WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:12.760
 Good morning. It is 11 31 and welcome to this meeting of the Mobility Committee of the City

00:00:12.760 --> 00:00:19.920
 of Denton. Seeing that we have a quorum, we will jump right into our items for individual

00:00:19.920 --> 00:00:25.200
 consideration and item A is to consider approval of the Mobility Committee meeting minutes

00:00:25.200 --> 00:00:32.600
 of June 11th. Is there a motion to approve? Move to approve. Minutes are approved. Wait no,

00:00:32.600 --> 00:00:38.200
 we need to take a vote. All in favor? Aye. Minutes are approved. Moving on to item B,

00:00:38.200 --> 00:00:43.520
 receive a report on the City of Denton mobility plan scope of work and plan schedule.

00:00:43.520 --> 00:00:59.680
 Just on that one, can we get John updated and have his report go earlier because I think he

00:00:59.680 --> 00:01:28.960
 waits here for two hours. That's fine with me. Sorry, I should mention that before. I'm going to table that item. Do we need a motion to table? No. Okay, rearranging. I never opened it. So let's go right then to item E. That's fine, we can do that in the future too. Although you know what, actually,

00:01:28.960 --> 00:01:58.560
 well I think this will be of interest to citizens who are visiting as well. Because somebody's going to wait. So I'm aware of the fact that we're now asking them to wait as well. But it shouldn't add out to be about the same. So I'm going to rescramble after this too then. So let's start with item E. Receive a report and hold a discussion regarding Texas Department of Transportation on system

00:01:58.560 --> 00:02:25.160
 projects in the Denton area. Okay, I'll be John Poster, Innovative Transportation Solutions, 2701 Valley View Lane, Texas, Farmer's Branch, Texas. This is a list of the projects we'll be going over real quick. The total value of the projects that are covered in this report

00:02:25.160 --> 00:02:54.960
 is a little over $2.3 billion. Most of that project funding is either funded or in the pipeline to be funded within the next 18 to 24 months. The first project is the FM 2181 project that was originally provided to a contractor named MCM. They were terminated for cause. The tech study at their last mobility meeting, I was out of town for, but my notes say that

00:02:54.960 --> 00:03:24.560
 they still don't have a contractor identified that Berkshire Hathaway is a little bit more difficult on the cost overruns than they originally anticipated. They will, however, be going out before school starts on the pedestrian pathway that they provided for the school walk to school routes and putting the herbicide down and making sure that it stays passable.

00:03:24.560 --> 00:03:36.560
 And remove all the vegetation. But at this point, they still don't have any time frame on when they'll get a new contractor for this job.

00:03:36.560 --> 00:04:06.520
 That's my breaks. So on that along the way, there's giant concrete things. Well, there's there's a lot of construction material just left there on the side of the road. The I think it's the not barriers, but the things that you put underground for the courts. Yeah, the culverts. Is that work part of this or is that the what text I did was they went in and they had a blader come in and bladed path basically for the whole length of the project to get to

00:04:06.520 --> 00:04:32.520
 Gower High School and they put a chip seal type gravel facility on it and they're just going to be keeping that passable for the school season until the contractor gets reselected and put on all the material that's still there is going to stay there until the contractor is reselected and brought back on some of the material out there that's PVC related.

00:04:32.520 --> 00:04:56.520
 There is some question is whether or not it's still usable for the length of time that it's been exposed to the sun. So that's one of those contract negotiations. But the material that's out there will stay there for the duration. It's a difficult situation, but the state legislature doesn't give the state of Texas a lot of authority to enforce these contracts once they're awarded.

00:04:56.520 --> 00:05:15.520
 You forward drive project will go out straight to the contract report. The project is moving along nicely now that we've got the Union Pacific. I mean the Union Pacific cooperation on the shoe fly at the intersection of 377 there.

00:05:15.520 --> 00:05:30.520
 We are in the process of adding additional pavement to the north part of 377 in the temporary as you know as you're coming north on 377 right now there's a long backup to get to the frontage road because of the lack of pavement there.

00:05:30.520 --> 00:05:54.520
 We've got the water lines relocated in that area and by the end of this month we should have additional pavement out there to allow some right turn movement to go south on the frontage road, so that it does it's backup that much on the, you know, south on the 377 so that's the main improvement you should see in the next, you know, three weeks.

00:05:54.520 --> 00:06:09.520
 The 35 e mayhill job this is an ultimate where we're coming in with 12 lanes underneath it'll it's actually going to be larger as we say, then the 35 at 288. It's still planned to begin November 2020.

00:06:09.520 --> 00:06:33.520
 We have all the parcels are in either negotiations, appraisal, eminent domain or closed and so the October timeframe for this right away acquisition to be completed is on track and you'll note that on some of the parcels they have they're already clearing the right away of its encumbrances so there you'll see on the northbound side.

00:06:33.520 --> 00:06:38.520
 The state coming in and strip cleaning the right away that they purchased.

00:06:38.520 --> 00:06:43.520
 This project extends all the way to 288 the new frontage road.

00:06:43.520 --> 00:07:03.520
 So the old the mayhill project we're talking about covers all of this section and this project will pick up the northbound frontage road as well. And so this is the breaker mayhill project, we anticipate having the brinker interchange open in September, along with the exit ramp.

00:07:03.520 --> 00:07:21.520
 We have a temporary ramp that's fairly dangerous and so we have barrels blocking it to the most southbound most entrance in the Buckees we're anticipating having the new exit ramp for brinker installed it so we'll be able to open up the underpass and brinker.

00:07:21.520 --> 00:07:36.520
 And we're expecting that to be sometime toward the end of September so that should relieve some of the pressure at 288 going forward and this project still has the end of year timeframe for the whole project to be completed.

00:07:36.520 --> 00:07:39.520
 That's what I just said, sorry.

00:07:39.520 --> 00:07:56.520
 35 35. This is the giant project $242 million project. It's still in the hopper with text that for clear lanes funding. We've had some communication from Austin asked us some additional questions so we think we're still in the running for that.

00:07:56.520 --> 00:08:12.520
 And again if we don't get the 242 million we have $150 million already allocated to the project. And instead of going all the way up to 77, he'll stop at 380 and make the improvements at the wishbone for 35 v and 35 w.

00:08:12.520 --> 00:08:33.520
 By the end of this summer on that funding source and a calm is on contract doing the work. And they're doing a schematic for the entire project, and if they find out that we're going to do a subset then they can just chop off the section north of 380 and continue on with the final design for this section.

00:08:33.520 --> 00:08:43.520
 35 North, we ran into a little bit of trouble on our, our environmental clearance this is July 2019.

00:08:43.520 --> 00:08:55.520
 But we just found out the other day that it's going to be more like November because there's a section a little bitty section 35 that goes into Cook County, which is in the Cook County metropolitan planning organization.

00:08:55.520 --> 00:09:13.520
 And the North Texas North Central Texas Council government's requested, but six eight months ago for the Cook County MPO to update their conformity to include what we're doing on this section of 35 and they haven't done it yet and until conformity is conforming

00:09:13.520 --> 00:09:18.520
 your highway program with your Clean Air Act program.

00:09:18.520 --> 00:09:33.520
 They have to conform and what they do, and our section which is 95% of the project is conformed but the Cook County MPO has failed to conform their section and we're anticipating that done in October, or I mean in September.

00:09:33.520 --> 00:09:37.520
 So we'll have a November environmental clearance date.

00:09:37.520 --> 00:09:41.520
 So that's the reason why that's, I'll update this before we send it back out.

00:09:41.520 --> 00:09:44.520
 But that dates November now.

00:09:44.520 --> 00:09:56.520
 See I 35 W main lanes we've got HNT be doing ultimate configuration, they're essentially on hold until the friends road project is finalized, and so I'm gonna jump to it real quick.

00:09:56.520 --> 00:10:00.520
 We're anticipating having the schematic approved in December.

00:10:00.520 --> 00:10:16.520
 We are in the process of doing the value V study which is called a value engineering, where we come in and we listen to our stakeholders for the state listens to the city the county adjacent property owners and attempt to value engineer the project we're

00:10:16.520 --> 00:10:21.520
 going through the review process with the state on that.

00:10:21.520 --> 00:10:32.520
 We're looking at about 120 parcels to acquire on this project, and we're looking at a potential let data sometime in 2025 assuming these dates hold.

00:10:32.520 --> 00:10:36.520
 If we expedite any of these dates that can move up.

00:10:36.520 --> 00:10:51.520
 And us 380 East project, and it's still on track for a February 2021, we are in the main critical path item now in the blue section is the utility coordination if they're significant utilities in that area.

00:10:51.520 --> 00:11:07.520
 And active partnering with the utility providers in that quarter or through the dictionary office to get them ready for moving these utilities because we are anticipating having the right away completed.

00:11:07.520 --> 00:11:16.520
 Just first part of next year. So, that's a significant project. Yes, ma'am.

00:11:16.520 --> 00:11:29.520
 So my question is about the, the path from may help to the green belt corridor, that's in the green section, and it's included in this project, and it'll be designed by the state, and included in the project.

00:11:29.520 --> 00:11:45.520
 And so will that happen before, or. So currently this project is anticipated to let it we've got to CSJ is only because the section across the lake has doesn't have a lot of a conflict, because it's

00:11:45.520 --> 00:11:57.520
 across the lake. So the state did that in house and they formed out the section in the blue, but it's essentially going to be led as one job for 100 and it's closer probably to $130 million now.

00:11:57.520 --> 00:12:02.520
 So it'll be part of the total package.

00:12:02.520 --> 00:12:18.520
 But what we can do closer to the plan set we can do a special provision, see if the contractors can get that done sometime earlier in the project since it's kind of off off track of the project it's off site.

00:12:18.520 --> 00:12:24.520
 Okay Luke 288. This is a project that continues to continue.

00:12:24.520 --> 00:12:39.520
 We're in the process of doing the ve review right now, this, the alignment is pretty much set we're waiting to finalize the traffic on it before we show a whole lot more to the public we had one in March, but we're going to come back with refined information

00:12:39.520 --> 00:12:55.520
 related to the ramping, but we're looking at a April of 2020 environmental clearance, and then the right away in this section will be fairly difficult because in the utility relocation because the number of not only well sites, but the transmission

00:12:55.520 --> 00:13:10.520
 lines that support them are going to make this project right away acquisition, take a little bit longer than normal but it's right now ready to let date is April 2026 I think that says, I can't see it.

00:13:10.520 --> 00:13:29.520
 But we're moving forward on it. And then your FM 1515 project we just got an email yesterday.

00:13:29.520 --> 00:13:40.520
 That doesn't matter what it says city wants the traffic circles where they want to roundabouts I don't know what the right vernacular.

00:13:40.520 --> 00:13:53.520
 So we'll make sure they get included in a project regardless of what the analysis shows text that's very negative about trip roundabout so they always try to darken the analysis on it.

00:13:53.520 --> 00:13:56.520
 So we just ignore it.

00:13:56.520 --> 00:13:59.520
 And then your FM 1173 project.

00:13:59.520 --> 00:14:16.520
 This is a project that will be tied into if we get the full funding for the wishbone on 35 takes it all the way up to this section where we're realigning FM 1173 to Barthol road as which is currently consistent with the city's thoroughfare plan.

00:14:16.520 --> 00:14:22.520
 In this project, we will get should have an environment declared sometime summer next year.

00:14:22.520 --> 00:14:39.520
 And at that point we'll have a better schedule on ready to let this is a project that text I'd asked us to start looking at county picked it up from an engineering standpoint so I'm assuming if we get the project environmental declared, since they asked us to start it, the help us find the funding for it.

00:14:39.520 --> 00:14:53.520
 For 28 This is a project where the city is reached out to its partner saying look future issues dictate that we have to do for 28 in a more mature manner than we did and say well I don't know on 380.

00:14:53.520 --> 00:15:05.520
 And we need to look at it as more of a regional spur as limited access facility we've got the metropolitan planning organization, agreeing with us and we're working with text on it.

00:15:05.520 --> 00:15:18.520
 We agreed to pick up a contractor to begin the advanced planning on this and once they have that we anticipate that sometime in fall, we'll be able to fill in this information, we just sent it to them about a month or so ago.

00:15:18.520 --> 00:15:22.520
 So we should be able to fill this out and start really pursuing.

00:15:22.520 --> 00:15:35.520
 So this is the section between 288 in the outer loop pretend, and Todd have projects at 288 and inside the loop that will be working as independent project but we're covering it as a whole.

00:15:35.520 --> 00:15:42.520
 Once we get some additional information will break those other two out that project and show them independently.

00:15:42.520 --> 00:15:49.520
 And I believe that's it.

00:15:49.520 --> 00:15:57.520
 Questions.

00:15:57.520 --> 00:16:01.520
 Can I do I do I have latitude to be like I said bother me.

00:16:01.520 --> 00:16:06.520
 I don't know who I'm asking. I'm asking you.

00:16:06.520 --> 00:16:12.520
 Yeah, because it's not it's not an item for discussion for deliberation it's a it's a report.

00:16:12.520 --> 00:16:16.520
 Right, it's really just as it's posted just for y'all to receive the report and discuss.

00:16:16.520 --> 00:16:31.520
 And if it was open for one for discussion and he had filled out a blue card then that would be one thing but feel, you know, feel free to contact your council members you know we'll, we'll bird dog any issues, you know you've got

00:16:31.520 --> 00:16:32.520
 that's it for me.

00:16:32.520 --> 00:16:33.520
 Anything from Council.

00:16:33.520 --> 00:16:44.520
 Yeah, that's what breaks. Yeah, just to clarify and ask again so the breaker underpass is going to be open in September.

00:16:44.520 --> 00:16:47.520
 In theory, yes, that's what they're telling us.

00:16:47.520 --> 00:16:49.520
 Okay.

00:16:49.520 --> 00:17:00.520
 Oh chill. Like I said, is, they're stationed out of Madrid, and so they don't really respond well they're telling us September but they haven't met any schedule they told us yet.

00:17:00.520 --> 00:17:04.520
 Okay. So, that should be an asteroid.

00:17:04.520 --> 00:17:20.520
 Is this a work on teesley all text on its text out but that contractor went bankrupt. Right, they're the ones that had to bridge fall and everybody in Florida. Yeah. So, can you provide any update on on that project on whether it's.

00:17:20.520 --> 00:17:22.520
 That was the first one.

00:17:22.520 --> 00:17:34.520
 There is no time to that's the deal where once the contractors were to the contractor contractor has latitude between the number of days they've got the only thing the state can do is terminate them.

00:17:34.520 --> 00:17:53.520
 They go to the surety, the bondholder and then the bondholder argues how much of what the contractor did is worth being paid for and what's not in the state says no they've already been paid. And so then there's this haggle between text out and surety surety and contractors surety and the new contractors, that's going to take the job.

00:17:53.520 --> 00:17:59.520
 And the state doesn't have any authority to dictate a timeframe on that.

00:17:59.520 --> 00:18:04.520
 Do you have a guess.

00:18:04.520 --> 00:18:16.520
 I've gone through this. It's not been done within. It's, it's taken at least a year to get done, and we're not. And how far into that, you know, you're halfway through a year.

00:18:16.520 --> 00:18:29.520
 So we get anything done sooner than that is fast. I was just gonna say one of the biggest issues right now as I understand it is the work that's already been done the warranty on that, the new contractor doesn't want to warranty because they didn't do the work.

00:18:29.520 --> 00:18:31.520
 Some of us covered up.

00:18:31.520 --> 00:18:41.520
 Some of the pipe is out there the PVC they're not sure if it's still usable, but will meet the city of the standards since it's been laying around the sun for baking for months.

00:18:41.520 --> 00:18:51.520
 It has like a shelf life on it. And so, you know, Mercer halfway got a contract, that's 1212 million dollars more than what's remaining on the contract.

00:18:51.520 --> 00:19:02.520
 The text that's willing to pay. And so that's where the big rub is is that it's way off kilter MCM got paid more for what they did.

00:19:02.520 --> 00:19:11.520
 They had more time they got paid for them what they actually put on in the ground, and they stopped paying their subs and stuff like that it was horrible. It's horrible.

00:19:11.520 --> 00:19:21.520
 So, we don't know, but it might be another six months till there's somebody else in place this is all adjudicated. And then, and then what's the construction timeframe ish.

00:19:21.520 --> 00:19:24.520
 That's part of the negotiations is the number of days.

00:19:24.520 --> 00:19:40.520
 Okay, so instead of giving them money the state might give them days, and that won't be determined that we do know that it's down to Zachary and Jay goes what I heard the two firms that are still in the running but they're both nine to $12 million difference.

00:19:40.520 --> 00:19:48.520
 Okay, and the range of possible outcomes on days might be as wide as.

00:19:48.520 --> 00:19:57.520
 We're, I'm still thinking once we get somebody on we're two and a half to three years from the project being done. Okay, I'm sure people will be thrilled to hear that progress. Yeah.

00:19:57.520 --> 00:20:00.520
 Okay, thank you. Did you have something.

00:20:00.520 --> 00:20:02.520
 Thank you very much.

00:20:02.520 --> 00:20:04.520
 I'm going to make a.

00:20:04.520 --> 00:20:15.520
 I want to add a consideration for the fact that we got members of the public who I think are interested in item D, I want to move there but I want to make a sort of, you know, last offer if you want to put in a blue card and want to speak about it.

00:20:15.520 --> 00:20:18.520
 Well, you know the sequence of events would be.

00:20:18.520 --> 00:20:29.520
 I'll have staff give the presentation, and we'd hear public comments and then we would speak. So, go once you want to put in a blue card, so that you could speak after that.

00:20:29.520 --> 00:20:33.520
 I'll give you three minutes.

00:20:33.520 --> 00:20:55.520
 Okay, so, so I'd like to go to item D then, and we'll just hear your report and hold the discussion. So item D is receiver report and hold the discussion regarding updates on the forest ridge drive street improvement project.

00:20:55.520 --> 00:21:04.520
 Good morning, or good afternoon pretend they smoke deputy city engineer. Let me just pull up the right presentation.

00:21:04.520 --> 00:21:07.520
 There we go.

00:21:07.520 --> 00:21:12.520
 So, a quick update on what's sorry.

00:21:12.520 --> 00:21:17.520
 I'm sorry.

00:21:17.520 --> 00:21:25.520
 Alright, now we're on the right place.

00:21:25.520 --> 00:21:33.520
 So, this is the second time we're bringing this item back to the committee.

00:21:33.520 --> 00:21:58.520
 So, quick brief overview on what the project is, and what we're talking about this forestry drive just south of Hobson. There is an existing median that is on center median which is about six feet wide between Hobson, which is north here, and all the way to just south of Timber Green

00:21:58.520 --> 00:22:09.520
 Circle, or between those two legs of Timber Green Circle. So the pavement is fairly wide the right away is wide. And currently the street is separated by a meeting.

00:22:09.520 --> 00:22:30.520
 How did how did this come about is, there is a, as part of the bond program there was a rehab project in this particular area. Street, street department was is rehabbing, have you circle and have you court, as well as forest rich drive so these are the main segments

00:22:30.520 --> 00:22:34.520
 of street segments that are in the rehab program that will be rehab.

00:22:34.520 --> 00:22:44.520
 So as part of that project discussion started about, you know, what are the options can we remove the median leave the median in, and it went from there.

00:22:44.520 --> 00:22:54.520
 As it stands currently the schedule for rehab. We did hit some weather issues with the high view court and have you circle project so we have some time at this point.

00:22:54.520 --> 00:23:04.520
 This schedule begins the actual reconstruction of the project, August 19, currently scheduled for moving forward.

00:23:04.520 --> 00:23:21.520
 Just to give you an idea so we do have a little bit of time to change things or be. If we have to get there and then redesign component background we presented this item to the committee back on last month on 11th.

00:23:21.520 --> 00:23:29.520
 And there were some discussions there were some concerns that were brought up from the citizens as well as committee members about.

00:23:29.520 --> 00:23:40.520
 Are there other options what can we do, and what is the input from the community. Based on the feedback received we took it back to community we held to community meetings.

00:23:40.520 --> 00:23:52.520
 The first one was June 20, which was held in the Trinity Church. The second was July 1, and that was held at the South Branch Public Library.

00:23:52.520 --> 00:24:11.520
 There were quite a few people members of the community that attended. I want to say, I think the totals are later on but I want to say the first meeting was around 30 and then the second meeting was not another 20 plus, just a ballpark number.

00:24:11.520 --> 00:24:18.520
 And so is that more than originally attended the first meetings, or is it.

00:24:18.520 --> 00:24:24.520
 I think the original attendance were around 30 to 40 people. It was similar number of people.

00:24:24.520 --> 00:24:26.520
 Thank you.

00:24:26.520 --> 00:24:37.520
 So, quick overview of the existing condition this is how it currently looks, you're facing the northbound direction you're if you're traveling on Forest Ridge, you're going towards Hobson.

00:24:37.520 --> 00:24:48.520
 And there are drive lanes that are about 12 feet wide on either side, north south parking on the west side.

00:24:48.520 --> 00:24:59.520
 It's a parking lane where cars can be parked, and then bicycle lane on the east side, going towards Hobson so this is the way it's currently set up.

00:24:59.520 --> 00:25:18.520
 Previously recommended option just a quick review of that. Previously, staff had recommended this option to to the committee, where you had to driving lanes, get rid of the median have to parking lanes on either side, and then have a sidewalk slash

00:25:18.520 --> 00:25:29.520
 multi use bat on the east side. This will be, this could have been fitted within the existing right of way as part of the reconstruction project.

00:25:29.520 --> 00:25:40.520
 So what happened during the two meetings that we conducted with the community, approximately 52 residents responded.

00:25:40.520 --> 00:25:57.520
 And this is, this is the review of how many people wanted to keep the media and approximately 62% or 32 out of the 52 wanted to keep the median and then 38 want to remove the media and that's purely.

00:25:57.520 --> 00:26:10.520
 Two alternatives. So let me. Yeah, these, these are the alternatives. Let me get into this is this is option one was presented at the meeting saying that remove the median.

00:26:10.520 --> 00:26:19.520
 And this would be the configuration so there was a sidewalk. There was a bike lane which was buffered to travel lanes and a parking lane.

00:26:19.520 --> 00:26:29.520
 So this is the remove median option that was voted on in the community meeting. And this is the keep median option which is exactly the same configuration.

00:26:29.520 --> 00:26:36.520
 Why wasn't the third option that we're about to see presented to the public.

00:26:36.520 --> 00:26:49.520
 Okay, so the, the third option was a question from the committee members and currently what we wanted to feed, wanted a feedback is, do you want to keep the median or remove the median.

00:26:49.520 --> 00:27:00.520
 That was the bottom line as far as adding the infrastructure, adding a bike pedestrian lane. If we keep the medians, we're not changing the existing configuration.

00:27:00.520 --> 00:27:12.520
 It will. So if we go with alternative three, we will continue having the same configuration as far as the lanes as far as the bike lane and then the parking lane.

00:27:12.520 --> 00:27:23.520
 So if we go with the third alternative, which is what you're going to see partial removal in these segments where the median will be remaining, and even in these segments.

00:27:23.520 --> 00:27:33.520
 The lanes would, the configuration would remain. So there was no configuration changes in the turtle turn. And that's why it was not presented to the public.

00:27:33.520 --> 00:27:37.520
 I'll let you keep going, then I'll come back. Go ahead.

00:27:37.520 --> 00:27:52.520
 So another consideration was really to keep the street reconstruction as originally planned on the bond program on schedule, as if there was going to be a removal of the median and a reconfiguration of the cross section that would impact that schedule.

00:27:52.520 --> 00:28:08.520
 So if the median were to stay, whether you punch multiple holes in it to allow people to turn left or it stayed intact as it was, it would not change the roadway reconstruction timeline because the two things could be done independent of each other.

00:28:08.520 --> 00:28:23.520
 And really the driver here when we were talking to the community at large was just, do I keep this project on schedule by keeping the median or does it get delayed from a reconstruction standpoint until such times the median is taken out we redo the entire roadway.

00:28:23.520 --> 00:28:29.520
 That was the critical path. And then as far as what the median looks like on the other side of this.

00:28:29.520 --> 00:28:32.520
 That would be something we can figure out as we go.

00:28:32.520 --> 00:28:38.520
 It has a different pathway, right, since I, you know, open the Pandora's box.

00:28:38.520 --> 00:28:47.520
 But you could see how, let's say, you know, the results came back overwhelmingly for remove the median, but they didn't see the alternative.

00:28:47.520 --> 00:29:01.520
 The third option, and you might have found out that that meets 90% of the concern, you know, but you wouldn't have had an opportunity to know that that exposing it, I mean, you know, I don't know I think we might end up there anyway but I'm just saying that.

00:29:01.520 --> 00:29:10.520
 So you know my thoughts on it but let's go ahead and hear the rest and we'll have the discussion. So, sorry, Joe waited on that.

00:29:10.520 --> 00:29:21.520
 So, quick overview of where the results were coming from. So, we tried to break it down to the impacted folks these are the people that are directly impacted.

00:29:21.520 --> 00:29:39.520
 These are the folks that live here that are indirectly impacted by the medians, and then the rest of the community so this was the vote. You can see, it's almost half and half here for the people that actually live along Forest Ridge Drive you have five that want to leave the median in and six that want to remove it.

00:29:39.520 --> 00:29:43.520
 There are the other streets high view cordon Tim O'Green.

00:29:43.520 --> 00:29:52.520
 There's an overwhelmingly. Keep the median kind of vote, and then three people that wanted removed.

00:29:52.520 --> 00:30:12.520
 And then last but not least the rest of the community that actually use the segment of foresters to get to hops and there was a 5050 vote on that well 50% want to leave the median, and then 50 want to remove so this is how the actual breakdown of the residents came about.

00:30:12.520 --> 00:30:14.520
 So let me get back to the.

00:30:14.520 --> 00:30:39.520
 So this is another option that was brought up. And I really want to focus on what what does what happens if you try and pick places to remove the median. It's not a clear defined area that you will be taking the median out, given the way these lots are located as well as the

00:30:39.520 --> 00:30:58.520
 driveways these are you driveways and most of these lots. And in order to find a balance for example if you look at this particular junction, if the median opening is provided here, there is a chance that folks will definitely start making you turn here, but at the same time

00:30:58.520 --> 00:31:15.520
 these property owners will be upset that, you know, you provide an option or access here but you could just extend the opening so once we start extending the openings, we're talking about at a minimum we're going to take out 30% of the median, it could go as high as to 50.

00:31:15.520 --> 00:31:30.520
 If we want to make sure that all the residents that live up and down the street have that opening available to them because if that's the case then we really lose almost up to 50% of the median to provide access.

00:31:30.520 --> 00:31:50.520
 So that's, these are the actual points. It also increases the locations where people can start making you turns again. So we're now instead of making you turns at two or three locations currently that exist at the intersections, they will start making you turns at these new openings to get to their properties.

00:31:50.520 --> 00:32:05.520
 So, this is a, these are the pros and cons of this particular alternative wanted to make sure that you're aware of that, and then here's the quick comparison of what it would take so if we have to remove the median.

00:32:05.520 --> 00:32:20.520
 The total cost is $1.2 million there will be a delay, approximately six months, we will have to move this, the city projects around and then make sure that some other projects have done while this is delayed.

00:32:20.520 --> 00:32:22.520
 So this is definitely going to be delayed.

00:32:22.520 --> 00:32:36.520
 Keep the medians, the lowest cost option will just go in and rehab we currently have this money. Other funds are not identified yet if we move forward with other options will definitely have to identify funds.

00:32:36.520 --> 00:32:41.520
 This will keep the project on schedule for rehabilitation.

00:32:41.520 --> 00:32:45.520
 And then the last option is partially removing the medians.

00:32:45.520 --> 00:33:11.520
 It has an increased cost. The median openings will not, will be delayed a little bit but the rehab project can continue moving forward and that's what Todd had alluded to we can move forward with rehab project but the medians will be delayed so there will be some delay but the biggest issue is the safety concern people will start making you turns from the new punch through holes.

00:33:11.520 --> 00:33:16.520
 So, we're just here to get direction from the committee.

00:33:16.520 --> 00:33:25.520
 What are the options, based on the survey and based on the different pros and cons that were discussed.

00:33:25.520 --> 00:33:28.520
 Quick question. Can you go back to the.

00:33:28.520 --> 00:33:32.520
 So you said on the first one the funds have not been identified.

00:33:32.520 --> 00:33:40.520
 Number three is a little bit less than but have those funds been correct that's the bond money. Okay, so option one is the only one that's unfunded.

00:33:40.520 --> 00:33:51.520
 And option three as well, because the remote meeting was not part of the bond funded reconstruction project.

00:33:51.520 --> 00:34:00.520
 That's what Brian had just a couple of things on this because I attended all three meetings the one before our last meeting and then the two public meetings since then.

00:34:00.520 --> 00:34:16.520
 And when this was first presented to me back last year about the possibility taken at the meeting I was like you're never going to convince them. It's not going to happen. But as I looked at the drawings and I saw the safety of adding a, adding a protected walking path.

00:34:16.520 --> 00:34:31.520
 That was a good thing having attended these evidently that's not necessarily how some of the neighbors feel and if that's the way they feel that's the way we go but I will say that this is the first time I've seen that there was a delay in the project.

00:34:31.520 --> 00:34:38.520
 We did not that was not brought up to us in the past. So, yes, originally the reconstruction was supposed to go in July.

00:34:38.520 --> 00:34:53.520
 Mid to late July. That was always the plan. There was an issue or delay rain delay on Highview Court because of the weather. So because of the weather days we had to push Highview Court and that's why this project got pushed to August.

00:34:53.520 --> 00:35:11.520
 But at the May 6 meeting the one before we had the discussion here. May 6 meeting with the, with the neighborhood. It was still on schedule was presented that it was going to happen with the median coming out, but there was no talk of delay at that point it was still supposed to be

00:35:11.520 --> 00:35:26.520
 June, July start time, and I understand that the weather delaying us till mid to late August but in I understand design, so my understanding at the time was that we were already in some design work for that.

00:35:26.520 --> 00:35:42.520
 So we had not started design. At that point, which is what we had alluded to at May 6 is that we could still make that timeline work had everything proceeded forward at the June was June 11 meeting, when we brought these considerations forward we've still would have been able to meet the

00:35:42.520 --> 00:35:57.520
 timeline because we had time to make all that work. What we've since had delays on starting even design because there's no pathway forward, the reconstruction piece was still moving forward, unless we're given a direction that the, the median is coming out at

00:35:57.520 --> 00:36:15.520
 which point we would start design but at this point, we didn't want to go on design on eight options, only to have to throw away half that cost and come back to whatever one we settled on we decide we put that on hold until an option was settled on, and then go forward on spending the money on design, and then construction.

00:36:15.520 --> 00:36:34.520
 So a little bit to add to that we did go out and conduct a survey so we have the basis to start the design so we had started gotten down that path we had ordered the survey which takes a couple weeks, and we do have that back but then we put a hold on this moving forward same as what Todd said.

00:36:34.520 --> 00:36:51.520
 Okay, other comments, I was just going to add that, you know, I'm fine with keeping the meetings if that's the choice of my fellow members, I also see some strong ways that we can, we can add safety.

00:36:51.520 --> 00:37:08.520
 And one of them is a traffic circle at each one of the intersections, not a roundabout the traffic circle that will naturally slow that that also is a speed deterrent that if you've got the media in the whole way you, you feel like you've got protection the whole way that

00:37:08.520 --> 00:37:19.520
 circles sets at that intersections I understand it, and that makes people slow down as they're getting to that intersection that they're not going to do otherwise, is that the way I understand how those work.

00:37:19.520 --> 00:37:25.520
 Yes, it provides a barrier in the middle that helps channel eyes and slow traffic down. Yes.

00:37:25.520 --> 00:37:36.520
 The other thing I do want to add out is, if we continue with the option to and keeping the meetings and do want to make some enhancements as far as traffic calming.

00:37:36.520 --> 00:37:41.520
 Yes, that's absolutely on the table in the meetings that we've discussed with the community.

00:37:41.520 --> 00:37:53.520
 We've talked about adding speed cushions, whatever the option that fits best for this particular segment. And yes, the traffic circles would be an option as well that we can consider.

00:37:53.520 --> 00:38:11.520
 Do you need to make a determination on what if any speed calming measures you use kind of before you start or is that something that can come back, I think, I think that would be a later stuff, especially once the street segment is completely rehab will go and start our process

00:38:11.520 --> 00:38:26.520
 which is started with a conducting a speed study, assessing if speed is really an issue or a perceived issue. Start with enforcement and then take those steps that we go every time during traffic calming process.

00:38:26.520 --> 00:38:32.520
 It's not posted to give direction but I gather you'd like some direction. Yes.

00:38:32.520 --> 00:38:39.520
 Councilmember Briggs are you ready to give direction.

00:38:39.520 --> 00:38:42.520
 Well, I will just say that.

00:38:42.520 --> 00:38:44.520
 When this first came to us.

00:38:44.520 --> 00:38:52.520
 I was, I was mostly upset about the recommended option with the bike lane being removed.

00:38:52.520 --> 00:39:13.520
 And I also thought that it was unnecessary to remove the median completely. And some homeowners that live on Forest Ridge contacted me and asked me to come to their house to see what they have to do to get out of their driveway.

00:39:13.520 --> 00:39:21.520
 And I realize the safety concerns that they have now that I didn't before.

00:39:21.520 --> 00:39:36.520
 But I also, I also don't think that we should remove the whole median because I do believe the, the aspect of it, the beautification of it, the uniqueness of the neighborhood is worth keeping.

00:39:36.520 --> 00:39:54.520
 So I do think corrected in my original comments from the previous meeting that it was completely unnecessary. So I mean I, I see the reason why the homeowners asked for it and I think I know that it's been there forever, and that they bought their house knowing it.

00:39:54.520 --> 00:40:10.520
 But as, as anytime when an option comes up, you know, hey, this could be different than, you know, they're going to jump on that chance. So I just want to go ahead and say that on the record that I, I understand where they were coming from.

00:40:10.520 --> 00:40:27.520
 I would personally, when I had the conversations with, with different people, partial removal seemed to be okay. They seem to be okay with that.

00:40:27.520 --> 00:40:36.520
 But I have not heard from the individuals here in the audience on, on that because I don't know if they've heard of that option before today.

00:40:36.520 --> 00:41:01.520
 So, yeah, and they chose not to speak. So that would be my recommendation if we could figure out a way to alleviate some of the frustrations that the, the driveways that are right there have on a daily basis.

00:41:01.520 --> 00:41:12.520
 Because I, I went in my large vehicle and tried and did, and did the, the thing that they do and so I get it.

00:41:12.520 --> 00:41:27.520
 But I also, I also see the, the benefit of keeping, keeping the median. So I would, I would hope that we could do something with option three.

00:41:27.520 --> 00:41:43.520
 That, that would be my hope. Can we go back to the illustration for option three? And, you know, I heard your argument that, you know, kind of once you try to accommodate everybody, it's a slippery slope and pretty soon medians have gone.

00:41:43.520 --> 00:42:05.520
 And that you're creating multiple areas for U-turns. Is there, is there a partway measure that would add, that would give some relief but not go all the way to, you know, making multiple problems.

00:42:05.520 --> 00:42:17.520
 That still might be a significant improvement. Like, is there one spot that would do the most good and would, that therefore wouldn't create, you know, multiple hazards?

00:42:17.520 --> 00:42:30.520
 Or is it, is it, like, because you've kind of presented the slipperiest slope implication, but you don't necessarily have to go all the way down there.

00:42:30.520 --> 00:42:39.520
 You know, is there sort of, yeah, one spot that would do the most good? So I think the challenge at that point is who do you pick? Who do you pick? Right.

00:42:39.520 --> 00:42:49.520
 Because you're going to be, if you just start picking and choosing one or two, you still have the U-turn condition. It's not gotten any different.

00:42:49.520 --> 00:43:02.520
 How much who do you pick? Everybody's going to have a different opinion on why their driveway is the best driveway to have that opening centered around. It just gets to be an extremely difficult scenario.

00:43:02.520 --> 00:43:19.520
 I don't deny that it's difficult, but is there a way that safety considerations and design considerations, you know, could guide us? There would be a little, you know, less, you know, sort of pressured by individuals.

00:43:19.520 --> 00:43:27.520
 In other words, we get the idea that there ought to be some relief. You know, is it like the midpoint or something?

00:43:27.520 --> 00:43:37.520
 I think the pathway you're talking about is the one we were trying to go down right now anyway with the original question of median or no median.

00:43:37.520 --> 00:43:46.520
 If we're saying, I mean, I'm saying, you know, that's what I'm talking about, median or no median.

00:43:46.520 --> 00:43:52.520
 What I'm trying to say is, is that gives us a pathway to go ahead and redo the street and get the roadway work done.

00:43:52.520 --> 00:44:05.520
 Because wherever that solution for the median, where you put holes in the median, however many of them are, or do you do something else, maybe it's roundabouts or traffic, that can be done on a different schedule.

00:44:05.520 --> 00:44:18.520
 I get that. Then doing the roadway, which is what we've heard the most outcry consistently from across the board in the neighborhood is get the roadway done, then we can figure out what to do to enhance the entire area.

00:44:18.520 --> 00:44:34.520
 Okay, I get that. So, I mean, if I take your implication correctly, if we move toward the idea of keeping the median, it's obviously indicated by the fact that the residents who are directly affected overwhelmingly want to keep it.

00:44:34.520 --> 00:44:42.520
 That doesn't preclude us from, you know, making a modification to the median at a later point, and it keeps us on schedule.

00:44:42.520 --> 00:44:49.520
 And I'm happy with going that direction, and I gather, well, go ahead, Councilor Roy.

00:44:49.520 --> 00:45:03.520
 I was just going to kind of ask, because I'm trying to, as I look at where you showed the partial median possible removals, that takes care of all but two houses on there, as I see.

00:45:03.520 --> 00:45:18.520
 But at the same time, there is a significant hill there that as we open up more median and you start making more policies that you can make U-turns, you increase the unsafe conditions.

00:45:18.520 --> 00:45:22.520
 That's true, and that would be the challenge that we would be facing going forward with this.

00:45:22.520 --> 00:45:33.520
 You also have a similar scenario on Hobson itself, where the crest of the hill and the higher speeds is tougher to deal with until you bring the roadway down.

00:45:33.520 --> 00:45:38.520
 You have some of that here, the neighborhood travel speeds should be lower.

00:45:38.520 --> 00:45:44.520
 Whether or not they actually are, that's a different scenario altogether.

00:45:44.520 --> 00:45:53.520
 Some of the challenges that would present itself would be how do we address that scenario, and it may option out some of the areas where we could put some of these openings.

00:45:53.520 --> 00:45:58.520
 That would be something we would be looking into as we go through the design process.

00:45:58.520 --> 00:46:15.520
 So what would the time frame be for coming back to look at traffic coming and whether there is any really recommendable punch-throughs of the median? What would that time frame look like?

00:46:15.520 --> 00:46:26.520
 As far as the time frame, I would go with pre-TAM, but I would think easily within the next two months we could come back with options for the median, which wouldn't slow down reconstructing the roadway.

00:46:26.520 --> 00:46:31.520
 So we could come back with some options of what those things would look like.

00:46:31.520 --> 00:46:42.520
 So to add to that, if you look over here, November is when we can wrap up the reconstruction portion of this.

00:46:42.520 --> 00:46:52.520
 Then we would go through a phase where we'll start monitoring traffic and the speeds and assess and make sure that we have the appropriate traffic calming devices.

00:46:52.520 --> 00:47:06.520
 I'm thinking more towards the end of the year in December, most likely we may have some idea of is there really a speeding concern and what needs to happen for the traffic calming portion.

00:47:06.520 --> 00:47:22.520
 As far as adding more brakes in the median or other alternatives, one of the issues that Councilmember Briggs brought up was how difficult it was to get in and back out.

00:47:22.520 --> 00:47:30.520
 We can look at different configuration for the driveways because I believe there was 20 feet of pavement available there.

00:47:30.520 --> 00:47:39.520
 So is there anything that we can do with the entrance point and once the street is calmer, would that help someone to back out on slower traffic?

00:47:39.520 --> 00:47:44.520
 So those are the options that we can look at before we even get into punching more holes in the median.

00:47:44.520 --> 00:47:56.520
 So yes, I think the earliest we can talk about traffic calming measures is most likely December because we want that street to be in place, the traffic traveling at a reasonable speed,

00:47:56.520 --> 00:48:00.520
 and then we can assess are there any options.

00:48:00.520 --> 00:48:02.520
 Councilmember Briggs.

00:48:02.520 --> 00:48:14.520
 I will say that part of the conversations that I had with the individuals that have the driveway on Forest Ridge was that their concerns were speeding and vehicles traveling down really fast.

00:48:14.520 --> 00:48:28.520
 And so part of the reason why they wanted the median out was because they were told as, you know, we have been told that you have more stuff squeezed in that people would tend to go slower.

00:48:28.520 --> 00:48:36.520
 And so I think that addressing that concern would go a long way for everyone in the neighborhood.

00:48:36.520 --> 00:48:44.520
 I bet you they could all agree on that one fact that people speed down the street going really fast.

00:48:44.520 --> 00:48:46.520
 And so that would be helpful.

00:48:46.520 --> 00:48:51.520
 So I'll just ask to try to close this item.

00:48:51.520 --> 00:49:15.520
 Are we okay then with the idea of today saying move forward, leave the median in, get the road resurfaced, and then within a time frame of kind of around the end of the year, have staff come back with an assessment and proposals related to traffic calming and potential alterations of the median.

00:49:15.520 --> 00:49:20.520
 Objections?

00:49:20.520 --> 00:49:25.520
 Again, because I attended the meetings, I'm fine with that.

00:49:25.520 --> 00:49:30.520
 And I have studied it quite heavily.

00:49:30.520 --> 00:49:39.520
 One of the things that actually makes it a little easier to put that sidewalk in is during this whole segment on that east side, there are no drains.

00:49:39.520 --> 00:49:45.520
 So we're not talking major money to do that.

00:49:45.520 --> 00:49:52.520
 I just like the walkability. The neighborhood has walkability, but there are safety concerns with the walkability.

00:49:52.520 --> 00:49:57.520
 But again, if the two of y'all want to move forward as is, I'm fine with that.

00:49:57.520 --> 00:50:06.520
 I think I have more safety concerns with the partial removals than what I do with just keeping the median as is.

00:50:06.520 --> 00:50:10.520
 And again, I'd have to look at it as to where we're talking about doing those because of that hill there.

00:50:10.520 --> 00:50:22.520
 And I know that right now it's nothing but a bunch of speed bumps through there, and we will have, I guarantee you, we're going to have safety concerns for speeders once that's done.

00:50:22.520 --> 00:50:33.520
 And part of that as well relates to the fact that 377 is under construction where many of us on the southern end would go out Ryan Road and go out 377.

00:50:33.520 --> 00:50:43.520
 And now we all want to go up to Teasley, so we're all going to go through this area, which is going to make it even more fun with this under construction at the same time.

00:50:43.520 --> 00:50:45.520
 Okay, do you have enough direction?

00:50:45.520 --> 00:50:49.520
 Yeah, I think option two, that's what I get. Move forward with option two.

00:50:49.520 --> 00:50:51.520
 Option two with a bunch of asterisks on it.

00:50:51.520 --> 00:50:55.520
 Asterisks, yeah. Come back to the committee with alternatives.

00:50:55.520 --> 00:51:04.520
 And yeah, I do agree that right now the condition of payment is bad, so when we really redo the payment, that's when we need to really gather data of speeding.

00:51:04.520 --> 00:51:11.520
 Okay, and I didn't notice any use of firearms. I think, I don't know, we'll see what we hear back from the citizens.

00:51:11.520 --> 00:51:13.520
 Thank you very much.

00:51:13.520 --> 00:51:15.520
 Thank you.

00:51:15.520 --> 00:51:21.520
 Okay, so let's kind of get back on track with the agenda as originally sequenced.

00:51:21.520 --> 00:51:29.520
 Let's go to item B, receive a report on the city of Denton mobility plan scope of work and plan schedule.

00:51:29.520 --> 00:51:37.520
 Okay, just wanted to update the members of the committee on what's going on as far as the mobility plan.

00:51:37.520 --> 00:51:48.520
 We had taken to council a contract with one of our consultants to move forward with this particular plan and we're just checking along.

00:51:48.520 --> 00:51:56.520
 What is the goal of this project? To look at the overall mobility in the city. When we say mobility, it's not just vehicles.

00:51:56.520 --> 00:52:04.520
 We're talking about non-motorized trips. We're talking about bicyclists. We're talking about walking and sidewalks.

00:52:04.520 --> 00:52:20.520
 So we're not just looking at a moving of vehicles as the goal for the mobility plan, but it's completely moving of individual people from their location to the destinations that they want to go.

00:52:20.520 --> 00:52:37.520
 And this plan also includes freight. We're talking about how do we move goods, not only within the city where there are a bunch of deliveries in the retail area, but also in our western part of the city where there's a lot of industrial and warehouse.

00:52:37.520 --> 00:52:55.520
 So that would be part of the things that are taken into consideration when we're planning these regional connectors. And we're looking at 30 years in the future, not just five or 10, and define our roadway and transportation infrastructure.

00:52:55.520 --> 00:53:10.520
 So there are three key elements. Yes, technical analysis and coming up with recommendations is just a portion of it. I think the biggest component is the community engagement, really understanding what the community wants.

00:53:10.520 --> 00:53:23.520
 We want to know how they use the infrastructure. We want to know how they plan their trips. What are the elements that they really care for in neighborhood residential streets versus arterial?

00:53:23.520 --> 00:53:37.520
 And we want to understand, based on their paths and based on their travels, how can we better lay out our infrastructure or at least a plan for our future infrastructure?

00:53:37.520 --> 00:53:55.520
 And last but not least, most of the times people complete a plan and forget the last step, which is how do we implement? What are the ways of implementing? And that's really the key. So that's the third component. So these three components combine and form our mobility plan.

00:53:55.520 --> 00:54:01.520
 Yes.

00:54:01.520 --> 00:54:19.520
 And so you kind of click to the next page and it may answer my question. But so the community engagement, is that all going to happen? Well, we have technical analysis at the same time that we're presenting to the community or vice versa.

00:54:19.520 --> 00:54:32.520
 I mean, how is that going to all work together? Yes, input and re-input. Yes. So I'll cover that in the next few slides and we can circle back if it's not answered.

00:54:32.520 --> 00:54:44.520
 So here are the steps. Task one is just project management data collection. It's just a quick overview. The next three tasks are one is the thoroughfare plan for vehicles.

00:54:44.520 --> 00:54:55.520
 The second is bicycle master plan. And then the third is the pedestrian master plan, which mostly covers sidewalks and multi-use trails.

00:54:55.520 --> 00:55:15.520
 The remaining portions of the scope also include an impact fee at the end of everything. How are we going to pay for this? Or what is our plan in implementing? So that would be part of our implementation plan, is the transportation impact fees.

00:55:15.520 --> 00:55:29.520
 Start with the thoroughfare plan. What are we going to do is update our travel demand model quickly and briefly. What is a travel demand model? It is a fancy term for just a traffic network.

00:55:29.520 --> 00:55:45.520
 So this is our streets network and the reason it's called travel demand model is we define our streets and design them and lay them out or plan them in the future to understand where is the demand for the future.

00:55:45.520 --> 00:56:02.520
 Where are people going to live and where are people going to travel? What are the attraction points? It could be retail, it could be schools, it could be industrial, it could be office. So where do people, what are the nodes where people live and where do they go?

00:56:02.520 --> 00:56:18.520
 And from point A to B, what are the different routes they can take? So our main goal is to design streets and arterials that provide that direct connection and then keep traffic out of our lower residential roads.

00:56:18.520 --> 00:56:38.520
 So this demand model actually weighs alternatives based on capacity, based on speed along a transportation infrastructure. So from point A to point B, there are 50 cars or 50 people want to go, then it will weigh in different alternatives for those 50 people.

00:56:38.520 --> 00:57:00.520
 If there isn't enough capacity on the network, it will send to parallel streets. So we want to make sure that we design and plan enough capacity to make sure that we provide infrastructure for them to use the appropriate arterial system or appropriate roadway system and not use our local roads.

00:57:00.520 --> 00:57:18.520
 The second step, yes. So on that, so when you upgrade the roads to handle the demand, will you also reduce lanes on other roads as you do that? So all the roads aren't high demand?

00:57:18.520 --> 00:57:34.520
 Correct. So yes, that would be part of our analysis. And I think one of the things in our matrix, I want to touch that, is we will be looking at streets like Carroll. Can we really have some capacity enhancements there?

00:57:34.520 --> 00:57:57.520
 To if we have an alternate route, say we upgrade Bonnie Brea or upgrade Bell, what are the implications? Can we reduce the capacity? So yes, all those things will be looked at within the mobility plan and appropriate cross-sections will be defined there, saying Carroll only carries 5,000 trips a day, so it doesn't need to be six lanes.

00:57:57.520 --> 00:58:04.520
 So then we can do something within that space for other types of modes. Thank you.

00:58:04.520 --> 00:58:21.520
 The next step moving on is evaluation and prioritization criteria. We will be evaluating all of these streets and prioritizing some of them where you can see that currently we are, if we're lacking capacity and it's a pinch point, we'll prioritize those to a higher level.

00:58:21.520 --> 00:58:35.520
 Part of the transportation impact fee is understanding what are the costs for putting in the infrastructure, so we will be developing cost estimates for all of our major thoroughfares and street segments.

00:58:35.520 --> 00:58:45.520
 And then obviously update the existing old map. We had updated that back in 2015, so we'll have an updated mobility plan map.

00:58:45.520 --> 00:59:02.520
 Bicycle plan, we do have a current bicycle plan, which was adopted in 2014, and we do have connections. As part of the mobility plan, we will be looking at this, updating the bicycle plan holistically.

00:59:02.520 --> 00:59:16.520
 If you look at it, I do want to point out certain segments. If you look at Bonnie Bray or Mayhill, we do not show any bike facility, and we are putting a 10-foot trail multi-use.

00:59:16.520 --> 00:59:35.520
 These are connections that can be added, and these connections can be shown in both the mobility plan, where it has a six-lane thoroughfare master plan, but in the bike plan, it shows the facility that, hey, there is a multi-use trail along this particular street.

00:59:35.520 --> 00:59:57.520
 So that would really create a robust network, and we can identify different nodes. The other thing we're doing is we're also coordinating with parks and their park master plan, so they have multi-use trails within the park systems, and they have their master plan of connecting their trails within the park system.

00:59:57.520 --> 01:00:09.520
 So we will be working with them to identify what are the right locations, what are the streets that they can use to connect different trails, and then we can add our multi-use trails on those.

01:00:09.520 --> 01:00:17.520
 So it's a coordinated effort. We're coordinating with all the other departments to put that in. Similar steps for the-

01:00:17.520 --> 01:00:19.520
 That's one of our breaks. Excuse my question.

01:00:19.520 --> 01:00:36.520
 So take a road like Mingo, for example. Yeah, because there's nothing there. Will we be looking at roads like that as well for pedestrian and bicycle connectivity from neighborhoods to downtown?

01:00:36.520 --> 01:01:05.520
 Absolutely. I think Mingo is really high on our list, especially because T.W. is just north of it, and we will be definitely looking at Mingo, especially connecting all the residential component, all the residential apartments on the east side, how they go filter through the T.W. area, because T.W. will have a brand new network of sidewalks and paths within their system, and then also flow along Mingo to connect it to the downtown system.

01:01:05.520 --> 01:01:12.520
 Yes, so Mingo will be- we'll be looking at Mingo.

01:01:12.520 --> 01:01:32.520
 Next is a pedestrian plan. Currently, we don't have a pedestrian plan. That's why I didn't have a nice picture here. So we want to make sure that we talk about pedestrians and sidewalks, and as part of- if anyone- if you guys are plugged into our bond, you can see that particular graphic right there.

01:01:32.520 --> 01:01:55.520
 As part of our bond effort, we are emphasizing- yeah, it's there. Outside the presentation, it's moved. But as part of our- for this particular bond, we are proposing more funding for sidewalks, and we're primarily focusing on the SRTS, which is safe for us to school zones.

01:01:55.520 --> 01:02:17.520
 We've picked up- the way we're prioritizing our sidewalks, we've picked up all the elementary schools and some middle schools in the area, and we've laid a quarter mile, half a mile, and a full mile radius around these schools, and then based on that, we'll start getting funds for the sidewalks within the school area.

01:02:17.520 --> 01:02:29.520
 So quarter mile is our priority, and then we'll move on to the next. So that's- that's the emphasis for prioritizing and evaluating the sidewalks. Once we have a better pedestrian plan, we can do that.

01:02:29.520 --> 01:02:30.520
 Question. Councilmember Ryan?

01:02:30.520 --> 01:02:44.520
 I just wanted to point out that we have gotten some RTC funds for safe routes to school and are more available, that as we get this plan in place, it makes it easier for us to go down there and say, "Here's what we need to do. How much money can we get from you?"

01:02:44.520 --> 01:03:01.520
 Yes, absolutely. And part of our bond discussion, we are planning to leverage our city match dollars, or the bond dollars, with whatever SRTS project funding we can get from COG.

01:03:01.520 --> 01:03:02.520
 Councilmember Briggs?

01:03:02.520 --> 01:03:24.520
 And on the safe routes to school, I'd like for you to keep in mind as well, because elementary, they do have- well, within the two mile radius around the school where the bus doesn't go, so if you live within a certain area of the school, then a bus will not come get you, so you have to walk.

01:03:24.520 --> 01:03:38.520
 So I just want to put that out there to make sure that that is the specific areas, and not just with elementary school, but we have middle schoolers who cannot drive, who have to walk as well.

01:03:38.520 --> 01:03:40.520
 I think, Todd, they can answer the same-

01:03:40.520 --> 01:03:42.520
 I don't think they can't drive. They're not allowed to drive.

01:03:42.520 --> 01:03:43.520
 Right.

01:03:43.520 --> 01:04:05.520
 And that's exactly why we put these radii in. So the quarter mile, really the definition there was more, what kind of monies could we leverage our current bond dollars and bond capacity for in the 2019 bond, if it passes, to reasonably get more of that infrastructure in the ground, and then systematically move out towards that two mile radius.

01:04:05.520 --> 01:04:09.520
 And as we got to one mile, there's so much overlap, the two mile pretty much evaporates.

01:04:09.520 --> 01:04:10.520
 Okay.

01:04:10.520 --> 01:04:19.520
 I think when we were looked at the one mile radius around each school, it was around $250 million in sidewalks.

01:04:19.520 --> 01:04:35.520
 Whereas if we start with the quarter mile, we start with that bite-sized chunk, it's around $18.7 million, so the bond program, the 2019 bond would focus on getting that quarter mile now taken care of, and then leveraging those SRTS funds to take care of that.

01:04:35.520 --> 01:04:49.520
 And then pursue other options like active transportation, CDBG grants, things like that, that would bring in some money to help with the connectivity to parks and trails and things that you can't really tie to the school safety perimeter.

01:04:49.520 --> 01:04:50.520
 Okay.

01:04:50.520 --> 01:04:58.520
 I would like to add to that, if you look at the map, anything in yellow is one mile radius, so it almost overlaps and covers the entire city.

01:04:58.520 --> 01:05:04.520
 So by the time we get to two mile, I think we'll be overlapping in other school zones.

01:05:04.520 --> 01:05:07.520
 Thank you.

01:05:07.520 --> 01:05:09.520
 Impact fees.

01:05:09.520 --> 01:05:33.520
 We will be preparing impact fees and we will be identifying the total infrastructure needs in terms of dollars, and then also identifying for the future development, if a developer comes in, what is the appropriate impact fees, and we'll be including that and folding it into as part of our new mobility plan.

01:05:33.520 --> 01:05:36.520
 Schedule.

01:05:36.520 --> 01:05:38.520
 Here's a quick overview of the schedule.

01:05:38.520 --> 01:05:41.520
 We kicked it off back in May.

01:05:41.520 --> 01:05:48.520
 We took it through council and selected a consultant and had him going.

01:05:48.520 --> 01:05:53.520
 In October, we'll have the first draft, first round of public meetings.

01:05:53.520 --> 01:05:56.520
 After that, we'll have a draft ready.

01:05:56.520 --> 01:06:12.520
 And then the final version towards the end of the year, I think it says April 2020, but the last round of public meetings is going to be in November, so we'll most likely get a final version towards the end of the year, December early next year.

01:06:12.520 --> 01:06:19.520
 Here are the schedule meetings, and you can see we've already started working with all the department back in June.

01:06:19.520 --> 01:06:24.520
 We have also had a first stakeholder meeting.

01:06:24.520 --> 01:06:33.520
 This is all the stakeholders, including the universities, TechStat, everyone was invited and involved in this meeting.

01:06:33.520 --> 01:06:38.520
 Can you give a rough list of who are the stakeholders?

01:06:38.520 --> 01:06:40.520
 I can provide a list.

01:06:40.520 --> 01:06:41.520
 Categories?

01:06:41.520 --> 01:06:53.520
 Categories is the two universities, TechStat, and then all our internal stakeholders like the parks department and streets, all the different aspects.

01:06:53.520 --> 01:06:55.520
 I can give you a whole list.

01:06:55.520 --> 01:06:57.520
 You need to answer the question.

01:06:57.520 --> 01:06:58.520
 Okay.

01:06:58.520 --> 01:07:00.520
 Are police and fire involved in that?

01:07:00.520 --> 01:07:03.520
 Correct, they are.

01:07:03.520 --> 01:07:06.520
 There will be multiple stakeholder meetings.

01:07:06.520 --> 01:07:21.520
 We will continue meeting them every couple months so that we will, once we get the feedback, we come up with a plan or a draft, and then they have a chance to re-look at it, comment on it, and it continues.

01:07:21.520 --> 01:07:28.520
 So it's a work in progress that we continue moving forward and getting feedback from all the stakeholders.

01:07:28.520 --> 01:07:32.520
 We'll have a similar, we have three public meetings.

01:07:32.520 --> 01:07:35.520
 The first one is end of this month.

01:07:35.520 --> 01:07:42.520
 There will be one in August, and also there will be a second round.

01:07:42.520 --> 01:07:53.520
 So first round, we have two meetings, and then second round we'll have in November where we'll go back to the community and say, hey, this is the feedback we received the first time.

01:07:53.520 --> 01:07:56.520
 Now we've put this plan together.

01:07:56.520 --> 01:07:57.520
 How about a second round?

01:07:57.520 --> 01:08:00.520
 So this is something that Councilmember Briggs wanted to see.

01:08:00.520 --> 01:08:03.520
 Are we going to have a feedback loop?

01:08:03.520 --> 01:08:05.520
 And yes, we are going to have those two rounds.

01:08:05.520 --> 01:08:10.520
 So we'll first receive input, and then second, there will be a feedback loop thing.

01:08:10.520 --> 01:08:12.520
 We included most of it.

01:08:12.520 --> 01:08:15.520
 There are these issues with the stuff that was not included.

01:08:15.520 --> 01:08:22.520
 That way it's clear to everyone why it was taken in or not taken in.

01:08:22.520 --> 01:08:24.520
 And I think that's my last slide.

01:08:24.520 --> 01:08:27.520
 If you have any questions on the mobility plan.

01:08:27.520 --> 01:08:28.520
 Councilmember Ryan.

01:08:28.520 --> 01:08:32.520
 I'd like to know how often is this going to come back to mobility?

01:08:32.520 --> 01:08:35.520
 Because in my personal opinion, it should be on every agenda.

01:08:35.520 --> 01:08:38.520
 On every meeting until we get there.

01:08:38.520 --> 01:08:40.520
 We will give you an update.

01:08:40.520 --> 01:08:41.520
 So this was a brief overview.

01:08:41.520 --> 01:08:47.520
 We can come back and say, this is what we've done in the first meeting, second meeting, public comments.

01:08:47.520 --> 01:08:48.520
 This is our draft.

01:08:48.520 --> 01:08:52.520
 Yes, we can absolutely have it for every month.

01:08:52.520 --> 01:08:54.520
 Is that something that the committee wants?

01:08:54.520 --> 01:09:01.520
 Yeah, and since our agenda is generally posted as all items for individual consideration, if members of the public can't make it to one of these meetings,

01:09:01.520 --> 01:09:04.520
 they can come in and fill out a blue card and make a comment to us as well.

01:09:04.520 --> 01:09:06.520
 That's a good comment, yes.

01:09:06.520 --> 01:09:14.520
 What is the relationship between this process and the comprehensive plan, the 2030 plan?

01:09:14.520 --> 01:09:16.520
 In other words, the growth vision.

01:09:16.520 --> 01:09:22.520
 Because I see it as being presented as being driven by community input and kind of needs assessment.

01:09:22.520 --> 01:09:26.520
 And that's obviously great.

01:09:26.520 --> 01:09:35.520
 But is there also some -- what is the degree of anticipation of growth patterns and that kind of thing?

01:09:35.520 --> 01:09:42.520
 As I alluded in the travel demand model, one of the key bases for that model is land use.

01:09:42.520 --> 01:09:52.520
 So the entire 2030 Denton plan, the scope of it, the land use, the zoning, it all gets integrated into our system.

01:09:52.520 --> 01:09:59.520
 So we know exactly what is developing where and have an idea of what will happen in the future.

01:09:59.520 --> 01:10:03.520
 And that gives us the basis for generating our trips for the traffic model.

01:10:03.520 --> 01:10:06.520
 So it is absolutely embedded in here.

01:10:06.520 --> 01:10:09.520
 And planning is one of our key partners in this.

01:10:09.520 --> 01:10:18.520
 So planning and development services is a key stakeholder in setting the stage so that the right development,

01:10:18.520 --> 01:10:25.520
 right zoning is taken into account and we have the right mix of land uses so that the traffic model replicates.

01:10:25.520 --> 01:10:28.520
 So both these models go hand in hand.

01:10:28.520 --> 01:10:32.520
 Your transportation infrastructure goes hand in hand with land use.

01:10:32.520 --> 01:10:37.520
 So if you don't consider that, then you're planning in vacuum for either of them.

01:10:37.520 --> 01:10:42.520
 So we would be referring back then to the goal of growing compactly,

01:10:42.520 --> 01:10:47.520
 not just responding to -- that we want to guide people toward those goals.

01:10:47.520 --> 01:10:48.520
 Correct.

01:10:48.520 --> 01:10:53.520
 And then in the cost estimates, obviously there's an awful lot to construct.

01:10:53.520 --> 01:11:01.520
 But are we also building a model of what the maintenance impacts would be of everything that we do?

01:11:01.520 --> 01:11:08.520
 Because it seems sometimes, you know -- well, let's just say obviously we want to be sure that we're looking at it holistically, right?

01:11:08.520 --> 01:11:13.520
 Not the upfront and the recurring.

01:11:13.520 --> 01:11:15.520
 So yes, we take into account the ongoing maintenance costs.

01:11:15.520 --> 01:11:20.520
 And that was an item we brought to council last year when we talked about roadway budget.

01:11:20.520 --> 01:11:26.520
 And the ongoing maintenance is that over time as the city does grow and infrastructure increases,

01:11:26.520 --> 01:11:32.520
 you will see at key points, which is where the street program engages every year on a budget perspective,

01:11:32.520 --> 01:11:39.520
 is we would see growth of the maintenance schedule to go up $20 million in, say, 10 years.

01:11:39.520 --> 01:11:40.520
 I don't know.

01:11:40.520 --> 01:11:42.520
 I'd have to go over how fast we're growing.

01:11:42.520 --> 01:11:44.520
 But you would see it grow over time.

01:11:44.520 --> 01:11:51.520
 And that's something that council and this plan would absolutely have to take into account is that as the city continues to grow,

01:11:51.520 --> 01:11:53.520
 the ongoing maintenance needs would continue to grow.

01:11:53.520 --> 01:12:00.520
 But in tradeoff, if the more robust our maintenance program is on an ongoing maintenance,

01:12:00.520 --> 01:12:07.520
 then our capital needs long term should reduce just from a total volume of projects.

01:12:07.520 --> 01:12:08.520
 All right.

01:12:08.520 --> 01:12:09.520
 Councilmember Briggs.

01:12:09.520 --> 01:12:13.520
 And on that note, because we have talked about street maintenance, and I brought it up before,

01:12:13.520 --> 01:12:17.520
 and I'm going to bring it up again, is that we don't have a sidewalk budget.

01:12:17.520 --> 01:12:23.520
 There's not a specific designated amount of money for just sidewalks and maintenance.

01:12:23.520 --> 01:12:26.520
 I mean, there used to not be unless we have it now.

01:12:26.520 --> 01:12:29.520
 So I would still like to consider that.

01:12:29.520 --> 01:12:30.520
 Percent.

01:12:30.520 --> 01:12:33.520
 So there's not a defined line item.

01:12:33.520 --> 01:12:34.520
 You're 100% right.

01:12:34.520 --> 01:12:39.520
 Now, what has happened is the sidewalks maintenance program is part of the street's budget.

01:12:39.520 --> 01:12:42.520
 It's just captured and isolated off each year.

01:12:42.520 --> 01:12:45.520
 But defined as an overall program, no.

01:12:45.520 --> 01:12:51.520
 It is just one of those other duties that the street's department does tackle on an annual basis.

01:12:51.520 --> 01:12:59.520
 Well, if this goes well and we do have a pedestrian plan, I feel like we would need to have,

01:12:59.520 --> 01:13:02.520
 and I send an email about metrics and, you know, things like that.

01:13:02.520 --> 01:13:06.520
 We would need to have something, Evert, write that out.

01:13:06.520 --> 01:13:10.520
 So it looks like, you know, we're actually doing something for that plan.

01:13:10.520 --> 01:13:21.520
 So to clarify, I want to break it down to maintenance means we're just fixing the current sidewalk system as it exists today.

01:13:21.520 --> 01:13:27.520
 When moving forward, when we're focusing on the bond and adding, we're adding the missing gaps.

01:13:27.520 --> 01:13:34.520
 And if you're referring to not having money on the street's program to add the gaps, that's something separate.

01:13:34.520 --> 01:13:41.520
 That's more of a capital project for implementing the pedestrian plan as opposed to when the street department goes in,

01:13:41.520 --> 01:13:45.520
 if there is broken panels, broken sidewalk, then we'll just go maintain it.

01:13:45.520 --> 01:13:49.520
 And that's part of our street maintenance program.

01:13:49.520 --> 01:13:51.520
 So when they go in, they do that.

01:13:51.520 --> 01:13:57.520
 But if they're missing gaps, then those will be picked up as part of our ongoing CIP projects.

01:13:57.520 --> 01:14:07.520
 >> But you're suggesting, you know, your suggestion of having that break out so that it's easily seen that we have a program for repairs and maintenance.

01:14:07.520 --> 01:14:08.520
 We can easily do that.

01:14:08.520 --> 01:14:11.520
 >> I mean, if we're having a plan, I'm sorry.

01:14:11.520 --> 01:14:12.520
 >> No, please.

01:14:12.520 --> 01:14:17.520
 >> Yeah, it would make sense that we have something that we can forward back to and say, okay, well, this is the amount of money.

01:14:17.520 --> 01:14:19.520
 This is what we want to do.

01:14:19.520 --> 01:14:21.520
 This is how much it's going to cost us.

01:14:21.520 --> 01:14:27.520
 I mean, if we add all of these new sidewalks, then we're going to have to repair them eventually.

01:14:27.520 --> 01:14:34.520
 So it would just be nice to see that in a separate category and to just say, oh, well, I promise we're doing it.

01:14:34.520 --> 01:14:36.520
 It's in our streets, you know?

01:14:36.520 --> 01:14:37.520
 >> Correct.

01:14:37.520 --> 01:14:43.520
 It's no different than, as we've evolved with our streets repairs and maintenance, it's that we actually have a line item.

01:14:43.520 --> 01:14:47.520
 It's a cost, and we can measure it, determine whether or not it's enough money.

01:14:47.520 --> 01:14:53.520
 And we may need to come to council for additional funds as the years progress, as we add more inventory of sidewalks.

01:14:53.520 --> 01:14:55.520
 >> It's a cost with specific goals attached, right?

01:14:55.520 --> 01:14:56.520
 >> Correct, absolutely.

01:14:56.520 --> 01:14:57.520
 >> Yeah, yeah, absolutely.

01:14:57.520 --> 01:14:58.520
 >> That makes sense.

01:14:58.520 --> 01:14:59.520
 More?

01:14:59.520 --> 01:15:00.520
 Yeah, good?

01:15:00.520 --> 01:15:01.520
 >> Good, thank you.

01:15:01.520 --> 01:15:03.520
 >> Anything else on this item?

01:15:03.520 --> 01:15:04.520
 All right, thank you very much.

01:15:04.520 --> 01:15:06.520
 >> Thank you.

01:15:06.520 --> 01:15:16.520
 >> I think we can now move on to item C, receive a report, hold the discussion, and provide staff direction regarding bicycle and pedestrian crossings of US 380.

01:15:16.520 --> 01:15:22.520
 >> Good afternoon, Mark Oliphant, bicycle and pedestrian program coordinator.

01:15:22.520 --> 01:15:36.520
 And I'm here to speak about crossings of university or US 380, mostly in that north-south direction and how it can sometimes serve as a barrier between different parts of the city.

01:15:36.520 --> 01:15:45.520
 If you recall, I think two or three months ago, we talked about a similar topic with I-35, that crossings there are difficult as well.

01:15:45.520 --> 01:15:54.520
 So I've isolated ten intersections here between 288 and I-35 that I'm going to quickly go through with you.

01:15:54.520 --> 01:15:56.520
 Here's the names of them.

01:15:56.520 --> 01:16:04.520
 I've combined Elm and Locust because they sort of complement one another with the north-south directions.

01:16:04.520 --> 01:16:07.520
 And we're going to look at them from west to east.

01:16:07.520 --> 01:16:19.520
 So first is Town Center Trail, this is over in that very new section on the west near your Sam's Club, Academy Sporting Goods, things like that.

01:16:19.520 --> 01:16:33.520
 This is a very nice intersection as far as crossing -- as far as equipment is concerned, we have great signals, we have great push buttons and so forth.

01:16:33.520 --> 01:16:43.520
 It is a very wide intersection, that's really my only concern about this one, how we're looking at distances of 120 to 140 feet crossing it.

01:16:43.520 --> 01:16:52.520
 But we have good striped crosswalks, we have good connections outside of it, sidewalks coming to and from the area.

01:16:52.520 --> 01:17:05.520
 And so possibly if this was going to be improved, something like a median refuge might be a possibility in the future, you know, depending how things go.

01:17:05.520 --> 01:17:07.520
 This is actually a pretty good one.

01:17:07.520 --> 01:17:09.520
 Next on to Bonnie Bray.

01:17:09.520 --> 01:17:12.520
 Bonnie Bray is exciting because there are -- oh, question.

01:17:12.520 --> 01:17:13.520
 Sorry, got a question.

01:17:13.520 --> 01:17:14.520
 A question about the previous one.

01:17:14.520 --> 01:17:15.520
 Sure thing.

01:17:15.520 --> 01:17:21.520
 So since it is so wide and there's not a median, is there a significant amount of time on the crosswalk to --

01:17:21.520 --> 01:17:23.520
 Yeah, we have long count.

01:17:23.520 --> 01:17:24.520
 Yes.

01:17:24.520 --> 01:17:26.520
 Okay.

01:17:26.520 --> 01:17:37.520
 The way we count the flashing don't walk, the flashing time is when the hand starts going flashing is dependent on the distance.

01:17:37.520 --> 01:17:47.520
 So if it's 120 or 140 feet, it's typically three feet per second walk time, and then that's how we calculate how many seconds we want to have that.

01:17:47.520 --> 01:17:50.520
 So definitely it is a consideration in our timing.

01:17:50.520 --> 01:17:51.520
 Okay.

01:17:51.520 --> 01:17:54.520
 And so how many seconds is it for that?

01:17:54.520 --> 01:18:00.520
 We can find that out exactly, but it's typically that's the way it's calculated, three times.

01:18:00.520 --> 01:18:01.520
 Okay. Thank you.

01:18:01.520 --> 01:18:06.520
 If we're at 120 feet, about 40 seconds, I think, with that formula.

01:18:06.520 --> 01:18:07.520
 Councilman Bray?

01:18:07.520 --> 01:18:10.520
 I think three legs of this do have a median.

01:18:10.520 --> 01:18:13.520
 It's not much of a median, but at least there is something on three legs.

01:18:13.520 --> 01:18:14.520
 There is a nose.

01:18:14.520 --> 01:18:19.520
 Yes.

01:18:19.520 --> 01:18:20.520
 Here then.

01:18:20.520 --> 01:18:24.520
 We don't have it.

01:18:24.520 --> 01:18:25.520
 Refuge Island.

01:18:25.520 --> 01:18:26.520
 Okay.

01:18:26.520 --> 01:18:36.520
 Bonnie Bray, you can see in the upper left, your northwest corner, the connection there is missing, unfortunately.

01:18:36.520 --> 01:18:43.520
 Otherwise, on the other three corners of this intersection, we have good connectivity.

01:18:43.520 --> 01:18:48.520
 As far as sidewalks that connect to useful things, I don't know why we have the gap up here.

01:18:48.520 --> 01:18:50.520
 It's actually not that large.

01:18:50.520 --> 01:18:54.520
 I've reached out to our planning department to ask about that.

01:18:54.520 --> 01:18:57.520
 Again, here we have good signal heads.

01:18:57.520 --> 01:18:58.520
 We have push buttons.

01:18:58.520 --> 01:19:01.520
 We have ramps and things like that.

01:19:01.520 --> 01:19:12.520
 And once that 10-foot side path comes in with the development of Bonnie Bray, I think that will really increase the utility of the intersection.

01:19:12.520 --> 01:19:19.520
 We will at the very end look at a graphic that shows connecting routes for bicycles north to south, south to north.

01:19:19.520 --> 01:19:23.520
 And we really don't have great connection right now.

01:19:23.520 --> 01:19:27.520
 We have a lot of routes that end at university or begin at university and go north.

01:19:27.520 --> 01:19:31.520
 But as far as a through route, we're missing that right now.

01:19:31.520 --> 01:19:32.520
 Yeah.

01:19:32.520 --> 01:19:33.520
 Chancellor Briggs.

01:19:33.520 --> 01:19:34.520
 Yeah.

01:19:34.520 --> 01:19:36.520
 So I'll go back to Bonnie Bray.

01:19:36.520 --> 01:19:46.520
 And I actually had a little note here to say something at the end, but this is a good actually the place where it belongs.

01:19:46.520 --> 01:19:56.520
 So turning, I guess, east on University from Bonnie Bray, there is a--

01:19:56.520 --> 01:19:58.520
 Southbound or northbound?

01:19:58.520 --> 01:20:01.520
 Yeah, like right there, following your arrow.

01:20:01.520 --> 01:20:06.520
 So there's a blinking yellow light to turn.

01:20:06.520 --> 01:20:10.520
 And so if cars aren't coming, you're looking at that light and you're turning.

01:20:10.520 --> 01:20:15.520
 Well, it turns out that the people in that walk lane have a walk signal.

01:20:15.520 --> 01:20:24.520
 And so someone was in that pathway walking with a walk signal, which they have the right to do.

01:20:24.520 --> 01:20:34.520
 And I came very close to not seeing them because I was looking at the-- trying to see the oncoming traffic and if it was clear for me to turn or not.

01:20:34.520 --> 01:20:45.520
 So is there a way to-- while that hand is on for it's safe to walk, that the flashing light will not flash?

01:20:45.520 --> 01:20:46.520
 So typically the flashing light--

01:20:46.520 --> 01:20:51.520
 It just seems like it's-- I mean, like it doesn't go well together.

01:20:51.520 --> 01:20:57.520
 So typically the flashing light means it's a permitted phase where you have to yield to the phases.

01:20:57.520 --> 01:21:04.520
 So you have to yield to pedestrians as well as the traffic, both at the same time.

01:21:04.520 --> 01:21:10.520
 Is there something that we can do to remove the yield or the flashing yellow and just put in as a green?

01:21:10.520 --> 01:21:12.520
 Yes, absolutely, we can do that.

01:21:12.520 --> 01:21:23.520
 But that's going to increase the delay and you will-- during non-peak hours, you will not be able to make that quick turn even when you see the gaps.

01:21:23.520 --> 01:21:30.520
 So if you're sitting there and we remove the flashing yellow, then you won't be able to go even if there is no vehicles going through.

01:21:30.520 --> 01:21:32.520
 So there is a pro and con.

01:21:32.520 --> 01:21:37.520
 But can we put it in flash and not put it when the pedestrian goes?

01:21:37.520 --> 01:21:39.520
 That's a really tough one because--

01:21:39.520 --> 01:21:46.520
 You mentioned that it's a problem-- it could create a problem during non-peak hours or lack of an opportunity.

01:21:46.520 --> 01:21:55.520
 But I don't know how fine our degree of control is, but can the lights operate differently during different parts of the day?

01:21:55.520 --> 01:21:56.520
 Yes, they can.

01:21:56.520 --> 01:22:00.520
 So why wouldn't-- if you wanted to address the--

01:22:00.520 --> 01:22:06.520
 But the issue was that can we not have the flashing yellow go when the pedestrian phase goes?

01:22:06.520 --> 01:22:14.520
 Because that's the-- the way the signal cycle is controlled is that pedestrian phase is a key component.

01:22:14.520 --> 01:22:17.520
 It takes a long time for that pedestrian to cross university.

01:22:17.520 --> 01:22:20.520
 So that is what is giving time to your north-south phase.

01:22:20.520 --> 01:22:27.520
 So if we add that to your north-south phase, then the whole system will have more delay.

01:22:27.520 --> 01:22:29.520
 That's the way it works.

01:22:29.520 --> 01:22:37.520
 Just a follow-up, though. I mean, for anyone who's walking across the street and they see a walk sign, they think they have--

01:22:37.520 --> 01:22:39.520
 They do have the right of way.

01:22:39.520 --> 01:22:46.520
 Right. But for somebody driving who sees a yellow arrow, if there's not a car coming, they have--

01:22:46.520 --> 01:22:49.520
 They have to yield to both. So if you--

01:22:49.520 --> 01:22:51.520
 Can you put a sign up that says--

01:22:51.520 --> 01:22:53.520
 Yield to pedestrians?

01:22:53.520 --> 01:23:00.520
 I mean, there has to be something there so that way, I mean, the pedestrians have to look out or--

01:23:00.520 --> 01:23:05.520
 I mean, I just always assume that if I was in the-- I thought, "Why is this person crossing right now?"

01:23:05.520 --> 01:23:10.520
 And I looked and they had a walk sign and I thought, "Well, that's really strange because--"

01:23:10.520 --> 01:23:15.520
 We can definitely install signs that say yield to pedestrians during flashing.

01:23:15.520 --> 01:23:26.520
 And I'm not saying that I do this all the time. It's something that I noticed and I was kind of surprised. So thank you.

01:23:26.520 --> 01:23:28.520
 I hope you'll watch out for pedestrians.

01:23:28.520 --> 01:23:33.520
 I will, I promise. I apologize to whomever that was.

01:23:33.520 --> 01:23:36.520
 It is difficult. They're wide roads and--

01:23:36.520 --> 01:23:39.520
 I will add this to the matrix so that we can follow back.

01:23:39.520 --> 01:23:40.520
 Okay.

01:23:40.520 --> 01:23:41.520
 Follow up back.

01:23:41.520 --> 01:23:42.520
 Councilman Ryan?

01:23:42.520 --> 01:23:50.520
 On that intersection because you said with 120 feet thereabouts that you're crossing University, we add to the length.

01:23:50.520 --> 01:23:58.520
 So is there strictly if nobody pushes the button to walk, does it just go straight into the caution to walk?

01:23:58.520 --> 01:24:05.520
 Yes. So it doesn't have a pedestrian phase that quickly cycles through the phase and then provides more time to University.

01:24:05.520 --> 01:24:15.520
 Okay. So could it be that if when the walk is on that the right arrow remains red and when it goes to flash,

01:24:15.520 --> 01:24:19.520
 now you've got two people that are both getting caution signs?

01:24:19.520 --> 01:24:27.520
 We can, but that would just increase because Bonneberry is slightly different than what you have on the other intersection that's really wide.

01:24:27.520 --> 01:24:33.520
 There's a lot more pedestrians crossing here as opposed to the other intersection.

01:24:33.520 --> 01:24:36.520
 So, yeah, that would be more--

01:24:36.520 --> 01:24:45.520
 I mean, it just makes sense if they've got a walk sign as opposed to the flashing yellow for the walking that at that point nobody could turn into that lane.

01:24:45.520 --> 01:24:50.520
 So that would be a protected left turn and no flashing yellow.

01:24:50.520 --> 01:24:57.520
 So we can do that for peak hours, but as I mentioned, I mean, there's a give and take within the cycle.

01:24:57.520 --> 01:25:06.520
 But I think installing the signs should really provide enough warning for people because that case is not just this intersection.

01:25:06.520 --> 01:25:11.520
 Every intersection is designed that way.

01:25:11.520 --> 01:25:15.520
 So what-- because the yellow flashing is new, right?

01:25:15.520 --> 01:25:17.520
 I mean, there's a lot of learning about it.

01:25:17.520 --> 01:25:23.520
 What happened at this intersection before the flashing yellow?

01:25:23.520 --> 01:25:27.520
 It was only protected as-- to my understanding, it was a protected left turn.

01:25:27.520 --> 01:25:29.520
 There's a lot of lefts going down there.

01:25:29.520 --> 01:25:38.520
 So that means you had very little green time for left to cycle and then it would back up, especially in peak hours.

01:25:38.520 --> 01:25:48.520
 So we're talking about moving vehicles through a lot safer, but I did hear you just comment that there's a lot of pedestrians at this intersection.

01:25:48.520 --> 01:25:59.520
 And I've seen them too, especially, you know, when we have that path going as well in the future because there's a park and then I think there's a bus stop up there.

01:25:59.520 --> 01:26:02.520
 So we can remove the flashing yellow completely.

01:26:02.520 --> 01:26:06.520
 I mean, that would increase delay.

01:26:06.520 --> 01:26:09.520
 Mr. City Engineer.

01:26:09.520 --> 01:26:20.520
 I just-- the consideration is always this is the challenge for traffic engineers especially is that historically traffic was vehicles.

01:26:20.520 --> 01:26:28.520
 I mean, you have a-- I think we're very fortunate we have a transportation staff that looks at pedestrians, public transit, cyclists.

01:26:28.520 --> 01:26:30.520
 They're trying to combine all that.

01:26:30.520 --> 01:26:40.520
 And the challenge that they're trying to balance is anytime we get into this scenario of how do I stop one group and allow another group,

01:26:40.520 --> 01:26:48.520
 what ends up happening, especially on Bonnie Bray in this case, is more and more cars begin to arrive and pedestrians and cyclists wanting to go in other directions.

01:26:48.520 --> 01:26:57.520
 So it's not an easy situation that-- I know pre-TAM staff and Brian now that he's here as well.

01:26:57.520 --> 01:27:01.520
 They're doing their very best to try to balance all of this at one time.

01:27:01.520 --> 01:27:10.520
 What does end up happening is if we create too much delay at the intersection for whatever reason, whatever mode of transportation we're trying to push through.

01:27:10.520 --> 01:27:13.520
 I'm not saying we don't do exactly what pre-TAM is talking about.

01:27:13.520 --> 01:27:16.520
 It's just understanding the challenges.

01:27:16.520 --> 01:27:18.520
 It's very complex and very dynamic.

01:27:18.520 --> 01:27:22.520
 You end up having to build much wider roadways and longer roadways.

01:27:22.520 --> 01:27:33.520
 And now I've offset part of the problem and challenge that I'm trying to overcome, which is I've got a very long stretch of pavement that I've got to get pedestrians and cyclists across as well.

01:27:33.520 --> 01:27:44.520
 So there is a consistent amount of balance that these folks are really working hard to try to resolve a very complex and very dynamic scenario.

01:27:44.520 --> 01:27:52.520
 And as we continue to move in those modes of transportation and see that growth in pedestrian and cyclist activity, it's just going to get more and more complex.

01:27:52.520 --> 01:28:00.520
 We may be looking at some very different alternatives than we've ever looked at in the past.

01:28:00.520 --> 01:28:02.520
 Yeah, I agree.

01:28:02.520 --> 01:28:07.520
 This intersection, especially by Razor Ranch, is a mess to get in and out of.

01:28:07.520 --> 01:28:16.520
 I mean, it is very challenging right at the entrance there towards the light.

01:28:16.520 --> 01:28:17.520
 And it does back up.

01:28:17.520 --> 01:28:19.520
 I mean, I don't disagree with that.

01:28:19.520 --> 01:28:24.520
 I was just under the impression that if there was a walk sign that I was safe and that I didn't have to.

01:28:24.520 --> 01:28:29.520
 And I know that that was just something that I've learned that is new.

01:28:29.520 --> 01:28:41.520
 And so we could just educate the public, maybe put something out there, or let the drivers know they have to yield to the pedestrians if there's a walk sign.

01:28:41.520 --> 01:28:44.520
 But no, I appreciate all that you've done.

01:28:44.520 --> 01:28:45.520
 You do.

01:28:45.520 --> 01:28:46.520
 It is a balance.

01:28:46.520 --> 01:28:51.520
 And if that was just a hard left, then that may back up all the way.

01:28:51.520 --> 01:28:54.520
 So I mean, it's a balance.

01:28:54.520 --> 01:28:57.520
 I just wanted to bring that up as a lesson learned.

01:28:57.520 --> 01:29:00.520
 Anything to improve safety, we're always trying hard.

01:29:00.520 --> 01:29:02.520
 Thank you.

01:29:02.520 --> 01:29:03.520
 All right.

01:29:03.520 --> 01:29:04.520
 Thank you.

01:29:04.520 --> 01:29:07.520
 Next, we'll look at Malone.

01:29:07.520 --> 01:29:11.520
 Malone Street, this is where we have, we're near the Razor Ranch Elementary.

01:29:11.520 --> 01:29:16.520
 On the upper left, you have a Whataburger shopping center.

01:29:16.520 --> 01:29:19.520
 Again, we have good ramps here.

01:29:19.520 --> 01:29:21.520
 We have good signal heads.

01:29:21.520 --> 01:29:23.520
 We have push buttons.

01:29:23.520 --> 01:29:32.520
 We're missing a sidewalk segment on that northwest portion heading north across the Whataburger property there.

01:29:32.520 --> 01:29:36.520
 Otherwise, though, the sidewalks are fairly good here.

01:29:36.520 --> 01:29:43.520
 I know students do cross this to go to Razor Ranch, and so some attention has been there.

01:29:43.520 --> 01:29:49.520
 In the past year, we did stripe south on the south side of the university here, the bike lanes.

01:29:49.520 --> 01:29:58.520
 On the north side, we've looked into it, we just, with the current traffic configuration, we don't have the width to do bike lanes there currently.

01:29:58.520 --> 01:30:03.520
 There may be a way to look into it a little deeper and work on it.

01:30:03.520 --> 01:30:14.520
 I actually cross this fairly often when I'm going to the North Lakes Rec Center, and I found it to be sufficient for my needs.

01:30:14.520 --> 01:30:22.520
 But if we could just finish that small segment of sidewalk there, that would really get this intersection in good shape.

01:30:22.520 --> 01:30:23.520
 Councilman Ryan.

01:30:23.520 --> 01:30:24.520
 Thank you.

01:30:24.520 --> 01:30:32.520
 On this intersection, if you are heading north on Malone, you get there, there's the bike lane.

01:30:32.520 --> 01:30:35.520
 Does the bike lane go all the way to university?

01:30:35.520 --> 01:30:39.520
 If so, can we put some signage or do something up there?

01:30:39.520 --> 01:30:42.520
 People constantly try and use that as a right turn lane.

01:30:42.520 --> 01:30:55.520
 Okay. Yeah, we do have difficulties with that. Yeah, we'll make a note of that.

01:30:55.520 --> 01:31:01.520
 I've actually been sitting there waiting to make a right and had somebody pull on the right-hand side of me.

01:31:01.520 --> 01:31:03.520
 Wondering what you're doing.

01:31:03.520 --> 01:31:06.520
 No.

01:31:06.520 --> 01:31:13.520
 Yeah, so won't get too off on that, but that is a difficult thing to deal with.

01:31:13.520 --> 01:31:20.520
 Some places they kind of have the bike lane peter out and merge with the regular traffic.

01:31:20.520 --> 01:31:30.520
 There at Hickory and Carroll, we actually have that green box, but it's pretty wide and all the time you see cars enter it thinking it's a lane.

01:31:30.520 --> 01:31:36.520
 So it's something we need to work on. Thank you.

01:31:36.520 --> 01:31:38.520
 Next, we'll go to Fulton.

01:31:38.520 --> 01:31:51.520
 Now, it's funny as you go west to east, it really is nicer, safer intersections going to much less accommodating safe intersections.

01:31:51.520 --> 01:31:53.520
 So here's Fulton.

01:31:53.520 --> 01:31:59.520
 You'll see on the north side, we have no ramps on the northeast.

01:31:59.520 --> 01:32:08.520
 We do have ramps partially on three other sides, but for example, we don't have a crosswalk on this east side.

01:32:08.520 --> 01:32:20.520
 We do on the west, but if you cross there, there is no way without just getting on the dirt and the grass to enter the shopping center there.

01:32:20.520 --> 01:32:23.520
 We have received communications from people about this.

01:32:23.520 --> 01:32:43.520
 We do have it on our lists, don't have funding currently to change it, and it would require working with some of these property owners because we don't have right of way in all of these areas.

01:32:43.520 --> 01:32:48.520
 Next is Atlas. This also connects to that same shopping center.

01:32:48.520 --> 01:32:59.520
 You'll see we have two crosswalks. We actually have signs up, no pedestrian signs so that people don't try to cross this way or this way.

01:32:59.520 --> 01:33:04.520
 So two out of the four sides, you have crosswalks and we do have buttons and ramps on these two.

01:33:04.520 --> 01:33:17.520
 Now, unfortunately, like if you come up here, you enter, like if you were on a wheelchair or something, you get on a concrete pad and you can't go anywhere from it currently.

01:33:17.520 --> 01:33:27.520
 It's just a dead end. So if you want to get into the driveway for the shopping center, you would literally have to enter traffic.

01:33:27.520 --> 01:33:34.520
 We have looked at some possible solutions there.

01:33:34.520 --> 01:33:45.520
 There's a decent difference between the height of the parking asphalt and where you are with that landing pad.

01:33:45.520 --> 01:33:58.520
 And so some kind of ramp or something would have to be built, which would require the cooperation and land that belongs to the property owner there.

01:33:58.520 --> 01:34:04.520
 But we receive a number of communications about this as well.

01:34:04.520 --> 01:34:17.520
 And it's the sort of thing that we sort of put in our parking lot projects that as funding comes along and as we get the right resources that we will go in and address.

01:34:17.520 --> 01:34:39.520
 Question. Yes. Yes. So have has anybody talked to the shopping center owner because it looks like if there's already concrete there at some point right away was given or talking about this is the section where I get lots of complaints and messages about.

01:34:39.520 --> 01:34:45.520
 So, I mean, I have not but I was under the impressions that streets.

01:34:45.520 --> 01:34:53.520
 I think it's a text out right away. So we are coordinating on several portions of the sidewalk on three eighty with text out.

01:34:53.520 --> 01:35:07.520
 And definitely would add this because I think right behind the parkway area is where the right of way ends for text out and the right of way for the shopping center begins.

01:35:07.520 --> 01:35:14.520
 But there is a drop between those two. There is an elevation difference. And that's where the issue with the eighty eight compliance comes in.

01:35:14.520 --> 01:35:20.520
 So we need to work with both the entities to make sure that it's eighty a compliant.

01:35:20.520 --> 01:35:28.520
 So. So is that in process or we are discussing that with the text. I was actually texting Tina right now.

01:35:28.520 --> 01:35:37.520
 Okay. Yeah, because I mean, I think like if we just had a ramp on the back side, you know, just something to connect it because that's pretty dangerous.

01:35:37.520 --> 01:35:45.520
 And I do know of a couple of people that I've seen in in wheelchairs that use that area.

01:35:45.520 --> 01:35:53.520
 I think one actually works in that shopping center. So, I mean, to have to have it be safe is.

01:35:53.520 --> 01:36:07.520
 Yes. Yes. And the stuff that we're coordinating is more closer to T.W. for making it eighty compliant. But yes, this is definitely in the list.

01:36:07.520 --> 01:36:16.520
 So on on next. Oh, I'm seeing you. There is one other concern here that just makes this a more complex scenario.

01:36:16.520 --> 01:36:22.520
 Certainly getting people back and forth. But there's a large floodplain that runs through the parking lot.

01:36:22.520 --> 01:36:27.520
 And that's another consideration when we start trying to figure out how do we get people effectively back and forth there?

01:36:27.520 --> 01:36:32.520
 This is a drainage flood prone drainage prone area because it is a low spot.

01:36:32.520 --> 01:36:39.520
 That's another consideration that makes this more challenging than merely working with property owner and text on it.

01:36:39.520 --> 01:36:52.520
 It's something that needs to be handled, but it's definitely a lot more comprehensive an issue than how do we get access?

01:36:52.520 --> 01:36:57.520
 On to Carol, the actual crossings on Carol are pretty good.

01:36:57.520 --> 01:37:05.520
 We have ramps in all directions. We have crosswalks. We have push buttons and we have signals.

01:37:05.520 --> 01:37:24.520
 However, I would not recommend it to cyclists at the very least as a north south corridor to use because of the high volume of traffic and the high speeds and the quieter alternatives that you have around it.

01:37:24.520 --> 01:37:35.520
 Now, as far as sidewalks are concerned, we are missing some connections on the south side here and on that west side there.

01:37:35.520 --> 01:37:40.520
 But on the north, you do have good sidewalks going up and down.

01:37:40.520 --> 01:37:51.520
 And on this side, you do have it connects into a real sidewalk here. It's not very well. It's flat, but not marked out as a sidewalk.

01:37:51.520 --> 01:38:01.520
 So as far as Carol being used as a good north south corridor for cyclists, pedestrians, I would discourage the cyclists.

01:38:01.520 --> 01:38:10.520
 I wouldn't recommend that we add infrastructure there to encourage them unless something fundamentally changed about the roadway or traffic patterns.

01:38:10.520 --> 01:38:23.520
 But pedestrian wise, if we can complete some of those sidewalks here and here, some of those sidewalk segments, it could really make it a much more useful intersection.

01:38:23.520 --> 01:38:35.520
 And there's a lot there. There's a lot of businesses that would serve to attract pedestrians and so forth.

01:38:35.520 --> 01:38:46.520
 Elm and Locust. So we've got Locust in the northbound, Elm in the southbound. Elm has ramps, crosswalks, buttons, your signals.

01:38:46.520 --> 01:38:55.520
 Locust has those too, but the crosswalks there are fading. You'll see we have different styles of crosswalks in the two.

01:38:55.520 --> 01:39:08.520
 The sidewalk connections in this area do tend to be quite good, although I think in some spots we are missing ramps where you have driveway entrances and things like that.

01:39:08.520 --> 01:39:17.520
 As you get further from the intersection, that can be improved. I think TxDOT has a plan for improvements of those going on right now.

01:39:17.520 --> 01:39:28.520
 So these are much more bike friendly than Carroll, and I would recommend to anyone, use Elm or Locust versus Carroll for your north-south directions.

01:39:28.520 --> 01:39:30.520
 Question. Council Member Blix.

01:39:30.520 --> 01:39:40.520
 So the bike, I mean, so the crosswalks that are faded, is that, since it is a TxDOT road, do they do that or is that city maintenance?

01:39:40.520 --> 01:39:44.520
 I mean, who is responsible for redoing those crosswalks?

01:39:44.520 --> 01:39:49.520
 I think typically all crosswalks are done by the city.

01:39:49.520 --> 01:39:58.520
 We're doing the same at Dallas and Teasley, but I think we'll, I'll find out, we'll work with TxDOT and get those repainted.

01:39:58.520 --> 01:40:08.520
 Thank you.

01:40:08.520 --> 01:40:15.520
 All right. Moving on then, Bell. Bell is a pretty good intersection because it's right there next to TWU.

01:40:15.520 --> 01:40:23.520
 You have a lot of crossings with students and so forth to the south of the intersection, especially it's very bicycle and pedestrian friendly.

01:40:23.520 --> 01:40:28.520
 Really wonderful corridor to move through on a bicycle or something.

01:40:28.520 --> 01:40:32.520
 To the north, the road becomes less busy.

01:40:32.520 --> 01:40:37.520
 You don't have the same width and you don't have striped bicycle lanes up there.

01:40:37.520 --> 01:40:40.520
 But it is a slower paced road.

01:40:40.520 --> 01:40:49.520
 I've ridden on both and while one feels extremely comfortable on South Bell, it's all right to the north.

01:40:49.520 --> 01:40:57.520
 Sidewalk connections as well are quite good coming into and out of this intersection.

01:40:57.520 --> 01:41:02.520
 I really don't, I don't have any recommendations for that one right now.

01:41:02.520 --> 01:41:06.520
 You know, it's pretty darn good.

01:41:06.520 --> 01:41:08.520
 Crosswalks could use new paint.

01:41:08.520 --> 01:41:10.520
 Crosswalks could use new paint there too.

01:41:10.520 --> 01:41:12.520
 Yes, sir.

01:41:12.520 --> 01:41:20.520
 Yeah, if you look at the crosswalks, anything that are vertical lines, so on the TxDOT University all along that,

01:41:20.520 --> 01:41:27.520
 that's typical TxDOT standard and anything that are, that look like the other type are typical city standards.

01:41:27.520 --> 01:41:35.520
 So we'll make sure that they're consistent and verify that.

01:41:35.520 --> 01:41:37.520
 Yeah, they do stand out.

01:41:37.520 --> 01:41:42.520
 Rodel, this may be one of our greatest challenges.

01:41:42.520 --> 01:41:47.520
 Right now, it's not a very pedestrian friendly area.

01:41:47.520 --> 01:41:55.520
 You do have a node, you have a commercial node there, you have restaurant stores, a donut shop, bowling alley, things like that.

01:41:55.520 --> 01:42:00.520
 But getting into and out of it right now, if you're not in a motorized vehicle, is quite difficult.

01:42:00.520 --> 01:42:08.520
 But I do know a number of things are coming down, the Pike project-wise redevelopments of the golf course by TWU.

01:42:08.520 --> 01:42:14.520
 There's some development south of the intersection here that's coming along.

01:42:14.520 --> 01:42:18.520
 And so right now, yes, we do have aprons.

01:42:18.520 --> 01:42:21.520
 We have the ramps there, but they go nowhere.

01:42:21.520 --> 01:42:28.520
 I mean, this is probably the greatest example where it goes straight into a hillside.

01:42:28.520 --> 01:42:30.520
 There's nowhere to go.

01:42:30.520 --> 01:42:33.520
 And the trouble there is, and correct me if I'm wrong.

01:42:33.520 --> 01:42:41.520
 Text.will build, as they're doing the intersections, they will build those aprons, but they leave it up to us to do the sidewalk connections.

01:42:41.520 --> 01:42:48.520
 And so we have what they left us, but we have not come in with sidewalks.

01:42:48.520 --> 01:42:52.520
 Now, to the north there, it goes right into a neighborhood.

01:42:52.520 --> 01:42:55.520
 You got a lot of people living there.

01:42:55.520 --> 01:43:09.520
 And I think as this area redevelops, there's a good opportunity here to try to better connect folks living on the north side with what's going on on the south side.

01:43:09.520 --> 01:43:13.520
 Just a comment, because I pass through this intersection a lot.

01:43:13.520 --> 01:43:27.520
 There are pedestrians that come from the apartments down up to this gas station quite a bit, and from the hotel or motel across as well.

01:43:27.520 --> 01:43:33.520
 And they do it at nighttime as well, and it's difficult.

01:43:33.520 --> 01:43:47.520
 Just to comment there that we do have, although there's a neighborhood up there, the connections are coming from down up to the gas station, the convenience store.

01:43:47.520 --> 01:43:52.520
 Yeah, I think this is a tech stop facility as well as the challenge is the elevations.

01:43:52.520 --> 01:43:56.520
 I think most of these properties are elevated to a higher level.

01:43:56.520 --> 01:44:04.520
 And when text I went ahead and did 380 back in the day, a lot of the segments did not have sidewalk connections.

01:44:04.520 --> 01:44:08.520
 So mostly north side has been left without sidewalks.

01:44:08.520 --> 01:44:10.520
 And it's a challenge.

01:44:10.520 --> 01:44:11.520
 We'll text out.

01:44:11.520 --> 01:44:15.520
 We have to work with text out to develop something.

01:44:15.520 --> 01:44:27.520
 And it is difficult under ADA. You have certain maximum angles, pitches, grades, certain maximum grades.

01:44:27.520 --> 01:44:34.520
 And so if you need to traverse six feet between the sidewalk and where the buildings are, it's going to take a very long.

01:44:34.520 --> 01:44:36.520
 You might have to double back or something like that.

01:44:36.520 --> 01:44:40.520
 And so they require extra consideration.

01:44:40.520 --> 01:44:41.520
 All right.

01:44:41.520 --> 01:44:48.520
 Okay, on to Nottingham again, got those ramps text.

01:44:48.520 --> 01:44:52.520
 I gave us those ramps crosswalks here are quite faded.

01:44:52.520 --> 01:44:55.520
 They're not up to the city standard.

01:44:55.520 --> 01:45:02.520
 There are push buttons and pet heads in place, but a real lack of connecting sidewalks on the north side.

01:45:02.520 --> 01:45:04.520
 And again, this is a neighborhood.

01:45:04.520 --> 01:45:13.520
 Now there is a project underway to to build sidewalk along one side of Nottingham.

01:45:13.520 --> 01:45:22.520
 As far as the frontage of university, you can actually see people have made their own little goat paths and things as necessary.

01:45:22.520 --> 01:45:26.520
 Now, on the south side, you have the big church and the school down there.

01:45:26.520 --> 01:45:41.520
 And they do have a pretty good sidewalk network there, which I think, you know, serves the people serves the people there.

01:45:41.520 --> 01:45:43.520
 Just Councilmember from District two.

01:45:43.520 --> 01:45:51.520
 Yeah, well, so do we have any updates on when that sidewalk is going to be implemented?

01:45:51.520 --> 01:45:55.520
 And just for the committee here, it's going to be it's going to start here and go all the way down to Windsor.

01:45:55.520 --> 01:46:01.520
 So it's going to be a really nice connect connectivity from correct.

01:46:01.520 --> 01:46:11.520
 So we had clubbed up sidewalks in twenty eighteen and twenty nineteen sidewalk bundles and we're moving forward with the twenty eighteen.

01:46:11.520 --> 01:46:17.520
 One of the one of the things that was found out after the design is completed.

01:46:17.520 --> 01:46:32.520
 Some of the right away requirements and easements, the cost of these sites, all the sidewalks that are in the bundle are prohibitive of the amount that we currently have remaining from the twenty twelve and twenty fourteen bond numbers.

01:46:32.520 --> 01:46:34.520
 So we started with the two million.

01:46:34.520 --> 01:46:39.520
 We've done a lot of smaller segments all over the city.

01:46:39.520 --> 01:46:46.520
 One of the things that was brought up that this sidewalk segment as well as the one on old north are pretty long stretches.

01:46:46.520 --> 01:46:55.520
 So if we have to, we might have to look at options of which ones we can really go out and construct and the amount of funds currently available.

01:46:55.520 --> 01:47:04.520
 So it might be either one of those two could go forward or we'll have to wait for the next bond dollars, which is probably early next year.

01:47:04.520 --> 01:47:09.520
 We can work on those just to weigh in on that.

01:47:09.520 --> 01:47:20.520
 Nottingham would should be priority because there's a park there and old north already has a wide path for walking and biking and parking.

01:47:20.520 --> 01:47:22.520
 So we'll consider that.

01:47:22.520 --> 01:47:25.520
 And then the other question was the intersection upgrade.

01:47:25.520 --> 01:47:30.520
 We are working on the right right away component.

01:47:30.520 --> 01:47:35.520
 There are some right away needs on one of the access point, one of the approaches.

01:47:35.520 --> 01:47:41.520
 So we're making sure that the design is appropriate to accommodate the extra left turn lanes in both directions.

01:47:41.520 --> 01:47:47.520
 So we're working on that later this year, early mid mid fall.

01:47:47.520 --> 01:47:53.520
 We should have something to go to construction.

01:47:53.520 --> 01:47:56.520
 And then last but not least, old north.

01:47:56.520 --> 01:47:59.520
 So this is on the far east side.

01:47:59.520 --> 01:48:10.520
 There are ramps in place, but connecting sidewalks are missing and in the north south, especially there are no connecting sidewalks.

01:48:10.520 --> 01:48:22.520
 But if you'll look here on the northeast corner, all we require is 200 feet to get up and connect to that segment there.

01:48:22.520 --> 01:48:29.520
 Now, there are sidewalks that do go to the east along University across that bridge.

01:48:29.520 --> 01:48:39.520
 So you do have that on the north for cyclists, especially old north is fairly calm road and it does have.

01:48:39.520 --> 01:48:50.520
 Well, it has these delineators painted on the road, which I think currently are not identified as bike lanes,

01:48:50.520 --> 01:48:58.520
 but can serve as such in a few spots bike lanes were installed.

01:48:58.520 --> 01:49:02.520
 As my understanding is, then there were some complaints about not being a park and things like that.

01:49:02.520 --> 01:49:07.520
 So they've kind of become a no man's land along the road.

01:49:07.520 --> 01:49:09.520
 I have written up and down this a number of times.

01:49:09.520 --> 01:49:14.520
 I find it to be a very comfortable road to the north of University to the south.

01:49:14.520 --> 01:49:21.520
 I've written that as well and would only recommend that for a very experienced, confident cyclist or something like that.

01:49:21.520 --> 01:49:32.520
 So if there's an opportunity, especially we can look into this with the mobility plan for creating a connection to south of University through old north

01:49:32.520 --> 01:49:39.520
 and to future connections on mingo or something like that, that would really serve us well.

01:49:39.520 --> 01:49:40.520
 That's one for Briggs.

01:49:40.520 --> 01:49:46.520
 Well, that was just my comment that it's mingo like I consider this park mingo.

01:49:46.520 --> 01:49:53.520
 So when you cross that, I mean, you're that that's where the not safe comes in.

01:49:53.520 --> 01:49:55.520
 There's a big corner around.

01:49:55.520 --> 01:50:03.520
 And so if when we do look at mingo improvements, I hope that that would include this all the way up to this intersection.

01:50:03.520 --> 01:50:05.520
 Yes, correct.

01:50:05.520 --> 01:50:08.520
 OK, thank you.

01:50:08.520 --> 01:50:17.520
 And then finally, just to sort of illustrate this overall disconnect between the cycling network on the south side of town and the north side of town.

01:50:17.520 --> 01:50:20.520
 And the colors may be a little difficult to see.

01:50:20.520 --> 01:50:32.520
 But as you go along here, there's actually no no location where the infrastructure on the south directly continues on the north.

01:50:32.520 --> 01:50:39.520
 So we are we are really losing we're losing opportunities here at our crossings.

01:50:39.520 --> 01:50:50.520
 But this this is exactly the sort of thing that the mobility plan is designed to address to look at to find find the opportunities to do that.

01:50:50.520 --> 01:50:53.520
 Now, some of this is in the future.

01:50:53.520 --> 01:51:02.520
 So what I'm saying is currently built right now, we don't have this, but some of these your dashed lines are identified as potential future opportunities.

01:51:02.520 --> 01:51:05.520
 And this is.

01:51:05.520 --> 01:51:17.520
 And so you can see there are some locations, Locus and now Bell as well, where where we may be able to make those those connections and get some funding.

01:51:17.520 --> 01:51:20.520
 You know, I just want to point out.

01:51:20.520 --> 01:51:36.520
 You can really see, let's say, the merit in our having looked at this, as well as on 35 when you look at this view right because 35 is the same thing on the south is not hardly anything that connects in terms of high school facilities.

01:51:36.520 --> 01:51:40.520
 Also, am I right as I look at this.

01:51:40.520 --> 01:51:49.520
 It doesn't appear that there are any high school facilities in Southeast end.

01:51:49.520 --> 01:51:59.520
 Well, the Katie trail is not on here at a train trail that that's not called out on here.

01:51:59.520 --> 01:52:04.520
 As you look between, you know, say, Fred Moore Park and the square.

01:52:04.520 --> 01:52:09.520
 How do you even do it.

01:52:09.520 --> 01:52:22.520
 They tend to be kind of calmer, wider streets, some of those there, but no, we have not officially designated either Sharos on those streets or bicycle lanes.

01:52:22.520 --> 01:52:27.520
 And I would point out that most of District four is not even on the map.

01:52:27.520 --> 01:52:40.520
 Right. I mean, there you go.

01:52:40.520 --> 01:52:42.520
 We're talking about connectivity across 35.

01:52:42.520 --> 01:52:49.520
 That'll take you into the before.

01:52:49.520 --> 01:52:58.520
 So on will they with the updates that we do with the pedestrian and the bicycles, will they encompass the whole town?

01:52:58.520 --> 01:53:01.520
 And I assume that even in Southeast and there's, you know, schools there.

01:53:01.520 --> 01:53:06.520
 And so that that's going to be included if if it hasn't already.

01:53:06.520 --> 01:53:13.520
 And okay, yeah, I included the limited graphic because we're specifically discussing about university here.

01:53:13.520 --> 01:53:24.520
 But yes, there there are some more, but in the middle of town is really where the vast majority of this is for now.

01:53:24.520 --> 01:53:28.520
 I do want to point out some of our projects moving forward.

01:53:28.520 --> 01:53:38.520
 Bonnie Bray will have a site path, which is bike and pedestrian multi-use trail may Hill already is implementing that.

01:53:38.520 --> 01:53:45.520
 So there are several things happening that will enhance this plan already updated.

01:53:45.520 --> 01:53:46.520
 That's my right.

01:53:46.520 --> 01:53:56.520
 I can't figure out for sure which one it is, but it looks like it's a shared roadway on 1515 Airport Road.

01:53:56.520 --> 01:54:03.520
 Is that is that right? That we've actually got the next one down.

01:54:03.520 --> 01:54:10.520
 A shared roadway on Airport Road unfunded at the moment.

01:54:10.520 --> 01:54:19.520
 Yeah, so hopefully that's just part of the widening project that we had a side path because semis and bicyclists do not mix well.

01:54:19.520 --> 01:54:24.520
 So, yeah, the text out is going through their schematic phase right now, and we're working with them for the cross section.

01:54:24.520 --> 01:54:32.520
 So, yeah, definitely that's something we'll add in bike and pedestrian text out is kind of opposed to that.

01:54:32.520 --> 01:54:36.520
 But we'll work something out and some of this is aspirational as well.

01:54:36.520 --> 01:54:38.520
 Kind of the fake it till you make it.

01:54:38.520 --> 01:54:40.520
 You know, hey, we want this there.

01:54:40.520 --> 01:54:42.520
 So how are you going to safely accommodate it?

01:54:42.520 --> 01:54:44.520
 And this is a priority and things like that.

01:54:44.520 --> 01:54:48.520
 You know, it's aspirational.

01:54:48.520 --> 01:54:57.520
 May I suggest that all of your great observations, I'm really glad you did all this and took out the helicopter to take those pictures.

01:54:57.520 --> 01:55:05.520
 May I suggest that all of your observations go on to the matrix, you know, about the deficiencies that you identified.

01:55:05.520 --> 01:55:18.520
 And I would include just let's say an evaluation of the potential for any bike facilities in Southeast.

01:55:18.520 --> 01:55:30.520
 And I'm kind of assuming that the comment about crossing into 35 addresses, you know, Southridge and so on.

01:55:30.520 --> 01:55:49.520
 Councilmember breaks just stretching. So will we have a dollar amount attached to or do we what it would take to make all of these connectivities?

01:55:49.520 --> 01:55:57.520
 This was the original 2014 plan and I don't believe there was any cost estimation or prioritization associated with it.

01:55:57.520 --> 01:56:13.520
 It was just a map with some lines put on it, but not really the missing components that we're really working through currently with our mobility plan where now we have community engagement as well as we have an implementation plan with costs associated with it.

01:56:13.520 --> 01:56:20.520
 So what we're doing is really legit and it will be a plan and coordinate and not just lines on paper.

01:56:20.520 --> 01:56:29.520
 Okay. Thank you so much. I appreciate the investment in colored ink at least it was done in 2014.

01:56:29.520 --> 01:56:31.520
 Okay.

01:56:31.520 --> 01:56:33.520
 Very good. Thank you.

01:56:33.520 --> 01:56:37.520
 I think all that's left is staff reports.

01:56:37.520 --> 01:56:45.520
 So I'm going to turn over to Mr. Deshmukh since that's my first day back and he put the information together.

01:56:45.520 --> 01:56:54.520
 So we have our standard street report and I don't have anything to report on that one. I think council looks at it pretty frequently.

01:56:54.520 --> 01:57:02.520
 I don't want to jump on the matrix. I've been adding as we're talking, but there are a couple things I want to point out.

01:57:02.520 --> 01:57:16.520
 Item number two, a quick update. We have selected the contractor to move forward with upgrading the signal, the ADA compliant ramps, the poles.

01:57:16.520 --> 01:57:34.520
 Currently, we are going through a subsurface utility exploration, which means we hire someone, start potholing. There are a lot of utilities on different corners. There's a big gas service area, gas mains on all corners. Actually, they run in different directions. It's very difficult.

01:57:34.520 --> 01:57:42.520
 But we want to make sure that we put our pole foundation in the right location and still have space for ramps and ADA compliant ramps.

01:57:42.520 --> 01:58:02.520
 There's some challenge in the elevations, but this intersection will be completely updated, construction starting soon, followed by the subsurface utility exploration starting soon, which means potholing, starting soon, followed by the construction after that.

01:58:02.520 --> 01:58:14.520
 That's my right. Will the construction involve any road closures since Hickory's already? There might be after August 31st or whenever we get that section of Hickory back open.

01:58:14.520 --> 01:58:24.520
 Yeah, I think it most likely will be after August 31st, but most of these closures will be one lane at a time, so it won't really be full closure.

01:58:24.520 --> 01:58:42.520
 They'll be taking out corners, which means either take a corner that will close one lane on Oak or take the other corner, so it won't be both or full closures on the intersections.

01:58:42.520 --> 01:58:58.520
 We will bring back the item number three as a full item for discussion as to what we learned on zero vision, not just here in the previous conference that we attended in Austin, but there's a follow up conversation.

01:58:58.520 --> 01:59:12.520
 There's a conference coming up starting next weekend for all the traffic and transportation engineers. They get together, it's an annual meet, and there are some topics about zero vision in there.

01:59:12.520 --> 01:59:23.520
 So we'll bring all of that discussion back and see how we can start at least working towards a goal to getting this implemented within the city.

01:59:23.520 --> 01:59:33.520
 TDC credit, we have identified a couple projects, primarily the ones that are listed in the bond funding.

01:59:33.520 --> 01:59:39.520
 Hickory Creek is a big project, and then also Bonnie Bray.

01:59:39.520 --> 01:59:50.520
 Todd was at the RTC, and I think Council Member Ryan, you were there too, that city was awarded $750,000 worth of credits.

01:59:50.520 --> 01:59:59.520
 So next time we have a project, we go through the process, and we're going to start engaging John Polster to understand what the process is.

01:59:59.520 --> 02:00:13.520
 That our match could, we could easily get $750,000 worth of credit for the city, and that would be our match for these projects, which is almost a million dollars.

02:00:13.520 --> 02:00:20.520
 >> So some of these, if I can start removing, is that something that is okay by the committee?

02:00:20.520 --> 02:00:25.520
 I mean, the TDC, we can start this item if we can remove that one.

02:00:25.520 --> 02:00:30.520
 And then zero vision, once it becomes a full item, I can remove that.

02:00:30.520 --> 02:00:32.520
 Is that?

02:00:32.520 --> 02:00:33.520
 >> Council Member Briggs?

02:00:33.520 --> 02:00:35.520
 >> You can also remove item number one.

02:00:35.520 --> 02:00:38.520
 >> Okay, thank you.

02:00:38.520 --> 02:00:53.520
 >> Kind of back on construction report, can you remind me, and I'll bet you've told me no fewer than six times, but can you remind me when Hickory Street gets done between Fry and Carroll?

02:00:53.520 --> 02:00:55.520
 >> So there are two separate projects.

02:00:55.520 --> 02:01:10.520
 The first one is between Fry, Avenue B to Fry is currently under construction, and then between Fry and Welch will be the next piece that will follow this current construction schedule.

02:01:10.520 --> 02:01:17.520
 So the first portion up to Fry will get done early August, and that's our schedule.

02:01:17.520 --> 02:01:22.520
 We'll move on to the second segment up to Welch immediately following that.

02:01:22.520 --> 02:01:24.520
 >> Wait, I'm sorry, I just want to make sure I'm tracking.

02:01:24.520 --> 02:01:26.520
 >> So what gets done by early August is up to Fry?

02:01:26.520 --> 02:01:27.520
 >> Up to Fry.

02:01:27.520 --> 02:01:28.520
 >> Okay.

02:01:28.520 --> 02:01:29.520
 >> Because that intersection is closed.

02:01:29.520 --> 02:01:36.520
 >> So that's during the school's open, but the next section.

02:01:36.520 --> 02:01:38.520
 >> It's the next section.

02:01:38.520 --> 02:01:41.520
 Just a quick difference between the type of work.

02:01:41.520 --> 02:01:51.520
 The type of work that's being currently done in the Fry intersection area, there's a lot of involved utility work that's going on in there, drainage.

02:01:51.520 --> 02:01:59.520
 And we're running into really shallow utility, abandoned utility as well.

02:01:59.520 --> 02:02:01.520
 Atmos pipes and whatnot.

02:02:01.520 --> 02:02:05.520
 So it's been challenging to get that piece done.

02:02:05.520 --> 02:02:13.520
 The next portion is resurface, so we're hoping we can quickly go through that with less issues.

02:02:13.520 --> 02:02:16.520
 The current one requires a lot deeper digging.

02:02:16.520 --> 02:02:19.520
 That's why there are closures and single closures.

02:02:19.520 --> 02:02:25.520
 >> So just roughly, if you start resurfacing to Welch around the beginning of September.

02:02:25.520 --> 02:02:26.520
 >> I think we have a schedule.

02:02:26.520 --> 02:02:27.520
 I can send that to you.

02:02:27.520 --> 02:02:29.520
 >> I'm looking at the construction report.

02:02:29.520 --> 02:02:32.520
 It kind of addresses the immediately at hand.

02:02:32.520 --> 02:02:40.520
 But, you know, I'm just trying -- I just get asked so often about it, and now I'm dealing with a viral video.

02:02:40.520 --> 02:02:41.520
 Have you seen that one?

02:02:41.520 --> 02:02:42.520
 >> Yeah.

02:02:42.520 --> 02:02:43.520
 >> Yeah, everyone's seen it.

02:02:43.520 --> 02:02:44.520
 Okay.

02:02:44.520 --> 02:02:51.520
 I look forward to moving from people being upset about that to having them be upset about the construction.

02:02:51.520 --> 02:02:52.520
 >> Why don't we do this?

02:02:52.520 --> 02:02:58.520
 Why don't we just work with streets and putting an informal SNAP report for the coming -- either this Friday or next Friday.

02:02:58.520 --> 02:02:59.520
 That way --

02:02:59.520 --> 02:03:00.520
 >> All the way to Canada.

02:03:00.520 --> 02:03:01.520
 >> Right, all the way, all the way.

02:03:01.520 --> 02:03:02.520
 >> The question.

02:03:02.520 --> 02:03:03.520
 >> Yeah.

02:03:03.520 --> 02:03:04.520
 >> That way you have a full --

02:03:04.520 --> 02:03:08.520
 >> If you want to put it in the form of a video, that's all right with me.

02:03:08.520 --> 02:03:09.520
 >> We can do that, too.

02:03:09.520 --> 02:03:10.520
 We can sing.

02:03:10.520 --> 02:03:11.520
 >> Animation, yeah.

02:03:11.520 --> 02:03:12.520
 Okay.

02:03:12.520 --> 02:03:15.520
 Anything else on matrix, John?

02:03:15.520 --> 02:03:20.520
 >> Well, I want to piggyback on that, that Avenue A, that we're changing to a one-way.

02:03:20.520 --> 02:03:21.520
 >> Yes.

02:03:21.520 --> 02:03:27.520
 >> That we probably don't want to do that until we're done all the way to Welch, because otherwise you lose your circulation.

02:03:27.520 --> 02:03:28.520
 >> Absolutely.

02:03:28.520 --> 02:03:38.520
 I was going to definitely bring it up and mention that our detour will be gone if we do that implementation before we are done up until Welch.

02:03:38.520 --> 02:03:44.520
 And I think a portion of the improvements at Welch are needed even before we can reroute, start rerouting.

02:03:44.520 --> 02:03:46.520
 So it acts both ways.

02:03:46.520 --> 02:03:47.520
 >> Okay.

02:03:47.520 --> 02:03:52.520
 >> Good point.

02:03:52.520 --> 02:03:55.520
 I have added a bunch of items.

02:03:55.520 --> 02:04:00.520
 I'm just going to read them out and then all the items that Mark talked about.

02:04:00.520 --> 02:04:08.520
 But Bonnie Bray University signage addition for the signal so that people understand the flashing yellow.

02:04:08.520 --> 02:04:14.520
 University ALICE access to the back of that private facility.

02:04:14.520 --> 02:04:17.520
 Evaluation of bike facilities in Southeast Denton.

02:04:17.520 --> 02:04:23.520
 And then Alan Locust Bellin University restrapping the crosswalks.

02:04:23.520 --> 02:04:26.520
 Those are the items on the matrix that I've added just in case.

02:04:26.520 --> 02:04:29.520
 If you have any more, then we can add them.

02:04:29.520 --> 02:04:32.520
 >> The missing bits of sidewalk.

02:04:32.520 --> 02:04:33.520
 >> All the items.

02:04:33.520 --> 02:04:35.520
 >> I trust you've got the PowerPoint.

02:04:35.520 --> 02:04:38.520
 >> In the Malone right turn versus bike lane.

02:04:38.520 --> 02:04:39.520
 >> Malone right turn.

02:04:39.520 --> 02:04:44.520
 >> Okay.

02:04:44.520 --> 02:04:46.520
 >> Ready to move to concluding items?

02:04:46.520 --> 02:04:50.520
 >> And you can get rid of number 8.

02:04:50.520 --> 02:04:54.520
 >> Number 8.

02:04:54.520 --> 02:04:55.520
 >> Perfect.

02:04:55.520 --> 02:04:58.520
 >> And on the Windsor Street update.

02:04:58.520 --> 02:05:05.520
 I guess we can, if that's moving right along, or maybe I could meet with you guys and get that.

02:05:05.520 --> 02:05:07.520
 >> Yeah, I think we can give you a quick overview.

02:05:07.520 --> 02:05:08.520
 >> Okay.

02:05:08.520 --> 02:05:10.520
 And then once that is, I mean, you can take it off of the matrix.

02:05:10.520 --> 02:05:12.520
 It's just for my knowledge.

02:05:12.520 --> 02:05:16.520
 Unless everybody else wants to know.

02:05:16.520 --> 02:05:19.520
 Windsor, it's going to update.

02:05:19.520 --> 02:05:20.520
 >> Oh, okay.

02:05:20.520 --> 02:05:21.520
 You're fine with not having it be on the matrix.

02:05:21.520 --> 02:05:22.520
 >> Yeah.

02:05:22.520 --> 02:05:29.520
 Anything else?

02:05:29.520 --> 02:05:31.520
 >> Are we on to concluding?

02:05:31.520 --> 02:05:32.520
 >> Ready for us to move on?

02:05:32.520 --> 02:05:33.520
 Okay.

02:05:33.520 --> 02:05:34.520
 So concluding remarks.

02:05:34.520 --> 02:05:38.520
 And Councilmember Ryan caught my attention first there.

02:05:38.520 --> 02:05:39.520
 >> Yep.

02:05:39.520 --> 02:05:44.520
 So I've got one that kind of interconnects with mobility and police being informal staff

02:05:44.520 --> 02:05:51.520
 report from the police department on how their different sections, I don't know that I'd

02:05:51.520 --> 02:05:55.520
 necessarily call it departments, but you've got traffic and you've got parking enforcement

02:05:55.520 --> 02:05:57.520
 and you've got patrol.

02:05:57.520 --> 02:06:03.520
 At what point do they cross and do someone else's job?

02:06:03.520 --> 02:06:09.520
 Because when we mark something, no parking, if patrol, that segment that it took us two

02:06:09.520 --> 02:06:13.520
 years to get there on Bernard, they're still parking there.

02:06:13.520 --> 02:06:17.520
 So we might need to add entire block on the no parking signs, but they're parking right

02:06:17.520 --> 02:06:19.520
 underneath the no parking signs.

02:06:19.520 --> 02:06:23.520
 But do we have to get parking enforcement that's three people, two or three people in

02:06:23.520 --> 02:06:27.520
 the whole department to come out and enforce that or does the police department, if they've

02:06:27.520 --> 02:06:29.520
 got a patrol car, go through?

02:06:29.520 --> 02:06:31.520
 That's what I'm talking about, a crossover.

02:06:31.520 --> 02:06:35.520
 Patrol guy comes out and he sees somebody parked in no parking, can he write him a ticket

02:06:35.520 --> 02:06:39.520
 or does he have to call or does he even bother to call and just skips it and says that's

02:06:39.520 --> 02:06:42.520
 not part of my job?

02:06:42.520 --> 02:06:43.520
 Does that make sense?

02:06:43.520 --> 02:06:44.520
 >> No, it does.

02:06:44.520 --> 02:06:49.520
 In my understanding with the police department, they have full enforcement powers to issue

02:06:49.520 --> 02:06:55.520
 citations wherever they have jurisdiction.

02:06:55.520 --> 02:06:57.520
 >> But my question is, what is their policy?

02:06:57.520 --> 02:06:58.520
 Do they do that?

02:06:58.520 --> 02:06:59.520
 >> Do that, yeah.

02:06:59.520 --> 02:07:00.520
 We can check.

02:07:00.520 --> 02:07:01.520
 >> Okay.

02:07:01.520 --> 02:07:02.520
 Policy.

02:07:02.520 --> 02:07:12.520
 >> And also on that same line is as we increase our biker population in town, how are they

02:07:12.520 --> 02:07:19.520
 enforcing bikers for stop lights, stop signs that just slow down, look both ways and keep

02:07:19.520 --> 02:07:29.520
 on going or other things that make citizens upset with bikers that if we can -- we should

02:07:29.520 --> 02:07:34.520
 have some type of enforcement for bikers.

02:07:34.520 --> 02:07:38.520
 >> I think Mark pulls him over.

02:07:38.520 --> 02:07:42.520
 >> I'm not saying they need to write a bunch of tickets, I'm just saying unless you get

02:07:42.520 --> 02:07:47.520
 rid of the bad eggs, the good eggs suffer.

02:07:47.520 --> 02:07:50.520
 >> Anything else?

02:07:50.520 --> 02:07:53.520
 Councilmember Briggs?

02:07:53.520 --> 02:07:56.520
 >> I have a couple of comments.

02:07:56.520 --> 02:07:57.520
 One question.

02:07:57.520 --> 02:08:04.520
 Somebody posted and tagged us and asked if we used foam for lifting streets and sidewalks.

02:08:04.520 --> 02:08:09.520
 I guess it's called mud jacking or slab jacking.

02:08:09.520 --> 02:08:10.520
 >> Short answer is yes.

02:08:10.520 --> 02:08:11.520
 There's a variety of materials.

02:08:11.520 --> 02:08:13.520
 But we do when it's appropriate.

02:08:13.520 --> 02:08:14.520
 Absolutely.

02:08:14.520 --> 02:08:15.520
 >> Okay.

02:08:15.520 --> 02:08:16.520
 That was interesting.

02:08:16.520 --> 02:08:17.520
 I didn't know.

02:08:17.520 --> 02:08:26.520
 And last to the matrix or just if somebody could -- I request that staff drive on Rockwood

02:08:26.520 --> 02:08:34.520
 and Mistywood, either like on a bicycle or in a car, they're pretty bad.

02:08:34.520 --> 02:08:36.520
 They're really bad.

02:08:36.520 --> 02:08:41.520
 And I don't know -- I've seen them on the construction thing, but I don't think it takes

02:08:41.520 --> 02:08:43.520
 care of the whole road.

02:08:43.520 --> 02:08:52.520
 And so I'm just kind of looking for an update on if those are included on getting resurfaced.

02:08:52.520 --> 02:09:01.520
 Rockwood, it's probably -- you can probably equate it to hickory, like that bad.

02:09:01.520 --> 02:09:02.520
 >> Yeah.

02:09:02.520 --> 02:09:05.520
 And the entire stretch of these streets?

02:09:05.520 --> 02:09:11.520
 Or is there a specific portion that you want to -- we'll drive it.

02:09:11.520 --> 02:09:12.520
 That's fine.

02:09:12.520 --> 02:09:13.520
 >> Thank you.

02:09:13.520 --> 02:09:14.520
 >> Okay.

02:09:14.520 --> 02:09:21.520
 I have a few items that are mostly just thoughts I had after you made your presentation.

02:09:21.520 --> 02:09:23.520
 So the items were already closed.

02:09:23.520 --> 02:09:26.520
 But, you know, sometimes I'm slow.

02:09:26.520 --> 02:09:29.520
 So just a broad comment on mobility plan.

02:09:29.520 --> 02:09:35.520
 For sure, you're going to hear about construction fatigue when you go for the public input.

02:09:35.520 --> 02:09:42.520
 So just, you know, put that out there with the idea that you might have some way to respond

02:09:42.520 --> 02:09:47.520
 to the public about how all the ambitious things they're going to come up with can be

02:09:47.520 --> 02:09:51.520
 phased without making them miserable.

02:09:51.520 --> 02:09:52.520
 It's a challenge.

02:09:52.520 --> 02:09:54.520
 I don't have any answers on that.

02:09:54.520 --> 02:09:56.520
 But maybe you do.

02:09:56.520 --> 02:09:59.520
 I note that we have no DCTA update this month.

02:09:59.520 --> 02:10:00.520
 >> Correct.

02:10:00.520 --> 02:10:03.520
 I think there are a couple of people that were on vacation as well.

02:10:03.520 --> 02:10:04.520
 >> Not allowed.

02:10:04.520 --> 02:10:05.520
 >> Some people then.

02:10:05.520 --> 02:10:06.520
 >> Not allowed.

02:10:06.520 --> 02:10:07.520
 >> Sorry about that.

02:10:07.520 --> 02:10:08.520
 >> Okay.

02:10:08.520 --> 02:10:09.520
 All right.

02:10:09.520 --> 02:10:10.520
 >> But they will be coming up next.

02:10:10.520 --> 02:10:11.520
 >> They won't do that anymore.

02:10:11.520 --> 02:10:13.520
 >> No, they will be coming up next month.

02:10:13.520 --> 02:10:14.520
 >> That's great.

02:10:14.520 --> 02:10:15.520
 I find it helpful.

02:10:15.520 --> 02:10:22.520
 On forest ridge, you know, on reflection of thought, in terms of critical path, is there

02:10:22.520 --> 02:10:28.520
 any reason that the speed study couldn't be done before the construction begins?

02:10:28.520 --> 02:10:37.520
 Because the resurfacing shouldn't drastically alter the speeds people go.

02:10:37.520 --> 02:10:40.520
 It might make them go faster.

02:10:40.520 --> 02:10:43.520
 But the concern is about speeding now.

02:10:43.520 --> 02:10:48.520
 So just in terms of like we're kind of outlining a critical path where the resurfacing would

02:10:48.520 --> 02:10:51.520
 have to happen, then we see how people drive, then we see if there's a speed need.

02:10:51.520 --> 02:10:54.520
 But we're hearing the concern under current conditions.

02:10:54.520 --> 02:10:58.520
 It will be a while until you resurface, right?

02:10:58.520 --> 02:11:02.520
 >> So my primary recommendation would be at least wait until school starts, which would

02:11:02.520 --> 02:11:06.520
 allow us to get a good bit of the resurfacing and then we can see what the actual traffic

02:11:06.520 --> 02:11:07.520
 through there would look like.

02:11:07.520 --> 02:11:08.520
 >> Makes all kinds of sense.

02:11:08.520 --> 02:11:09.520
 Yep.

02:11:09.520 --> 02:11:13.520
 Let's see.

02:11:13.520 --> 02:11:16.520
 That's all I have.

02:11:16.520 --> 02:11:19.520
 So but Councilwoman Briggs has another comment.

02:11:19.520 --> 02:11:21.520
 >> What did I do?

02:11:21.520 --> 02:11:22.520
 I lost it.

02:11:22.520 --> 02:11:23.520
 >> Come back.

02:11:23.520 --> 02:11:27.520
 >> Oh, if we can have an update on Elm and Locust turn back.

02:11:27.520 --> 02:11:34.520
 I know that the conversations are going and we've had some, just update on that, on how

02:11:34.520 --> 02:11:38.520
 that conversation is going and if it's going to happen.

02:11:38.520 --> 02:11:50.520
 >> So hearing no other comments, I'll entertain a motion to dismiss, to adjourn rather.

02:11:50.520 --> 02:11:53.520
 >> I move to adjourn.

02:11:53.520 --> 02:11:55.520
 >> Okay.

02:11:55.520 --> 02:12:05.520
 I hereby close this meeting at 1.43 p.m.