All right.
We are live with our committee on persons with disability.
My name is Mario.
I'm the deputy city manager, and I'm going to hand it over to our chair, but before we
get started on officially calling the meeting to order, I just would like to say a couple
of housekeeping items.
This committee has not met for several months due to COVID.
We were scheduled to have a meeting, I believe, in March, and so a lot of the issues with
the pandemic started, and so as a result, city council authorized several of the committees
to stop meeting for the foreseeable future, and this is our first meeting back, and we
are doing a meeting virtually through Zoom.
So a couple of housekeeping things for our members and also for our committee members
and also for the viewing public.
Obviously, we're not in person, so this meeting is going out live via our streaming system
at the city.
So please be cognizant of the fact that we've got three presenters, staff presenters, certainly
members, was it a 11 member committee?
So it's a large committee, so please be cognizant of the fact that trying not to over speak
on people just because we're trying to keep some sort of order when it comes to the video
quality, audio quality of these meetings, and so if possible, if you could please raise
your hand, keep your microphones on mute so that we don't hear any feedback from the audio
that's going across your speakers.
So if possible, if you can raise your hand to be acknowledged so that the chair can acknowledge
you and allow you to speak, and so if there's a situation where there may be some crosstalk
that may not be audible, I'm going to do my best to try to reemphasize or at least restate
what was stated from the members so that way we can get that clearly on the record.
So with that, if there's any questions at that point, if there's no questions, I'd be
happy to hand it over to Mr. Rivera, but if you have any questions, I'd be happy to try
to answer that as best I can.
Okay.
Well, with that, Val, please take it away.
>> All right.
Thank you, Mario.
Appreciate that.
Thank you, everyone.
This is the Denton City Committee on People with Disabilities meeting, and it's nice to
see everyone.
It's been a few months, so it's nice to see everyone, and I guess it's time to get to
business.
Do we have any comment cards?
Do we need virtual cards now?
>> No, sir.
>> Okay.
So we will go to the next item, which is CPD 20-013, consider the approval of the minutes
of February 20th, 2020.
Yes, Rex.
>> I still move to accept the minutes as printed.
>> Alex?
>> I second.
>> All in favor?
>> Aye.
>> Yes, yeah.
So we will approve those minutes as stated.
Our second item, CPD 20-014, receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction
regarding the allowable uses of the downtown reinvestment grant program and the possible
addition of funding of funding Americans with Disabilities Act improvements on eligible
projects.
>> Good afternoon, committee members.
This is the first time that I've met many of you.
I'm Jessica Rogers, I'm the director of economic development.
One of the responsibilities of our department is overseeing what we call development districts.
In this case, we're talking specifically about a tax increment reinvestment zone.
We have two here in the city of Dutton.
Out of our reinvestment zone that exists in downtown, we operate the downtown reinvestment
grant.
So I'm going to give a brief presentation about a suggested change that we're making
to that program that we thought the committee would be interested in.
So give me one second, and I'm going to bring up the presentation.
And while Jessica is doing that, one of the things that we've been working with our council
and other committees is to allow the presentation to go all the way through, and then the presenter
will then minimize the presentation and allow committee members or council members to ask
questions if that's okay.
>> Right.
So as I mentioned, we'll be discussing and getting your feedback about our plan to include
ADA improvements as eligible costs in our downtown reinvestment grant program.
A little background on the program is that the downtown reinvestment grant program provides
matching grants of up to $25,000 for improvements, renovations, rehabilitations, and historic
preservation projects in downtown Dutton.
Projects have to be within the boundaries of the downtown tax increment reinvestment
zone, number one, which is pretty much most of downtown, and those grants are funded through
dedicated tax dollars that come in through the reinvestment zone itself.
So in the grant program, applicants can submit for eligible projects that are within any
of these five categories.
So in the grant application, an applicant has to demonstrate the expenses, and the project
meets these categories.
So it could be a facade rehabilitation or a building renovation.
It could simply be an improvement to the awning and signs on the exterior of the building.
It could be impact fee reimbursements.
So there are many buildings in the downtown area that have to make utility improvements
during their renovation because they have older utilities.
And so this allows them to be reimbursed for a portion of those costs.
They may also do direct utility upgrades that could include water, wastewater, electrical
service.
And those utility upgrades could be either interior or exterior to the structure.
And lastly, any interior or code improvements.
That might include an asbestos abatement, mold abatement, or a fire suppression system.
Just to give you an example of what type of projects were going on that we fund with this,
this is actually a project that's being completed right now on McKinney Street.
If you're familiar with the area, so actually Locust would be right over here on the right
hand side of the skate shop.
And this is McKinney Street.
And so this is a former auto mechanic facility, and it's actually being renovated and converted
to a restaurant.
And so here's a rendering of what the project will look like when it's completed.
And it's actually under construction now.
It looks substantially different than this if you make your way past it today.
This is a rendering of what the, sorry, the schematic of what the interior will look like.
So if McKinney Street is over here, this is the front entrance.
And so those bay areas where the vehicles are in the last image are being converted
to a patio area, a bar area, a dining room, and then they're adding a full kitchen and
restroom and office and storage facilities.
So that's a project that came to us through the grant project.
Now because of this, the nature of this project and the conversion and the change in use of
the building, there are requirements that they meet come up to code on some ADA improvements.
So one of that is making sure that the bathrooms themselves meet ADA or compliant with ADA
requirements.
So a change in the grant that we're talking about would be to specifically call out ADA
improvements, like the one I just described, in the interior and code improvement section
of the grant to make sure that those expenses would be eligible if they were included in
the renovations that were occurring.
So our two boards that review these grants are our TERS board, and they expressed that
they wanted to specifically include ADA improvements under that interior and code improvement section
as an eligible project.
And then our downtown economic development committee also concurred with the TERS board.
And after we talked with those boards, we wanted to come to this committee to make sure
we have all of the feedback and understanding to move this forward.
And so our proposed change, like I said, is to add a specific definition under the interior
and code improvement section that improvements made as required or in accordance with the
Americans Disabilities Act as amended, certainly because it may change as we move forward,
would be eligible project expenses.
So just calling that out a little bit more is that the interior code improvement will
include that language now, or we're going to propose that to the TERS board at their
meeting next week that they adopt that language.
And then what will also change is the scoring criteria for grants.
ADA improvements can now be scored and can be awarded points on the scoring matrix for
the grants.
And so that may allow an applicant to get additional points, which increases the grant
that they're eligible to up to $25,000.
So the result of the work that we're doing is that we'll include clear language that
ADA improvements made as part of projects, either if they're required or elect if the
renovation, throughout the renovation there, it's elected to make those changes that those
are eligible expenses, and they can now be included as part of the scoring criteria.
So for our next steps after our discussion today, we'll move on to final review with
our TERS board next week.
And if the TERS board accepts the proposed changes, it will be going to the city council
for consideration later this summer.
And that's all I have and I will stop sharing my screen so I can see everyone.
I believe Mr. King has a question.
That's right.
Thank you.
I'm sorry.
Yes, before you distribute the grant, do you secure financial background on the on the
individuals to make sure they have sufficient funds to on their part to finish the project?
Yes, sir.
It's a reimbursement grant.
So they actually have to demonstrate the actual dollars they spent.
And so we approve the grant amount up to a certain dollar amount.
And then for us to before we actually pay them, they have to demonstrate that they made
those expenditures and provide us the invoices and receipts to document, to document those
expenses.
All right.
I have a question.
I can't raise my hand.
So I'll just jump in.
One of my main question is, if the grant is based on a competitive nature and a business
does not either get the grant to make those improvements, is there language that the business
where the business will understand that the ADA is a mandate regardless of whether they
get this grant or not?
I guess that's how I'm trying to get here.
For every business, I mean, the ADA is a mandate and they should be accessible.
So this should be looked at as, you know, an assistance to that.
But if they do not obtain it, it does not exempt them from not complying.
Yes, you're correct.
So many improvements that are made as part of these projects are well beyond the $25,000
in the grant, but they're still required to be made.
If someone's renovating a building, they have to bring it up to code at a certain point.
So yes, those would still be required, and those would be required as part of our building
review and development process.
The grant could help pay for them if that's what they elected to request in the grant.
Thank you.
Beth?
If they are requesting funds to use in their application for ADA renovations, are those
renovations and plans overseen by an ADA coordinator or an ADA engineer to make sure they're really
doing proper renovations?
I'll defer to Mario a little bit, because that's handled through our development services.
So the actual plans that are filed go through our development services department.
And so we require that someone from development services sign off and say, yes, the improvements
that they're making meet code.
I'm not sure of the exact detail of that process on their side.
Right.
As far as the design, certainly it would have to be designed through a licensed engineer.
But as far as the inspections, to make sure, as Ms. Rogers said, as far as the inspections,
those would go through our building inspections department.
And I believe you may have seen a presentation several months ago from Scott McDonald, our
chief building official.
So him, along with his inspectors and the assistant building official, they're required
by law to make sure that those ramps and other improvements that are ADA required are done
according to code.
Are there any other questions?
Thank you for the presentation.
Well thank you for letting me join you guys today.
Just to make sure, because it does give staff direction, I would assume that the committee
is in favor of this provision within the grant requirements.
Okay.
Yes.
Okay.
Yes.
We just want to make sure that that's included as part of the staff report, that it was presented
before the committee, and that the committee was in favor.
Thank you.
Okay.
Our next item, CPD-20-015, Receive a report, hold a discussion, and give staff direction
regarding an update of the AWAP crosswalk pilot program at the downtown intersections
at Oak and Elm, Oak and Locust, Hickory and Elm, and Hickory and Locust.
And Mr. Chairman, if I may, this presentation is going to be made by, I believe, Brian Yahn.
He's in our traffic department.
He's not on site.
So I believe he'll be able to load the presentation here shortly, if you'll give him just a few
seconds.
Sure.
Yes.
I'll try and share my screen.
Right.
There you go.
Okay.
We see you, Brian.
Awesome.
All right.
Can everybody see that?
Yep.
Excellent.
So, Brian Yahn, City Traffic Engineer, here to talk today about a pilot program.
And if you'll remember, late last year, close to the end of November, beginning of December,
staff implemented a, what we're calling an AWAP crosswalk around the square, those four
intersections, those four traffic signals that bound the four corners of the square downtown.
And what we did was we created a pedestrian-only phase.
So if you activated the crosswalk button at the end of the vehicle cycle that was currently
underway, it would provide 26 seconds of pedestrian crossing time that could get you across one
or possibly two of the intersection approaches.
So during that phase, none of the other cars were allowed to move.
We put up no left turn on red and no right turn on red.
So all the vehicles were supposed to stop when that pedestrian phase was activated.
So we had to, again, we put up the signs, PD went out and we did some enforcement.
And at the same time, during those first several months, and I think we actually pulled the
data that I'm going to be talking about today, middle or end of June.
So we had an online survey where people could provide their responses and their opinions
and their experiences with this AWAP crosswalk so that we can get some feedback of is it
good?
Is it bad?
Do you like it?
Do you not?
So that's what we're here today.
I've summarized what I think are the hot topic questions and there were some that were very
difficult to quantify and it was what we're looking at today are just the high level.
How was your experience?
How did you use the crosswalk?
And would you like to see this continue?
So the first question was IMA.
And you'll see the big area in blue, that is a Denton resident.
The other options were a visitor, employee of a business, student or business owner.
So by and large, the greatest number of people who use these AWAP crosswalks were Denton
residents who were visiting the square.
The second question is have you traveled through an AWAP crosswalk intersection?
92% of the respondents said yes.
And then this question was to try to figure out how did you use it?
Did you drive through it?
Did you walk through it?
Did you go through it as a cyclist or as a transit passenger?
So 44% were drivers, 51% were pedestrians, we only had about 3 or 4% of transit riders
are cyclists.
So primarily drivers, people driving through those intersections, and pedestrians, people
who are just walking around the square going to a destination.
As a pedestrian, how safe did you feel at this AWAP crosswalk?
35% said they were safer, they felt safer than they did before, 35% were neutral, about
the same, and then we had 10% that didn't feel as safe.
So if you look at the neutrals and the people who felt safer, you've got about 90% of pedestrians
thought that the AWAP crosswalk were at least as safe, if not safer, than moving with traffic
with the vehicular traffic at the same time.
And then, this is kind of a follow on question, did you like the fact that basically did you
feel safe because there were no vehicles moving, 86% said yes, we felt safe, 9% were about
the same, and then 5% felt less safe crossing with just pedestrians versus crossing with
pedestrians and vehicles.
And then, as an auto driver, this is looking at that other 40 or 50%, do you feel that
they are safer or less safe than the option of moving pedestrians and vehicles at the
same time, and 55% were in favor or felt they were safer, and 28% neutral, and 17% didn't
feel it was as safe.
So if you add again the neutral and the safer, then you've got about 83% of the respondents
that said that if you're as a driver, it was as safe or safer than moving with pedestrians.
And then, the next question was basically aimed at all modes of transportation, do you
feel that the all walk crosswalks are safer in general, 78% yes, 22% no.
So again, we're seeing a majority, two thirds to three fourths at least of the respondents
that are finding the all walk crosswalk to be a safer option.
And then, this was with that all walk crosswalk, with that pedestrian phase, there's a little
bit of an additional delay inherent because we're offering only the vehicles move at one
time and the pedestrians move at one time.
So on average, whether you're a pedestrian or a driver, it's going to add at least three
to four seconds to your overall trip, that's just a nature of the way we've segmented the
time of the traffic signal, but again, 75% said yes, that three second to four second
delay, well worth the enhanced safety.
And do you think that there are benefit to downtown again, 75, 25 in favor?
Would you like to see all crosswalks, all walk crosswalks at other pedestrian heavy
locations within Denton, two thirds said yes, 25% no, and then this, the 8% was, it's kind
of a miss, there was a follow on question, but basically what we're talking about in
this question is, would you like to see these at other intersections where we've got high
pedestrian volumes, whether it be around UNT or TWU, anywhere we've got pedestrian volumes
that are significant enough to, we're really concerned about that, or we've got a long
crossing, or we're really concerned about getting the pedestrians across safely and
not having that conflict with the vehicles, whether they're turning left or turning right.
So with that, I'm not sure if any of you have had the opportunity to pass through any of
those intersections, but we would love some feedback or opinions or other input relative
to the question at hand is, should we retain this as a permanent operation or should we
terminate the pilot and revert back to having the vehicles and the pedestrians moving the
same time?
So I'll open up, I'll minimize this and I'll open up the floor for questions and comments.
Val, I believe Mr. King has a question.
Sorry, my screen hadn't popped up yet.
That's okay.
Go ahead, Rex.
This is more of a comment.
I have to use an electric wheelchair, occupational hazard of killing commies for mommy.
The new program where you have all intersections open for pedestrian traffic has greatly enhanced
my ability to get that electric wheelchair across the intersection safely.
There have been times where I've been in the intersection prior to this all intersection,
all stop situation where people were in a hurry and were making right or left hand turns
on red and I've actually been hit and they didn't hit me hard enough to kill me, but
it was a bit annoying.
So I, for one, am very pleased with this and I think it should be continued at intersections
where there are a lot of pedestrians.
I can't get out of the way of people when they turn like that.
They can't see me because I'm lower in electric wheelchair.
And so I think this is an enhancement and it's a safety issue.
Tom, then Beth, or John, I'm sorry.
I agree that they're safer.
And I think I'm completely blind, I've not met any of you yet, but I find those crosswalks
easier to cross and safer.
Now, if we can keep people from stopping on top of the crosswalk, then that would be great,
especially at Hickory and Locust.
But yeah, I think these new crosswalks, the new crosswalks set up is great.
Beth?
One, I apologize for my dogs, I can't work the mute button properly.
Two, I've gotten a lot of feedback from college-age kids and they say that they love the new system.
They're all for it.
They particularly would like to have the diagonals put in that we have talked about before.
But the comment that was the most striking was one said to me, "It's not just about
the crosswalks."
He said, "Pedestrians no longer lunge in front of our cars midway down the block trying
to beat the light cycle."
They were afraid of the light cycle, so they just try to jump out in front of cars and
run across the street.
And they said that that has cut way back.
Sonya?
Thanks, Val.
I'm looking at the feedback that was provided to us in our agenda on the feedback forum,
similar to what Beth said, a lot of comments about diagonal and making that a crosswalk,
making that time frame a little bit longer.
And so I didn't know how y'all were going to be using that feedback as I think the majority
of the comments were really positive.
And so I think keeping this would be ideal and expanding to other locations where there's
high pedestrian volume, but how are you going to be using some of this feedback and incorporating
that into more permanent designs?
Let me address that.
So our intention all along has been that if this is received in a positive manner and
the city council decides to make it a permanent operation, then we're going to come back and
add those diagonals.
What we didn't want to do, and because it's going to take some capital dollars, we actually
have to reconstruct partial portions of the corners, what we didn't want to do was create
that diagonal and then have the program not be successful and then not have that safety.
Basically you provided a crosswalk that we can no longer protect.
So that's always been the plan is if this is is permittized, if we continue to do the
all walk crosswalk, then we will come back with sidewalk dollars and create those diagonals
is that's going to help a lot of getting instead of having to make two crossings, you'll just
have to make one.
So yes, that is the plan and we are committed to that.
So as far as the like timeframe, some of the other feedback in the feedback form is increasing
the length of time, you don't anticipate the need to increase the length of time if you
add those diagonal crosswalks.
Exactly.
If we add the diagonals, the feedback that I saw, sometimes it's difficult for people
to depend upon how fast they're actually able to travel to make it across two.
So if we put the diagonals, it's actually a shorter distance, so we might not have to
increase the time, they may find that they can make that diagonal very comfortably within
the amount of time that we're providing.
Of course, we're constantly looking at opportunities to tweak it.
So when we when we do put the diagonals in, initially, we'll leave the timing as is, but
we'll constantly monitor and we may be able to shorten the time, because now you can get
across that intersection diagonally, you don't need the same amount of time that we were
trying to provide to be able to cross two legs.
So if you're crossing one leg, or you're making a diagonal, you may actually need less time,
we just don't know yet.
But we'll constantly monitor whatever direction we end up taking, we'll change those timings
as needed.
Yeah, sorry, lots of questions.
My other question is, again, looking at the feedback and me being a violator myself, I
know it was took a little bit of time to get used to not turning right on red, and be mindful
of that.
So what type of education did y'all use?
I know I saw some of the signs and those kind of things, but what do you plan on continuing?
Or did you see that decrease as time went on?
Well, so I drive through the square as often as I can, just to watch this pilot program,
and it has diminished significantly.
The turns on red, now, we still get violators, and we still get pedestrians that are crossing
without trying to activate the button, they just walk.
We'll never get rid of all of that, but we will continue the enforcement with PD, and
the social media on the website, and we'll continue the education process as long as
needed.
And it is a learning curve, and as people are now starting to drive again, they may
not have driven through those in a while.
So we still have, because we're coming out of the entire COVID, and people are starting
to go back, and activity is starting to pick up, we're going to have a little bit of that
learning curve all over again.
So we quelled a lot of it, and now people are going to be kind of new again, oh, I don't
remember that I can't turn right on red here, or left on red here.
So that education will continue.
>> What type of textual feedback will you provide for blind people on the diagonal crosswalk?
>> Could you repeat that, I missed the first part.
>> What type of textual feedback on the diagonal crosswalk will you provide for blind people?
>> Well, it will be the same as the other, the domes will be there, it will be the same,
we may actually do a, well, it's better to have it channelized, we have found.
So it's just going to be another accessible ramp that's pointing diagonally.
So you'll have, potentially have three ramps on a corner.
I don't like to lay down, where they lay down the entire corner, that doesn't give enough
direction as far as I'm concerned, and you're not lined up.
So it will be, and that's the construction that I talked about, we have to go back and
add those additional ramps, so they'll have the same treatment that the other facilities
do.
>> John?
>> I agree with you about the corners not being fully flattened, that's very difficult
to figure out which direction to walk, and if there's any way, since we're talking about
the crosswalks, to have any other textual thing, maybe along the sides of the crosswalks,
that would be great, it's not the truncated dome that's necessarily as large as it is
on the ramps to the crosswalks, but I know there are countries with textual stuff within
the crosswalk that have to blind out tremendously.
We try to walk straight, but it doesn't always work out.
And we can certainly look at options, again, if we're going to initiate a construction
project to create those new ramps, we can certainly look at options to address the crosswalks
themselves.
It may be something that we want to incorporate as a standard on an all-walk crosswalk, or
maybe all-crosswalks, to see if that's an additional, tactile reference for pedestrians.
Beth, you're muted or I'm mute.
I just wanted to mention that when we first were learning about the all-walk crosswalk,
we talked about the initial pedestrian delay that they had been using, and one of the things
we talked about was adding that initial pedestrian delay to every crosswalk in Denton, because
we didn't see any reason not to.
Correct.
You're talking about what we call the leading pedestrian interval, where the walk sign comes
up five or six seconds, and we're installing that, we are.
It's taking a little bit longer than we thought, we got pulled in some other different directions,
but that's still our plan is to, wherever we've got pedestrians, we're going to have
that leading pedestrian interval.
Okay.
Thank you.
Yeah, that's still the plan.
All right, great.
I just have one comment that's maybe a minor thing, just on the use of language of the
all-walk, perhaps change that to all traverse or all direction, so that the language is
inclusive of everyone.
How about the all-ways crosswalk?
That's perfect.
That was something that was, I don't know that we coined it, but it's out there in the
industry, and I hear what you're saying, and we can certainly wordsmith that title.
Yes, I have.
Mr. Chair, before we move on to the next item, I do want to make one quick comment.
One thing I don't think that Brian mentioned in his presentation is, and it was something
that's come up since the whole pandemic, was to try to figure out a way to minimize the
touching touch points there in some of those public areas.
And so there will probably be, and that is an item that was brought forward by some city
council members and some members of the community that was providing input.
And so what they'll be doing in addition to, and again, I don't want to speak for the committee,
but if you all do recommend moving forward with this proposal to maintain that is it
always a crosswalk, that we also look at the appropriate technology to, again, minimize
those touch points around the square.
And we're also looking at not just the square, but around those more highly pedestrian areas,
but certainly kind of get started with the square just because it is a high profile area
with a lot of pedestrian traffic throughout the course of any part of the year, any part
of the day.
So if you don't mind, Mario, I'm going to follow.
We are doing a pilot project.
It's not downtown.
We are testing some of this technology that is basically, it's a passive pedestrian detector.
So it's just a sensor that mounts on a pole above the crosswalk or the landing.
And our first location we're going to try is Riddell at 380.
That's a fairly high pedestrian crossing and it's a long crosswalk.
So one of the issues that we're trying to figure out how well that technology would
work around the square is sometimes people just dwell there on the corners and they're
not really ready to cross yet, but they're standing there and they're talking and they're,
so we're trying to figure out how sensitive we can make this equipment so we can really
just detect only those people who are ready to make that crossing.
So we are working towards that.
Okay, one more question, Beth.
When are you going to be testing that at Riddell on 380?
I, so we met about a month ago with the vendor and the pilot is at no charge to us.
So I think he said we were 60 days out, so probably another 30 days for them to get the
hardware and get it installed and start our test period.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
No other questions, comments?
That's your Brian.
So Mr. Chair, again, just like the previous item, we were just trying to get input from
the committee to recommend or not recommend to the full council on this program.
So just really just looking at consensus or shaking of nodding of heads or whatever you
all feel is comfortable.
I think there is consensus considering with all the comments and the minor.
Good deal.
Well, thank you very much.
Yeah.
Thank you, Brian.
Okay.
Our next item, CPD-20-016, receive a report, hold a discussion and give staff direction
regarding the 2020 debt mobility plan update with a focus on the one-way versus two-way
traffic analysis.
And this will be Brian Yon again, be bringing that presentation to the committee.
Okay.
All right, I've lost my mouse, so there we are.
Okay.
So I'm going to share my screen again.
Can you see that?
Yes.
Okay.
So, can everybody see that?
Yeah.
Okay.
There it goes.
Okay.
So, this topic has been brought about by a request from council to look at the conversion
of Elm and Locust and Oak and Hickory from one-way operation to two-way.
What are the impacts and how does that work?
So I changed the title of this.
I used to say one-way versus two-way, but there's not really a versus.
Both types of streets have their good points, their bad points, they both have their place.
It's really up to the community as to what type of street they want to have.
So basically what I want to talk about today is some of the characteristics of one-way,
some of the characteristics of two-way relative to pedestrians, congestion, mobility, et cetera.
So if you ask any two, sorry, this is my humor.
If you ask any two traffic engineers are two-way streets better than one-way streets, you're
going to get three answers, yes, no, and it depends.
And it's really that middle answer there that it depends.
That's what I want to focus on because it really does depend on the choices that the
community makes and their goals and what they want for their community.
So relative to goals, improve safety, that's always one of our top goals.
We always are striving to increase the safety of the intersections and the roadways in town.
Mobility options, how do we get all modes of travel better served?
Economic vitality, how can we serve our business stakeholders to the highest level?
Is that with a one-way street, is it with a two-way?
And then the last one is to decrease congestion.
This historically has been the traffic engineer's first thing as well, we need to decrease congestion.
But at some point, there are times when the tradeoff versus increased congestion is worth
the increase in safety or increase in mobility or economic vitality.
So it's really, it's always a tradeoff.
One of the ground rules of this particular study is that we are not reconstructing these
four roadways.
We're taking them as is, curb to curb, the pavement that's there, it's not going to get
any wider.
So that's one of our constraints.
So we're looking at how do we best purpose these roadways one-way or two-way?
So I'm going to start with safety and I'm going to start with pedestrians.
So on a one-way street, if you're crossing the main street and it's in one direction,
you only have to look one direction.
So that's kind of a plus.
Just as a side note, when I was at the city of Fort Worth, we converted the West Seventh
area from two-way to one-way and it's significantly enhanced the ability of pedestrians to cross
the street.
So with two-way streets, if you're crossing a, say if you took Locust and made it two-way
and you want to cross from east to west, well now you've got to make sure you look both
directions.
And to that end, if you're crossing a one-way street that's more than one lane wide, the
first car at the curb sees you as you step off the curb, it stops, but that second car
may not because you're now shadowed by the car that stopped for you.
So that's a definite detriment for pedestrian traffic.
They're not, with multi-lane one-way streets, you have this factor of basically invisibility.
On a two-way street, the same width, one lane in each direction now, both cars have a clear
line of sight to the pedestrian as they step off the curb, whichever direction you go.
One of the other things we look at as we analyze the safety of a given situation are the number
of conflict points.
So we look at pedestrian and vehicular conflict points on a two-way, one-way, and when you've
got a one-way main street, you've got literally half as many conflict points as if you have
a two-way.
So again, you've got cars now coming in both directions, you've got pedestrians that have
to look left and right.
So that's a very important factor that we look at is just the more conflict points we
have, that's a greater opportunity for crashes to happen.
So with the fewer conflict points, you have a lower crash potential, increased conflict
points, higher crash potential, and the key word there is potential because just because
you have more conflict points doesn't necessarily mean you're going to have more crashes.
One of the other characteristics of one-way streets are because you don't have that friction
of somebody traveling in the other direction, you tend to have the potential for higher
speeds and that higher speed leads to higher severity of crashes.
On a two-way street, you've got the potential for somebody to be traveling in the other
direction.
You've got a head-on traffic.
Somebody facing you, people tend to slow down, lower speed, more survivable crash, so the
severity of those crashes on a two-way street typically go down.
So I just wanted to throw up the little summary here.
This is the last 10 years of crash data from the state, and their database is filled or
created by all of the cities throughout the state submitting their crash reports.
So this is a fairly accurate depiction of the number of crashes on Oak and Hickory,
that's the top slide, and then Elm and Locust, and I apologize, but north would be to your
right.
So that on the bottom half of your slide where it says 219, that is Elm and Locust, those
two yellow lines, and that's University Drive 380.
So Oak and Hickory in the last 10 years, we've had 617 crashes, zero fatalities, but a hundred
and ten injuries.
Now, some of those injuries are severe and some are not.
On Elm and Locust, much higher volume roadways, higher speed roadways, almost 1,100 crashes
in that same 10-year period, two fatalities, and 362 injuries.
This is the kind of thing that we look at, we look at the hotspots.
If you look at on the bottom half of your screen, the 322, that's around the square.
So a lot of crashes around the square, and a lot of crashes on Elm and Locust at University.
Now, that's not saying it's because they're one way or not, but that does give us some
indication of the type of crashes, the number of crashes that we can expect.
Hey, Brian, can I stop you for just a moment?
Hey, Val, I believe I'm getting a word in my ear that I believe Mr. Rivas may have his
hand up, the virtual hand that you can do with Zoom.
I don't know if you need to just acknowledge Mr. Rivas to see if he has any questions before
we move forward.
Can you bring the presentation down, Brian, for just a moment, please?
Yeah.
You see everybody now, Val.
If you don't mind asking Joe if he has anything.
Joe, did you have a question?
Joe, we can barely hear you.
I don't know if you can bring your image up, please.
Okay.
I'm not hearing anything on my end either.
Mario, would it be appropriate if you had a question to use the chat just for accommodation?
Sure.
Yeah.
Certainly.
If he could, if that's possible.
What I'll do is I may touch base with our folks in manager DTV, maybe reach out to Mr.
Rivas via text or by call and see if there's some technology issues that's happening.
We can barely hear you, Joe.
Was there a question, Joe, or did you have some technical issues?
No.
Okay.
I may recommend if that's okay ... Well, I'm just ... Maybe we should ... If that's
okay with the committee, do maybe just take a five-minute break.
Would that be okay?
Just to make sure we can make ... I just want to make sure that if he's got some connection
problems, we can try to get those resolved for him before we continue.
That's fine.
Okay.
It is ... Again, you'll need to call us to recess, but it's 1-53, so could we just say
we'll be back online at two?
Is that okay?
Sounds good.
Okay.
We'll just take a quick break.
I apologize, but we'll see if we can get Mr. Rivas resolved on any technical issues that
he may be having.
We'll be back at two.
All right.
We're back from our recess.
Joe, did you have a question before we proceed?
No.
Yeah.
He does have a question.
I'm not sure if he already covered this.
It was kind of breaking in and out when we were on the computer, but he was wondering,
are they going to expand the frostbite program to other areas of Denton?
The all-way crosswalk and other parts of Denton?
Right now, the issue at hand was that the proposal or the presentation that was made
just a few moments ago for the committee, it was a pilot program that was initiated
late in 2019, and so the information was brought to the committee back last fall, and we're
now at the conclusion of that pilot program, and we were requesting input from the committee
to then bring it to the city council to either continue it as it was, as it was previously,
which had stopping at various intersections, or doing the all-way crosswalk as the pilot
program was in place.
So right now, it was just really the square area that we were considering.
Okay.
Thank you.
You're very welcome.
Anything else, sir?
No.
Okay.
Very good.
Thank you.
Thank you all for everyone's patience.
And if that's okay, Val, can I go ahead and allow Brian to continue where he was?
Yes.
Okay.
Brian, please proceed.
All right.
Thank you.
Let me share my screen again.
Okay.
So we were just talking about some crash data, historical crash data on the four streets
in question.
Again, higher volumes and higher crash numbers on Elm and Locust versus Oak and Hickory.
So the next item we're going to talk about is economic vitality, and basically this is
how do one-way and two-way streets either benefit or are they a detriment to the businesses
along them?
And one-way streets for visitors are much more difficult to navigate.
If you've ever visited a city and you don't know the one-way street pattern, a lot of
times it's easy to get confused and turn around and frustrated because you can see where you
want to go and you can't get there from here.
Two-way streets have the advantage of they allow access from both directions.
So you can turn left, you can turn right, you can travel east, west, north, south, and
it's much more friendly to visitors.
Other characteristics of one-way street, because you can only travel one direction, you typically
will have to, especially on the one-way cupboards like we're talking about where you've got
one in one direction and one street in the other direction, you'll have a little bit
farther to travel.
So if you look at, and I just picked Giuseppe's there on Locust.
And if you're coming from, in this photo, or this slide, north is to your left.
So that red arrow on the left-hand side of your screen is University.
So if you're coming down University with a one-way street system, you have to come down
Elm, cut across, come back up Locust, versus if it was a two-way, you're coming from University
and you simply turn left onto the new two-way Locust and you arrive at your destination.
So it shortens the travel distance, which is, again, another index that we look at of
vehicle miles of travel.
If you can reduce the vehicle miles of travel, you can reduce emissions and you have fewer
opportunities for crashes, so your conflict points are down.
It's just much more convenient.
Mobility options.
So what we want to talk about are bicycle, some transit, some deliveries.
How do our vehicles and our pedestrians and our cyclists move through these corridors?
So looking at bicycles, on a one-way street, you're going to need one bike lane because
there's only one direction of travel.
Typically, the bikes would travel with the vehicular flow, on a two-way street, since
you have two directions of travel, the expectation is that you have two bike lanes.
So that basically adds up to utilization of pavement and then that puts us into the area
of having to decide, do we want to put on-street parking, do we want to have two bike lanes,
do we want to have a bike lane on every other street?
And so it just becomes, again, that trade-off and that decision that we have to make is
how do we best utilize the pavement that we have.
So relative to deliveries, and I'm going to lump deliveries and transit in here because
they both have very similar characteristics.
They want to drive down a street, stop and unload or load, and then continue.
So on a one-way street design, like Elm and Locust and Oak and Hickory, where we have
two lanes in each direction, even with a bike lane, you have an opportunity for a delivery
vehicle or a transit vehicle to stop in a lane of traffic and still allow other vehicles
to bypass because you've got a parallel lane of traffic that's not being blocked.
So on a two-way street system, if we converted these two-lane streets to two-way, one in
each direction, that delivery vehicle now blocks the one and only travel lane that you
have.
So potentially, if there's significant oncoming traffic, motorists have to stop behind this
vehicle until he's ready to move on or until there's a gap and they can drive around.
Again, it's a convenience factor and it does lend itself to some safety issues because
you might get drivers on that two-way street that take a chance on getting around that
vehicle when there may possibly be a gap that's too small for them to make that movement
safely.
Another issue as we talk about mobility and how we use this pavement and how we keep that
all modes of traffic flowing, on-street parking, while it has a definite, you know, we need
parking and especially around the downtown area, some of those buildings were never designed
to provide off-street parking, so the parking occurs on the street, but again, we're working
with a limited pavement, we're not widening the streets.
So we may conflict between if we go to a two-way and we want two bike lanes, we may have to
lose some parking.
So again, that balance and that trade-off, we have to decide which is the most critical.
So decreased congestion.
And this is the one that most people will say, the traffic engineers, this is how they
rate a facility and that's how fast can I go and how many cars can I get down that roadway.
Two-way streets, because they don't have that friction of oncoming traffic and because you've
got twice the number of lanes in one direction, you can get up to 50% more cars, bikes, whatever,
more vehicles in that corridor than you can with two-way.
So that friction that you introduce when you have head-on traffic and people wanting to
turn left, which actually operates or acts very much like a vehicle making deliveries
or a transit picking up and dropping off passengers, it stops for a shorter period of time.
To make that left, you have to stop, wait for a gap, make your move, and the people
behind you have to wait as well.
So just because of that increased delay, we decrease our capacity on a two-way street.
One of the other elements that's inherent to a one-way street system is that it allows
much better progression because we don't have the turns.
All the turns from a one-way street, all the turns from the main street are free.
If you're traveling on locust northbound and you want to turn left, you don't have to stop
for anybody.
Same thing with a right turn.
But if you make that same street two-way to turn left, as we just talked about, you've
got to wait for a gap in traffic, make your move, and that basically takes away some of
the efficiencies and it doesn't allow us to have that progression.
This is all, again, from a driver's standpoint, but it's still something that we have to look
at, and what we don't want to do is make it so difficult to get down the roadway that
you get the driver in the road rage and people are starting to make some bad choices.
This is another impact of that same characteristic of a two-way street, when you have that additional
delay and the capacity is diminished because of the left turns, what you see is you get
people migrating from the primary roadway to parallel facilities.
Sometimes that's okay.
In the case of Elm and Locust, we've got Carroll not far away, you've got Bell, and in the
future you'll have a widened, improved Riddell.
That overflow is fine because those streets are designed to carry the traffic.
When you talk about Oak and Hickory, that's a much more residential characteristic neighborhood.
So when you push people off of those two roadways, Oak and Hickory, because you've introduced
this delay and some increased congestion and diminished capacity, you now have them driving
through people's neighborhoods, and that's not really where we want that traffic to be.
We want it to be on the roadway that's designed to carry that traffic load and where we can
make safety improvements to enhance the safety of the entire corridor.
So this is just an example.
I've got two slides.
One of the elements of our mobility plan, which this one-way, two-way conversation is
part of, was an analysis of the travel demand in and around Denton.
So we forecast 24-hour traffic volumes using software and our land use and comprehensive
plan, and we try to forecast future volumes, and they did a scenario.
This is as is.
This is one-way Elm, Locust, Oak, and Hickory.
And then the next slide is two-way Elm, Locust, Oak, and Hickory.
So if you look at the green number on the top, Elm and Locust, north of the university,
it dropped between the two streets.
It dropped about 11,000, and you can see that Bell picks up part of that and Carroll picks
up part of that.
So that's okay.
Those roadways, at some level, are designed to carry that traffic volume, especially Carroll.
So that's not so much of a concern.
But when you look at Oak and Hickory, we've dropped 8,000 cars a day on those two.
Just because of the number of -- if you think about those two streets, you've got so many
residential driveways, there's a lot of increased delay and increased congestion, because of
-- just because people are coming home and turning into their driveway or turning left
on a street, you've got two-way traffic now, so we introduced a lot of left turns.
The downside is that those 8,000 cars are now in the neighborhoods.
There's no significant facility east-west until you get down to Eagle to carry that
displaced traffic.
So that's -- again, that's the intent of the slides to show you what might be diverted
from the primary corridors that we have today.
In the future, if we make those two-way, that traffic is going to go somewhere.
If it has too much delay on those two streets, Oak and Hickory, it's going to end up in the
neighborhoods.
So this is one of my last slides, I promise we'll get to the end.
Just a quick summary of parking.
We talked about it may conflict the bike facility.
One of the things we looked at, or flexibility, parallel parking offers the best flexibility
when we talk about the conversion from one-way to two-way, because it doesn't matter what
direction the traffic -- you parallel park on the left, you parallel park on the right.
Parallel parking is nondirectional.
Parallel parking requires much more of that pavement.
You get a lot more parking on a block face, but it eats into your opportunities for bike
lanes and turn lanes, et cetera.
And then this last comment, if a one-way road is converted to two-way, and this is specifically
around the square, we looked at where we've already got the -- the islands are designed
for directional, and now we're going to change it, we may lose without reconstruction, and
again, we're not talking about rebuilding these roadways, if we just remark that parking,
we may lose 5 to 10%.
So just a quick discussion of some of the impacts and some of the decisions associated
with on-street parking.
So a quick summary, one-way streets, higher capacity, less congestion, safer space for
delivery and transit, fewer conflict points, however increased travel distance, potentially
higher traffic speeds, and that leads to potentially more severe crashes.
Two-way streets, lower traffic speeds, severity of crashes go down, but because we've introduced
all these conflict points, the likelihood that the number of crashes will go up is very
high.
They'll be less severe, but you'll see more of them.
Construction of vehicle miles of travel, we've talked about that, it's much easier to get
from point A to point B if you don't have to loop around.
More convenient access to business and neighborhoods, just you don't have to know which street to
be on, you just need to know where you're going because you can now travel any direction
on any street.
Better visibility for PEDS cyclists as they cross because they don't have that shadowing
of the two-lane, one-way street, that first car stops and the second one doesn't.
Again, we talked about more conflict points, possible increase in delay and congestion,
possibly need double the bike facility, a little bit lower in the capacity, and that
last point, the potential for traffic to migrate to parallel streets that may not be intended
to carry traffic, or may not be where you want traffic to divert.
So just as we're going through a series of meetings, in June we met with the Main Street
Association, in July we met with Economic Development.
Most of the comments we're getting back are, primarily leave it as it is for now, a lot
of the business owners are concerned if we make them two-way and people divert and they
lose some pass-by traffic, but not a strong argument in favor of the conversion to two-way.
And so with that, and I've got recommendations and, but what we want today, as Mario said
with the last presentation, we want your input.
We're trying to get your feedback so we can formulate and summarize all the input from
the public and the committees, we're taking this on Monday to traffic safety, and then
July 28th, we'll package all of that input up, all the responses, and take it to city
council to see what direction they want us to take.
So right now I'm going to close this presentation and open the floor for questions and comments.
And there you go.
I'm sorry, let me give a good question and comment and I'll pass it on.
I think one of my concerns and probably the concerns of others is the changes and how
that would impact the existing accessible parking spots and the potential for adding
more, because that's definitely something that's needed, especially in the square area
where the accessible parking is very limited.
So my concern would be how that would impact that.
So no matter what direction we take, and I'm going to address around the square first,
we actually have a plan to add more accessible parking around the square.
We've looked at where the ramps are and we can add some spaces.
If we had to change the direction, we're still going to maintain the same number of accessible
parking.
Before we lose accessible parking, we'll lose some general purpose parking.
Now the impact it might have is that if you have to take away parking on a block phase
because you just don't have enough room to put all the features that you want, that might
reduce some parking that, while it may not be truly marked as accessible, it might reduce
the overall parking space.
Thank you.
Was it Sally?
Yeah, I'm going to speak as a cyclist, if you don't mind.
My experience is I find one-way streets much easier to navigate and much safer.
I've had more close calls on two-way streets myself.
I just wanted to throw my two bits in.
John?
I think two things.
The statistics may say things about two-way streets being safer in ways, but you're talking
about the square being area that's got a lot of bars.
I have no problem with that, but if you have two-way streets, you're welcoming more head-on
collisions, which will definitely increase injuries and deaths.
And then the pedestrian side of it, I find traveling in downtown cities or wherever with
one-way streets to be safer for a blind person because it's the flow of traffic one direction
all at the same time, you just have to pay attention to.
I hardly ever even need to find a crosswalk button because I just listen, and then that's
when I go.
So that's important.
So to that, John, if you'll remember, I talked about the West 7th area in Fort Worth.
It's a 12-block area.
There's over 40 bars, and our crash history when we converted it from two-way to one-way
dropped over 50%.
Well, what's the speed limit right there?
It's unmarked, so it's 30, but you can't.
When the bars are active, in that particular area, it's practically gridlocked.
Most of the crash history was coming after the bars were closed or during the day.
Well, around here, even on neighborhood streets, there are people that drive way too fast, and
I just like the one-way traffic better.
Thanks.
Beth?
You're muted, Beth.
No, maybe not.
Go back.
I'm sorry.
Maybe you weren't.
Hear me now.
Yes, ma'am.
Okay.
On the parking issue, some of y'all have heard this, but maybe not everyone.
It is not easy for a lot of disabled people to do reverse parking, and it is not easy
for disabled people to do parallel park.
If you're looking at parking options for handicapped spots, I would not recommend parallel parking
or reverse parking, because those can just be really difficult for people like me that
have arthritis in their neck and can't turn their head all the way and look, or if you've
got a scooter on the back of your car, you can't back up far enough.
That was my concern with the parking talk.
Agreed.
Parallel parking is all but impossible to mark as an accessible space.
Although we do have some, there's a couple of parallel spots behind the Wells Fargo building
that comes to mind.
Right.
Where we've got the pavement, we can make, and we have an area for the landing.
Yes.
I have a question.
Go ahead.
Is most handicapped parking free in all areas?
Yeah.
Did you catch that, Brian?
No, could you repeat that?
Sure.
The question is, from Joe, is all handicapped parking free in all areas?
Yes.
Even at the Wells Fargo Bank?
Well, if it's in the public right of way, it's free.
Yeah.
Basically, the answer is, if it's a public lot, it's absolutely free.
If it's a private lot, where they're charging fees to park, then you do have to pay.
Does that answer your question, Joe?
Yeah.
Okay.
Thank you.
Yeah.
Are there any other questions or comments?
So, Val, because again, you've got competing interest, not on this committee so much, but
as Brian mentioned, he has gone before a number of groups here locally.
Some of it is more business-oriented because some businesses are suffering, and so they're
wondering, "Why are you doing this now?"
Which we're not.
We're not looking at implementing this in the immediate term.
That's something that would be discussed with city council and then recommended to be phased
in in the future time, but you do have some competing interest in the community versus
those that want to make sure businesses are well-viewed by the commuting public when it
comes to two-way, but it sounds like from this committee's perspective, you all are
more concerned.
And again, I don't want to speak words, but you're more concerned about just the pedestrian
safety of being able to traverse the roadways there in the square, and you all would be
more inclined with a one-way option.
Is that correct?
I believe so, yes, from the comments here.
Okay.
Yes.
So, Brian, is that the input that you need, or is there some other components that you
need for...
No, I think that's just the general preference of one-way versus two-way.
Obviously, even if we did decide to go to a two-way option before we did any conversion,
we'd do a design and we'd, again, receive feedback on what elements need to be included.
So I think just the general consensus of one-way versus two-way.
Great.
Okay.
I think that's what we have.
We'll go on to the next item, the CPD 2018 staff report.
Sure.
And let me go ahead and I'll provide...
This will be more of a verbal report, if that's okay.
Just to make the committee aware, this will be my last meeting.
Actually, I'll be resigning to the City of Denton come early August.
I'll be assuming a new position in a different location starting in, I guess, sort of early
August.
So, hello and goodbye, all at the same time.
I know I've worked with you all early on on the early on in the committees, and I know
Mark Oliphant was a liaison for the last several months, and that transitions to that next
topic is replacing Mark, Mark's position.
Mark left the City of Denton towards the end of June.
And so we are in the process of replacing that position, and we're retooling the position,
just so you all know.
What we're looking at doing is creating a transportation/ADA coordinator that will be
specifically on the transportation side.
Now, as you all know, if you've been on the committee for a while, the city, because of
its size and scope, has basically three coordinators from an ADA perspective.
One is regarding facilities, which is our facilities manager.
And we actually have an architect on staff that has those skill sets.
I think you may have met him, but certainly we'll still maintain that.
We have one on the human resources side when it comes to interfacing with the community
in regards to our employment, any issues related to those kinds of things on the soft skills
kind of areas.
That's in our human resources.
When it comes to infrastructure, as far as trails, paths, sidewalks, the items that Brian
covered this morning, or excuse me, earlier today, and some of the areas that were discussed
by Jessica, those fall under engineering.
But what we're wanting to do is, because of this opportunity that we have with that vacancy
that Mark created, is to go down that path, kind of this next generation of employee skill
set.
And so what will happen with that is we're working with human resources to make sure
that the job description on our recruitment incorporates ADA expertise in the job description.
So it's not something that will be, certainly there will be opportunities for training and
seminars, just to keep those skill sets fresh and that continuous learning.
But the job description that we'll be recruiting towards will have those ADA coordination or
ADA skills through policy regulations.
All those components that are required under the ADA law, we want to make sure that that
is incorporated as part of that recruitment.
So that will be, we're working on that as we speak.
And so that will be forthcoming in the near future as far as when it comes to recruitment.
In the meantime, Brian Yahn, who you heard earlier, will serve as your liaison for the
near future.
This is not a permanent assignment, it's just a temporary thing until we actually bring that
person on board.
So I just wanted to keep the committee informed on that.
And then the last thing, and then I'll open it up for questions that you all may have,
is the last piece is, you know, this is certainly our first meeting in a virtual environment.
And as long as the governor along with and his authority across the state is allowing
cities and counties and other public entities to meet virtually, we would like to continue
that.
We've been doing this with city council for several months now, and we will continue doing
that as long as we're allowed to do so.
And so what I would like to ask of the committee is, do you prefer to do the virtual meeting
as you have had today, or is your preference to do something in person?
I would say for me personally, I think the virtual meeting just makes the most sense
right now, considering not just the circumstances, but the makeup of the individuals in the committee
as individuals with disabilities or immune compromise or underlying health conditions.
Okay, well, I appreciate that.
I mean, you know, knowing that the committee is an 11 person member committee, and we do
have sort of tight spaces anyway, being able to keep that social distance between, you
know, person to person, and just the logistics of being able to have bring folks under the
within a in person environment does make it more challenging.
So as long as the committee is is is okay with that, then we will continue to host these
meetings virtually.
And as long as law allows, we'll continue to do so.
And hopefully, it will get better with time as we get more experience in this in this
environment.
I think Sonia has a question.
It's okay.
Thanks, Val.
Just a quick question, do we anticipate increasing the frequency of the virtual meetings?
Because I know we have a long gap this during the initial stages of that transition.
So I didn't know what the timeline and what to prepare for.
Well, again, I don't want to speak for for the chair and the committee members.
But you know, I think we, you know, obviously, with the gap, that was just to kind of get
our trying to get things in order.
And so now we're kind of bringing these committees back into the fold all virtual.
And so the thought would be is to sort of maintain that once a month meeting, just because
it is a it's a it's a large lift for our staff.
You heard Billy Matthews earlier, speaking to Joe via phone, it is a large lift for him
and his staff, and he has a limited number of resources.
And so as we bring these committees in a virtual environment, it is it's it while it's it's
it just makes it more challenging because of just, you know, making sure that everybody
has the technology and the bandwidth at home or wherever they are.
And and not only the bandwidth for own staff.
So my suggestion would be that we do it on a monthly basis still.
But we make sure that that to be cognizant of your time and the cognizant of the time
for staff is that we are tighter on our presentations and our agenda items and that we make sure
that that those those presentation materials are to the point.
And that way you all can get the information that you need and ask ask the questions that
you need to give input as necessary.
That's going to be transportation slash ADA coordinator.
What percentage is transportation and what percentage is ADA coordinator?
You know, it's it's hard to say.
Certainly the job description will will dictate that it's that it's a 50/50 split it just
as far as just the the expertise and the and the needs.
But you don't know until you start recruiting to see what the actual skill set skill sets
that are out there and the just people that may apply.
And so certainly having someone that has a full cadre of ADA skills and and policy understandings,
it does limit the population that's out there that has that expertise just because it's
a very it's a very niche industry.
But but we are definitely interested in making sure that that person comes to the table with
those skill sets.
They may have it on paper, but then on the resume, but then when they go through the
interview process, we want to make sure that they have the requisite skill set so they
can hit the ground running and not be too new in that in that arena.
Thank you.
Welcome.
Vow.
Yes.
Good afternoon, everyone, and to you, Deputy City Manager, when the committee is formed
for interviewing selected applicants for the position, will you consider having our chair
or co-chair participate on that committee?
Absolutely.
We can certainly make sure that that's something that that's that's considered.
Yes, ma'am.
I'm Mario.
I'll be one say that I'll be sad to see you leave and wish you well on your new endeavors.
Well, thank you.
Appreciate it.
Yeah.
I do agree that the meeting should probably continue as once a month.
I think one of my questions and concerns is, as Mario mentioned, streamlining the processes
for putting agenda items on, making those suggestions.
The other one is making this format more accessible.
I know we talked about closed caption when we were live, but now that we're streaming,
that might be a concern that we have to to address.
I'm just writing those things down.
Are there any other questions or just for the concluding remarks?
Yes.
Beth.
No, I think I'm I'm sorry, Rex.
Beth.
You may be muted.
OK, better.
Yes, ma'am.
All right.
I feel like I'm preaching to the choir, especially since Mario's leaving.
But the committee was already behind when we started and all the city employees worked
really hard to get us to where we are.
And it was a steep learning curve just not just for us as a committee, but for the city
employees that really didn't know much about disabilities.
And I feel like we're still behind.
We haven't seen the ADA plan.
We haven't had input on the 2030 plan.
We're still addressing parking and bus stops.
And we haven't gotten as far as I feel like we should maybe.
Or better, we need to get better at working faster.
But I think we're now further behind because of the covid crisis, because Denton will have
a much larger disabled population when that crisis is over.
People that have recovered have decreased lung capacity, balance and walking issues,
amputations, brain injury, strokes.
The list is long.
And when you start looking at the number of handicapped parking spaces and walkable areas
in Denton, you really need to consider that you're going to have a larger and much younger
disabled population when this virus is over.
So if we started out behind, we need to catch up fast and start running forward.
And one way to do that is there's got to be a way for committees to communicate better.
It's like we're all working in our own bubbles and information's not being shared between
the committees.
So that was what I had.
Thank you, Beth, I'll kind of piggyback off a couple of those items, I think.
Being away for five months, I think there were some opportunities that were missed for
this committee to input on, especially in the navigation of a pandemic and how that
would impact our community.
The same goes for the social unrest and use of police force.
I understand that the mayor has a hand pick committee, but I would safely say that this
committee has a lot more diverse and more broad perspectives on those kind of things.
So I think what Beth said is true is making sure that this committee is at the forefront
of almost every issue that could come up, you can almost put a stamp on disability and
say how does this impact our residents with disabilities.
Well, let's take this to the committee and see.
I will share one thing, if it helps.
We are in the process, the city is in the process of doing some building renovations,
and so we'll be bringing those things to the committee for your input.
There's two buildings, or I guess really two areas in specific.
One is our public safety, we're renovating the police headquarters along with adding
the police substation on the southwest side of the community, and then our development
services building, which was a former day break facility just off of McKinney.
So that will be coming forward to you all for input in the coming weeks, months.
Are there any other questions or concluding comments?
Will our meeting date remain the same, the third Thursday?
I think so, I think that's kind of what everyone sort of already has penciled in.
So we'd like to maintain that schedule and at least get back to normal as normal, whatever
normal means now.
Exactly.
And John, let me welcome John, John's a new committee member.
Oh, well, I didn't realize, welcome.
Thanks.
Yeah, I just wanted to know, will we keep the same time slot also if we're doing every
Thursday still?
It's up to you all.
We're here.
We're already working so whatever committees wishes are.
Does this time not work for anyone?
I took off of work to be here.
I guess an after hours option would not be available.
At this point, it's not just because what we're trying to do is leave those time slots
for city council.
Those go, they meet weekly and they go long.
And so our, we're trying to as best we can keep those committees and other board meetings
during the work day, if at all possible.
And so Ali, maybe it's something that maybe working with Becky Owens, we can maybe try
to find an amenable time that might work for you or again, my hope would be that the most
that the committee meets, again, if you're meeting monthly, try to keep the meetings
to about an hour and a half, no more than two hours tops, because just at some point,
you know, you just, people just lose steam and they've got other things going on.
So that's why I'm very, you know, key on keeping those meetings pretty, those, those topics
tied and the presentations on point to get people in and out.
I agree.
Becky, do you have your hand up?
If you all could just share an email with me on a preferred time or a preferred day of
the week, keep in mind, I'm working with 27 other public meeting committees for time slots
between eight and five.
So what we tried to do for this particular meeting was keep it on the same third Thursday
of the month, but we may have some wiggle room in the time slot.
So please share your or voice your opinions.
It's best if you could share those individually to me in an email.
So then I can just juggle everything and then perhaps throw out some options on availability
for the coming months ahead.
All right.
Any other final thoughts?
Anyone I want to make a motion to close the meeting?
Any seconds?
Great.
Well, thank you everybody for joining us.
Thank you Mario again for being with us and our speakers and we'll see you guys next month.
All right.
Take care everyone.
Good, good meeting.
Thank you all.
Have a great one.
It's been a pleasure working with you.
Absolutely.
Best to you. Bye-bye. Bye-bye now.