WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:09.420
 We are at the City of Denton Mobility Committee Wednesday, May 28, 2025, 10 a.m., in the council

00:00:09.420 --> 00:00:11.340
 work session room.

00:00:11.340 --> 00:00:13.620
 We do have a quorum present.

00:00:13.620 --> 00:00:18.940
 We know one member is on his way, council member Beck.

00:00:18.940 --> 00:00:23.540
 Do we have any citizens comment on any of the agenda items?

00:00:23.540 --> 00:00:25.500
 No, I see no.

00:00:25.500 --> 00:00:34.860
 Then we'll move on to our items where individual consideration, AMC 25-021, consider approval

00:00:34.860 --> 00:00:39.380
 of the minutes April 30, 2025.

00:00:39.380 --> 00:00:40.380
 Anybody want to make a motion?

00:00:40.380 --> 00:00:41.380
 They are, as I recall.

00:00:41.380 --> 00:00:43.780
 I will motion they be approved as submitted.

00:00:43.780 --> 00:00:44.780
 Second.

00:00:44.780 --> 00:00:45.780
 Second.

00:00:45.780 --> 00:00:46.780
 Any disagreements?

00:00:46.780 --> 00:00:47.780
 All right.

00:00:47.780 --> 00:00:48.780
 All in favor?

00:00:48.780 --> 00:00:49.780
 Say aye.

00:00:49.780 --> 00:00:50.780
 Aye.

00:00:50.780 --> 00:00:51.780
 Aye.

00:00:51.780 --> 00:01:00.260
 Second. B, AMC 25-022, receive a report and hold a discussion regarding the Ballard's

00:01:00.260 --> 00:01:03.260
 evaluation.

00:01:03.260 --> 00:01:11.660
 Good morning, Chair and committee members.

00:01:11.660 --> 00:01:15.300
 Farhan Butt, Deputy Director, Transportation Services Division.

00:01:15.300 --> 00:01:22.740
 I'm here to present the final of the series of Ballard evaluation presentations.

00:01:22.740 --> 00:01:27.300
 This is the final presentation where we will conclude and provide the recommendations to

00:01:27.300 --> 00:01:32.180
 this committee.

00:01:32.180 --> 00:01:38.180
 Before we start on the recommendations, there will be a slide for the recap that will cover

00:01:38.180 --> 00:01:46.660
 the importance of Ballard's, how they can significantly save or be lifesaving when it

00:01:46.660 --> 00:01:57.640
 comes to extent between bikers and auto users, and then also it will highlight what the standard

00:01:57.640 --> 00:02:01.260
 dimensions are for the Ballard's.

00:02:01.260 --> 00:02:06.660
 And then later on, we'll have recommendations and then some selected corridors that staff

00:02:06.660 --> 00:02:12.020
 has researched, not all of them, but some corridors have been researched and then others

00:02:12.020 --> 00:02:20.360
 we have in our radar, on our radar, and we will, if needed, we can audit those as well.

00:02:20.360 --> 00:02:24.980
 And we will have future recommendations as well, as a final slide.

00:02:24.980 --> 00:02:25.980
 Excuse me.

00:02:25.980 --> 00:02:26.980
 Yes.

00:02:26.980 --> 00:02:30.180
 I'll make this statement first.

00:02:30.180 --> 00:02:39.620
 I know that this particular topic is a significant topic for Dr. Benk, who's absent right now,

00:02:39.620 --> 00:02:46.340
 and I would like for him to be here on this presentation, actually, I know that he's the

00:02:46.340 --> 00:02:53.620
 one that brought this forward, and I didn't recognize that he would be late, but I know

00:02:53.620 --> 00:02:58.380
 that this one is very important to him.

00:02:58.380 --> 00:03:04.740
 And then the other thing is, the next one is the pitch.

00:03:04.740 --> 00:03:07.580
 Is there any way that I can...

00:03:07.580 --> 00:03:10.740
 I was hoping he walked through the door when I turned my head that way.

00:03:10.740 --> 00:03:20.580
 Is there any way that I could be allowed to just change this one in exchange for the pitch

00:03:20.580 --> 00:03:21.740
 to this?

00:03:21.740 --> 00:03:22.740
 Can I do that?

00:03:22.740 --> 00:03:25.580
 I mean, can I recommend that?

00:03:25.580 --> 00:03:29.040
 And it's just a level of respect here, if he would come in the door and see that we're

00:03:29.040 --> 00:03:34.060
 almost nearly pushing the way it's done, I know that he would be very disappointed.

00:03:34.060 --> 00:03:35.060
 I don't want to do that.

00:03:35.060 --> 00:03:36.060
 Okay?

00:03:36.060 --> 00:03:37.060
 All right.

00:03:37.060 --> 00:03:38.060
 Can we...

00:03:38.060 --> 00:03:39.060
 So we're going to switch around?

00:03:39.060 --> 00:03:41.460
 Would you set up the pitch?

00:03:41.460 --> 00:03:42.460
 Are you ready to pitch?

00:03:42.460 --> 00:03:48.060
 I'm happy to do that, but frankly, I'd like him here for this, for my item as well.

00:03:48.060 --> 00:03:49.060
 Okay.

00:03:49.060 --> 00:03:50.060
 So now what do you want me to do?

00:03:50.060 --> 00:03:51.060
 Yes, sir.

00:03:51.060 --> 00:03:52.060
 Madam Chair.

00:03:52.060 --> 00:03:55.740
 I mean, I'm trying to be respectful to the guy.

00:03:55.740 --> 00:03:56.740
 Madam Chair, I absolutely understand what you're trying to do.

00:03:56.740 --> 00:03:57.740
 Yes.

00:03:57.740 --> 00:04:02.440
 I might make a recommendation, is maybe just go ahead and we can take...

00:04:02.440 --> 00:04:08.140
 Whether it is item D, if you want to start working through some of the staff memorandums,

00:04:08.140 --> 00:04:10.600
 you can kind of talk through that.

00:04:10.600 --> 00:04:15.460
 You did call that first item, so just pull that back and then go ahead and go to item

00:04:15.460 --> 00:04:16.460
 D.

00:04:16.460 --> 00:04:24.980
 And then we pull back the first item off of, and that would be MC25-0522.

00:04:24.980 --> 00:04:25.980
 Okay.

00:04:25.980 --> 00:04:26.980
 All agree?

00:04:26.980 --> 00:04:27.980
 Yes?

00:04:27.980 --> 00:04:28.980
 Okay.

00:04:28.980 --> 00:04:29.980
 Thank you.

00:04:29.980 --> 00:04:30.980
 All right.

00:04:30.980 --> 00:04:31.980
 Thanks.

00:04:31.980 --> 00:04:32.980
 I feel like I was compelled.

00:04:32.980 --> 00:04:33.980
 MC...

00:04:33.980 --> 00:04:44.740
 We're going to move on to MC25-024 with the understanding that when Dr. Beck arrives,

00:04:44.740 --> 00:04:47.980
 we will stop and then we will come back.

00:04:47.980 --> 00:04:48.980
 Okay?

00:04:48.980 --> 00:04:49.980
 Can we do that?

00:04:49.980 --> 00:04:50.980
 Awesome.

00:04:50.980 --> 00:04:51.980
 Yes, ma'am.

00:04:51.980 --> 00:04:52.980
 All right.

00:04:52.980 --> 00:04:53.980
 Let's start with the first one.

00:04:53.980 --> 00:04:54.980
 Okay.

00:04:54.980 --> 00:04:55.980
 Construction project information on Shady Oaks.

00:04:55.980 --> 00:04:56.980
 Yes, ma'am.

00:04:56.980 --> 00:04:58.740
 So again, we provided a response there.

00:04:58.740 --> 00:05:02.220
 It looks like it was just some franchise utility work that was taking place in that parking

00:05:02.220 --> 00:05:04.060
 lot near Curley.

00:05:04.060 --> 00:05:05.340
 Since then, that work has been completed.

00:05:05.340 --> 00:05:08.500
 The roadway has been restored back, including the parking lot there.

00:05:08.500 --> 00:05:13.020
 So all should be good on Shady Oaks Drive.

00:05:13.020 --> 00:05:15.860
 Okay.

00:05:15.860 --> 00:05:19.180
 Second one here is the US 380 side path pedestrian impact.

00:05:19.180 --> 00:05:22.100
 So Council Member Rumer had asked about this one.

00:05:22.100 --> 00:05:27.040
 So according to the current schematic that's being reviewed by TxDOT, it will just continue

00:05:27.040 --> 00:05:28.660
 along underneath the bridge.

00:05:28.660 --> 00:05:33.940
 So no impact, no disruption, other than probably a little bit during construction as they're

00:05:33.940 --> 00:05:37.140
 doing bridge piers and hanging girders over the top.

00:05:37.140 --> 00:05:38.140
 Okay.

00:05:38.140 --> 00:05:45.100
 And then I won't read through all of the quarterly construction reports, but we did provide some

00:05:45.100 --> 00:05:54.140
 updates on Bonnebrae 3, 4, 5, 6, Riney Road East, Westgate 5B, McKinney Sidewalks, Ryan

00:05:54.140 --> 00:05:57.380
 Road, and Hickory Creek 3.

00:05:57.380 --> 00:05:59.400
 I will point out a couple of quick things.

00:05:59.400 --> 00:06:02.500
 So Riney Road East, we have 100% design.

00:06:02.500 --> 00:06:05.180
 It's going to be going to bid this summer.

00:06:05.180 --> 00:06:08.100
 Westgate Road is also already been bid.

00:06:08.100 --> 00:06:13.900
 This is the east-west connector to Bronco Way, Denton High School area.

00:06:13.900 --> 00:06:18.180
 So we're hoping that's going to go forward to Council, either that last meeting in June

00:06:18.180 --> 00:06:22.260
 or the first meeting in July, right after we get back from the break.

00:06:22.260 --> 00:06:23.260
 Forgive me.

00:06:23.260 --> 00:06:28.220
 Riney Road East, is that where Riney Road intersects North Elm Street?

00:06:28.220 --> 00:06:29.220
 Yes, sir.

00:06:29.220 --> 00:06:30.220
 Yep.

00:06:30.220 --> 00:06:34.740
 And so it's essentially from the elementary school to US 77 there at Elm Street.

00:06:34.740 --> 00:06:36.220
 Which couldn't be very much.

00:06:36.220 --> 00:06:37.220
 It's not.

00:06:37.220 --> 00:06:38.220
 No, I think it's --

00:06:38.220 --> 00:06:39.220
 For a while or --

00:06:39.220 --> 00:06:40.220
 Maybe that much.

00:06:40.220 --> 00:06:41.220
 Maybe.

00:06:41.220 --> 00:06:42.220
 Probably less.

00:06:42.220 --> 00:06:48.040
 When will -- will that be finished before school starts?

00:06:48.040 --> 00:06:50.360
 It will not be finished before August.

00:06:50.360 --> 00:06:56.460
 So we're working with the Bonnebrae 6 contractor to have the section from Bonnebrae to the

00:06:56.460 --> 00:07:01.660
 eastern boundary of the elementary school completed by August 8th, I believe is what

00:07:01.660 --> 00:07:03.580
 we're tracking on.

00:07:03.580 --> 00:07:10.780
 That section from the east side of the elementary school 277 probably will not start until after

00:07:10.780 --> 00:07:12.340
 school's in session.

00:07:12.340 --> 00:07:16.180
 So the goal will be have it completed early next year.

00:07:16.180 --> 00:07:22.940
 When would you guesstimate it is complete from Bonnebrae to Elm Street?

00:07:22.940 --> 00:07:28.180
 My guess would be Q1, Q2 of '26, depending upon how quickly we get through the bidding

00:07:28.180 --> 00:07:29.180
 and advertising phase.

00:07:29.180 --> 00:07:30.180
 Okay.

00:07:30.180 --> 00:07:31.180
 Thank you.

00:07:31.180 --> 00:07:32.180
 You bet.

00:07:32.180 --> 00:07:36.620
 Any other questions?

00:07:36.620 --> 00:07:39.980
 I'm just very pleased to see that McKinney sidewalks are still on the list.

00:07:39.980 --> 00:07:40.980
 Yes, ma'am.

00:07:40.980 --> 00:07:42.740
 I actually have a meeting for that later on today.

00:07:42.740 --> 00:07:45.940
 So we're getting close to having our design finalized there.

00:07:45.940 --> 00:07:46.940
 Excellent.

00:07:46.940 --> 00:07:47.940
 Excellent.

00:07:47.940 --> 00:07:48.940
 Okay.

00:07:48.940 --> 00:07:49.940
 Well, you have a question about these?

00:07:49.940 --> 00:07:50.940
 I do.

00:07:50.940 --> 00:07:51.940
 I apologize.

00:07:51.940 --> 00:07:57.900
 I was at the same meeting that you were on, the Bank County Owned List News reveal -- reveals

00:07:57.900 --> 00:07:58.900
 the wrong word.

00:07:58.900 --> 00:08:07.140
 But anyway, did we cover the strode element of the staff member random?

00:08:07.140 --> 00:08:08.140
 We have not yet.

00:08:08.140 --> 00:08:09.140
 We're about to get to that.

00:08:09.140 --> 00:08:10.140
 Yeah.

00:08:10.140 --> 00:08:11.140
 We haven't gotten to that.

00:08:11.140 --> 00:08:12.140
 So we're going to stop here.

00:08:12.140 --> 00:08:13.140
 Okay.

00:08:13.140 --> 00:08:16.260
 And we've got to go back to the front with Barheed, with the bollards.

00:08:16.260 --> 00:08:17.260
 You don't want to just complete this?

00:08:17.260 --> 00:08:18.260
 Y'all don't want to finish this?

00:08:18.260 --> 00:08:19.260
 You don't want to finish this?

00:08:19.260 --> 00:08:20.260
 Yeah, let's complete this.

00:08:20.260 --> 00:08:21.260
 Okay.

00:08:21.260 --> 00:08:22.260
 Well, then let's complete this.

00:08:22.260 --> 00:08:23.260
 All right.

00:08:23.260 --> 00:08:24.260
 All right.

00:08:24.260 --> 00:08:25.260
 Any other questions on project updates?

00:08:25.260 --> 00:08:26.260
 Otherwise, I'm going to get it to Farhan to discuss their --

00:08:26.260 --> 00:08:27.260
 No, we'll finish this.

00:08:27.260 --> 00:08:29.300
 We're going to finish this on time real quick.

00:08:29.300 --> 00:08:30.300
 Now that you're here.

00:08:30.300 --> 00:08:31.300
 Yeah.

00:08:31.300 --> 00:08:32.300
 And then we'll go back.

00:08:32.300 --> 00:08:33.300
 Yeah.

00:08:33.300 --> 00:08:34.300
 That's fine.

00:08:34.300 --> 00:08:35.300
 So keep going.

00:08:35.300 --> 00:08:36.300
 Okay.

00:08:36.300 --> 00:08:37.300
 Barheed, sit down.

00:08:37.300 --> 00:08:38.300
 He's going to cover his items.

00:08:38.300 --> 00:08:39.300
 Oh, he's got an item.

00:08:39.300 --> 00:08:40.300
 Oh, okay.

00:08:40.300 --> 00:08:43.300
 I used my teacher voice, didn't I?

00:08:43.300 --> 00:08:44.300
 Sorry.

00:08:44.300 --> 00:08:52.220
 Good morning, Chair, and committee members, Farhan Butt, Deputy Director, Transportation

00:08:52.220 --> 00:08:54.180
 Services Division.

00:08:54.180 --> 00:09:03.580
 So we have here on memo items, we have allowed use of TRIP funds, and the exhibit was provided.

00:09:03.580 --> 00:09:15.540
 And if in case of TRIP funds, they are centric to DCTA's strategic plan, and any proposed

00:09:15.540 --> 00:09:21.100
 improvements that we recommend as projects must align with that plan, and also they should

00:09:21.100 --> 00:09:28.900
 be integrating or enhancing DCTA's service in terms of multimodal activities that not

00:09:28.900 --> 00:09:35.540
 only includes pedestrians, but also bicyclists, and location enhancements, stop bus location

00:09:35.540 --> 00:09:37.120
 enhancements, and more.

00:09:37.120 --> 00:09:39.420
 So the detailed memo has been submitted.

00:09:39.420 --> 00:09:42.900
 If there are any questions, I'll be happy to address.

00:09:42.900 --> 00:09:50.660
 And then for increased wrapped equipment box locations, again, the memo has been provided,

00:09:50.660 --> 00:09:57.140
 which talks about -- in details, it talks about how this plan is going.

00:09:57.140 --> 00:10:04.140
 And in order to expand this program, where we add more wrapped equipment box locations,

00:10:04.140 --> 00:10:08.460
 we would need additional budget.

00:10:08.460 --> 00:10:11.300
 Roughly the cost is $1,500 per unit.

00:10:11.300 --> 00:10:19.780
 And then there is a proposed honorarium that we are recommending to give to the artists.

00:10:19.780 --> 00:10:25.060
 If we add that on, that will be around $1,700 a unit.

00:10:25.060 --> 00:10:32.100
 And so we are happy to expand it, but as long as there is a budgetary approval for that,

00:10:32.100 --> 00:10:35.700
 and if budget is available, the transportation services will be happy to collaborate with

00:10:35.700 --> 00:10:38.660
 planning and CMO to expand this further.

00:10:38.660 --> 00:10:39.660
 >> Okay.

00:10:39.660 --> 00:10:40.660
 I think we have a question.

00:10:40.660 --> 00:10:41.660
 Did you have a question?

00:10:41.660 --> 00:10:42.660
 Oh.

00:10:42.660 --> 00:10:43.660
 >> No, on this one.

00:10:43.660 --> 00:10:44.660
 >> I'm sorry.

00:10:44.660 --> 00:10:46.220
 He had his hand up a little.

00:10:46.220 --> 00:10:56.540
 For Strouds, again, the memo -- for Strouds, again, the memo has been submitted with details

00:10:56.540 --> 00:11:03.300
 on rather high-level details because individually we have to cover on segment levels if this

00:11:03.300 --> 00:11:06.660
 committee is interested in looking into different segments.

00:11:06.660 --> 00:11:15.980
 But to give a brief account of what Strouds are, they are a combination of streets and

00:11:15.980 --> 00:11:22.860
 roads where they provide access to -- they are multi-lane arterials which provide access

00:11:22.860 --> 00:11:28.580
 to businesses and residential developments right to the lanes.

00:11:28.580 --> 00:11:35.580
 And so the access is -- there are multiple access points, and that makes them a bit risky

00:11:35.580 --> 00:11:41.940
 from an engineering standpoint, but they are widely used in locations where multiple access

00:11:41.940 --> 00:11:43.740
 points are needed.

00:11:43.740 --> 00:11:52.300
 But from planners and professionals' viewpoint, they are not highly recommended in many places.

00:11:52.300 --> 00:12:01.740
 The reason is that if we are not designing these Strouds correctly, we may put the road

00:12:01.740 --> 00:12:03.160
 users at risk.

00:12:03.160 --> 00:12:12.580
 So if it is recommended, it is expected that these Strouds are designed correctly by accommodating

00:12:12.580 --> 00:12:15.620
 all road users, not only cars.

00:12:15.620 --> 00:12:19.540
 And if there are any questions on that, I will be happy to address.

00:12:19.540 --> 00:12:21.620
 >> Yes, sir.

00:12:21.620 --> 00:12:24.300
 >> So I appreciate the framing and the definitions.

00:12:24.300 --> 00:12:28.340
 I think that's going to be helpful for the committee and council going forward, so thank

00:12:28.340 --> 00:12:29.340
 you for that.

00:12:29.340 --> 00:12:35.820
 One of the things when I asked for this item that I was trying to get to was that next

00:12:35.820 --> 00:12:42.100
 step that you sort of allude to in the conclusion, that you allude to just now in terms of -- I

00:12:42.100 --> 00:12:48.860
 mean, we certainly in our mobility plan can say, let's avoid Strouds, let's have roads

00:12:48.860 --> 00:12:56.460
 or streets, but we are -- as we expand, they tend to merge in the mobility plan because

00:12:56.460 --> 00:13:00.620
 we tend to reuse existing roadways.

00:13:00.620 --> 00:13:10.460
 And also then we get into the conundrum of, okay, now we have a street that has become

00:13:10.460 --> 00:13:16.660
 a road or a road that has become a street because of development pressures and expansion.

00:13:16.660 --> 00:13:23.500
 What are the recommendation -- I guess I was really looking for recommendations from transportation

00:13:23.500 --> 00:13:33.060
 experts like you to how do we mitigate a lot of the risks that you lay out in the documents.

00:13:33.060 --> 00:13:38.980
 So I like the definition, but I would like us to keep this on the radar because what

00:13:38.980 --> 00:13:47.280
 I didn't hear a lot of was -- and it doesn't have to be a per segment definition, but what

00:13:47.280 --> 00:13:53.380
 general approaches can we take that should be, you know, adopted in another committee

00:13:53.380 --> 00:14:03.700
 or in council like DCRC or P&Z or council to create policies that prevent these, and

00:14:03.700 --> 00:14:07.140
 then once we have them, what should we be doing to mitigate?

00:14:07.140 --> 00:14:13.500
 That's what I was -- that sort of the next page of this memorandum would have been delightful.

00:14:13.500 --> 00:14:16.100
 Is that a possibility to get some recommendations?

00:14:16.100 --> 00:14:23.060
 There's a possibility, but they are highly dependent on land use, a mix, and on case

00:14:23.060 --> 00:14:27.100
 by case basis, we'll have to figure out what treatments are needed.

00:14:27.100 --> 00:14:32.580
 So if there are identified corridors as a first step that these could be potentially

00:14:32.580 --> 00:14:39.880
 strode, then we could get into the criteria on what elements treatments would be included.

00:14:39.880 --> 00:14:45.740
 For instance, if there's a strode near the college, and it is heavily used by bikers

00:14:45.740 --> 00:14:49.860
 on the shoulder side, then we need appropriate treatments for that.

00:14:49.860 --> 00:14:55.180
 But on the contrary, if there's a retail, big retail where there's a lot of auto presence,

00:14:55.180 --> 00:15:00.480
 and it is conflicting with pedestrians, then we need treatments accordingly for pedestrians.

00:15:00.480 --> 00:15:08.300
 So it all depends on corridors, and we will have to define these treatments -- they're

00:15:08.300 --> 00:15:12.020
 context sensitive, basically, you know?

00:15:12.020 --> 00:15:16.220
 Corridors to corridor, it depends.

00:15:16.220 --> 00:15:23.700
 Not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good and vice versa, I guess maybe something

00:15:23.700 --> 00:15:33.500
 that would be helpful to various bodies is a delineation of where we have strodes, and

00:15:33.500 --> 00:15:41.300
 whether those strodes have particularly reproducible characteristics like you just described.

00:15:41.300 --> 00:15:50.380
 And I see you, I see you, but I can't pass the baton because only she can do that.

00:15:50.380 --> 00:15:58.220
 But in that way, the various committees and bodies can interact with you and say, okay,

00:15:58.220 --> 00:16:03.940
 this is a, just as you said, this is a retail area of a strode, and we have four strodes

00:16:03.940 --> 00:16:10.340
 that have a retail presence, this is what staff would recommend for that sort of thing.

00:16:10.340 --> 00:16:18.380
 And then later, get into the nitty-gritty of, okay, the razor ranch segment of 380 strode.

00:16:18.380 --> 00:16:24.180
 And I understand that that's going to be further down the pipeline, but in terms of asking

00:16:24.180 --> 00:16:27.780
 questions, setting policy, that's something that the various committees can do.

00:16:27.780 --> 00:16:28.780
 Okay.

00:16:28.780 --> 00:16:29.780
 Thank you.

00:16:29.780 --> 00:16:32.220
 In what, did you have, yes, did you have something?

00:16:32.220 --> 00:16:37.780
 I was just going to make a point, and Farhan can correct me on the dates, but I think the

00:16:37.780 --> 00:16:44.060
 next budget year, not this upcoming, we will be looking to do or begin the update for the

00:16:44.060 --> 00:16:49.100
 mobility plan, which I think is an ideal time for us to go through this exercise.

00:16:49.100 --> 00:16:53.740
 And that would kind of put those next steps in place as we look at what we introduced

00:16:53.740 --> 00:16:57.580
 with the previous mobility plan was contact-sensitive roads.

00:16:57.580 --> 00:17:02.620
 This just furthers what that is, and I think addresses Council Member Beck's questions

00:17:02.620 --> 00:17:04.460
 or concerns.

00:17:04.460 --> 00:17:15.020
 No, I love the planning, I'm a little concerned about a year and a half away.

00:17:15.020 --> 00:17:24.380
 I never, I understand that you have to weave together plans and not be reactive, but that

00:17:24.380 --> 00:17:33.020
 feels like we could have a more current timeline for some of the planning elements to be.

00:17:33.020 --> 00:17:42.460
 We'll work through that, and again, that would probably be at least a part of the mobility

00:17:42.460 --> 00:17:43.460
 plan.

00:17:43.460 --> 00:17:44.460
 Okay.

00:17:44.460 --> 00:17:45.460
 Thank you all for giving these definitions of Strode.

00:17:45.460 --> 00:17:51.900
 I'm curious, on the full memo, not this part, but the full memo, we had a list of some of

00:17:51.900 --> 00:17:54.300
 the merits and benefits of Strode's.

00:17:54.300 --> 00:17:59.020
 Until today, I'd never heard any benefits or merits of Strode's, so I'm curious, one,

00:17:59.020 --> 00:18:02.500
 to see what the source material was for that, so you don't have to do that right now.

00:18:02.500 --> 00:18:06.020
 But if you can send it to us after the fact, what that source material was.

00:18:06.020 --> 00:18:12.220
 And then there was another item in that memo that said, "Strode's, if not conceptualized

00:18:12.220 --> 00:18:17.520
 and designed properly, often proved to be an expensive and efficient and dangerous compromise."

00:18:17.520 --> 00:18:22.860
 So I'm curious what a properly designed Strode would look like, and sort of also source material

00:18:22.860 --> 00:18:24.860
 for that, because I haven't seen that before.

00:18:24.860 --> 00:18:28.340
 So I've added three references at the end of the document.

00:18:28.340 --> 00:18:33.260
 These are the main references, one of them is NACTO document.

00:18:33.260 --> 00:18:38.180
 And so we can provide more, if that helps.

00:18:38.180 --> 00:18:45.540
 And as far as the geometric design or design elements of Strode's, as I explained earlier,

00:18:45.540 --> 00:18:53.020
 it is dependent on what type of corridor it is, and what types of treatments needed.

00:18:53.020 --> 00:18:59.140
 As an example, again, if it is a college corridor, then we'll have to look for bicycle treatment.

00:18:59.140 --> 00:19:02.860
 And if we go one step deeper, we'll have to provide buffers for bike lanes, we'll have

00:19:02.860 --> 00:19:11.500
 to provide maybe bollards or blocks, concrete blocks, separation of flow of autos and active

00:19:11.500 --> 00:19:13.100
 transportation.

00:19:13.100 --> 00:19:20.220
 And if it is, on the contrary, retail spot with ATB or Walmart or Target, Super Target,

00:19:20.220 --> 00:19:26.100
 then we'll have to look for pedestrian conflicts with autos exiting and entering these facilities.

00:19:26.100 --> 00:19:31.300
 And not even there, but maybe a block away.

00:19:31.300 --> 00:19:35.500
 Mostly the activities of turning, vehicles turning from these residential neighborhoods

00:19:35.500 --> 00:19:37.700
 is a problem as well.

00:19:37.700 --> 00:19:44.840
 So we can provide more details, but again, it will be example of two or three examples

00:19:44.840 --> 00:19:52.100
 of retail versus college, or if this committee has recommended Strode corridor, we can look

00:19:52.100 --> 00:19:55.820
 into that as well.

00:19:55.820 --> 00:19:58.940
 So the NACDO document, because I've read the NACDO document before, I don't think I've

00:19:58.940 --> 00:20:02.180
 ever seen Strode's recommended in it, I guess.

00:20:02.180 --> 00:20:06.340
 That's where I'm getting a little caught up, because they tend to be, okay, either this

00:20:06.340 --> 00:20:11.420
 is an area that's encouraging walking, biking, and trying to make a safe facility, which

00:20:11.420 --> 00:20:13.940
 usually is not combined with high speeds.

00:20:13.940 --> 00:20:19.780
 The high speeds and lots of street activity is generally what creates the worst crashes.

00:20:19.780 --> 00:20:23.660
 And so I've never seen them, I guess, a thing that you want to do, it's something that you're

00:20:23.660 --> 00:20:25.900
 trying to make safer is generally what I've seen.

00:20:25.900 --> 00:20:28.100
 So I think that's why I'm getting a little confused by the memo.

00:20:28.100 --> 00:20:30.740
 So we can provide the reference.

00:20:30.740 --> 00:20:38.820
 And so one of the document is specifically talking about how improper designing activity.

00:20:38.820 --> 00:20:44.900
 What happens is that if the developments usually follow once the facilities are built or designed.

00:20:44.900 --> 00:20:51.900
 So once this full development scenario happens, by that time, those access points are, I won't

00:20:51.900 --> 00:20:55.140
 call them obsolete, but they are outdated.

00:20:55.140 --> 00:21:01.660
 So that means that facility with their full development is now acting like a Strode, but

00:21:01.660 --> 00:21:03.700
 it was never designed to be a Strode.

00:21:03.700 --> 00:21:09.940
 So that is the dilemma in traffic operations and transportation planning, where a street

00:21:09.940 --> 00:21:15.680
 in the beginning was designed as an arterial, providing some access points to a development

00:21:15.680 --> 00:21:22.840
 versus when the development had full potential with all the retail and commercial and residential

00:21:22.840 --> 00:21:30.000
 activities in there, those access points are, their designs is probably outdated.

00:21:30.000 --> 00:21:35.460
 So I think that's where the recommendation of looking at auditing these designs elements

00:21:35.460 --> 00:21:39.260
 and providing proper treatments come into play.

00:21:39.260 --> 00:21:40.260
 Okay.

00:21:40.260 --> 00:21:41.260
 Thank you.

00:21:41.260 --> 00:21:42.260
 Mm-hmm.

00:21:42.260 --> 00:21:50.420
 I feel like I was in a construction classroom, so thank you for the attention.

00:21:50.420 --> 00:21:53.060
 Yes, ma'am?

00:21:53.060 --> 00:21:54.060
 Hi.

00:21:54.060 --> 00:21:56.420
 Thank you so much for your information.

00:21:56.420 --> 00:22:04.500
 I was curious to know if we have surveyed or engaged the local residents kind of in these

00:22:04.500 --> 00:22:11.140
 corridors and also our business owners to find out how these corridors are currently

00:22:11.140 --> 00:22:18.060
 being used, maybe what issues that they face with how they currently are constructed, and

00:22:18.060 --> 00:22:24.060
 then maybe also what they would want them to become if they're not serving them currently.

00:22:24.060 --> 00:22:30.740
 Typically, that is a process when the developments come, we go to that public engagement process,

00:22:30.740 --> 00:22:35.300
 and on top of that, as Scott mentioned, when we go into the mobility plan stage, we have

00:22:35.300 --> 00:22:40.100
 active transportation element, we have smart mobility element of mobility plan that we

00:22:40.100 --> 00:22:42.140
 are planning to address.

00:22:42.140 --> 00:22:47.300
 So during that stage, we will have a public engagement process and we'll talk about these

00:22:47.300 --> 00:22:48.300
 corridors.

00:22:48.300 --> 00:22:52.840
 So before we get to that point, from what I understand, we're still in the kind of early

00:22:52.840 --> 00:22:57.500
 stages of understanding what these corridors are, defining them as strobes.

00:22:57.500 --> 00:23:03.780
 Would there be a process of asking for engagement from our citizens to find out this is something

00:23:03.780 --> 00:23:09.180
 we really do want to prioritize and have a process for so we can get started maybe on

00:23:09.180 --> 00:23:13.460
 some smaller segments of it, or where are we at on that?

00:23:13.460 --> 00:23:19.460
 The challenge is the fragmented approach would hurt us more than helping us, because imagine

00:23:19.460 --> 00:23:25.940
 if we go to one single corridor and then provide treatments there and are not able to account

00:23:25.940 --> 00:23:32.820
 for other factors that are coming from regional elements, it may backfire, because now we

00:23:32.820 --> 00:23:37.860
 are zooming in and looking at one small segment and trying to provide a treatment when the

00:23:37.860 --> 00:23:40.060
 problem is occurring elsewhere.

00:23:40.060 --> 00:23:45.220
 Those trips that are causing access problems at different retail developments or commercial

00:23:45.220 --> 00:23:49.980
 developments or residential access points are originating elsewhere.

00:23:49.980 --> 00:23:52.540
 They are not originating in that same community.

00:23:52.540 --> 00:24:00.180
 So I think that's why a regional review of strobes, if any possibility, would be a better

00:24:00.180 --> 00:24:06.820
 approach versus us individually going to these smaller segments and trying to address those.

00:24:06.820 --> 00:24:08.540
 I understand that.

00:24:08.540 --> 00:24:15.820
 What I might suggest though is that we've got where I live, I see a lot of elderly people

00:24:15.820 --> 00:24:16.820
 in wheelchairs.

00:24:16.820 --> 00:24:17.820
 I see kids.

00:24:17.820 --> 00:24:18.820
 I see people walking around.

00:24:18.820 --> 00:24:22.180
 I live kind of near Razor Ranch.

00:24:22.180 --> 00:24:29.980
 That need is now -- I totally understand taking a long-term approach, but I also kind of am

00:24:29.980 --> 00:24:36.740
 curious what can we do sooner and even in segmented or kind of quicker projects, even

00:24:36.740 --> 00:24:41.860
 if it's a temporary fix, but at least it's allowing people to get where they want to

00:24:41.860 --> 00:24:42.860
 go safely.

00:24:42.860 --> 00:24:44.140
 I don't know.

00:24:44.140 --> 00:24:51.980
 On the budget side, I'll let Scott talk about it, but I think we have a proposal ready for

00:24:51.980 --> 00:24:52.980
 US 380.

00:24:52.980 --> 00:24:59.780
 We submitted that project to HSIP, TextDOT's HSIP, and it was a pretty good project, well

00:24:59.780 --> 00:25:06.020
 thought, and TextDOT was on board as well, but due to TextDOT's processes, this project

00:25:06.020 --> 00:25:10.020
 was not selected, but there were some other projects selected which were high priority

00:25:10.020 --> 00:25:13.460
 based on the fatalities and crash data.

00:25:13.460 --> 00:25:18.900
 So this is our priority, that US 380 segment that you are talking about is priority to

00:25:18.900 --> 00:25:27.580
 us, and we are looking for venues where we can apply for funding to plan improvements

00:25:27.580 --> 00:25:32.140
 for this project, and hopefully we'll be able to give a good news soon on this.

00:25:32.140 --> 00:25:36.200
 We are proactively applying for funding, as a matter of fact, this will become part of

00:25:36.200 --> 00:25:39.540
 our SS4A application as well that is going in June.

00:25:39.540 --> 00:25:40.540
 Great.

00:25:40.540 --> 00:25:41.540
 Thank you.

00:25:41.540 --> 00:25:53.700
 Well, that was very informal, informational, but I do want to remind the public that you

00:25:53.700 --> 00:26:00.460
 don't know, I'm thinking about McKinney Street, I'm obsessed with McKinney Street, who knew

00:26:00.460 --> 00:26:06.060
 that there would be six or seven apartment complexes that have come up so quickly on

00:26:06.060 --> 00:26:14.800
 that road, and still having infill space that's still out there for that road, and you don't

00:26:14.800 --> 00:26:17.160
 really know what's going to be coming there.

00:26:17.160 --> 00:26:25.660
 So there is a process that everything has to go through before, I mean, we've been raising

00:26:25.660 --> 00:26:32.980
 all kinds of stuff, noise, for McKinney Street, and so we're still in the process, and so

00:26:32.980 --> 00:26:38.180
 that's what will have to be understood by many folks, that things are just not being

00:26:38.180 --> 00:26:39.180
 ignored.

00:26:39.180 --> 00:26:40.940
 It has to come through a process.

00:26:40.940 --> 00:26:43.700
 So we appreciate you all for that.

00:26:43.700 --> 00:26:45.700
 Alright, so then we got the walking audits.

00:26:45.700 --> 00:26:47.060
 Yeah, so walking audits are basically...

00:26:47.060 --> 00:26:48.860
 Oh, I'm sorry, did you have something over there?

00:26:48.860 --> 00:26:50.860
 I'm sorry, go ahead, I'm sorry, go ahead.

00:26:50.860 --> 00:26:58.980
 So walking audits are basically the preliminary audits at pedestrian locations where there

00:26:58.980 --> 00:27:03.260
 are obvious pedestrian issues that we find, and they are sporadic in nature.

00:27:03.260 --> 00:27:08.140
 For example, if there is one intersection where we have to go and audit the location,

00:27:08.140 --> 00:27:15.020
 we just go and complete the audit by walking in the area, as if we are the pedestrians,

00:27:15.020 --> 00:27:19.640
 and feel for it, and see what improvements are needed.

00:27:19.640 --> 00:27:22.100
 And they're very helpful, they're quite helpful actually.

00:27:22.100 --> 00:27:30.700
 And then if there is a serious conflict detected with autos or other modes, then only then

00:27:30.700 --> 00:27:33.340
 we just go for comprehensive audits.

00:27:33.340 --> 00:27:38.740
 So comprehensive audits would look into full length traffic operation measures, active

00:27:38.740 --> 00:27:44.340
 transportation measures, and then safety measures, and crash data, and all the math that goes

00:27:44.340 --> 00:27:45.340
 into it.

00:27:45.340 --> 00:27:50.020
 So for the walk audit, we just simply walk the area, sometimes neighborhood folks join

00:27:50.020 --> 00:27:57.140
 us in these walks, and I've seen a couple of cases where they would just ask us to join

00:27:57.140 --> 00:28:02.980
 them, and then we will just audit the area and conclude with them what is actually needed

00:28:02.980 --> 00:28:05.020
 as an improvement there.

00:28:05.020 --> 00:28:07.220
 In other cases, we will just...

00:28:07.220 --> 00:28:14.500
 This request would come from citizens, and staff would go and audit those locations.

00:28:14.500 --> 00:28:15.500
 Any questions?

00:28:15.500 --> 00:28:16.500
 Any comments?

00:28:16.500 --> 00:28:17.500
 Any concerns?

00:28:17.500 --> 00:28:18.500
 All right.

00:28:18.500 --> 00:28:26.420
 So upcoming transportation service agenda items.

00:28:26.420 --> 00:28:27.900
 Thank you.

00:28:27.900 --> 00:28:30.860
 Are we still...

00:28:30.860 --> 00:28:31.860
 Okay.

00:28:31.860 --> 00:28:32.860
 Okay.

00:28:32.860 --> 00:28:44.380
 All right, I guess it goes on to the next page there.

00:28:44.380 --> 00:28:51.420
 There you go.

00:28:51.420 --> 00:28:52.420
 Anybody have any questions?

00:28:52.420 --> 00:28:59.420
 Any comments or concerns about the upcoming transportation service agenda items?

00:28:59.420 --> 00:29:05.660
 We have one question there, Mr. Faughan.

00:29:05.660 --> 00:29:14.060
 Can you just give us a little more color to the Malone University comments there?

00:29:14.060 --> 00:29:15.060
 What's going on there?

00:29:15.060 --> 00:29:16.060
 What are the delays?

00:29:16.060 --> 00:29:17.060
 What are the concerns?

00:29:17.060 --> 00:29:25.500
 Because we just sort of, we put it back in the cloud and left it nebulous.

00:29:25.500 --> 00:29:28.700
 So what's going on there?

00:29:28.700 --> 00:29:29.700
 Which item is it?

00:29:29.700 --> 00:29:30.700
 I can talk about it, but I want to...

00:29:30.700 --> 00:29:31.700
 Prohibiting free right turns at Malone?

00:29:31.700 --> 00:29:32.700
 No right turns.

00:29:32.700 --> 00:29:33.700
 Oh, yeah.

00:29:33.700 --> 00:29:48.060
 So for this item, there was a request to reconsider and see if we are willing to look at it from

00:29:48.060 --> 00:29:55.820
 the viewpoint that if these no turns are needed, these signages are needed, and then also highlighting

00:29:55.820 --> 00:29:57.100
 of these signages.

00:29:57.100 --> 00:30:01.660
 So these two considerations, we are already looking into this and we may...

00:30:01.660 --> 00:30:08.780
 I think there is an audit that is scheduled for this, and we may come with more information

00:30:08.780 --> 00:30:13.700
 in the next meeting.

00:30:13.700 --> 00:30:14.980
 And these were chandras.

00:30:14.980 --> 00:30:20.000
 They were carried forward for the mere fact that during school hours, there were safety

00:30:20.000 --> 00:30:22.420
 concerns with the right turns.

00:30:22.420 --> 00:30:27.660
 So it's just prohibiting the right turns on those three, I think the three...

00:30:27.660 --> 00:30:33.340
 There's three road sections, but just in specific, this West University of Malone is really updating

00:30:33.340 --> 00:30:34.340
 this body.

00:30:34.340 --> 00:30:38.740
 And I think there's a request to highlight those signages as well.

00:30:38.740 --> 00:30:45.580
 So we are considering those options and have more details in the next meeting.

00:30:45.580 --> 00:30:46.580
 Is this something...

00:30:46.580 --> 00:30:53.180
 I know that the way our policies are currently structured, these have to come back to council

00:30:53.180 --> 00:30:54.780
 to get approval.

00:30:54.780 --> 00:31:02.100
 Is that something where we could streamline this to make it easier for transportation

00:31:02.100 --> 00:31:04.580
 services to implement?

00:31:04.580 --> 00:31:10.980
 Because I have it in my four years now, I've never seen us say no to a safety recommendation.

00:31:10.980 --> 00:31:16.620
 So and Vicki and I are now the senior members of council.

00:31:16.620 --> 00:31:25.020
 So is there something that staff would encourage council to visit to streamline?

00:31:25.020 --> 00:31:29.300
 If this recommendation comes from mobility committee, staff could draft something for

00:31:29.300 --> 00:31:31.740
 that and present.

00:31:31.740 --> 00:31:34.820
 But the recommendation has to come from mobility committee.

00:31:34.820 --> 00:31:38.620
 All the recommendation for the streamline process?

00:31:38.620 --> 00:31:39.620
 Yes.

00:31:39.620 --> 00:31:40.620
 Yes.

00:31:40.620 --> 00:31:44.140
 I would love to maybe...

00:31:44.140 --> 00:31:45.900
 I don't think this is the right item.

00:31:45.900 --> 00:31:47.380
 I think legal would check this.

00:31:47.380 --> 00:31:51.180
 But for the right item, I'd love to explore getting that on the matrix to see if that's

00:31:51.180 --> 00:31:57.020
 something that this committee could send a positive recommendation for.

00:31:57.020 --> 00:32:03.860
 If this is a safety positive thing, I'd love to see that be...

00:32:03.860 --> 00:32:10.300
 If we can do the recommendation somehow in this agenda, great.

00:32:10.300 --> 00:32:14.140
 But I defer to legal whether we can do it today or not.

00:32:14.140 --> 00:32:17.300
 But yeah, I didn't think so.

00:32:17.300 --> 00:32:21.660
 So I would love to have that come back at the appropriate time for us to see if that's

00:32:21.660 --> 00:32:28.180
 a good recommendation to push and maybe get staff's input on that.

00:32:28.180 --> 00:32:30.220
 Yes, sir.

00:32:30.220 --> 00:32:31.740
 The code would have to be updated.

00:32:31.740 --> 00:32:36.660
 So staff can evaluate if there's anything that we can do to bring forth to this body

00:32:36.660 --> 00:32:39.160
 just to say this would help to streamline.

00:32:39.160 --> 00:32:41.260
 But code changes would be required.

00:32:41.260 --> 00:32:45.660
 So it's more than what this body can do as an advisory.

00:32:45.660 --> 00:32:50.740
 All right.

00:32:50.740 --> 00:32:52.860
 Anything else on upcoming transportation services?

00:32:52.860 --> 00:32:53.860
 All right.

00:32:53.860 --> 00:33:01.820
 It looks like we can move on to upcoming public meetings, upcoming public meetings.

00:33:01.820 --> 00:33:05.540
 Oh, okay.

00:33:05.540 --> 00:33:11.940
 June the 12th, did you want to say something?

00:33:11.940 --> 00:33:19.180
 So this is I think construction project maybe set would be...

00:33:19.180 --> 00:33:20.180
 Thank you.

00:33:20.180 --> 00:33:23.180
 Thank you, Mr. Betts.

00:33:23.180 --> 00:33:24.180
 All right.

00:33:24.180 --> 00:33:26.220
 So Seth Garcia, Interim Director of Capital Projects.

00:33:26.220 --> 00:33:29.880
 So yeah, this is just that Westgate Drive reconstruction project that I was speaking

00:33:29.880 --> 00:33:30.880
 of earlier.

00:33:30.880 --> 00:33:34.060
 This is the east-west connector that's going to connect Bronco Way all the way over to

00:33:34.060 --> 00:33:38.300
 the 35 northbound side.

00:33:38.300 --> 00:33:42.300
 So that contract will be going to council here in June.

00:33:42.300 --> 00:33:46.880
 And so we'll hold that public meeting right after to get started in construction.

00:33:46.880 --> 00:33:47.880
 Thank you.

00:33:47.880 --> 00:33:48.880
 You bet.

00:33:48.880 --> 00:33:52.180
 Anybody have any questions about that?

00:33:52.180 --> 00:33:53.180
 Okay.

00:33:53.180 --> 00:33:58.740
 Well, while you're standing there, if there's not any additional questions in this regard

00:33:58.740 --> 00:34:12.540
 for the staff memorandum, then we will go back to BMC25-022, receive a report, and hold

00:34:12.540 --> 00:34:21.340
 a discussion regarding the Ballard evaluation.

00:34:21.340 --> 00:34:28.060
 This is where we were.

00:34:28.060 --> 00:34:29.780
 Thank you, Chair and committee members.

00:34:29.780 --> 00:34:33.460
 Farhan Bhatt, Deputy Director of Transportation Services.

00:34:33.460 --> 00:34:39.820
 This is the third presentation on Ballard evaluation topic.

00:34:39.820 --> 00:34:43.100
 This is the last of this Ballard evaluation series.

00:34:43.100 --> 00:34:50.860
 And we'll cover, we have previously covered the types of ballards and then a lot of information

00:34:50.860 --> 00:34:56.260
 on their standards and locations and potential best practice users.

00:34:56.260 --> 00:35:01.540
 And in this case, in this presentation, we will, staff will provide a brief recap in

00:35:01.540 --> 00:35:08.860
 one slide and then we'll move forward to recommendations of ballard types that we have recommended

00:35:08.860 --> 00:35:12.460
 for City of Denton and then for use in City of Denton.

00:35:12.460 --> 00:35:16.380
 And then we'll have selected corridors for implementation that we are recommending based

00:35:16.380 --> 00:35:27.660
 on our audit and future recommendations including, you know, what types of corridors could further

00:35:27.660 --> 00:35:28.660
 be added.

00:35:28.660 --> 00:35:43.060
 Oh, sorry, I did not realize, I apologize.

00:35:43.060 --> 00:35:55.300
 And so, when it comes to ballards, we previously presented through references that, you know,

00:35:55.300 --> 00:36:04.540
 they help reduce up to 56% of bike versus auto crashes in, you know, in most cases when

00:36:04.540 --> 00:36:07.420
 added to a bike lane in particular.

00:36:07.420 --> 00:36:13.980
 And then from standard standpoint, you know, average, if we compare with a standard full-size

00:36:13.980 --> 00:36:21.100
 truck which is six feet by seven, ballards would stand for a four feet average bike lane

00:36:21.100 --> 00:36:28.940
 around three to 3.5 feet tall and separating the flow, different flow movements and making

00:36:28.940 --> 00:36:36.940
 it safer for the bike users to traverse through to the road.

00:36:36.940 --> 00:36:45.460
 Based on our research on this topic and best practice use cases that we have already discussed,

00:36:45.460 --> 00:36:47.980
 we recommend two different types of ballards.

00:36:47.980 --> 00:36:55.580
 First is the typical ballards which are, you know, in most cases, they'll have 20 to 40

00:36:55.580 --> 00:36:58.060
 feet of intervals, sometimes 50 as well.

00:36:58.060 --> 00:37:05.100
 And then they are in the form of flexi sticks which are added directly to the streets or

00:37:05.100 --> 00:37:14.500
 sometimes based on they have a platform that is used to put those on the roads and streets.

00:37:14.500 --> 00:37:21.380
 And also in case of curved locations or near the intersections, the distance between these

00:37:21.380 --> 00:37:32.940
 ballards is usually dropped to provide safer traversing opportunity for the bikers.

00:37:32.940 --> 00:37:37.380
 Typically they are made of plastics but there are other elements that are used as well.

00:37:37.380 --> 00:37:41.220
 Sometimes they are aluminum ballards as well, they are available in the market.

00:37:41.220 --> 00:37:49.620
 And design varies and based on the use and cost or budget available.

00:37:49.620 --> 00:37:54.660
 Typically the ones we are recommending are made of plastic and then they'll have two

00:37:54.660 --> 00:38:00.740
 feet buffer, closer spacing to curves, and then cost would be around 50 per unit, $50

00:38:00.740 --> 00:38:01.740
 per unit.

00:38:01.740 --> 00:38:10.700
 Installation cost would be around additional $25 and total making it to $75 per unit, including

00:38:10.700 --> 00:38:14.220
 installation cost.

00:38:14.220 --> 00:38:20.340
 Second type of, this really is not a ballard but it's a concrete block separator that is

00:38:20.340 --> 00:38:29.980
 used on, in bike lane buffers, typically, and usually they are sized at eight feet by

00:38:29.980 --> 00:38:40.460
 one foot dimension and they provide a lot of opportunity for painting them, for accommodating

00:38:40.460 --> 00:38:45.060
 different types of situations, their size could be changed as well, they could be interlocked.

00:38:45.060 --> 00:38:52.620
 And then on top of, if their lighting is an issue due to whatever reason, design reasons,

00:38:52.620 --> 00:38:55.820
 we could also put ballards on top of these blocks.

00:38:55.820 --> 00:39:01.940
 I've seen some of those in Washington DC, in Boston, they are widely used where they

00:39:01.940 --> 00:39:10.500
 are blocks, interlocked, and at some places they are buffered, but they have these flexible

00:39:10.500 --> 00:39:18.300
 ballards on top of them, highlighting, delineating the safe traversing opportunity for the bikers.

00:39:18.300 --> 00:39:25.460
 Bulk cost would be $300 per unit and installation cost is around $150 to $200, depending on

00:39:25.460 --> 00:39:32.660
 the location, how complex it is, and then depending on project length as well.

00:39:32.660 --> 00:39:37.500
 With that, we go to the selected corridors for implementation, we have Malone Street

00:39:37.500 --> 00:39:47.180
 north of US 380 to Amherst Drive, as shown in Exhibit A. Malone Street is a two lane

00:39:47.180 --> 00:39:55.740
 collector and it is connecting a residential neighborhood to US 380 or University, and

00:39:55.740 --> 00:40:01.940
 the terminal part where it just connects to US 380 provides opportunity to have access

00:40:01.940 --> 00:40:09.300
 to detail and commercial on both sides actually of US 380.

00:40:09.300 --> 00:40:15.700
 In this case, we are recommending from Amherst Drive to US 380, which is a critical portion,

00:40:15.700 --> 00:40:23.380
 that's where the conflicts are happening, because bikers would be trying to reach on

00:40:23.380 --> 00:40:29.020
 other side or maybe on east or west side of this facility, and that's where we need to

00:40:29.020 --> 00:40:33.500
 make sure that we are separating them from the flow movement.

00:40:33.500 --> 00:40:38.860
 Another one is Georgetown Drive north of US 380 again to Amherst Drive, it's pretty much

00:40:38.860 --> 00:40:45.100
 same neighborhood, similar conditions, connecting the residential neighborhood to the attractions

00:40:45.100 --> 00:40:55.940
 on US 380, where bicycle users, they are trying to access these different choices they have,

00:40:55.940 --> 00:41:00.940
 and again, we are trying to make sure that the conflicts in the last part of the segment

00:41:00.940 --> 00:41:07.060
 of Georgetown Drive is made safer for bikers, because that's where the conflicts are happening,

00:41:07.060 --> 00:41:11.220
 that's where the turning movements are, that's where the access points are, so all of those

00:41:11.220 --> 00:41:20.940
 in that traffic chaos, we are trying to provide a safe way for them to cross.

00:41:20.940 --> 00:41:25.620
 Another corridor, recommended corridor for implementation is Actors Street from US 380

00:41:25.620 --> 00:41:32.540
 south to Scripture Street, as shown in Exhibit C. Actors Street is a two-lane collector,

00:41:32.540 --> 00:41:39.100
 and again, this, the northern part of Actors Street close to US 380 has some commercial,

00:41:39.100 --> 00:41:46.940
 some retail, but then, as we go south, all the way to Scripture, it's fairly residential,

00:41:46.940 --> 00:41:54.540
 and heavily used by bikers, based on our audit, and relatively heavily used by bikers, and

00:41:54.540 --> 00:41:59.860
 so that's why we are recommending this as a potential corridor for implementation.

00:41:59.860 --> 00:42:07.140
 We have Malone Street south of US 380 again, and all the way to Scripture, that's another

00:42:07.140 --> 00:42:12.460
 corridor where, close to US 380, it has some retail and commercial activity, but then,

00:42:12.460 --> 00:42:19.700
 as we go south, it's fairly residential neighborhood, and we are trying to ensure that bikers, while

00:42:19.700 --> 00:42:24.740
 they traverse through this road, are safe.

00:42:24.740 --> 00:42:31.620
 And there's a potential concrete walled roadway candidates, which is Carroll Boulevard, South

00:42:31.620 --> 00:42:39.660
 Carroll Boulevard, US 380 to Parkway Boulevard, and it's a six-lane primary arterial, and

00:42:39.660 --> 00:42:45.940
 so that's why, since it is a primary arterial, so speed is a concern, so the concrete blocks

00:42:45.940 --> 00:42:53.340
 will not only provide buffers, but they will provide a clear exclusivity to bike lane,

00:42:53.340 --> 00:42:57.660
 and make the whole travel experience safer for bicyclists.

00:42:57.660 --> 00:43:05.580
 There are other future corridors, including Bonny Bray Street, Oak Street, McKinney, Elm,

00:43:05.580 --> 00:43:09.980
 and more, more and more corridors we can come up with, but of course, you know, if we go

00:43:09.980 --> 00:43:15.900
 in further details, we'll have to do audit, we'll have to do those checks before we recommend

00:43:15.900 --> 00:43:20.100
 them for any treatment.

00:43:20.100 --> 00:43:29.980
 So for future recommendations, we looked into the whole area as an activity or circle of

00:43:29.980 --> 00:43:33.980
 activity image.

00:43:33.980 --> 00:43:40.660
 So this image that we have drawn, the circles are going beyond the image on purpose.

00:43:40.660 --> 00:43:46.380
 The reason is that we understand that there is a residential influence in this community

00:43:46.380 --> 00:43:54.860
 all over, but then if you see that there's a square, which is a major attractor in off-peak

00:43:54.860 --> 00:44:01.180
 hours in particular, then we have TWU, which is also a major attractor during the peak

00:44:01.180 --> 00:44:08.700
 hours, then we have UNT on the southeastern side, a major attractor again, and then there's

00:44:08.700 --> 00:44:16.780
 an elementary school, yes, in the middle right here, Newton Rays Elementary School, and many

00:44:16.780 --> 00:44:19.860
 other retail opportunities.

00:44:19.860 --> 00:44:28.140
 So what it essentially is trying to tell is a story, that story of bicyclists and pedestrians

00:44:28.140 --> 00:44:34.500
 that are actively using these uses in this area, in this neighborhood, and so you can

00:44:34.500 --> 00:44:41.180
 see that it overlaps, these circles are having, and the more overlaps, this central region

00:44:41.180 --> 00:44:46.100
 of overlapping areas is basically the activity center.

00:44:46.100 --> 00:44:51.100
 That's where things are happening, and the larger outer circles, that's where the trips

00:44:51.100 --> 00:44:57.700
 are originating, and these trips are in many cases, bike, bicycle, and pedestrians.

00:44:57.700 --> 00:45:02.660
 And so not only these corridors, and you can see that how these green corridors, they are

00:45:02.660 --> 00:45:09.380
 going right through the heart of these areas, these activity areas.

00:45:09.380 --> 00:45:17.860
 Staff believe that this entire area needs improvements when it comes to bicycle and

00:45:17.860 --> 00:45:25.020
 pedestrians, and as we go, we will continue conducting audits and providing treatments

00:45:25.020 --> 00:45:31.020
 when it comes to road safety and bicycle and pedestrian movements.

00:45:31.020 --> 00:45:35.420
 And most of our audits will be context-sensitive, we'll not just look at the street, but we'll

00:45:35.420 --> 00:45:39.380
 look at the uses, where people are actually coming from, where they are going to, where

00:45:39.380 --> 00:45:44.700
 they are trying to go, and how we can connect them better.

00:45:44.700 --> 00:45:49.020
 We will also update the active transportation plan, incoming mobility plan update, this element

00:45:49.020 --> 00:45:50.020
 will be updated.

00:45:50.020 --> 00:46:04.580
 I really appreciate the integration of the original request, and then the Malone focus

00:46:04.580 --> 00:46:10.220
 that's come around recently, or the Malone University area, so all those are excellent,

00:46:10.220 --> 00:46:16.580
 and I really commend the destination planning for tractors, all that.

00:46:16.580 --> 00:46:24.820
 We have some existing corridors that also provided impetus to comments from the community,

00:46:24.820 --> 00:46:33.100
 through us, through council, Hector, Parkway, Congress, Old North, some places where we're

00:46:33.100 --> 00:46:40.700
 using the four inch bollards, and if you could talk a little bit about what's the plan for

00:46:40.700 --> 00:46:46.780
 the old bollard locations integrating with the potentials that you talked about in this

00:46:46.780 --> 00:46:47.780
 plan.

00:46:47.780 --> 00:46:50.220
 Are you going to swap them out, or what's the situation?

00:46:50.220 --> 00:46:58.460
 We have already done some audits at old bollard locations, and in cases where they are old,

00:46:58.460 --> 00:47:06.980
 they are tangled, or displaced, or not in good shape, we are planning to, at least in

00:47:06.980 --> 00:47:12.100
 one case, the audit suggested that we'll remove them and provide striping, because they are

00:47:12.100 --> 00:47:19.460
 more appropriate, because they were, the bollard areas were, I think, exploited by parkings,

00:47:19.460 --> 00:47:25.540
 so we wanted to get away from that and provide, so that audit is still continuing, and we

00:47:25.540 --> 00:47:30.260
 are looking into that, and we can provide some information about the audit on, I think

00:47:30.260 --> 00:47:36.420
 it's on Windsor as well, and then there is another road that we are conducting this audit.

00:47:36.420 --> 00:47:43.140
 So let me just paraphrase so I understand, so some places you will swap them out for

00:47:43.140 --> 00:47:50.120
 the new flexi sticks, other places you'll, depending on the outcomes of the audit, may

00:47:50.120 --> 00:47:51.120
 be striping.

00:47:51.120 --> 00:47:52.120
 Yes.

00:47:52.120 --> 00:47:53.120
 Is that a summary?

00:47:53.120 --> 00:47:54.120
 That is correct.

00:47:54.120 --> 00:47:55.120
 Okay.

00:47:55.120 --> 00:47:56.120
 All right.

00:47:56.120 --> 00:48:01.700
 And we can expect that when, when's the ETA on these changes?

00:48:01.700 --> 00:48:08.880
 It is tied to budget, and we will, if our ongoing budget allows, some of them may happen,

00:48:08.880 --> 00:48:14.100
 but it is highly linked to budget availability.

00:48:14.100 --> 00:48:19.400
 Last question, how much do the 4-inch bollards cost us to replace?

00:48:19.400 --> 00:48:23.660
 Someone told us this a long time ago, maybe you, and I just don't remember, you were saying

00:48:23.660 --> 00:48:31.340
 these are $50 each and with an additional $25 to install, how much are the round 4-inch

00:48:31.340 --> 00:48:33.540
 bollards like we have now?

00:48:33.540 --> 00:48:38.420
 I think that's the cost we came up with, so 50, so that predates me, the existing one

00:48:38.420 --> 00:48:45.300
 that when they were purchased, but I think based on the current cost, this is our assessment,

00:48:45.300 --> 00:48:47.140
 $50 per unit.

00:48:47.140 --> 00:48:52.980
 And so we, I can, so staff can look into this and see what was the cost for the bollards

00:48:52.980 --> 00:48:53.980
 that we purchased.

00:48:53.980 --> 00:48:59.760
 No, I'm just curious what the relative cost of the old bollards versus this, the new flexi

00:48:59.760 --> 00:49:04.660
 sticks concept is relative to each other is all, it's not urgent.

00:49:04.660 --> 00:49:05.660
 It's what?

00:49:05.660 --> 00:49:06.660
 The previous one will be cheaper.

00:49:06.660 --> 00:49:07.660
 The previous one will be cheaper.

00:49:07.660 --> 00:49:10.260
 Because of the cost inflation and all those other things.

00:49:10.260 --> 00:49:11.260
 Okay, gotcha, thank you.

00:49:11.260 --> 00:49:12.260
 Anyone else, yes?

00:49:12.260 --> 00:49:21.460
 I just want to follow up on that, that seems incredible, that little, what is it, 4 feet

00:49:21.460 --> 00:49:22.460
 tall?

00:49:22.460 --> 00:49:29.100
 Yes, 3.5 to 4 feet, well, 3 to 3.5 feet tall.

00:49:29.100 --> 00:49:31.460
 And is the block, is there an adhesive?

00:49:31.460 --> 00:49:32.460
 Oh, the block?

00:49:32.460 --> 00:49:33.460
 You're talking about the block?

00:49:33.460 --> 00:49:37.340
 No, no, no, I was talking about the, what are we gonna call it, he called them flexi

00:49:37.340 --> 00:49:38.340
 sticks, I hate that.

00:49:38.340 --> 00:49:41.940
 So bollards is a, I think we can call them bollard or flexi sticks.

00:49:41.940 --> 00:49:43.020
 Flexi sticks, okay.

00:49:43.020 --> 00:49:50.020
 The flexi stick includes the vertical and the base, and it looks to be about a 12 inch

00:49:50.020 --> 00:49:51.020
 base.

00:49:51.020 --> 00:49:56.220
 Yes, and let me take it, yeah, so this is where we have dimension 3 to 3.5 feet.

00:49:56.220 --> 00:49:59.920
 Is there an adhesive under that to hold the base down?

00:49:59.920 --> 00:50:00.920
 Different options.

00:50:00.920 --> 00:50:04.460
 We can bolt them, but adhesive is as well, there's an option for adhesive, depending

00:50:04.460 --> 00:50:05.460
 on the use.

00:50:05.460 --> 00:50:15.180
 If the use is at not very highly used location, for example, if it is a mall area where we

00:50:15.180 --> 00:50:17.260
 are using bollards, it could be adhesive.

00:50:17.260 --> 00:50:24.660
 Okay, that just seems like a stunning amount.

00:50:24.660 --> 00:50:29.580
 And the blocks are eight feet by one foot.

00:50:29.580 --> 00:50:31.700
 And they're $300.

00:50:31.700 --> 00:50:35.140
 Yes, and that is a bulk cost.

00:50:35.140 --> 00:50:38.980
 If we buy fewer, then it will be slightly higher.

00:50:38.980 --> 00:50:48.940
 This is a great, I really appreciate your thoughtfulness on considering where people

00:50:48.940 --> 00:50:53.140
 are traveling to.

00:50:53.140 --> 00:50:57.420
 Like I mentioned earlier, I do live in this neighborhood, and we have a lot of neighbors

00:50:57.420 --> 00:51:04.500
 that work at UNT or work on the square, and that is their direct path.

00:51:04.500 --> 00:51:08.380
 And we're hoping to be able to get there safely.

00:51:08.380 --> 00:51:19.540
 One thing I was curious about, the streets mentioned here, Malone, Georgetown, Ector,

00:51:19.540 --> 00:51:27.340
 and potential, let's see, South Carroll.

00:51:27.340 --> 00:51:34.980
 Those areas, there are no sidewalks for pedestrians, which is something that I'm really concerned

00:51:34.980 --> 00:51:35.980
 about.

00:51:35.980 --> 00:51:40.900
 I've noticed that on South Carroll, there's one side of the street where the people who

00:51:40.900 --> 00:51:43.140
 live there are trapped.

00:51:43.140 --> 00:51:47.060
 They literally cannot walk anywhere from their home.

00:51:47.060 --> 00:51:52.860
 So I'm wondering if these protected lanes, could they be pedestrian and for cyclists?

00:51:52.860 --> 00:51:58.140
 Could we mark them as for both, kind of like what happened by Newton-Razor, which right

00:51:58.140 --> 00:52:03.340
 now after that has been implemented, it is being used by pedestrians and cyclists.

00:52:03.340 --> 00:52:09.060
 And wondering if that could be a cost-effective way, instead of constructing sidewalks and

00:52:09.060 --> 00:52:16.020
 side paths in those areas, could we mark these lanes for pedestrians and cyclists?

00:52:16.020 --> 00:52:17.020
 That's a possibility.

00:52:17.020 --> 00:52:22.300
 When we look into the implementation of the project and the design, we may look into the

00:52:22.300 --> 00:52:29.340
 multi-use path option, especially because we are suggesting blocks, using concrete blocks.

00:52:29.340 --> 00:52:33.740
 So there is a possibility, but of course we'll have to go to some kind of road diet because

00:52:33.740 --> 00:52:38.100
 it will take additional space if we put a pedestrian there.

00:52:38.100 --> 00:52:40.740
 But we are open to that idea.

00:52:40.740 --> 00:52:45.220
 And then with the design at this, so after this, forgive me, I may not know the correct

00:52:45.220 --> 00:52:46.220
 process here.

00:52:46.220 --> 00:52:51.940
 So these are selected corridors for implementation and then there will be a design, and I'm curious

00:52:51.940 --> 00:52:56.980
 in some of these areas where, for example, at Malone Street north of 380, right now there

00:52:56.980 --> 00:52:58.940
 are three car lanes.

00:52:58.940 --> 00:53:03.780
 If you're heading south, there's a turn lane, which I'm guessing maybe there would be reworking

00:53:03.780 --> 00:53:05.500
 of some of those lanes.

00:53:05.500 --> 00:53:09.100
 Would that be presented at some point when we come up with a, when you come up with a

00:53:09.100 --> 00:53:12.020
 design for these protected lanes?

00:53:12.020 --> 00:53:13.500
 It will be at the implementation.

00:53:13.500 --> 00:53:17.460
 If we go towards the implementation of any of these projects, yes, they could be included

00:53:17.460 --> 00:53:19.700
 in mobility committee presentations.

00:53:19.700 --> 00:53:24.140
 And then my last question would be, I know the cost is something that we're concerned

00:53:24.140 --> 00:53:27.260
 about.

00:53:27.260 --> 00:53:34.060
 When we think long-term about if these lanes are here, I'm wondering if there's any way

00:53:34.060 --> 00:53:45.240
 we, if staff or someone can find out what the economic benefits could be once these

00:53:45.240 --> 00:53:51.420
 things are implemented, the cost, if that would kind of helps us think through offsetting

00:53:51.420 --> 00:53:59.500
 the cost, if it allows people to get to more businesses or get to work, less road use,

00:53:59.500 --> 00:54:06.180
 less cars on the road, how do we kind of find out maybe the benefits, the cost benefits

00:54:06.180 --> 00:54:10.300
 for those, for the implementing these kinds of projects and then if we were to find a

00:54:10.300 --> 00:54:16.420
 way to measure those things, could we then repeat that process when we maybe think about

00:54:16.420 --> 00:54:18.600
 doing other corridors?

00:54:18.600 --> 00:54:24.740
 It will depend on each corridor, how much savings are there, but yes, that cost benefit

00:54:24.740 --> 00:54:27.940
 analysis is typically done post implementation.

00:54:27.940 --> 00:54:33.360
 Great, thank you.

00:54:33.360 --> 00:54:36.180
 Thank you for all this information, Farhan.

00:54:36.180 --> 00:54:42.700
 One question I had, or clarification I guess, the picture of that plastic bollard is not

00:54:42.700 --> 00:54:47.260
 necessary, y'all aren't necessarily recommending that specific design, that's just an example

00:54:47.260 --> 00:54:48.260
 of a plastic bollard, correct?

00:54:48.260 --> 00:54:49.260
 That is correct.

00:54:49.260 --> 00:54:51.680
 So it could be any variety that y'all might go with?

00:54:51.680 --> 00:54:52.680
 That is correct.

00:54:52.680 --> 00:54:53.680
 Okay, I just wanted to clarify that.

00:54:53.680 --> 00:54:57.580
 I felt like maybe we were taking it as like that's the literal one, but could be that,

00:54:57.580 --> 00:55:00.940
 could be the one we've been using, something like that, just as an example of a plastic

00:55:00.940 --> 00:55:02.060
 one.

00:55:02.060 --> 00:55:06.580
 And then on this slide, it does say spacing may be 20 to 40 feet.

00:55:06.580 --> 00:55:10.320
 Do we have a standard of some sort that we will use for that?

00:55:10.320 --> 00:55:15.180
 Because I know on Hickory near Fry, it was 40 feet and right off the bat I was like that's

00:55:15.180 --> 00:55:20.180
 not gonna work, 'cause my car's like 15 feet long and people were just constantly pulling

00:55:20.180 --> 00:55:21.380
 in between and blocking them.

00:55:21.380 --> 00:55:26.540
 So will there be sort of a standard to figure out when it's appropriate to do it all the

00:55:26.540 --> 00:55:30.780
 way between 40, 'cause a little Corolla like mine can easily fit in 40.

00:55:30.780 --> 00:55:36.460
 So at high speed locations or relatively higher speed locations with a continuous flow, the

00:55:36.460 --> 00:55:42.820
 distance, the offset will be higher and at slower speed locations or where the potential

00:55:42.820 --> 00:55:48.140
 of parking is there, then the offset or distance between the bollards would be smaller.

00:55:48.140 --> 00:55:56.740
 For example, it would go, I have seen that five feet or in some cases lower as well,

00:55:56.740 --> 00:56:01.420
 just to discourage parking or interference with the bike lanes.

00:56:01.420 --> 00:56:03.060
 - That makes sense.

00:56:03.060 --> 00:56:08.760
 And then is it possible to sort of implement these two options incrementally?

00:56:08.760 --> 00:56:12.460
 So if we're like, okay, let's try a protected bike lane right here.

00:56:12.460 --> 00:56:16.180
 We start off with the plastic posts, that way there may be a little more flexible about

00:56:16.180 --> 00:56:19.780
 adjusting the design a little bit, and then over time, of course, the plastic posts will

00:56:19.780 --> 00:56:22.020
 get beaten up and tired.

00:56:22.020 --> 00:56:27.380
 And if that design's working for that neighborhood or business area, that we might upgrade to

00:56:27.380 --> 00:56:31.980
 the more expensive, more permanent, more sturdy concrete, and just sort of upgrade it over

00:56:31.980 --> 00:56:35.660
 time once we know that that's gonna work for that location.

00:56:35.660 --> 00:56:40.860
 - That will always be the case because strodes, if they become strodes and there are excess

00:56:40.860 --> 00:56:45.480
 issues, then we will reorder the location and suggest something different.

00:56:45.480 --> 00:56:53.500
 But typically, the blocks would be used where we have relatively high speed arterial or

00:56:53.500 --> 00:56:59.180
 collector, and we are trying to reduce bike, so we separate the movements through blocks.

00:56:59.180 --> 00:57:00.460
 And that's the objective.

00:57:00.460 --> 00:57:06.740
 But yes, there's a possibility we will audit and see if there is a risk we can introduce

00:57:06.740 --> 00:57:07.740
 this.

00:57:07.740 --> 00:57:11.900
 - And I do agree on going just for the hard stuff right off the bat on higher speed, 'cause

00:57:11.900 --> 00:57:15.660
 I know those plastic things will get taken out real fast.

00:57:15.660 --> 00:57:20.720
 And then in terms of all of these recommendations that we're getting today, what's the plan

00:57:20.720 --> 00:57:25.780
 to implement it to make sure that in the future, these recommendations are taken forward?

00:57:25.780 --> 00:57:29.180
 What are we gonna update or where are we gonna put these recommendations more permanently?

00:57:29.180 --> 00:57:35.340
 - They are tied to budget, and as long as the budget is available, staff will implement

00:57:35.340 --> 00:57:37.340
 them and prioritize them.

00:57:37.340 --> 00:57:42.900
 - But in terms of, let's say we have staff turnover every once in a while, so in terms

00:57:42.900 --> 00:57:47.780
 of talking about these 20 to 40 feet, we're gonna use concrete or plastic, and all of

00:57:47.780 --> 00:57:52.180
 these recommendations we're having here, are these ongoing recommendations or just recommendations

00:57:52.180 --> 00:57:54.580
 for those specific segments that we talked about?

00:57:54.580 --> 00:57:59.380
 - So we are planning to put that, put these recommendations when it comes to specific

00:57:59.380 --> 00:58:04.580
 design formats into the transportation criteria manual as well.

00:58:04.580 --> 00:58:07.380
 But not in this update, because this update is almost complete.

00:58:07.380 --> 00:58:11.740
 It's a new update that we are starting that will go for some time, and we are planning

00:58:11.740 --> 00:58:18.940
 to bring a lot of new design elements into that.

00:58:18.940 --> 00:58:19.940
 - So long-term?

00:58:19.940 --> 00:58:25.940
 - So if staff stays or leaves, the elements would be there, design elements would be there.

00:58:25.940 --> 00:58:30.820
 - Okay, so transportation criteria manual is where this will ultimately end up just

00:58:30.820 --> 00:58:32.660
 not yet, in terms of the standards.

00:58:32.660 --> 00:58:33.660
 - That is correct.

00:58:33.660 --> 00:58:34.660
 - Okay, great, thank you.

00:58:34.660 --> 00:58:38.180
 And then one last one.

00:58:38.180 --> 00:58:42.820
 Did I hear correctly that there's a possibility some protected bike lanes may become unprotected

00:58:42.820 --> 00:58:43.820
 in the future?

00:58:43.820 --> 00:58:45.860
 Did I hear that right?

00:58:45.860 --> 00:58:53.660
 - There's a possibility where it is a residential neighborhood, low speed, and where we are

00:58:53.660 --> 00:58:59.500
 seeing a lot of parking violations, as you highlighted, there are some spots where if

00:58:59.500 --> 00:59:06.420
 it is low speed residential neighborhood where we have ballers and we have a wider offset

00:59:06.420 --> 00:59:13.020
 where the car can park, we've been seeing that if it is exploited by the neighborhood,

00:59:13.020 --> 00:59:19.100
 that means that neighborhood is in a way recommending that ballers are not the choice.

00:59:19.100 --> 00:59:25.100
 So we will have public engagement sessions, and we'll come up with this striping idea

00:59:25.100 --> 00:59:30.500
 for some of the neighborhoods that we have been auditing, and that may work because on

00:59:30.500 --> 00:59:34.820
 one side we'll have bike lane and on the other side we'll have parking, and that's the arrangement

00:59:34.820 --> 00:59:35.820
 we are looking at.

00:59:35.820 --> 00:59:38.460
 - Okay, so you're not saying, because what I heard-

00:59:38.460 --> 00:59:39.460
 - Not for arterials.

00:59:39.460 --> 00:59:44.700
 - Yeah, what I heard earlier was if there's a bike lane and people are parking in it,

00:59:44.700 --> 00:59:49.020
 we're going to remove the ballers, which would honestly encourage more people to park, because

00:59:49.020 --> 00:59:52.140
 now it's even easier than it was before, but that's not what you're saying.

00:59:52.140 --> 00:59:56.100
 - No, what we are recommending is that if people are parking and that's the natural

00:59:56.100 --> 01:00:01.500
 behavior, tendency of the neighborhood, then let's go with that and provide a separate

01:00:01.500 --> 01:00:06.900
 bike lane instead of having two bike lanes and one is being exploited.

01:00:06.900 --> 01:00:11.540
 So I think that's the direction we are going, but it will never happen on arterials.

01:00:11.540 --> 01:00:17.420
 We will have to separate the movements, provide exclusivity for safety.

01:00:17.420 --> 01:00:22.140
 But this option that we talked about is always a possibility in residential neighborhoods

01:00:22.140 --> 01:00:25.860
 where the speeds are relatively much lower.

01:00:25.860 --> 01:00:30.940
 - So like two-way protected bike lane on one side, parking on one side, does that sound

01:00:30.940 --> 01:00:31.940
 accurate?

01:00:31.940 --> 01:00:32.940
 - Yes.

01:00:32.940 --> 01:00:33.940
 - Okay, all right, thank you.

01:00:33.940 --> 01:00:42.060
 - I'm going to pick right up from there, because the only place that I am aware of that that

01:00:42.060 --> 01:00:52.280
 happens are Windsor and Old North, where it's already a mixed use transportation conundrum,

01:00:52.280 --> 01:00:58.900
 because it's parking and bike pad, which is not ideal.

01:00:58.900 --> 01:01:03.580
 The reason those bollards were put in was because people were swerving into cars and

01:01:03.580 --> 01:01:05.460
 into pedestrians and bikes.

01:01:05.460 --> 01:01:14.820
 So those were put in to be a visual barrier to prevent swerving, not to prevent overlap

01:01:14.820 --> 01:01:20.020
 of parking and people, although I don't want to go too much down there.

01:01:20.020 --> 01:01:26.140
 So I think I heard the answer to my first question when you were talking to a member

01:01:26.140 --> 01:01:35.500
 of the room, that you're anticipating striping one side and striping the other side to different

01:01:35.500 --> 01:01:40.300
 uses, one to parking, one to bike pad.

01:01:40.300 --> 01:01:41.300
 Is that what I'm hearing?

01:01:41.300 --> 01:01:42.300
 - That is correct.

01:01:42.300 --> 01:01:44.080
 And then we will reinforce striping.

01:01:44.080 --> 01:01:48.060
 It's not just going to be striping, but we'll have some reflectors, some other treatments

01:01:48.060 --> 01:01:55.180
 that will highlight to the auto users that there's a separate mode going on on this lane,

01:01:55.180 --> 01:01:56.780
 and it should not be used.

01:01:56.780 --> 01:01:57.780
 - Okay.

01:01:57.780 --> 01:02:02.300
 - So that swerving could be discouraged using these reflectors.

01:02:02.300 --> 01:02:03.300
 - Okay.

01:02:03.300 --> 01:02:04.300
 Good.

01:02:04.300 --> 01:02:10.400
 I look forward to the engagement meeting to get the neighborhood to stop doing that.

01:02:10.400 --> 01:02:15.380
 Whenever there's a change of behavior, there's always going to have to be engagement.

01:02:15.380 --> 01:02:21.140
 The other partial question on that is, if you know whether we're going to continue to

01:02:21.140 --> 01:02:29.380
 use the concurrent bollards or we're going to switch bollards, as soon as you can get

01:02:29.380 --> 01:02:34.560
 some engagement with the community on the visual appearance of those, that would be

01:02:34.560 --> 01:02:40.540
 lovely, because we've had many discussions where Idiots Hill likes the bollards, but

01:02:40.540 --> 01:02:45.060
 hates the appearance of the four inch cylindrical bollards for whatever.

01:02:45.060 --> 01:02:48.940
 I don't know why they hate them, but they do, but they like the presence of the bollards,

01:02:48.940 --> 01:02:50.380
 but not the appearance of them.

01:02:50.380 --> 01:02:57.860
 I know that's, yes, first world problems, but this would help mitigate some community

01:02:57.860 --> 01:03:01.700
 angst if they knew what was coming to the changes.

01:03:01.700 --> 01:03:06.900
 The last thing I will bring up is, I'm going to encourage staff to think about, for the

01:03:06.900 --> 01:03:15.980
 cost benefit analysis, opportunities for sponsorship, the way we have trash pickup areas for sponsorship.

01:03:15.980 --> 01:03:23.540
 If a business wants to be an attractor, say, well, I just say there's a bike shop somewhere

01:03:23.540 --> 01:03:30.740
 in the area, and they want to be an attractor to Bikeped, then they might be willing to

01:03:30.740 --> 01:03:40.100
 sponsor that segment's costs, so that we could have more segments, or a residence might be

01:03:40.100 --> 01:03:45.580
 willing to sponsor costs, or an organization might be willing to sponsor costs, even though

01:03:45.580 --> 01:03:52.860
 that wouldn't be a distributed cost across the entire tax base at $50 a pop or whatever.

01:03:52.860 --> 01:03:56.860
 If they were willing to pony up, then that is a community benefit that I encourage you

01:03:56.860 --> 01:03:59.140
 to look into opportunities for that.

01:03:59.140 --> 01:04:00.540
 What would that look like after that?

01:04:00.540 --> 01:04:10.240
 I have no idea, because I don't know what opportunities and pathways there are for donated

01:04:10.240 --> 01:04:12.580
 funds into the transportation system.

01:04:12.580 --> 01:04:14.460
 I don't know how that would work.

01:04:14.460 --> 01:04:16.420
 That's why I'm asking a question of staff.

01:04:16.420 --> 01:04:20.980
 We can circle back on, but typically, the development review process goes through these

01:04:20.980 --> 01:04:26.580
 recommendations, especially in the design stage, what the street would look like.

01:04:26.580 --> 01:04:32.300
 If there's a retail business coming, we would include these bike lanes as part of the review

01:04:32.300 --> 01:04:37.900
 process, and then typically, the developers would agree to that idea.

01:04:37.900 --> 01:04:40.540
 For new developers, yes, it makes sense.

01:04:40.540 --> 01:04:49.100
 You put it into the concept plan, or the final platting, or whatever, but for existing neighborhoods,

01:04:49.100 --> 01:04:54.700
 if a bike shop wanted to sponsor those, he's leaning hard on that bike shop.

01:04:54.700 --> 01:04:55.700
 Yes.

01:04:55.700 --> 01:04:56.700
 Thank you.

01:04:56.700 --> 01:04:57.700
 Thank you.

01:04:57.700 --> 01:04:58.700
 Thank you.

01:04:58.700 --> 01:05:01.700
 Anything else on this item?

01:05:01.700 --> 01:05:02.700
 All right.

01:05:02.700 --> 01:05:03.700
 Thank you, everybody.

01:05:03.700 --> 01:05:04.700
 Appreciate it.

01:05:04.700 --> 01:05:05.700
 Yeah.

01:05:05.700 --> 01:05:06.700
 Yeah.

01:05:06.700 --> 01:05:07.700
 See you.

01:05:07.700 --> 01:05:10.940
 All right, we're going to move on to MC25.

01:05:10.940 --> 01:05:17.020
 Oh, Dr. Butts, once again, the man of the hour.

01:05:17.020 --> 01:05:18.020
 All right.

01:05:18.020 --> 01:05:19.020
 Let me introduce this here.

01:05:19.020 --> 01:05:25.340
 See, we're going to go to MC25-023, receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff

01:05:25.340 --> 01:05:31.260
 direction regarding moving forward with a two-minute pitch to investigate the cost of

01:05:31.260 --> 01:05:40.740
 returning East Hickory Street to traditional right-side head-end parking.

01:05:40.740 --> 01:05:44.100
 Ken Farhan Butt, Deputy Director of Transportation Services.

01:05:44.100 --> 01:05:49.140
 This is East Hickory Street back-end parking presentation.

01:05:49.140 --> 01:05:59.140
 On April 1, 2025, Council Member Holland presented a two-minute pitch to investigate the cost

01:05:59.140 --> 01:06:03.540
 of converting East Hickory to traditional front-end parking.

01:06:03.540 --> 01:06:12.140
 There was an ISR that was published in the Friday report on April 25, 2025, and the Agenda

01:06:12.140 --> 01:06:21.500
 Committee considered three options, and they recommended that staff route the pitch to

01:06:21.500 --> 01:06:27.260
 the Mobility Committee for review before council consideration.

01:06:27.260 --> 01:06:32.820
 The Hickory Street back-end parking was completed in 2014 as part of the Hickory Grand Street

01:06:32.820 --> 01:06:41.540
 Project, a capital project, and approximate expenditure was around $3.2 million on this

01:06:41.540 --> 01:06:43.740
 project.

01:06:43.740 --> 01:06:50.020
 And potential solutions based on our audit staff conducted comprehensive traffic operations

01:06:50.020 --> 01:06:52.580
 and safety audits on this location.

01:06:52.580 --> 01:06:59.540
 And after our audit, we have some solutions to present.

01:06:59.540 --> 01:07:05.980
 The first one is the audit findings suggest that we may be able to resolve these parking

01:07:05.980 --> 01:07:12.100
 violations issue with the aggressive targeted enforcement.

01:07:12.100 --> 01:07:16.820
 But another challenge is that this enforcement, when we spoke with the police department,

01:07:16.820 --> 01:07:22.700
 they are tying it to the budget availability, and at the moment, they don't have financial

01:07:22.700 --> 01:07:30.100
 resources to implement this additional enforcement that is needed, targeted to this location.

01:07:30.100 --> 01:07:43.780
 Another option is that we transition from back-end parking to conventional or traditional

01:07:43.780 --> 01:07:51.020
 parking, that is basically front-end, front-end parking spots, locations, but that too would

01:07:51.020 --> 01:07:59.540
 cost significantly more, over $3.5 million when it comes to full implementation of this

01:07:59.540 --> 01:08:00.540
 project.

01:08:00.540 --> 01:08:06.180
 And the third option is implementing a one-way traffic system, which typically these back-end

01:08:06.180 --> 01:08:10.620
 parking lots or parking locations are assigned to.

01:08:10.620 --> 01:08:16.140
 Basically, they are assigned to one-directional flow so that there is no conflicting parking

01:08:16.140 --> 01:08:18.060
 or violation chances.

01:08:18.060 --> 01:08:25.700
 And so that is typically recommended for back-end parking, that at least the traffic flow is

01:08:25.700 --> 01:08:27.100
 one way.

01:08:27.100 --> 01:08:36.140
 And so this adjustment or reconfiguration will have to do, will warrant a lot of design

01:08:36.140 --> 01:08:41.700
 and planning review in terms of how the traffic flow movement would be impacted, not only

01:08:41.700 --> 01:08:47.380
 on this street, but also in the adjacent streets and in the area overall, because it is downtown,

01:08:47.380 --> 01:08:50.380
 and especially during the peak durations.

01:08:50.380 --> 01:08:59.660
 So these are the three options, and staff recommend no change when it comes to technically

01:08:59.660 --> 01:09:10.660
 addressing this, because if we are tying it to the police enforcement, that is a minimal

01:09:10.660 --> 01:09:14.280
 that we can do, and that is tied to additional financial resources.

01:09:14.280 --> 01:09:19.800
 And other two options, staff is not recommending, because they would require significant redesign

01:09:19.800 --> 01:09:28.540
 and planning work, and would cost a lot in terms of budget.

01:09:28.540 --> 01:09:36.260
 And it's up to the mobility committee if this should be further forwarded to the council.

01:09:36.260 --> 01:09:37.260
 Please.

01:09:37.260 --> 01:09:38.260
 Yes.

01:09:38.260 --> 01:09:43.620
 Why don't you start?

01:09:43.620 --> 01:09:50.820
 I have a myriad of things to say about this, and I think the first thing is that we refer

01:09:50.820 --> 01:09:56.180
 to converting East Hickory to traditional front-end parking.

01:09:56.180 --> 01:09:57.740
 It's traditional.

01:09:57.740 --> 01:10:05.260
 From California to the New York Island, that you park in head first.

01:10:05.260 --> 01:10:07.300
 And that's the issue.

01:10:07.300 --> 01:10:14.820
 Since we've done this, there's been no clamoring in the community for more rear-end parking,

01:10:14.820 --> 01:10:20.560
 and the reason that nobody wants more rear-end parking is they don't like the rear-end parking

01:10:20.560 --> 01:10:22.980
 we got.

01:10:22.980 --> 01:10:27.700
 In this room last week, I spoke to the director of the Main Street Association, and I mentioned

01:10:27.700 --> 01:10:29.580
 this two-minute pitch to her.

01:10:29.580 --> 01:10:32.660
 She said, "I hope you can get something done about that.

01:10:32.660 --> 01:10:36.100
 We hate it."

01:10:36.100 --> 01:10:40.100
 And I'll be the first to admit, this is an unscientific study that I've done.

01:10:40.100 --> 01:10:45.020
 But merchants up and down East Hickory can't stand it, because they're always having to

01:10:45.020 --> 01:10:52.100
 explain to their patrons why this guy backed in and why this guy came in front.

01:10:52.100 --> 01:10:56.100
 As far as the police enforcing it, the police don't want to enforce it, because it's a

01:10:56.100 --> 01:10:59.500
 no-win situation.

01:10:59.500 --> 01:11:04.960
 Even though the sign says, "Back in parking," the response is, "That's ridiculous."

01:11:04.960 --> 01:11:05.960
 And it is.

01:11:05.960 --> 01:11:07.060
 It's simply ridiculous.

01:11:07.060 --> 01:11:11.460
 It was a bad idea the first time we did it.

01:11:11.460 --> 01:11:19.220
 Mistakes are expensive, and it needs to be corrected.

01:11:19.220 --> 01:11:24.500
 Enforcement's not going to help, because as you point out, the police have got plenty

01:11:24.500 --> 01:11:29.380
 to do besides enforcing back in parking.

01:11:29.380 --> 01:11:36.260
 I'm not sure that the citizenry can stomach another one-way street in the downtown area.

01:11:36.260 --> 01:11:40.660
 But again, I don't think that's the situation.

01:11:40.660 --> 01:11:41.660
 It's a bad idea.

01:11:41.660 --> 01:11:45.100
 It was a bad idea from the day it was conceived.

01:11:45.100 --> 01:11:48.620
 It's a bad idea today, and mistakes need to be corrected.

01:11:48.620 --> 01:11:50.620
 Thank you.

01:11:50.620 --> 01:11:59.540
 Anyone else want to speak on this?

01:11:59.540 --> 01:12:00.540
 Yes?

01:12:00.540 --> 01:12:05.500
 I wonder if the committee has had an opportunity to review ... Farhan, do you remember when

01:12:05.500 --> 01:12:08.260
 we did this like a year ago?

01:12:08.260 --> 01:12:16.700
 It was like September of '23 or something in that time frame, September ... At least

01:12:16.700 --> 01:12:25.460
 a year ago, I hope the committee had had an opportunity to review that ... This was brought

01:12:25.460 --> 01:12:32.460
 up then, and while I don't know what I would have done back in 2014 when this first came

01:12:32.460 --> 01:12:41.160
 up for $3 million, because I didn't precisely see all the backup materials, when it was

01:12:41.160 --> 01:12:52.340
 reviewed a year ago, there was mild improvement in accident data, safety data, attributed

01:12:52.340 --> 01:12:55.820
 to this.

01:12:55.820 --> 01:13:03.500
 While I could see the argument being that it was mild enough that we shouldn't have

01:13:03.500 --> 01:13:13.000
 done it in the first place, based on current conditions, I don't see decreasing safety

01:13:13.000 --> 01:13:20.340
 to the tune of $3.5 million at this time, unless we are just flush with cash, which

01:13:20.340 --> 01:13:28.020
 I'm not sure ... There's a lot of things we could use $3.5 million on, even if we left

01:13:28.020 --> 01:13:31.780
 it in the mobility budget.

01:13:31.780 --> 01:13:43.540
 We just talked about $50 to $300 a ballard, that $3.5 million is going to go quickly.

01:13:43.540 --> 01:13:45.340
 I guess that is my encouragement.

01:13:45.340 --> 01:13:51.180
 If you hadn't seen the ... It is admittedly mild, and please correct me if there is no

01:13:51.180 --> 01:13:58.460
 safety enhancement that should be said, and then you could evaluate $3.5 million against

01:13:58.460 --> 01:14:03.540
 no safety enhancement, but what I recall from a year and a half ago was there was a mild

01:14:03.540 --> 01:14:09.140
 safety improvement that staff determined a year and a half ago.

01:14:09.140 --> 01:14:11.700
 Is that correct?

01:14:11.700 --> 01:14:16.940
 There's always room for safety enhancement, I would say, and no location is perfect.

01:14:16.940 --> 01:14:22.420
 When it comes to safety enhancement, there'll always be room.

01:14:22.420 --> 01:14:27.180
 One versus the other, there'll be advantages, there'll be merits, but the key challenge

01:14:27.180 --> 01:14:35.740
 here is the budget requirement, and that is not only for the overall redesign, but even

01:14:35.740 --> 01:14:43.820
 for the first recommendation of targeted enforcement, we need resources.

01:14:43.820 --> 01:14:52.500
 I think all other options are open as long as we can tie some budgetary element to this,

01:14:52.500 --> 01:15:00.800
 but at the moment, staff doesn't recommend any changes, we recommend that we proactively

01:15:00.800 --> 01:15:06.940
 see for the right time when we have budget availability, we could look into this again.

01:15:06.940 --> 01:15:09.500
 That's my question, and you ended on it there.

01:15:09.500 --> 01:15:16.460
 If we had a magic wand and we had a spare, we found $4 million in the couch cushions,

01:15:16.460 --> 01:15:24.300
 and it could only be used on transportation issues, would staff ... This conversion could

01:15:24.300 --> 01:15:32.420
 stay or be converted back to the ... Because we have the $4 million available for it, would

01:15:32.420 --> 01:15:38.940
 staff recommend reconversion, or would they not recommend reconversion is what I'm trying

01:15:38.940 --> 01:15:39.940
 to get?

01:15:39.940 --> 01:15:42.580
 Let's parse the safety issues from the budgetary issues.

01:15:42.580 --> 01:15:48.580
 We'll recommend, if the funds are available, we'll recommend technology use, and there

01:15:48.580 --> 01:15:58.220
 is a technology available that can detect the parking violations, and we could invest

01:15:58.220 --> 01:16:03.420
 in that, and that will not only work for this location, but could be applicable to many

01:16:03.420 --> 01:16:06.260
 other locations in the downtown.

01:16:06.260 --> 01:16:14.460
 That is one option, versus we spend full $4 million to redesign and rebuild the whole

01:16:14.460 --> 01:16:21.980
 parking lot, versus we use the technology, and that application will not be specific

01:16:21.980 --> 01:16:26.860
 to this location, but it will also help us in downtown, in other locations as well.

01:16:26.860 --> 01:16:31.860
 I think staff could look into that if that is needed, but at the moment, I think this

01:16:31.860 --> 01:16:35.420
 is our recommendation, that we just do not do anything.

01:16:35.420 --> 01:16:36.420
 Okay.

01:16:36.420 --> 01:16:37.420
 I appreciate that.

01:16:37.420 --> 01:16:38.420
 Thank you.

01:16:38.420 --> 01:16:46.100
 Farhan, I don't know if you're going to remember this, but I thought part of the reason they

01:16:46.100 --> 01:16:52.020
 went with back end instead of pull in the first time was they actually got more parking

01:16:52.020 --> 01:16:54.420
 spaces, I believe, from back end.

01:16:54.420 --> 01:16:56.300
 Maybe Scott's the money of the river members.

01:16:56.300 --> 01:16:58.300
 Has anybody been here that long?

01:16:58.300 --> 01:16:59.340
 I recall seeing that.

01:16:59.340 --> 01:17:04.300
 I don't remember how many spaces it was, so I would be very curious to remember how many

01:17:04.300 --> 01:17:06.900
 spaces we gained by doing back end.

01:17:06.900 --> 01:17:12.940
 I know quantity of parking really matters to people too, so that's a factor.

01:17:12.940 --> 01:17:15.500
 There's a variety of people who prefer back end.

01:17:15.500 --> 01:17:18.020
 Some prefer front end, right?

01:17:18.020 --> 01:17:21.260
 It's kind of a mixed bag from what I've heard from people.

01:17:21.260 --> 01:17:29.980
 In the literature I read before drafting the ISR, I found that it was pitched as a very

01:17:29.980 --> 01:17:37.000
 innovative idea back then, and then it also won an award.

01:17:37.000 --> 01:17:40.940
 I think it was a great downtown award.

01:17:40.940 --> 01:17:41.940
 Great streets or something.

01:17:41.940 --> 01:17:48.220
 Great streets award, and it's an award winning concept that Denton provided.

01:17:48.220 --> 01:17:52.420
 As a matter of fact, I read some news articles as well praising it, so it was pitched as

01:17:52.420 --> 01:17:58.060
 a very innovative idea to serve the community.

01:17:58.060 --> 01:18:05.340
 I will back up Councilmember Holland's opinion about converting this to a one way street.

01:18:05.340 --> 01:18:08.780
 At least one side of the road would have to be flipped, the parking, so that would still

01:18:08.780 --> 01:18:13.740
 cost money, and the one ways are frustrating, and if it's a two lane one way, now you're

01:18:13.740 --> 01:18:16.860
 talking probably faster driving speeds than what's currently there.

01:18:16.860 --> 01:18:20.780
 I find it a very comfortable road on my bike or when I'm walking trying to cross the street

01:18:20.780 --> 01:18:25.580
 because everybody drives naturally slower just because of the design of the street,

01:18:25.580 --> 01:18:30.260
 so I would agree with Councilmember Holland that definitely not game for making it one

01:18:30.260 --> 01:18:32.180
 way.

01:18:32.180 --> 01:18:38.860
 I do know, I've observed other places when I see back end parking, I observe when I see

01:18:38.860 --> 01:18:43.960
 everybody following the rules there, I'm always like, "Well, how are these people doing it?"

01:18:43.960 --> 01:18:48.700
 It is usually a one way, or there's a median in the middle where they physically can't

01:18:48.700 --> 01:18:50.020
 do it the wrong way.

01:18:50.020 --> 01:18:54.740
 I do see if we were to do a future project like this, a two way street with no medians,

01:18:54.740 --> 01:18:58.500
 probably not the best route, but I am concerned in terms of timing.

01:18:58.500 --> 01:19:04.660
 I know we have budget challenges coming up in this fiscal year, and so if we're not sure

01:19:04.660 --> 01:19:12.100
 if this is going to make it less safe, more safe, if it's not necessarily going to affect

01:19:12.100 --> 01:19:17.860
 the economics of the area, because I know when we redid it that I know we've got a lot

01:19:17.860 --> 01:19:21.900
 of investment in the businesses along there, and it's brought in a lot more tax revenue

01:19:21.900 --> 01:19:29.700
 and that kind of thing, so it did create a bit of economic generation.

01:19:29.700 --> 01:19:35.620
 Perhaps flipping it the other way would create more investment, I don't know, but until we

01:19:35.620 --> 01:19:40.740
 know that this would create more investment and somehow make it safer, right now may not

01:19:40.740 --> 01:19:44.340
 be the best time for it.

01:19:44.340 --> 01:20:01.020
 I can just weigh in as a driver that I actually avoid going there because it's too stressful

01:20:01.020 --> 01:20:10.900
 to back in, and it's too stressful to drive there because oncoming traffic could cut in

01:20:10.900 --> 01:20:16.540
 front of me and then park across.

01:20:16.540 --> 01:20:24.820
 I've observed this even recently online, this particular stretch always gets a lot of heated

01:20:24.820 --> 01:20:35.140
 opinions from our residents, so that's anecdotal, the only thing I can think is to our residents

01:20:35.140 --> 01:20:40.300
 this may be money well spent if it's something where now they actually want to go to that

01:20:40.300 --> 01:20:45.580
 area, they feel safer to park, they feel less stressed out, and they feel like they, like

01:20:45.580 --> 01:20:53.140
 us, like I would probably frequent the businesses down there more often if it was more comfortable.

01:20:53.140 --> 01:21:01.980
 >> Okay, so we'll have to come back to the focus of what we are to do here, and that

01:21:01.980 --> 01:21:09.180
 is to vote on whether or not we want to send this forward to the Council.

01:21:09.180 --> 01:21:14.900
 And so what I'm hearing, I don't know what I'm hearing because of, you know, the differences

01:21:14.900 --> 01:21:25.340
 of opinions, so I am going to go ahead and, let me get this to the discussion board if

01:21:25.340 --> 01:21:28.820
 we need to, but we've got to move forward, yes.

01:21:28.820 --> 01:21:32.420
 >> I was going to wait until you got to this point at least to answer a couple of the questions

01:21:32.420 --> 01:21:33.420
 that I heard.

01:21:33.420 --> 01:21:36.260
 >> Okay, so we want to go ahead and do that first, and then you can just--

01:21:36.260 --> 01:21:41.660
 >> It was Council Member Beck talking about safety and that there was, it was minimal

01:21:41.660 --> 01:21:48.180
 as far as less incidents that were occurring as a result of the back end, certainly rather

01:21:48.180 --> 01:21:50.700
 than people crossing lanes.

01:21:50.700 --> 01:21:57.260
 The redesign from the standpoint of having a $3.5 million cost isn't realistic, isn't

01:21:57.260 --> 01:22:03.060
 realistic today when we're looking at that we're going to have to make, you know, just

01:22:03.060 --> 01:22:07.220
 reduce services or what we're doing to consider that.

01:22:07.220 --> 01:22:13.260
 So looking at this and whether there's some alternatives for the enforcement piece, and

01:22:13.260 --> 01:22:18.220
 then the second piece was on the number of spaces, well some of this was placemaking

01:22:18.220 --> 01:22:19.460
 as well.

01:22:19.460 --> 01:22:25.620
 So again, adding shade trees and doing different elements and just, it was placemaking that

01:22:25.620 --> 01:22:30.000
 was part of the design, why it is that it ended up winning an award.

01:22:30.000 --> 01:22:33.700
 So just want to kind of put that in there and then of course for this committee it's

01:22:33.700 --> 01:22:38.460
 just really kind of reviewing what you've heard, and then making recommendation how

01:22:38.460 --> 01:22:42.300
 it is that you want to send this forward or not send this forward to Council.

01:22:42.300 --> 01:22:47.100
 >> So that's about a lot, yes ma'am, sure clarification.

01:22:47.100 --> 01:22:51.460
 >> So I can understand the broader picture here, Council Member Holland made a pitch

01:22:51.460 --> 01:22:59.140
 and it did not get accepted for further, okay so this is second step, and so we would be

01:22:59.140 --> 01:23:05.300
 if we put something forward, we are recommending to Council for further discussion?

01:23:05.300 --> 01:23:11.460
 Our recommendation or are we just recommending future discussion on Council?

01:23:11.460 --> 01:23:15.860
 >> You got to go ahead because I have something right here.

01:23:15.860 --> 01:23:20.100
 >> This was sent, his history is on there, but this was sent from the agenda committee

01:23:20.100 --> 01:23:26.740
 based on the two minute pitch process, so this is part of that process, it was sent

01:23:26.740 --> 01:23:35.420
 for mobility to make a recommendation to Council on the item, and then based on that recommendation

01:23:35.420 --> 01:23:37.940
 I think that's, yeah.

01:23:37.940 --> 01:23:41.860
 >> And whether that will be a work session or not going forward?

01:23:41.860 --> 01:23:42.860
 >> Correct.

01:23:42.860 --> 01:23:50.460
 >> I recall Council Member Holland asking for a work session, yeah, yeah, so whatever

01:23:50.460 --> 01:23:58.180
 you decide here would be incorporated in a Council work session, yes or no?

01:23:58.180 --> 01:24:08.820
 >> Well, from what I am understanding is that the City is recommending that we make no changes,

01:24:08.820 --> 01:24:14.940
 that we do not move this conversation forward to, for the Council, that's our decision to

01:24:14.940 --> 01:24:16.340
 do that.

01:24:16.340 --> 01:24:22.740
 And if we want this conversation to go to the City, I mean, I'm sorry, to the Council,

01:24:22.740 --> 01:24:30.260
 then that's when the process of the Council saying yes or no to whether or not we're going

01:24:30.260 --> 01:24:33.620
 to move forward.

01:24:33.620 --> 01:24:42.820
 If we decide right here, I'm asking for a vote on sending his pitch to the Council.

01:24:42.820 --> 01:24:50.660
 The City has given us all the information and have given us their recommendation that

01:24:50.660 --> 01:24:59.420
 we do not move it forward based on that first line item that they had given us, can you

01:24:59.420 --> 01:25:00.420
 go back?

01:25:00.420 --> 01:25:02.980
 >> Yes, please.

01:25:02.980 --> 01:25:11.380
 >> Based on traffic fines, that backing in, parking, you know, can be effectively managed.

01:25:11.380 --> 01:25:13.620
 Which way are we going to manage it?

01:25:13.620 --> 01:25:23.140
 Are we going to go with the financial, are we more concerned about the financial impact

01:25:23.140 --> 01:25:24.220
 in sending that?

01:25:24.220 --> 01:25:30.060
 Because the Council is going to have to hear, either the Council is going to hear nothing,

01:25:30.060 --> 01:25:32.620
 it's going to stop here, is that what I'm understanding?

01:25:32.620 --> 01:25:40.680
 That it could stop here because they are not recommending any changes, you get it?

01:25:40.680 --> 01:25:45.180
 In other words, keep everything the same, that could stop here.

01:25:45.180 --> 01:25:50.620
 Or if we are recommending that it go towards the Council, the Council is going to have

01:25:50.620 --> 01:25:57.540
 to look at this and decide on what we want to do at the Council, okay?

01:25:57.540 --> 01:26:00.540
 >> Do you need a motion?

01:26:00.540 --> 01:26:04.660
 >> Can we ask for a motion at this point, is everybody understanding the motion?

01:26:04.660 --> 01:26:05.660
 Yes, sir.

01:26:05.660 --> 01:26:12.580
 >> I would like clarification from legal because I don't think that's the process, I thought

01:26:12.580 --> 01:26:18.100
 it was going to work session regardless of what we said, that just there would be bundled

01:26:18.100 --> 01:26:25.000
 into the work session whether staff, what their recommendations, what the committee's

01:26:25.000 --> 01:26:26.000
 recommendations were.

01:26:26.000 --> 01:26:30.900
 >> Well, I mean, we have an option right now to either say yes, move it forward, or no,

01:26:30.900 --> 01:26:31.900
 it stays here.

01:26:31.900 --> 01:26:35.020
 >> That is what I don't believe is accurate, Chair.

01:26:35.020 --> 01:26:41.660
 I would like legal clarity on that.

01:26:41.660 --> 01:26:48.460
 >> I believe that the intent from the agenda committee was to have this vetted as an advisory

01:26:48.460 --> 01:26:56.220
 board recommendation, and whatever your recommendation is, is your recommendation.

01:26:56.220 --> 01:27:05.260
 I think at that point, the recommendation would go, and it would be, I guess, go through

01:27:05.260 --> 01:27:12.780
 the process of the chart if Council, if it's on a work session, your recommendation has

01:27:12.780 --> 01:27:17.700
 been noted, staff's recommendation has been noted, and that's kind of how, because the

01:27:17.700 --> 01:27:22.980
 whole body, I believe, kind of went through the ISR process, the two-minute pitch process,

01:27:22.980 --> 01:27:28.620
 which is the new thing that the whole body incorporated and agreed to.

01:27:28.620 --> 01:27:33.420
 So then the whole body would, after this process has taken place, the whole body would take

01:27:33.420 --> 01:27:39.580
 it up again as the understanding, and then you just, you've had time to vet it more thoroughly

01:27:39.580 --> 01:27:44.900
 than the rest of the body, and then the body would make that decision based on that.

01:27:44.900 --> 01:27:50.420
 >> Okay, so it sounds like we are, we have to send it to the Council.

01:27:50.420 --> 01:27:54.980
 I mean, it's written here, "Vote on sending the pitch to the Council."

01:27:54.980 --> 01:27:55.980
 Are we sending?

01:27:55.980 --> 01:27:56.980
 >> It's a, yeah.

01:27:56.980 --> 01:27:57.980
 >> I mean, we've got a--

01:27:57.980 --> 01:27:58.980
 >> It's a direction.

01:27:58.980 --> 01:27:59.980
 >> Yeah, the direction.

01:27:59.980 --> 01:28:11.260
 >> It's to give a direction to staff based on the two-minute pitch concept.

01:28:11.260 --> 01:28:18.620
 >> So this goes back to which direction, what direction are we giving to the city, to send

01:28:18.620 --> 01:28:20.260
 back to the Council?

01:28:20.260 --> 01:28:26.540
 I would like to move, if that's the correct term, that the committee send this to the

01:28:26.540 --> 01:28:30.540
 Council for a work session, for consideration.

01:28:30.540 --> 01:28:33.900
 Is that the proper motion?

01:28:33.900 --> 01:28:36.780
 Did I word that correctly?

01:28:36.780 --> 01:28:40.220
 >> The, yes, that is the proper motion.

01:28:40.220 --> 01:28:46.700
 The direction is going to be what the discussion is on, and if there's not a direction, then

01:28:46.700 --> 01:28:52.420
 that is a direction, I guess, but that's what your discussion is going to be on the floor.

01:28:52.420 --> 01:28:58.620
 The floor is, okay, it's going, but what's your, is your additional motion to, one way

01:28:58.620 --> 01:29:05.140
 is that your additional motion to look at the 3.5, is your, make an additional statement

01:29:05.140 --> 01:29:12.420
 on top of that, I guess, to clarify the direction.

01:29:12.420 --> 01:29:13.420
 >> Okay.

01:29:13.420 --> 01:29:14.420
 >> So the direction, go.

01:29:14.420 --> 01:29:15.420
 >> Madam Chair.

01:29:15.420 --> 01:29:16.420
 >> Yes, please.

01:29:16.420 --> 01:29:22.780
 >> Is the, two pieces, and Council Member Beck's position is going to the, it is going

01:29:22.780 --> 01:29:24.620
 to go to a work session.

01:29:24.620 --> 01:29:30.580
 So if we're recommending it, go to a work session, supporting, or what's staff direction

01:29:30.580 --> 01:29:32.060
 when we're going forward?

01:29:32.060 --> 01:29:38.620
 Mobility committee, staff's direction is that this is where we're at, you've heard that.

01:29:38.620 --> 01:29:45.380
 Now the Mobility Committee has listened to the presentation, reviewed the documentation,

01:29:45.380 --> 01:29:48.140
 what's the recommendation carrying that forward?

01:29:48.140 --> 01:29:53.260
 When we go to work session, staff will be presenting in work session, it'll be deliberated,

01:29:53.260 --> 01:29:57.980
 but what's the recommendation coming out of this body to, for that?

01:29:57.980 --> 01:29:59.940
 Correct, Ben?

01:29:59.940 --> 01:30:10.380
 >> That was correct, that's what I, so, goes back to whether or not we're going to send

01:30:10.380 --> 01:30:16.380
 it back to the Council or not.

01:30:16.380 --> 01:30:21.740
 That is the question, and we've got to get past that part.

01:30:21.740 --> 01:30:28.380
 That's what I understand, that the new process is, is when you're coming to the committees

01:30:28.380 --> 01:30:40.060
 for an advisory recommendation, or advisory recommendation, then it stays with the committee,

01:30:40.060 --> 01:30:47.700
 or it goes back to the Council for further, for further approval.

01:30:47.700 --> 01:30:53.580
 So now if everything's going to be, that comes to a committee, really this should all be

01:30:53.580 --> 01:30:56.760
 done in discussion because we don't even have a second yet.

01:30:56.760 --> 01:31:03.380
 So we're actually out of order right now, in our role with it, since we're here.

01:31:03.380 --> 01:31:11.100
 If it comes, if we're going to bring things to a committee for advisory, everything that

01:31:11.100 --> 01:31:18.660
 comes from the committee is going to go back to the Council anyway for continued discussion

01:31:18.660 --> 01:31:23.140
 and approval from the Council.

01:31:23.140 --> 01:31:28.340
 What I understand right here is we're giving direction regarding moving forward with a

01:31:28.340 --> 01:31:30.140
 two minute pitch.

01:31:30.140 --> 01:31:40.260
 Are we going to send this pitch back to the Council so the Council can approve it or do

01:31:40.260 --> 01:31:48.300
 we stay here and we advise on what the City has recommended?

01:31:48.300 --> 01:31:53.980
 The City has recommended that we do nothing, okay.

01:31:53.980 --> 01:31:54.980
 That's what I'm understanding.

01:31:54.980 --> 01:31:56.380
 Did you all hear that?

01:31:56.380 --> 01:32:02.460
 The City is recommending that we stay as is, Joe Holland has put in the motion that we

01:32:02.460 --> 01:32:10.740
 stay as is, but our information here is whether or not we're going to move forward with the

01:32:10.740 --> 01:32:14.180
 two minute pitch to investigate that cost.

01:32:14.180 --> 01:32:18.500
 And that's my motion, that we proceed.

01:32:18.500 --> 01:32:20.940
 That we proceed to the Council?

01:32:20.940 --> 01:32:21.940
 Yes.

01:32:21.940 --> 01:32:33.220
 Proceed with an affirmative direction, so these are just advisory opinions, we're not

01:32:33.220 --> 01:32:39.780
 stopping the process, we're saying our advice is go forward young man or stop, but regardless

01:32:39.780 --> 01:32:43.560
 it's going to go back to Council is what Ben said.

01:32:43.560 --> 01:32:48.740
 So whatever way we're going, we can make that recommendation but it's coming back to the

01:32:48.740 --> 01:32:52.220
 three of us plus four more at some future date.

01:32:52.220 --> 01:32:55.860
 So what's the correct motion?

01:32:55.860 --> 01:32:57.220
 It needs a second regardless.

01:32:57.220 --> 01:33:00.220
 That's really what it means.

01:33:00.220 --> 01:33:01.220
 Can we get a second?

01:33:01.220 --> 01:33:05.860
 Can I ask for a pause until we have direction so that it can be bundled with that?

01:33:05.860 --> 01:33:11.140
 We've got to have a second to have the conversation, even have the pause to give the direction.

01:33:11.140 --> 01:33:14.140
 You're not allowing us to move forward.

01:33:14.140 --> 01:33:21.100
 We're still up here with fur on butt and we're trying to get past him so we can have a discussion

01:33:21.100 --> 01:33:27.100
 to move it forward.

01:33:27.100 --> 01:33:34.860
 We've got to have the motion to move forward to send the pitch back to the City to the

01:33:34.860 --> 01:33:39.300
 Council unless we just stay here.

01:33:39.300 --> 01:33:42.900
 Staff recommends mobility committee send pitch to City Council.

01:33:42.900 --> 01:33:46.460
 You're getting tripped up on this presentation but I don't think that's the process.

01:33:46.460 --> 01:33:47.460
 I think that's the statement of the presentation.

01:33:47.460 --> 01:33:48.460
 Okay so what's the process?

01:33:48.460 --> 01:33:49.460
 What's the process?

01:33:49.460 --> 01:33:50.460
 Tell us what Ben said.

01:33:50.460 --> 01:33:51.460
 Ben said what I said.

01:33:51.460 --> 01:33:52.460
 No he didn't.

01:33:52.460 --> 01:33:53.460
 He did.

01:33:53.460 --> 01:34:05.460
 Council Member Holland, if you could just restate your motion to include the returning

01:34:05.460 --> 01:34:11.260
 of East Hickory to traditional, whatever your opinion is.

01:34:11.260 --> 01:34:21.860
 My motion is to send, for this committee to send to Council the recommendation that we

01:34:21.860 --> 01:34:29.580
 investigate returning East Hickory Street to traditional front-end parking.

01:34:29.580 --> 01:34:34.260
 Is that, does that touch all the bases?

01:34:34.260 --> 01:34:41.060
 Yes and I'll second.

01:34:41.060 --> 01:34:49.620
 All in favor, any additional discussion?

01:34:49.620 --> 01:34:52.980
 Do we actually need a vote to move this forward or can we just do the little go down the line

01:34:52.980 --> 01:34:54.820
 thing where we all give our opinion?

01:34:54.820 --> 01:34:56.140
 Is that sufficient?

01:34:56.140 --> 01:35:01.260
 Because it sounds like either way it goes forward in some regard.

01:35:01.260 --> 01:35:07.780
 I think the important part to this is does this committee make a recommendation to make

01:35:07.780 --> 01:35:12.520
 a change to the parking, no change to the parking, some of the things that we're saying

01:35:12.520 --> 01:35:15.540
 here, whatever that might look like.

01:35:15.540 --> 01:35:19.300
 It will be going to look at a work session.

01:35:19.300 --> 01:35:21.900
 What does the mobility committee say?

01:35:21.900 --> 01:35:29.500
 So I think the motion that I heard in the table is to make a 3.5 million dollar change.

01:35:29.500 --> 01:35:33.820
 The motion in fact was to convert East Hickory to traditional front-end parking.

01:35:33.820 --> 01:35:36.260
 Yes thank you.

01:35:36.260 --> 01:35:42.060
 And then so it's a matter of if that's what this, if that's what this body is going to

01:35:42.060 --> 01:35:44.980
 advise council, that's what they're saying.

01:35:44.980 --> 01:35:46.540
 That's what you're going to come out of this with.

01:35:46.540 --> 01:35:51.340
 So it's a recommendation of what the mobility committee says in that work session.

01:35:51.340 --> 01:35:56.400
 So when they hear the work session and the mobility committee supported, denied, whatever,

01:35:56.400 --> 01:35:59.900
 wherever it ends up, that's what this group is doing.

01:35:59.900 --> 01:36:00.900
 Ben is?

01:36:00.900 --> 01:36:01.900
 Correct.

01:36:01.900 --> 01:36:02.900
 That's my understanding.

01:36:02.900 --> 01:36:10.220
 We have a motion in a second.

01:36:10.220 --> 01:36:13.140
 Okay, you're recognizing me.

01:36:13.140 --> 01:36:18.220
 I'm not going to support the motion because there's not, it's not that I don't recognize

01:36:18.220 --> 01:36:24.620
 the pain and stress that has been brought up by members of the community.

01:36:24.620 --> 01:36:31.060
 If we had excess budget, I wouldn't care, we would hopefully go in and it wouldn't be

01:36:31.060 --> 01:36:41.060
 too disruptive to Hickory to flip it back, but with that and not a clear indication from

01:36:41.060 --> 01:36:44.900
 transportation services that we will not be decreasing safety.

01:36:44.900 --> 01:36:50.820
 So if it was free to do and we decreased safety, I would vote no, like if it was a huge decrease

01:36:50.820 --> 01:36:52.980
 in safety, I would vote no.

01:36:52.980 --> 01:36:58.780
 If it's neutral to safety and a huge increase in budget, which is what I'm seeing on the

01:36:58.780 --> 01:37:02.860
 previous discussion, then I'm still going to vote no because it's a huge increase in

01:37:02.860 --> 01:37:03.860
 budget.

01:37:03.860 --> 01:37:09.340
 If it's neutral to safety and we could just do it trivially, then I'd say sure, who cares,

01:37:09.340 --> 01:37:10.900
 let's go for it.

01:37:10.900 --> 01:37:17.700
 So that is the nuanced position, but two out of those three are no and we're not in a condition

01:37:17.700 --> 01:37:23.300
 where we're either showing that it's an improvement in safety or not a huge decrease in safety

01:37:23.300 --> 01:37:29.060
 and we're definitely showing that there's a substantial enforcement redevelopment or

01:37:29.060 --> 01:37:31.660
 whatever cost associated with it.

01:37:31.660 --> 01:37:38.380
 So at this time in 2025, I'm not going to be supporting the motion.

01:37:38.380 --> 01:37:43.980
 - Okay, anybody else wanna comment?

01:37:43.980 --> 01:37:47.340
 - I'll similarly have to back council member back on this.

01:37:47.340 --> 01:37:51.660
 I just keep hearing about our budget in the upcoming fiscal year and I just don't think

01:37:51.660 --> 01:37:56.340
 now is the time for that particular option.

01:37:56.340 --> 01:38:02.500
 I could be amicable to the first option if they ever become available to be able to do

01:38:02.500 --> 01:38:06.940
 enforcement, but I understand they're also short staff partially because of budget, but

01:38:06.940 --> 01:38:12.260
 at this time I would not be able to because of the high price for the specific motion.

01:38:12.260 --> 01:38:13.260
 - Okay.

01:38:13.260 --> 01:38:14.260
 - Very quick.

01:38:14.260 --> 01:38:18.220
 - Oh, you don't wanna say something else?

01:38:18.220 --> 01:38:19.220
 - Sure.

01:38:19.220 --> 01:38:23.300
 - Do we have discussion page?

01:38:23.300 --> 01:38:29.700
 - In my humble estimation, we the city made a mistake in doing this experiment.

01:38:29.700 --> 01:38:38.100
 I've not heard one person in my very unscientific study of this say, "Boy, that's a good idea.

01:38:38.100 --> 01:38:40.100
 We ought to do that all over town."

01:38:40.100 --> 01:38:42.580
 I haven't heard one person say that.

01:38:42.580 --> 01:38:47.780
 What I have heard is people up and down East Hickory, particularly merchants that say they

01:38:47.780 --> 01:38:52.820
 have to explain this to their customers all the time, I wish you'd do something about

01:38:52.820 --> 01:38:54.580
 it.

01:38:54.580 --> 01:39:00.740
 Mistakes are expensive and nobody wants to spend money to redo a mistake.

01:39:00.740 --> 01:39:06.420
 Nobody wants to do that less than me, but it's a mistake when you jump off sides with

01:39:06.420 --> 01:39:10.840
 a fourth and one, you pay a penalty.

01:39:10.840 --> 01:39:12.140
 We're paying a penalty here.

01:39:12.140 --> 01:39:13.140
 I'm sorry.

01:39:13.140 --> 01:39:18.060
 - All right, we'll all have spoken.

01:39:18.060 --> 01:39:24.580
 If you are in affirmative of this vote, raise your hand.

01:39:24.580 --> 01:39:32.660
 And if you're not in favor, raise your hand.

01:39:32.660 --> 01:39:36.620
 So we have an affirmative to this motion.

01:39:36.620 --> 01:39:38.620
 Thank you.

01:39:38.620 --> 01:39:43.380
 - Okay, time is getting short.

01:39:43.380 --> 01:39:44.380
 That was a lively discussion.

01:39:44.380 --> 01:39:48.980
 Thank you all very much and we'll see how that goes.

01:39:48.980 --> 01:39:49.980
 - Our next meeting is when?

01:39:49.980 --> 01:39:50.980
 I'm sorry.

01:39:50.980 --> 01:39:54.380
 - Let me put up the matrix.

01:39:54.380 --> 01:40:03.780
 We have got to look at the EMC 25-025, receive a report and hold a discussion and give staff

01:40:03.780 --> 01:40:09.180
 direction regarding future meeting topics.

01:40:09.180 --> 01:40:14.860
 So we have this in front of us like we do every month and is there anything, we see

01:40:14.860 --> 01:40:16.640
 the yeses on there.

01:40:16.640 --> 01:40:18.420
 You want to run through those yeses real quick?

01:40:18.420 --> 01:40:19.420
 - Yeah, sure.

01:40:19.420 --> 01:40:24.380
 So a few of these items were covered today in some of our conversations, a lot were covered

01:40:24.380 --> 01:40:25.740
 in the staff memo.

01:40:25.740 --> 01:40:31.460
 So those increasing wrapped equipment boxes, the ballard evaluation, construction project

01:40:31.460 --> 01:40:38.020
 information on shady shores, understanding strode, the US 380 side path and pedestrian

01:40:38.020 --> 01:40:43.780
 impact allowed use of trip funds, walking audits, and then lastly that Hickory Street

01:40:43.780 --> 01:40:44.780
 back in parking.

01:40:44.780 --> 01:40:51.500
 So we would request to remove all those items and next month we'll work to remove some more.

01:40:51.500 --> 01:40:54.180
 - Did you have a question?

01:40:54.180 --> 01:40:55.700
 - Yes, on these.

01:40:55.700 --> 01:41:00.060
 I'm comfortable removing all those items except for I think points were brought up during

01:41:00.060 --> 01:41:06.260
 the strode discussion that merit revisiting at some point appropriating the agenda.

01:41:06.260 --> 01:41:11.660
 So I'd like to keep that one on there for the updates that were asked for, but otherwise

01:41:11.660 --> 01:41:15.340
 I'm supportive of the rest of them.

01:41:15.340 --> 01:41:18.340
 - Anyone else?

01:41:18.340 --> 01:41:25.900
 Okay, can we get a motion to remove the yes items as noted?

01:41:25.900 --> 01:41:30.180
 - I'll make a motion to remove all the yes items except for strode.

01:41:30.180 --> 01:41:31.180
 - Second.

01:41:31.180 --> 01:41:34.260
 - Okay, all right, all in favor say aye.

01:41:34.260 --> 01:41:35.260
 - Aye.

01:41:35.260 --> 01:41:39.740
 - That looks like all has aye, all ayes, that is approved.

01:41:39.740 --> 01:41:40.740
 - All right.

01:41:40.740 --> 01:41:43.740
 - You have your hand up.

01:41:43.740 --> 01:42:03.060
 - So we had earlier a discussion about putting on the matrix a discussion about whether councils

01:42:03.060 --> 01:42:10.020
 should get streamlined recommendations from, the early discussion is our safety concerns

01:42:10.020 --> 01:42:14.380
 streamlined so that transportation can implement them 'cause we're constantly coming back to

01:42:14.380 --> 01:42:16.700
 council that discussion from early on.

01:42:16.700 --> 01:42:22.420
 I would like to put that on the matrix for a discussion and positive or negative recommendation

01:42:22.420 --> 01:42:28.220
 to council if people wouldn't mind, if the board wouldn't mind.

01:42:28.220 --> 01:42:30.220
 - All right, so that's future matrix.

01:42:30.220 --> 01:42:31.220
 Anything else?

01:42:31.220 --> 01:42:32.220
 Yes.

01:42:32.220 --> 01:42:34.540
 - Council Member Beck, is it okay if I tack on to that slightly?

01:42:34.540 --> 01:42:39.460
 If staff think of anything besides that up to two additional items that are in a similar

01:42:39.460 --> 01:42:43.060
 vein for us to look at, is it okay if we add that?

01:42:43.060 --> 01:42:45.940
 - As a friendly amendment, I'd love to hear more safety recommendations, yes.

01:42:45.940 --> 01:42:46.940
 - Sure.

01:42:46.940 --> 01:42:49.260
 - Or whatever you're specifying, what are you asking?

01:42:49.260 --> 01:42:51.900
 - Because you said no right turn on red specifically, yeah.

01:42:51.900 --> 01:42:55.260
 - What, up to two more safety recommendations?

01:42:55.260 --> 01:43:00.500
 - If there's something in a similar vein for staff, if they want, this is totally choose

01:43:00.500 --> 01:43:01.500
 your own adventure.

01:43:01.500 --> 01:43:06.980
 If there is an additional item similar to that where streamline is good, Council Member Bird

01:43:06.980 --> 01:43:07.980
 does not like this amendment.

01:43:07.980 --> 01:43:09.700
 - I don't like that amendment.

01:43:09.700 --> 01:43:17.260
 - The only reason I'm hesitant is 'cause we're vague and I don't know what that means, whereas

01:43:17.260 --> 01:43:22.180
 this is a highly specific item.

01:43:22.180 --> 01:43:27.220
 I'm happy to add things into that that are safety concerns if staff has them, but I think

01:43:27.220 --> 01:43:31.100
 wouldn't we have to have the matrix item to discuss them, to get them on the thing, and

01:43:31.100 --> 01:43:33.940
 it's not that hard to get them on the list.

01:43:33.940 --> 01:43:35.540
 - I'll pull back that.

01:43:35.540 --> 01:43:36.540
 - Thank you.

01:43:36.540 --> 01:43:37.540
 - Appreciate that.

01:43:37.540 --> 01:43:38.540
 Anything else?

01:43:38.540 --> 01:43:39.540
 Anyone else?

01:43:39.540 --> 01:43:47.060
 So we did that, and so let's move on to the next meeting and concluding items.

01:43:47.060 --> 01:43:48.060
 Thank you very much.

01:43:48.060 --> 01:43:49.060
 Great job.

01:43:49.060 --> 01:43:51.700
 Y'all did such a wonderful job.

01:43:51.700 --> 01:43:57.020
 Concluding items, next meeting, June 25th, is everybody okay with June 25th?

01:43:57.020 --> 01:43:58.020
 Yes?

01:43:58.020 --> 01:44:00.580
 Are we anticipating being out?

01:44:00.580 --> 01:44:06.780
 I believe that we have a new process for notifying committees, if you're not gonna make it to

01:44:06.780 --> 01:44:07.780
 the meetings.

01:44:07.780 --> 01:44:08.780
 - Oh.

01:44:08.780 --> 01:44:09.780
 - Is that this meeting?

01:44:09.780 --> 01:44:10.780
 - Oh.

01:44:10.780 --> 01:44:19.500
 - I'm just trying to remember my city phone stuff, so I did receive something there, but

01:44:19.500 --> 01:44:22.060
 I'll need clarification on that apparently.

01:44:22.060 --> 01:44:25.660
 Next meeting, June 25th, is there anything else on board?

01:44:25.660 --> 01:44:30.660
 Then we will conclude this meeting at Elyse.

01:44:30.660 --> 01:44:32.980
 - Just real quick, welcome to our new member, Lauren Penn.

01:44:32.980 --> 01:44:35.700
 I just wanted to recognize that as part of the meeting.

01:44:35.700 --> 01:44:36.700
 Welcome.

01:44:36.700 --> 01:44:37.700
 - Thank you.

01:44:37.700 --> 01:44:38.700
 Glad you could be here.

01:44:38.700 --> 01:44:39.700
 - Thank you so much for that.

01:44:39.700 --> 01:44:40.700
 You just blended in.

01:44:40.700 --> 01:44:41.700
 You were just blending.

01:44:41.700 --> 01:44:44.340
 So we certainly do welcome you on board.

01:44:44.340 --> 01:44:45.340
 - Yeah.

01:44:45.340 --> 01:44:46.340
 - Yeah.

01:44:46.340 --> 01:44:47.340
 Anything else?

01:44:47.340 --> 01:44:48.340
 All right.

01:44:48.340 --> 01:44:49.340
 If there's not anything else, we'll conclude at 1146.

01:44:49.340 --> 01:44:50.340
 - Very good.

01:44:50.340 --> 01:44:51.340
 - And you and I, we gotta get through a little bit of extra, and we gotta hurry up and get

01:44:51.340 --> 01:44:52.340
 over it.

01:44:52.340 --> 01:44:52.340
 - Sure.