Dec 10, 2019 Mobility Committee on 2019-12-10 9:00 AM

>> Well, that's a lot of morning and welcome to this meeting of mobility committee which I will call to order since I see that we do have a quorum present. We can dive right into item A, consider approval of the meeting minutes of November 12th, I'll entertain a motion. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Aye. >> Aye, opposed to the approval of the minutes? >> No, aye, I accept. >> Okay, so two to one, no, no, he knows, seven minutes, okay. We're going to item B, receive a report of the discussion to provide staff direction regarding the text-off proposal. >> Yes. >> The removal of certain roadways in the state highway system. >> Oh, that's right. >> Didn't read the quorum. >> Yeah, that, you're trying to go too soon. Sorry. >> You're welcome to discuss this item. >> You'll be fully involved. >> I pretend they, Deputy City Engineer, I was talking about the turn back program that the state highway is being turned back to the city from text-off. So here's a quick overview of the presentation, background, what exactly is the turn back program, proposed roadways that are being considered in the turn back, and then options, what are our options. So background, there are several state highways that run through the city. Currently, as you can see, some of these are numbered here, this and that, from text-off website, this is, these are the highways on system, these are the roadways that pass to our community. Most of them are perceived local roadways, so there are a lot of citizens calling the city if they have any concerns, if they have any issues on these roadways, so they're considered as local roadways or city roadways, and the community accepts them. So if you look at this map, there are about approximately 12 state highways that run through the city, and this is outside of the main freeway system and loop 288. So these are US 380, US 77, these are main thoroughfares north, south, and east, west, and there are several other little spurs throughout the city that are within the city limits. US 77 particularly, that's the one that's the main focus, it starts at 35 in the north and then traverses all the way through the city, from the heart, through the heart of the city, and then back, connects to 35. What is the turn back program? It was implemented back in, starting in 2014. This is, the turn back was designed for turning back the maintenance, operations, and the control of certain state highways back from the, from Textile or from the state to the local entities. This program is completely voluntary, so if the local entity does decide that they do not want to have those highways turned back to them, that they have the option to do so. How does the program work? So the main objective is to transfer control, as I said, of the state owned highways, these are probably US 380, US 77. What are the candidate roadways? The main ones that Textile is not interested in is the ones that are low volume. At a certain point in time it had served its purpose, US 77 was the main route, it was really high volume, and now over years that volume has gone down, the purpose is no longer intended as a large regional connector or a regional facility. So those are the roadways that would be the candidates for taking them off system. And then action, the action is once the city accepts that, yes, we're ready to take on, you know, whatever the number of segments we have, these are the segments we'll take off, then it goes to the Texas Transportation Commission and that's where it's authorized to be turned back. So that's the process, that's the way the program works. Now what are the proposed roadway systems? If you can see, anything in red is associated with the US 77, so this is US 77 going through the system, primarily Elmond Locust and then you have Dallas Dive South here, and a portion of Locust or a spur of Locust, this is actually FM 2164. And then it continues north of the loop, but Texot is interested in turning back whatever is within the loop. The other roadway, a couple of roadways are, the green is Sherman Drive, currently the city maintains and operates this portion of Sherman Drive from Elmond Locust all the way to the loop, and we actually maintain it, so it's not that Texot maintained it, it's not going to be extra cost on our city expenses, we already do that as part of an MOU agreement. So Sherman is maintained, Texot does have some control over widening in the right of way because of the way the current agreement is set up. And then FM 1515 is a Texot roadway, they're currently looking at widening it, they have, they're currently in the schematic phase, once that is designed and widened at that point, it will be, it's a candidate for turning it back to the city because it doesn't really connect anywhere or go anywhere outside between the airport and 35W. So some of the streets that are within the city but then connect and they become Texot outside the city, if we were looking to just say take Sherman Drive for instance, further up towards Windsor, if we wanted to add a stop sign or a stop light or anything, Texot still need to weigh in on that? And if we turn it back, if the city owns it, there is no Texot say or authority or permits required, the city will be empowered to make their own decisions similar to what you can do on Carroll, similar to what you can do on other streets, Bell, Mingo. Okay, thank you. So I'll get into a little bit of detail of what these pavement sections are, Locust or US 77, the first segment is from 35 all the way to US 380, I'll talk about both these segments. This segment of US 77 that goes in front of the TTI, old TTI and now the UNT North Campus and then this segment, it's a concrete pavement, good condition currently, four lane divided segment and it does have a wide median in the middle. The section from this point all the way to US 380, this segment of Elm and then this whole segment of Locust is primarily asphalt and it is a two lane undivided segment for FM 2164. So this is the current condition and I'll get to why I'm talking about what kind of roadway it is or what kind of is it concrete pavement or asphalt pavement because it comes down to the maintenance dollars at the end. So US 77, that's the whole section of Elm and Locust going through the heart of the city from all the way from 380 to Eagle Drive here and down to Carroll, so they're willing to take this whole piece out of the system. It's a four lane facility, it's a two lane in each direction couplet, it's a one way couplet and both these roadways are asphalt pavement, fairly wide pavement. US 77, this is the last piece, Dallas Drive from Locust at the intersection of Bell, Locust and Dallas Drive all the way to 35E. This is, a portion of this is concrete, I think somewhere in the middle it ends, there's a concrete segment for this particular roadway and then from Teasley further south to 35E is an asphalt pavement, so it's both. It's a five lane section where you have a center turn lane and then four lanes, two lanes in each direction. This is Sherman Drive, it's a four lane undivided, it has two lanes in each direction with just a double solid yellow line strapped in the middle and it is a asphalt pavement, this entire stretch is currently maintained by the city under AMU. And last but not least, this is currently a two lane facility, but Textile is working on a schematic to widen it, it will be a combination, the section between I-35W to Western will be widened to a six lane, just given that Western is going to be that major connection to this industrial, a lot of truck traffic moving, so this will be a six lane segment. And then the segment from Western to the end will be a four lane section. Currently Textile is working on the plans and I think John can fill in on the details of what their timeline is with this project, but it will be most likely concrete pavement once it's said and done. And after the completion of the project is when Textile really wants to turn it back, the city would not accept it without improvements in place, they're currently working on the design and then after the construction is completed we can take it over. So what are the benefits? Quick list of benefits. We'll have obviously local control, we can obviously plan events, we can use them, we don't need take stop permits to get on and close roads, detour any traffic that we have during construction, detour any traffic that we have during events, so we'll have a good control over that facility that's turned back. We will have control over the driveway spacing and access provided onto these streets, then we can... Excuse me, you skipped right over, creates opportunities for economic development in New York. I was curious to hear how that is, or if you're just putting lots of things that are said on the list. I was going to cover that at some point. So economic development, one of the primary or our main focus is how can we convert some of these streets to complete streets. Elm and Locust are large, wide streets that can be used for adding more facilities, infrastructure for bicyclists, for pedestrians, creating that perfect environment. So if you create that environment on Elm and Locust that would definitely attract more businesses in this area to make it more economically feasible. So if you have some of these streets that are already complete streets and designed for more pedestrian friendly activities, that entices economic development, and we are working with economic development to put that in, but if we have local control over these streets, it is much more easier. We can do complete streets, we can narrow streets down just based on the volume. If tech stock controls it, it becomes much more difficult for them to justify the narrowing of streets and adding more parking or adding bike lanes and adding larger pedestrian sidewalks. So that's the economic development that you have. You can entice businesses to come to a place that's more appealing for pedestrians and walking and walkability in New York. And then moving forward on street parking, I touched on that. You can enforce it, remove it, change any parking layouts if you want to. Obviously the other thing is landscaping. You can make it much more prettier, you can add trees, you can add different shrubberies, street lighting. All of that is now possible because it's now under local control. Also the other thing is the right-of-way. The utility is being installed under the pavement. So currently if you have any tech stock roadway, any utilities that have to be installed there outside the right-of-way. So you need much more space. So if a roadway is say 100 feet wide, you need another 20 feet on either side for utilities, water, wastewater, D&E to be in place. Now what we can do is we can shorten the amount of right-of-way and have within the existing right-of-way, put all your utilities down, water, wastewater can be under the pavement. So that gives us more flexibility and control over where our utilities go and reducing the public right-of-ways. And obviously the last one is maintenance of the roadway and I'll get into the maintenance aspect of this. So to give you an idea, there are a couple of graphs here. This one is for asphalt to define the life of a pavement. This is typical asphalt pavement. It starts at year zero and extends all the way to year 40. And these are the different type of activities that are needed. So this is crack seal, this is crack seal and plus a micro seal and then so on and so forth. And this is a full overlay where you can see the maximum cost. So here's the cost implications. So first four years you don't have to do anything. At year eight you have to spend $20,000 and so on and so forth all the way to at year 24 you have to spend $140,000. Similarly there is a curve for concrete. And you can see here you start maintaining up until year four you don't have to do anything. Even year eight you don't have to do anything. After that the first maintenance around year five you start increasing. You go up to $40,000, $50,000. These are some minor, really minor repairs. These are not paneled replacements. So this is 5% repairs. Then you go to 10% and then so on and so forth. This is a typical curve in life for a concrete pavement. What we have done is the average annual cost of the total 40 year is divided annually. If you do that you get about $6,000 for asphalt pavement. So if you were to start at year one and start accumulating, hey every year I need $6,000 for this street and you get to year five then you spend the first $20 out of the $6,000 you've accumulated. That's the logic behind these numbers. I'm really glad you explained those charts because I didn't realize it was a time sequence. Has anybody discounted the cash flows to present value? Because you've got a big hit for concrete that's in like year four. So obviously you could invest a quarter of that or something in your zero to cover that. So how does it work? I think that's really counted in. It's just to give you an idea on an annual basis of how much your operating budget will be hit. If those streets are entered and you start collecting the money that you need at year five. But time value is very important on a 40 year set of cash flows. Could I answer that as a follow up? I'd be very interested to see what's the present value of each of those. I used to know how to do it myself but I don't remember. We'll get that. And then similarly concrete pavement is about a little over $11,000 on average annual maintenance cost. So the overall average annual maintenance cost is close to half a million dollars is $450,000. This does not include FM 428 because we're already maintaining that. That's not additional funds. And FM 1550, the date is not determined yet. It's not going to be wiped many times soon. So we don't know the implications of that. But if we take over US 77 and Locust, then these are the cost implications on an average annual basis. Now when we're taking over, one thing I do want to say is that TxDOT is ready to rehabilitate and reconstruct the majority of these roadways or all of them to a condition that is acceptable to the city. So we will not accept any pavement that's currently failing or ready to fail or on the brink. For example Dallas Drive, all the concrete panels are failing. There are holes and potholes. Those will be completely redone. TxDOT is ready to pull the trigger on a contractor to move forward the minute this thing moves forward. So once we say we're okay to take it over, then they'll go and do a bunch of panel replacements, bring it up to either city standards or higher. >> If we were not doing this, they would not repair the road? >> They will repair the road, but I think John can answer that question much more better. >> So they'll repair the road consistent with their maintenance schedule and the workload to have for the whole district and the whole county. So they try to get to it when you want to, but more times than not, their schedule and the locals don't match. So typically it will be on the list of the schedule within the whole county and then it will fall wherever it falls. But if we take it over, they'll expedite it. They're like, we're ready to give it to you. We'll fix it immediately and then turn it over. >> Councilmember Briggs. >> I'm not sure how you have a few more slides. My question is really more about asphalt versus concrete. Have we done studies on which is better or do we have a recommendation on if somebody's going to do something, what we would like for them to do? >> So these are already existing pavements, so a lot of them are already inbuilt and when they go and maintain or reconstruct them, they'll be put back as the same type of material. Both of these, if you look at both of these roadways, they have similar lifespan. You have to do a lot of continuous maintenance for asphalt, but for concrete, it's more sporadic, so you get a longer range. So you go eight years without doing anything and then you have to do something. So moving forward, this is existing conditions and they will be maintained as the way they are. Textile is not going to go and replace if it's an asphalt, replace it with concrete because that's not in their plan or maintenance dollars. So all they're going to do is if it's an asphalt roadway, they'll then go ahead and replace it with an asphalt or if it's concrete, they'll replace it with concrete. So right now we don't have too much say on this. As far as city roadways, we are shifting our direction. We're going in the direction where we want to convert most of our arterials into asphalt because it's quicker to get in and out, quicker to lay the asphalt down and be done and get out as opposed to closing lanes, disrupting traffic. So most of our arterials will slowly shift to an asphalt type of pavement and most of our residential streets that doesn't get that much traffic and don't really require anything to be done for years, those will remain concrete. So our city thought or staff thought is going to be going in that direction. But for these particular segments, we don't really have very much flexibility. So here's a quick summary of what's happening. The first segment of U.S. 77, that's from 35 to 380, it's the longest. It's 3.7 miles and it's completely concrete. So the expected turn back date, they'll fix everything that has to be fixed and by next fall, they will be ready to turn it back. We won't begin maintenance as you saw in the graphs for eight years and when the maintenance begins, it won't be the full amount, it will be smaller chunks of 20,000 to 40,000 a year. And then this is the total maintenance cost on the average annual basis. So you can see this is the longest segment, it is concrete and it requires the most amount of money. One concern I've got on this is right now they're planning on doing body break phase seven for us because it connects on system and if we take this off system, is there any concern over them backing out and saying it no longer connects on system? I'm looking at that. So body break phase seven, that little spur that connects between them. The reason they're saying that that's tech stock is because they're connecting those two roads together and you can go 600 feet past the intersection and that covers both of those roadways. My question is if we take this back in August of 2020 and that project hasn't started yet, then 77 has started. We're going to have a conversation about some of this stuff in a minute because I've got some concerns about the structure that have been disdained and we'll get to that whenever the time is right. Just to move through the rest of the segments, as you can see, most of the remaining ones are asphalt and they're smaller segments based on the length of the segment and the width of the roadway, the maintenance dollar amounts on the annual basis, average annual basis are fairly low. And most of them won't start maintenance starting from 2024, so we're not talking about maintaining them for another five years where smaller maintenance, crack season and stuff will begin. And then for 428, we already have the maintenance, so there is no maintenance dollars. As you can see, one of the things that was added here is sidewalk and street lighting. For the segment between US 77 from 380 all the way to Eagle Drive that goes to the heart of the city, there is another project where all the sidewalks will be improved by tech stock. So any sidewalks that are failing in that main drag between 380 and Eagle will be made 80 compliant, they will replace all the panels that are cracked up and you know, heaving, upheaving and all that, so they'll be replacing all that. They're currently working on the Elm corridor going up and down on some of the sidewalks on both sides and they do seem to have funding on the other side. So this is something that we've talked to tech stock and they've conveyed that they will be willing to work if we request in our turn back that we need all the sidewalks fixed, then that's something that they will put in and add dollars for their sidewalk. So that's one thing. Lighting improvement is something that tech stock doesn't do, so there wouldn't be any lighting improvement and we'll have to consider that as a separate project moving forward. What they can do is actually during the maintenance phase and rehab phase, while they're working, they can install the lighting or get a contractor on board to install it, but the city will have to chip in the dollars needed for installation of lighting. So that's why I included this sidewalk and lighting because this is always when you inherit a facility, that's one of the main things people start talking about how do we work with the sidewalks, what's happening with that. So the main segment between 380 and Eagle will be completely upgraded for sidewalks on element of those both locations. They will have the four or five feet sidewalk that they currently had will be all ADA compliant. There's a project currently going on. And then as you can see, some of these are further out the Dallas Drive. There is no sidewalk program for Dallas Drive segment at this point. There are portions that have sidewalk, but it does not have sidewalk all the way up and down. And TechStop doesn't currently have a plan to do that. But if council recommends that, hey, we need sidewalks on play before we can turn it over, that's something they're willing to consider. Yeah, on Dallas Drive, that one just sticks out to me because we've had a presentation on all the polls and the lights and I remember Councilmember Ryan bringing up, well, before we redo streets, we should have conversations about how much extra it would be for underground utilities. And so, I mean, I just see this as an opportunity to make that since it's a first entrance into the city for many people. When we redo the road, if we have sidewalks and we bring some of those utilities underground, I see that as a really great opportunity for that section of street before we get into the major conversation. Okay. And then last but not least are options. This is the committee, there's a committee to recommend moving forward to council, which is in a few hours. And if not, what are the options? You do have options to pick and choose if there are certain segments that you think that we're not ready, we can do that, if there are segments that you want to add. I mean, it's fairly flexible at this point right now that the recommendation can move forward to council and then there will be another discussion with the entire council. Councilmember Briggs. On Salmon Locust, right now there's a lot of work going on for the drainage project. And the businesses there are suffering. I see posts from small businesses all the time that their entrances are blocked off and especially since it's one way street, right, if a couple of entrances or connector streets are blocked off, you have to go all the way down and come back around and try to find a way to get in. So my concern would be, what would be the timing of this? Like for the drainage, so would it hit right after or have we thought about it that far? So I think currently there are two things happening. There's a concrete drainage project that's going through and that's cutting across Locust right now. The majority of that is on Wainwright but then it's moving into Locust. That's a big drainage project. But the other project that's happening is the utility relocations up and down Elm and Locust. So this is the first phase. From the square all the way down to EGLE, they're replacing and relocating. Atmos is doing its gas lines and we at Citi are going to go next, do the water and sewer. Once that's done and water and sewer is under the pavement, which is less disruption for the businesses so that they can keep the... So at this point our plan is to go forward and get the project completed as a whole. So right after our utilities are done immediately after it takes off, we'll come back and redo the pavement if we move forward with the turn back. That way we are out of the area and we don't go back redoing some of this over and over. That's one thing. As far as keeping the businesses access open, we've worked with our contractors and asked them to any changes to the way they're doing with the means and methods. Keeping the businesses open, especially if they have one driveway versus two and three. So we are working currently and yes it's going to be a little bit of disconferred or a little bit of access issue for a few months, but after that I think it's for the overall drainage plan. So you're saying that the drainage and a lot of the work that should be wrapped up in a couple months? Now the drainage that's crossing Elm and Locust that's impacting the traffic should be out of that area and then it'll get on private property on a parking lot and go behind. It was on Wainwright for a long time, now it's crossing, that's why you're seeing all that issue and it's a huge, it's a big hole that the drainage boxes need to be inserted so it's a safety concern. They're quickly moving so once that crosses we'll be in a private area so it shouldn't impact as much to the traffic. Any direction or questions? Well one of my concerns is I look at those dates and I know how we talk about roads and when they'll be done and when they'll be ready. And we should just quit putting years on things. That, I mean, Hickory is not going to be done for a while at this point and yet we're planning on redoing water and sewer which is already done on Hickory. And we're looking at April of '21 that we would have the drainage done and have the water and the sewer and take Scott to come back in and redo the surface. So these dates are not final, this is a tentative start. Currently we're moving back, moving with a MOU/resolution for saying we as a council or we as a city are ready to accept some of these terms. Now the actual agreement will come in at a later date which will have actual dates. So this is a tentative start for getting Tic-Toc rolling. So this is where I think being your staff disagrees. Because you know I work for other people and this is not my first rodeo and I have a client who went forward and passed a resolution saying that they were going to agree to do all this stuff. And at the end of the resolution it says the City of Crowley, Texas will begin introducing jurisdiction, operation, and maintenance responsibilities of the roadway upon an acceptable agreement with the Texas Department of Transportation. Seems straightforward, right? That resolution four months later resulted in a minute order from the Highway Commission where they turned it back and gave it to Crowley and so two years later when we want to go back to get money for assistance for that section of roadway they're saying it's already off system. So all I'm suggesting you do is don't pass a resolution. Get the benefits first. Say what your intent is that it's just an agreement, an agreement that's not binding and you can say right off the top it's not binding unless certain things occur. And then if they meet the dates you take it off. If they don't you say I'll see you when you do it. But I'm concerned the way it's structured and what I've seen that the Commission will take that resolution and when those dates hit, boom they're going to pass a minute order and it's yours. Whether or not you accepted it or not because that's what they did to the City of Crowley. We're working though. I'm banging on that bell. I'm going to bang until somebody tells me to shut up. Nobody told me to shut up. Yeah, I think it should be based on an event certain, not a date certain. I have some questions. It looks like a lot of real but kind of qualitative benefits and some very hard quantitative costs. But it seems that the case could be tightened up just from a pure, you know, pure cost benefit just by the fact that you've mentioned things that aren't memorialized here, they're just verbalized about sidewalks and things like that have real costs that, you know, have real financial benefit because we wouldn't have to spend them. So, you know, I'd be interested to know what the value is of things that they might do for us in such an agreement that they would not otherwise do. So I know they don't otherwise do sidewalks, but they ought to fix, maybe not to our liking, that's a qualitative thing, or not to our timing preferences, but they ought to fix the roads that are theirs anyway. So it's kind of a little hard for me to see why this is totally compelling to do with a $450,000 price tag. Another question I have is put that $450,000 in some kind of context. It's not general fund dollars, right? It's street maintenance. So what is that as a, you know, I kind of have a better feel for what that is as an increment to general fund. What is our total street maintenance? Is that like $15 million? Correct. Yeah. It's not insignificant, but what would the impact be, you know, of taking on that increment? What would we be taking it out of or, you know, would it have to go to the tax levy? It's not insignificant. I think I'd want to see how many hard quantitative benefits we could stack up against it. And then just as more of a refinement, because it's not determinative, you probably could have that present value, look at the maintenance cost of asphalt versus concrete by this afternoon. I mean, that takes two minutes if you know how to do it. But that's not determinative, right? You're going to have concrete and asphalt. Exactly. So that's kind of where I'm at. It's like, I like it. I like it for all the reasons you like it, but I don't know if I like it for the $50,000 worth. So one of the, I think you didn't have a question. A year. And your question was, was the cost benefit of time saving? Right. And the cost benefit of time saving is, if you're looking at, for example, a project like Dallas and Deesley, that project went through a design phase and right after design phase, it went through a long review and approval process with Textile for a permit. So we're talking about between anywhere, depending on, for that particular intersection, it could take anywhere from a month to four months. So we're talking about four months of construction cost inflation at the current rate between 10 and 14 percent that's going on annually. If you do that, that's a cost saving on every little project that we're planning on doing. Same thing with Sherman at the loop intersection improvements. We're going through the process. We're getting Textile engaged and their permits applied for the permits and getting those permits. So the time saving there on every aspect of the project is what it's cutting. How much and how does that compare to $450,000 a year? That's just a straightforward financial analysis. And if it's close, then maybe say, yeah, do it for the qualitative benefits. But it would help to be a strong aid to judgment to try to put a dollar value on it. We know how many little projects we do, how much each, compared to the other number. That would help me, Council Member Briggs. So I'm in favor of this in theory. I really want to pay attention to what Mr. Polster said. I think that he makes a lot of sense there on the resolution and how we go about doing it, the timing. We don't want to give them a reason to just turn it back. I mean, because we definitely don't want to have to make the needed improvements before we do the maintenance. So if that part can be handled right, I'm good with it. I mostly, because of the the tech stock communication and the issues and the confusion, I think it's beneficial to us to have these. We will have, we can make them complete streets, the economic development benefit of it if we decide, you know, one way needs to be two way. There's all sorts of things that we can do in the core of our city to make it better, I think, if we own these streets. Would we be able to, because I know tech stock has different rules for DCTA stops and things like that, so I feel like we could also put more stops in the core of our city as well. So I'm, I'm in favor of this, if we can get the ordinance or resolution or information right, I just, I want to be very careful that we're not giving them opportunity just to push everything on us and then we are responsible for all the updates because, you know, locus is pretty bad right now. I mean it needs to be fixed. Okay. I would pretty much echo it on say, proceed with caution. Lessons learned on McKinney. Yes. We've gone through that, yes. Okay. Does that give you enough direction that you could paraphrase this afternoon? With the, yeah, the, nailing down the exact cost is going to be a little bit of a challenge. And as Council Member Briggs mentioned that there's a lot of back and forth and confusion coordinating any changes a lot at Star Wars, so there's an effort associated with staff going back and forth, an effort associated with, you know, citizens getting more frustrated, so it's our customer service as well. Yeah, long list of qualitative benefits, I totally get that. I would like them to, I just want to know how much money, how much it's going to cost us to get those qualitative benefits, you know, or can we get, can we see our way to, you know, some effort at quantification that could make us feel a little bit better about it. Because that $450,000 that everyone is very eager to spend here, you know, that, what could we do with that? If we didn't do this, and we had $450,000 laying around in road maintenance, you know, what else could we improve in the city? I mean, I, so, you know, everything's a choice. Okay, all right, so moving forward, does the committee recommend this moving forward with Council overall, or do you still? I think you heard, you heard, she was saying move it, she was cautioned. You heard one saying, show me the money. Okay. All right. Okay. Let's move on to close out that item, open up item C, receive a report and hold the discussion on bicycle and pedestrian citation statistics and enforcement of laws, and then police department discuss safety ramifications with respect to these laws. Good morning, Mark. I'll open by pedestrian coordinator, pretend asked me to take charge of this topic but I've actually invited a tenant Preston polar from our police department is the neighborhood services commander to come and address the topic. But I'm also involved with the speak to it. Excuse me. Hopefully I'm not getting sick. Good morning everyone. Like I said, I'm Preston polar lieutenant with the police department. Lucky for me I did this presentation a while back for the, the other committee traffic safety committee so a little bit shorter than pretends, I'll, I'll skip through these first couple slides it just goes over our city's mission statement and vision. So we wanted both pedestrian and bicycle statistics within the city. Is that correct. I'll jump into it so here's our here's our bicycle related citation statistics. I included all of last year's, and this year's year to date as a week or so ago. And I'll just go through them. I checked our end code all of our citations that we do throughout the city, which includes our department and also if University of North Texas or TV you if they writing citations because it goes through our, our municipal court system. The first one our citations for no front bicycle lights. We've had for for so far this year, and bicycles riding on the wrong side of the road, we've had a couple, we had five last year. No rear reflector light. We've had to so far this year. And we haven't had any with for bicycles disregarding a stop sign this year we had a couple last year, and bicycles riding on a sidewalk, I put the asterisk there because there's just certain parts in the city where we're not supposed to do that. And then bicycle fail deal the right away we have to that could be related to like a crash or something to that effect. And then the last one bicycle disregarding a red light we've had one so far this year. So on the on the data chart that we got the number of bicycles involved in a crash, just for 2019 has been 20. So, are these citations written within those or is this something separate then they involve crashes. It would be both. So yeah, if there's a if there's a crash involved, and we write a citation that's it's all it's all in the same system or it could be, you know, for the real no rear reflector light that an officer could just see a bicycle right down the street. Outside of crash and write that as well. They both go into the same system. So out of 14 citations stuff some of those may have been likely in those 28 crashes. That's correct. Yes, I don't I don't have may be separate from. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Kind of a Venn diagram bicycle riding on sidewalk probably not in the crashes, but bicycle failed to yield right away maybe more likely something like that for the crash. But it's not a subset. Yes. Yes. That's it. That's a safe assumption. Yes. Any sorry any other questions on that. All right. A few more different ones for the pedestrian related. So we haven't had any this year but the first one it's the failed to yield a pedestrian at a signal intersection. We had five last year, zero so far this year. The next one is failed to yield right away and a pedestrian and a crosswalk with a signal. That's, you know, pedestrians crossing in the square they have they have the right away they have the light. And the vehicle fails to yield pedestrian crossing a point other than a crosswalk. We've had seven so far this year and had 10 last year. Now the way that the law reads pedestrians are allowed to cross in the middle of the street as long as there's not lights on each side of corresponding intersections. So if they have like the best example is the square. We all see people do it but pedestrians are not supposed to do that on the square because they have controlled pedestrian crossings on each intersection. And next one just pedestrian soliciting on a roadway. Probably not relevant to what we're discussing pedestrian walking on a highway with traffic no sidewalk we just had one this year pedestrian walking on a roadway where sidewalks provided. We had seven last year and six so far this year. And then disregarding pedestrian control signal, we had three last year, and two so far this year. And then failing to yield to pedestrian and crosswalk with no signals. We've had one last year in this year. And then the last one disregard a school crossing guard we had one last year, and zero so far this year, still time. Yes. Oh, I was just, I was looking at the involved crashes again with the data I just find it so there's 40 involved crashes and I was counting, I'm trying to see, you know, the citations are written when the crashes are involved or if it's separate. I know that some of these probably aren't, you know, the crosswalk but I would like to see if there's a way possible to see on any of those actual crashes when response happened. Who or what received the citation, if it was the vehicle or if it was the pedestrian. Okay, we can get you the information. And, and I do know that the last one has occurred. Because I witnessed it. Yes, that's a. Yeah, that's it. That's a that's a big one. You know, of course, as you all know at the police department we have competing priorities but I would certainly say the school crossing guard is important for us. Just a side note this this past school year, I was able to get with one of the area superintendents to get probably 30 of the ISD staff members trained up with actual crossing guard training, so they had the, not just the ability but the authority to do it, and kind of as a supplement for our crossing guards so it is something that we're that we're aware of, for sure. I have noticed more crossing guards around the school so I really appreciate that. That was it for statistics. I don't know how deep you want to get in this also I touched on last time. In addition to just the statistics basically some of the things that we are doing in traffic as far as outreach that deals with pedestrian bicycle safety. We've had for this past year, we've been doing a bicycle pedestrian safety forms. We've done it three times attendance has not been great, but it's a worthwhile cause. We kind of focus on the traffic laws talk about safety tips and allow residents to ask us questions it's typically myself and then one of our traffic sergeants. The other one that's been real popular we do the police officer story time where we read to the kids about bicycle safety. The last one, we had over 100 children attend so it's been a good event for us and of course their parents are there too so we kind of hopefully instill some knowledge in them as well. Just a suggestion, on the forms that aren't heavily attended, maybe advertising to schools, elementary or middle schools or do one with DCTA. I know that now we have a larger social media presence than we used to but I think they're really beneficial. I don't know that I knew about the last one. So when you say attendance is low, you mean like four? Ilya averaged about half a dozen for the three that we've had each time. We're exploring, trying to find ways and that's a good idea with DCTA. Some of the other things that we've touched on, so the department is still developing, it should be pretty close to being done, just a comprehensive strategic plan. A little subset of that is just the traffic plan and this isn't all encompassing but part of what we recognize is prevention is a big part of that. A lot of, just some stats here that we wanted to mention, in 2017 40% of the fatal crashes, and this is statewide, involved no seatbelt usage and of the almost a little under a million crashes, over 30% involved the driver between the ages of 16 and 28. Probably not a shock to anyone, younger, less experienced drivers tend to be involved in more accidents but it gives us an opportunity, we want to do more with social media outreach, not just within our agency but with the school district as well and finding ways to really educate the kids a bit better. We're fortunate that we have a student resource officer sergeant in place now, that's their sole responsibility so part of their job is to try to get some more outreach within the school district related to this. So is the implication of those two facts that a key focus of your efforts would be to educate young people about the importance of safety belts, seatbelts? Yes, when I was looking at all the statistics to see, because there's a lot of safety concerns when it comes to people driving, people on bicycles and walking, but these were two of the things that really popped out to me where with our resources that we have, where can we do the most good. So these were the two things. So yes, but also there's more to it with the young drivers than just seatbelt usage. When you talk about distracted driving, cell phone usage, all that, it's a priority for us moving forward. We haven't lately, but there's been agencies that do, of course, the shattered dreams where it's like a mock scenario of someone that was at school and they were drinking and driving and got injured and it's just different ways to try to impact the kids and actually get it through to them, the importance of safety, especially when they're driving and things like that. All right, as far as our enforcement efforts, of course we do close patrols, targeted enforcement based on either things that we observe or citizen complaints or anything that comes from city hall or council. We'll certainly target. We have speed trailers. We frequently do speed studies along with traffic engineering. That's a big tool for us to see if there is a speeding problem in certain areas of the neighborhood and sometimes it's just a perception issue where the data just doesn't show that. In school zones, obviously we do heavy enforcement with that for every school year. We do at least two weeks of having an officer at start of school and end of school, a new school year, new batch of kids, new batch of parents, trying to get them to understand the routine and what they can and can't do and just have a visible presence out there helps out as well. I mentioned here the solar panel driver feedback signs. That's something that traffic engineering is doing, but I thought it was important there. The goal is at some point to try to get those feedback panels for the signs at all the school zones where everyone driving can actually see their speed as they're driving instead of just the flashing lights. And this was a little bit ago, but the National School Bus Safety Week is where we actually designate officers to, you know, throughout the course of the school year buses, they can file complaints with drivers that are ignoring whenever they're stopped, they just blow through as they're letting kids on and off where we take those complaints and we'll actually put officers out there where we've had the most complaints and just do some targeted enforcement there. That was going to be one of my questions about that because I've seen buses that have the stop sign and some drivers just disregard that stop sign as an actual stop sign and thinking that the kids are just going to get off on this side, but kids cross from one side to the other using that stop sign as safety. So do we know, have we ever written anyone a ticket for that? Yes, yes we have, yeah. I don't have the numbers on those right now, but yeah, absolutely, yes, because we've, especially within our traffic division, all of our guys, our motor officers specifically, that's one of the things that they certainly look for. And we try to always stay in touch with the school district because a lot of times the bus drivers will, you know, if it's happened a few times, they're like, hey, I keep at this part of the neighborhood that I have my route, these cars aren't paying attention, you know, so that is something that we try to keep an eye on. All right, and for the analysis, this is a part of my role, oops, probably about a year ago I was designated as just the department's pedestrian safety officer and all that really means is, as I wrote here, just a comprehensive review of any fatal crashes and specifically crashes that deal with pedestrians and bicyclists. Once the primary investigator is done with everything and the crash report has been finalized and sent to the state, I'll take a look at it and see if, obviously, anything that we can do as a police department, but anything we can do as a city to either improve the environment of that area and determine if there's, if I need to try to reach out to any other city departments to see if there's improvements to be made. Would you be coming back to us with that? You're saying you're going to be doing this? This has been occurring. Yeah, just the example that pops in my mind. Unfortunately, the lady, they got struck by the train by our police department. One of the things that came out of that was those signage that was put up there because she was crossing on the wrong side of the street, just extra gates as a safety measure were installed. So, little things like that. And then lastly, of course, we, as a police department, we try to have fairly regular meetings with traffic engineering just to work together to solve any issues that might come up on their end or our end. I think that is it for my presentation. Yeah, I don't know if this is in response to what I brought or asked about earlier, but on more about the bicyclists and from what I'm seeing on the data that we've had 28 crashes involving and there's only 14 tickets that have been written this year. I understand that we are, we are not, or the perception is we are definitely not enforcing bicycle laws. Is there any plan in the future to try and make that stronger because it's very difficult when people who are anti-bike lane come to me and say why are we spending money on this? If we're not enforcing the laws, because I'll give you an example the other day, and I don't know if this might not even be legal, but on Bonnie Bray, I had a bicyclist in front of me. Once we got past the roundabout, I moved over in the other lane, went past them, got down, had to stop at the light. Well, there are several other cars that get behind me, and I'm watching the guy in the rear-view mirror weave between everybody to get up to the very front of the light, and then he takes off in the middle of the lane again and blocks the traffic again. And so those are the types of things that aggravate people that make them anti-bike. So if we're enforcing stuff, we can at least point to, hey, we're trying to make sure that they're doing the right thing. It is important to us. With pedestrians and bicyclists in particular, it's one of those, if we're not there to observe the violation of the law, it's hard to take enforcement. So as far as a plan, it is important for us moving forward, and it's something that we've been discussing. I hate to bring it up, but again, a lot of it for us comes back to competing interests and limited resources. It's never a good reason, but I don't disagree with you that it's important to show, like you said, if we're going to make it a priority to be able to show that we are enforcing it as well. So it is something that we're looking at and finding ways to get better with, for sure. Well, I was just going to ask staff to take note. I think Councilmember Ryan just asked for a bike lane on Bonnie Bray. Once the roundabout is all two-lane, it won't be the issue. Your sort of overall view of the statistics you presented, would you say that these are relatively concerningly high levels, or thankfully low levels, they reflect changes in activity, or sort of inability to be everywhere at all times? What should our takeaway be from the raw data? I think it's okay. Now, I would say just personal opinion. If we pie in the sky in a perfect world, if we could have officers specifically targeting bicyclists that are doing violations of the law, the numbers would be higher. And that's just from my, even when I'm not working, you'll have bicyclists that will just disregard stop signs. I think our numbers are okay, by and large. I think our city does well, but there's certainly room for improvement. And that's part of the reason why we're trying to do the bicycle safety, because it comes from both sides. It's not just the folks on the bikes, it's also the drivers that either aren't giving them the proper distance or paying attention to them or acknowledging that they have a right to the road as well. So it's kind of a combination of things. And if you wouldn't mind saying so as bluntly as you can, what's at the top of your list as far as what council might consider that would help in these efforts? Who would you like to see us at least look at? That's a difficult question. For the police department, as long as we're all on the same page, our role as the police department is to obviously enforce the laws, but also a big component of that is outreach too. So I think as long as that's a city, including the police department, we're pushing out the same message as far as what is and isn't acceptable, that's important. But as mentioned earlier, it's incumbent upon us to make sure as we're improving bicycle safety in the city to hold those bicyclists that aren't conforming to those things accountable for that. So to answer your question, I don't know if right now I could give you kind of the highest, most important thing for the council to do to help us. But I can certainly find out. Well, personally I'm sure it's good for all of us. I'm very appreciative of you taking the time to investigate this and bring it forward. And I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on that. Sure, absolutely. Anything else? Yeah, I just want to repeat the same thing, better enforcement. Once it's just like on Dallas Drive and Bell, after the law enforcement's been there doing speed, writing speeding tickets for a couple of days, you'll notice that the average speed slows down. So writing just a few tickets out there to bicyclists, you're going to start seeing better enforcement of it, or better following of the rules once word gets out. Because word gets out within the community pretty quick. They don't enforce it, but they do enforce it, and we need to abide by these rules. Absolutely. Do you have something else? Yeah, I just want to say, and the same goes for drivers who are actually infringing on the rights of bicyclists as well. Just got to put that in there. I mean, it's not just always one way. I agree. And sometimes the reason bicyclists do what they do is feeling threatened, or like their safety is threatened. So I just want to make sure that it's not just the one-sided conversation. Seen a lot of parking in bike lanes? Depends, yes, in some areas we do. We've started last school year and this school year, I know specifically for UNT campus in surrounding areas and streets. We've dedicated a lot of resources and presence out there. Our parking officers now are public safety officers. The title has changed, but they still perform that role. They've been out there frequently. So the citations for that are, I'm certain, would be significantly higher than the numbers that you saw today. And I can give those to you if you'd like. Sure. It certainly could be a cause for safety issues. Yes, absolutely. Not just the blocking itself, but forcing bike traffic into car lanes. Anything else? Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Good to see you again. Okay, let's turn to item D, receiver report and hold a discussion regarding small transportation projects. This is a relatively small presentation. I just wanted to hit the main points. So as mentioned in the back up, there were two sets of separate small transportation projects that were authorized. The first set came in, I think an authorization went in early 2017, and we started working on the design. And here are all the projects. There were six projects that were included and completed, half of them. And I want to point out that the remaining projects, they're mostly -- the design has been completed a long time, but we're dealing with some of the issues with -- we're running with property owners. So it's the right of way take or it's working with the mall. For example, Colorado and Loop 288 were working with the mall. So it's kind of difficult to have that coordination and dialogue. We're shutting down one full access. We don't want them to be blindsided by. We just go in and do the project because it's in our right of way. But then they don't have -- they feel that as if they don't have an access. So we've worked with them all for almost -- I want to say eight to 12 months in the last year or so. And we've come to an agreement that will provide a separate access for them off of the Loop 288 while we're closing the one on Colorado, which is the issue that we're addressing. We're extending the left turn lanes, the entrance to the bank area, or the mall will be taken out completely because that's what the conflict is. And in order to do that, we've been -- we had to get the permission. We had to get a new driveway approved. And that required a coordination not only with the mall but also with TechStop because now we're putting a driveway on Loop 288. So there are some things that are happening to the point in the previous presentation that takes a while to get coordinated with TechStop and work with them to get a brand new opening for a driveway. So at this point, we feel that we're done with all the steps. And the last thing that we're looking at is a signature from the mall and they're saying, yeah, we grant you permission to do that. We're anticipating that we'll start construction early next year. It's not a large project. It will not take more than four to six weeks to do it. But we anticipate that that would go to construction early next year. And then we can wrap it up in a couple months. So that's the timeline for the Loop 288 project. And then moving forward with the Hickory Country Club and Carroll Insurance, same thing, TechStop approval took a while because there is a bridge right there on 1830 where Hickory Creek comes in and there was an issue with the abutment, the card rails that went in. So we've been working with them to iron some of the concerns that they had. We feel comfortable that I think we're really close to getting the permits or the permits are almost approved and that will be next. Some of the challenges around these smaller projects also have been availability of street crews that will be doing this work. They're currently scheduled for some other projects that are going on as far as street maintenance, doing the bond program, street maintenance projects. And we have to schedule them around that as well. So that's another challenge. And then the last one, it's the right-of-way delay. We have a gas station on one side and there's a private owner on the other side where the signal cabinet is. So some of these delays have been negotiating with property owners and TechStop in order to get the design right. So we've spent a lot of months back and forth making sure that every party that's involved, our design has been complete for a while. So I want to say that we are getting to a point where we're comfortable to say that we will get these projects wrapped up within this timeframe. >> Council Member Perks. >> So the Carol Sherman one I've been really wondering about because that's been an issue there with that really tight turn. But I also want to make sure that we're coordinating that we don't have construction going on with the fair in August. >> Correct. So we'll be in and out before the fair ends. Exactly. That's our plan. We're doing the first half of next year so it's before the fair is there. Absolutely. We have that in mind. And the real challenge here has been working with the gas station owner who are taking some property on that particular side to widen that curve. So there is a sign that sits in the corner we're working with. So that has been our challenge to get that property owner to accept some of our designs. Next set of small transportation projects that came in a year after the first set and these are the next six intersections. We're pretty much done with most of the design on all of these. We're done with the design. As you can see, the delays are either related to tech stock or availability of in-house crews to do some of the smaller projects. So one of the things I do want to point out is this last intersection. We did the survey. We ran through initial feasibility tests in this area. And where the roadway sits, long road where it connects to Stewart, there's currently a big drainage area and it has become an environmental issue there. So it's environmentally sensitive. We identified that it was an ESA so we can't really -- we'll have to either put a bridge which makes this project feasible. So what we're planning on doing is that currently we're going to put this project on hold to straighten that locust. Once the property to the north comes in and develops, at which point we'll have better understanding of the drainage needs. And that way we can address that during that project. So at this point, this is on hold. Some of the funds, the funds that are available for this project will be transferred to Sherman and Luke 288, which really needs that signal. So that's our current plan and moving forward. And as you can see, we're going to wrap these up early, getting that text off, and get the right of way in place. We'll wrap most of them by summer next year. So we have someone here that knows how to speak to text. So is there anything -- I mean, because this -- these are, I mean, a delay. I know that some of it's the row acquisition and kind of I have a question about that. Is that, you know, legal issues or is that just homeowners or, you know, lack of staff? No, I think there's a whole legal statute and a process that we have to go through. You have to have a certain number of days. You send the first notice. Then there's a certain number of days that you have to give them to respond. And then so on and so forth. And then the negotiations itself may take a certain number of days. And then there are legal limitations. You know, you have to give them a six-week period for people to respond back and forth. So there's a legal statute that rules this. So we can't really push saying that, hey, we want to move forward, and you only have one week as opposed to four weeks that you're legally allowed to do. So we have to go through the process. That's why it takes a little bit of time. So on all our projects, we're definitely working that schedule into our large capital projects as well. Yeah, on that, I know those are legal times, and that should have been in -- or I would assume that was all in the original timing of the project. But as far as TxDOT goes, is there anything that we could have done different on some of these? Or was it just their process? I think it is their process, but there were some staff changes as well in their area. So I want to say that there were some staff changes in the review, the people that were reviewing some of our plans changed. So there are some inefficiencies there. So it's just a process that we have to follow. So you've also got an additional change for TxDOT here over the last year. TxDOT has been much more aware of some deficiencies they've had in the process when it comes to stormwater, which is every one of these connections that we're talking about. So as they go through this stormwater review period, they're taking a much more serious look at this, a more stringent look than they ever have in the past. With that being the case, they rely on the district's hydraulic engineer to actually do these reviews. The Dallas district, which we reside in, only has two people on the hydrology side to do this review, because most districts in the state, they have very small communities. There's not near as much development as going on in the Dallas/Port Worth area. They have one or two engineers that do nothing but hydraulics and hydrology, the stormwater component. They can get through things much quicker because there's just not as much going on. The Dallas district office, they're just overwhelmed by how many of these. There's a private development driveway that comes in every public project that is in the queue, going through the exact same funnel. We've recently worked with TechStop on an avenue that would go forward. We've had a good conversation with their hydrology folks, their drainage folks, and their bridge engineers to say, "As we go forward, you guys need to understand we're doing that in-depth analysis already. We're already doing that review both private and public. And if we give you a letter, we agree to that, if we give them a letter up front, tell them what we did to review and make sure everything looks good, would that help shorten that process?" So I'm very confident they were very agreeable with that. As far as I know, we're the only city that's asked for that. From that standpoint, I think it will get better as we go forward, but that is absolutely one of the hang-ups they have, is they're just very limited on who's reviewing that work. for the district office, and that's really catching us up on many fronts. Is TechStop opposed to concentrating resources where the work is? It's not. So TechStop for a long time has really been focused on the roadway. The drainage was really just a component of carrying it through. Now, for the vast majority, 98, 99% of the roadways that TechStop works, they're in agricultural areas. So you look at those areas, and the constraints they have for drainage are very minimal. So that's not been a huge focus for TechStop over its history. Now, over the last couple years, they have had a couple of legal scenarios that have absolutely impacted the state, where they could have done something up front to prevent some issues occurring. So they're now reacting to that, and it's something they're trying to catch up on. Many cities, they did some things that, in the past, maybe they could have done better, sure. Now they're trying to figure out how to do that. So what they've done is they've over-corrected to what extreme, but not really elevated the resources. Because, again, most districts in the state, they just don't have that volume. If you're in the Houston area or the Austin area, you've only got about five areas in the state where you have the volume that we have here in the Dallas district. So that's really what's going on behind the scenes, is they're trying to catch up, knowing that, in the past, they've not been as prudent as they should have been. And to add onto that, I think we're in the same exact boat when it comes to traffic signals. It's not their forte. They don't maintain them. They don't want them. And they have very little staff to oversee some of that. So oversight on signals, for example, the University of Nottingham has a signal. So any changes to that, they have to send it back to the Dallas district office, which they had one or two people do that. I want to make sure that I'm telling you what the problem is. I want you to understand that your staff is meeting with TechStalk every two to three weeks. And Councilman Ryan comes, and we beat each other pretty mercilessly in those meetings over schedule. And so we understand the delays, and we are valiantly fighting the city's position in these meetings with truck staff. People still have to get hurt sometimes. So the estimated completion dates we see there is when the project is totally completed and that road is back to being used. That's correct. Anything else? Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Moving on to item E, receiver report and hold the discussion about current sidewalk conditions and future improvements on Bell Avenue between East McKinney Street and East University Drive. Good morning. Mark Olfant, bicycle and pedestrian coordinators. I'm going to be talking about Bell Avenue between McKinney and University. It's actually right close to us here. And the condition of the sidewalks there, this is just an overview of the area we're looking at. McKinney's at the bottom. There's a number of major landmarks along this route. We've got the Civic Center, the Senior Center, the Municipal Pool, Quaker Town Park, and then the TWU campus, which straddles Bell. And I'm just going to take it piece by piece, starting from the south and moving towards the north. So McKinney to Mingo, you have nice sidewalks on the west side along the Civic Center. Generally, for the whole segment where it's public property, we have good complete sidewalks, but private property not necessarily. So the Golden Chick does have complete sidewalks, but at the new former backyard on Bell location, there are no sidewalks in place there, nor is there a place to cross the drainage area just north of Bell there. So the sidewalks are completely missing on that side, but we do have them on the west side. And there's a crossing of the drainage area as well. When you get to Mingo, we continue with the good wide sidewalk there in front of the Civic Center, in front of the pool. But we are missing sidewalks on the other side, on the east side, in front of that service center, a gas station, and there's a few other businesses there. But once we get up to where the homes are, then the sidewalks come back. We'll see. So that takes us to Withers. So we do have sidewalks on that east side. Now once you get to Withers, the sidewalks are quite good, there is one pinch point. It's the west side, right? Excuse me. Sorry. The west side. If you go back, it's fine. Wait, wrong way. This way. Oh, they're incomplete on the east side. You have them on the west side. Yes. So now to Withers, really there's just one spot on the west side where we have a pinch point, where we don't quite have the minimum ADA requirement of 36 inches. It's where we have a utility pole and a fence in that area. We don't have a current plan to be able to move that. We need to work with the utilities, but we are aware of it. On the other side, we do have a complete sidewalk. It is kind of the old standard, so three foot minimum. This is from Withers to Texas. And then approaching the university, we have very good sidewalk coverage. In places, we do have broken concrete slabs, a few little issues like that. But from Withers north, all the way to the university, there is definitely a sidewalk in some form on both sides of the street, serving the university there. Where the university, where we're on university property, they have done a good job of installing wide sidewalks. They actually drive a lot of golf carts on there, so it serves a number of purposes. I actually drove this this morning, and you know, one of the issues that you run into, even if you have a complete sidewalk and so forth, is there's actually a mobile sign giving information about closures that was blocking the sidewalk. So even when the infrastructure is all there, it doesn't always necessarily mean that it's open all the time. Was it a city sign or a university sign? I don't know that yet, but look into it. Yeah. And so all the way to that intersection at university, you have good coverage. So overall, this is what we're looking at. There are some planning efforts underway. There's going to be a traffic study with part of the mobility plan. Also looking at potential roundabouts at Administration Drive, I think another to the north. But if there were specific questions about Bell, I can certainly answer those. So I drive Mingo a lot. Mingo or Bell? Mingo, which connects to Bell. And part of that odd intersection is Bell Place and Bell, and then Mingo. And so I understand that we want to have sidewalks on the opposite side, but do we really want to encourage pedestrians on the backyard of Bell, a co-crossing there, where there's nowhere really for them to go? The sidewalk ends. There's not a safe crossing at Bell and Mingo. There's no sidewalks on Mingo to continue onto. So I feel like that adding that little section in front of the backyard on Bell sounds good, but what's our plan there? Because I saw someone try to cross, and I think we actually have a no-crossing recommendation there at Bell Place, right there at that intersection. It's really awkward, because you have the cars weaving in that have their own light, then you have Mingo, and then you have people crossing. Yeah, so what is the pedestrian situation, the crossing situation? I don't know that there's any lights that you can push to show for crossing. To answer your question, that whole intersection is currently under design. We're replacing the signal completely. As part of that, I think the turn lane that is a sweeping right turn lane that would be brought in, and you'll have crosswalk and AVM apps on all four corners. So we are making sure that that's ADA-compliant intersection once it's completely upgraded. So this weirdness that's going on will be fixed. So right now it's under design. It should go to construction fairly quickly. Well, then that makes sidewalks on that side much more understandable, because then you have someone crossing from downtown over, and they just want to stay straight, and they want to cross over. Or future sidewalks on Mingo, that connection. That makes more sense to me. I'm just done with sidewalks to nowhere, or putting more people in danger if there's not a crossing there. That's really the only question I had about it. So we are fixing this intersection definitely. That's good to know. Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to look at it. I think this was in response to a member of the public reaching out to me. And it looks like, you know, less concerning than it might have feared, with the significant exception of that one pinch point. I don't know, what's the recommendation when you have a situation like that? Really nothing to do? I think if you go to the street view, you can see at the pinch point itself, the amount of pavement that's available is not completely used. So you can see it's painted off, not even marked for parking. So there is an option, an alternative, to go around it and have a safe area for pedestrians to cross over. It's just going to be a little more involved. It's more drainage, curb and gutter, pavement. But we can definitely make sure that we take care of that in our construction of the roundabout down the street at Withers at North Texas. There's a roundabout coming in there. So this doesn't require a whole separate effort? We'll probably fold it in and make sure that we're addressing it. And it will show up on our ADA transition plan as well. So we'll have to address it either way. It makes sense, but it would be better if you just addressed it. Okay, thank you so much. It's your time. Receive a report, item F, receive a report and hold a discussion regarding existing projects in that area. So these are the ones that work now, right? Not this, because I was always having to do this. Okay, so project list of projects that we're working on. Again, this is the total value of about $2.3 billion over the next three to five years. First project is the 2181 North/South. I want to let you know that Zachary's on board. They were given 558 working days, no weather. Calculations, the date on the contract is November 2021. And so we now can start showing you a construction report again. And right now they're out doing the mobilization, the signs, and the SW3P. So Zachary is out in the corridor, and we can now start monitoring their progress and continue to report that progress monthly. And the fourth drive. So I'm going to show you with a picture, you'll drive it, you know. From the railroad track north, you've got all of the northbound pavement, permanent pavement in its location, and it's actually being used as a detour for both north and south traffic. They're working on southbound main lanes. If you've driven the corridor, you know that the sheet flies in, and the old bridge is demolished. They are this week drilling the drill shafts for the future bridge. And then from that railroad track all the way south to the end of the job, the traffic is on the southbound side of the roadway, and they're working with City to replace the water, wastewater, and the storm drains on the northbound side. And that is what all this is. And their current contract is November 2020. We've got some time issues that we're analyzing related to this project that may push this a little bit, but the State and the City have not agreed with these time arguments yet, and we will keep you posted on how that impacts the project. But they are, seeming to be moving very well through this corridor. Your 35A Mayhill Ultimate. This is a project that's a little over $50 million. It'll add 12 lanes underneath 35 for Mayhill, and add the last part of the Furnace Road system up to 288. We're in the process of finalizing the right-of-way acquisition, and we've begun in earnest the utility coordination and the sub-utility engineering for this corridor to determine what's out there and what the conflicts are. And so we're shooting for a May of 2021 let date, and again, it's fully funded at the $53.4 million. Your 288 Brinker Mayhill. As you know, the good news is right before Thanksgiving, we opened up the Brinker Road to signal. The City did excellent work to get that thing done. The bad news is that the signal was open, and people started complaining about having to be stopped on the front of the road. So the City worked with that to try to work that timing out. It's an impossible task to please everybody, but they tried. December of 2019, this project is supposed to be what we call "substantially complete," which means that you'll be able to, generally speaking, move through the 288 Brinker intersections on pavement where you're supposed to generally be. There may be some land closures, striping, signal work after that. But by the end of the year, this project should be substantially operating as it will in the future, with it being completed probably totally at the end of January 2020. That's my story. I'm sticking to it. All right, so I've got to talk to you about this project and this project. This is the Section 1 of 35 North, and this is what we call the "merge." TechStop is going to combine the merge with the segment 0F77, which is this part of this total project, and then they're going to change this schedule for this part of the project to meet this schedule of July 2021. This is what's currently in the system when the funds are available, but if we can meet this date, those dollars can be moved. So the intent is to move this project up and then do all of the work within sitting it proper as one project as opposed to letting it up as segments. So that segment would go with the wishbone, and then, again, this segment schedule is for this entire project. TechStop is thinking about taking this project and breaking it up into more than one project as well, but once we get past 77, we have less interest, not that we don't have any, just less. This all starts, the wishbone part, the piece adjacent, all starts after body brace done. In theory. That is the current goal of the schedule. We are working hard to make that happen. And the good news is that TechStop's own osmosis will probably drag this schedule down a little bit, and so we have some chance to catch up. Okay, that was the 35s. Now, 35W main lengths, we've got the value engineering approved, the traffic's done, and so we're looking at having this project environmentally cleared October of next year, which means for all this part of 35W in the city of Denton, you will now be able to protect the corridor through your normal processes. The frontage road project, we're looking at June of next year for environmental clearance. Although it's a $300 million job, we have submitted it for the Texas Clear Lanes, saying why would you have frontage roads eligible for clear lanes? And the answer is we've demonstrated that when you have a frontage road system, it provides more redundancy toward your main lanes, and it provides more throughput on that corridor, and we broke that mold in the region on I-30 doing the frontage roads across Ray Hubbard, where there weren't no frontage roads, and they used clear lanes for that. So that's kind of our thought here. We don't have a lake, but if you drive out there through the floodplain, you'll see that it's mostly on fill, and it's essentially a lake with no water. I forget how long the frontage road is. Oh, so we should have the public hearing in April, which ties in with being a couple months later having the environmental clearance done in June. We're in the east, so this project is currently in two segments. We did get confirmation after our last mobility meeting, not mobility, this is mobility, task force meeting, that they've got one certification left for the utilities here, and the state is intending to let this project this fiscal year in the green segment. So we'll be able to probably report that to you the first part of next year, that this project is on a different schedule than this, the flood section. Luke Tridague West, we've got the traffic resolved. We are doing the IJR, which is an interstate access justification report for its tie-in at 35W and 35 segment. We are anticipating having the project environmentally cleared in April, which then means we can protect the corridor, which is important in this area, because this is a very active corridor for a corridor that doesn't exist. And again, we're talking about doing frontage roads first, but if we can get it done, get the project cleared, then we're going to continue to also push for ultimate improvements to this project, which is $400 something million. So why would this project not be a priority project for us? But right now, the county is paying for all the advanced planning, engineering, and environmental clearance, and TxDOT is the one that asked us, the county, to pick it back up. And so once we get it environmentally cleared, we believe that since they're the ones that asked us to start it again, the district will find a way to get it funded. Let me jump in. Since you brought the priority aspect up, I know we have to submit our priorities to the DMRC committee. And the way I understand it, and correct me if I'm wrong, is we have a list of projects that are state projects that are funded already. So they're already on our priority list, but they're funded. Now, the priority list that's required by the coalition is for any projects that are not funded, and what is the city's priority? That's what you're asking. Yeah, this can be on there. So as part of our process, I think we could put a list together and take it to council if that's something that we want to submit. Having it on the DMRC's priority list helps, because the RTC looks at what the DMRC wants for the eastern subregion. I apologize, I didn't understand the question. It's like asking me which one of my children I love more. Of course it's my daughter, but I wouldn't say that a lot. Okay, FM 1515, this is the project we were talking about earlier. It's part of the turn back, and it's currently as of May 2022. Is it December 2023? Is that what it says? The utility is December 2022. That's the ready-to-let date. So between now and 2022, our job is to, again, get $32 million needed for this project, and I think if we can get the turn back drafted properly, then the fact that we're willing to take it when it's off-system will push this up high in the priorities of the state to fund it once it's ready to go. FM 1173, again, this is a project where we're expecting to have the schematic done by 2020. The improvements that are going to be needed for this tie-in to 35 will be included in the 35 project that you saw earlier we talked about. The actual roadway itself, we're trying to make sure it gets done on the same time frame, right now. It's not funded in its entirety, except the part where it ties into 35 is part of the 35 north project, segment two. 428, I talked to Lacey Rogers, the TPD, just last Friday, and she says they are still working on trying to get a consultant on board to do the work on a limited access facility for 428. Hopefully, by the time we see you again, we'll be able to tell you that that's happened. This is that project we were talking about earlier. The tie-in to the loop in '77, this is where we're talking about. TechStat and Cog is funding this project because those portions that are outside of TechStat right-of-way can be funded with Category 2 federal dollars. And so we're looking at getting a commitment on Phase 7 so that we can get this whole corridor done in advance of the 35 project going under the knife. And we should have something by the first quarter next year resolved on that because we're working on the UTP for the next cycle, which is going to be approved in July next year, we're working on it right now. And I believe that's all I have. I have a question about 35 and Lillian Miller intersection there and under the bridge. What project is that and when is that going to be completed? Because it's not been on any of our updates, but it's -- 35 and Lillian Miller? Yeah, so Lillian Miller -- 288? 288. Well, yeah, Lillian Miller on the other side, sorry, 288. And so there's just been a lot of questions and issues there. And they're changing lanes all the time. It's not marked. But I keep thinking that it's going to be done soon. What project is that? That's this one. Okay. So this is one where I was telling you they've got the Texas U-turns open now. Okay. They were focused on getting breaker open because that would reduce a lot of the volume of traffic coming through the loop. And by the end of December, they're supposed to have a look 288 essentially operating where the lanes cross where they're supposed to cross. And they'll just be temporary lane closures for final work up. But what we call substantial completion is supposed to be done before the end of this year. And that's what they committed to. 284. You know, they said the 21st. 21st and then the fourth was -- Yeah, December 21st is substantial. January is complete. We're saying the same thing. But he's always right. It's January final. But December substantial. Closely. So when that is open, it'll have -- It'll have two lanes going north and south or east and west, however you want to call it. Two lanes going into Lillian Miller and two lanes coming into 288. You'll have two dual lefts going north off of Lillian Miller. You'll have two dual lefts coming off of 288 coming south. There are a total of eight lanes so far. And you'll have two Texas U-turns. It'll be a total of ten lanes that operate. So the two turn lanes are going to come back. Absolutely. Those are strong movements in both directions. December 21st. That's what OHL said. I trust OHL. That doesn't sound convincing. I'm not convinced. Thanks a lot. Okay. Thank you. I'll let you identify to the extent the law allows. So can you hold on to that page? This page? Yes. But the priorities are some of these projects that are not funded that we need to push with the DRMC. Yes. So the ones that say TBD are the ones that we need to focus on because the rest are funded. Okay. So we'll put that list together. And I think 1830 can be added as well. So we probably, if you want, we can start -- I don't know what Texas is doing yet, but I know they want to do something. We can include 1830 to the list of offices. We can just have the priority list and send it and we can put it in a practical form or we can bring it into council or whatever works. But I wanted to clarify that. Yeah. Okay. And also I see where it says there that the loop, it doesn't -- I know that only the frontage roads, right, have the fundings. Yeah. So the loop, we need to probably change that to TBD. Yeah. They're pretty much committed to the frontage roads, but we're not going to settle for that. Right. I'll change that. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Appreciate it. All right. Thank you. Let's move on to ING staff reports and future considerations. Okay. So how about the matrix? I think we're -- So I think a lot of these are going to be a discussion and mobility plan discussion. We plan on bringing about four work session items in the next two, three months and the one-way, two-way streets and, you know, carol, boulevard, possible reducing number lanes. I don't want to have a discussion about Malone right lane versus the bike lanes and I think Mark can give you there are a couple options that he's going to talk quickly about. So just a quick reminder, this is northbound Malone where it reaches University of a bike lane on the right side and then two vehicle lanes and so there's concerns about conflicts with vehicles and bicycles and what we've decided to do is add signage there. So there's two signs staggered from the end of the intersection and those will warn bicyclists that the lane is ending there and so to be aware and watch for vehicles, right turning movements and so forth. And that -- they're not up yet but the request is in with the operations department. So I think they've built it in their schedule so the signage should be up in the next few weeks depending on their schedule. We're working through the next rest of the items. I think we're planning to bring some of this further. I think mobility plan discussion will get into details of some of the concerns that you have. And then I think that's it. We've covered a lot of them that were here that we've put on the agenda like the small transportation projects and MOU, turn back MOU. So we're slowly getting through this. Any new items? Well, yeah, I want to put a little sharper focus on the last item. The comment came to me from a citizen in the context of focusing on a specific road segment but I'm already communicating this through Stuart just to underscore it. This is about West Oak Street between Bradley and Monte Bray. So a perception that I think it's true is that that was resurfaced or reconstructed, I don't know, something was done to it within recent memory and I don't know if anyone's been out to drive it yet but it's a roller coaster. And, you know, what does that reflect? Does that reflect building to insufficient standards? You know, is it supposed to be like that? I kind of doubt it. You know, what does that tell us? Okay, so we'll add the context here because that was missing. It's a very general question here but West Oak Street and I think they are working on a response back what exactly we did and how much of their work was redone versus just, you know, resurfaced as opposed to completely reconstructed. But it appears to be, I'll wait to hear. Okay. All right. Any new additions? Test one of the bricks. So I have a couple of questions. I don't know if it needs to go on the matrix or not. Maybe just a quick update. Are we planning on having lights on Mayhill? Yes. Okay. Because it is extremely dark right now and so we're having, you know, people are driving faster and there's no lights and in the dark, like I almost seriously had an accident like that. The street lights are supposed to be installed on both sides of Mayhill. Okay. Very good. Second, is it possible to increase the walk time in the pilot downtown just by a couple of seconds? We can definitely evaluate that. Let me talk to Maria about that and see. Okay. Because I've heard pretty good feedback so far. It's just that for some people, and I know that we wanted to be able to get at least two sections and some of it by kind of the last section you're running or kind of, you know, there's some people that can't really run. So if you could just look and see if that is warranted. Sure. That's really the feedback I've heard for that, but generally really good. A lot of that, you know, we knew going into it without the diagonals already established in the ADA that as a pilot program, we knew there would be a bit of a tradeoff. And that was one of the things that we wanted to see where we were with the pilot program. You can definitely get better efficiency by going and putting in the diagonal so that people aren't having to rush at the same time. Yeah. Yeah. We'll take a look at that. Okay. Thank you. That's all. That's what we're running. I've got one on 2499 Hickory Creek. I noticed I took the barrels down and made that a right turn only. That's correct. And there's a pavement marker. But I didn't notice. I'm afraid we're going to have a lot of people just flumming through there because it looks like if you don't see the thing on the pavement, you're not going to know that you've got to do it. I don't know if there's anything that can be done. Yeah. If you put reflectors down to make it look like a right turn, the problem is people turning left are going to run over those and tear them up. The more signage, maybe the little, I don't know what you call it, little bumps that make you crash. Rumble strips? Yeah. Rumble strips. Something on there to alert people a little bit better. Let's take a look at that and see. That's awesome. It's a textile facility. It is a textile facility. What is the one that hasn't been communicated by some councilmember breaks that we see on Facebook a lot and people find frustrating. Is it going under Teasley where there's like a right turn lane? Shannon Barnhill and Karen Crothers are particularly vocal about it. Is there something very confusing about a turn lane there? Do you know what I'm talking about? Yeah, I think it's the Teasley intersection. There's a light there and I've sent it in once. It's a textile thing, but something we've vocalized. What location is it in? It's Teasley in 35, so it's that intersection there, I think. I also thought I heard one about Fort Worth Drive. It's something about turn lanes or going straight. We can find that for you, but yeah. Whatever it is, it seems very irritating. I can't quite follow it. I'll put it on the matrix and then if you have more information, we can add it to the discussion. If nothing else, do you want to share anything about street closure report or are we done? No, I think it's all in the report. Any questions I can answer. Great. Thanks everyone very much. We'll see you again in about an hour, 10 minutes. I'll adjourn at 1052. Thank you.