Welcome, everybody, to the Transportation Advisory Board for the City of Langmont on the 8th of August. This is a call to order. We will go to roll call. Taylor Wicklund, Liz Osborn. I'm here. Patrick Hinterberger. Present. David McInerney. Present. Steve Lainer. Present. Next item on the agenda is our 2022 election of officers for chair and vice chair. I'm going to let Phil Greenwald handle the nominations and the counting. Sometimes people disconnect that stuff. Again, Phil Greenwald, Transportation Planning Manager with the City of Langmont. Just wanted to let you know, we do need to do election of officers tonight. And so we are looking for nominations for chair and vice chair. So if you'd like to, we can start with nominations for chair. Is there anybody who's interested? And we'll put their name in the hat, or we'd select someone else. In recognition of his admirable work as vice chair, I nominate Steve Lainer to become chair of Langmont's Transportation Advisory Board. Are there any other folks that would? I just wanted to second that nomination. Sounds good, thank you. Is there any other nominations as the time is still open? Wait with that, we'll close the nominations and go to elect with only one person out there. So, all in favor of Steve being the chair, Steve Lainer. It's unanimous. Thank you very much. We'll take any nominations for vice chair at this point. Do you want to throw their name in the ring for that one? Yeah, I would like to, ooh, a little close. I'd like to nominate council person Osborn for vice chair. I guess at this point we'd like to see if you accept the nomination. Anyone else? I would accept the nomination. Wonderful, anyone else? But that will close nominations and accept a motion for Liz Osborn to be vice chair of the TAB. A motion, a second would be great. I'll submit that motion that Liz Osborn be elected vice chair of the board. I'll second that motion. All in favor, I'm taking Steve's spot because he's officially chair as well, so sorry Steve. That's fine, Phil. Everybody voted as in the affirmative. So congratulations vice chair. Okay, with that done, we'll move on to the approval of minutes of the preceding meetings of both June and July. Can I get a motion to approve, or I should first ask are there any questions or comments about the prior meetings? As staff, we just want to make the comment that even though if you were not at the meeting, you can still vote in the affirmative to approve the minutes. You just can't make any amendments to the minutes. So just to be clear on that because we had a little issue last time, thank you. No, thank you, Phil, for the clarification. So any comment on the minutes? I have a few editorial comments on the July minutes. The first would be on page four, the third bullet item, sidewalk rehab. And under that, the fourth open bullet should read right of way, three words rather than right away, two words. On page six, the fourth bullet item cost strategies. Beneath that, the second open bullet spell bus with just one S. And finally on page nine, second paragraph in the last line, the last line should contain the word youth, Y-O-U-T-H, not U, Y-O-U. And that's it for my comments. Thank you, Council Member McInerney. Any other comments or anybody else? Okay, can I get a motion to approve the minutes from both the June and July meetings? I move that we approve the minutes for both the June and July meetings. And can I get a second? A second.  Perfect. Okay, we will move on to communications from staff. Phil, I'll hand it over to you. Wait, first of all, I just wanted to let you all know that we received Joe Long's resignation this afternoon. He has a number of personal issues going on right now. So he has officially resigned from the board, effective immediately. So we forward that onto the city clerk and we'll wait to hear what she has to say about the future of that position and when we need to fill it. So as you know, we just went through the process not long ago, we have two new members and that happened in July or that started in July. So we're interested to see what the next process is gonna be and we'll let you know how that goes. Second, just wanted to have Caroline Michael come up. She's one of our civil engineers and have her explain or just give you a little update on the traffic mitigation program as there's a number of things happening this summer on that. Hello. I just wanted to give you an update on where we are on the traffic mitigation program because I know the board has expressed interest before. We currently have an ongoing project on Gay Street from Mountain View to 17th. The most recent meeting we had on that is I met with some folks in person in the 1300 block which is north of Mountain View. I'm about a proposed speed table near some of their properties and kind of gave them the opportunity to voice their yay-nay about that. So see if we need to move it if we need to which it looks like we might wanna end up doing that. So the next part in that process will be to, our process calls for a second public meeting where we present the final proposal and then it goes to a neighborhood vote. Other than that project, we have received a few more applications like this summer for future projects and I don't have the full list in front of me but that includes Bowen Street, 3rd to 9th, Missouri Avenue, Renaissance Drive, Maxwell Avenue, Redmond Drive, Eastwith Avenue and I think I'm forgetting the last one but those are still in the data collection phase so we haven't made like any calls about whether or not we're going to move forward with those to like physical mitigation or even if we can or how many you might be able to manage because it does become a constraint with time and budget. So that was all I had. Thank you very much. Next we'll have Ben Ortiz come up and just talk a little bit about the zero fair for better air in August campaign that's going on. Thanks Ben. Certainly, thank you Phil. My name is Ben Ortiz, Transportation Planner. So as many of you may know, the months of June through August are Colorado's high ozone season and so in anticipation of that, the Colorado Legislature passed Senate Bill 22-180 which is for programs to reduce ozone through increased transit. So SB 22-180, it earmarks approximately $58 million and with the intention of providing 30 days of new or expanded transit services throughout the entire state of Colorado for those transit agencies that are interested in applying. So RTD, our local transit provider, they are implementing the zero fair for better air program and their intention is to incentivize transit ridership and with that all transit services throughout the RTD district, including local bus, express, regional and sky ride service as well as light rail service, they will all be free to all riders throughout the entire month of August. And so RTD is not the only one participating. I did look at the list of transit providers that have taken advantage of this application and there are many all over the state. And that concludes my presentation. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer those. If I can. Any questions for Ben? Looks like we have one. Yes, thanks for the presentation, Ben. Longmont already provides free RTD service within the city. I guess by paying a lump sum to RTD, is that correct? Yes, that's correct. The city bought up the Fairbox Revenue for the local services and those are, those you can tell which ones they are there, the 323, 324, 326 and 327, as well as the flex ride service. Accessoride. Is it still? Okay, I am staying corrected, the accessoride service. Does zero fare for better air mean that Longmont will get a rebate of one-twelfth of that money? It's, I'll answer that real quick. Go ahead. We will not. It wasn't in our original intergovernmental agreement that we'd get those money's back but we are gonna negotiate for our next, our next IGA negotiation will likely include that sum in there as well. And I should just correct, the flex ride will be free under this program as well as the, and that's the colon ride service that RTD provides. Accessoride was always free. People don't really know about that but that's always been free. The local bus is also a part of that buyup that we have in actually Boulder County but sitting behind me tonight is integral in the pilot of that project. So without them, we probably couldn't have got it started but it did get the ball rolling. But also the bolts and then the LD3 that goes to Den, well goes to Broomefield is also free. Great, thank you. Mad, one more thing. So the city of Longmont will be rebated one-twelfth of what we paid for eco passes for the city employees for the next eco pass purchase. I had a quick question. How are we getting the information out of zero fare to the ridership public in general? Is it through just regular print media online stuff or is there a concerted effort to get that information out? Yeah, all of the above. I mean, there have been a number of stories in the print media as well as online. RTD has made a concerted effort to reach out to all their partners. We have internally promoted the program amongst the city staff as well as the public information office has engaged in outreach to all of the city using their various venues. Great, thank you. Really briefly I wanted to just chat a little bit about Caroline and I have been working on what's called the airport road project where we're working with Boulder County and the Colorado Department of Transportation to realign the section of airport road that's between the two sections of diagonals. So if you think about the Longmont bound, northbound diagonal or it's technically northbound but it's more eastbound and then the southbound or westbound diagonal to Boulder. There's a section of airport road that has two directions to right now. It's bi-directional today. In order to keep that operating safely and efficiently in the future with bus rapid transit we need to change it so it's all one way northbound and no southbound direction of travel on that. So we wanna make sure we get that out to the public that you know about it. We're trying to get it out to the public as well with Boulder County and CDOT's help to get that information out to the people that use that the most. It's kind of an interesting way of traveling because if you're going south on airport road to then go north on the diagonal it's almost like a U-turn but people are doing it and people do need to access Ogallala Road which is the county road that's across the highway there and that is a dirt road. But to whatever ends this is it really does save us a lot of money in the project and saves us probably more crashes. It's a safer situation to not have a signal on that northbound leg at northbound airport. So just a couple of things and if you want any more information about that please let me know and I'll send that out to you and we've got a lot more information on the traffic that's gonna be impacted and those kind of things but we wanted to get that out in front of you sooner than later. So just to let you know that that's happening. So any questions on that stretch or would you like to see the full report I can send that out to you tomorrow morning as well if you'd like the legal report if anybody's interested and kind of how many cars are affected. I'd like to see it. It's about 400 to 500 vehicles per day. If you consider there's 10 to 10 to 15 times more than that traveling on the diagonal but it gives you an idea of order of magnitude. That's not a lot of trips per day technically but it is people impacted. So we'll send that out tomorrow or tonight. Quick question as somebody who's used the dirt road to get over to north 95th. Is 95th part of the city of Longmont? In other words, I know that there's a small kind of community over there and I would imagine they're probably the ones who access that the most probably to get to some of the things either off of airport and otherwise. So I didn't know if you had any information. I should mention that there'll still be a write in write out for Oglala Road onto the diagonal. So people coming from Boulder will still be able to turn right and still access Oglala Road and people from Oglala will still be able to turn right and go north into Longmont. So that won't be affected but the other ways will be affected. But there are within, I think it's within less than two miles each direction. There are opportunities to make you turns on the diagonal. 95th Street technically isn't in the city of Longmont. It's in Boulder County. This whole section of street that we're talking about is actually in Boulder County as well and it's C dot controlled except for the signal which is the city of Longmont signal which is, so it's an interesting cross-jurisdictional thing that I don't think anybody knows about. We just maintain it, correct, sorry. We do not own it, we maintain it. Thanks, Jim. So that's kind of it for that one and I will send out that information to TAB later tonight. And I just wanted to finally do one last transportation. Oh, did you want to say? Oh, I wanted to say one more thing about transportation improvement program we've been talking about this almost every month now with this group. Just wanted to let you know that we did get approvals from the Southwest Weld sub-regional forum for our project on Countyline Road from 17th North to 66. I probably should have told Tom that because he's the project manager, but we did get formal approvals from that board but we don't have formal approvals from the Dr. Cogboard yet. So once we get those approvals then I'll be official, I'll tell Tom about it. So thanks for your time on those. If you have any questions about the tip updates too I'd be happy to take those but otherwise we've got a full program for you tonight. Three items on the agenda that will take a little bit of time but any questions so far? Yeah, we're gonna, I think number six is we're gonna do, we do have somebody from the public here to speak and then we'll jump into the information items if that's okay. So Steve Nix is here to speak. Thanks, my name's Scott. I'm sorry, that's okay. So I'd have to say it was 30 years ago but right now I was a TAB member. So I live at 10694 County Road one. So I'm on the east side of town. I've always lived on the east side of town. So we've back in the day we had issues with all kinds of different transportation things fact I was on the group that came up with sales tax and I'm so saddened by how it's morphed into something totally different than what we ever expected. You know, as well it became permanent and that was just nothing that the group envisioned. So I had a lot to say. I don't know much time I got but I don't know why I picked this meeting to come to. So much more official than meeting upstairs in a conference room, you know, when we used to do it. Of course we didn't have city council membership and it was always pretty low key but we'd have some people from the public show up and it's amazing how they got their stuff done by showing up to meetings. So I thought said it just calling into people I know at the city I'd show up and try to voice my concerns just to see if they're even on the radar. My wife's she'd been jumping me because there's no painting at the eco center for parking. And I don't know who you talk to to get them to paint parking spaces but everybody parks crazy when they're going to the eco cycle. So I thought I'd better bring that up. Maybe that'll help. The other thing is I think what fired me up was the painting on 3rd Avenue going eastbound. So I actually talked to Alden the city engineer that's in charge of the project and basically 80% of the people all go east but the way they've got it striped now they stripe it to go into that subdivision. So if you're in the right lane and you don't get in the left lane quick enough you end up getting shut off or getting over. So I talked to many people that end up going into that subdivision accidentally because they can't get over and get in that left lane to make the double turn. So I just wanted to bring that up. The other thing was is bike paths. The name of the name of these paths are bike paths, right? So why would they have a bike lane painted on the edge of the traveling? Because I would think that you would want to move the bikes off the travel lane onto the bike path. We don't have a lot of bicycle traffic on 3rd Avenue on the road itself from my experience and it just, the striping is quite different than it's been in the past. They give that three feet buffer. They painted it up and I think the old way was better. One of the other things, I mean 35 years ago when we worked on the sales tax one of the issues was overpasses over the railroad tracks. Now, for us that live on the east side of town we're always waiting for trains if you do anything on the west side. For people that don't live on the east side of town it's really not an issue. And I think politically you guys have so much power when it comes to persuading the public or elected officials. I didn't realize that when I was young because I was just learning. But if I could go back in time you would really use your position to get these projects in a sense they're more public generated than staff generated. Staff's got their own projects and for whatever reason and sometimes it doesn't line up with public. But I think overpasses on 3rd Avenue on Main Street, some of those when the trains are traveling faster like 17th or 66th you're not sitting there waiting as long. But when they're doing the switching and some of those other issues it's really a long wait. And I do know that I'm trying to think of the engineer Nick Nick was always working on trying to get a switching yard north of town. But you know, if we talk about it we never see anything happen. So it's actually, I mean it's been 10 years in talk. Probably, you know. So patients as I'm getting closer to that old age it's like this stuff takes forever anyway. But so, and then the other thing is Longmont's probably the only community that doesn't have four lanes going on 52 and 66. And of course everybody pushes it off to another jurisdiction. But I think politically I don't know everybody's been repairing bike paths and doing other modes of transportation whether BRTD or whatever. And they've just ignored the traveling public and the traveling public is what we deal with every day. So somehow I'm hoping that it's on you guys' radar. And if it's not, if you can give it some thought because it takes so much political will to get the other counties and state involved. And I know it's probably on the radar but the radar's gonna run out of batteries. So anyway, I think that was it. I have a lot of respect for you guys. I know it's a monthly meeting and you leave your families at home. My kids were little, you come to these meetings and you wonder what you're actually accomplishing but you really are making a difference. So I just hope that you get enough thank yous for your position. But I would say some of these things that they throw at you in my sense somebody else is telling them it's not their idea but if you guys are running the show so make it your priorities and I think they'll gladly deal with those. So anyway, thank you. Thank you Scott. We'll move on to the information items starting with the transportation operational budget review. Good evening, Jay Lanier and board members. I'm Jim Angstadt, Director of Engineering Services. This evening we wanted to provide you just some quick information regarding one of the components of our budget process. Tom Street and Ariel Rituda will be talking about the CIP Capital Improvement Program budget for 2023 to 2027 later. I just wanted to give you a quick overview of the operating budget. You can think of it in ways of the CIP is kind of what we do. The operating budget gives us the tools to actually do that. Kind of a general overall statement. But you'll see hopefully as this unfolds and I'll try to, it's only a few slides. Try not to hold up too much. I know there's a lot more on the agenda. Transportation funding for the most part comes out of our three quarter cent sales tax to serve the street fund. We normally in a year-to-year basis see about $22 million come into that fund mostly through our street fund sales and use tax. There's a little state highway use tax, automobile tax and miscellaneous dollars. Usually miscellaneous is some developer driven dollars as well as maybe some grants. So that changes from year to year. For our operating budget in streets in 2023, we're looking at around a $13 million budget. I've broken it out kind of some major items, administration, engineering, operations, traffic signals and the transportation system management kind of program. There's also a TSM item in CIP so I don't want to confuse you with that when Tom speaks about it later. This is basically the dollars we use to make things kind of go. So what are the budget items? Usually you'll see salaries, insurance, office supplies, safety expenses, uniforms, training and conferences, equipment, repair items, leases and rentals, telephones, materials and supplies, which is very critical and particularly in our operations group for items like snow removal. And then we also, a portion of our budget goes into the fleet budget because they are responsible for purchasing vehicles and then maintaining our vehicles as well. In general administration, there's an item we have in our budget. That's usually mostly salaries for the come out of the street fund for other employees who help and assist the street fund. It's usually at the director level. We see the, who is now the, I want to say the acting or interim deputy city manager used to be the public works director. He is, a lot of that is his budget salaries. There's some goes to communications and there's some parcels in land management. We also help to fund engineering. This is kind of, I think it's the brains of the outfit but Phil may question that statement. Transportation engineering, our survey and tech team, construction inspection. We have a team of inspectors who serve for our CIP as well as some of our development projects, street improvement and street rehab. Those are all coming out of the, that helps serve the engineering team for our work and then operations. These are the guys who are actually boots in the ground who do a lot of the field work. Street and alley maintenance, street cleaning, snow and ice removal. A large chunk of that is the materials they need to actually when they are out prior to storms and during storms. We do some concrete repair and then signing and pavement marking. There's quite a number of signs in the city. We have a program that goes through and looks for reflectivity in accordance with standards. We replace signs, signs get knocked over as well as every year we do in conjunction with some of our CDOT roads in front of from CDOT. We do refresh a lot of the pavement markings in town. Another item that falls under engineering, it's kind of between engineering and operations is our traffic signals. We have three staff members that serve that. We also have a lot of contracted services. We contract with a vendor who provides a lot of our maintenance with oversight from our staff. Equipment's a big number. We get a lot of, every couple of months one of our signal cabinets gets knocked over. We keep, basically we keep two spare cabinets year round so that if one's knocked over and damaged we can replace it almost immediately without loss of service. Utilities, supplies, fleet and repair and maintenance are other items that we include. Transportation system management. This is one, it's a little bit different in our operating because it has a large chunk of it as professional and contracted services. Salaries are noted there. Most of those dollars are for our crossing guards. We have a crossing guard program in conjunction with the school district that we have crossing guards at a number of crossings throughout the city during the school year. They work like an hour in the morning and an hour in the evening. And then our supplies, I noted that because that's what is assisting some of our bike programs. We buy some bike racks each year as well as our bike to work program and printing of bike maps. Bennett mentioned earlier, EcoPass. For every city employee we provide an EcoPass that runs at about $70,000. As indicated we will see a rebate for the month of August. Do's and subscriptions for some outside vendors we have as well as, and then going into our professional and contracted services. This is where our transit dollars are. We spend $150,000 to VIA to help support their program. Special event traffic control is for events in town. We cover those for help with LDEA on the events when we close Main Street or there's a parade. The flex bus coming out of Fort Collins is $138,000 a year. And then our free ride, which is RTD and the accessor ride runs over $500,000 a year. So this is just some of the dollars we wanted to provide. Show you kind of where another aspect of kind of what the city does with our tax dollars. That I'll open it up to any questions. Jim, what's the source or the sources of the operational budget? Where's the money come from? That comes from the, go back to the first, it comes into this out of the street fund, which is funded through the three quarter cents sales tax about 14 million. We get some statewide use tax dollars, about 2.8 million. Some automobile tax and then some miscellaneous dollars. Changes year to year depending on whether we get grants. That's where we'll see grants. Some of that dollars from this year is, I think we got an H-SIP grant, Highway Safety Improvement Program grants and then some C-DOT stuff. Thank you. I was wondering the new Colorado delivery fee. Will that change this funding next year? Where is that money going with that? 27 cents for every delivery. That is such an accounting nightmare. Phil says we'll see some of it. I hope so. I laid this out from 2022. We have not in our 2023 budget have programmed that in at all yet. So when we get more information on that, we can provide you an update. Hi Jim, thanks for your presentation. I was wondering, I got two questions. How does the 22.1 million compare with last year's budget? Secondly, since a lot of this comes from the sales tax, how does that coincide with the revenue projections for the year and is it going up by the same amounts and stuff like that? So when we program our budget, what we usually look at is a three to 5% increase in revenues as there's growth in the city. The three quarter cent sales tax hasn't changed from when it was originally initiated, I think in the mid-80s, I wanna say. But we've seen a steady increase of that as population grows, as we add commercial entities, you'll see that those taxes go up. So they factor that in and then we track it. So this is a projected budget. This numbers are actually what we saw in 2022. Those numbers would have changed as we saw those revenues come in. And I think Jim Golden, finance director, sends out a monthly report that notes the budget and the revenues that have been coming in. So we track that. Usually where our three or 5% that we note is usually well below what we see. So we're not at a loss later in the year. Did I get both questions? Do you recall about where last year's budget was? Are we in the 10% where inflation is or where do you think we are? So for operating, we really haven't seen, you don't really get it except for supplies that get hit with a lot of the inflation. The inflation we see is sort of in our CIP when material costs going through the roof. But in the operating budget, it hasn't impacted it nearly enough. And then we always put in a little bit of factor of safety in some of our budgets. So for this year, we usually see about 20 to 22 million coming in revenues. And then as I indicated, of late, we've, I think last year we had about $12 million operating budget. Next year is gonna be 13. So that's what we're seeing, some of those increases. Great, if there are no more questions, we'll move on to Boulder County's US 287 BRT phase one and support of recommendation. So they're going to do their presentation on the BRT project and have a question for you for your support at the end. So with that, I'll turn it over to Kathleen Bracky who is the director of, and I always forget it. Kathleen Bracky, I'm the deputy director for Boulder County's Community Planning and Permitting Department and lead our transportation planning team. And with me tonight is Jeff Butts, our transportation planner from Boulder County and he's the project manager for our US 287 corridor planning. I wanna say a great shout out to Phil for all of the work that we get to do together with the city of Longmont and Boulder County. None of the projects we work on together would be possible without these partnerships and all the work that we do side by side working on all of these different projects. And while this evening we're here to talk specifically about the corridor planning for US 287, we work together on all of the different corridors and safety and bicycling, pedestrian and transit and the list goes on and on. So I just am very, very thankful for the work and the partnership with Boulder County and the city of Longmont and working with Phil. So thank you. And I think that's a good example of how we got here with the US 287 corridor planning process. This project came about through the Northwest Area Mobility Study that we, our communities all worked on together over the years and it's really been a planning partnership with Boulder County, city of Longmont, Erie, Lafayette, Broomfield, RTD and the Colorado Department of Transportation and commuting solutions. We do a lot of work together with our local agency partners as well as commuting solutions, our Transportation Management Association for this area. But what's also unique about the US 287 process is that we partnered with the communities to the north when we look at city of Loveland and city of Fort Collins and there's many reasons for that but really it comes down to how people travel. People just need to get where they need to go. They don't think about what geographic boundary they're crossing or what jurisdiction or what county they're in for that matter. They just wanna get where they need to go and so this multi-agency partnership was really an example of that, of trying to focus on where do our customers need to go and how do we work together across our agencies to figure that out. So it's been a lot of great work together. We can go to the next slide, Jeff. Great, so if you wanna take over from here, if you want me to, I can get a little bit more background on this but again, I think many of us know what we're facing on 287, the traffic congestion, the safety concerns and our air quality issues and we know we're facing a growing region. We have more and more people traveling along 287 for more trip types and purposes. It was interesting in Boulder County, we just updated our transportation plan back in 2020 and the highest growing area of trips between Boulder County, it was Larimer and Weld counties. So yes, there's lots of trips that are continuing between Boulder County and the Denver Metro area. The growth area for us is in this area. So I think with that Q, I'm gonna turn it over to Jeff to take it from here. Great, thank you, Kathleen. Thank you, members of the Transportation Advisory Board for having us here. Thank you, Phil, for your continued partnership and great ideas and he has a keen eye when it comes to this and he's always looking out for the community here. So thank you, Phil. Building off what Kathleen said, this area is not only growing but it is expected to grow faster than the entire region at 75% versus about 50%. And so with that, we look at the slides here and we can see that the population is along 287 and when we look at the US 287 transit route, people aren't getting there by car. Fewer than 20% of people are getting there by car. Most people are getting there by transferring from another bus or they're walking or bicycling to it. As Kathleen mentioned, this came from the Northwest Area Mobility Study which was another large study done back in 2015. RTD led the charge on and it created a network of routes that you can see on the map that really help people get to and from everywhere that they want to go. And after that, there's been a lot of planning that has happened including a couple of plans here in Longmaw, the downtown plan and then the Main Street plan. So we looked at those and we took those into account and now we're moving into the Bus Rapid Transit Plan. And so talk about first off, really what was our objective and what we were trying to achieve? And so as Kathleen mentioned, and as we all know, people travel beyond jurisdictions and that is an important feature of this region. And so we looked at connecting services with transit from Fort Collins into Denver and then we had a core area where we were looking at transportation, the transit and then also capital investments in the roadway between Colorado 66 and North Longmont and then 36 at Bermfield. We had a lot of community engagement including coming to the Transportation Advisory Board a while ago, probably have some new, in fact I know we have some new members now. I spoke with some of them back then and we also talked with technical staff, members of the public, elected officials and we heard a lot of themes come from the public and from the technical side of things and the elected officials, which you can see here a lot of it beyond transit. There was safety, there was connectivity, bicycles came up and so there was a lot more than just the transit on this corridor that people were talking about. And so focus is right now on the transit and what we did, first thing that we did was we looked at the stations and we developed the stations area toolkit on that's applicable elsewhere and it includes four different areas. It includes intersections around the stations themselves. It includes multimodal connections such as like bicycling, bike parking, long-term bike parking, the stations themselves and making them comfortable, some enclosure, signage, where you wait. There's a whole lot of ideas in this and then finally building up to placemaking and transit-oriented development which is which I'll build too. And this map shows the recommendations. It could be a little bit confusing. It's sort of like a subway map. The north is on the left and so that's where Fort Collins is at and the real thing I wanna highlight here is that there's a long route from Fort Collins into Denver which is really an express route with limited stops and then there's the core BRT between North Longmont and Broomfield 36 station and then there is the shorter one between Lafayette and Broomfield. There's a hospital there and so there's excess demand and these layer on top of each other to get, you're looking about 15, 10 minute intervals. Here's what we were looking at for this area and then we looked at different capital investments.  This is where the demand is after the routes but what about the capital? First thing was do nothing at all. Next thing we could do is operational improvements and do nothing but operational modifications and then after that we look at the stations and look at the intersections and then finally bus or the bus and turning lanes or battalines, business access and transit. These were modeled scenarios. It's not necessarily an implementation plan. So Longmont may wanna go with battalines prior to doing intersections or these were the modeled and so to walk you through the data here we looked at the morning, we looked at the night, we looked at the northbound and southbound directions here and then we found the baseline travel time for the bus and then we found that we could significantly reduce the travel time by optimizing the operations of the route itself and then once we get into capital investments we see that we are able to reduce the travel time even more and more and with that we see increased ridership for the operations side of things we're looking at just under 4,000 is what was modeled to give you an idea of scale that's just under triple what there is right now and then as soon as we get up into capital investments the bus starts going even faster and it becomes more competitive form of transit transportation for people to use and so we see more people using it looking at the different routes within here that blue again is the long route from Fort Collins to Denver the red in the middle is the core BRT between Longmont and Broomfield and then you can see the Lafayette to Broomfield portion at the bottom there the largest section of ridership is really coming from that express service into Denver that drives a lot of the ridership which I'm sure you're all aware of that's a lot of people going there looking at the costs here when we do the operational costs that's changes there's no capital expenditures and so that's operations and maintenance only and then we get into scenario one which again with stations and intersection improvements and we're looking around 180 to 200 million in 2021 dollars and then scenario three where we do the stations, the intersections and then include the bus and turn lanes, bat lanes we're looking 215 to 230 is the estimate there an important thing to call out here this is the operations that I put below here and the reason I put it below here is because it shows that as we make one time investments in capital it reduces the ongoing operations that means we have to have fewer buses, fewer drivers fewer hours of service paid out looking at the next steps as I mentioned at the top we are continuing to move along would it be opportunistic looking at multiple different opportunities to implement this so there could be some going in in Longmont some going in in Boulder County some in different areas as opposed to rebuilding the whole highway at once so it'll be a phased approach and try to meet multiple objectives we met up top safety that came up huge and bicycling came up huge it was just consistently talked about so much so that it's led to a phase two that we didn't know was gonna happen when we started what's now phase one the BRT feasibility study and phase two is vision zero safety and multimodal mobility so how do we reduce crashes looking from on US 287 from the county line to US 36 we're gonna have funding partners of course Longmont is part of it so thank you City of Longmont for your continued partnership the emphasis of course will be on safety for people whether they're driving, walking, bicycling getting to from the stations and then we'll be following a federal planning process that way we get ourselves set up for those federal dollars and the recommendations from this study we'll feed into that next study and so we'll look for overlapping projects where we can find some win-win so that's the overview that we have if you want to go to the website it's boco.org slash 287 planning if you wanna stay up to date boco.org slash 287 news and with that open it up for discussion and Philip I believe you said this was an action item where we're asking for support to continue on this process for towards federal funding I forget how you wrote it Philip yeah the recommendation the staff recommendation is listed in your packet it's listed as provide general support to the 287 BRT phase one plan and support the continuing planning work needed to bring federal dollars to this corridor and so I'm happy to take any questions I have a couple kind of a question on the BRT and how we're gonna be able to decrease I should say increase safety with the traveling public not really being familiar with BRT kind of protocols and methodology with the buses is there gonna be a fairly long term let's say education plan for the commuters because you're still gonna have obviously cars on this corridor and as we all know some of them are gonna speed up and do other things to try to get in front of a bus when even a bus has a dedicated lane and or these these battling I was just curious if you guys have done either any modeling on that or has there been past studies on this to kind of talk about the safety value on that thank you for the question on travel behavior I believe and how do we educate the public and this is exactly why we're here is to hear from you and to listen from you and that will be an important part when we get into implementation and that'll be something that I think everybody will need to work on together and individually so that's a really important point that you bring up thank you for bringing that up and then the last other question that I had was in regards to I saw the termination down in Broomfield and obviously points along has there been talk about last mile providers as it relates to again coming from let's say you're at a station let's say in Longmont and you either electronic scooter, electronic bike and David we've talked about the having Uber drop off those sorts of things is that also something that's part of this plan? Again, great question and you're thinking along the lines of where we are and the questions that came up as we moved along and the one thing that we did in this plan was we developed that stations area toolkit that looked at the safety between getting to and from the stations themselves and the intersections because the intersections is where it's really important for predictability as far as the rest of your question we're moving that into the phase two study and so that's going to really highlight safety for all users and that's going to highlight as well those connections into the stations and into different areas where people may go and including bikeway connections trails were mentioned earlier so those are things that came out of this study that we've learned that we need to look at more that's what we've heard from multiple people so thank you for your question. Chair, thank you chair or ex chair or chair now. Any other questions from the board? Okay, thank you. Thank you. Appreciate that. There's an action item. There's an action item Phil. The board would so entertain the staff recommendation to again that's to provide general support to us to be seven BRT phase one plan and support the continuing planning work needed to bring federal dollars to this corridor so you can or you don't have to but we should ask for a motion I suppose. I move that we provide support for continued study on this. I will second that motion.  Okay, we'll move to comments from board members and we'll start down. Oh, I'm sorry, I jumped ahead. I apologize. Oh, the CIP. Chairperson Lainer, members of TAB. My name is Tom Street and I work within the Public Works and Natural Resources Department and tonight I'm here with Ariel Ratuda and we're here to present the city's proposed 2023 to 2027 CIP as it relates to transportation projects. As far as tonight's format, we're gonna start off with some background information on the city's CIP process. We'll move into presentation of the projects and then at the end of tonight's presentation we're gonna be asking TAB for recommendation. There's gonna be two options. Option one would be recommendation of the CIP as presented by staff. Option two would be recommendation of the CIP as presented by staff but with revisions as recommended by the TAB. As far as the city's CIP process, first and foremost, our CIP is a planning document. It identifies the city's capital infrastructure needs over the next five years. A capital project can be different types. We could have a new project. We could have a project that replaces existing infrastructure and we can have a project that modifies existing facilities. Our CIP identifies met and unmet needs in that projects are grouped as funded, partially funded or unfunded. And it's important to note that our CIP is a dynamic document. It changes each year in response to changing city-wide priorities, changing funding levels. One other item to note is that even though our CIP is a five-year planning document, the expenditures, the budget, is only approved one year at a time. So when city council meets this October to approve budgets, to approve our CIP budget, only the 2023 expenditures will be approved at that point. Staff uses a variety of information to determine which projects go into the CIP. At the highest level is Envision Longmont. This document has dedicated sections for transit needs, roadway improvements, pedestrian bike needs. At the next level, staff will use a variety of master plans and studies, such as the 2014 Longmont roadway plan. This plan identifies the various arterial and intersection needs throughout Longmont. We also use asset management plans on a regular basis. We have a five-year pavement management plan that identifies pavement rehabilitation and pavement preservation needs for the next five years. We also have detailed bridge inspection reports we receive every two years. And these reports help guide our improvements needed for our bridges within town. And of course, funding is always a constraint when selecting projects. As Jim mentioned, we have our most critical funding source in the city, is our three-quarter cent street fund sales and use tax. And we have two funds in Longmont that are dedicated to transportation needs. We have our street fund and TCIF, our Transportation Community Investment Fee. The street fund was originally set up in 1986, and it was set up to maintain and improve Longmont street system. At that time, it required renewal by the voters every five years. And through the years, it had been extended six times until 2019 when this tax was extended permanently. Our TCIF, Transportation Community Investment Fee, this is a fee that, per our municipal code, can only be used on arterial street and intersection improvements. And this fee is levied on new construction, and these fees are collected when building permits are issued. But again, when it comes to the most critical revenue funding source for transportation in Longmont, it's a three-quarter cent street fund sales and use tax. In 2023, we have a variety of projects. We have asset management projects. We got projects that will improve our intersections. We have roadway capacity projects. We have bridge improvement projects. We have many different types of multimodal projects. We got projects that will improve our sidewalk systems, our multi-use paths. We got projects that will improve our bicycle infrastructure. We also have projects that will construct pedestrian underpass improvements. As far as the total appropriation needed in 2023 for these projects from the street fund, it's coming in at about 21.6 million. And tonight's staff will be presenting information on these projects. Our first project we wanted to talk about is TRP001, our Pavement Management Program. Each year within this program, there are five, six, maybe seven different projects. This is a city-wide asset management project program. It's a program where we contract out all of the construction needs, all of the construction services. And projects can range from concrete repair, concrete rehabilitation to pavement preservation needs such as crack ceiling and chip ceiling. And to the lower right, we have some of our goals for this program. We want to optimize city resources in a fashion that meets our needs in the lowest long-term cost. We want to make data-driven decisions. We use automated data collection methods to collect our pavement data. We use pavement management software to help guide the selection of pavement projects within this program. And one of the most important goals for staff is to build credibility as good stewards of public resources. Asset management truly is a cornerstone responsibility for staff. We have over 355 centerline miles of roadway in Longmont. And the lion's share of maintenance and rehabilitation for our entire street system, our entire transportation system is completed within this program. TRP11, our Transportation System Management Program. Again, this is another yearly program. And within this program, we design and construct a variety of improvements. We have improvements that will improve safety. We have multimodal improvements. We may install traffic signals with this program, alternative mode projects, intersection projects, projects that would improve high-accident locations. So a lot of different type of work and projects is completed within this program. In 2023, we plan to move forward with our Sunset Street and State Highway 119 project. This project has two primary components. We have an intersection component. And we also have a road diet that will be implemented on Sunset Street from Kansas Avenue up to Nelson Road. Also in 2023, we have two alternate mode projects on County Line Road. The first project on County Line Road will be from 17th Avenue up to State Highway 66. We plan on widening County Line Road to accommodate on-street bike lanes in each direction. And currently, we expect that we'll be in the design process for this project for all of 2023. Our second project on County Line Road will be a similar project. It'll make improvements to County Line Road from Slate and Drive to the St. Vrain Creek to accommodate on-street bike lanes in each direction. And we expect this project will go to construction in 2023. TRP 92, our Boston Avenue Connection Project. This is a project that's located at Boston Avenue and Price Road. This project will provide a new East-West arterial connection within the city. This project will not only improve connectivity for vehicles, it'll also improve connectivity for pads and bikes. This project will support BRT as Boston Avenue is a preferred route that will provide connectivity to the future transit station at 1st Avenue and Main Street. Probably the most critical aspect of this project is the coordination that is needed with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. In order for this project to move towards construction, we need to have approval from the Colorado PUC for the proposed new act grade crossing with the railroad tracks. Current status is we're in the design process. In 2023, we expect to wrap up the design process and acquire all needed right away, which would clear this project to go to construction, assuming we have PUC approval in 2024. One of the goals of Envision Longmont is the need to identify missing sidewalk segments throughout the city and to fill those gaps. TRP is one of our projects that will help fulfill that goal. This project will design and construct gaps in our sidewalk system, but also this project will rehabilitate and reconstruct existing sidewalks throughout Longmont. In 2023, our focus is gonna be on the relatively large 17th Avenue sidewalk reconstruction effort. This project will replace the deteriorating asphalt sidewalk along the north side of 17th Avenue from Cook Court to near Lincoln Street. Currently, this project, the design has been completed. We've made significant progress on the acquisition of right away needed for this project. And in 2023, we expect to go to construction. At this point, unless there's questions, I'm gonna hand it over to Ariel Rituda. Thank you, Tom. I'm Ariel Rituda. I'm a civil engineer that works in Tom's group. So moving right along, we have TRP 122 Hover Street improvements. This project came straight from the top priority list cited in the Longmont Roadway Plan, which was delivered in 2014. The chief goal of this project is to expand vehicular capacity of Hover Street. That would be from Ken Pratt Boulevard up to Boston Avenue through road widening and adding both travel and designated turning lanes wherever possible. I'll note that this is a corridor that contains two of the highest crash rate locations for signalized intersections, which is why it was prioritized so heavily in the planning document. In addition to easing traffic, part of the design is also expanding bicycle, pedestrian and public transit facilities along this corridor while making safer those that are already existing through slight modification. So over the last few years, the entire corridor has been under design in one single design effort. However, construction is to be divided into three different phases and constructed as funding becomes available within the city. So as prioritized with staff consensus, phase two, which is the Nelson Road and Hover Street intersection, pictured in this rather busy figure that I've included. But here you can kind of see where we're planning to add travel lanes, turning lanes and increase ADA accessibility and pedestrian facilities. This project was broken out into a new CIP project, which is listed in your handout to your P124. Right now we are undergoing right-of-way acquisition and negotiations with Boulder County. We are planning to take that 90% design effort through the finish line, and then we are hoping to construct this phase in 2025. GRP 132 is our Enhanced Multi-Use Corridor, or EMUC, plan. The EMUC plan, which was finalized and delivered in 2018, proposed designs for each of the selected EMUCs at a higher planning level. Considerations for design included buffered bike lanes, detached sidewalks, and modifying roadway lanes to mitigate traffic wherever possible, depending on existing and projected traffic loading in these areas. Two areas that were identified to most improve connectivity to key destinations such as parks, trails, schools, and the like shook out as 21st Avenue and Mountain View Avenue, both roads spanning from Francis Street all the way to Main Street to the East. So design for 21st Avenue is slated to start next year in 2023 with construction in 25. Following that Mountain View Avenue design, which is, there's a slight error in my slide, apologies, is slated for 2025 with a construction goal tentatively in 26. The Main Street Corridor plan, which has been cited a couple times tonight. This plan, similar to the EMUC plan, provided preliminary engineering of conceptual high level planning for a five mile stretch along Main Street from Highway 66 capping the North to Plateau Road capping the South that's shown here on the left. The plan's objective is to highlight transportation needs centered on safety, mobility, connectivity, and access. In general, this meant throughout the entire corridor identifying optimal locations for median and mid block crossings, as well as sidewalk connections and bicycle infrastructure where possible. So North Main and Midtown, the two Northern areas highlighted in red are slated for further evaluation to help inform actual design efforts. Part of this design is a pedestrian underpass at 21st Avenue, that is on the docket for 2023. And along with that, we're hoping to incorporate a coordinated wayfinding effort as well as traffic signal modifications throughout. Those are also in the pipeline. And I will mention that the spirit of this effort is shared and connected by the previous project, TRP 132 EMUC project, providing this grade separated crossing under Main Street at 21st Avenue, and then also progressing the EMUC that will be on Mountain View to Main Street and through the intersection progressing to the East. So this is a new one, TRP 138, Pace Street retaining wall reconstruction. This project came to us by the patrons of the Ute Creek golf course and the golf course staff reported a failing wing wall adjacent to the underpass located on 17th, excuse me, Pace Street between 17th Avenue and Windemere Circle. This is nearly identical to an underpass wing wall failure that we saw, which was designed and reconstructed in 2018. It is currently posing a safety hazard to the public. So we have already designed the reconstruction to this wall and we are hoping to construct it in 2023. Part of this design includes an underdrain system to avoid drainage loading behind the walls, layered reinforcement within the walls, which is currently not present as shown in the picture, and sidewalk improvements to the east side of Pace Street while we're there. In the interim, we had our operation staff temporarily secure the wall so it is not currently posing a safety hazard. So rest assured. So yeah, 2023 we're hoping to construct this one. Sprinkle number two, Greenway. This would be phase three, which is pictured in color above in the slide. This is the last leg of an over two and a half mile Greenway trail system, which will complete a north-south connection starting at Greek golf course to Union Reservoir and then eventually under 119, connecting with the Sandstone Ranch nature area, eventually to connect with the St. Vrain Greenway trail phase 13, which is currently under design. Much like phase two, which is now complete, phase three incorporates drainage improvements and a pedestrian underpass under the Great Western Railroad. I'll echo Tom's words about coordination with the Public Utility Commission and the railroad to notoriously schedule busting entities. This project, the construction of this project will be contingent on negotiations and approval by these two entities, specifically the PUC. Design is well underway. If everything goes smoothly, we are hoping to commence construction in spring of 2023 to finish off the Spring Gulch number two Greenway project. Last but not least, we have PBF 192 Operations and Maintenance Building Site Improvements. This project addresses the final phase of the City of Longmont Public Works campus master plan, which was produced back in 2023. You can see what was completed part of this plan in gray and then what is proposed is shown in green in the triangular figure. These new installments will house equipment, personnel and materials that support significant street and transportation operations and maintenance activities throughout the year. So for this reason, the Transportation Fund has a seat at that table, about 35% of a seat at that table for this budget for both design and construction. Phase four of this plan, which is the last phase, includes general paving, drainage improvements on the site, the construction of a drying bed, vehicle wash bay, material bunker storage building and also vehicle and equipment storage building. So design for this phase is anticipated in 2023 with construction tentatively in 2024. So that concludes our presentations on all of those CIP projects. I will open up the floor to any questions. Thank you, that was really fascinating and I enjoy it. Thank you for all the work you did. The question I have was about TRP 137, the Main Street Improvements, especially Midtown and North. When we were looking at the information for the BRT plan from the previous presenters, they noticed that there's a lot of changes that they'll be doing to the turn lanes and some of the things we looked like we had just done recently. Is there coordination between both groups to make sure we're not making changes now that have to be undone to do that or vice versa? Yeah, there's definitely a lot of coordination going on between the two efforts. I believe Phil would probably be able to expand upon the type and amount of coordination that is happening, but definitely the different groups involved with the different projects are talking on a regular basis. So I think it's important to note, I'm sorry, Board Member Osborn, Chair Lane here. It's important to note that the Main Street corridor plan is really doesn't adjust a lot of the areas between the curbs on Main Street. It focuses a lot on other components of the transportation system, trying to move, trying to do some improvements, improve landscaping, improve bicycle and pet connectivity to start driving some of the development on those areas of Main Street. What we're tying it to mostly is we're starting to see a lot more development or redevelopment along the corridor. So as part of the development review process, we are requiring developers to add improvements from the curb line to their building that is in accordance with the Main Street corridor plan. But as the BRT plan unfolds, we'll be coordinating with them and try not to, there shouldn't be too many conflicting items that are going on within the curb to curb area of the roadway. Well, I'll just carry on to that because the BRT plan really does not do much north of 9th Avenue in Longmont on 27, for either the 119 or the 287 corridor. What we are looking at is at the intersection some signal timing improvements that would help with the bus operation. Also looking at some bike head improvements, again, beyond the curb line or outside that curb line is still within our right of way. But they're all working together with these different opportunities to move forward. As you'll see is the 21st Avenue underpass design. That's one of the tip projects that we brought forward to you and is looking very promising as receiving funding. So that will be incorporated with the planning piece but then the engineers will take that over as the design piece and work it into that pieces as it moves from planning to implementation. Thank you. What I would think I noted that answered a lot. What I think I noticed that was concerning to me was the previous slide, previous group was showing us information and in their packet there was information that indicated some bus lanes right there at 17th Avenue. And I don't know how that's going to work especially with all the things that were just done to upgrade 17th Avenue. That's a great point. And the idea would be that you could probably have the bus use the turn lane to carry through those intersections, but just at the intersection. So we could do a bus bypass piece but that's still very preliminary in nature. We don't have that designed at this point. It is something that the county included in their planning process. We're gonna certainly try to implement as much as we can but the reality is some of that may not show up and not be feasible. That addresses what I was thinking, not be feasible. That intersection is a nasty intersection to begin with and trying to imagine a bus pass lane. I do the southbound left turn from main to 17th daily. And I can't imagine a bus pass lane happening there at all. And so I guess I just wanna make sure that everybody is aware of what can and can't be done without taking more land, I think. Thank you. Hi, thanks for the presentation. My question was about the pavement management program, the TRP-001. And maybe I missed it during the presentation but it is a large chunk of money, the $8.2 million, I believe this is made for this. Can you just go over some of the major areas of the city that that $8.2 million is gonna hit? It's a city-wide program. And again, the project selection is based on the pavement data we receive, use of our pavement management software, along with staff judgment. At this point tonight, I don't have the list of streets that are being proposed for 2023. But typically speaking, they're spread throughout the city and there's typically a good balance between local residential, collector, and arterial type roadways. My question is TRP-122, the Hover Street. I will have two questions, my main thing is wondering, are there gonna be pedestrian underpasses planned to make that safer for separation? And then secondly, I was wondering, because I'm feeling like adding widening free lanes just doesn't follow, I don't know if you're familiar with the down talks and paradox. Improvements in the road network will not reduce congestion if improvements make public transit less convenient. So I'm just wondering if we're gonna try to improve congestion, should we focus on just public transit network? That's... I'll take a shot at it. I appreciate that. The idea with Hover is really that's the primary corridor for our bus rapid transit from 119. So you saw a previous slide of Boston Avenue crossing the railroad tracks just north of the St. Frank Greenway, closer to downtown. This is actually the segment to the west where on Nelson we have a BRT that comes up airport, north on airport and east on Nelson and then north at Hover right here. And then we have the 119 portion of the corridor that comes up 119, a separate bus route comes up 119 at Hover, turns north on Hover and then it uses Boston Avenue to get across to the first and main station. The other bus will go kind of on the west side of town and then jog over on 17th and go north up to 66 on Main Street. So that one kind of serves the whole west side of town for bus rapid transit. It'll be especially effective in the more commuting times. And then this other bus is meant to go down Boston and use that crossing. So the widening does actually enhance what's happening with buses as well in this corridor. What may be a potential is that we could provide more bus only operation or bus operation for that third lane in each direction. But right now we're just, it's been designed as a through movement for all vehicles, but it does help the bus. My point is if we just make it easier for a car then who's gonna take. Thank you, Mr. Street and Ms. Rotuda for your presentation, very informative. I'll start off with a question for you, Mr. Street. I was looking through the project sheets that were included in our packet and some of them were puzzling to me. For example, PBF080, which is titled Municipal Building Boiler Replacement. Some of next year's funding for boilers would come from a source identified as fleet. So what is fleet and what does it have to do with boilers? Good question. I think this question is really related to PBF192 that Ariel spoke about. And it's really related to our financial policies and when we have a building, a facility that needs improvement, that needs modifications, it's up to that service that's within that facility to pay their fair share. So my assumption on that particular CIP sheet that fleet has skin in the game and they need to pay their fair share. And the intent, to be honest with you, wasn't really to point out fleet's responsibility in that project, it was really meant to show the street funds responsibility for that facility, for that project. A lot of times people ask, well, why is the street fund paying for boilers? Why is the street fund paying for a new roof? And that's the reason why. In other projects, I won't go into the details of the project numbers and so forth. I noted that fleet funding and also street funding, which I assumed refers to the sales tax revenues. We're also being appropriated for lowering replacements, HBAC replacements and so forth. And some of the buildings listed, I was really hard pressed to make any connections or transportation. Yeah, again, it goes back to those facilities that they have a street or transportation service. How is that building or that facility and the street fund needs to pay for that portion of those improvements. So it could be replaced in a carpet, it could be replaced in a roof, it could be modifying that structure. So all of these projects are related, but we really wanted to have full disclosure and make sure it was apparent that street fund funding is going towards some of those efforts. And to the best of your knowledge, have revenues generated by the street improvements tax been appropriated for these projects that seem to be tenuously related to transportation ever since the money started to be collected in probably 1987? Or is that something that's happened more recently? To be honest with you, I can't attest that it's been this approach from day one from 1986. I can attest that over the last five or 10 years, this has been consistent with city policy. Okay, thank you. I noticed that the project justification for the Kauffman Street busway improvements indicates that center running bus lanes are the fastest and most efficient facility for buses. Are center running lanes proposed for Kauffman? No, they are not. What happened was there was a reevaluation of the whole corridor. That was the original scope of the project that center running lanes were considered the best for bus rapid transit. That was in more like corridors like Colfax and Denver. Also along US 36 in between Boulder and Denver. It did not apply for Kauffman Street. So it was considered the standard, the gold standard. But with Kauffman Street, we took a reevaluation of a two lane road with a center turning lane and parking. It was a completely different type of facility. So it did warrant that we do the outside lanes because there were stops along that outside lane too. We weren't gonna put stops in the middle and then try to have people cross the street. Right, that was my recollection that the preferred alternative was side running, but I was puzzled to see that. Yeah, those CIP projects, once you get the scope in there for the very first one, regardless, it seems to just, unless we go through and do a really, my job is to edit those down better. And I didn't look at that one specifically, but that one was probably one that we could have changed, but it does stay, once you put it in, it stays that way throughout its history. Okay, thank you. I'm gonna move along to Nelson Road and Hobart. And this is kind of a follow up to the comment earlier about pedestrian underpasses. So I'll ask you, Ms. Rotuda, explain to us how you believe that expanding an intersection to eight lanes enhances the pedestrian experience. I'll say that I myself was not part of this design effort. I'm moving it along as we had some staff move away from our group. So I'm gonna phone a friend and turn it over to Tom. Difficult question, and you're right. When you add lane each, there's always trade-offs, but what I will note on this project is that it has taken a balanced approach as far as trying to incorporate transit needs, on-street bike lane needs, vehicular needs. We're trying to promote the best balance for all modes of transportation, but to be honest with you, there is some trade-off. Okay, so pedestrians will be allowed to cross hover at that intersection. Is that correct? That is correct. It's a signalized intersection. So it'll be demand-actuated pedestrian signals? Correct. So how much time do you have to allocate for a pedestrian to cross eight lanes? I'm looking all the way in the back to Caroline. How many feet per second? It's a significant amount of time. Obviously, going from two lanes to four lanes to six lanes to eight lane, it takes additional time, and there is an impact on capacity at that point. Right, that was going to be my next question. Would you disagree if I said that having to put in a pedestrian crossing time for eight lanes significantly reduces any capacity improvements that would otherwise entail for cycles that include a pedestrian in the intersection? There certainly will be an impact, but again, it's going to be based on the actual demand for pedestrian movement across that intersection. So my next question is, can I just add to that? Go ahead. Real quick, sorry. We have also spent a significant amount of resources on a pedestrian underpass just south of this location. So we really are trying to work people to move closer to that bent way. It's just south of bent way, that crossing as well. So a lot of effort was put into that underpass a number of years ago to get that built to help alleviate some of these issues that you're seeing at the intersection here at Hover and Nelson. So I won't say that there's anything close, very close north of this, but we are planning a new signal north with the new development near Home Depot that will also facilitate pedestrians across this roadway. So we've got a couple opportunities, but I don't think that's the exact answer you're looking for, but it does help with underpasses for Hover. And you would use some kind of signing to try to direct people to the underpass? That's part of the whole Bus Rapid Transit program just to do a wayfinding program to get people both to the different transit stops. And there is one just north of Nelson on Hover planned. So a transit stop there would be critical. And they're not only that, but to get people over, in this case under Hover Street, just south of this location and basically point people to the safest crossing point as well and the different new facilities that we'll have out here for bicycle and pedestrians. We won't have the on-street on Hover, obviously. That's gonna be mostly anything for bicycles and pedestrians will be beyond the curb, I should say, or within that curb piece outside of the lanes of traffic. The on-street piece is the Nelson section, so there's a on-street there, but it is about getting all these different, and we talked about this, I think, a little earlier about how do you get all these kind of micro mobility pieces and the first and last mile pieces to the bus rapid transit corridor. So it's all a system along this whole corridor and this is one aspect of it. Okay, thank you. That sounds like a good approach. And finally, I'll turn to BRT on Boston Avenue. Now, did I hear correctly that the extension of Boston Avenue will utilize an at-grade railroad crossing? That is the current proposal. Okay, and my follow-up question is, isn't it somewhat antithetical to put bus rapid transit over an at-grade railroad crossing considering that the roadway traffic always has to stop for a train? I will answer that one as well, because I can feel the heat coming from these guys. There is an issue, obviously. There's a couple issues actually. By locating first and main where we did, we do have to cross the railroad twice. We do have South Prep Parkway, the overpass. And Scott Nix will remember this one and the issues with that. That overpass does provide the relief that we need. So we can have buses. It's a little longer way to go, but it is going Boston to Price Road if there's a train block blocking and then use the South Prep Parkway overpass to get around that. But we were pushed quite hard by the folks who were doing the marketing and the redevelopment is to really put that station where we planned it and that Southwest corner first and Main Street. That tucks us into that corner of being surrounded by railroad tracks. You're correct. And we've looked at the idea of how do you do underpasses for Main Street under the railroad tracks and how do you do underpasses for Boston underneath the railroad tracks? And they're both, they're just so expensive and they basically take away all the access for the businesses nearby because of the amount of space that you need. So we've looked at those through the years. I'd say that every five or so years we get another request for Main Street underneath the railroad tracks and we look at it again, cost it out and figure out what the impacts are. But those are both tough intersections and we're gonna have to live with kind of what's happened with all this historical consequence for where we need to put these things for redevelopment purposes and for the bus purposes. Got it. Thank you. That's all for me. I've got one question, but a comment. First off, thanks for all the information. Very comprehensive. Thank you. Thank you board members for all the questions and the comments as well. However, I was just curious as we're talking about the widening and with the redevelopment of Twin Peaks Mall, I've noticed there's a lot more ped traffic that goes across almost mid, you know, mid between Nelson and that way. Head overpass. That's pretty common. I know Littleton, they did that quite extensively to a remodeled shopping mall. They put head overpasses I think as Wadsworth and I can't remember the other street. So I'm just curious if there's been other alternatives to alleviate some of the head issues that would happen at the signalized intersections to be able to allow them the ability to get over to, you know, let's say you wanna get over to Whole Foods, right, but you parked over by, I don't know, Wahoo's fish tacos, right? So I was just curious if that was anything that was even looked at in terms of a plan. Oh, I see some nodding. I think it goes back to Phil's earlier comment as far as the Dry Creek pedestrian underpass that was designed and constructed several years ago. It's just south of Bentway and I think it provides a lot of the benefit and fulfills a lot of the need that you're talking about with a possible overpass at that location. And I'll just add that none of those things are in our current comprehensive or envisioned Longmont plan at this time. Certainly as we come back to this group, we'll wanna talk about how we get those different items, those different projects into our plan. If those are things that we need to start looking at and evaluating. Yeah, I mean, I appreciate what we've done with the underpass. However, how many folks that are shopping in either those spots, you know, on Hoover know that there is a pedestrian underpass that's south of Bentway. So I realize that some of this is, you know, the onus is on the city to communicate this and let folks know about that. But let's face it, I mean, in the day to day, we know that not everybody's gonna see that or know that. So just a comment about that, thank you. And I think you gave us two options. That is correct. First option would be recommendation of the CIP as presented by staff. But with revisions as recommended by the board. I guess I'm open to, how would we tackle this in regards to the second option? What revisions from the board, does anybody see that they would want to, I guess, discuss further? So I think maybe what we should do then is get a motion to move to option one as an approving of the CIP. We'll move to option one as an approval. Does that sound like it's the right course? Prove the CIP plan as presented by staff. Oh, second. All those in favor, raise your hand. Okay, I think we've wrapped up the action items and we have comments from the board members. Let's start down with the vice chairperson, pause board. I just want to thank everyone that worked so very hard to present information to us tonight. We value the time, or I should say I value the time that you put in and it was very informative and it explained a lot of things. I want to thank Mr. Nix for speaking, giving us some historical background on some things that I hadn't realized and I really appreciate the work that he has done in the past and his willingness to come here and tell us what is important in his eyes and the people he speaks to because we don't get a lot of feedback from the community and I really value you coming here tonight. Thank you. Good evening, everybody. I'd like to thank everybody. Like Mr. Nix said, everyone taking time away from their families on a Monday night. Isn't the easiest thing to do, especially public servants like yourselves that come here and so thank you for preparing all this and giving your presentations for us. I really do appreciate it. That being said, I don't know if I get in trouble for this, but there were a couple things that I would, is it appropriate that I could ask a staff to address Mr. Nix's comments or I counted four on here about, I don't know if you have notes or anything, but I have. I think that's okay. Well, we took the note. We took the note, Chair and member Hinterberger. We took the notes that there is no paint at the Ecosycle for the striping of the parking lines and so that needs to be addressed. So we'll move that forward. For the Third Avenue striping, I think we heard that there was maybe, maybe Jim has a better idea of kind of what's happening here, but the, for eastbound bike path versus lane, we're really talking about, there's been a very big push lately. And I think a lot of you have heard this from us before, is that bike paths are wonderful and they do a great job. There's one on the north side of Third Avenue in this location where Mr. Nix was talking about. It does a good job of carrying two-way traffic for the most part, but it's a little narrower than we would build today. So we do have issues when there's people walking, dogs, strollers, or even bicycling on that. And that's really for the lower stress bicycle folks. So we are building lanes in a lot of these locations where we already have side paths that seem to be adequate for all bicycle users, but we're finding out that that's not the case. So we're seeing that there's a lot more need and a lot more desire for the people who are much more confident bicycling to have a bicycle lane on street because they're gonna use the street anyway is what we're finding out. And so we're trying to provide that space to be safe. And so we're putting the new standard just to do the buffered bike lanes. And so we're seeing that those are much safer than what we had out there before, which is no bike lane, right, to our shoulder. And the shoulder was fairly adequate but it is not very inviting. So those are some of the issues there. We have been talking about overpasses for railroad tracks for a long time. And this, I think the original sales tax was really meant to start looking at those things, but as we've evaluated these over time, we're seeing that the over or the underpasses for the railroad tracks are just not feasible or realistic, especially when we start looking at the local businesses that would be impacted by what we're doing. I mean, you really do have to provide a frontage road system plus the underpass for a lot of these businesses to still have access. So you know how much we go through with just loss of parking in front of some businesses for some different ways of trying to mitigate some of these issues. So those are the things that I have for that. I'm not sure about the comment about the access into neighborhoods. I'm not sure if you've driven it more than I have Jim, but I'm not sure. We'll have to, we'll follow up with Scott and just try to find out a little bit more about what that means. What am I missing? 66. Phil? We do have PEL or plan, oh, go ahead. There is one additional item that will take some follow up from staff. Mr. Nix referenced their striping changes on Eastbound 3rd Avenue as you approach state highway 119. At a staff level, we'll sit down and we'll have a more in-depth discussion about those changes. And Mr. Nix did mention, why aren't we doing four lanes on 52 and 66? So both of those state highways have had planning and environmental linkage studies, which is almost, it's kind of like an environmental evaluation, but it's just a little less than that. But it sets us up for all the environmental work that has to happen. And 66 is being looked at as a four lane facility, at least from basically over street on the west side, all the way through into Welde County Tide 25 and then probably beyond as a four lane facility into Firestone and Mead. So that is being looked at on state highway 66. 52 is a little different animal. It is something that where Boulder County's had more say in it and they do not want to see a widen, they don't have road widening projects per se, unless it is for transit or for other means. So they do subscribe to Mr. Wicklund's thought process. With as far as widening and only for transit, making transit better, but east of County line road, I do believe that Welde County has some ideas of how to add some additional linkage for that portion of the roadway, but it's all online and we can send you those links. Thank you everyone, that's great. Just one last comment on state highway 66. The city has been working with CDOT and Boulder County for a project for widening of state highway 66 from Main Street to the West, or to the West to Hover. That is currently in design. We are working our way through the process. It is not funded for construction at this time. Well, I'll just, you know, everyone will, yeah, thank you for being here, the presentations. Really, I don't have much comment. I will add my thanks to everyone who's presented to the board this evening, but I've made my comments and have asked my questions and appreciated the answers you've given me. And I'll wrap up just, I concur with everything that's been said here, and again, Monday night coming here and giving up this night to show up, and as well as Scott, Nix for showing up and giving us comments and your input, and obviously the historical lesson was very, very well taken, so I'll leave it at that and we'll move to comments from council member Yarbrough. Hey, I missed the historical piece, man, that's the key. I just want to say thank you as well. Thank you for the comments. I know, sorry I missed, I was hopping out of one board meeting to another, and unfortunately that's the story of my life. So thank you for being patient with me, first of all. You know, I'm still learning a lot about transportation and I'm learning about the city and how it operates. One of the things I really want to focus on myself is education. You know, as you all were mentioning that area on Hoover, that underpass, I don't see very many people taking that, you know? And I think a lot of people really don't know that it's there unless they are coming from over there by what, sprouts or elevations or something and then they go under. But what I'm finding on city councils that a lot of community members are not educated on how accessible the city is and where we're going. So I think it's important that while we're ahead of a lot of things that we figure out ways to inform our community as to what we're doing and also to get their input as well, what would benefit them. I love the idea of the overpass to walk across a lot of cities have that. But then you talk about those with disabilities who may not be as mobile to walk upstairs. I don't know how we would do that. But that's an awesome idea. So all the comments were amazing. I just want us to really focus on educating our community because you all do all of this amazing work and no one knows about it. And so think about when we put in all this together when you have the consultants and how are we going to inform our community? Because that's one thing that council hears over and over again in our emails, no one knew about it after you completed it. So let's put some extra effort if we can to make sure that we are intentional in how we deliver the message. So thank you all, appreciate you. Okay, items for the upcoming agenda, I guess our next scheduled meeting is going to be September 12th. Yes, and Chair, I failed to put in some items underneath that category. So I apologize, I was kind of going through the meeting trying to figure out what we've been talking about, see if you guys have had any breaks yet. And I'm seeing that you've not had, except for maybe the May meeting where some of you still had to work and help with recruitment here for the TAB board. Otherwise we've had meetings every month this year so far. We'll take a look at what's coming. We had some things that were supposed to come up that aren't gonna be ready in time, one being the crash report just because we're missing some data and we can't put together a good report until we have that for you. We usually put that together for you in September.  We also had, we do wanna get a formal tip recommendation from this board to city council on the two projects that we do know about, one being the 21st Avenue Main Street, Underpass Design Study, what's going on there? And so we do want to, now that we know that there's a high probability of us getting approval for that, we'd like to get your recommendation, the board's recommendation to take to city council to get their recommendation to spend the money on it and provide that level of funding. So that and the County Line Road Project that I spoke about earlier too, to add the shoulders and the bike lanes to that piece that it's under, I guess the reviewing the consultants at this point to find out which consultant will actually get the job to do the design work on that. We are going for funding on that. So those are the two things that we'll need from you. September, October, and I've just been going through the other list just to make sure we're hitting all your work plan items for this year. We typically have that annual meeting in. Sometimes we say July, but it doesn't seem to make sense to have an annual meeting in the middle of the year when we kind of set your work plan in January. So just making sure we're working through that work plan for you, but those are the two.  So again, we're thinking about how we give you a break, but we want to certainly get the work done. So we'll let you know as soon as we can get the items together, what's going up in September. Thanks for my lengthy conversation on that. Thank you. And I guess we would need a motion to adjourn our meeting. I will move to adjourn. Second. I'll second. All those in favor, raise your hand. Great, meeting adjourned. Thank you.


What's up guys, Michael Wajasky is doing a quick recap for our three box chrome mixer This was number one random team number one is a box of 2023 tops chrome hobby 2023 tops chrome jumbo and 2022 tops chrome sapphire. It's a little multi-year mixer. Here are all the teams in case you forgot No It's just a quick recap here sack wheeler Bobby way out of 125 Some rookies and refractors Shohei Zach Wheeler one out of 25 for the Phillies and a Logan O'Hoppy out of 99 Got an Adley Got an orange Travis Darno out of 25 gold Donovan Solano out of 50 gold Brock Holt and a gold Frankie Montas Some of the autos Marco Pell rookie auto out of 299 Matthew Batten Esteban Kiro's refractor out of out of 499 Brett Beatty base rookie auto a Sammy Sosa ultraviolet and then a Frozen Fractor negative five of zero Chris sale for Boston pretty cool hit there. These are extremely rare So yeah, that's awesome Thank you to everyone who got into the break. Thank you guys for watching and I'll see you guys in the next one. Bye guys