooking anyway. You've got a hot water heater running, if you've got natural gas, okay? 00:46:06.240 --> 00:46:10.240 So what it's doing basically is, it's almost a net zero. 00:46:10.240 --> 00:46:20.240 We're not increasing any emissions on the users end, but reducing the amount of burning and emissions that are happening at the landfill through the flare. 00:46:20.240 --> 00:46:27.240 So we're seeing a reduction in what's at the flare because we're not using as much coming through the pipeline. 00:46:27.240 --> 00:46:36.240 Okay. Well, just general overall, that would be good for us to see in a presentation, that data and those emissions. 00:46:36.240 --> 00:46:44.240 For me, anyway, I'd like to see that in fracking versus this way, 00:46:44.240 --> 00:46:51.240 because there's several different ways to get gas, and renewable natural gas is what we're calling this. 00:46:51.240 --> 00:46:53.240 Correct. 00:46:53.240 --> 00:47:05.240 Which is great if it works and it is better for our environment than the way that it's currently being received. 00:47:05.240 --> 00:47:10.240 So are we going to sell it and use it? 00:47:10.240 --> 00:47:15.240 I know that when we were producing our own electricity in our pie chart, 00:47:15.240 --> 00:47:23.240 that I think it was 4% or 3% went directly to our residential usage. 00:47:23.240 --> 00:47:25.240 We were able to capture that. 00:47:25.240 --> 00:47:38.240 Is there a way when we move to this new utility that we'll be able to capture that direct benefit to the residents? 00:47:38.240 --> 00:47:43.240 Or is it just going to all go in and we just won't know? 00:47:43.240 --> 00:47:52.240 No, we'll be able to capture how much methane that we were actually putting in the pipeline, 00:47:52.240 --> 00:48:03.240 and then we'll be able to, from an economic standpoint, show what the benefit is to the rate payers in the city of Denton at that point, if that makes sense. 00:48:03.240 --> 00:48:12.240 It does, but for me, I'm an Atmos rate payer, and so I'm just confused about how that's going to translate to my electric bill. 00:48:12.240 --> 00:48:13.240 It won't. 00:48:13.240 --> 00:48:14.240 Okay. 00:48:14.240 --> 00:48:17.240 But what it will transfer to is your solid waste bill. 00:48:17.240 --> 00:48:25.240 You may pay the exact same, if you're at Atmos and you get your natural gas from Atmos, let's say your bill's $100. 00:48:25.240 --> 00:48:28.240 $100 makes the math. 00:48:28.240 --> 00:48:33.240 It's easy. It's $100. 00:48:33.240 --> 00:48:34.240 I'm just going to throw this out. 00:48:34.240 --> 00:48:42.240 A million dollars a year net from the sale of this natural gas to the city. 00:48:42.240 --> 00:48:54.240 We could actually realize potentially a dollar or two rate reduction or cost avoidance to your solid waste bill as a result of this on a monthly basis. 00:48:54.240 --> 00:49:00.240 So again, that's where you'll see the reduction is at your solid waste bill level, not at your natural gas level, 00:49:00.240 --> 00:49:07.240 because you will always pay stock spot market price on what that natural gas is that's coming to your home, 00:49:07.240 --> 00:49:13.240 regardless of whether it's renewable natural gas, regardless of where it comes from in the country. 00:49:13.240 --> 00:49:20.240 As long as it gets into that pipeline, you're paying what the spot market price is on an average basis. 00:49:20.240 --> 00:49:23.240 Now, to cure that just a little bit further, 00:49:23.240 --> 00:49:28.240 we still have a few vehicles on our fleet that run off natural gas. 00:49:28.240 --> 00:49:35.240 So we could use this gas in our fleet to power some of these natural gas vehicles, 00:49:35.240 --> 00:49:44.240 but from a value standpoint, we can actually put it in the pipeline and then pull it out 100 foot down the pipeline 00:49:44.240 --> 00:49:53.240 and buy it at a cheaper rate from a cost savings standpoint than it would be to buy it directly from before we put it into the pipeline. 00:49:53.240 --> 00:49:56.240 And that goes back to the RINs and the RECs and the green energy credits. 00:49:56.240 --> 00:50:10.240 We're getting almost 30, in today's market, close to $30 in MMBTU for every molecule that we put in or every amount that we put in. 00:50:10.240 --> 00:50:13.240 We're losing that money if we take it directly from the plant. 00:50:13.240 --> 00:50:19.240 But if we buy it in the pipeline, we're paying what the spot market price is, which is $2 or $3. 00:50:19.240 --> 00:50:25.240 So again, we're making money even though we're pulling it out almost immediately when we put it back in. 00:50:25.240 --> 00:50:32.240 So that's part of the valuation that we have to consider as we're going through the cost allocation on this. 00:50:32.240 --> 00:50:39.240 But there will be a way, because I know for us, we go by the greenhouse gas emissions that it's reported. 00:50:39.240 --> 00:50:44.240 We get that report, and solid waste is pretty high. 00:50:44.240 --> 00:50:46.240 Yes, they are. 00:50:46.240 --> 00:50:57.240 But again, as we continue to report back on this, that report is exclusive of any efforts we make to destroy those emissions. 00:50:57.240 --> 00:51:00.240 So it's just what we've produced, not what we've controlled. 00:51:00.240 --> 00:51:05.240 Again, if you put that control in there, it drops us way down to the bottom of the list. 00:51:05.240 --> 00:51:15.240 So all of this is, I just bring that up because I'd like to see how all that translates into the data that we're going to see. 00:51:15.240 --> 00:51:22.240 I think it would be very beneficial for us and the public, too, as we talk about it, 00:51:22.240 --> 00:51:29.240 how these greenhouse gases and emissions and what they are, what they were, and what they will be. 00:51:29.240 --> 00:51:35.240 It will be helpful for us to put that in a perspective. 00:51:35.240 --> 00:51:37.240 I know you have a question, but just a quick follow-up. 00:51:37.240 --> 00:51:41.240 So your statement that you just made, speaking of the statement that you just made, 00:51:41.240 --> 00:51:48.240 that we examined our municipal and community emissions really early at the start of this committee's process. 00:51:48.240 --> 00:51:54.240 Are you stating that the emission records that were in that were not reflective of what you controlled, 00:51:54.240 --> 00:51:56.240 but as you said, what you were producing? 00:51:56.240 --> 00:52:04.240 Yeah, the way that the model works is it looks at the amount of waste that it brings in. 00:52:04.240 --> 00:52:09.240 And correct me if I'm wrong, but it applies a standard reduction. 00:52:09.240 --> 00:52:13.240 You've got this much waste, this is how much methane it can or could produce. 00:52:13.240 --> 00:52:19.240 It does not take into account the controls that we have once we collect it, 00:52:19.240 --> 00:52:24.240 so the destruction that we do through the flare, through the engine, through this process. 00:52:24.240 --> 00:52:30.240 So are you stating that we were looking at perhaps not entirely comprehensive data 00:52:30.240 --> 00:52:33.240 than what you may be able to provide in a future presentation? 00:52:33.240 --> 00:52:36.240 That is correct. Excuse me, in my opinion, that is correct. 00:52:36.240 --> 00:52:42.240 Okay, so off of the question she's raised in perhaps a future presentation, 00:52:42.240 --> 00:52:47.240 could you bring us that data that's a little more reflective of what you say is actually being emitted 00:52:47.240 --> 00:52:51.240 outside of the production of what you're actually able to control? 00:52:51.240 --> 00:52:54.240 I think we could probably do that. 00:52:54.240 --> 00:52:55.240 Go ahead, Adam. 00:52:55.240 --> 00:52:58.240 I think on Keely's first question, I really appreciated that, 00:52:58.240 --> 00:53:01.240 and I thought I was going here, but we didn't get there. 00:53:01.240 --> 00:53:10.240 One of the very first things you said was that about 50% of the gas is methane and 50% is other stuff. 00:53:10.240 --> 00:53:11.240 Didn't you say that? 00:53:11.240 --> 00:53:15.240 In landfill gas, correct. 00:53:15.240 --> 00:53:19.240 Then you talked about pipeline gas being almost pure methane. 00:53:19.240 --> 00:53:20.240 Correct. 00:53:20.240 --> 00:53:23.240 What I thought we were driving at, and I think it would be good to see, 00:53:23.240 --> 00:53:26.240 is what happens to the other 50% of this stuff? 00:53:26.240 --> 00:53:30.240 Because you said the flare has gone entirely, but they don't want that in the pipeline. 00:53:30.240 --> 00:53:31.240 Correct. 00:53:31.240 --> 00:53:33.240 Where does it go? 00:53:33.240 --> 00:53:39.240 Things like the oxygen, carbon dioxide, things that can be emitted under the permit, 00:53:39.240 --> 00:53:41.240 because again, this is a permanent process. 00:53:41.240 --> 00:53:45.240 It's not just somebody coming in and setting up by the state and be allowed to do this. 00:53:45.240 --> 00:53:52.240 There will be some releases, there are potentials of carbon sequestration of some of the gas, 00:53:52.240 --> 00:53:59.240 but a lot of what we're seeing, there will be what we call scrubbing media. 00:53:59.240 --> 00:54:05.240 Again, the ballast gas or the rest of the gas will flow through. 00:54:05.240 --> 00:54:13.240 It will be absorbed onto different types of beads, and that material will react, will be neutralized, 00:54:13.240 --> 00:54:18.240 and then that will go for disposal or treatment in some way, shape, or form. 00:54:18.240 --> 00:54:22.240 There are different ways that we manage that other half of the material. 00:54:22.240 --> 00:54:26.240 That's a good point, I will say. That's a good question. 00:54:26.240 --> 00:54:27.240 Can I? 00:54:27.240 --> 00:54:29.240 Yes, please. Go ahead, Mr. President. 00:54:29.240 --> 00:54:36.240 In agreement with the -- I need to see a total comprehensive plan to in essence put our blessing on it. 00:54:36.240 --> 00:54:41.240 If we're going to advise on this, there's a lot more information that we need. 00:54:41.240 --> 00:54:49.240 And then I really would like to come alongside what Ed is saying is that how does it impact the overall master plan, 00:54:49.240 --> 00:54:54.240 greenhouse gas reduction and so forth, the 2050 plan. 00:54:54.240 --> 00:55:02.240 I'd like to see how does it integrate into that, how does it help us achieve that goal, if we can ask that. 00:55:02.240 --> 00:55:09.240 Yeah, and I think that's things that we tend to bring forward in future greenhouse gas reports to the city. 00:55:09.240 --> 00:55:14.240 We can show what we're reducing, net result of the reductions here, 00:55:14.240 --> 00:55:21.240 and just get a much bigger and more comprehensive evaluation on what the total production is. 00:55:21.240 --> 00:55:27.240 But to clarify, you watched your material before the approval of the facility, right? 00:55:27.240 --> 00:55:28.240 Yes. 00:55:28.240 --> 00:55:32.240 Well, again, part of that -- and again, we're asked to advise. 00:55:32.240 --> 00:55:38.240 The purpose of this committee is to advise the council and put our blessing on our yay or nay. 00:55:38.240 --> 00:55:47.240 Yes, I have to see that before I can agree or vote or whatever to say yay or nay. 00:55:47.240 --> 00:55:56.240 And awesome plan, it sounds like, but it sounds like I need to see it documented and presented accordingly. 00:55:56.240 --> 00:56:06.240 And then just an overall renewable gas percentage, what that would look like for our community. 00:56:06.240 --> 00:56:11.240 So like what we get now, and then you get this process started, 00:56:11.240 --> 00:56:17.240 what percent of our community's usage would now be renewable usage versus non. 00:56:17.240 --> 00:56:20.240 I think that might be something I'm interested in. 00:56:20.240 --> 00:56:35.240 Yeah, so really how much of the current pipeline gas would be supplanted by the induction of all renewable natural gas into the system. 00:56:35.240 --> 00:56:44.240 Yeah, and I think that -- are we going to -- do we need to bring this up at the end when we reopen the matrix maybe? 00:56:44.240 --> 00:56:48.240 Or is this good for now as like a direction to you? 00:56:48.240 --> 00:56:49.240 I think it's good for now. 00:56:49.240 --> 00:56:50.240 Okay, it is. 00:56:50.240 --> 00:56:52.240 I'm not even captured in the picture. 00:56:52.240 --> 00:56:53.240 Okay. 00:56:53.240 --> 00:56:54.240 Okay. 00:56:54.240 --> 00:56:55.240 All right. 00:56:55.240 --> 00:56:56.240 Thank you all very much for your time. 00:56:56.240 --> 00:57:01.240 Thank you for your time. 00:57:01.240 --> 00:57:12.240 We will move on to Item B, Receiver Report, call to discussion on the Department and Capital Project Sidewalk Work Plan with Nathan George, 00:57:12.240 --> 00:57:17.240 the City Senior Planner, Bicycle, Pedestrian, and ADA Coordinator. 00:57:17.240 --> 00:57:18.240 I don't believe we've met yet. 00:57:18.240 --> 00:57:19.240 Welcome. 00:57:19.240 --> 00:57:20.240 Thank you. 00:57:20.240 --> 00:57:21.240 Nice to meet you. 00:57:21.240 --> 00:57:24.240 No, I don't believe we've met yet. 00:57:24.240 --> 00:57:29.240 So yeah, I'm Nathan George, the City's new Mike Ped and ADA Coordinator. 00:57:29.240 --> 00:57:31.240 I sit in the Capital Projects Division. 00:57:31.240 --> 00:57:41.240 I heard you guys wanted to hear a little bit more about where I am and what I do because you've seen several different iterations of the position that I hold over the years. 00:57:41.240 --> 00:57:45.240 So I'll be happy to entertain any questions you have towards the end. 00:57:45.240 --> 00:57:48.240 I guess I can give a brief introduction of myself. 00:57:48.240 --> 00:57:51.240 So I joined the city in July of last year. 00:57:51.240 --> 00:57:56.240 I come from the Washington, D.C. area, previously working in consulting roles. 00:57:56.240 --> 00:58:11.240 So I had been doing similar work, bike ped and ADA type work, with a consulting firm based out of Baltimore and doing a lot of designing facilities and supporting communities like the City of Denton with implementing those facilities, 00:58:11.240 --> 00:58:19.240 either through planning or design phases, helping them get funding for those outside funding opportunities to accelerate programs. 00:58:19.240 --> 00:58:22.240 So I did a lot of the same kind of work that I'm doing here today. 00:58:22.240 --> 00:58:33.240 I just happen to now be admitted as a staff member at the City of Denton and looking forward to continuing to do the work that I have been doing the last seven months and delivering projects. 00:58:33.240 --> 00:58:38.240 And hopefully you'll start to see some of my work in the ground very soon. 00:58:38.240 --> 00:58:41.240 Are you familiar with our sustainability plan? 00:58:41.240 --> 00:58:45.240 At a high level. I'm not very familiar with it yet. 00:58:45.240 --> 00:58:49.240 I have had a lot of other stuff on my plate, but I'm sure we'll take a look at it. 00:58:49.240 --> 00:58:53.240 And today I'm here to talk with you about the sidewalk work plan. 00:58:53.240 --> 00:58:56.240 So this is one of, I'll call it one of our capital programs. 00:58:56.240 --> 00:58:59.240 It's effectively, we have a lot of different capital programs. 00:58:59.240 --> 00:59:03.240 Some of you on this side of the room refer to the mobility plan. 00:59:03.240 --> 00:59:10.240 And then once we have those plans, we put together work plans that help us deliver those capital programs, in this case sidewalks. 00:59:10.240 --> 00:59:13.240 We have a separate program for bicycle lanes or bicycle facilities. 00:59:13.240 --> 00:59:19.240 Sometimes there's a little overlap between those bike and ped components of facilities that we implement around the city. 00:59:19.240 --> 00:59:24.240 And then of course we have a lot of other programs that you see like waterline projects down by the gray. 00:59:24.240 --> 00:59:27.240 There's a lot of other work the capital projects does. 00:59:27.240 --> 00:59:29.240 So I'm going to walk you through the sidewalk work plan. 00:59:29.240 --> 00:59:33.240 This is basically, it's a presentation that I've given now. 00:59:33.240 --> 00:59:40.240 I think this is the fifth time to different various bodies, council, mobility committee, and so forth. 00:59:40.240 --> 00:59:52.240 So I'll give you the presentation. It'll be a little bit different because we were presenting this more as a guiding sort of framework to help reshape how we're going to deliver sidewalk projects under our work plan. 00:59:52.240 --> 00:59:58.240 So you'll see a little bit of that background and a little bit of information about how we're going to deliver the projects moving forward. 00:59:58.240 --> 01:00:07.240 And the next critical step is to take a lot of this information out to the public and start talking about specific projects because this information is helpful background information. 01:00:07.240 --> 01:00:12.240 But we still have to put a lot of additional application in place to use the information. 01:00:12.240 --> 01:00:14.240 So I'll walk you through the presentation. 01:00:14.240 --> 01:00:19.240 Hyperlink was included in AIS or the agenda information sheet. 01:00:19.240 --> 01:00:22.240 So anybody who wants to can go and take a look at this on. 01:00:22.240 --> 01:00:24.240 It's actually hosted online. 01:00:24.240 --> 01:00:31.240 So all the information that I'm presenting today is available for members of the committee or the public to take a look at their lecture. 01:00:31.240 --> 01:00:39.240 So the sidewalk work plan is a plan that helps us guide where we're going to make sidewalk investments. 01:00:39.240 --> 01:00:45.240 The most important acknowledgement here is that pedestrians really do enjoy walking on a sidewalk. 01:00:45.240 --> 01:00:48.240 They tend to not like walking in the street with cars or with big trucks. 01:00:48.240 --> 01:00:52.240 So it's just an important acknowledgement that people really enjoy walking. 01:00:52.240 --> 01:01:04.240 It's something we saw a lot of emphasis on as COVID emerged, stay at home orders were in place, people walked out the front doors and found out they were living in unwalkable communities. 01:01:04.240 --> 01:01:13.240 So it really is a facility that makes your neighborhood an enjoyable place to walk as opposed to, say, a street that doesn't have sidewalks. 01:01:13.240 --> 01:01:16.240 And I'll get into some caveats on that in a minute. 01:01:16.240 --> 01:01:21.240 Our future is guided by that mobility plan, or at least I would say it was. 01:01:21.240 --> 01:01:33.240 Now, I would say this process is helping us get a little bit ahead of that grand vision and it provides more specific detail where we're going to provide complete streets. 01:01:33.240 --> 01:01:40.240 But the mobility plan that we're putting forward for adoption in a few weeks is really a true multimodal vision for the city. 01:01:40.240 --> 01:01:46.240 So instead of just looking at cars and the thoroughfare plan, we have a bike plan, we have a PED plan. 01:01:46.240 --> 01:01:49.240 This sidewalk work plan actually tells us how we're going to implement the PED plan. 01:01:49.240 --> 01:01:55.240 So that's why I say it's a little bit more advanced, but we do have a true multimodal vision for the city that we're working to deliver. 01:01:55.240 --> 01:01:59.240 And this is one part of that. 01:01:59.240 --> 01:02:06.240 One of the acknowledgments that we wanted to make sure everybody recognized is just that we don't own all the streets in the city. 01:02:06.240 --> 01:02:10.240 There are textile roads or state roads that we have. 01:02:10.240 --> 01:02:14.240 We don't have control over them. We can encourage the state to make changes. 01:02:14.240 --> 01:02:22.240 We can go in and make changes with their blessing, but there are streets within the city that are not -- they're not city streets. 01:02:22.240 --> 01:02:30.240 And so we made this map just to give folks an idea of where we have city streets, where we have county streets, and where the streets are textile. 01:02:30.240 --> 01:02:38.240 So there are three maps in the present -- or in this story map. I think it's not a true presentation. 01:02:38.240 --> 01:02:44.240 They're interactive maps. They allow you to turn things on and off and play with the visualization. 01:02:44.240 --> 01:02:52.240 So just to give you an idea, you can go in and search any address using the little search button on the upper left-hand corner. 01:02:52.240 --> 01:02:58.240 You can turn layers on and off if you wish to. There's a little interactive legend. 01:02:58.240 --> 01:03:06.240 So you can actually see what's a city street, what's a textile street, or what is a county roadway. 01:03:06.240 --> 01:03:13.240 It really gives anybody who's viewing this information the opportunity to look in their neighborhood, look at a specific area of interest in the city. 01:03:13.240 --> 01:03:19.240 So that's why we're not doing a PowerPoint presentation today. We're facilitating using this medium. 01:03:19.240 --> 01:03:25.240 So just to highlight a few of those features. 01:03:25.240 --> 01:03:31.240 Yeah, this thing is a little glitchy sometimes. I gotta make sure it loads up correctly. 01:03:31.240 --> 01:03:43.240 So to inform development of the sidewalk park plan, when I came on board, we really started with a lot of robust data information that came out of our ADA transition plan. 01:03:43.240 --> 01:03:51.240 So the ADA transition plan, the core of that plan is really to look at our existing assets and their condition. 01:03:51.240 --> 01:03:56.240 Fortunately, our consultant also collected data on where we were missing sidewalks. 01:03:56.240 --> 01:04:05.240 So we were able to use the information from the ADA transition plan not only to see conditions of existing sidewalks, ramps, any conflicts that we had in those facilities, 01:04:05.240 --> 01:04:11.240 but we can also see where they're missing and then start to analyze all of that information on a citywide basis. 01:04:11.240 --> 01:04:19.240 A lot of communities I work with don't have that much information, so it's actually really helpful to have all that information. 01:04:19.240 --> 01:04:26.240 I did all the analysis myself, so to have it all at my disposal to run that analysis was really great. 01:04:26.240 --> 01:04:29.240 I'll walk you through kind of how all that came together. 01:04:29.240 --> 01:04:39.240 So to help us identify where to make sidewalk investments, historically the city has used a process that is called a pedestrian potential index. 01:04:39.240 --> 01:04:45.240 That pedestrian potential index is really looking at, you know, we need a lot of sidewalks. 01:04:45.240 --> 01:04:50.240 When you look at a citywide basis, where are the sidewalks going to be used if we make those investments? 01:04:50.240 --> 01:04:56.240 Sometimes it's pretty easy to go out and make an investment where it doesn't pair well with where the users are located. 01:04:56.240 --> 01:05:05.240 So it's really important for us to leverage data to understand where those dollars are going to translate to payment under people's feet. 01:05:05.240 --> 01:05:15.240 So this pedestrian potential index is a way that we can assess that potential to meet needs where they are located. 01:05:15.240 --> 01:05:21.240 So historically that had been a bit more of a focused effort. 01:05:21.240 --> 01:05:27.240 I see needs. I see a ghost path or a worn path on the side of the road. 01:05:27.240 --> 01:05:36.240 And it was less data driven and more driven by just a process of visual identification, if you will. 01:05:36.240 --> 01:05:40.240 The process I'm presenting to you today was more of a data analysis. 01:05:40.240 --> 01:05:43.240 So it's driven by different metrics. 01:05:43.240 --> 01:05:47.240 I'll walk you through the metrics that feed into the resulting paths. 01:05:47.240 --> 01:05:52.240 There are some limitations to that and we'll get into that a little bit later. 01:05:52.240 --> 01:06:01.240 So basically what we did at a citywide level is analyzed every sidewalk segment that's missing and gave it a point for each of these criteria. 01:06:01.240 --> 01:06:05.240 To summarize all the points, you get a PPI score or a pedestrian potential index. 01:06:05.240 --> 01:06:10.240 First is major streets. Major streets are the roads that connect most places most directly. 01:06:10.240 --> 01:06:18.240 They tend to be the easiest way for a pedestrian to make their trip because local streets might discontinue at the end of a project. 01:06:18.240 --> 01:06:22.240 They may not connect through. It's called a SACS or something like that. 01:06:22.240 --> 01:06:28.240 So major streets tend to be a very direct way for a pedestrian to get from point A to point B. 01:06:28.240 --> 01:06:33.240 So each of those were given a point. There are some ways that we could play with that data to further refine it. 01:06:33.240 --> 01:06:40.240 But for this level of analysis, we just gave each of what we call our thoroughfare or collector and arterial streets a point. 01:06:40.240 --> 01:06:46.240 Another category is schools. Schools represent an area where pedestrian activity tends to be very high. 01:06:46.240 --> 01:06:52.240 Students can't drive themselves until they get to be a certain age. So they're a very good user type to try and support. 01:06:52.240 --> 01:06:59.240 There are also a lot of funding programs that are driven around supporting that walkability around schools. 01:06:59.240 --> 01:07:02.240 So that's an important acknowledgement as well. 01:07:02.240 --> 01:07:09.240 Government facilities. We have a duty from an ADA perspective to make sure that our facilities are accessible. 01:07:09.240 --> 01:07:19.240 There are also places that our customers as a city need to get to. So each one of those locations is a potential generator or tractor of pedestrian trips. 01:07:19.240 --> 01:07:21.240 We need to make sure that they're accessible. 01:07:21.240 --> 01:07:25.240 So we gave a point to each of those. That's like the building we're sitting in right now. 01:07:25.240 --> 01:07:30.240 But it's also things like libraries and parks and other park trails, buildings like that. 01:07:30.240 --> 01:07:36.240 So those are all considered government facilities for the sake of this exercise. 01:07:36.240 --> 01:07:39.240 And then points of interest is all that other stuff that people might walk to. 01:07:39.240 --> 01:07:45.240 So this is restaurants, shopping, maybe going to the doctor's office or the dentist. 01:07:45.240 --> 01:07:48.240 So places that people might need to get to by foot. 01:07:48.240 --> 01:07:57.240 Maybe it's a place that's more based on the need to get from a transit stop to that essential service. 01:07:57.240 --> 01:08:03.240 So we have a lot of information about where all these sort of central business district areas are located. 01:08:03.240 --> 01:08:10.240 And that helps us hone in on where there's a lot of activity that's going to drive those pedestrian trips. 01:08:10.240 --> 01:08:13.240 And then the last point is just safety. 01:08:13.240 --> 01:08:19.240 So when we see pedestrian crashes, it doesn't mean that there is a missing facility necessarily. 01:08:19.240 --> 01:08:25.240 That's a good indication that in some proximity of where that crash occurred, something's not working right. 01:08:25.240 --> 01:08:31.240 And so giving a point to some proximity helps us focus that we have pedestrian activity. 01:08:31.240 --> 01:08:35.240 We need to take a look at what's not working in that area and try to correct it. 01:08:35.240 --> 01:08:38.240 So those are the five characteristics that we looked at. 01:08:38.240 --> 01:08:42.240 Somewhere around a quarter mile of spacing in general had to play with the numbers. 01:08:42.240 --> 01:08:47.240 So like trails, if you do a quarter mile, it covers the whole city. 01:08:47.240 --> 01:08:50.240 With very few exceptions, it covers the entire city. 01:08:50.240 --> 01:08:58.240 So some of it was a little tighter, but the majority, that's a quarter mile spacing of each of those points. 01:08:58.240 --> 01:09:07.240 And then apply from a geospatial analysis to identify all the segments, add up all the points, and we get a PPI score. 01:09:07.240 --> 01:09:09.240 So I'm going to show you two maps. 01:09:09.240 --> 01:09:14.240 The first map is going to be what our existing sidewalk projects are. 01:09:14.240 --> 01:09:21.240 And these were identified with the old system of more of that manual look at where we need to invest in sidewalks. 01:09:21.240 --> 01:09:25.240 The second map will display the results of that PPI evaluation. 01:09:25.240 --> 01:09:33.240 So we wanted to make sure that nobody lost sight of the fact that we do have an existing sidewalk program in the city. 01:09:33.240 --> 01:09:38.240 It has been informed by staff evaluation of where needs were located. 01:09:38.240 --> 01:09:42.240 The sidewalks are under construction in a variety of places. 01:09:42.240 --> 01:09:46.240 Some of the sidewalks that show up on this map have actually been completed. 01:09:46.240 --> 01:09:52.240 And then we broke them out by year, which is the approximate year that each sidewalk segment would be completed. 01:09:52.240 --> 01:09:57.240 Just to show, here's where you might see a sidewalk under construction in the city. 01:09:57.240 --> 01:10:04.240 I can tell you right now that we have some medical parkway or medical center drive. 01:10:04.240 --> 01:10:07.240 I forget the exact name here, but Med Park Drive. 01:10:07.240 --> 01:10:11.240 These sidewalks were just completed a week or two ago. 01:10:11.240 --> 01:10:14.240 So these are projects that are actively ongoing throughout the city. 01:10:14.240 --> 01:10:16.240 You can take a look and see where they are. 01:10:16.240 --> 01:10:21.240 There are also projects listed in here that will deliver sidewalks out of our other capital programs. 01:10:21.240 --> 01:10:29.240 So that's road projects like rebuilding Hickory Street, the main L extension, the new bridge that will go over the DCETA line. 01:10:29.240 --> 01:10:34.240 So sidewalk projects may be delivered standalone independent of other projects. 01:10:34.240 --> 01:10:38.240 So they may be a component of a larger project as well. 01:10:38.240 --> 01:10:43.240 That's an important acknowledgement. 01:10:43.240 --> 01:10:45.240 So here's the PPI score map. 01:10:45.240 --> 01:10:47.240 It might take a minute to load. 01:10:47.240 --> 01:10:52.240 I'm trying to pre-seat it before we start talking. 01:10:52.240 --> 01:10:58.240 The main point of going through a PPI analysis, from my perspective especially, 01:10:58.240 --> 01:11:02.240 is that it's really important to see where those hot spots are. 01:11:02.240 --> 01:11:08.240 And I'll show you in a minute how all the data parsed out. 01:11:08.240 --> 01:11:16.240 But what's really helpful is when you can see the needs based on where we have the highest density of users 01:11:16.240 --> 01:11:21.240 and where we have the greatest potential for users, it's also good to see some dispersion. 01:11:21.240 --> 01:11:27.240 So we don't want to see all of our highest scores being just in downtown, just around a certain place. 01:11:27.240 --> 01:11:36.240 We want to see it spread out because that helps us recognize that the evaluation didn't point us to a preconceived idea. 01:11:36.240 --> 01:11:39.240 I want to make sure that downtown is the highest ranked. 01:11:39.240 --> 01:11:46.240 So I made sure that all of my factors that I put into that evaluation favor downtown and that I get that result. 01:11:46.240 --> 01:11:52.240 We saw a pretty good spread of where those highest ranks are because it's based on all those factors that I said, 01:11:52.240 --> 01:11:54.240 like government facilities and things. 01:11:54.240 --> 01:12:01.240 The parks and the schools and things like that really did spread the results around the city. 01:12:01.240 --> 01:12:04.240 So that's really good from my perspective. 01:12:04.240 --> 01:12:07.240 A few acknowledgments here. 01:12:07.240 --> 01:12:12.240 The PPI of one is every missing sidewalk at one point. 01:12:12.240 --> 01:12:16.240 So in addition to those factors that I said, we also apply the point. 01:12:16.240 --> 01:12:22.240 So no sidewalk in our ranking receives a PPI of zero. 01:12:22.240 --> 01:12:24.240 The zero is existing. 01:12:24.240 --> 01:12:27.240 If it doesn't have a point, it's an existing sidewalk. 01:12:27.240 --> 01:12:31.240 Otherwise, we have these reds and purples that are our higher scores. 01:12:31.240 --> 01:12:41.240 And then you get into the yellows and oranges, and as you get down lower and lower, those scores start to look more like a radar map. 01:12:41.240 --> 01:12:43.240 They're not as significant. 01:12:43.240 --> 01:12:47.240 And then our existing sidewalk projects are shown in the green solid line. 01:12:47.240 --> 01:12:57.240 So how this information will be used is we have to look at where those highest ranks are and start to identify potential projects, 01:12:57.240 --> 01:13:06.240 take that information to the public, because it's really important as we, as cabinet projects, are delivering projects, 01:13:06.240 --> 01:13:13.240 going through the planning, design, and then actual construction process that we're communicating at a tent. 01:13:13.240 --> 01:13:20.240 That's a necessary step to make sure that we go, just like we have to go through and clear all our design, 01:13:20.240 --> 01:13:25.240 we have to make sure that the public is aware that we're about to show up and do work. 01:13:25.240 --> 01:13:29.240 So the next step with this information that you see is that we'll have to identify the next round of projects, 01:13:29.240 --> 01:13:35.240 go through a public process to indicate where we intend to do that work, identify any constraints, 01:13:35.240 --> 01:13:42.240 make sure that we have put together a fiscal plan that's responsible and that we can deliver within the available budget. 01:13:42.240 --> 01:13:46.240 And that's how we use this information. 01:13:46.240 --> 01:13:54.240 All right, so walk through what's next and then let you guys ask any questions that you might have. 01:13:54.240 --> 01:13:57.240 So like I said, the first step is just project selection. 01:13:57.240 --> 01:14:04.240 So we have to identify what makes the most sense, and we're looking at that from a network connectivity perspective. 01:14:04.240 --> 01:14:15.240 We might see that our highest PPI scores are important, but we see a few 2s and 3s that would make a connection to an existing sidewalk. 01:14:15.240 --> 01:14:22.240 So we have to look at that very practically to make appropriate recommendations at a network basis. 01:14:22.240 --> 01:14:26.240 People want to walk, they don't want to find the sidewalk stops 100 feet from the intersection. 01:14:26.240 --> 01:14:31.240 So we have to think about the recommendations that we're making from a project basis. 01:14:31.240 --> 01:14:37.240 Once we've identified those segments that we want to build, we still have to go through that feasibility process. 01:14:37.240 --> 01:14:43.240 We need to look at what are the opportunities and constraints along that proposed sidewalk section. 01:14:43.240 --> 01:14:47.240 There might be utilities, could be trees. Trees is a very important conversation. 01:14:47.240 --> 01:14:55.240 I've had several times this week actually about tree removals, so we're looking very carefully at when we put in a sidewalk, 01:14:55.240 --> 01:15:09.240 what would the impacts be, what alternatives might we need to assume in that design to make sure that we limit impacts to adjacent property owners, utilities, trees, whatever the potential impacts may be. 01:15:09.240 --> 01:15:18.240 This picture is on Carroll Boulevard. I can think of a few streets that are more important to have sidewalk projects on than Carroll, but none of them. 01:15:18.240 --> 01:15:25.240 So that's just an important acknowledgement. Another part of that process is stakeholder engagement. 01:15:25.240 --> 01:15:31.240 So like I said, we've taken this presentation to a handful of our committees. We're going to see you guys today. 01:15:31.240 --> 01:15:38.240 Making sure that we're receiving that input, making sure that this approach is comprehensive and that it's informed by the majority of the city. 01:15:38.240 --> 01:15:47.240 And a big part of that was making sure that we have spoken with the committee on persons with disabilities 01:15:47.240 --> 01:15:55.240 because ensuring equal access and that these improvements are designed appropriately is an important part of that process. 01:15:55.240 --> 01:15:58.240 So we're going to make that acknowledgement as well. 01:15:58.240 --> 01:16:05.240 Once we've gone through all of that background to identify the projects and tee them up and make sure we understand a feasible design, 01:16:05.240 --> 01:16:09.240 we still have to do the design before we get into construction. 01:16:09.240 --> 01:16:15.240 So that was just a quick acknowledgement of what that would look like. 01:16:15.240 --> 01:16:23.240 Quick summary. So like I said, so if I isolate that, the result of the PPI evaluation, 01:16:23.240 --> 01:16:33.240 what I wanted to see in this data was that as you go from that highest rank to the lowest rank, you see some graduation in the results. 01:16:33.240 --> 01:16:39.240 So you wouldn't want to see equal distribution where your PPI 1 and your PPI 6 are equal numbers. 01:16:39.240 --> 01:16:46.240 You want to see that number gradually get bigger until you get to the lowest rank and that was the outcome of this evaluation. 01:16:46.240 --> 01:16:53.240 So our PPI 6 is only a half mile of missing sidewalk and then PPI 5 goes to about five miles. 01:16:53.240 --> 01:17:02.240 So as those numbers get bigger, the rank gets lower. That means we've got manageable amounts of high PPI to low PPI. 01:17:02.240 --> 01:17:09.240 So as we start to make those improvements and then rerun this evaluation, hopefully those numbers will stay sort of distributed like this. 01:17:09.240 --> 01:17:13.240 So it's manageable and we're making those investments where they're needed the most. 01:17:13.240 --> 01:17:23.240 So that was a good outcome. I was afraid it wouldn't turn out that way, but it actually did. That was great. 01:17:23.240 --> 01:17:30.240 And then the last step before I turn it over to you all for discussion and questions is just community engagement. 01:17:30.240 --> 01:17:40.240 So it's not uncontentious to make recommendations where to put sidewalks and how we're going to build those sidewalks. 01:17:40.240 --> 01:17:50.240 So it's really important that out of any process, sidewalks, bike lanes, building a new road, that we engage with the community, engage with our stakeholders. 01:17:50.240 --> 01:18:03.240 And we have a discussed end page that's linked here. And on that discussed end page, folks can ask questions, they can make recommendations, they can seek any clarity that they need. 01:18:03.240 --> 01:18:12.240 But like I mentioned, a part of this process is that we have to identify the next round of projects and then get them out front of the public so they can see where we plan to work next. 01:18:12.240 --> 01:18:21.240 Our projects are outlined from 2021 to 2024, give or take. So we're talking the next round of projects will be 2025 and later. 01:18:21.240 --> 01:18:27.240 So that'll be an upcoming process that we'll go through as we identify that next round of projects. 01:18:27.240 --> 01:18:36.240 And anybody who wants more information, they can go to Discuss Denton and communicate with us there or they can see this presentation. 01:18:36.240 --> 01:18:42.240 And with that, I will stop talking and let you guys ask questions. 01:18:42.240 --> 01:18:46.240 Do you have questions? Go ahead. 01:18:46.240 --> 01:18:53.240 Yeah, so I noticed my road is in there and we're at PP level one. 01:18:53.240 --> 01:19:00.240 And I know that there's been a bunch of people in my neighborhood who have talked about issues on my road and the need for sidewalks. 01:19:00.240 --> 01:19:09.240 And so I just wonder how you weigh if there's like a neighborhood that's asking for sidewalks versus your rankings and how you make those determinations. 01:19:09.240 --> 01:19:16.240 Yeah, because there's some subjectivity in this point of interest is how you're defining a point of interest. 01:19:16.240 --> 01:19:20.240 But neighbors might define something else as a point of interest that you're not capturing. 01:19:20.240 --> 01:19:31.240 Right. Exactly. And I would say that this is one way of taking data, evaluating it, and making recommendations. It's not project recommendations. 01:19:31.240 --> 01:19:37.240 So there's, like you said, subjectivity to how we would apply the results of that evaluation. 01:19:37.240 --> 01:19:45.240 I'd say we were not preparing this evaluation with the intent of deprioritizing anywhere. 01:19:45.240 --> 01:19:50.240 We prepared it with the intent of identifying where the highest priorities are, because, you know, 01:19:50.240 --> 01:19:59.240 if I have a community requesting a sidewalk in an area with a low potential for pedestrian activity 01:19:59.240 --> 01:20:06.240 and I've got people walking in a worn grass path on the side of a major roadway, 01:20:06.240 --> 01:20:15.240 this data suggests that I need to make the investment where I've got a lot of people in a worn grass path on the side of a busy roadway 01:20:15.240 --> 01:20:18.240 before I make the investment in a neighborhood. 01:20:18.240 --> 01:20:24.240 The folks who would make the decision whether we need to invest in that neighborhood above somewhere else 01:20:24.240 --> 01:20:36.240 are department heads or my bosses or politically elected or appointed folks who would identify a different priority. 01:20:36.240 --> 01:20:43.240 So we're going to make decisions based on that data-driven process and working with the public. 01:20:43.240 --> 01:20:51.240 But we may not say we're going to go and we're not going to necessarily recommend a sidewalk improvement in a neighborhood 01:20:51.240 --> 01:21:00.240 where there's not a park or a school or some other asset that would drive that need, if that answers your question. 01:21:00.240 --> 01:21:05.240 Sort of, but it's still, I mean, like, we live near a school, but it's a university. 01:21:05.240 --> 01:21:08.240 We live near a park, but it's part of the university. 01:21:08.240 --> 01:21:15.240 So to me, I could see where you're not capturing certain things based on the route that you might be using. 01:21:15.240 --> 01:21:24.240 The thing in the school maybe has something else. We live in an street that doesn't have actually an area where you can walk on and tread a trail. 01:21:24.240 --> 01:21:27.240 So you have to walk on the street. So you wouldn't be able to see that. 01:21:27.240 --> 01:21:34.240 Yeah, that was a limitation. I expressed this to other staff as I was working on the evaluation, 01:21:34.240 --> 01:21:41.240 that we can't evaluate worn paths because I'd have to run some kind of, 01:21:41.240 --> 01:21:47.240 take the aerials and run a raster analysis to identify what a worn path is. 01:21:47.240 --> 01:21:53.240 So that is a factor that was considered previously that we can't do from a data-driven perspective 01:21:53.240 --> 01:21:59.240 to identify where there's that kind of demand or evidence of demand, if you will. 01:21:59.240 --> 01:22:02.240 But yeah, there are other metrics that could be used. 01:22:02.240 --> 01:22:10.240 I mentioned I would acknowledge one that I forgot to circle back to, but transit is one that is not included in this evaluation. 01:22:10.240 --> 01:22:18.240 Key reason with that being DCTA last year was still in the process of making their recommendations of how they would address transit. 01:22:18.240 --> 01:22:23.240 So we didn't have an understanding of what transit looked like in the city at that time. 01:22:23.240 --> 01:22:29.240 We do now, but it's still unclear what DCTA's plan is. 01:22:29.240 --> 01:22:38.240 So that's another limitation of this evaluation is we don't have a full understanding of what that's going to be. 01:22:38.240 --> 01:22:44.240 To me it's a little dissatisfying to hear that we'll run this whole plan, 01:22:44.240 --> 01:22:50.240 but if a neighborhood has an issue, they shouldn't come talk to us, they should go talk to their councilman. 01:22:50.240 --> 01:22:52.240 Oh no, you can absolutely talk to us. 01:22:52.240 --> 01:23:01.240 I can tell you the response from a staff perspective is going to be that we're going to first look at this data to see what it suggests. 01:23:01.240 --> 01:23:08.240 We're not ignoring the universities because as the bike, pet, and ADA coordinator for the city, 01:23:08.240 --> 01:23:15.240 my primary focus, and I've been very clear about this from taking time that I took the job, 01:23:15.240 --> 01:23:21.240 my primary focus is UNT, TWAU, and Downtown, and it branches out from there. 01:23:21.240 --> 01:23:29.240 There are other big destinations outside of that that could potentially drive a lot of bike and pet activity, 01:23:29.240 --> 01:23:31.240 but those are the three biggest areas. 01:23:31.240 --> 01:23:39.240 If I heat map, that's my three hottest spots in the city, so I won't ever ignore those three areas. 01:23:39.240 --> 01:23:49.240 That's not to say that there aren't barriers around those three areas that might limit the opportunity for somebody to travel. 01:23:49.240 --> 01:23:56.240 We have to fix the barrier, like a major street crossing or something like that, or I-35. 01:23:56.240 --> 01:24:04.240 We might have to figure out how to cross a major barrier with a very costly project before we look on the other side of the barrier. 01:24:04.240 --> 01:24:07.240 That's another way we have to look at things. 01:24:07.240 --> 01:24:15.240 The purpose of this Discuss Denton page is to have those conversations, to understand where there is demand. 01:24:15.240 --> 01:24:18.240 There's also our broader capital projects. 01:24:18.240 --> 01:24:22.240 There are streets that are not what we would call complete streets. 01:24:22.240 --> 01:24:30.240 They're missing sidewalks, or they're missing bike lanes, or they're not up to the functional classes called for in our mobility plan. 01:24:30.240 --> 01:24:36.240 Then those become separate projects where we have a handful of them that are still planned. 01:24:36.240 --> 01:24:44.240 I'll just refer to Ryan Road, because that's one that we have, a capital project that's going through at least some level of design. 01:24:44.240 --> 01:24:46.240 That's not a sidewalk project. 01:24:46.240 --> 01:24:51.240 We're going to rebuild the road, and then the sidewalk will be part of that. 01:24:51.240 --> 01:24:56.240 Teasley's Tech Stots Road, so I can use that as an example. 01:24:56.240 --> 01:24:59.240 They're putting sidewalks in, maybe not the facility we'd like. 01:24:59.240 --> 01:25:03.240 It's not what we're going to call for in the new mobility plan. 01:25:03.240 --> 01:25:06.240 That project, they would never have come in and built a sidewalk. 01:25:06.240 --> 01:25:10.240 They widened the road to six lanes and put sidewalks in. 01:25:10.240 --> 01:25:13.240 This is a discussion. 01:25:13.240 --> 01:25:18.240 It's kind of like to stimulate discussions. 01:25:18.240 --> 01:25:26.240 It's because the projects are in place, so there's going to be no new sidewalks until after 2024 in terms of what this plan might do. 01:25:26.240 --> 01:25:28.240 For those projects, yes. 01:25:28.240 --> 01:25:38.240 I'll say one of the other ways we found this information really useful is when we're looking at our projects that are still in a planning or early in design. 01:25:38.240 --> 01:25:43.240 We've been able to check, especially with ADA data. 01:25:43.240 --> 01:25:54.240 We've been able to look at our projects and see if there are high rated, high ranking sidewalks that need to be replaced or maybe poor condition sidewalks and ramps that need to be repaired. 01:25:54.240 --> 01:26:05.240 The data's actually been really helpful on the capital project side of helping identify ... I'm going to go off on a tangent for just a second. 01:26:05.240 --> 01:26:12.240 Federal government only requires us, when we do a roadway project, to repair the ramps or put in ramps that are missing. 01:26:12.240 --> 01:26:23.240 This data has helped to justify closing sidewalk gaps that are not required in a project, unless we institute a policy and we will construct those sidewalks. 01:26:23.240 --> 01:26:31.240 It's a self-imposed requirement, but we're not mandated that we have to put in the sidewalk when we widen the roadway. 01:26:31.240 --> 01:26:36.240 We only have to, or I shouldn't say widen, when we repair a roadway, when we go in and repave it. 01:26:36.240 --> 01:26:46.240 This data has helped us to close some sidewalk gaps or to make repairs based on the assessment and the conditions. 01:26:46.240 --> 01:26:53.240 That's been another really useful way that we've been able to use the data as staff. 01:26:53.240 --> 01:26:59.240 It doesn't address the concerns you're raising about where we need to install sidewalks that are missing in the neighborhood. 01:26:59.240 --> 01:27:06.240 We have a lot of those neighborhoods that are built without sidewalks anywhere. 01:27:06.240 --> 01:27:10.240 The approach there has to be looking at it from a network perspective. 01:27:10.240 --> 01:27:18.240 Where can we make the A to B connection through the neighborhood along the street that's going to capture the most pedestrian traffic? 01:27:18.240 --> 01:27:22.240 Maybe on one side of the street instead of both. 01:27:22.240 --> 01:27:32.240 That becomes a very qualitative assessment to identify where to make that sidewalk investment if we're not coming in and doing another project like a road or utility. 01:27:32.240 --> 01:27:37.240 We have a number of projects like that where it's moving. 01:27:37.240 --> 01:27:39.240 Let's go up here to one of them. 01:27:46.240 --> 01:27:55.240 One of our streets that we're putting in a sidewalk on one side of Renard Street which is down in the Demian neighborhood. 01:27:55.240 --> 01:28:11.240 If I could, say, go out and put sidewalks on both sides of the street because that's our preference, that's what we would build. 01:28:11.240 --> 01:28:13.240 Sorry, it's just taking a second to load. 01:28:13.240 --> 01:28:18.240 It would be ideal if every time we did a sidewalk project we were going to that gold standard. 01:28:18.240 --> 01:28:23.240 That was one of the issues that many old persons with disabilities were really focused on. 01:28:23.240 --> 01:28:31.240 Why can't we eliminate all the barriers, get rid of telephone poles and mailboxes that are in the sidewalk? 01:28:31.240 --> 01:28:34.240 We can't always deliver the ideal project. 01:28:34.240 --> 01:28:36.240 It all depends on the scope of the project. 01:28:36.240 --> 01:28:42.240 If it's a sidewalk only project and we can only build it on one side of the street, maybe that's the best facility we can get in. 01:28:42.240 --> 01:28:45.240 But at least we've got something there. 01:28:45.240 --> 01:28:57.240 That's not the ideal answer, and I wish it was, but at least we're making a connection, if this thing was, between two points where there is a sidewalk. 01:28:57.240 --> 01:29:02.240 I can tell you right now the sidewalk along the north side of Parvin is a very poor condition sidewalk. 01:29:02.240 --> 01:29:04.240 It's probably about two or three feet wide. 01:29:04.240 --> 01:29:12.240 So we put in to trip fund construction of a sidewalk on the south side that would make a link. 01:29:12.240 --> 01:29:17.240 There's an elementary school over here, I forget the name of the school. 01:29:17.240 --> 01:29:30.240 But there's an opportunity there to make an improvement on the other side of the street that makes a true ADA compliant facility that are connected with the Bernard sidewalk that we're constructing. 01:29:30.240 --> 01:29:35.240 So then we'll start having more network connectivity in that part of the neighborhood. 01:29:35.240 --> 01:29:38.240 One more question. 01:29:38.240 --> 01:29:41.240 We do have other questions about other topics. 01:29:41.240 --> 01:29:45.240 So how often will you update these PPI rankings? 01:29:45.240 --> 01:29:58.240 Because even looking at this map, it's outdated because in that gray area to the left, that's a huge new development that I'm expecting is not being taken into consideration about. 01:29:58.240 --> 01:30:03.240 Traffic and major roadways running through this neighborhood. 01:30:03.240 --> 01:30:07.240 So the data is 2020. 01:30:07.240 --> 01:30:10.240 Early 2020 was when it was all collected. 01:30:10.240 --> 01:30:19.240 And I've been going through to clean up some of the, you know, where a new sidewalk has been constructed, that sort of thing. 01:30:19.240 --> 01:30:31.240 The goal of staff is to have this map, which is GIS based, tied to our asset management software, which is how our streets department uses the data. 01:30:31.240 --> 01:30:39.240 So then this doesn't answer the PPI score question, but just so we have a real time understanding of where we have sidewalks. 01:30:39.240 --> 01:30:43.240 That's a process that we're building out, I would call a protocol. 01:30:43.240 --> 01:30:50.240 So as sidewalks are constructed and accepted by the city, they'll populate into this map and into that software. 01:30:50.240 --> 01:30:55.240 So then we'll have a real understanding of where we have sidewalks and when they were constructed. 01:30:55.240 --> 01:31:02.240 A little better understanding so we can make sure that repairs can be tracked over time and we can assess need. 01:31:02.240 --> 01:31:11.240 And that helps us from a fiscal impact analysis perspective understanding of where we might need to make improvements based on the age of the infrastructure. 01:31:11.240 --> 01:31:19.240 How often we'll reevaluate the PPI scores, I don't have an answer for right now. 01:31:19.240 --> 01:31:26.240 I would expect we'd do it each time we're looking at that capital program to make a new assessment. 01:31:26.240 --> 01:31:32.240 So it might be, it could be annually because it only takes a couple of minutes to run the evaluation. 01:31:32.240 --> 01:31:42.240 But it could also be semi-annually every three years, just really depends on how often we see the need to update those rankings. 01:31:42.240 --> 01:31:47.240 There's no qualitative observations that go into the PPI score at all. 01:31:47.240 --> 01:31:51.240 I mean it's basically you're just, everything is within GIS. 01:31:51.240 --> 01:31:58.240 Yes, it's not a qualitative evaluation. It's really to give us just a, it's going to be a one-to-one. 01:31:58.240 --> 01:32:03.240 I put in data, I get an output, and we can then tweak the factors. 01:32:03.240 --> 01:32:10.240 So like I mentioned earlier, there are ways that we could tweak for speed limits, for width of a roadway, for number of lanes. 01:32:10.240 --> 01:32:13.240 There are a lot of different ways that we could play with the data. 01:32:13.240 --> 01:32:26.240 The goal wasn't to get too into that approach, but more so to focus on what are the outputs, do they make sense, start identifying projects out of that. 01:32:26.240 --> 01:32:31.240 Because I'm always of the opinion data is great, but I want to do something. 01:32:31.240 --> 01:32:35.240 So I don't think we need to have the perfect data. 01:32:35.240 --> 01:32:40.240 I think we need to have a good enough data source to make strong decisions from. 01:32:40.240 --> 01:32:47.240 And we're making recommendations that are out of line with elected appointed bodies or the public. 01:32:47.240 --> 01:32:51.240 We'll hear that through the process. 01:32:51.240 --> 01:32:57.240 Adam? Yeah, thank you for this. It's a really cool tool. 01:32:57.240 --> 01:33:07.240 We've spent 70 years building a city for cars, not people, and I see you trying your best to rectify where you can. 01:33:07.240 --> 01:33:13.240 All of that, and that's zoning and design, and it's a built environment that's a mess. 01:33:13.240 --> 01:33:19.240 I'm really interested in going forward, how do we do better, and are we doing better? 01:33:19.240 --> 01:33:22.240 Are we really now thinking about complete streets? 01:33:22.240 --> 01:33:25.240 Are we really thinking about genuine walkability? 01:33:25.240 --> 01:33:30.240 You know, sidewalk is an interesting term. It means it's on the side of something that's at the center. 01:33:30.240 --> 01:33:35.240 Can we, and if so how, can we think about center walks? 01:33:35.240 --> 01:33:43.240 In other words, how do we think about walking as the best way, not just to enjoy yourself, for a stroll, which is super important. 01:33:43.240 --> 01:33:49.240 Like to actually go shopping, to actually get to school, to actually displace car trips. 01:33:49.240 --> 01:33:55.240 Are we able to do that in the new developments? Can we do better? 01:33:55.240 --> 01:33:59.240 And if so, how does your position weigh in on that? 01:33:59.240 --> 01:34:04.240 Yeah, unfortunately a lot of that is out of my control because I'm in capital projects, not planning. 01:34:04.240 --> 01:34:14.240 And you're asking questions that are very, very great questions because that's how we need to look at it. 01:34:14.240 --> 01:34:25.240 So let me answer first how we're making improvements in how the city is delivering transportation projects and that complete streets aspect of things. 01:34:25.240 --> 01:34:35.240 So earlier this year we adopted new transportation standards and that was a process that was done semi-infrequently. 01:34:35.240 --> 01:34:40.240 And the process has been put in place to make those updates on an annual basis. 01:34:40.240 --> 01:34:47.240 Part of that was as we were working on the mobility plan update and having those sort of what I'll call guiding principles, 01:34:47.240 --> 01:34:53.240 what our vision is for what streets look like, we were able to make changes in the transportation standards 01:34:53.240 --> 01:35:01.240 that say when you build this type of road, collector or arterial, whatever the road type is, this is the facility that goes along with it. 01:35:01.240 --> 01:35:08.240 So if you build a Teasley Road today, the road that's currently under construction with sidewalks, 01:35:08.240 --> 01:35:11.240 instead of having sidewalks it would have a side path. 01:35:11.240 --> 01:35:18.240 So our standards have been updated to provide more robust facilities, greater separation from traffic. 01:35:18.240 --> 01:35:23.240 So that term sidewalk that you referred to and how we get it more to the center, 01:35:23.240 --> 01:35:27.240 we're actually not focusing on how to get it more to the center but how to make it more comfortable, 01:35:27.240 --> 01:35:32.240 how to provide a better quality environment for anybody who wants to take those kinds of trips, 01:35:32.240 --> 01:35:39.240 walk or bike or whatever it may be, transit, transits of what is really important. 01:35:39.240 --> 01:35:41.240 So that's part of it. 01:35:41.240 --> 01:35:49.240 But then the other part is the land use aspect which is that falls under planning and other planning and zoning board, 01:35:49.240 --> 01:35:57.240 other folks who have the oversight because we can make a really great environment for somebody to walk on 01:35:57.240 --> 01:36:03.240 but if the trip is too long, if you're trying to make a trip from outside the loop to downtown, 01:36:03.240 --> 01:36:06.240 you're not going to make that trip in one foot, not likely. 01:36:06.240 --> 01:36:13.240 There are some folks I've heard that walk that far but in general we have to acknowledge that trips have a certain distance 01:36:13.240 --> 01:36:18.240 and outside of that distance most users are going to go get their car. 01:36:18.240 --> 01:36:20.240 There are certainly limitations to that. 01:36:20.240 --> 01:36:24.240 Somebody who doesn't have a car may choose to ride their bike. 01:36:24.240 --> 01:36:29.240 Somebody who doesn't have a car or bike might walk and those trip distances would be outside the norms 01:36:29.240 --> 01:36:32.240 but in general people are going to walk a half mile or less. 01:36:32.240 --> 01:36:35.240 People might ride their bike two miles. 01:36:35.240 --> 01:36:42.240 So part of that is really us as a city working to make sure that we want to have this walking and biking activity, 01:36:42.240 --> 01:36:47.240 we're pairing that land use with it to make sure that those trips are within a reasonable distance. 01:36:47.240 --> 01:36:55.240 And I'm looking at it, I'll scroll out of this thing because it didn't load up, 01:36:55.240 --> 01:37:03.240 I'm looking at that same sort of principle as we look around the city for do we have a neighborhood shopping center, 01:37:03.240 --> 01:37:06.240 there's a certain distance away from a neighborhood shopping center, 01:37:06.240 --> 01:37:10.240 we can create the opportunity to take those trips by foot or by bike. 01:37:10.240 --> 01:37:15.240 So that's not something that I've really been able to, I've only been here seven months, 01:37:15.240 --> 01:37:19.240 I haven't had time to get that far into my approach yet. 01:37:19.240 --> 01:37:23.240 But that is something that we'll look at is what a reasonable trip distance is 01:37:23.240 --> 01:37:27.240 and how to make those trips accessible, walking or biking. 01:37:27.240 --> 01:37:34.240 So that's part of our approach for the bike and bed program, I would say, is to look at that attraction generation 01:37:34.240 --> 01:37:37.240 and start making investments that way. 01:37:37.240 --> 01:37:41.240 Adam, did you have another follow-up, or Brian? 01:37:41.240 --> 01:37:43.240 I just want to echo one more time what Matt was saying. 01:37:43.240 --> 01:37:45.240 Make sure you do this every time. 01:37:45.240 --> 01:37:46.240 Sorry. 01:37:46.240 --> 01:37:50.240 What Matt was saying I feel like may be the most important component of this data. 01:37:50.240 --> 01:37:54.240 If we really are using this to inform future projects, 01:37:54.240 --> 01:38:00.240 I would sincerely hope we see a lot more community-driven and participatory functions down the line. 01:38:00.240 --> 01:38:06.240 I know this just lives right now in your office and the avenue for people to engage with it is a discussion platform. 01:38:06.240 --> 01:38:09.240 I just hope that if that's where this data is going, 01:38:09.240 --> 01:38:16.240 you really want to see a lot more open contribution where people can make real place-based inputs 01:38:16.240 --> 01:38:21.240 for what you're driving these capital investments to be. 01:38:21.240 --> 01:38:29.240 And then two, to my opinion, a sidewalk is pretty much useless if the road I need to cross is a big barrier for me. 01:38:29.240 --> 01:38:36.240 So we mentioned the loop, we mentioned 35, and I see on your data here that crosswalks really aren't a factor. 01:38:36.240 --> 01:38:44.240 So how does that build into the connectivity argument of incorporating all these different dislocated links? 01:38:44.240 --> 01:38:54.240 Okay. I would say crosswalks, the reason you don't see crosswalks as a factor here is because we're really looking at that node to node, 01:38:54.240 --> 01:38:57.240 like what's the piece that needs to be built. 01:38:57.240 --> 01:39:02.240 And to me the crosswalk is the natural outcrop of building that link. 01:39:02.240 --> 01:39:10.240 I'm also, I bring a lot of background from industry best practices and I'm like in the focus, 01:39:10.240 --> 01:39:17.240 so I'm typically fighting with the traffic engineers about what's the appropriate crossing treatment type, 01:39:17.240 --> 01:39:24.240 not just the crosswalk but what should be at the crosswalk to help people safely get across the street. 01:39:24.240 --> 01:39:28.240 I think that's more where we're going to make standards into, you know, 01:39:28.240 --> 01:39:35.240 we'll incorporate or refer or by inference provide guidance that points to industry best practices. 01:39:35.240 --> 01:39:43.240 And the transportation criteria manual is sort of our guiding document and our standard details, investigations. 01:39:43.240 --> 01:39:49.240 So all that stuff that we say, this is what we expect to be provided based on certain parameters. 01:39:49.240 --> 01:39:53.240 We couldn't get that into the documents this year. 01:39:53.240 --> 01:39:57.240 I got here late enough that we couldn't go through that process. 01:39:57.240 --> 01:40:04.240 So like I said, that's an annual update that we'll be doing and we've made notes of all of those things that I want to include. 01:40:04.240 --> 01:40:10.240 So it'll be references to MACTO, references to ITE, walkable urban thoroughfares, 01:40:10.240 --> 01:40:18.240 all these different standards and best practices that we can refer to will help us then have that resolution 01:40:18.240 --> 01:40:25.240 that this is what we expect and what we're going to not only expect of developers but of ourselves. 01:40:25.240 --> 01:40:33.240 We deliver projects and I'm informing our capital projects as we're going through those to say, 01:40:33.240 --> 01:40:39.240 here are the facilities that I expect to be included in the projects that I at least have influence on. 01:40:39.240 --> 01:40:41.240 So you'll see things that are being constructed right now. 01:40:41.240 --> 01:40:49.240 I have no influence on anything that I take a look at, the design, providing that input as of six months ago. 01:40:49.240 --> 01:40:50.240 Do you have a thought on that? 01:40:50.240 --> 01:40:56.240 Yeah, I mean, I respect the weight of your experience and that's why I'm so happy that you're in the room arguing 01:40:56.240 --> 01:41:00.240 for the pedestrian qualities that we are really lacking in the city. 01:41:00.240 --> 01:41:05.240 I suppose just a counterpoint, because it's not represented as a need and to your point, 01:41:05.240 --> 01:41:10.240 you were able to influence discussions about what could be built in the future, 01:41:10.240 --> 01:41:15.240 not necessarily looking at what gaps exist right now but what had been built. 01:41:15.240 --> 01:41:22.240 So I'm just curious if there's a way to incorporate similar data sets of what you've done with the PPI maps 01:41:22.240 --> 01:41:27.240 that also contributes to real areas of need where there might not be the same connectivity 01:41:27.240 --> 01:41:30.240 even within block to block. 01:41:30.240 --> 01:41:37.240 Yeah, that's a really important point because, like I said, this is really focused on how do we close gaps 01:41:37.240 --> 01:41:43.240 and we have a tandem process, our ADA transition plan, which is also adopted in January. 01:41:43.240 --> 01:41:48.240 So our ADA transition plan is all those existing assets and making improvements to those. 01:41:48.240 --> 01:41:50.240 We have to look at the two programs together. 01:41:50.240 --> 01:42:00.240 So it's not like we're saying one's a gap project and one's a repair project and we don't see any overlap between the two. 01:42:00.240 --> 01:42:08.240 But we have to go through a similar evaluation of our ADA needs and there's a ton more subjectivity 01:42:08.240 --> 01:42:15.240 in what do we do about our existing infrastructure because the federal government gets a lot of latitude 01:42:15.240 --> 01:42:22.240 how we are going to prioritize improvements. Do we prioritize missing ramps and non-compliant ramps? 01:42:22.240 --> 01:42:26.240 Do we prioritize removing point conflicts like utility goals? 01:42:26.240 --> 01:42:29.240 So we have a lot of flexibility, which is good. 01:42:29.240 --> 01:42:34.240 It just makes it a little bit of a challenge to say where we need to make the improvements. 01:42:34.240 --> 01:42:38.240 What's the timeline and prioritization of that? 01:42:38.240 --> 01:42:46.240 My at least initial focus had been to use PPI, the same sort of PPI ranking that gives us sort of our hot spots 01:42:46.240 --> 01:42:50.240 of pedestrian activity around the city and then look at some of the greatest needs. 01:42:50.240 --> 01:42:55.240 So like missing ramps is the biggest because people can't get across a curb. 01:42:55.240 --> 01:42:57.240 So putting those in is certainly one of our highest priorities. 01:42:57.240 --> 01:43:04.240 But there are other factors that we have to look at to identify what we're going to fix first. 01:43:04.240 --> 01:43:11.240 And I've done a lot of work on that ADA side of like what is a true barrier versus what is something 01:43:11.240 --> 01:43:15.240 that's a pretty tough barrier that most people can get through. 01:43:15.240 --> 01:43:20.240 So very few people can get their wheelchair over a curb. 01:43:20.240 --> 01:43:25.240 I've seen a few people do it, but that is one of the biggest barriers that there is out there. 01:43:25.240 --> 01:43:30.240 But as a non-compliant sidewalk that's got a cross slip of 2.5%, there are a lot of them too. 01:43:30.240 --> 01:43:37.240 Is that a true barrier and should you focus your attention on making it fully compliant? 01:43:37.240 --> 01:43:42.240 My answer is always going to be if it's passable, if it means all the general geometry 01:43:42.240 --> 01:43:45.240 and it's just slightly out of compliance, I'm not going to focus on it. 01:43:45.240 --> 01:43:47.240 I need to put that attention somewhere else. 01:43:47.240 --> 01:43:50.240 So hopefully that answers your question. 01:43:50.240 --> 01:43:53.240 We have to do more work to get to that point. 01:43:53.240 --> 01:43:59.240 Our streets department does most of those repairs, so we're working with them to make those improvements. 01:43:59.240 --> 01:44:04.240 Some of that has been very driven by citizen input. 01:44:04.240 --> 01:44:10.240 We've put in at least one crosswalk in the city since I got here that was missing. 01:44:10.240 --> 01:44:13.240 We're looking at another one right now that's right next to UNT. 01:44:13.240 --> 01:44:20.240 So some of those are just an outcome of hearing from the community of where we have some challenges 01:44:20.240 --> 01:44:22.240 in getting out and making the corrections. 01:44:22.240 --> 01:44:27.240 But hopefully we'll have a more data-driven process for that this spring. 01:44:27.240 --> 01:44:31.240 One final question, Ken. 01:44:31.240 --> 01:44:37.240 So I know obviously a PPI is one method to evaluate our sidewalk qualities. 01:44:37.240 --> 01:44:39.240 I just wonder, is this available somewhere? 01:44:39.240 --> 01:44:41.240 You said we've been using it for quite some time. 01:44:41.240 --> 01:44:47.240 Yeah, all the information that you see on the screen is on a web-based platform. 01:44:47.240 --> 01:44:48.240 So everything that you see here. 01:44:48.240 --> 01:44:50.240 Finding the protocols for what's your PPI. 01:44:50.240 --> 01:44:52.240 It was difficult to read in the fields. 01:44:52.240 --> 01:44:56.240 If you open it up within your embedded maps, what the field actually meant 01:44:56.240 --> 01:44:59.240 and how you collected that. 01:44:59.240 --> 01:45:05.240 I'm just interested if you had a protocol breakdown of what you did to give these scores. 01:45:05.240 --> 01:45:10.240 Yeah, it's basically this portion of the presentation if I go back here. 01:45:10.240 --> 01:45:13.240 So there are major streets. 01:45:13.240 --> 01:45:17.240 And you're saying you want to look at the attribute table and see what all the points are. 01:45:17.240 --> 01:45:22.240 So each of these has an attribute in a table that gets a point. 01:45:22.240 --> 01:45:27.240 The only one that's broken out separately, because I wasn't sure if I applied points differently 01:45:27.240 --> 01:45:31.240 to six-lane versus four-lane versus two-lane streets, is the major streets. 01:45:31.240 --> 01:45:38.240 So we ran a geospatial analysis that basically just says I can capture anything 01:45:38.240 --> 01:45:41.240 within a certain distance of whatever the factor is. 01:45:41.240 --> 01:45:44.240 So the factors were streets, schools. 01:45:44.240 --> 01:45:50.240 Schools, I think, were based on the center line, like a point at the school location. 01:45:50.240 --> 01:45:53.240 Same for government facilities. 01:45:53.240 --> 01:45:57.240 Points of interest was we have like 4,000 points of interest in the city. 01:45:57.240 --> 01:46:02.240 So that's everything from home-based businesses, which was a little bit of a challenge, 01:46:02.240 --> 01:46:06.240 home-based businesses to everything that's inside the mall. 01:46:06.240 --> 01:46:10.240 And then running that same sort of distance-based analysis. 01:46:10.240 --> 01:46:14.240 And then crashes, this was all of our pedestrian crashes around the city. 01:46:14.240 --> 01:46:19.240 And then each one of those, I ran the analysis and it picked up the line. 01:46:19.240 --> 01:46:26.240 It would then, once it selected at a point, accumulate all the points, gives you the PPI score. 01:46:26.240 --> 01:46:30.240 And each of them, the names are a little bit wonky 01:46:30.240 --> 01:46:35.240 because you can't have spaces in the attribute table or in GIS. 01:46:35.240 --> 01:46:43.240 So they might say something like MJR_RD_2_LN, something like that. 01:46:43.240 --> 01:46:50.240 So there's a little bit of, you kind of have to figure those fields out, 01:46:50.240 --> 01:46:55.240 but they sort of make sense if you pair the name with these fields right here. 01:46:55.240 --> 01:46:57.240 Thank you so much. 01:46:57.240 --> 01:46:58.240 Mr. Saban? 01:46:58.240 --> 01:47:00.240 Yeah, just a suggestion. 01:47:00.240 --> 01:47:02.240 Yes, sir. 01:47:02.240 --> 01:47:08.240 The quality of the information that's going into the PPI index, 01:47:08.240 --> 01:47:16.240 it is imperative that we hear and consider the needs of the taxpaying community. 01:47:16.240 --> 01:47:25.240 You know, being a taxpayer in the city and the projection of tax rates to continue to increase on our homes, 01:47:25.240 --> 01:47:31.240 we need a sidewalk and I'm paying towards sidewalks and I can't get a sidewalk. 01:47:31.240 --> 01:47:39.240 The PPI needs to include, it needs to factor in that consumer concern such as that. 01:47:39.240 --> 01:47:44.240 And then forward thinking, with the aging of the community, 01:47:44.240 --> 01:47:48.240 walking is a very important part of our future health. 01:47:48.240 --> 01:47:53.240 So I would just want to suggest that that become part of the factor, you know, 01:47:53.240 --> 01:48:00.240 the aging of the community and the accessibility to take a good walk 01:48:00.240 --> 01:48:02.240 in your immediate community. 01:48:02.240 --> 01:48:06.240 I like to talk to Parks about beautifying it and so forth, 01:48:06.240 --> 01:48:08.240 but the point I want to make here is, yeah, 01:48:08.240 --> 01:48:17.240 we want to make this information more qualitative in terms of what is the taxpayer desire and need. 01:48:17.240 --> 01:48:21.240 And I think it's been spoken to well so far. 01:48:21.240 --> 01:48:27.240 So my part is just I highly recommend, however we can fit that into the PPI index, 01:48:27.240 --> 01:48:31.240 the calculator would help us from a sustainability perspective. 01:48:31.240 --> 01:48:35.240 And I'll say thank you for the comment because it does remind me 01:48:35.240 --> 01:48:39.240 that there were another limitation of when we ran this evaluation 01:48:39.240 --> 01:48:41.240 and I think it's still true today. 01:48:41.240 --> 01:48:44.240 I don't think the data is going to come out until at least next month. 01:48:44.240 --> 01:48:48.240 But one of the ways that I did hope to look at this data was through the new census 01:48:48.240 --> 01:48:53.240 because that will provide some really good information about aging in place 01:48:53.240 --> 01:48:58.240 or, you know, there are a lot of metrics that get put into the census data 01:48:58.240 --> 01:49:00.240 and then we can run an evaluation against that. 01:49:00.240 --> 01:49:06.240 And if that data hasn't published yet, to my knowledge at least, it should be out soon. 01:49:06.240 --> 01:49:09.240 So as that data becomes available, I think that will be really helpful. 01:49:09.240 --> 01:49:13.240 We'll be able to start running an evaluation against some of those metrics 01:49:13.240 --> 01:49:19.240 that, you know, socioeconomic based evaluation will give us some really interesting ways 01:49:19.240 --> 01:49:24.240 to reevaluate PPI and make it a more robust evaluation. 01:49:24.240 --> 01:49:26.240 Like I said, this is a good starting point. 01:49:26.240 --> 01:49:33.240 But we by no means consider this PPI score to be the final result or the final evaluation approach. 01:49:33.240 --> 01:49:38.240 I appreciate your comments because I agree that those are very important variables. 01:49:38.240 --> 01:49:39.240 And just a follow-up. 01:49:39.240 --> 01:49:40.240 Go ahead. 01:49:40.240 --> 01:49:50.240 I heard you say TWU, UNT, and downtown drives your prioritizing repairs, replacements, and so forth. 01:49:50.240 --> 01:49:57.240 And yet I don't know how much those institutions were not downtown businessmen. 01:49:57.240 --> 01:49:59.240 I understand they pay taxes and so forth. 01:49:59.240 --> 01:50:06.240 But that community or the lifeline to the revenue stream to the city 01:50:06.240 --> 01:50:10.240 and the community needs to be factored in there. 01:50:10.240 --> 01:50:18.240 When I think about the UNTs and the TWUs, you're catering to a lot of people, absolutely necessary. 01:50:18.240 --> 01:50:20.240 You're catering to a lot of transient people. 01:50:20.240 --> 01:50:21.240 They come and go. 01:50:21.240 --> 01:50:24.240 They walk on great sidewalks while they were at the university. 01:50:24.240 --> 01:50:28.240 But the everyday citizen, kind of getting the short end of the stick. 01:50:28.240 --> 01:50:29.240 I'm done. 01:50:29.240 --> 01:50:30.240 That's my situation. 01:50:30.240 --> 01:50:33.240 Yeah, I by no means mean we're only focused in those areas. 01:50:33.240 --> 01:50:34.240 Perfect. 01:50:34.240 --> 01:50:41.240 But from where we have the highest potential to change trips from cars to other modes, 01:50:41.240 --> 01:50:43.240 those are the areas where we have the highest potential. 01:50:43.240 --> 01:50:47.240 And I'm looking at other, like I mentioned a little while ago at least, 01:50:47.240 --> 01:50:53.240 I'm trying to find ways to look at those other areas outside of those three places. 01:50:53.240 --> 01:51:00.240 The big challenge that I would suggest outside of those three key areas within the city 01:51:00.240 --> 01:51:05.240 is just the barriers that we've got, mostly 35, which is an area we've focused on a lot 01:51:05.240 --> 01:51:11.240 as part of our bike program work and working with Gary and Parks on trails connectivity 01:51:11.240 --> 01:51:13.240 because 35 is a major barrier. 01:51:13.240 --> 01:51:16.240 We've had a lot of conversations and texts out about that as well. 01:51:16.240 --> 01:51:21.240 But I don't want to misinterpret the work that we're doing. 01:51:21.240 --> 01:51:23.240 We're not just focused in those three areas. 01:51:23.240 --> 01:51:29.240 Those just happen to be the areas from a pedestrian perspective that are going to drive the most trips. 01:51:29.240 --> 01:51:32.240 Thank you. 01:51:32.240 --> 01:51:35.240 I have some questions and comments, but I think Ed? 01:51:35.240 --> 01:51:37.240 Yeah, just a very short observation. 01:51:37.240 --> 01:51:42.240 This sidewalk was put in on Nauticam Drive. 01:51:42.240 --> 01:51:44.240 That's an area where I live. 01:51:44.240 --> 01:51:55.240 And I was pleasantly amazed at how that one strip is unified in that neighborhood 01:51:55.240 --> 01:52:03.240 and increased socialization amongst people because we walk on that, people walk on their dogs, whatever. 01:52:03.240 --> 01:52:07.240 I mean, it's amazing how many people are coming out now and walking. 01:52:07.240 --> 01:52:10.240 And you meet new people, you meet neighbors you didn't know you had. 01:52:10.240 --> 01:52:18.240 So I mean, the social aspect of sidewalks is absolutely incredible in that respect. 01:52:18.240 --> 01:52:24.240 And I think that should be taken into consideration as well, if it isn't already. 01:52:24.240 --> 01:52:29.240 Yeah, I tried to refer to that a little bit in how the projects will have to be delivered. 01:52:29.240 --> 01:52:34.240 But basically, we can't just look at a project and say we're going to build all the BPI 6 and 5s. 01:52:34.240 --> 01:52:38.240 We have to look at every investment we make from a network perspective. 01:52:38.240 --> 01:52:48.240 So the project you're Nauticam sidewalk that you're referring to makes the connection that goes north of university, it goes up. 01:52:48.240 --> 01:52:55.240 So having those connections fill in gaps in the sidewalk network and not stop short 01:52:55.240 --> 01:52:58.240 so somebody can't get to where they want to go to. 01:52:58.240 --> 01:53:02.240 I mentioned a lot of people there using the trail once they get on the sidewalk. 01:53:02.240 --> 01:53:12.240 So it is important to acknowledge that these projects have to deliver a complete link from one sidewalk to the next. 01:53:12.240 --> 01:53:22.240 They can't just be we extended the sidewalk a few hundred feet because they're probably not going to drive that sort of engaging socialization. 01:53:22.240 --> 01:53:26.240 It won't have that benefit if we don't create those complete networks. 01:53:26.240 --> 01:53:29.240 So Paul, piggybacking on that, because that's my neighborhood too. 01:53:29.240 --> 01:53:35.240 And we worked on there was originally supposed to be two sidewalks on a north. 01:53:35.240 --> 01:53:40.240 And then we had a community member who lives there, Brian Beck, who's now a council member, suggest, 01:53:40.240 --> 01:53:46.240 well, why don't we divide those up, do one on Old North and one on Nottingham because we have the money for it. 01:53:46.240 --> 01:53:49.240 But Nottingham still didn't go all the way to Windsor. 01:53:49.240 --> 01:53:52.240 Although it was supposed to, it stopped a block short. 01:53:52.240 --> 01:53:55.240 So there's not that connectivity to the bike lane that's on Windsor. 01:53:55.240 --> 01:54:01.240 It just is another sidewalk we have in our community that just stops. 01:54:01.240 --> 01:54:04.240 But that's that's another topic. 01:54:04.240 --> 01:54:07.240 So I wanted to thank you for being here. 01:54:07.240 --> 01:54:11.240 We were given a budget, this sustainability. 01:54:11.240 --> 01:54:17.240 And part of that is since our transportation is the highest polluter, 01:54:17.240 --> 01:54:26.240 some of that funding we were looking to to go into marketing to get people off, you know, out of cars and into the community on bikes and walking. 01:54:26.240 --> 01:54:32.240 And we wanted to make sure that before we recommended that that we had a safe place to recommend that they go. 01:54:32.240 --> 01:54:37.240 And so we wanted to come here to see I wanted you to come here to present. 01:54:37.240 --> 01:54:40.240 So we know what's in store. 01:54:40.240 --> 01:54:46.240 I know this is just the sidewalk part of it and not necessarily the bike lane part of it. 01:54:46.240 --> 01:54:52.240 But that's all included and it's all important for us as we look to reduce those emissions and, you know, 01:54:52.240 --> 01:55:00.240 make sure that people are safe and healthy as they're getting out of cars and mobility. 01:55:00.240 --> 01:55:05.240 And part of that is, like you said, code and planning. 01:55:05.240 --> 01:55:13.240 And I know that we have a developmental code committee that is that is meeting and they make recommendations. 01:55:13.240 --> 01:55:23.240 Have you presented to them some of your ideas as far as what you have to to help to help with these going forward? 01:55:23.240 --> 01:55:35.240 Like for the built community? Yeah, I would say I haven't met with code. Now, the city's code refers to the transportation criteria manual and transportation standards in our specs. 01:55:35.240 --> 01:55:46.240 So Capital Projects has the we lead the charge on what are the standards and how how would they do the work. 01:55:46.240 --> 01:55:56.240 Development just refers over to what we say and then requires that of the developer or anybody who's doing some kind of improvement on the street. 01:55:56.240 --> 01:56:01.240 So like DCTA is an example, but not developers working on our streets or our utility companies. 01:56:01.240 --> 01:56:10.240 Well, there's a city council code, development code committee that needs to talk about ways to improve our code. 01:56:10.240 --> 01:56:18.240 And so maybe, you know, if you had some ideas for our built community. Yeah, I've not met with them. I was not even aware that was. 01:56:18.240 --> 01:56:30.240 Well, that's that might be something because for us, as we talk about existing codes and, you know, our goal is to get people out of cars and into the community safely. 01:56:30.240 --> 01:56:41.240 That might be just a suggestion, something that you to make me with. So is there on for the for the data? 01:56:41.240 --> 01:56:51.240 Is there data out there for every sidewalk or every section of sidewalk built that there's a reduced emission correlated to it? 01:56:51.240 --> 01:57:06.240 Is that possible? Probably the best data to look at in that regard is like mode share. So, you know, how many people are walking or biking and then cities or states look at that data over time. 01:57:06.240 --> 01:57:23.240 Brad advisor actually is one of the leading researchers in bike mode share and looking at that data over time. I can't point to anything that says you build a sidewalk and it will reduce carbon emissions or increase that mode share by a significant variable. 01:57:23.240 --> 01:57:43.240 That's usually I would say anecdotally the communities that invest in making biking and walking improvements that truly make safety enhancements. So the crosswalks example that say we're going to prioritize walking and biking and make it safe and comfortable. 01:57:43.240 --> 01:57:58.240 Tend to increase their mode shares the most because they're they're making those significant investments and they're changing behavior. Come from Washington, D.C. They had a huge investment in biking and they now have a huge bike mode share. 01:57:58.240 --> 01:58:15.240 It continues to increase every year and they make more investments every year. So I just see that as an outcome of the work, but it has to be sustained. It needs to be driven by all of those goals and making sure that we're not investing. 01:58:15.240 --> 01:58:29.240 The reason I was talking about the loop a little bit and you know some of this needing to look at demand is that if we're saying we're going to be a bike friendly community and we're going to focus on doing all these things that improve biking and walking, 01:58:29.240 --> 01:58:39.240 but we only look outside the loop in new developed areas and we're not looking inside our core is those places might be walkable, but they may not have a lot of demand to walk or bike. 01:58:39.240 --> 01:58:52.240 So we have to make very intentional change in the character of our city in the core or we're not going to really sort of it's not a genuine investment. It's not a genuine goal. 01:58:52.240 --> 01:58:57.240 So we have to be very intentional if we're going to make those changes. 01:58:57.240 --> 01:59:11.240 And on on those so I saw that in your PBI one of the main thing or the first thing that came up is major streets and one thing you probably notice of being new or not all of the streets here in Denton are Denton streets. 01:59:11.240 --> 01:59:19.240 We have a lot of textile streets and then there's some, you know, the universities who have streets, but they're still, they're not private streets. 01:59:19.240 --> 01:59:36.240 They're Denton streets. Have you when we talk about sidewalks on those, is that a like a special relationship where you have communication with textile or is it so like when I'm thinking right now thinking of University East. 01:59:36.240 --> 01:59:52.240 So as you're heading out, there's, you know, we talked about the people walking all the time on there. There's not sidewalks on either side. So going back in, if we were to build sidewalks there, that would be a text that issue, right? 01:59:52.240 --> 02:00:06.240 Not a, not a city, not a city build. Is that correct? Correct. Yeah. So we've had ongoing conversations with text. They've changed their standards. Like I mentioned today they would build a side path. 15 years ago they wouldn't even build a sidewalk. 02:00:06.240 --> 02:00:20.240 We're having those conversations with them on roads that they're turning over for city maintenance. So, yeah, there, there are a lot of mixed conditions of those facilities throughout the city and text. 02:00:20.240 --> 02:00:34.240 There's a lot on a lot of the roadways. Loop 288 is a big one that we're actually looking to make some sidewalk investments because of the junction relocating, relocating downtown the, our daily bread, I think it is. 02:00:34.240 --> 02:00:42.240 So, we are looking at some sidewalk investments like that, but the need is still a lot greater than, you know, what we're looking at right now. 02:00:42.240 --> 02:00:55.240 And there are people who are walking on those major roads. That's why I made that the first point in the presentation that, you know, somebody who needs to get along university, they're not going to find a connected network that parallels university. 02:00:55.240 --> 02:01:05.240 You can parallel portions of McKinney, but certainly those major roads are a way that people have to get around and we have to make them accessible. 02:01:05.240 --> 02:01:16.240 Would that be like a cost sharing situation, maybe? Right now, no. If we want to make those connectivity improvements, we can pay for them. 02:01:16.240 --> 02:01:25.240 If TxDOT has funding, then they will pay for them and we could look to do cost sharing, but I haven't seen any emphasis from TxDOT on those existing roads. 02:01:25.240 --> 02:01:29.240 When they would come back to do something else, they would make the investment. 02:01:29.240 --> 02:01:43.240 And then another one of your PPI calculations was safety. And I noticed that you had pedestrian crashes, but I didn't notice any bicycle crashes. Was that separate or is that still kind of included in that? 02:01:43.240 --> 02:01:59.240 It's not included because we were specifically looking at pedestrian. I would say we didn't have a lot of bicycle crashes as opposed to there's more pedestrian crash data than there is bicycle crash data. That's a trend that's typical. 02:01:59.240 --> 02:02:13.240 We look at bicycle crash data and I'll be looking at that as part of our bike program work. But even then, I would point out that outcome-based data, so where the crashes occurred, is just one indication of safety. 02:02:13.240 --> 02:02:21.240 There are a lot of other ways that we can look at safety and that gets somewhat to the questions about those crosswalks. 02:02:21.240 --> 02:02:29.240 Looking at the potential threat for somebody to have a crash or even, like I said, where the crash occurs may not be where the safety challenge is. 02:02:29.240 --> 02:02:41.240 So sometimes you have to acknowledge that somebody took a risk away from where they perceived a threat and they got hit. So there's a lot of different ways we have to look at safety, not just the crashes. 02:02:41.240 --> 02:02:50.240 And again, for this committee, if we're recommending people walk and bike, we want to make sure that those areas are addressed with the safety issues. 02:02:50.240 --> 02:03:10.240 I have just a couple more. So when we, the citizens voted in a bond, there was a section of sidewalks, like a list of sidewalks. Is that what you're going off of still or have you changed any of those with the new information that you have come up with? 02:03:10.240 --> 02:03:23.240 I can't speak robustly to the bond program and the sidewalk segments. I know a lot of the projects that you see in that project list or the map that's here has listed or discussed it. 02:03:23.240 --> 02:03:32.240 A fair amount of those were out of the bond program list. I don't know how many, so I'd be speculating to say anything beyond that. 02:03:32.240 --> 02:03:41.240 And on the, seeing the PPI calculation, when I saw it, it kind of reminds me of the OCI when you're talking about streets, but you're talking about sidewalks. 02:03:41.240 --> 02:03:49.240 And I know for us as a community, we invest a lot in our streets. We look at repair and maintenance and there's a budget for that. 02:03:49.240 --> 02:04:03.240 And I know at one time there wasn't a specific budget for sidewalks, but there needs to be one for repair and maintenance. Is that something that you have now or you're looking into? 02:04:03.240 --> 02:04:19.240 I would say the bonds previously, the theme that I heard entering capital projects is the bonds were street bonds that didn't consider bike or pedestrian connectivity. If those elements could be addressed, they might have been like a resurfacing project might have been a bike lane. 02:04:19.240 --> 02:04:29.240 But in general, those funds did not address other modes. That is something that needs to be reevaluated when future bonds are issued. 02:04:29.240 --> 02:04:42.240 I've also been sure to pass along that we have a requirement, a federal requirement that as we do road improvements, we at least address that missing or non-compliant ramp issue. 02:04:42.240 --> 02:04:53.240 So that's something that I was sure to pass along as well. We can't go in and fix the street and leave out the ramps. If we've got sidewalks, at least the ramps need to be compliant, even if what's behind it is not. 02:04:53.240 --> 02:05:00.240 That doesn't mean we build ramps to nowhere. It just means if there's a sidewalk and the ramp is missing or not compliant, it needs to be repaired. 02:05:00.240 --> 02:05:27.240 Last two, last two. So in there, I know that for the community and for me personally, equity is a big thing in the community and sometimes it doesn't seem like it's applied in every aspect. And so I heard you mention it just in the conversation, but I didn't see it addressed anywhere in here. 02:05:27.240 --> 02:05:47.240 So how do you make sure that when you look at these three main areas that you talked about, that we look at providing equal equality among the neighborhoods that need it rather than the university area? 02:05:47.240 --> 02:06:04.240 Where you may have heard me somewhat refer to equity was when I was talking about the census data, because that's where I think we'll probably see the best data to look from an equity perspective and also from a health perspective. 02:06:04.240 --> 02:06:19.240 And the data has just not been released yet. Census hasn't published. So some census data has been published, but like overall population and those other factors that will be really beneficial in those areas have not been put out yet. 02:06:19.240 --> 02:06:34.240 We've still been looking at equity in other aspects of our work, so you don't see it in the sidewalk plan, but it's certainly we're looking at it from other project bases, if you will. 02:06:34.240 --> 02:06:41.240 So it's not something that's being ignored. We did hear that in some of the earlier presentations as well. It's not a point that's lost. 02:06:41.240 --> 02:06:51.240 We're not going to make project selections based on the overall data, and there will be an equity aspect that's applied, especially as we get our hands on that data to take a look at it as well. 02:06:51.240 --> 02:07:14.240 And one of the challenges that I, when you mentioned the universities, one of the challenges I think we'll see in the data is that university students trigger some of the metrics like low income that could potentially skew the data as well and point us towards student housing areas where folks don't have higher incomes because they're students and they don't have a job. 02:07:14.240 --> 02:07:32.240 So I would be interested to see if the data has any of those correlations to make sure that we're not, by default, biasing our recommendations into those areas based on household incomes. We'll be looking at factors that help to avoid that sort of potential. 02:07:32.240 --> 02:08:00.240 I'm really glad to hear that. That's really important for us here on this committee, too. Last question. I heard you talk about ADA compliance and the federal, the regulations are kind of free, but I've also heard once you start work on, say you want to fix this ramp, then it triggers something and you have to completely upgrade that whole intersection to compliance. 02:08:00.240 --> 02:08:28.240 And so that is why, you know, you'll see more intersections not completed ADA wise. Is that a fair statement? Like, the funding has to be completely there to completely upgrade it if you're going to say, you know, if there's a hole in the ramp or something, you can't just go in and fill that hole without making everything else in compliance. 02:08:28.240 --> 02:08:40.240 Yeah, so the Justice Department defines compliance from an ADA perspective based on the ramps. So that's why the focus on intersections and not on anything around the intersections. 02:08:40.240 --> 02:09:04.240 So when we have a project that touches a ramp at an intersection, it triggers a requirement to make the intersection fully compliant. So like, we're working on a Sycamore Side Path project that goes from the A train station over to UNT, and that project goes through several intersections where because we touched one part of the intersection to put a trail through, we have to make the entire intersection compliant. 02:09:04.240 --> 02:09:15.240 That's just to make sure that we're not ignoring the needs of people passing through an intersection just because our project only touched one part and not the other. 02:09:15.240 --> 02:09:36.240 So that's where that criteria lies, and that's why we go in and resurface a road. Anything along the road at each intersection, the ramps have to be compliant. That's really the only criteria that the federal government has been very specific about. Then they give us the leeway of those other issues. 02:09:36.240 --> 02:09:59.240 If those crossroads or point conflict or things like that are in the sidewalk, we have more flexibility to determine what are our priorities and what we need to fix along a corridor first. So we have a lot more flexibility in that regard, but the intersection is sort of the main thing that needs to be fixed from a federal standard. 02:09:59.240 --> 02:10:17.240 And just last, I'd like your opinion because for us, this committee, as we go and we look at the funds, we want to make sure that we reduce pollution and we get cars off the road and we want to make sure that our community is safe and walkable and sustainable. 02:10:17.240 --> 02:10:39.240 Are we, how far away do you think we are? Are we at a good point right now where we can start spending those dollars to advertise to our community and market to our community to make those trips out of your vehicle and walking and biking when we're in regards to safety? 02:10:39.240 --> 02:10:55.240 Yeah, I'd say we have a lot of work to do in the sidewalk department. Especially, there were a lot of sidewalk deficiencies in downtown even, and that's one of our more walkable places outside of the campus, like on-campus areas. 02:10:55.240 --> 02:11:13.240 So, and I feel like we've heard a theme that a lot of our neighborhoods don't have sidewalks in them, or there are not a lot of sidewalks in the neighborhoods. There's still a lot of work to be done to make our city more walkable, more bikeable, and that's what our team and others around the city are working on every day. 02:11:13.240 --> 02:11:30.240 And I've heard it consistently as a priority of our current council and across the city, it's a big priority. Well, thank you, I think. Is everybody good? I have to add to the matrix, so not necessarily. 02:11:30.240 --> 02:11:43.240 Yeah, we're going to open that back up right after this. So I just want to thank you for coming to present to us, and I appreciate all the work you're doing. We know that there's a lot. There's a lot. 02:11:43.240 --> 02:11:59.240 Well, thank you for listening and sharing your comments. We'll go back and take a look at them and take them to heart. Rest assured, everything you said will be re-reviewed and we'll consider how we can improve this plan. We appreciate your comments. Thanks for having us here. 02:11:59.240 --> 02:12:19.240 You're welcome back anytime. Thank you. Alright, so we will go ahead and reopen our item for the matrix because of the things that we heard today. Go ahead. Yeah, so I was the one that asked for the transportation overview, and I really appreciate the overview of the sidewalks plan. 02:12:19.240 --> 02:12:34.240 The transportation is the kind of gorilla in the room for emissions and other things. So Nathan mentioned the new transportation standards. I'd love to hear about that. I'd love to hear about the broader mobility plan as well. 02:12:34.240 --> 02:12:51.240 I'd like to hear more about bike lanes and the bike program because we didn't hear about that today. I'd also like to hear more about vehicle idling standards because that's a low-hanging fruit that we could actually target for reducing emissions from the transportation sector. 02:12:51.240 --> 02:13:07.240 I'd also like to know what the plans are for slow streets. So fitting in with this presentation on sidewalks, those places where we can't put sidewalks, how do we enforce slower traffic where people have to walk on the road? 02:13:07.240 --> 02:13:30.240 And then I had a side thought that we know that there is this new infrastructure bill that's coming out. Does the city get some of that money? I mean, do we know what the plan is for that? So that's more just kind of a question about the infrastructure bill and what we might be in store for debt and what the plan is to do with that money. 02:13:30.240 --> 02:13:47.240 So I would like to hear more on transportation on a couple of those points because I think, as we all recognize in the climate, that is the biggest emitter and the biggest issue I think for a truly sustainable city. So I would like to hear a lot more. 02:13:47.240 --> 02:14:02.240 So we'll just add that to the matrix of presentation, more engineering probably, just transportation overall, biking streets. And then just I think on the transportation, the question on funding may be an update. 02:14:02.240 --> 02:14:17.240 We may want to pull somebody from development services in to talk about standards in new development. Okay. Anyone else? Matrix? We talked a little bit earlier, Ed? 02:14:17.240 --> 02:14:46.240 Yeah, I had a thing on the TUV matrix that's been on for over a year and I'd like to put it on our matrix in hopes of bringing it to fruition. And what that request was was to know the amount of electricity generated in both residential and commercial 02:14:46.240 --> 02:15:00.240 PV installations over a designated amount of time and the amount of that electricity that was returned to the grid. 02:15:00.240 --> 02:15:17.240 Thank you. 02:15:17.240 --> 02:15:40.240 I just want to reiterate, I think what I've heard different members say about all the different plans in the city. If we can have just an update on those and pull the sustainability parts out of each of those plans and make sure that they're 02:15:40.240 --> 02:15:53.240 all correlated or that they're working together and not against each other and that there is specific sustainability parts in each of the plans going forward. 02:15:53.240 --> 02:16:10.240 I think that was mentioned earlier, I just want to make sure that that's as an item. 02:16:10.240 --> 02:16:28.240 And I think we will move on to concluding items, but we pretty much did that I think under the matrix. If anybody has anything at this point that they want to say, if not, we will close the meeting. 02:16:28.240 --> 02:16:32.240 319. Thank you everyone.