>> Okay. Good morning, everyone.
Seeing that we have a quorum present, I'm going to call this meeting of the Mobility Committee to order at 9 a.m.
We'll go into individual consideration.
I may consider the approval of the meeting minutes, agenda 13.
I'll entertain a motion.
>> I'll make a motion to approve.
>> Second.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> Okay, the minutes are approved.
We're going to change things a little bit, because, you know, John's just a prerodontist.
If he's not first, like, there's something wrong.
So, we're going to go to -- we're going to go up to item D, receiver report and hold a discussion
regarding textile non-system projects in the debt area.
So, my apologies for the prima donnery, if that's a word, got to be in the district to work on one
of these projects that we'll talk about when we get to it in just a second.
So, these are the projects that we are involved with.
These are the total dollar amounts that are -- that we know to date that we have committed
on these projects, some of them we still have to work on, on textile and getting those funds.
Totally committed, but that dollar amount will only go up from the $2.5,
$2.3 billion that we're tracking for you.
So, on your 2181 Northside project, again, this is a project that Zachary has picked up.
The construction report, basically, they're coming in and doing pothole repair and stabilization
of the existing temporary facility that's out there now so that they can, once they start back
to work on the utilities, they'll have a roadway
that the traveling public can semi-safely drive on.
So, what's the -- is there any communication continuing or ongoing with the businesses
and our homes in that area that butt up to Teasley?
>> You know, I don't think the state is actually doing much of that on this contract,
but we meet every two weeks.
We can coordinate a public outreach process starting, you know, next month or so.
I think that's not a bad idea now that we're going to get it back into the heavy movement
of traffic there.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> So, we'll just -- we'll add that to our task force.
>> Especially because it was so long and waiting and now, you know, it's moving,
so it'd be good to have.
>> Right. So, we were at a -- because these projects do have impact because we were
at a meeting where my wife was, and it was Candy Haven was on the frontage road of 35
at the 377 project, she's saying it has had a noticeable impact on her clientele,
for like a little word.
Nobody in the room knew, but that's nothing compared
to the frontage road project we're fixing right there at the rural track.
So, we got to make sure she knows what to do.
So, yes, that's critical component, but we'll bring that up.
So, your four-wheel drive, speaking of four-wheel drive, they are in the process
of finishing the punchless items for the city's water line.
I think they've got some additional efforts they have to complete to get the city
to sign off on that, but we are getting close.
We're going vertical on parts of the railroad, new railroad bridge structure,
and yeah, that's pretty much it.
We're still looking for November 2020-ish, it may be more like January '21,
but it depends on how we work out these change order requests that SEMA submitted.
But generally speaking, this project seems to be working as it should.
Okay, a breaker job, they continue to keep opening parts of it.
The main lanes are operational, the Dallas Drive is operational,
your frontage road ramps are operational.
The main area we're still working on is the 288 intersection, and basically,
I think this is the critical path out of the underpass under 288.
And TechStat's still saying that it may be February when they're done,
but it may be February 29th because they're thankful there's a leak year this year
because they needed one yesterday.
But yeah, so Brian and his guys are still working, we're still trying to figure
out the best way to maximize what we can do at Brinker and the frontage roads
because that signal still seems to want for assistance.
>> So I'm just really confused about the loop 288 intersection there.
I mean, why is it taking so long?
>> So I'm not an engineer, and hopefully somebody can go me out here that is.
>> Why'd you ask?
>> But they call something in the section where all the utilities
and all the work they have to do, the Mariana Trench.
And apparently, there's a lot of water that flows underneath that roadway,
and so it's on the north side of the underpass area.
And it takes a significant amount of work in that area, and as they try to come in
and do asphalting, they have to have not only the temperature a certain range,
but the under pavement has to be a certain level dry.
And the rain that's been occurring, there's a certain part underneath 288
that doesn't dry as fast as the other,
and I guess that's why they call it the Mariana Trench, I don't know.
But we asked that question last week, because we're going to do a ribbon cutting,
and I don't know the date, but it's like next week, 20th, he knows the date.
So y'all will all be invited.
And we're doing it before it's done because it's the only time we'll be fine.
>> So the ribbon cutting will take place before the project's done?
>> Well, it sounds bad when you say it that way.
It's substantially complete.
And so, yes, the commissioner wants to do a ribbon cutting on that project on the 20th.
>> I had someone ask me this on Saturday.
>> Yeah, please.
>> If OHL has any other projects in our community?
>> I want to say in the state.
So I'm so frustrated, I'm kind of so frustrated with OHL that there are 115 days or so
that are liquidated damages at $7,500 a day or whatever it is.
And they're going to go to mediation after this project is done,
which is done in some dark room in the Greer Building on the fourth floor
with people who don't care, right?
I'm going to be at that meeting because typically what happens is the headquarters
folks are pro-contractor and they just simply give, split the difference and
give the contractor back some of that time and we're talking millions of dollars.
And so I've told the district and I've told headquarters that when that mediation
comes, Denton County wants to be present in the room to make our case on why.
They should not only not get any leeway, but they should be penalized even worse.
But the state law does not allow for
the state of Texas to take into consideration previous
experience and work when they select a contractor.
It's only low bid, it's not lowest and best.
Like a lot of entities are able to do, it's just lowest.
So they could have toasted you in the last project.
And if they come in with a complete bid package that's lower than everybody else,
they'll get the job again.
>> Follow up question to that, I don't want to get too off topic but
since this is really affecting our community.
>> Absolutely. >> Should the city of Denton be in that room with you?
>> Yeah, sure, I think it would be great.
More the merrier, I'll take pre-ten.
>> Thank you.
>> Yeah, so that project has been critical, it's been impacted.
And Tech Start has tried at the Dallas district to do everything they can to
minimize the type of contractors like OHL and
MCM going forward getting with these jobs by trying to have tighter
specifications on the schedule, making sure the utilities are
more out of the way than normal, stuff like that.
So yeah, I mean, it's left a frustrating bitter taste to all of our mouths on us.
So yes, ma'am, I think that would be eminently doable.
Cuz I'm just doing it out of spite.
>> [LAUGH]
>> Last phone conversation I had with OHL,
they hung up on me cuz I called them a liar and a cheat and a crook.
So I haven't talked to them since.
>> Why do you sugar coat it?
>> Sir? >> Why do you sugar coat it when you talk
to them?
>> [LAUGH]
>> That was.
>> [LAUGH]
>> Okay, Mayhill project.
The schedule has moved a little bit from the May 21 to the February 22,
which I think is a good thing because it will give our traveling public some
freedom from construction between 288 and Mayhill.
The reason for that is the additional right of way that we need between Mayhill
and 288, it's taking a little bit longer than we thought.
And we also found a gap in the plans where there is a portion of the frontage
road, south by the frontage road from Brinker to Mayhill that was gonna remain
in the old two-lane configuration that's out there now as opposed to the three.
We called BS on that, so they're coming back, including the ultimate cross section
there, which for the Brinker signal, once we get the frontage roads to a three-lane
frontage road configuration, then Brian and Preetam will be able to do a little
bit more magic on that intersection to help the flow through Brinker.
It's a physical problem at this point.
So the schedule got moved a little bit because we added scope and
the right of way is becoming a little bit more difficult to get than we thought.
Okay, so we told you we were gonna combine the projects.
The merge project that you're now seeing includes going all the way up to 77.
The schedule you see is for that project.
And at any step along the way that we're able to expedite the schedule,
it will be expedited, which we'll talk about Bonnie Brain in a second,
cuz we had a very good conversation with the NPO last week, last week, with Michael.
>> So this passes Windsor, right, I don't know where Windsor is.
>> Windsor is around 380, is it just north of 380?
>> Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's way past it, yeah.
So, right, cuz the other project was 380 and north.
>> It goes just past the loop.
>> Yeah, yeah.
So I know we've brought this up before, I'll just bring it up again.
Cuz I see there's environmental approval back in last October, and
I don't remember us revisiting the topic of noise assessment.
Is that done as part of the environmental- >> Yes, sir, it is.
>> And then what did they conclude?
>> There's, I know where you're going.
There's no noise attenuation allowed or
recommended in and around that Windsor area for multiple reasons.
First is that they don't attenuate noise for commercial property.
So the adjacent property to the freeway in that area is commercial.
>> Well, you've got Westgate, Westgate area.
>> It's back.
>> The second is that when they did do the noise analysis for
that area, you have to have two criteria met.
It's gotta be feasible, reasonable, reasonable, feasible.
I don't remember, but they're interchangeable in their order, but
not in their meaning.
First one means that you have to be able to lower the noise five decibels from what
it is.
The second is that you have to be able to attenuate that noise at a forever
benefited receptor at less than or equal to $25,000.
So let's say you got five receptors.
Let's do four because I'm gonna text the math.
So you've got four receptors.
That means if you build a wall in that area, 14 feet tall or whatever,
you have to be able to build that structure for $100,000 or less.
So they may want attenuation, which is feasible.
And then if it's $170,000 to build a wall, it's not reasonable, and
the feds won't allow you to build it.
And they also will not allow the local governments to come in and
pay the difference, because then you violate what they call environmental justice.
>> Yes, I remember that conversation, that you can't do it just for some areas,
not for others.
But did they determine that it wouldn't be feasible?
Or that it wouldn't be reasonable?
Or just that they don't care about anybody who's more than 100 feet back?
>> Okay, so you're talking like me now, so.
>> [LAUGH] I think that's a compliment.
>> Yes, sir.
It's not that they don't care, it's that there is a state can't go beyond what
the feds require, because the feds apply it nationwide the same way.
And there is a 65 dB contour.
And I think you'll probably have received a letter in the last three or
four months from TechStop, because I know a lot of my other entities have.
It says that wherever the 65 dB contour inside,
wherever it's deemed reasonable and feasible,
the state's responsible for attenuation of noise.
Anything outside that 65 dB contour, it's somebody else's problem.
>> What determines, I don't quite get what determines the size of the system.
>> Right, exactly, so it's a range of things.
So you have a roadway.
The majority of the noise that comes off of a facility is where the,
literally the rubber meets the road.
So that creates a noise wave.
That wave goes out and dissipates over time and distance, and
when it hits impediments, whether it be a berm, shrubs,
screening wall, or a sand wall, but it dissipates.
And so it may be starting out at 85 dB where the rubber hits the road.
And if they go out, and they'll do noise analysis, checking.
And when it drops to 65 or less, they put a contour line.
And it then it moves, it could be 1,500 feet from the road.
It could be 500 feet from the road depending upon what's impeding the noise.
And they do a contour.
Anything inside the contour, if it meets those two criteria,
they'll come in and attenuate the noise.
If it doesn't meet those two criteria, they won't.
If there is a impact to a benefit receptor outside that 65 dB L contour.
Then it's either the counties, cities, or nobody's responsibility to take care of.
>> So you got, help me connect the dots here, please.
So you got neighbors that are clocking in the 80s, now.
Now, that's because conditions change since what they already built.
And I don't know who's responsible for that.
Maybe the answer is nobody, which is maybe we got to think about that from a policy
point of view.
But if it's clocking 85 now, I can't imagine it's going to get better.
>> Well, now there you go.
So that's, when I tell you the clocking of 85 now on that environmental clearance,
it's not on today's traffic, it's on that horizon.
So in this case, it's the 2040, 2045 traffic.
So what they do is they take the volume of traffic,
run it up to the elevation of where it will be in 20 years.
Take the noise that they know is there, I don't know how they do the model.
But it generates a higher impact than what is currently occurring now.
And then they attenuate and mitigate and address what the future issues will be.
Because in some cases, the future means the road is 70 feet closer to you than it
was before.
So they calculate that, so you've got more of an impact.
So they do all the analysis on the projected future ultimate improvement.
>> So if you're at 85 now, and it's going to be somewhere north of that in the future,
you're already beyond 65 dB.
>> Right, so that means that if you're, let's say you're at 85.
And they say it's going to go to 95, so that's a more than 5 dB increase, right?
And you are able to do so.
>> So they don't care about the increase, not the fact that it's how much above 65.
>> Right, so their argument is you're already used to 85, but you're not used to 92.
>> Yeah.
>> And if we can get 92, which is more than 5 above what it is now,
and down 5, then it's worth doing, if we can do it for $25,000 of benefited receptor.
>> So, okay.
>> Would you like to put an item on the agenda?
>> You get continuing education credits for this, by the way.
>> It's on topic so far.
>> Well, I mean, it sounds like it might be just a good presentation to have that we can
share with the general public.
>> Yeah, okay.
I'll take that as an advisor for future topics.
But I am interested in what remediation is available.
>> I got notified of this issue yesterday at the Transportation Forum.
And I knew I was coming here.
So I'm going, part of what my conversation at 11 o'clock will be is the same people
that I'm dealing with are the ones who brought this up.
So I'll get more detail on what the issues are, on how the environmental, what it said.
Because it'll say there'll be R1, R3, and R4, R5, and R6 are all benefited receptors.
They'll have a calculation on what the noise was, and what the continuation was,
and what the remediation was.
They'll have a whole list of specific details for
that specific neighborhood in that document.
And I will get that and analyze it.
>> So can something come back to us, when might you anticipate that?
>> I've done this 1,002 times, so I know exactly what you're asking and what you need.
And so I'll be ready the next time you want to talk about it.
>> Okay, and if anything comes up sooner to look at that I could share with constituents,
so it would be public, even put an ISR to get that, it wouldn't be in.
>> Yeah, okay, that'd be great.
>> All right, carry on.
>> So are we done with this one, I can't remember.
I won't move on anyway.
Okay, now your north segment has been broken into two additional segments.
And it's basically from 77 to 455.
And 455 to the county line.
And the reason they're doing that is because they don't want it to trigger any
design build or any special delivery method.
So they have to keep the dollar amounts below a certain number.
So they're splitting it.
Now it doesn't include 455, the interchange, because we're doing a project in the county
called FM455 from the high school in Sanger all the way west to 2440 or 2450.
And we're building the interchange because of the impact to the owners at the intersection
of 35 and 455.
We felt like we didn't want to run them through that meat grinder more than once.
So we're doing the interchange as part of the 455 job.
So there's actually three projects here, but for your purposes it's two.
And that's the schedule for both sections.
So they're on the same schedule, they're just gonna be left with different contractors
so that it stays under a certain dollar amount.
Okay, main lanes, let's go to the next one.
So this project is continuing to move forward with the schematic approval next month, which
is important.
But then in July, once we get this project environmentally cleared, that means that all
jurisdictions that are adjacent to our own part of that facility have the ability to
protect that corridor now from future development.
We have submitted it for clear lanes funding and we've had some pretty good success in
our clear lanes applications in the past, and we feel fairly confident that we will
get all our part of that request and we can start wherever we think is the most necessary
and both the veterinary office and the district thinks that generally speaking, if we started
anywhere it'd probably be in the northern segment because that's where all the development's
going.
So we're on track from the schedule standpoint because there's nothing to highlight it and
we're chasing clear lanes funds for that.
Okay, so the blue section, that's going to be moved to a, what does it say, June let.
So remember this was out in February of 2021 because the city's ready with the utilities,
all the other franchise utilities are ready, the right of way is cleared.
They're moving this project up into the 2020 fiscal year and letting it in June of 2020.
So you'll have 288, which will also then improve the intersection of 380 and 288 to solve some
of the problems we have that council member brought up about the turning, so that will
include improvements there.
So this project is advancing faster than the section to the east.
This is part of what I'm going to the district to talk about this afternoon.
So I've been noticing that the turn lane from 380 headed west onto the loop is continuously
getting backed up.
Is it possible or even talked about to have two lanes?
There already is two.
To turn left.
To turn left to go to like, because that's how I go to church on Sundays.
Turn left to go to the loop off of 380.
Oh, yeah.
My apologies.
Yeah, so it's all the traffic coming in.
Yeah, that'll be addressed with this project.
Okay.
Thank you.
I'm sorry.
Your transportation consultant has confusion in the direction.
So the blue section is the section east of 377, where, again, meeting with the Tech Stock
District this afternoon, we have an opportunity issue that we have to deal with, and there's
a town hall meeting coming up on Wednesday the 12th that Representative Jared Patterson
is hosting.
And so we're just making sure that he doesn't get too much of it wrong.
So we're trying to help him out on that.
But this project has got a May 20, 22, blood date, as I said, that says 21, 24, yeah, vanity.
So we're on track on this project, and the opportunity is going to be the critical path
item.
We may need all hands on deck to convince them to do the right thing.
Okay, so, look 288.
We are looking at having the spending done in March, and the environmental clearance
is September.
And I think he was on the phone call with Michael, and he kind of obliquely referenced
that he's going to go spring an idea on the district for the Outer Inner Loop, for the
Inner Outer Loop.
And he's now saying that he considers this part of the Outer Loop, which is good for
us, because we need the road, and if it has a greater good, then it'll help us not just
build the frontage roads, but the whole thing.
And so he's talking about his plan for the loop, starting the Outer Loop, starting here
at 24, 49, coming up around, making improvements to your section of 288 that you control by
permit, kicking off and taking your idea about 428, making it into a freeway, hit the Outer
Loop, and then cross all over Collin.
But in the interim, he's also talking about an Inner Loop between 380 and the Outer Loop
in between there.
And I don't know where that would be, but he's got something he's going to show somebody
at some point.
He hadn't showed us yet, so it's oblique at this point.
But it's putting a lot of beneficial pressure for funding on this job.
So as that flashes out, we'll be able to come back to you and give you more information
on those other jobs, but to tell you that it's having a positive impact on the funding
opportunities for 288.
How is it going with the, have you started on the right-of-way with this, with the gas
wells?
No, we won't be able to require the right-of-way until after environmental clearance.
Do you have an idea how many wells will be impacted by this?
I don't.
I can get that for you.
But as you can see, the time frame from when we get it cleared to when the right-of-way
acquisition is complete is about three and a half years.
So we're anticipating it being fairly nasty to acquire.
Because on the gas wells, it's not just a right-of-way acquisition.
It's right-of-way acquisition or utility relocation, all wrapped up in one, because the transmission
lines are what kill you out here.
The wells you can do pretty good, because we did do pretty good threading the needle,
but it's the transmission lines that are out there that are going to really put the whoop
on you.
So we know it's going to take a long time, but I think with this new impetus for the
greater good, that they'll put whatever resources they, and they'll bring in some, TexTot has
a right-of-way slash utility coordinator expert for the state of Texas that deals with, only
with, with Permian Basin, Barnett Shell, areas where the state is also extracting a lot of
natural resources out of the ground.
So we're bringing in the heavy hitters.
Okay, FM 1515, it's my understanding that TexTot and the county's consultants provided
your staff with all the files needed to overlay this project in this area because you have
the Wishbone 1515 and Bonnyberry all coming together, and it's a good thing we did because
the two state projects are off by one foot horizontally on their, on their alignments,
so it's a good thing we're checking our homework, but y'all's, y'all's is fine so far.
So this project continues to move on the schedule, there's no highlight in the schedule, so it's
still on track for December 2022, let's see, 1173, again, the reason there's a highlighted
schedule is because if you remember in our past reports, those were mostly asterisks
because it was just getting started, now we know that we're shooting for March 21, environmental
clearance, and then the rest of those dates are what we call sandbox dates, they're fairly
traditional timelines, and so sometime around the end of 23, the project should be ready
to let.
We are incorporating the tie-in of 1173 at its new location at Barthol Road in our 35
project that we talked about earlier, so it'll be constructive to accommodate that new alignment.
428 is part of that greater good I was talking to you about where it's going to be picking
up the loop on the west side of 35, making improvements physically, because right now
y'all control 288 by permit to be a controlled access facility, Michael's talking about coming
in and actually building the furnace roads, which will help that corridor then be able
to be viable, developable, developably, that's a word, I'm going to put it in.
Tell me a little bit about Michael Morrisack, he seems to be a branch of government.
You are correct, so you've got, in 1991, the feds allowed the regions, the metro areas,
to have some say in their transportation destiny, prior to that it was literally a tex dot's
way or the highway, right, a lot of people complained that the state didn't really take
local needs into consideration, there was a lot of environmental justice issues, so
in 1991, under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, affectionately known as ICT,
they injected power into an organization called the Metropolitan Planning Organization, which
has the authority or concurrence to make transportation decisions inside the metropolitan area boundary,
which covers ten counties in this area.
That authority was delegated to, the governor selected the North Central Texas Council of
Governments as the Metropolitan Planning Organization for North Texas, and then the North Central
Texas Council of Governments subceded that authority to an entity called the Regional
Transportation Council.
The Regional Transportation Council is a policy body, but it is made up of policy officials,
but it is underpinned by the transportation department staff at Cod.
The director of transportation for North Central Texas Council of Governments is Michael Morris,
who acts essentially as the city manager for the RTC, and because of the concurrence obligation
that the feds put on to the state, the MPO can have a significant role in telling the
text of our Metropolitan Planning Organization, which in this case is sub-allocated down to
RTC.
Cog, RTC.
So MPO, Cog, and RTC, Michael Morris, are all the same entity, for our purposes.
And he's staff, right, head staff.
Technically, he's staff.
Who's he accountable to, that he's accountable to?
The RTC policy.
So Councilman Ryan, what are his bosses?
Technically.
But he pretty much decides what he wants to do, brings it to RTC.
That's how it has tended to go, to the point where he's represented on one of your slides
as if he were an independent authority, but he's really, right, he's accountable.
He's not technically a one-man show.
He has to get everything that he does or wants to do validated by a policy body of the Regional
Transportation Council.
Okay.
And that council has got appointees from the various councils?
Forty-three, forty-four appointments.
Three or four of them are ex officio, for example, the two districts are there, the
DART and DCT are there, and they can vote, but they're not elected entities.
Everybody else around the table was elected.
Okay.
That's very helpful, I appreciate it.
So whenever you want to get something done in North Texas, you go into Fort Worth's side,
you go to Lowell Bussell, which is the Fort Worth District Engineer, and you go to Michael.
Whenever you want to get anything done in the East, you got to go to Moe Burr and Michael.
But you could conceivably have an issue with his choices of whether to partner or not to
partner.
You could conceivably get on the agenda for the governing body.
Concur.
The RTC.
Yes.
Okay.
Thank you.
I appreciate it.
Yes.
We have assisted and defeated Michael as needed over the years.
Thank you.
So the 428 project is in the system now as a limited-access facility, and what the RTC's
staff is saying, Michael's saying is, is that we need to consider moving forward on this
now as opposed to later because, remember, 380 is a horrible nightmare for everybody
that drives it.
And so the outer loop is not a solution to the problem on 380.
It's a solution to the future growth of that corridor.
So he's looking at this holistically.
He's got two counties, Denton and Collin.
We already got our act together on 380.
Collin County still doesn't know where their 380 is going to go, whether it goes through
McKinney or around it as a bypass.
And looking at it individually doesn't work.
So he's saying we're going to bring all the kids into the room and we're going to have
an adult conversation.
Question for you.
Yeah.
Do we need to have a separate one for the loop 288 frontage roads, or is this all going
to be connected?
Because I remember that we separated the other side of the loop from the frontage roads,
and now it's kind of expanded into this larger project.
Well, so we really don't know, I mean, Councilman, you were on the phone, weren't you, with Michael?
Yeah.
We really don't know what he's concocting other than what we're, we're just assuming,
based on his words, how that would work.
So I don't know that we know enough to, anything we tell you would be lied, and we just don't
know it.
So at this point we don't know, and he told us to stand by.
Basically what he wants to do is go talk to Mo, because this is all in the Dallas district.
Yeah.
About his plan.
If he gets them to say, "Okay," then he's going to come back to the cities, and pitch
his pitch to us.
Okay.
And at that point we'll know what to report.
Okay.
Thank you.
Okay.
In that same conversation, Todd Estes did a very good job of communicating to Michael
why Bonnie Bray needs to happen sooner than later because of the improvements on 35, and
it also included the fact that we haven't gotten textile to buy on this segment.
And he doubled down again saying that he was frustrated that the district hadn't been more
aggressive in supporting this section and that he was going to go attempt to change
their attitude.
So now that Todd's here, is this the section that recently was highlighted in the newspaper
that said there was a story and it was the first time the residents were hearing about
the extension, or is this different, like farther out?
This is Bonnie Bray.
You don't need to...
Farther out.
Are you referring to the residents once in the public meeting?
Yes.
Is this the same segment?
It's the same segment, the segment you see in blue, the phase six, not the one up there
in the green.
Oh, okay.
Take your coat off.
Relax.
Stay walking.
Yeah.
So the segment in blue, the reason we're not covering that is because that's already got
a commitment from COG, and we're already submitting tip mods and updates and all that to them.
So that's already, for lack of a better word, put to bed.
Financially speaking.
Just a comment on that section in blue, 'cause some of the residents or the people that live
there are wondering about the design of that.
So is that something through the city that we'll continue to work with, or since it's
already...
Yes.
So to clarify, the intent of that public meeting, it was to meet the environmental clearance
requirements we're required to go through to get federal or state funding, especially
federal funding.
And part of that is the public outreach process.
We go early in the process to just get people to understand there is a project coming through.
We have not set by any stretch or the imagination at that point where the road was gonna go,
opportunity to make adjustments are absolutely there, but it, by the environmental clearance
requirements that the federal overlaws put us against, or at least the requirements they
put against us to go do these things in their prescribed manner to get funding, that's the
pathway we had to go down.
So it wasn't that we were trying to scare people into, "Hey, we're taking your property,"
it was absolutely a, "This is the project, current alignment shows that it may impact
you in this way, but then we will be coming back to visit with you personally once we
get to the environmental clearance phase."
So this is that scenario, I tell you, where there's two types of meetings or processes
the state has, one that's meaningful and the other one's a box check.
The one that's meaningful are these early on public meetings where the entities involved
with the project are truly reaching out to the public to say, "Here's what we think.
What do you think?"
And we still have time to take what you say and make appropriate adjustments.
At the end of the project where you have an environmental clearance and you have a public
hearing at the end of the job, that's when it doesn't matter what you say, that's a box
to be checked and they're moving on.
So this is the meaningful time.
So anybody that's got concerns about running the bridge and what they may or may not do,
now is the time to funnel those people to pretend.
Well, just on that, I know I don't want to get too way off, but taking the median out
or reducing the median so that there's less impact to the homeowners is the one comment
that I've heard.
Just to explain something we can take a look at, the harsh part about taking a median out
is that effectively you've built essentially a three lane road instead of a four lane road
because the inside lanes then become turn lanes and it has a tendency to clog everything
up as opposed to, we could actually look at a narrow median, but it would still have to
flare out where the left turns were required.
Sure.
Thank you.
And so just to add a little bit to that color, we did some work with Little M ISD on their
middle school and the MPO was funding part of that project as well and initially Little
M was planning on doing a center flush median and the MPO was very adamant about having
there be a raised facility to channel turning movements because it's safer in and around
the school as well, so that may be another thing that they have to look at.
And I believe, other than my glossary, I think I'm done.
Last question, because it may take another presentation, but the UTP there, the glossary,
we learned at the Dallas Regional that there's proposed changes, and so we may need to come
back or just have on that and if we need to from this body or council talk about that
any further, the funding change category, clear lanes is getting zero, and then the
discretionary.
Okay, so I can do a 30-second for you real quick.
Okay.
At the last transportation commission, so the unified transportation, I was lying about
the 30 seconds, it's going to be longer, you have a 10-year plan, it's called the unified
transportation plan, and then you have a let schedule, which is the first two years
of that, and then you have a TIP or STIP, which is the transportation improvement program,
which is the first four, including those two that have let dates that are hard.
Every year, they come back and they say, "Okay, this is what we thought we were going to have
as a budget because of Prop 1 and Prop 7, and here's now what we know we have for the
next 10 years for these 12 categories."
In this particular case, it dropped by $3.5 billion because of Prop 1 and 7.
And so what the commission did is they held all of their accounts at the current $20.20
dollar amount for 2021, and so all of the $3.2 billion in anticipated reduction in revenue,
they're taking out a category two, which is your MPO federal dollars, and then category
four region, and category four urban, which is your connectivity that the state uses for
on system projects, so they're basically taking all of the shortfall, anticipated shortfall,
for the next three years out of the urban metro areas.
And so that conversation was at the peak of its intensity yesterday and the day before
because that was the transportation forum, and so the commission's starting to get to
hear that that's not a great idea, and that's probably what the RMC is talking about.
But every year in August or September, they start the new year process.
They have until the end of January, which is already passed, obviously, to submit your
projects that you want to be considered, and then by June, the commission does a draft
presentation of what that is, and by July, they approve it.
It's not a 10-year plan like if you're not in the 10-year plan and you submit a project,
you end up in year 11.
It's a horse race, right?
So your project may be in year two now, but it's slowing down in the next UTP 10-year
plan.
It may be in year nine.
Your project is a new horse.
It comes in.
It's not going to be in year 11.
It may be in year three because it's that much faster.
So not only is it an add-on, a new year, adjust the categories based on what their anticipated
budget is, but then it's a reshuffling of all the horses inside the pack, depending
upon how fast they're running.
So I just wondered if any of our projects--
And I've got visuals so I can show you on the line.
Yeah.
If any of our projects would be gone through or would be affected, that's my question for
you.
Not a chance.
No?
No.
Okay.
All right.
Thank you.
Great.
Thank you, as always, for the great update and for your spirited advocacy at all times.
And my brief salary?
Deserved.
So we'll move on to-- I'll move back to item B, Receiver Report and Hold the Discussion
regarding updates from the CTA.
We've got Lindsay and Jenny for order to call.
Good morning.
Thank you all so much for having us today.
As the Chairman said, Lindsay Baker, Director of Strategic Partnerships with DCTA, and I'm
here on behalf of Nicole Recker, our Vice President of the Marketing Administration, and we also
have Troy Rayleigh here, who is over our operations, and he is our technical guru here.
So if you have any questions related to service parameters and things originally met, I'd
be happy to step in.
Just have a very brief update for you today.
I know when Nicole's here next month, we'll have a much more thorough update on everything
that we've got going on, because it's quite a bit.
I just wanted to let you all know that we did complete the 19-mile A train rail trail
at the end of December, and the final construction phase of that, it was a piece that connected
the Highland Village, Lewisville Lake Station to the Old Town area in downtown Lewisville.
That actually provides a full connectivity from the DTC all the way to Hebron Station
in Lewisville, so that's really exciting.
And then the timing was great on that, because the COG also named us the Trail of the Month
in January.
They produced a wonderful video on the trail, interviewed Judge Eads and some other community
stakeholders for that.
So if you've not seen that, happy to send that to staff to share that with you.
And then just a quick save the date.
Yes, please.
I'll post it.
Okay, wonderful.
And then on April 18th, we will be hosting a Rails to Trails event in honor of National
Opening Day for Trails.
I know that we are working closely with the city as well as the other communities along
the corridor to make that a successful event.
As we get more information firmed up on that, I'm sure we'll be sharing that.
Also, just briefly, the Monsignor King shuttle that's going between Monsignor King and our
Daily Bread.
Very successful.
It's been operating since when, Troy?
January.
January, so about 14 days now.
We have two routes currently.
One that departs at 8.50 and one that departs at 9.15 a.m.
The first shuttle has 474 as the ridership and then the second at 9.15 has five.
So with Monsignor King closing at 8.45 a.m., it's pretty clear where that ridership is
needed most and so I think we'll continue to evaluate the need and identify what the
best path forward is for that particular service.
So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions and take any feedback back to the city.
Two questions.
One about the Bonnie Bray stop is still closed.
And I think last time we met there was like, oh, well, we are going to talk about that
and we're checking on the buses or the roundabout or something and then I drove by and it's
still closed and so I'm wondering when that's going to be able to open and is it going to
reopen?
It is.
March 16th.
We have to do our schedule changes and define intervals and that is going to be a schedule
change because the path has changed.
So that is in the queue to take effect right after spring break.
So will the current stops be the same stops or will they be?
Yes, they'll be.
Everything will go right back to the way it was originally.
But it's going to take?
Yes, to March 16th.
The last thing is when I was at the DRMC, Dart did an update and they said they just
recently got $49,000 in grant funding for human trafficking training and I asked or
would like to see if DCTA could apply for something like that and do the trainings here
for our operators.
And it's for trainings and I think also an event awareness.
I will absolutely take that back and we'll do some research on that.
Okay.
Thank you.
Anything else?
Anyone else?
Thank you very much for coming.
Thank you so much.
Thank you for your patience and letting yourself be booted and waiting for 50 minutes.
It's always good to hear from John.
Well, he's always there for me.
Okay.
Welcome to IMC.
We received an updated report on the discussion regarding initiatives to reduce wrong way
driving.
Good morning, everybody.
Good morning.
All right.
Sorry while I fumble around to make this wide screen.
I'm Haley Salazar, traffic engineering department, here to discuss initiatives to reduce wrong
way driving on one way street.
Thank you.
Here we go.
All right.
And as a reminder, I'm discussing this initiative today because this initiative was one that
we did not get credit for satisfying when we submitted the policy bundle.
And so the committee asked us to take a look at the ones we did not get credit for to see
if there were any that we should be pursuing.
And this initiative stood out not only because of the prudence of the matter, but also we're
actually implementing a lot of the countermeasures to reduce wrong way driving already.
It's just not in a formal program.
And so when wrong way driving occurs, it can be particularly dangerous.
And I know speaking for myself, in the 17 years I've been a resident of Denton, I've
seen more than one wrong way driver near the UNT campus.
I've seen a clockwise tour of the square, wrong way driving on Elm and Locust as well.
But luckily, any time I've seen it, the driver is self-corrected.
And most of the time, that's what happens, which is really good because when they don't,
that's when we run into the possibility of a wrong way crash.
It's a particularly dangerous type of crash.
And unfortunately, Texas leads the nation in wrong way driving crashes, followed by Florida
and then California.
So these are typically head-on collisions, and they're the most fatal because if you
have two cars going 30 miles an hour, you now have an impact speed of a 60 mile an hour crash.
Most of these crashes occur at night, between 6 and 6, with a small window between midnight
to 3 a.m.
Most, over half, occur on the weekends.
Most involve alcohol, and there's an over-representation of drivers under 25 and over 70.
So all that considered, we take this very seriously, and what we want to do is first
figure out what are our target roads where we need to implement these countermeasures.
And so a lot of us think of the roads I've already mentioned.
The roads around the square, Hickory, Elm, Locust, Oak.
We also want to take a look at our on-ramps and service roads, and then our larger,
median divided one-way roads.
Those are going to be like 288, Teasley, Carroll, and so on.
We already have all of those roads identified in GIS, so we know where we need to go.
Now we just need to identify the particular locations that are vulnerable for someone
entering the wrong way, and implement our countermeasures.
So first up is a countermeasure.
We have signage available.
There are two types of signages we can pursue.
The static signage is a traditional signage that we're all used to seeing.
These are not cost prohibitive.
The cost of printing, which we can do in-house and installation, is about $70 a sign.
So we can put these just about wherever they're needed.
The flashing signages are really neat.
They're LED, edulite signages.
They are very noticeable.
They are a bit cost prohibitive.
They're about $1,800.
And that is, we're working with about $140,000 signage budget at the moment.
So about $140,000 a year.
And so that said, we do have to be very careful with choosing the flashing signage.
But at very key locations, it can be an incredible tool to mitigate wrong way driving.
The next tool available is the raised pavement marking.
And we have these all over town.
Not everybody knows, though, that if you drive the right way,
they illuminate the road and glow that bright white.
And if you go the wrong way, it glows red.
So if you haven't noticed it, take a look when you're driving in your rear-view mirror,
not in front of you because you're going the right way.
But take a look and see, and they glow red behind you.
And we can look at other areas where we can put this in addition to what we already have.
Councilmember Briggs.
Yeah, I think that just this or something for our social media, like "did you know" kind of thing.
And that way people understand that if they see red, they need to do something different.
Yeah, turn around.
Turn around, yeah.
I mean, I obviously don't drive the wrong way because I didn't know this.
But it's very, very informative.
And it would be helpful so that if they know they do see it, then do something different.
And are we sure that all of ours do this?
Okay.
Yeah, take a look when you're driving.
I didn't know until I did this, and I looked and it was kind of like, wow, they're everywhere.
This is a really powerful tool.
When the knowledge is presented, you're right.
I'd like to suggest that mostly people look at the windshield more than in the rear-view mirror.
And I'd also like to say that if you think that flashing "wrong way" signs are a quote really mean,
you are a transportation nerd now.
Okay, share.
All of it.
Another thing, though, that's really neat about these rave pavement markings is they're not cost prohibitive.
They're only about $8 at the maximum to install.
And in-house --
Per dot or --
Per dot.
But in-house, we can install them at around $1.50.
So this is very readily available.
And another countermeasure that we have is the pavement markings.
I'm sorry.
Just a question.
We already have them?
Because we have them in some places where we can look.
But there are places where we don't have them where we could install them.
There are.
So right now, most of the roads that are going to be striped are larger roads.
We do have them.
So, for example, driving down University, you can take a look and see these markers in other places as well.
But there are smaller streets where we don't necessarily have the raised pavement markings, but we could put them.
Do we have them on Elm and Locust and Oak and Hickory?
Is there a text on that?
We'll have to check into that one because it's --
Textile roads currently.
Textile roadways are slightly different the way they are.
And those two are ready to be resurfaced.
So I'm not sure if textiles maintain that.
Very ready.
But we're also having conversations about taking them back.
Correct.
And so we have, once they're done, opportunity to --
To redo them.
Absolutely.
Correct.
Thank you.
And then finally, we can also mark the pavement.
So in this photo, you can see with this white car, we've got a directional arrow striped indicating wrong way.
Don't enter.
We have paint truck.
And so we've got the capability to do striping as well as some other pavement markings with our push cart to indicate wrong way as well.
So we have a variety of tools at our disposal to clearly help reduce wrong way driving.
And so what our recommendation is, is that we go ahead and adopt a proactive wrong way driving prevention program, which is taking all these tools and just formalizing a strategy of attack to implement these measures.
And we do want to use a variety of measures.
Different measures are appropriate for different situations.
So that will be the signage, pavement markings, and the RPMs.
And then we do, of course, need to be cognizant of our budget and take a cost-effective approach.
So that would be mixing the static signage and the LED edge load signage.
Comments?
Couple of questions.
I think that's good.
What would constitute making a program?
Would there be council action you'd like to do, like a resolution or something?
I think that will be something we'll see coming as part of our budget package this year as a defined program for increased budget to address these issues.
We currently are on a, like Brian and Haley ran the numbers, if you look at what the life cycle costs or the life cycle replacement time frame would be for signs and markings today, we're budgeted to replace all the city markings in 31, 39 years.
Every 30 something years.
Yeah. So to give you an idea, pavement markings and striping especially, it has a two to five year lifespan depending on where it is, how much traffic is taking on it.
Of course, all of these elements, both signs and RPMs, pavement markings, they get hit by traffic.
They're left out in the sun to bake throughout most of the year.
So you've got issues and challenges and we're just not staffed right now to be able to move that needle into a three or a five or a seven year return so that we're replacing those markings more consistently.
The budget just doesn't currently support that, but historically we've not really had a program built to be able to bring the council to say, here's what it would cost to move that needle and where do we go.
We do anticipate bringing that with the next budget cycle to council for consideration and show you what would those programs look like.
Is there a crossover between this, because I know that the bundle, this is good, but is there a crossover with this right away and road to zero?
Division zero. Division zero. Yeah, there is.
Okay. So I mean it can, it can help in. It is one of the elements that will help us get into that vision zero.
Okay.
You definitely see, especially on larger roadways but wide medians that are not well lit, you do see wrong way driving where people try to turn left down the wrong pathway for a variety of reasons and that ends up creating this fatality so that vision zero is targeted and correct.
Do we, if I'm correct, we talked in this presentation about state fatality, fatalities and collisions. Do we have that data for denting too or did we just see it and it didn't register on me?
It was not in the presentation, but I can absolutely pull that out.
I just think it would help make the case, right? And then, you know, it also occurred to me when you showed the map of all the one-way streets and the ramps, you know, if we, if the numbers are significant, as I fear they may be, you know, to map those fatalities onto those intersections, right?
So, you know, create a rationale and for what you want to spend where. Sure need it, you know, like it or love it, that's what Mayor Portem likes to say.
You know, we have a lot of one-way streets, you know, this makes a lot of sense.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Okay. Let's do on-system projects again.
Yeah.
Okay, I can use staff reports.
So, let's see. I'm going to bring in the matrix. I want to start cleaning up the portions of it if we can.
So, I'm sorry.
Okay, so one of the things I want to point out, I think these starting items are mostly related to the mobility plan. I want to leave them in.
But the walk time, I think we've made the changes, so if we increase it, I'd like to take that one out.
The next one would be item A, we've talked to TxDOT, they've added some of the signage.
But one of the things that we're expediting is the signal.
So, what we've done is from our project for the Hickory Creek widening on the east side, we've pulled the actual signal work out of the project.
We're going to get it done with the ability of our contractor that we have for signals sooner than wait for the contractor to go ahead and widen and then add the signal.
So, we're planning on getting the signal work started next month.
And that's why I wanted to see if we can take this out because we kind of have a plan in place and we'll be addressing it if you don't mind.
I'd like to leave it on there just so that we can, because you're still looking at four months before that signal is up and operational.
We're trying to get it before that. We're better than TxDOT's schedule.
Well, I'm looking at what you've got going on on Oak Street.
No, okay, we'll leave it.
And because you're in the springtime, the weather related.
It is weather related.
If we can get some rumble strips down there, it would be extremely helpful.
The market is better, but it's...
That was the issue is in talking to TxDOT, we haven't had any good days that they can actually deploy their crews to put any of their signs and markings on the street because of the conditions.
But that one ended there. Number nine, we wanted some clarification on what exactly, because we got that, yeah, there's some TxDOT and I-35 issue, but we don't know exactly what we're looking for.
If we can get any additional information, that would be helpful.
Yeah, well, I think it was addressed last time.
Okay.
Yeah, and I think also there was something that had the councilman put in in the request as well.
I think it's all the same issue that was in the Friday report.
It was a confusing signage.
Yeah.
And is that addressed or will it be selected?
Okay.
So I'll probably take this one.
We are working consistently on the policy bender.
I don't know if you want to leave it or we're one item at a time.
I see you doing it, you know, but maybe it's working then.
It is working.
It's probably not doing it.
What's next?
Great presentation today.
It's coming.
Did you hear the question? What's next?
We haven't thought about it.
So we should leave it then.
Yeah, absolutely.
No sale.
We are working on item 11 that should be in for next meeting.
And then as I mentioned, there are a couple items that we're looking at for next meeting.
I think it would be a good segue into the main event.
I think Mark will have some feedback on this event.
And then we're currently working on the last one.
Are there any new ones that you want us to add or look at?
This may be for concluding items or to go on.
I just have a couple here that I was curious about.
I'd like an update or to check on the status for the cutout design for Forest Ridge.
I know that that was getting it repaved was part of it,
but this committee also wanted to see more options on reducing the median size.
And we talked about that a little bit like for future and during our last conversation.
So I was just wondering where that conversation is.
I'm sorry, you can respond.
Is it just to get an update on where we are on it?
Yeah.
I think last time what I recall the way it was that is we are going to completely redo the pavement as is,
the pavement markings will go back as it is.
And then we're going to have a speed study conducted sometime in the next few months,
in the next couple months, not necessarily immediately.
I think we just completed the striping yesterday.
So recently you striped it, so we want to make sure that everyone in the neighborhood is aware that it's striped.
It's ready to go.
It's back in service.
And then have a month or so and then conduct a speed study.
If the speed survey comes back that people are really speeding,
there are really speed issues, that people are swinging around, still safety concerns,
then we'll go back and look at options.
How do we count the traffic now, and at that point we'll look at some options of medians or intersections.
So yes, we can bring an update if you'd like next.
I think it won't be next time, but we'll be following because we still have to collect the speed data.
So most likely this will be April item.
So I didn't know if that needed to be on the list or that was just something that you were curious about following up on that.
But we'll have an item on the April.
On that note, there is some moral construction going on at the end of this month beginning next on Forest Ridge.
Which by the way, this is a street closure report.
Forest Ridge is one word.
And I know y'all are quick, but it's showing up on the street closure report that the closure will start on 3/2 and end on 2/28.
So it goes backwards.
That's amazing.
Yeah, I mean that is fast.
Did we put the year on that?
Yes, you got 20 on that.
The other one is a big concern.
I'm hearing not so good feedback about removing the lights at Logast and Elm.
Oh, on Parkway?
Yeah, it's very confusing for drivers.
People aren't sure what to do, especially for pedestrians there that are trying to cross both of those streets.
It's more like Frogger trying to get to the library.
So I wanted to make sure that we were still monitoring that or that there was some kind of pedestrian access that was going to go in somehow.
It's just that the cars are speeding down faster and you just kind of got to look either way and go through.
It's just not working out as we thought it would.
Are we still looking at that situation?
Yeah, we are continuing monitoring that.
Is it more for pedestrians as well as vehicles or just pedestrians?
Well, both.
I think anyone who's trying to cross those streets going either way, it seems more dangerous for them now than it did before.
I think part of it is getting used to it.
I think a lot of the intersections, Mulberry, East and Moore, all of them, and Elm and Logast, they don't have signals.
They have stop signs and it's the same type of situation.
But one of the things that we're also looking at is at some point Parkway is supposed to go on a road dive where we add bike lanes and make it more safer.
At that time, we'll look at that intersection if there are any enhancements that are needed for the crossing.
But we're continuing monitoring that.
Because I remember that Parkway is part of that conversation with the removal of the lights.
It was all together, or really close together.
So when is that Parkway situation supposed to occur?
So it is more of a striping, but we'll definitely have to make sure that people get used to it first as a signal is out.
And I think our next step will be evaluating what are our options.
We'll be bringing that to the committee to look at how do we work at this, what are the current volumes and how does it flow all the way to the library from Carroll.
We'll just be cognizant and monitor those two intersections very close because people are going faster now through there.
And I don't know if there's been any accidents or how many near misses or what, but I'm not getting very good feedback from the residents.
Okay, we'll definitely.
So I have a few questions and comments.
On item six, you used to have a note there that clarified that really, that's kind of like a subpoint question what's there.
The primary issue is root cause analysis on the West Oak Street roller coaster.
Okay, yes, and we are working on a report.
Yeah, for April I see.
But I just want to kind of check in, are we talking about the same thing?
Correct, it is the West Oak Street.
We hired a firm to go do a geotechnical analysis and we're getting samples and we're collecting all the information.
Okay, so do you want to just reflect on that?
It would be focused on the West Oak Street, this whole conversation.
Yeah, it's going to work.
Thanks for not even noting.
Thank you.
Yeah, thanks for doing that.
And on the rotary, inscription of Bonnie Gray.
The barrels are still.
I mean to cause you pain just by doing the circle.
Rotary is a very different thing from traffic.
Oh, sorry, sorry.
Wait, what's the right term?
Roundabout, traffic circle.
Roundabout, roundabout.
Round thing.
Round thing?
Am I okay with that, round thing?
What's the right way to?
It's a roundabout.
It's a roundabout, roundabout, roundabout.
You probably made Trey really happy right there.
Okay.
So on the roundabout, the barrels are still up.
People ask me why.
Is it done?
Is it not done?
What's the right answer?
So currently we're change-wearing into the project some items that work with parks to
make sure that center island looks the best it possibly could.
So we're going to do a couple iterations of them to put in landscaping there.
So that, I made the right guess then that the barrels were there as a placeholder so
they'll be protected when they do that work.
Could you have barrels north and south as well?
That's also to protect those corners until they're re-landscaped.
Okay.
So it's all about the landscape.
Right.
And the weather's been against us all through the fall.
Sure.
Also to complete the stamp pattern concrete.
Yeah.
So the weather's just not been with us to make all those things happen.
Yeah.
Because you also have like kind of like an effective partial lane closure.
Right.
Yeah.
And that's all about the landscape.
So the other component to that is we didn't want to open up the intersection with both
lanes on body grade open.
It's a phase step process that get people used to one lane entering the roundabout.
Okay.
So that's conscious.
If we open everything it kind of creates that issue and I think Todd's gone through
some of that in his past previous job.
So we want to make sure that it's a phased, people get used to it, and then we open both
lanes on body grade.
So it's both.
I appreciate understanding that.
Thank you.
And on the landscaping part, the reason to protect it with the orange barrels until there's
landscaping is that, this is a question, is that landscaping serves a kind of traffic
calming purpose or a visibility purpose that the barrels are doing now?
Right.
It's a visual barrier.
The barrels are really, they're more out of convenience right now because it would cost
them more to have that contracting company that they've hired to put the traffic controls
to come out, take them away.
Cheaper to leave them.
Okay.
But it also provides a warning because there's, you see it every day, I know.
Yep, yep.
There's a, it's much lower behind the back curve over there, so if somebody were to go
up and over the curve, they're in an area where they potentially couldn't get out.
So they also serve as a warning that these conditions are different than what they're
going to be.
Which landscaping will serve that purpose in the future.
Correct.
Okay.
That's really helpful to understand.
And yeah, I go out of my way to go through that intersection because I really like it.
I know I'm not that way.
Second issue about the rotary.
I just, my personal, oh sorry, roundabout.
I wrote roundabout, roundabout.
Second question about the roundabout.
You know, the basic rule is priority to those in the, correct, in the roundabout.
When you're entering from scripture and you've got, you know, more traffic coming northbound
on body and brain, it kind of creates a little catch 22 where like, they're always before
the scripture people, right?
So if there's a lot of traffic coming north, I'm in, I have priority.
I'm in, I have priority.
So it's really, you know, kind of, it's no real opportunity to come in from scripture,
right?
There's nothing that governs that.
So I don't know, I'm just, I don't know if that's something, if that's the way it's supposed
to be.
So it's a couple of things.
I mean, if you think about it, traffic is slow.
There are gaps within different platoons that travel along body and brain.
And the other thing, it primarily, if you look at it, may function as a two-way stop
on scripture.
So you wait for that gap and it's a very slow travel speed environment as compared to if
you're on Elm and Locust and you're on Cross Street, there's traffic that's fast.
So there are gaps that you can look into.
The other thing is, by the time this traffic enters, if you're, if you're at this location
long enough, you can easily speed up to that 15 mile an hour.
You're not speeding up.
So if you're on scripture, trying to get into the intersection, and there's traffic coming
on body, brain, they're entering the, they're completely slowing down and entering at 15
miles an hour.
So you have that...I talked to someone that was trying to go over 20 miles an hour and
they said my truck almost started going.
So it's very uncomfortable at 20, 22 miles.
Okay.
You've got several things going on at one time.
So a roundabout similar to a signal will function differently in the high traffic peak volumes
of the day.
So in the morning and the evening, just like a signal where you're going to sit more, you're
going to sit longer at those signals at a roundabout.
They have a tendency, especially during the peak hours of the day, to function more in
one direction than another.
Sure.
Now throughout the rest of the day, and that's, that's really where we evaluate the difference
between roundabouts and truly signalized intersection is going to be, is it operating that way all
day long?
Or is it, is there an induced condition, let's pretend just described?
Yeah, which might be appropriate.
But I would just suggest to you that the degree of curvature is not great when you're going
north.
And it's not complete yet because it will be complete when Bonnebray phase four is built
and then phase five picks up and goes to the north.
And the curvature will be greater going into the roundabout from going north?
There will be adjustments that are more appropriate than what there are today.
Today we're trying to tie into the existing roadway.
Yeah.
Okay.
It's a very temporary measure once Bonnebray phase four kicks into construction later this
year.
Okay.
And that will change that condition.
Because I would just say, I'm sorry to go in so long.
It feels like you can pretty much keep going straight if you're going northbound on Bonnebray,
not adjusting much as you go through the roundabout.
Right.
And we, we were afraid of that condition once we started down the temporary connection pathway.
Yeah.
That's why we really wanted phase four to be contiguous with it.
Yeah.
But we also wanted to take advantage of, can we get the intersection done first?
Yeah.
Which is choke point during construction.
It's always going to be the toughest point.
Intersections will be.
Oh, if you might, I'm just, the suggestion now is to look at whether you might adjust
through the barrels, move them a little bit to the left.
Sure.
If they've got to make a sharper turn to get in.
Sure.
No, it's absolutely zone we can look at.
Yeah.
Well, just on that, on the roundabout, I know we, we are one lane right now and there's
no real good signage as to what's going to happen when there's two lanes.
So put the signage out and partially cover it since it's not really working, but where
people can see what they're supposed to do.
So it's not the first, first time it's opened up to two lanes and they're cutting through
there.
And it's like, okay, I got to read the sign and watch the traffic and figure out what
I'm doing now that it's open to two lanes.
We can get some type of marking in there so that, you know, since you've got a two lane
roundabout north-south.
We can absolutely look into that.
I mean, there's even the alternative that we could put out temporary signage now and
change that signage out once we're complete.
I mean, there's several options that we'll definitely take, take a look at.
So I have a couple of questions about streets.
One on the construction report, Thomas is listed and it says part of the 2019 bundle,
but there's no date and there's no information about, about that.
And so just want to follow up.
2019 is coming to council today, I want to say.
So I believe that there's a placeholder knowing that construction will be starting here very
soon.
I don't, I'm not sure as to why they didn't actually have dates in there, so we'll find
out.
But before we, is your, I mean, besides the fact that there's no dates, when you say 2019
bundle, is your, one of your issues, not issues, but concerns that, that it may be, that was
reflected as part of the 2019 bond program?
Because I think we're using different nomenclature and I don't think it's quite as clear for
the council members versus it is for us.
So that's, I think that's the other issue too.
2019 streets bundle is actually a 2014 bond project.
It was intended to be in construction in 2019, but due to some delays, it got pushed back
a little bit further.
So there will also be a 2020 streets bundle that will be coming to council here in the
next couple of months, and that will be projects that are still under the 2014 bond package,
but intended to go to construction in 2020.
So that, that may be some of my next question because there's the different bundles and
then there's part of the bond project.
So my next street of concern, because these have been bad for a really long time, Fulton
Street, and I can't find that on the street closures list.
I can't find that in, you know, the bond.
And so I don't know how far back when someone asked me about a street to go look for that
information.
And so that leads me to my next comment, and it might be something that we need to discuss
here.
Is there anything that we can do on timing so that when water and wastewater gets done,
it's not years before that street gets reconstructed so that people aren't driving on really bad
streets.
I mean, because there's, once that gets done, we're like, well, it's going to get reconstructed.
We don't want to do anything, but we are, you know, living in a situation in our residential
streets where they're really bad for a long time.
And that's what we're trying to change.
So, you know, we talked in the 2019 bond program about hitting more of a neighborhood-centric
approach to these projects.
It was getting away from the old model level, wastewater goes, then water goes, and then
streets goes, and their schedules don't always sync up.
Now, I know for a fact that the water department, the wastewater and the stormwater in streets,
they're much closer now than they ever were in the past.
But we certainly understand that problem.
Well, yeah, new streets, but I'm still talking about streets that were fixed.
I mean, the water and wastewater went in a long time ago.
I understand.
We're still trying to overcome all that.
I mean, there's still some that are just caught in that mill where water and wastewater got
their pieces done and streets, for whatever reason, they went into their schedule until
much later in the program.
A lot of that was the way staff previously interacted.
So it was very siloed.
You know, I'll get my wastewater done, don't care what your schedule is.
I'll get my water done, don't care what your schedule is.
And that absolutely is not the way they coordinate today.
None of that is happening today.
But we do have some legacy projects that are hanging out there that were lagging farther
and farther behind.
And sometimes what has happened is you had a roadway that didn't even make it on the
list, and water and wastewater had a need to go put in utility upgrades out there.
Now the roadway started to fall apart because I've got a patched together roadway.
That road now is in that condition.
Maybe it didn't get high enough on the OCI index for us to go attack that one just yet.
So what you're saying is we're already addressing it?
We're doing our very best to try to address all of those issues.
And part of this 2019 street bundle, getting along with tonight, is coordination.
We went back and we've talked to water and wastewater that are all included in the design.
The design is inclusive.
Same thing with 2020 bundles.
We have inclusive all the future bundles.
Even with the old 2012 and 2014 bond money, they will have water and wastewater.
And the next step is we're coordinating with ACMAs so that we have a tighter schedule,
we have a tighter accountability.
We hold that same contractor accountable for you're in this area, you get everything done,
and we move on to the next area.
So yes, there are certain measures in place as we work through the next bond as well.
The other component too is not just the coordination but the communication to the resident.
Because before it was each department had its own project where they treated it as a silo.
So three letters would go out, we're going to be on your street at this time,
we're going to be on your street at that time.
And so the resident just sees it.
You've already been up my street.
Why are you considering this as a project?
It's really just one big project all the way through.
So part of that is a communication plan as well.
And so Fulton Street, did you say, is in one of those bundles?
We're checking right now.
I'll give you an answer.
Thomas Street is and that's coming to us.
Yes.
Thank you.
The way that bundle that's coming is Thomas Hercules and Windsor.
Windsor.
Bless the park.
Speaking of Windsor.
So many proposals.
No, I'm good.
Yes.
Speaking of Windsor, this would have been on the John Ryan, you know, on system thing
that we hope to get next month.
You know, we're talking about having a list.
Oh, the major.
Yeah, yeah.
Windsor would have been on one of those.
I get questions on it.
Any word of update?
Windsor, Hinkle, you know, am I wrong that we're slipping dates?
Weather's killing it.
Yeah.
But I'm not holding a candle for weather.
But I'd like to be able to--
I think that the original contract was made for the Windsor-Hinkle project, right?
You're talking about the project?
Yes.
So the original contract date was May for that project.
And we still feel that we didn't hit that with the rain delay and schedule delays.
And Hinkle?
Wait, is it the same?
Hinkle, Windsor, it's the same magnolia range.
May.
Got you.
Okay.
Yes.
Okay.
The last item for me, unless you all-- do we have more?
Good.
My question's for you, Mario.
What part of city government would have kind of global, if any,
would have global policy oversight over the issue of noise, right?
Is it like a-- is there a citywide goal on noise?
We have a noise ordinance.
Yeah.
That dictates what's considered, I guess, a noise violation.
Right.
I don't know exactly.
I think it's 65 decibels, I believe, is that noise.
But it's based on noise emanating from a residence or a business,
and music about, you know, loud activities.
So if you take it globally, that sort of narrow, you know, noise topic,
it's like this person's causing a noise, please go, you know, investigate that.
But then we've road noise.
Correct.
Like, you know, for instance, when there's new construction, you know,
for like textile, we heard about the measures that are taken
to determine whether they need to do abatement.
But if just noise conditions grow ambiently above 65,
but it's not someone playing music, but, you know, rattling, et cetera,
do we have an opinion about it?
You know, do we have a policy perspective?
Well, I believe--
Probably an issue in a growing city, right?
It is, certainly.
You can correct me if I'm wrong.
But when there is those road expansions that TechStop takes on,
they do the environmental clearance components,
and they determine whether or not the additional traffic
is going to cause noise issues based on a certain threshold.
Right.
And if they do exceed that, then they do incorporate sound walls.
Which is sort of a-- It's a sub-topic, right?
That's when there's something new that's going to happen.
But what about growing city becoming noisier?
In a place where it isn't a person doing it, it isn't a new project,
but the city becomes noisier and just neighborhoods become later than 65.
Get affected by that?
Yeah.
Where do they turn to?
Yeah, that's a good question.
I think part of that, I don't really know if there really is a good answer on that,
just because it's just incremental increases of activity
that are just as a result of just increased traffic that just happen over time.
I wonder if other cities kind of own that as part of their quality of life remit.
Yeah.
Maybe I'll leave you with the question.
Okay, we'll try.
Yeah.
I may pursue it as a topic for Town Hall or something,
but it might be good to have generated some policy thoughts and advance that.
I'm just starting to think about it myself.
Clarification on it, is this related just to traffic?
Well, it's primarily--
Or are you talking about the overall growth in the city
and the noise associated with events and other general things?
Events, we have a process that we can give them a variance and so on.
It's kind of a single point origin of noise.
And when there are changes in the environment, we have a process to think about it.
But as we become-- who is accountable to do anything, if there is anything to be done,
for just increases in ambient noise that affect quality of life?
Just to clarify, what you're really wanting us to address is noise pollution.
Yes, there you go.
And is there a department of it?
There's not currently.
But we can talk internally about how that best gets addressed.
Are there policy actions, are there tactics that are appropriate for noise pollution?
It would be something that would be a decided policy direction from council.
It's things that can be provided to council.
As far as what are the options out there, then of course the question is always going to be,
how do you choose to fund those items?
Of course.
But that's absolutely something that can be brought forward
and we can figure out internally might be the best to work through that issue.
You know, probably like a heavy lift to pull it all together, so I'll request it as a topic for council.
So consider that just a heads up, but I'll be asking for that today because it's not advanced notice.
Anything else?
Anyone else?
Thank you very much, everybody.
Yes, I will adjourn this meeting at 1033.