 And so it is six o'clock and we will call this May meeting, regular meeting of the CCRPC in order and the attendance has been taken so we have a quorum. So are there any changes to the agenda? Don't hear anybody rushing to speak up so obviously we don't have any. Moving on then we have, if there's anyone here who wishes to speak to items that are not on the agenda, this is your opportunity to do so. So raise your hand or the little clicky icon or whatever it takes if you have anything to say. And I don't see any of those. So we have no consent agenda so we can move past that one to approving the minutes of the April 20th, 22nd board meeting. Move to approve. Second Barbara. Okay. Does anyone have any corrections or changes to the meet minutes? Okay. I just have one technical and one that makes a difference. On page five, line 31, it says then, although it should be then. And then on page six, line, oh, I didn't write down the line number. But it's important because it's line 40. It says, we were talking about the airport and it was mentioned that the airport was once outside of town but it's now saying is not in a much more built up. Should be now because it is in a much more built up area. So if there's no other corrections, all those in favor of accepting the minutes of April 20th with corrections as noted say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any abstentions? I will because I was in present. All right. And any negatives? Hearing none. The motion passes. What's that Dana? That was not present. I'm sorry. My name is Mara Shaw. Paul Chester. That's pretty cool. You can tell who you are. Paul Chester behind you. There you go. And I'm sorry, Madam Chair, can I interrupt for one second? Just a little technical IT issue. I'm not sure who is hosting this meeting right now. I'm assuming it's one of our staff. But if you could make me a co-host, I'd appreciate it. Do we know who's hosting it? Not me for sure. No, I know. Sorry. You know what I mean? Monday's meeting was great. No, I ran that one. No problem. I participated in the meeting last night, froze up all the time. It should be under your account, Charlie. The Zoom account? Yeah, that is. But I had an issue and I went out and got back into it and it was all gone. So we'll wait a few seconds because... Let me sign it. Interesting. And I apologize. I just know we're going to do a little screen sharing. I'm not sure if folks are unable to do that. So I'm sorry. Madam Chair, I'll let you get back to the meeting. We'll address these as they come up. All right. The next item on the agenda is we need to open the public hearing for the major tip amendments. And this is an MPO action item. I'll move that we open the public hearing for major tip amendments. Do we have a second? Second. Second, Dan Caron. Thank you, Dan. And now this is the time for anyone who is here to make comments on the major tip amendments. You have a few minutes to do so. And then that gives time to take care of our technical glitches, too, if anybody has anything to say. Can we vote on the motion? Yeah. All we need to do... Thank you. I just moved right on, everybody. So anxious to get to the comment. All those in favor of the motion to open the meeting? Say, aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Good. Now, officially, people can talk if anybody's here to speak on it. Thank you, Chris. Sometimes I get ahead of my skis as they say. I like to move things forward here until it's interesting discussion. And then, you know, I've let things run on. Does anybody have any comments they want to make on the major tip amendments? Seeing that nobody has stepped to the plate, we can make a motion to close the public hearing, then, on the major tip amendments. Aye. I will move to close the public hearing. Second, Barbara. Thank you, Barbara. All those in favor say, aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. The motion does pass. So now we need... Pardon? So now we need a motion, and it is noted it is an MPO action, so that only those that can vote on the MPO are allowed to do so. We need approval of these... A motion to approve the tip amendments. I move to approve the tip amendments. Sandy? Second. Chris? Okay. All those in favor say, aye. Aye. Aye. Any abstentions? Any nays? The motion then passes. We now have another public hearing, and this one is on the UPWP in the upcoming budget. So we need a motion to open the public hearing for the FY23 UPWP and budget. I'll move Barbara. And I'll second that. Chris? All those in favor of opening the public hearing say, aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. All right. This again is the time for any public comments on the UPWP and the up and coming fiscal year budget. Are there any comments to be made? Give people a few more minutes just in case there's somebody that wants to come in and say something. Yeah. But given that it's very quiet, I imagine we can go ahead and close public hearing. Move to close, Barbara. Second, Chris. All those in favor say, aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Now we need approval of the transportation portion of the FY23 UPWP and budget. And this is an MPO action item. So. No. So I'll move Barbara. And I'll second the approval of transportation portion of the fiscal year 23 UPWP budget. All those in favor say, aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any abstentions? Any nays? All right. That motion passes. Now we need a motion to signify approval of the FY23 UPWP and budget. And this is for the other non-MPO items so everyone can vote on this one. Move to approve the non-MPO items, Barbara. And Chris, I'll second that. Thank you. All right. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Abstentions? Any nays? Hearing none, the motion passes. So moving on to agenda item seven and that's the VPSP2 bridge priorities. And there is it's an MPO item and there's a discussion as well. So who gets to take that on? That is me. All right. VPSP2. Christine Ford, Cheney County Transportation Planner, Senior Transportation Planner. I think I know everybody so I'm introducing myself as I'm trying to get organized here. So we're talking about, so this is year two of the Vermont Projects Selection and Prioritization Process. We're looking at state and Tanhai Woo bridges. What we're going to talk about today, we're going to talk about the asset-driven potential project list. We're going to talk about the regionally driven potential project list. And we're going to talk about the VPSP2 scores. And at the end of this, we're looking for the board to recommend that the staff submit the projects and the scores to VTRANS. So just a little bit more about what I just said. So VTRANS as we I think we all know has an asset management system for all of their transportation assets that looks at a whole bunch of factors of the condition of the asset. And so that's where the asset-driven potential projects come from. It's mainly a it's kind of an output of these systems. It's a mathematical calculation that develops that list. It's not somebody saying this is a project that needs to be done right now. And for this, the asset-driven potential project list is 150% of the available funding. And that's just to have more projects available to choose from essentially to be able to determine which projects they want to move forward. And then this regionally driven project list is a new thing that came with the VPSP2. And this is the way that regional planning commissions can recommend projects to be added to the transportation and capital program. And those projects will be scored the same way the asset-driven projects are and compared to them to determine which projects end up moving into the capital program. And so reminder that this process, the VPSP2 is really developed to have a performance-based data-driven project selection and prioritization framework. And the idea is to maximize the transportation value. So to look at a little bit more than just the asset condition, but what's the value of the transportation asset to the taxpayers is kind of the idea behind this. And the transportation is value is value is calculated using a workbook that scores on eight criteria. You'll see from this list that four of the criteria are pink and the rest of them are black. And I think this just identifies that the ones that are in pink are scored by the Regional Planning Commission and the other ones, the black ones are scored by VTRANS. And the reason that they're pink is to correspond to the giant table that was in your packet that also used this color coding and had questions in pink that are the ones that the Regional Planning Commission's answer and the other questions are answered by VTRANS. And that table listed all the questions. There's 33 questions that get answered in this workbook. And so that table listed all the questions. I'm not going to go into them, but I'm happy to talk about any specific questions. And I have some more slides at the end of this that we can look at those topics if you want to get into a little bit greater detail about the questions. So this slide shows all of the, it shows the asset driven projects in three separate categories. So the first two are projects that are currently in the Transportation Capital Program. The next three are State Highway Bridges and the next seven, I think there are, there are 10 Highway Bridges. So this table has some columns that come directly out of the VTRANS asset management system. It's not the only thing that's in there for bridges. There's a lot of other factors that determine whether or not bridges are ready to be replaced, including conditions of the stream, conditions of the bridge of butt mints with the stream. So, you know, a whole bunch of different factors. But this is, these are the factors that the attack was looking at to score these projects. So we're really kind of looking at the three columns that have the yellow and the red. And these are the deck rating, the superstructure rating and the substructure rating. Very brief intro to bridge engineering. If you look at this little diagram of a bridge up on the top, the deck is, is the road, what carries the roadway, what carries the cars and trucks and bikes and people. The superstructure holds up the road and then the substructure holds up everything. So that's sort of what those three ratings are. This is, there is also a rating of the stream, but I don't have that in this table. If there's a stream. So the top two, as I said, those are in the current program. There's a bridge on Campbell's Hump Road in Huntington that will be constructed this summer. There's a bridge in Jericho on Brown's trace. That's just north of Governor Peck and that's in scoping right now. So we don't have a construction schedule. So those are existing projects. So then in the asset driven list, there are three state highway bridges in this list. There's a bridge on roof 15 under hill. That's in the under hill flats area. The 116 bridge over 89, you'll notice that the conditions are all in our satisfactory good and good for this bridge. So we'd have to ask the transfer more detailed information about why that got made it onto the asset driven list, but it is on their list. Probably because of the complexity, the importance of the bridge, things like that. And then the third state highway bridge is another on 116 in Hinesburg. This is south of Hollow Road. And then the bottom seven are the asset driven town highway bridges. And we can talk about specific locations if you are interested in any of these. I'll leave it here for a second and then we will move on. One question. Christine. Yes. Dan Karen as extension. I'm looking at the bridges. You just talked about the interstate 89, 116 bridge and the under hill roaring brook bridge. I see the traffic counts and it shows the traffic count daily average daily traffic on route 15 is 8100 and interstate 89 is 5900. I find it hard to believe that interstate 89 at 116 receives less traffic than route 15 the day on average. So it's not the interstate traffic. It's the traffic on 116 going over the interstate. These traffic volumes come out of a database that VTrans has. It's possible that they're not. I'm not sure how often they're updated, but it comes directly out of that. Is that okay? Okay. And then when we went, did you have another question, Dan? Sorry. No, that was the, I just, I didn't think, I saw one or 89, I'm thinking that includes the total traffic because I didn't realize. And so this and so the tack also in addition to those bridges, the tack identified six bridges to be considered as regionally driven potential projects. And this is the table with the same information. So the first one, Shelburne Bay Road. This bridge is right near the fishing access point in Shelburne. There's another Huntington Bridge on Main Road 9H. This is near the Audubon Center near Texas Hill Road. There's a Colchester Pond Road, bridge 14. This is near Colchester Pond. There's a bridge, a culvert actually in Hinesburg on Charlotte Road. That's just west of Hinesburg Village. There's a bridge on Industrial Avenue near the intersection with Vermont 2A. And the last one is the One Lane Railroad Bridge on Queen City Park Road in Burlington near Red Rocks Park. There's a note on the bottom just to be clear that if town highway bridges are added to the transportation capital program, they do require a local match. And we will know in the fall whether projects are added to the program and we would expect them to move forward in one to seven years. So in your packet, there was this table that had the transportation value score and all of the projects. The asset driven projects are in green. The regional driven projects are, I mean, I'm sorry, I have it backwards. The asset driven projects are not shaded and the regionally driven projects are in green. I will note that when I talked about the scoring, the ones that, the categories that VTrans scores and the categories that RPC scores, for these regionally driven projects, we, I estimated the VTrans scores. So these will be re-scored. All of the VTrans categories will be re-scored. And so the values will change somewhat, but this was a preliminary list of values. The things that make projects score high using this methodology is projects that have, if there are crashes, if there are a lot of crashes near the facility they score high, if they're in a growth center, if they have a lot of traffic, a lot of truck traffic, if they're important regionally, if they're in a state designated growth area, those are the main factors that cause it to score high. And I would also say that there are some factors, some of the environmental factors, that can't really be scored because the projects have not been designed yet. We don't know what the bridge is going to look like. So we don't know if it's going to help aquatic organisms and things like that. So some of those factors will be scored again when the project is designed. So that's really the background of it. If you want more detail, I am very happy to go into it. Or if you have specific questions, I will unshare if I can figure out how. So we can see each other. I lost, oh, there we go. And as just to reiterate, what we're asking is for the board to recommend that we forward the projects and the scores to VTrans for the due date on June 1st. It's just an MPO thing right now, Christine. If there are no questions, then we need a motion to approve the acid-driven and regionally driven potential project lists and scores and submit them to VTrans. I'll second. John's accounting. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any abstentions? Any nays? Barbara? Are you abstaining or guessing? Because your box is lit up. Who's, I'm, I didn't know my box was lit up. Yeah. At least it's green on my side. So I don't know. And any nays hearing none, the motion passes. Next is a discussion item talking about the I-89-2050 study draft recommendations. And I know that's a Linnies baby. Eight days and it has been for a long time. So I will, so I'm here tonight and Jason and I will give you a brief update as well as go through the implementation plan that the advisory committee just met this afternoon and voted on if I can share my screen. If I cannot share my screen, then maybe Jason can. Let's see. I can if you, oh, you got it. Okay, start. Can I start with that? And then maybe I can do that. All right. Do you see the actual presentation mode? No, you need to swap them. Okay. What about now? Okay. I can't see any of you. So if you want to just stop me, please, you know, just stop me if you have any questions or just comments as we go along. So again, thank you for the opportunity. And this is kind of like the agenda for our presentation. We're going to provide a very brief project overview. Jason is going to go through the corridor bundle overview. And then I'm just going to go over the actual. Sorry to do this to you, but I will share a spreadsheet with you because I'm at the committee met this afternoon. We finished around four o'clock and there were some updates that I needed to do. And I was doing it just before this meeting. So I'm going to share the latest with you instead of a bunch of slides that we had. So and then we're going to finish with the next steps. So just a brief overview. Most of you have seen these numerous times already. We work with the advisory committee to develop a vision statement. But before we just focus on the vision statement, I want to just note the statement above that that talks about the uncertainty that we have. They are say post COVID, even though we are seeing an uptake of cases. So the pandemic brought a lot of changes on how people travel. Where do they live? If they telecommute. So the uncertainty is not gone by any means. And so we acknowledge that there is uncertainty for the future travel, demand and mode and all that stuff. So recognizing that we basically we acknowledge that the vision goals and objectives and some of the implementation actions will need to be reassessed periodically and then basically change according to whatever the situation is happening in the future. So the vision statement is talks about an interstate system that is like safe, resilient and provides for reliable and efficient movement of people and goods. At the same time supporting our goals like state, regional and municipal plans and goals. We had six goals that we developed. There's a lot more specificity. If you go to the Envision 89 website about all this, but we have goals on safety, on livability and sustainable and healthy communities. And also the mobility and efficiency of our interstate, which is very important to the function of the interstate. We have a goal on the environment of stewardship, economic access and the system preservation. So we need to maintain what we have before we invest in new facilities. And you have seen this before too. And we are now at task. We completed task six, which is basically we develop a draft implementation plan, which I, you know, as I said before, we presented to the advisory committee this afternoon and they voted on the plan and I will go through the plan with you. This past year also we worked on various different things. I believe that we came and we presented on the strategic model that we developed and the results of that model. And those results were basically incorporated into the TDM scenarios or bundle two that Jason is going to talk about. And then we developed more scenarios in total, like five scenarios were developed and evaluated under task five. And the results of those basically informed our implementation plan. So with that, I'm going to just let Jason take over and I'll come back with the implementation plan. Thanks, Eleni. So we're going to walk through the bundles here and how we developed and evaluated them. And, you know, this whole process started off with a quarter assessment, which took in a host of recommendations from stakeholders and included and interchange evaluation that had a couple of rounds of screening. That's that graphic you see on the right, top right. Okay, that's it. If I stop talking, Eleni, just go for it. That's a cue. Okay. If I talk too long, just go for it and I'll get the cue. All right. I'll get that. I'll do that. The next, that kind of folded into the bundle evaluation. Once we got through the interchange evaluation process and determined which ones we're going to stay in, we then went in and developed five bundles. And from there, we developed our implementation plan, which Eleni is going to walk through after I wrap up the bundle piece. So starting with bundle one, this is our kind of our base bundle or talking about the year 2050 here, which is our MTP, our Metropolitan Transportation Plan future year. So that base bundle bundle one includes our MTP and our transportation improvement program. With the exception of the two placeholder items that we had in the MTP, which were the third lane on the interstate between 14 and 15 and exit 12B at Vermont 116, which were the whole reason that we went into this study to begin with. But to recap, our MTP calls for 90% of our household growth in existing growth areas. And there's a whole host of investments called for in bike, pet infrastructure and transit services, increased participation in transportation demand management. And lastly calls for electrifying our fleet to 90% of light duty vehicles. Bundle two builds on bundle one. And this is our transportation demand management scenario or bundle, rather. And we were, before you back in, I think it was February, talking about the strategic model that we used. And there was a focus group as part of this process. And when it was all said and done, we selected the scenario that achieved the lowest amount of vehicle miles traveled. And if everything in the package is implemented successfully, it has the potential to reduce vehicle miles traveled by up to 20% throughout the county, which is, as you can imagine, would have huge benefits to congestion throughout the county in terms of reducing it. Bundle three, continuing the building process. It just adds on to bundle two. The only change in it is it changes the interchange at exit 14 from the existing clover leaf to a diverging diamond interchange, which I think most of you are aware of is what is going to hopefully going to be going to construction soon at exit 16. But just to, I guess, a quick primer on that, there's, for this design, it calls for a shared use path on both sides at 10 feet wide that would go through the center of the two travel lanes that after you go through the signal. So between the two signals, you're traveling on the opposite side of the road. And then you come back. And in this design, I think the shared use paths is in the middle, right? Yep. And then the only difference between this and exit 16 is that the shared use paths or pedestrian pathways would be on the outside of the travel lanes. So that's the only difference here. Right. And of course, I just want to point out that these are just conceptual plans. So one of our recommendations that you will see in the implementation plan is that we need to do scoping on this so we can actually get to a preferred alternative. So I guess the point is like that shared use path might moved by the end, but for now, that's what we think is to go. And if that concept is new to you, please reach out to us because I think VTrans has a really helpful video on their exit 16 website that can kind of walk you through exactly how that works. Does that shared use path connect with any existing like Ted plan in that in the city there? Yeah, so that's a great question, Dana. I think that, you know, so right now, I think it's probably going to get, we haven't looked at connecting it, but the scoping study will look at that, the connectivity. I think this is a great improvement for bike and pets at exit 14, because it controls where pedestrians and bikes, you know, just cross and they cross at the signal, and they are protected also from the from the traffic. So as they go through the two barrels there, so I, you know, I think that's a great, the great thing right now, I think they're on road, you know, bike lanes that we can just pick up. And we also need to consider that they're going to be the bike and pet pedestrian bridge south of here that South Burlington actually got a grant for. So we need to be looking at all those things when we're doing the scoping study. Sounds good. I think for right now it just, it would connect into the existing sidewalk network at the outer limits of the time being bundle for continuing our building process here. This is ads in exit 12B, which is, would be a potential new interchange where 116, Vermont 116 crosses over the interstate. And that configuration there is shown on the right, a host of new traffic signals and or roundabouts that would be needed there to facilitate that. A little bit of a hybrid type of an interchange, not your standard configuration, your northbound ramps are kind of on the right there and would lead up to Tilly Drive, which is where there's a bunch of medical offices there, I'm sure you're all are familiar with. And then the southbound ramps are on the left side of the graphic there. Yep. And then bundle five does not build on bundle four. It swaps out the exit 12B for a full interchange at the existing exit 13. And this configuration is would be new to the region if it were implemented. It's a single point diamond interchange, which consolidates all left turns to a central traffic signal right in the middle there. And also associated with this would be a shared use path, which is a concept that hasn't been fully flushed out. They would have to be looked at in further detail to determine how that would connect into the existing network. But the other thing to make note of is that it would be a little bit of a reduction in assets to maintain. You can see as a call out there as some bridges would actually be removed. And then you just have to extend some culverts here and there. Sorry. Did I talk too long? Is that what you're doing? No, no, no, no, I was trying to just show where we're going to be removing ramps. Sorry. All good. I think we're good there, unless there's questions. Next up, we just have a couple of graphics just to kind of showcase some modeling efforts to determine the effects of implementing the TDM measures called for in bundle two. So on the left, you'll see some arrows pointing to segments of roadway that through the use of our regional model have been identified as being fairly congested when it comes to 2050. So the metric we're looking at here is what's known as a volume to capacity ratio. So every roadway has its theoretical capacity of the number of cars it can handle, be it 1500 or 1900. And what this ratio is, is just taking the volume that came out of a regional model and dividing it over, in theory, what its capacity is. So if you get to one, your roadway is at capacity. And this is showing some darker or I guess warmer colors as congestion gets worse. You can see the, I guess the big one to showcase there is the greater than 0.9 that Eleni is highlighting between exits 14 and 15 on the interstate. And then the take home message is that once if TDM measures are successful in achieving the 20% VMT reduction, you can see all that congestion reduces in the graphic on the right. This is really just a similar story. Exit 14, DDI scenario, bundle for bundle three is on the left. And then on the right, it's what happens if the exit 14 DDI is built along with full implementation of the TDM measures in bundle two. So again, similar story. You can see the colors in the left hand graphic get a little bit cooler. So congestion reduces in those areas that have the arrows pointed to shifting into some key observations from the bundles. This is not necessarily specific to the bundles, but from 2020 to 2050. So I guess this would be the base bundle. We're getting modeling results that are showing a 28% increase in vehicle miles traveled throughout the county. And when our MTP is implemented, that was able to reduce VMT by 4%. And then if the bundle two TDM package is successful, that's where I was able to reduce VMT by 20%. And that's shown in the box three below there. One question. When and where or if do you factor in the entire increase price of gas thing? I mean, is it something that are we thinking is going to sort of be sort of transitory or more permanent? And how does this factor into modeling, which seems to be a particularly acute issue today? Yeah, I will say it's not something that we can explicitly model as part of our regional travel demand model. But it is something that we looked at in the scenario strategic model. Thanks for missing that word. And what we found was that pricing was the biggest factor in terms of reducing people's travel. Actually, as part of that TDM scenario, there's a VMT, vehicle miles traveled B, that we are calling it, Lenny, on people's travel. So while our regional model can't directly take into account gas price increases, the price or the cost of travel is something that was examined when we use the strategic model. Thanks. Jason, John Zaccone here. When you guys did your VMT models, curious as to how you dealt with self driving cars and the at least thought that possibly it will increase VMT substantially because we'll have all these cars with nobody in them running around as they go from one place to another where all those cars are now currently parked instead of driving around. So I don't know what you did or what you didn't do or where that theory sits these days, but I was hoping you could at least let us know how it's factored or not factored into what you're doing here. Yeah, great question. The short answer is we didn't do anything this time around. You may recall when we did our MTP, we did look at this or we made an attempt to look at it. There's kind of two potential futures. It could result in the scenario that you are describing where we have all these cars just driving around with nobody in them. And that's kind of on the side of a private ownership model of an autonomous vehicle. There's a different potential future where these autonomous vehicles could be more shared, kind of like if there were a lift or an Uber. So those are just driving around and people are actually owning fewer cars and just able to rent vehicles, which is an interesting future. And so it's not something people have nailed down yet in terms of what direction things are going to go in, but those are kind of the two overarching potential futures. And I'm sure there's some middle ground in there as well. And John, I think that also remember that we talked about that uncertainty of the future, like before we developed our vision and goals. I mean, we recognize that technology and the future that we're going to have with the autonomous connected vehicles, whether it's a shared mobility or not, it's going to affect us a lot, but we have no idea the direction yet. That's why we need to be kind of like just looking into the future and seeing the direction that we're going and then reassessing everything that we do. No, no, that's fine. I wasn't being critical in any way. I was just curious how you potentially bake that into your numbers here or not. That's all. Thanks. Yeah, good question. That was very uncertain. None of us have a clue. We don't even know if there'll be a big trend by 2050. I mean, it could take longer than that, it could take shorter than that. I mean, who knows? But just, I was just curious. Thank you. Yeah, that is a question. You know, thinking about John's comments and some of my own thoughts here, seems to me this is a case where there are the things we know we know, the things we know we don't know, and the things we don't know we don't know. I was just looking like what's the Florida coastline going to look like in 2050 and where are those people going to go? Those of you who hadn't followed this, Burlington was named as one of the, what, 20 places to escape to in an era of climate change because it's not going to flood anytime soon and there will still be water here, a few things like that. So, you know, but it just seems to me to try to accommodate that in a forecast of population and vehicle miles is like virtually impossible other than to know the future is uncertain. Yeah, I think you're right. Yeah. And I'm also struck by a number of times where we look at component parts of the system, like this section here is really good for pedestrians and bicycles, but outside of that is like territory that is often squirrely or unknown where we have a transit hub that's great for public transit, but nobody can get there from here. So, I just keep wrestling with the connection of the different moving parts in these systems over time. Yeah, good thoughts. Yeah, great thoughts. And I think that the connectivity of modes are something that, you know, we need to just pay more attention and we try to and sometimes there are things that we cannot control, but we need to strive towards that connectivity is crucial. So, this is a question as well. Yeah, go ahead. So I had an observation. Can I share that with you, Jason? Please go ahead. Yeah, you know, these are having looked at the transportation demand to management, which seems to be a key piece of all this. And, you know, I haven't participated in any of the committee meetings or any of the comments that go with it. But this is the type of grand scheme that can really be a game changer. And the transportation demand management at 20% reductions that I think it seems to be the ballpark of it is really what hinges on the success of this whole thing. Now, we've tried to widen roads for years in the interstate. And I don't know how much interchange we get with the interstate. But boy, oh boy, you have a right of way out there in the interstate. And you have electric bikes that are becoming more and more popular. And people would love to take these electric bikes along the interstate if there was access that was widening the interstate with separate protected bike lanes for electric bikes or and regular bikes. And this would be a great use we did in the 1960s and the 50s, this Eisenhower interstate system. Oh, by God, this climate change requires this same level of commitment. The government's got this in place. And all they got to do is give us another six feet or eight feet of shoulder and protect it for far less than the original cost. And we can really make a dent in our traffic and emissions and everything goes along with this. And maybe not in Vermont for six months of the year. But holy cow, for the other six months of the year, we really can be making hay while the sun shines. And to me, it's a little disappointing not to see that as an integral part of anything that we're doing. Whether it can be done at a grassroots level, where it's got to come from the federal government, I don't know, but it's got to get done. And there it is. You've got a monster right there that created half the climate crisis of the last 50 years. And the solutions right there in the monster, we just have to adapt it. Thanks, Chris. You're here. Thanks, Chris. The word is back. Yeah, sorry. I just said, this is so ironic, Chris. For the first time in my life today, I was in a parking lot and saw a sizable electric motorcycle, asked me. And it was a large, it was a significant motorcycle, and it was clearly built to go at speed. And my real point of that is that's a pretty new technology. They're very expensive, but somewhere between the current state of electric bicycles and a future state, there's there's like a whole ecological niche between the current electric bicycles and that electric motorcycle, which is probably like $30,000 or something. And I just like I'm, I've started, as you described this, I pondered where, where does something like that go? Is that a bicycle? It depends how fast it's going. But it just struck me that that sort of technological environment is likely to change in the next 10 to 20 years in terms of what people might use. Absolutely. I think that it will change anything that we just, that's why we need to reassess everything that we do today. So, and, you know, I mean, having a part of the right way of the interstate, you know, devoted to another mode, it's something that maybe we'll be talking about it in five to 10 years. So we are keeping all our options open here. And we are also open-minded. Moving on. Just one last thing. I was just sorry. Thinking about everything being said. There was an element to the TDM package that tried to accommodate or account for the proliferation of electric bicycles. We changed a metric in the model that allowed people to travel at faster speeds, which was kind of a proxy for the advent or the adoption of electric bicycles. So that's kind of baked into that 20% number. It's, it's not a shared use path on the interstate, but there was an attempt made to account for electric bicycles. Well, thank you. But I think the time is coming not five years from now and needs to be accelerated because of the, the, we had great articles, Amy had sent us on induced demand. If you build it, they will come and it will reduce the vehicles on the interstate that are presently too heavy and, you know, single occupancy vehicles and so on. And it won't, you know, completely replace them, but it will draw away from them. Right. Yep. That's fair. All right. Make the discussion. What's that? Sorry. Yeah. Jason, you want to finish your presentation? Yeah. Yeah. Sure. Sorry. I had adjusted people's faces so I could see them. I had just had to reorient things. That's all. So where are we? We're, we're onto bundles four and five. We're talking about here. A little nuance here. We, we did separate out bundles four and five to four A and four B. And that was just a showcase. What would happen if we didn't do the, the TDM measures? And those are. Sorry, Jason. I'm getting distracted by my puppy here. Go ahead. But yeah, takeaway being that with the TDM measures, both bundles four. All right. Can you still hear me? Yes. Okay. My headset just died on me, of course. Yeah. Takeaway being that both exit 12B and exit 13 single point diamond interchange reduce volumes through the exit 14 interchange with the greatest reduction going to the exit 13 SPDI, which is part of bundle five B, which is the last column on the right there. Um, I don't think that's a terrible surprise to people. It's kind of intuitive. Exit 13 is just closer to exit 14 than exit 12B is. Okay. And then the next point being, both of these interchanges reduce volumes along Williston Road and Doris Street with the greatest reductions on Williston Road going to exit 12B and the greatest reductions on Doris Street going to the exit 13 SPDI. Okay. Thank you, Jason. So I'll take it over. So as I said, this afternoon we had a meeting with our ID 9 advisory committee and we are very happy to report that they unanimously approved the corridor implementation plan that I'm going to show you in a second to guide our investments along the 89 corridor through 2050. And I will stop sharing and then try to share the spreadsheet if I can find my cursor, which is kind of hard to find these days. There we go. Can I just ask a question in the interim here? Absolutely. Go for it. These improvements and alternatives, how do they fit in? And it's been a while since I've been caught up with this, but the CIRC alternative plan, do all the improvements fit into that overall thing? And I don't even know the status of that effort right now, but... Yeah, I'll take that while you're figuring out where your stuff is, Eleni. And Dana, actually I think that CIRC alternatives process we went through and developed a lot of alternatives that are getting implemented now to the CIRC, but that was really dealing with what happened in the circumferential towns from Williston, Essex, Colchester. What was left unaddressed really was the issue at Exit 14 area. And so this was kind of, I think the next thing we really needed to dig into is what happens in the core here at Exit 14 and here we are. Great, thanks. Do you see the spreadsheet right now? Part of it. Or is there only four things? I'm sorry. Catherine, did you say yes? Yes, except that you're at the end of it. Is there only four things on it? No, it's more than four things. I mean, do you see the beginning that says draft implementation plan and then it has the vision statement and the goals? We're seeing rows 42 to 45 right now. Well, what about now? If you take your scroll bar to the right and move that up, we'll see it. It's all the way to the top. I did the scroll bar, but you don't see it. I'm just going to just stop sharing again maybe and do it again. Let's see. I will try one more time. I just didn't see the, I mean, I have the, okay, let's try one more time. Otherwise, I'm going to have to send it to you. All right, let's share. Maybe what I need to do is like close some of my windows. I have so many open. Okay. What about now? There you are. I see. Yes. All right. Excellent. So this is still a work in progress. I was, as I said, I was doing some changes just before this meeting. And I'm just going to just quickly go through it. I'm just, before I go through the actual recommendations and description, because that's what I'm going to focus on, I'm just going to show you kind of like, so the implementation plan is a big spreadsheet. We have the recommendations, a description of the recommendation. I call them that we now call considerations. I'm trying to find a better term for it. It used to be called measures and triggers, but the committee didn't like that because it was so, these are not basically cast in stone things. These are things that they're going to be just shifting and changing. When we're talking about triggers, it's just so very specific number that they didn't like that, but I'm still looking for another term. If you have one, let me know. We have a cost estimate. If it's applicable, we have who is the lead implementation agency, who are the partners, and then the next steps. And then I'm going to just zoom in a little bit so you can actually just see the recommendations. So the implementation plan is broken into three different time frames. The first one is the short-term recommendations, medium and long-term, starting with the short-term recommendations. The very first recommendation is to form what we call the I-89 monitoring committee, which is basically it's a committee of pretty much the same interests that they were sitting around the advisory committee table, but maybe just a little bit less members. I think we have, I don't know, 19 people on our committee, maybe 16. And we're looking for anywhere from five to nine people in this committee. This committee is going to be sitting together with us and veterans to review the data, review the trends in the world of travel, review how the TDM implementation is going, and then just basically discussing all that so we can figure out next steps and what needs to be implemented and have recommendations. The second really very important thing that we are going to do and the implementation agency for S2 is the CCRPC at the beginning because we need to develop a plan and we need to initiate implementation of the TDM measures that we basically developed under the strategic plan. So Jason talked a lot about the bundle two, which is the TDM bundle. And if you see the things that we say there, it says telework share needs to increase by 50% over pre-pandemic levels. We have the land use goal that we have in the MTP. We are almost there, but not quite there. And I don't know, Charlie is the guy, 86% of our households now are in areas planned for growth, but we are looking for 90. We want to double walking and biking trips. We want a triple transit. So these plans, these are kind of all the aspirational goals that we need to decrease our VMT by 20%. How do we do that? Is it feasible to do that? Which one is the most cost-effective way to reduce VMT? So we don't need the bigger capacity improvements. So this plan, and we, as you can see, it's in the plan. We put $250,000 there. It's a plan that is going to basically take these aspirational goals and trying to say, this is feasible. This is the steps that you're going to take to implement it and then work with partners, because we are not going to be the implementation agency, but work with partners to implement those steps. The third big item that the CCRPC or V-Trans is going to embark on, it's an actual scoping study of the Exit 14. As I said before, we developed a concept plan that we feel it works really well for all users, even though we are reducing capacity a little bit, and maybe we need to just kind of look at it a little bit closer to see if we can actually keep the vehicle capacity so we don't send traffic to areas we don't want to send. But this is basically to take all the work that we did in this study and do a supplemental scoping study and get to a preferred alternative for Exit 14. We have monitoring of electric vehicle, fleet market in the short term, as well as kind of continuing on the work that V-Trans actually is starting to basically implement a mileage-based fee, the user fee. Jason talked about the VMT fee, and it's the same thing basically. And I think that there is a state commitment that they're not going to do that until the EVs have at least a 15% penetration of the market, so you don't discourage the sales of EVs. And then we have some other minor things, improve some of the ramps, geometric improvements. We want to install some loops because it's going to help us with the monitoring. We want to enhance speed enforcement, especially through our urban core on the interstate. And then we are adding these other interstate projects that they're already in the capital program just to have all the improvements on the interstate in one place. So we are adding the Exit 16 reconstruction, which is happening hopefully soon. And as most of you know, Exit 12 Park and Wright in Williston, it's currently under construction. They are clearing up the land over there. And then we're moving to the medium term. And the medium term, we're talking about like after five years. We're saying six to 15, but it's variable. And one of the things that veterans is working on right now is to install changeable. These are the variable message boards that you see. And these are kind of the boards that provide information to the traveling public, whether they are crashes ahead, incidents that they can just seek alternative routes, or they just provide information about weather and roadway conditions so they can adjust their speeds and stuff like that. There is continued implementation of the TDM plan because we're going to develop that plan in the short term. And a lot of the measures are probably we can implement faster than others. So it needs to be continuing implementation and monitoring of the outcomes of that plan. And then we have some relocation of existing exit 14 and improvements on the ramps that they only going to happen if the exit 14 supplemental scoping and the prefer alternative somehow doesn't move forward fast and or the recommendation is not going to be a DDI. It's going to be keeping the cover lift there. So two big things that we are proposing, mainly for safety reasons and operational reasons, is that we want to move the northbound off ramp and the signal slightly to the west. So we have a more space between that signal and Dorsal Street. So that will help with the operation of that segment of Williston Road. And then we are also recommending right now, we are recommending to tighten up the the radii of the ramps, all the ramps on exit 14, and that will slow vehicles down. So it's going to increase safety for bikes and pedestrians in that area. Again, this is depending on the outcome of the supplemental scoping study. So I talked about that, the 14 ramps. We're just going to work to increase the share of electric vehicles in the commercial fleet. In the next 10 years, hopefully we'll have 95 percent of the commercial fleet being electrified. We are definitely going to need more additional parking rides and multi-model transit interest facilities because that's the way to get people out of their cars, capture people before they come into urban areas and provide shuttles. So you just alleviate congestion and reduce VMT. And then if some conditions, so we are doing all these things first, right? The TDM measures are first. The exit 14 scoping is first. We're going to basically create those plants and move them forward. We're going to implement measures. And then if some of these, what we call considerations right here, which used to be triggers, are met, then what we are proposing is to initiate a NEPA process for the exit 12B and 13. That does not mean that we are recommending either a 12B or a full 13. We just want to just investigate how we can actually alleviate congestion at the exit 14 if the TDM measures that we're going to be focusing on first are basically not proven as successful. But we are very hopeful that we can actually bring the VMT down without that need. We are adding in this mid-term timeframe, the two projects that we have on the capital program, the exit 17 reconstruction, which is hopefully going to happen I think 2025, maybe 2026. And the ID9 exit 12 reconstruction, which is one of the circle turn of this phase three projects that we have. And it is in the capital program, but there is not funding associated with this yet. And for the long term, we have a number of ramp implementation. These are geometric improvements to improve safety mainly. And those are the recommendations that we need to do. These recommendations here are the ones that we put in the long term because they involve bridge widening. And the costs are high. If I move here, you can see that some of them it's like a $15 billion bridge widening. So these are pretty high costs. That's why they ended up all in the long term. And at the very end here, and hopefully we don't have to come to this, is that if the considerations here are met, and you can see we have a lot of traffic information here, ADTs, V over C volume to capacity ratio. We also have some safety and some real ability kind of measures here. You know, we need to evaluate again the TDM. How successful are we? Are we successful in changing behavior and people are using the other modes? And what's happening with exit 14? Are we moving forward with that solution and how did it affect the original travel? And then if the congestion is still present around the exit 14 area and on the interstate between 14 and 15 and or any other segment, then we are recommending as a last resort really to initiate an environmental impact statement for the main line. And we're not, I want to point out this last little sentence here that says alternatives to include at a minimum, of course the no build is always an alternative for an EIS. But we are looking at the transit system. Is there like a solution of like Havakas and exclusively for transit on the interstate not necessarily widening for vehicles or widening for vehicles? So you're going to be looking at all, you know, like solutions that you might have for the to alleviate congestion or interstate. So with that, I'm going to stop sharing and happy to answer any questions. I know that was a lot and I know that I went fast. We will share this. When I finished, you know, revising the text and find some better terms for some of this, I'll share this implementation plan with the project team. And once they are okay with it, then we'll share it with all of you as well as the advisory committee. But the advisory committee were comfortable with the amendments that we talked about. And that's what I'm doing now. So that's what they voted on. Any questions? Wow. That's great. Yeah, I don't see any hands. All right. Well, you know, it's either I talk too fast and people are just like, but are you going to have time to review this, you know, at your leisure and just please reach out to me if you have any, any, you know, questions or comments? Well, thank you very much, Eleni. You're very welcome. So moving on, on the agenda, we are now going to have a discussion on the equity work update. Yeah. So this month, I'll keep this pretty short, I think. We have just entered into a phase two contract with the creative discourse group. And we had some conversation at the executive committee about the training program and, you know, where to focus it, what it should focus on. The consult team is going to meet with the executive committee at their next meeting to talk further about that. The, the one thing, and sorry, this little bit of news for the executive committee members too, is that after talking to the consultant team, they are going to focus their training on the equity, what we were calling the equity leadership team, I think what we've decided to call the equity advisory committee, similar to our other advisory committees and staff initially, and they'll invite or will invite board members. So if you want to attend the trainings, that will be certainly open to you. But I think they're trying to respond to some of the feedback of, you know, probably isn't necessarily the most productive forum to be at the board meeting doing the training, but more with that committee and with the staff, you know, doing the more the equity work day to day. So that's probably the most significant update. I don't see Brian or Emma here to add any further things. And I guess the second related piece of work that is starting to get going is looking to expand that equity advisory committee with additional members from the community, you know, so that we do have more perspective on that committee. So I think that's the best update. I have any, anybody have any questions or anything I missed from our executive committee conversation that executive committee members want to add? Do you want to talk about what the, the leadership, actually the advisory committee was going to end up being in terms of staffing, in terms of the number of people on it? So, yeah, thanks for, we did spend quite a bit of time actually at the executive committee talking about kind of the charge, like what are the responsibilities of the equity advisory committee. And we took what we have in the bylaws for our other advisory committees. There's kind of a little bit of a template, you know, like who's on it, how many members of the board, how many members not from the board, and what are their responsibilities. And we were doing that really because we wanted to have an initial draft of the responsibilities of the equity advisory committee so that when we seek additional members, they have some sense of what they're getting themselves into. And so, we did get a good, you know, and I keep trying to use a term, it's an initial draft because part of one of the initial tasks of that expanded equity advisory committee will be to kind of give some feedback to the executive committee and board about the role of that equity advisory committee. So, I don't know, but, you know, I think nothing, I don't think anything was too surprising on there. We were talking about, you know, maybe seven to nine members or so of the committee, maybe three to four board members, maybe four to five members of the community. A couple staff people participating is not voting members, but I think it was important to the consultant team to make sure that staff was kind of part of the committee and not just separate from it just because we are going to be so engaged in the work. And then in terms of responsibilities, you know, I think we were talking about things like providing feedback to the UPWP committee on applications early in that process, right? And so, we'll take a look at, we've tried this first year to start asking questions in the UPWP process about equity. You know, that process will evolve over time. Same thing, if you remember last year, the VPSP2, like the votes that you just did on the bridges tonight, you know, there's not really a distinct equity criteria in that scoring system right now. So that may be something that the equity advisory committee weighs in on and provides some feedback to you all as you're considering that, and to the tap really, right, before it gets to you. So there were a number of things like that, you know, and I think we could say the same thing about our, you know, original plans, the metropolitan transportation plan, any of our planning documents that we would ask that committee to give us advice on. Is that helpful, Catherine, a little more context? Yes, I think that is very helpful to everyone. Yeah, any questions, feedback? Not this time? All right, thank you. Thank you, thank you, thank you all. Well, you're still on, Charlie, because it's the executive director's report. Yeah, so general updates, you know, one specific thing is, is that we are in still in the hiring process for a business office associate. Did a couple of interviews last week. I think I may have managed to avoid giving them COVID, but I'm not sure. I tried, I tried, but unbeknownst to myself. But and so that's one thing. And then, you know, we're thankful. Thank you for approving the budget and work program tonight. That's always a huge step for us in setting up for the next fiscal year. And then the last thing, legislative updates, legislature, they've adjourned. So that part of the process is done. Related to our budget, they did kind of tweak where funding was going in terms of regional planning commission funding. And then they were also doing some funding for bylaw modernization. That money will end up coming out of the municipal planning grant side of how they allocated the budget, which was, you know, good for the RPCs, just in terms of having flexibility in funding. But it was a pretty close to a 50% increase in funding to the RPCs statewide. So that was a really significant investment. There's also a significant role for RPCs in municipal building energy resilience, weatherization type work. So but the legislature, I think, was investing 40 something million dollars in municipal building energy work. And we'll try to facilitate that as much as we can. So stay tuned. You'll be hearing some stuff from that. Buildings and General Services Department is running that program. So that's a little bit of a new relationship for us. We'll work through that. And otherwise, I think there was an interesting, you know, last minute moves with the omnibus housing bill and Act 250 bills or legislation. So I don't know, I don't want to speculate too far, too much, but it did seem like the legislature made some last minute moves so that the governor would support what was in that omnibus housing bill. And, you know, I'm not too optimistic about the future of what was left as the Act 250 bill. So we'll see exactly what the governor decides to do. But I am based on the conversations or the rhetoric that was happening at the end there. I'm not anticipating he's going to sign that bill and may very well veto that. Any questions on any of that? Or anything I might have missed? And there are some kind of, you know, end of session summaries. Regina's been trying to get some of those summaries out to you as she sees them. So I expect there'll be some more in the next couple of weeks as things, you know, really finish up. Well, thank you. So basically, we reached the point where it's your committee report and liaison activities reports are in your packet or if you so choose just directly linked. And so, you know, they're there for your reading pleasure. The next item, item 12, was the future anybody had talked about future agenda topics. You know, I think I'll just remind you all that we are planning to be in person next month. I should be over COVID by then. I'm hoping you all are. Sorry, just Gallo's humor, I think. But so we are still planning on that. And we realize it is a very difficult time. So do not feel bad if you kind of just want to plug in remotely to the board meeting. We are going to have a hybrid board meeting for the bit of action. And so, you know, if you don't want to attend in person, there is still going to be an option for you to at least participate in the actual formal part of the board meeting. And then Emma has sent out a registration. I think we were trying to get an early sense of those who feel committed to coming with a note that she would send out the registration notice again near the end of the month so that you have a better sense of how you're feeling, you know, closer to June 1 where we have a deadline to get on and give them final numbers for catering, et cetera. So sorry, Madam Chair, there was maybe, I don't know if that was part of my report or the future board agenda, but any questions on the annual meeting, I guess, just because that's the next meeting coming up? Just to say what a great location. I am not familiar with Hula. I'm really excited to check it out. Yeah, and hopefully the weather holds true and we'll have some outdoor space there too, so hopefully that'll work well too. Yeah, since I've never been there myself, you'll be direction of where we're going to go. Yeah, yeah, Emma will definitely provide all those directions. And the parking is a little bit remote because it's the proverbial on the other side of the tracks. So you got to kind of walk down lakeside underneath the tracks to get to the building from the parking lot. But hopefully that's all fairly easy to understand. Of course, as always, encourage you to carpool or anything else. And try to think of other meeting details. Yeah, so we'll work on it. We're still a little bit working on the program a little bit too. So stay tuned, I am. We should have one of the principles of Hula, either Russ Scully, who's the major owner or the CEO, Rob Lair, be able to talk to us early on in the event so you can get a little bit more of a dive into what's going on at Hula, as one part of the program. All right. Are there any members items or other business? I don't see anybody rushing. So I guess it's the rush to the last of motion. Move to adjourn. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you all. Thank you. It's a lovely night, so hopefully you get to enjoy it in the nice sunset. Take care, all. Thank you. Bye-bye.